Live data from Hacker News

The Biases of Wikipedia and Moderators Today

larrysanger.org

31–34 of 34 posts

Re: The Biases of Wikipedia and Moderators Today

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They exist on far more than just less popular topics. You just never see them. Anything even slightly right of center tends to get censored for hate speech.

This has never been more appropriate: [Citation Needed]

pats you on the head you're adorable. If I were to say "water is wet" would you want proof of that too?

Re: The Biases of Wikipedia and Moderators Today

#32
post #16

Sanger has some really great ideas, apparently. From his linked ballotpedia article on neutrality: > "A disputed topic is treated neutrally if each viewpoint about it is not asserted but rather presented (1) as sympathetically as possible, bearing in mind that other, competing views must be represented as well, and (2) with an equitable amount of space being allotted to each, whatever that might be." Because, yes, we…

I think an article is treated neutrally when the person I agree with screams a lot and throws furniture at the dissenters until they curl into a submissive fetal position on the floor and admit they have lived hollow fruitless lives.

I assume Sanger will update whatever lies you’ve referenced to spend equal time on my perspective.

Post reply on HN