Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#141

Post by LordGrignard »

hodgesrm wrote: post #54

In my humble opinion Wikipedia is the single best thing thing to emerge from the Internet boom. Its name is a wordplay on one of the most important intellectual projects of the Enlightment.[0] The DC prosecutor letter reads like something straight out of the totalitarian playbook.[1] Please donate now to show your support. It's time to fight back against this crap. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclop%C3%A9die…

Hi I don't know if you know it but Wikipedias not that poor or hard pressed... Atleast, the whole "donate or we broke" narrative that they build every few months is complete bullshit https://youtu.be/3t8GUbzVxmQ?si=sa_oHe3DA_QmpGcE

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#142

Post by westmeal »

yndoendo wrote: post #138
r053bud wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We voted for this! This is “democracy” at work

Democracy built lies, decide, and rejection of facts through propaganda. Really need a viable means to fight it, say allowing an elected official's constitutes being able to sue them for no less than $10,000 for incidence of bearing false witness. Help erode the dark money networks. Also having a 4th branch of Governments, the people with State and Federal binding resolution, would help. Only way to overrides those i…

The suing thing would be cool but the court system is slow by design. I can't see it working in practice however I'm also really fed up with the bullshit so i understand.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#143

Post by moshegramovsky »

jjmarr wrote: post #120
LightHugger wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are counterexamples where this has failed/continues to fail, the gamergate article is famously non-neutral, only accepting primary sources from journalists directly involved in the controversy. This is rather than true secondary sources with less extreme and biased views, like is supposed to be the rules there. You can switch from the english one to other languages and get completely different content with very…

[flagged]

> You'll get a bunch of leftist (because they don't have jobs) volunteer moderators with an agenda.

What do you consider a leftist? Why do you think they don't have jobs?

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#146

Post by moshegramovsky »

almosthere wrote: post #22

It's 2 paragraphs... What's the substance of the allegation?

He doesn't have a leg to stand on and he knows it. Otherwise he would empanel a grand jury and wait for indictments. He is a partisan sadist and he loves to use the legal system to abuse people.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#147

Post by dralley »

habinero wrote: post #72
xqcgrek2 wrote: post #43

[flagged]

Churchs are tax exempt. Are they supposed to be neutral?

Yes.

They aren't, and nobody has the political cajones to actually pick that fight. But that doesn't mean that many of them aren't breaking tax laws left and right.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#148

Post by NelsonMinar »

tzs wrote: post #69

> Before being named U.S. attorney, Martin appeared on Russia-backed media networks more than 150 times, The Washington Post reported last week. In one appearance on RT in 2022, he said there was no evidence of military buildup on Ukraine’s boarders only nine days before Russia invaded the country. He further criticized U.S. officials as warmongering and ignoring Russia security concerns. This is getting ridiculous.…

Martin was also at the coup attempt on Jan 6 and on that day said "Like Mardi Gras in DC today: love, faith and joy. Ignore #FakeNews". https://archive.ph/jekzQ

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#150

Post by jjmarr »

kurtreed2 wrote: post #123
jjmarr wrote: post #87

The English Wikipedia is a massive target for influence campaigns. I don't think there are any other communities as resilient as it. Just an example: There's certain individual or group that edited under the name "Icewhiz", was banned, and now operates endless sockpuppet accounts in the topic area to influence Wikipedia's coverage on the Middle East. One of them was an account named "Eostrix", that spent years making…

One can look into Shira Klein and Jan Grabowski's report about how the Polish ultranationalists have distorted the Holocaust topic area on Wikipedia ( https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25785648.2023.2... ) if they want to find a counterexample. To the best of my understandings so far, I think Icewhiz is a good guy, just that he doesn't have strong grasp about Wikipedia's guidelines, particularly regarding…

A month after that article was published (and shortly after the article was posted on Wikipedia), the Arbitration Committee opened a sua sponte case to review the topic area despite the substance of that article being "Icewhiz was right".[1] It resulted in bans of Icewhiz' enemies for distorting the Holocaust topic area. I think moderators on pretty much any other website would laugh and ignore an article like that as being whining from a user they banned.

I agree that Icewhiz is an Emmanuel Goldstein-like figure at this point who's used by pro-Hamas editors/ultranationalists. A bunch of those pro-Palestinian editors that loved to complain about Icewhiz to deflect from their own behaviour were topic-banned from Israel-Palestine area a few months ago in January.[2]

It's challenging to deal with the Israel-Palestine conflict on any website that allows for user contributions. There's astroturfing and nation-state backed influence operations from probably a dozen countries. I don't think there's any website that has successfully navigated that minefield as well as Wikipedia.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests...

[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests...

Post reply on HN