Ban: good. Name-and-shame: better. (Score: 2, Interesting) by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-02 16:39 (#K7NM) I suspect they'll have better luck deterring this nonsense if they actively shame the companies who pay for/execute the biased bullshit.They'll never win the cat-and-mouse if they just ban accounts. Re: Ban: good. Name-and-shame: better. (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-02 21:54 (#K8JV) It isn't just paid editing firms they have to worry about. Wikipedia's policies, in general, are entirely untenable, requiring overwhelming force of numbers that just can't be sustained. Citizendium did a better job than I can, explaining why Wikipedia doesn't work:* no coherent narrative* disconnected grab-bags of factoids* degraded by minor ill-judged tweaks* intelligent laymen are often mistaken* "squaters" always win* blatant and shameless levels of bias* Vandalism is a headache* part anarchy, part mob rule* disputes sometimes go on interminablyetc.http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Why_Citizendium%3F
Re: Ban: good. Name-and-shame: better. (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-02 21:54 (#K8JV) It isn't just paid editing firms they have to worry about. Wikipedia's policies, in general, are entirely untenable, requiring overwhelming force of numbers that just can't be sustained. Citizendium did a better job than I can, explaining why Wikipedia doesn't work:* no coherent narrative* disconnected grab-bags of factoids* degraded by minor ill-judged tweaks* intelligent laymen are often mistaken* "squaters" always win* blatant and shameless levels of bias* Vandalism is a headache* part anarchy, part mob rule* disputes sometimes go on interminablyetc.http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Why_Citizendium%3F