Toward a Wiki Kind of World

♠
In the past year, Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia that "anyone can edit," has been cited four times as often as the Encyclopedia Britannica in judicial opinions, and the number is rapidly growing. In just two years, YouTube has become a household word and one of the world's most successful Web sites. Such astounding growth and success demonstrate society's unstoppable movement toward shared production of information, as diverse groups of people in multiple fields pool their knowledge and draw from each other's resources.

-- Cass R. Sunstein for The Washington Post

On LJ Monk has come across a practically universal condemnation of citing Wikipedia, as though it is not reliable and sound enough for our high uses. Well, if it is alright for courts of law, one should think it is fine for us, albeit not necessrily the final word.

Though, I suppose this new trend could be seen more as the degradation of courts, heh. It is hard to beat convenience, and it is free - my kind of money!

xXx

Toward a Wiki Kind of World

♠
In the past year, Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia that "anyone can edit," has been cited four times as often as the Encyclopedia Britannica in judicial opinions, and the number is rapidly growing. In just two years, YouTube has become a household word and one of the world's most successful Web sites. Such astounding growth and success demonstrate society's unstoppable movement toward shared production of information, as diverse groups of people in multiple fields pool their knowledge and draw from each other's resources.

-- Cass R. Sunstein for The Washington Post

On LJ Monk has come across a practically universal condemnation of citing Wikipedia, as though it is not reliable and sound enough for our high uses. Well, if it is alright for courts of law, one should think it is fine for us, albeit not necessrily the final word.

Though, I suppose this new trend could be seen more as the degradation of courts, heh. It is hard to beat convenience, and it is free - my kind of money!

xXx

Conservapedia

♠
How timely!

For those who are not happy with the heathen information-source that is Wikipedia, we now have Conservapedia. On its home page is this self-description:

Conservapedia is a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American. On Wikipedia, many of the dates are provided in the anti-Christian "C.E." instead of "A.D.", which Conservapedia uses. Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance. Read a list of many Examples of Bias in Wikipedia.

Conservapedia is an online resource and meeting place where we favor Christianity and America. Conservapedia has easy-to-use indexes to facilitate review of topics. You will much prefer using Conservapedia compared to Wikipedia if you want concise answers free of "political correctness".

Jon Swift gives a full send-up here. I want to get down a couple of the items that Swift pointed out:

KANGAROOS: "Like all modern animals, modern kangaroos originated in the Middle East and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood."

THEORY OF RELATIVITY: "Nothing useful has even been built based on the theory of relativity.…'All things are relative' became popular as atheists and others used relativity to attack Christian values. There remains enormous political support for the theory of relativity that has nothing to do with physics, and Congress continues to spend billions of dollars unsuccessfully searching for particles predicted by the theory of relativity."

These were actually written at Conservapedia. Okay, this does leave one wondering if it is a joke, and whether Monk is too easily baited by this kind of Christianist stuff. But I just don't know. Maybe it's real?

xXx

Conservapedia

♠
How timely!

For those who are not happy with the heathen information-source that is Wikipedia, we now have Conservapedia. On its home page is this self-description:

Conservapedia is a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American. On Wikipedia, many of the dates are provided in the anti-Christian "C.E." instead of "A.D.", which Conservapedia uses. Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance. Read a list of many Examples of Bias in Wikipedia.

Conservapedia is an online resource and meeting place where we favor Christianity and America. Conservapedia has easy-to-use indexes to facilitate review of topics. You will much prefer using Conservapedia compared to Wikipedia if you want concise answers free of "political correctness".

Jon Swift gives a full send-up here. I want to get down a couple of the items that Swift pointed out:

KANGAROOS: "Like all modern animals, modern kangaroos originated in the Middle East and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood."

THEORY OF RELATIVITY: "Nothing useful has even been built based on the theory of relativity.…'All things are relative' became popular as atheists and others used relativity to attack Christian values. There remains enormous political support for the theory of relativity that has nothing to do with physics, and Congress continues to spend billions of dollars unsuccessfully searching for particles predicted by the theory of relativity."

These were actually written at Conservapedia. Okay, this does leave one wondering if it is a joke, and whether Monk is too easily baited by this kind of Christianist stuff. But I just don't know. Maybe it's real?

xXx

American Democracy in Action

♠
Andrew Sullivan has a nice take on the recent campaign skirmish between Obama and the Clinton camp over Maureen Dowd's interview with Hollywood bigwig David Geffen:

But whoever you think got the upper hand, there's one aspect to the incident that merits more notice. This was a classic political A-list dust-up. It got national attention. It was the first real skirmish in the presidential campaign. And no straight white men were central players. This was an openly gay man dishing to a female reporter about a black man's threat to another woman's campaign. Yes, the mud flew. But look who was throwing it.

This is progress?


(Source: Andrew Sullivan Blog)

xXx

American Democracy in Action

♠
Andrew Sullivan has a nice take on the recent campaign skirmish between Obama and the Clinton camp over Maureen Dowd's interview with Hollywood bigwig David Geffen:

But whoever you think got the upper hand, there's one aspect to the incident that merits more notice. This was a classic political A-list dust-up. It got national attention. It was the first real skirmish in the presidential campaign. And no straight white men were central players. This was an openly gay man dishing to a female reporter about a black man's threat to another woman's campaign. Yes, the mud flew. But look who was throwing it.

This is progress?


(Source: Andrew Sullivan Blog)

xXx