This user is, of their own volition, no longer active on Wikimedia Commons.
- 'Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?'
'That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,' said the Cat.
'I don't much care where —' said Alice.
'Then it doesn't matter which way you go,' said the Cat
- 'But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: 'we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.'
'How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
'You must be,' said the Cat, 'or you wouldn't have come here.'
"The case is now over. The evidence is in, the closing arguments have been made, and the judgment is clear.
The modern notion of Encyclopaedia was a product of the Enlightenment and intended as an educational vehicle to raise the level of the masses. The Encyclopaedists included some of the greatest thinkers of their time. They valued, above all: knowledge, understanding, truth. The "scientific method" was based upon the same foundations: empirical knowledge, verifiability and careful reasoning. These were the ideals of the Enlightenment , together with a belief in justice in society.
Wikipedia is an embodiment of the opposite. It is a return to the Dark Ages, with an element of chaos that is greatly enhanced by the mass communications tools available in the internet. It involves a reduction of all genuine achievements to parity with the very basest, most primitive notions of the ignorant and undereducated. The encyclopaedists would never have proposed that their work was to be an equal collaboration of the ignorant and the educated. It was to be a vehicle for raising the former from their ignorance by making the most valuable achievements of human endeavor available to all.
Wikipedia, on the contrary, is the enshrinement of contempt for learning, knowledge and expertise. It is, for many, a diversionary hobby to which they are prepared to devote a great portion of their time, as others do to computer based video games. Unfortunately, it has led also to an inner cult, shrouded in anonymity, with structures and processes of self-regulation that are woefully inadequate. Many of these tools and procedures are reminiscent, in parody, of those of the Inquisition: secret courts, an inner "elite" arbitrarily empowered to censor and exclude all those perceived as a threat to the adopted conventions of the cult; denunciations, character assassination, excommunication. An arbitrarily concocted "rulebook" and language rife with self-referential sanctimoniousness give a superficial illusion of order and good sense, but no such thing exists in practice.
The post I quoted below was made at English Wikipedia by an award winning physicist who has his own Wikipedia entry. It says it all, so I guess I'll use it. As of right now this retirement message is more about English wikipedia that about Commons. Please do not allow Commons to become such a sick pace as English wikipedia is.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I have no interest in "defending" myself against false accusations, made with no other intent than harassment. I have a real world identity, and have had more than enough of the absurdities of this fictional pseudo-environment, in which people play out their aggressions as though they were knocking down "enemies" in a video game. I have the impression that many of those for whom this is a permanent romping ground are simply maladjusted individuals in their real lives who have a compulsive need to act out aggressions in this fantasy world as a rather pitiful form of self-affirmation...But individuals who try to launch, within science, campaigns of self-promotion through such absurd vehicles as Wikipedia clearly have no interest in the truth, and are only too happy to support the bullying, intimidation and denunciations of self-appointed enforcers such as User: <redacted>. Given the opportunity, they would doubtless wish to do the same in real life... My only remaining intention, within this lamentable setting, is to close down all vestiges of such contemptible farce, which is a parody of the well known practices used in police states, where denunciation is sufficient to imply guilt, and intimidation is a stock in trade to contain potential "enemies of the state". The only satisfaction that I have is to be able recall that I anticipated such an onslaught, and said so on record, although I failed to anticipate the scope of its absurdity. No-one with any intelligence or self-respect who becomes aware of the prevalence and apparently, encouragement, of such machinations would agree to participate further in such things.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
|File:Wikipedia asking for donations screen-shoot .jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Try to just ignore the people tormenting you. They will give up very quickly.
Just think of them as physical cowards. For some reason, you bring out this male protective thing in me...
Anyhoo...really...just ignore the little Island of the Flies toddlers. They will move on. They have no power over you unless you let them. I know it is super hard...but try. (This "forum" really really needs an "ignore" button!)
Grr...reply to me.
I'm not one of those effe, little twiggy neoliberals.
- Hi, TCO, I know you are a normal person, and not " a fucking wikipediot" such a rarity around here :-) and I thank you for the great advice! Cheers. Mbz1 (talk) 00:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks babe. Go green flashes, surfing, and pretty pictures.126.96.36.199 16:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
To note transfer of conversation
I have moved the conversation that you started on my local talk page to my meta talk page. I have undertaken actions there so you can edit locally, I hope that we can keep the editing there neat and not across the site. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)