Is that why there were so many darn anarchists there?
And yeah books to prisoners programs are both a means of direct action and of spreading anti carceral propaganda to those most effected. Not all programs are anarchist, but the one I helped with had a zine library that included a lot of stuff by former prisoners about the harm, ineffectiveness, and racist origins of the American prison system. Which was good because at least that was something they always had enough of unlike English-Spanish dictionaries. Seriously if you ever have any lying around donate it to a books for prisoners program. A lot of prisoners want to learn to communicate with those they’re locked in a cage with. And for anyone with more liberal sensibilities it’s also a form of self improvement that helps on the outside.
For those that are curious, the incomparable Matt Baume has some great videos on YouTube about the series and about Lear. I’m not American, I have no nostalgia for this series and have never seen it, and I still found it fascinating
I recently learned that chiropractors in Switzerland are very different. They are all medical doctors and need to fulfill strict requirements so they can work as chiropractor. It is also a common thing here to go to chiropractors and I have never heard of any accidents.
those are 'licensed physical therapists'.. the few good things that might be attributed to chiropractors are ready done by actual medical professionals... even here in the u.s.
the difference is, we allow quacks to pretend to be 'doctors' here. a certain subset of the population are drawn to the homeopathic, pseudo-science nature of it.
Was suspected of being paid to edit pages, and was an admin. But people tell me wikipedia is totally trustworthy. People never really see the fighting that goes on in the Talk pages, if they did they would absolutely give pause about giving full faith to wikipedia.
I am more likely to trust a site that is open and public about its edit wars and that demands sourcing claims than I am all the others that are completely opaque about it and is just trust us bro.
I don't know how it is now but back in the late 00's/very early 10's I had attempted to correct some obvious mistakes in some articles I came across. Some edits were immediately reverted -- seemingly by a bot while others were reverted to some editor. On some, I tried using Talk to discuss why the reversion is incorrect and had put forth better sources (the actual source) instead of some 'scientific journalist's' article that got it wrong and was basically threatened that I'd be banned.
These weren't some esoteric or difficult subjects but fairly well-known and straight-forward data. It was such a hassle that I just gave up after my very short foray into Wikipedia editing for 5 or so years. I gave it another go for some subjects in my industry and learned that editors are not only territorial but take corrections personally. Sources be damned. What I've seen is so-called scientific journalists for news articles/blogs are just anecdotes pulled from paper abstracts. An abstract of an abstract with opinions not derived from the actual data. How is something like theregister, CNN, MSNBC or Fox News more reputable than the sources that they sourced from?
With that, the well-known advice of "Take Wikipedia with a grain of salt and actually read the cited sources." and more importantly, the cited sources' source, rings true.
In other words, in my opinion, Wikipedia is more a summary of blogspam than it is an encyclopedia, though there are some exceptions of course.
That doesn't sound normal to Wikipedia at all. In fact in the first half of Wikipedia history most editors weren't territorial and even now territorialism is against policy (WP:OWN). It's only warnings to block for 4+ repeated edits after informing.
Is there also a policy against evading blocks/bans? If there was then perhaps the subject in this article would have never happened.
Perhaps the takeaway here is that we could all learn from writing policies that would definitely solve every instance of a problem. For example, if a company could have policies against sexual harassment it could all stop.
In another example on a bigger scale, if countries would sign a treatise of some type with other peoples and nations then we could all get along far better. A great example of this could be when the US signed various treaties with different Native American Tribes such, as happens, this Wikipedia article describes.
Thank you. I believe the world could learn much from our discussion and I know, I feel that my own experiences and opinions have been rightfully invalidated.
Yes, there is. In fact SPI (sockpuppet investigations) is known as one of the hardest "departments". You'd need pretty suspicious behavioral evidence before filing one for good reasons. Clerks need to sort through all the requests and see which ones deserve the actual IP-inspectors (CheckUsers) to check if the users seem to be the same (or an open proxy. Don't worry, the IP address retention period is only 90 days). Also, cases to check if an IP address is the same as an established user will never be CheckUser'd cuz that would be exposing the IP address though it won't go unpunished and will be judged purely on behavioral evidence.
Sockmasters who span ridiculously long amounts of time are documented at WP:LTA (long-term abuse). However, ones that inspire copycats (like some WillyOnWheels who move-vandalized tons of pages) have their documentation deleted as part of a policy called Deny Recognition (to the trolls).
Readers? Who? I think you mean random barely literate idiots you actually struggled to find to corroborate your paranoia. Give me a break. No sane, literate, intelligent person find a single redeeming thing about the tripe spewed out by chat GPT.
Have you ever considered that that is just an improper and wrong world view. Like literally what the fuck Are you actually out here judging people based on their jobs and or economic backgrounds and using that to decide how you interact with them. Everyone should be treated equally until they have proven they do not deserve to be treated with such a level of respect.
Have you ever considered that that is just an improper and wrong world view.
I agree that it is theoretically the wrong way to view the world. However it is how the world works, if you treat a cop like some people treat a service worker like a waiter you could easily be shot.
Are you actually out here judging people based on their jobs and or economic backgrounds and using that to decide how you interact with them
Personally, I do try avoid ranking others via social status but it is pervasive in society. If you don’t understand that people unfairly judge you based on your income, class, gender, role, or any other factor, it makes dealing with issues like sexism and racism a lot harder.
Seemed like it was more about how to react to authority and who has that authority in which situation. If some random dude told me to show my license and registration I’d ask him how that’s his business and to kindly leave me alone, if a cop asks that it’s a good idea to comply.
Just show them a picture of a homeless person next to a beautiful celebrity and ask them with whom they’d like to hang out with.
Depending on their age they probably are already familiar with the concept without realizing it
My dad barely knew how to run things in windows 3.1 but he still regrets the day he installed windows 95 because it was all downhill from there when it came to him knowing what was going on.
en.wikipedia.org
Top