On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:12:42 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
Imagine the Obama Wikipedia Care plan. Can the government
successfully intervene to save Wikipedia?
We need a single-payer Wikipedia system, so that uninsured families
aren't debilitated with ruinously high Wikipedia bills! Oops, wait a
2009/8/16 Daniel R. Tobias d...@tobias.name:
On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:12:42 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
Imagine the Obama Wikipedia Care plan. Can the government
successfully intervene to save Wikipedia?
We need a single-payer Wikipedia system, so that uninsured families
aren't debilitated
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 1:12 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/15 Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com:
Imagine the Obama Wikipedia Care plan. Can the government
successfully intervene to save Wikipedia?
- d.
$700 bn +/- a few dimes, divided by about
Soxred93 wrote:
Despite the fact that this guy has many of his facts are wrong, he does
have some element of truth.
Not only Technically Incorrect, but actually incorrect, and sloppy
too. It would be a pernicious meme, that you can't contribute
successfully to Wikipedia by getting an
2009/8/15 Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com:
Not only Technically Incorrect, but actually incorrect, and sloppy
too. It would be a pernicious meme, that you can't contribute
successfully to Wikipedia by getting an account, reading the
instructions, and doing your best.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-10309840-71.html?
Despite the fact that this guy has many of his facts are wrong, he does
have some element of truth.
Oh, Lordy. It's just like the Senate, isn't it? The bigwigs know best,
control the most important committees, and generally swan around in
limos
