Live data from Hacker News

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

washingtonpost.com

181–190 of 1001 posts

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

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

The concern is that it's too easy to contribute to hot political topics. Moderation wants to prevent this forum from becoming identical to so many others, and the only tool available is to deemphasize posts.

That’s an absolutely valid point — it’s important to prevent discussions from devolving into chaotic political battles. But there is a clear limit to how far you can go. When moderation starts suppressing or de-emphasizing information simply because it doesn’t align with a certain viewpoint — even when that information is objectively true — it’s no longer moderation, it’s censorship. What’s happening around Wikipedia shows how quickly the protection of truth can turn into political pressure: when a platform is accused of "propaganda" simply because its content is inconvenient for certain groups. I really hope we are not yet at the point where mere disagreement automatically makes someone a propagandist who must be silenced by force.

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

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same ADL that said that Nazi salutes are fine, but that protesting against genocide isn't? Why do we care what the ADL says about anything? They're fascist sympathisers.

Demanding moral perfection from an organization in order to believe that discrimination exists is a standard that I don't believe is fair to any group.

I don't demand "moral perfection", but I draw the line at overt fascism. The ADL are fascist sympathisers.

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

#185

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…

Good luck relying on a court of law when the President suspends courts and arrests judges. The latter is happening right now.

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

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, almost any time Zionists are mentioned, they're mentioned in a negative light and with genuine disinformation, such as that Zionism is the belief that Arabs needs to be destroyed. That is like saying the Civil Rights movement in the US was about killing white people. They also position things in such a way that implies antisemitic things, such as saying that Zionism is only 200 years old, or discussing the…

Most of the jews I know are through anti-genocide activism and they have a different view of this. I wanted to check because it is important to me that I not engage in antisemitism. Thanks for the info.

[flagged]

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

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Less than 30% of voter age Americans voted for this

The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.

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

#190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Demanding moral perfection from an organization in order to believe that discrimination exists is a standard that I don't believe is fair to any group.

I don't demand "moral perfection", but I draw the line at overt fascism. The ADL are fascist sympathisers.

Did you read the statement they put out later that day about Musk, or the day after?

I agree this was a terrible move on the ADL's part, and there have been others, but you're essentially labeling the oldest anti-hate group "fascist" because you disagree with one statement they made.

This dismisses any concerns they raise, or if someone else says the same as them, then they too must be pro-facist.

Post reply on HN