Well...someone with Ians' nick, anyway, but I thought the title of this post should reflect in the same way as that of Ians' about me. Equal treatement, after all (no doubt he will be lecturing again about off-topic posts, neglecting his same, earlier behaviour). And besides, I think there is little doubt; feel free to deny it if it's not true/you, Ian.
As one can see on the wikipedia, a small group of freenet-fanboys there, and probably Ian himself, have consistently tried to censor any form of criticism. Now, I myself am still fond of the freenet as a concept too, but that doesn't mean I have to close my eyes for the things that go wrong, and neither should anyone else, if they are really serious with helping the project. But aparently, Ian and his cronies do not only not agree with the criticism, they even don't want any mentionning that there *is* citicism on the freenetproject. Constantly new excuses are sought to justify the ongoing revertions, even AFTER the agreement was reached that we would abide by the compromise a wiki-admin had made with an edit. First, it was because it was posted by me; but when somebody else posts it, it's to no avail anyway. Then, in the interest of keeping the peace on the wikipedia, I agree with the decision of a wiki-admin...but aparently, *I* am the only one considered to be bound to it, and when a very watered-down wikiadmin-edit with the acknowledgement that at least there IS criticism of the freenet-project, then suddenly no-1 else feels bothered by completely ignoring the agreement. When I revert to that of the wikadmin-version, it is claimed there are no sources mentionned, when I give a wikipage where the sources *are* mentionned, it is claimed they are not notable, etc. As one can see, a perfect catch-22; no criticism exists, because no sources can be given, and when sources are given, then they are proclaimed to be of trolls and lamenters and not notable, which means no sources have to be reckoned with, which means the mentionning of the fact that there is criticism can be deleted, so no critcism exists... Thus even the simple fact that there *is* criticism is conveniently and self-servingly kept out of the wikipedia-page, as if no such thing exists; but in any pragmatic sense, it is clear it is just used by Ian and consorts to let it appear if no such thing exists - completely in line whith his continuous habbit of over-optimistic claims and mispresenting, in this case, an article by making it less NPOV (which inherently happens, if you censor criticism - a fact dictators well know, as Ian should know, seen his purported 'free-speech in china' goal). Is this fair and honest? A rethorical question indeed, because someone with a grain of honesty in his bones, would at least admit that there *is* criticism, whether you agree with it or not. But not so Ian and consorts, ofcourse. *They* think their ego and keeping their pet-project on a pedestal is more important then making a more NPOV wikipedia-article by including various criticisms on the Freenet Project. I'm actually not surpised to see him&co reacting like this, because I already encountered the hypocrisy on his own blog (free speech proponent, my ass)..but it still saddens me he is now using the wikipedia as his/their personal playground to work out his frustrated ego and bias. I would ask anyone with a free and open mind to edit the wikipedia freenet-article in a NPOV way, so that it may also contain the more negative facts and some criticism, and not only acts as if no criticism exists. Yes, I know, we all like freenet, at least as a concept, otherwise we wouldn't be here, but I would like to remind everyone that a project is *not* helped by optimistically misrepresenting things, neither by closing ones' eyes for things that are poorly managed, and certainly not denying that there IS criticism possible and being given. When making an NPOV article about freenet, one should at least acknowledge that; the wikipedia deserves such a thing. Understand me well; I'm not asking anyone to agree with my particular criticism, I'm only asking that one can acknowledge that some - maybe including you - have criticism on the project, and, of course, to make clear that any criticism should not be considered a threat, but rather a wortwhile effort to point errors out, or at least to come to a more NPOV wikipedia-article. friendly regards, Newsbyte _______________________________________________ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
