Seems relevant: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/endi...
Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
11–20 of 1001 posts
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#12[flagged]
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#13Well seems the war on truth has started. There is a 1984 quote about history that escapes me now.
[flagged]
Yes, as described in the blog post, I would imagine the median Fox News viewer to find Wikipedia biased. But the median Fox News viewer is not the median American, much less median world citizen.
But no seriously, having finished reading it, this article is incredibly Christian-centric and Americentric.
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#14[flagged]
[flagged]
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#15[flagged]
I had the same thought but most European countries don't have as wide freedom of speech laws as the US. Same problem with moving to Australia or New Zealand, though it'd be awesome to have a project like that based here.
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Yes, as described in the blog post, I would imagine the median Fox News viewer to find Wikipedia biased. But the median Fox News viewer is not the median American, much less median world citizen. But no seriously, having finished reading it, this article is incredibly Christian-centric and Americentric.
There's always Conservapedia: https://www.conservapedia.com
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#17[flagged]
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#18Remember when people pretended it was the scandal of all scandals that the IRS was reviewing PACs who were forbidden from doing political activity for political activity? And now many of those same people are cheering this, and the act blue ‘investigation’, and the threats against Harvard’s tax exempt status for nakedly corrupt reasons? Man I wish shame still had some stopping power.
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#19[flagged]
Talking about our march into fascism is still considered off topic here apparently. Isn’t that exactly the sort of topic a supposed forum of hackers ought to be discussing however?
Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney
#20Remember when people pretended it was the scandal of all scandals that the IRS was reviewing PACs who were forbidden from doing political activity for political activity? And now many of those same people are cheering this, and the act blue ‘investigation’, and the threats against Harvard’s tax exempt status for nakedly corrupt reasons? Man I wish shame still had some stopping power.
[flagged]