Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Community Watch' started by chimpburgers, Nov 22, 2015.
Also to be fair, Dawkins is an asshole.
He's a worthless asshole actually; his contributions to his own field was fairly marginal and is far overshadowed by his screeching that religion is the great Satan of society.
Honestly, it's really funny to see the Atheist community explode into nuclear failure like that considering they try to claim rationality after picking on easy targets for a few years.
I'll Powerlevel a bit here, but I had an account on this site.
I tried my hand modding for the site awhile ago on, among other things, their Ted Rall, USS Liberty, and you guessed it, the circumcision articles. Each time my edits were immediately undone no matter how many sources I gave. If you don't toll whatever the imaginary and ever changing SJW line is, you can't get fucking anywhere on that site.
It's a shame, because basing an online encyclopedia on actual rationalism is something that's desperately needed. Personally, I blame the Wiki model itself. It gives a nice headstart, but it breeds impenetrable beuracracy, constant infighting, rank-amateur research, and provides no incentive nor mechanism for ever improving things.
*Rates self Powerlevel.*
I noticed that they call anything that isn't scientific "pseudoscience", even when it's not even trying to be science, such as with Tarot Cards.
They seem to confuse skepticism with kneejerk disbelief layered in snark. I really do not think most of them are aware of what science and scientific method mean when they use these simple terms.
I used to be a contributor back in the day, even got mod status for being there long enough and not causing shit. But there came a point when I sat back and wondered about the futility of it all. My biggest issue with Assfly was his status as a teacher, going by the materials he posted online (along with his students' work), and I knew it would be nigh impossible to help his students with rationalwiki. People have a hard time accepting facts that clash with their own views, especially if it comes from the perspective/tone we were pushing.
In the end I just left without a word. I still feel bad about those kids but the real world will help knock Andy's bullshit out of them, not a bunch of guys online.
People on RW don't seem to grasp the concept of reliable sources as used on Wikipedia. As bad as Wikipedia culture is, stuff that is well sourced will usually survive an edit war, and the stuff that remains in a controversial Wikipedia article is usually very well sourced.
Even if you don't agree with the ultimate consensus, the surviving sources are generally top notch and you can evaluate them for yourself if you find the article(s) on a subject not to your liking. For example, anything related to Israel or Palestine. These articles have been the subject of scorched earth fighting by everyone on the planet with an interest in the subject, including the actual JIDF itself.
The articles themselves are actually pretty damn good considering this, and again, don't like them? Check the secondary sources, and the primary sources those sources cite.
To an extraordinary extent, by comparison, RationalWiki will basically nuke sources for no reason other than that they say things that don't fit into the ultra-SJW worldview that rules the whole site. This is exactly what the problem with Conservapedia is. They don't give a shit how solid the source is, but if the opinion is in line with theirs, personal blogs and all kinds of utter horseshit get cited in articles all the time.
Real rationalists who are interested in combating irrational nonsense online are way more likely to edit the actual Wikipedia itself than retreat to a goofy little hugbox where only their approved sources are allowed.
I experienced exactly this every time I tried editing a page. It was fucking maddening.
Take the USS Liberty page. I actually created the original page myself after noticing it brought up in a different article. It looked like this. In less than a week, it looked like this even though all the real sources in the article came directly from me.
This was one of the reasons I left. It's hard enough getting anything substantial done by crowdsourcing, but when you can't make a difference even on the principles of meritocracy, you might as well attempt to win a race with a gasoline fire.
I just walked through the saloon and checked the recent changes. Only recognized one name from my time there. I'm not sure how that makes me feel.
I was never sure if Conservapedia had honest intentions, was always insane, or was a Poe all along, but trying to "debunk" it when there was always Wikipedia to cover bad science.
As for RW, I browsed there once or twice, and got the impression of a bunch of pompous types, not necessarily an SJW hive.
That's the contingent that got BTFO with the Atheism+ loonies and all that. It isn't really completely an SJW hive now, but it's a gross slurry of all kinds of similar shit plus euphoria.
The result is really a total mess and there's no seeming editorial style to the articles, which range from being poor man's ED-snarking to trying and failing to be a real reference, often in the very same article. It's really dignifying it to even compare it to ED, which even in its current state is better.
So it's WrongPlanet for atheists?
One of the admins, David Gerard, is...something else. His ED page explicitly notes it doesn't even need to lolsify with him.
He's also why Ryulong wasn't banned long ago.
What's sad is that, at one point, RationalWiki was fairly respectable, back when they were more about not taking themselves so seriously, focusing on debunking legit issues like the anti-vax movement, exposing frauds, and trying to be informative on topics like science and politics. Sure, even then they had the athiest sperglords and shitty ED mimicking, but then weren't such a hive of pretentious assholes high on their own smug, at least not as much as they are now. I know, read their stuff for a few years, stopped after what little dignity they had went to hell.
The current problem is that they've completely bought into the idea they are smarter than the average plebe and have created a hugbox to circlejerk about their shared delusions of genius. Throw in some SJWism and a mobocracy atmosphere that encourages shitheads so long as they chant the group song, and you've got the fetid shithole you do now.
I'm amazed it's taken this long for the site to get an article. I used to rather like it - the debunking of pseudoscience and the humorous tone used to appeal to me. But now it's just devolved into a Tumblr offshoot with all the warning signs of a SJW hive (partriarchy, denying misandry exists, gamergate hateboner, etc.). The lunatics have taken over the asylum.
No, you fucking morons, we find you a bunch of jokes, not worthy of even mild annoyance. Also, the quote you cited was sarcasm.
I look forward to the Irrationals writing a Kiwi Farms article. If they want some tips, sprinkle on some SJW butthurt and some "we're totes not mad at being laughed at" crap, we could use the lulz.
P.S. - You want to know WHY we're laughing, thank Ryulong, your autistic devotion to that jackass propelled you guys to our radar.
I feel like I really accomplished something with this thread. Bring it on, RationalWiki fags. I'm laughing so hard right now.