Talk:Systemic bias of Wikipedia
I attempted to insert some comments on the original page, but could not. For some reason my editor does not allow access below a certain point on some files.
The anonymous 24 has certainly raised some issues that in my views as previously expressed are worth discussing. April I have a lot of respect for your writing on consensus but I must admit that 24 got a lot more discussion about some serious issues. Surely some discussion is necessary before a meaningful consensus can be reached?
Therefore I think I shall join his faction or party in this debate. Just out of curiousity ... did any one bother to mention to 24 that this discussion belonged on meta before it got heated and finally relocated???
I find it interesting that some of my predictions, that a 2nd party would be hard to form sufficient to make it easy to mirror or fork might not form are now clearly incorrect. It just takes a variety of people irritated with the status quo and a variety satisfied with it. Perhaps the Cuncator will join our faction .... if he still hangs out here.
The most telling argument to me which 24 appears to be brushing ocassionally is that there is no documented process to update the vaunted npov beyond an admonition to join the wikipedi-L mailing list. I am not fond of mailing lists for personal reasons. Besides, some personal goals I have for this type of technology implies that partipation in the governance/participation should be easily asynchronous for casual, ill informed, or uneducated anonymous dropins.
24 if it pleases you, if and after you are banned, contact me at email@example.com or use a different anonymous login to place a message on my home page; perhaps we can create a mirror or a fork.
Hallo Ihr alle. Kann mir vielleicht jemand sagen ( bin schon fast 1 std am suchen) wieviel oderob 1mg das gleiche wie !ml ist. firstname.lastname@example.org Danke im voraus mfg