The truth according to WIKI
Tuesday, August 30, 2005 by Jafo | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Criticisms
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please view the article's talk page.
There are many criticisms of the WinCustomize site. One of these critcisms include that the site owner, Brad Wardell, posts articles on the news page bashing Apple, Konfabulator and other competitors. WinCustomize has also been criticized for using a "different rules for different users" policy. A "newbie" cannot get away with flaming, trolling, ect. while a higher ranking long time user can. The site admins are very much criticized, especially Jafo. Jafo is known to hold a "holier than thou" and a "I am right and you are wrong" attitude. He is also said by critics to be a self-porclaimed expert on the English language that corrects everybody's spelling and grammer. Critics claim the "Stardockians" are very egotistical and will band together to attack any voice of dissent and anoint themselves with self-aggrandizing titles such as "Super Elitist."
 |
|
Page 3 of 5 | |
|
|---|
Reply #43 Thursday, September 1, 2005 1:54 PM
And I agree, if you're going to quote - qoute it right
| actually i think you would have a pair of bright red fishnet stockings that I, Sir Bichur, love to prance around in and cluck like a chicken |
Reply #45 Thursday, September 1, 2005 2:04 PM
| Sounds more...off shoot religion...more.. cultish. I got a real cool idea for robes and hats. |
Hey Bichur, when the hats and robes are ready let me know so I can be one of the first in line. . .or would wanting to be first be considered egotistical?
Reply #47 Thursday, September 1, 2005 2:21 PM
D-u-u-d-e, that's so Wiki.
Reply #49 Thursday, September 1, 2005 3:30 PM
Reply #50 Thursday, September 1, 2005 4:28 PM
| Damn double posts. I oughta give Brad a piece of my mind!! |
Lantec!!! Settle down!!
Reply #51 Thursday, September 1, 2005 4:47 PM
| Lantec!!! Settle down!! |
An obvious fraud....I'd have never said that. I don't have enough pieces left to give any away. 
Reply #52 Thursday, September 1, 2005 6:07 PM
Unlike a traditional encyclopedia (ex. Encyclopedia Britinica), Wikipedia isn't accountable for its content or the assorted agendas of its contributers. I see it more as a source of sources. If an entry has info I consider important, I confirm it by verifying the sources listed or by looking elsewhere. It has its good points & its warts, but ultimately it's like the rest of the web-- because something is written there doesn't mean it bears any relation to reality.
To me, information about companies is not an appropriate topic area for an encyclopedia-- seems like Wiki could have some kind of business listing resource if they want to go there. It is a positive step to let contributers challenge what has been said, but getting into this kind of subject area will cause users to question the purpose of the site & to go elsewhere. imho
Reply #53 Thursday, September 1, 2005 7:00 PM
Ah.....back on topic......thought for a moment it had deviated a tad....wasn't sure....
One hopes Wiki has some quaint legalese somewhere to exclude them from issues of Libel and Slander....particularly as they are professing to be 'encyclopaedic'.
I personally don't care if someone thinks I'm an arsehole.....but an 'authority' [self proclaimed or otherwise] should be very careful if unsubstantiated comment or opinion were to adversely affect a commercial institution.
I know I'm not THAT stupid....
Reply #55 Thursday, September 1, 2005 7:10 PM
Reply #56 Thursday, September 1, 2005 7:23 PM
As I said initially....much of it is true...to a degree.
Sometimes we confuse 'title' with 'superiority'. Instead 'title' is to distinguish 'experience'....and experience is not a just basis for a sense of 'superiority'.
'Newbies' are too often not treated as well as they 'could' be. Case in point, the thread about not being happy to have to install SDC just to get OD. That should only have contained reassuring explanations of the methodology. not 'you're an idiot for doing it like that'...[not a quote verbatim].
Criticisms are something that 'should' be taken onboard. The 'Royal "we"' might think we smell like roses here but the rest of the world might just see it all differently...and some clearly do.
The trick here is to get to a point where criticisms are non-existent....without bending to the every whim of the malcontent...
Reply #57 Thursday, September 1, 2005 7:25 PM
However, I agree that as far as allowing the posting of something like that Wikipedia would seem to be liable for slander/defamation.
Reply #58 Thursday, September 1, 2005 7:35 PM
It may not be objective or professional, bit it is how a lot of people view the site.
Reply #59 Thursday, September 1, 2005 7:54 PM
| The trick here is to get to a point where criticisms are non-existent |
You should know that is not possible.
Reply #60 Thursday, September 1, 2005 7:59 PM
| You should know that is not possible. |
I DID say it was a 'trick'....just gotta have the right mix of smoke and mirrors...
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 3 of 5 | |
|
|---|
Reply #41 Thursday, September 1, 2005 1:25 PM