Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Wikipedia, Sigh

Mark Bernstein:

Yesterday, ArbCom announced its preliminary decision. A panel of fourteen arbitrators – at least 11 of whom are men – decided to give GamerGate everything they’d wished for. All of the Five Horsemen are sanctioned; most will be excluded not only from “Gamergate broadly construed” but from anything in Wikipedia touching on “gender or sexuality, broadly construed.”

By my informal count, every feminist active in the area is to be sanctioned. This takes care of social justice warriors with a vengeance — not only do the GamerGaters get to rewrite their own page (and Zoe Quinn’s, Brianna Wu’s, Anita Sarkeesian’s, etc.); feminists are to be purged en bloc from the encyclopedia. Liberals are the new Scientologists as far as Arbcom is concerned.

The optics are terrible: of the 14 arbitrators in the case, between 11 and 13 are men.


garrett said...

On the website Salt In Wound.com, "progressive" writer Jack Silbert has suggested that select women can be labeled as a 'breed.' Confused at first, I think I may be now in agreement with Jack pertaining to the belief that women should be categorized with dogs and horses. I've been wrong before though.

garrett said...

I can't emphasize enough the importance of this topic Tom. Thanks for broaching this persistent Degradation of Women in popular culture. Like the saying from the media who can't control themselves from mimicking one another, "let's begin the conversation."

I figure there's plenty of time before this year's Breeder's Cup. I may propose to Jack and see if Salt In Wound's budget (aka AOL's budget) will finance a trip for him to see the race. I could meet him there, and with his highfalutin contacts, we could possibly arrange for us a peek at the warm cushiony vagina of the the leading mare.

Jack Silbert said...

breed (noun) a kind of person

or as Roky Erickson put it, "Don't slander me."

garrett said...

Slander? Is that a euphemism for "salt in wound?" Jack, let's all get along and rename your blog Happy Healing Love Smile.

-dig the new breed-

garrett said...

But back to your focus Tom, with an issue that has been on me since reading Tuttle. On websites which aren't nearly as theoretical or academic as yours, I've seen conservatives come at Common Core mainly from a mathematical standpoint. The picture linked is very typical. I'm hoping you could wax on it for a bit, for a couple of reasons. 1- you tend to write more from the literature end of the spectrum, and 2- I tried the picture's equation a few months ago and got both answers, then tried the other day, and could only solve to numeral 1. This strikes me as interesting as the problem could be doubly dubious given the mindframe of the problem solver.

Tom Hoffman said...

Well... it doesn't make sense that standards could change the order of operations. We don't start with a clear sense of what the goal and scope of standards are, so any critique is kind of floating in air.

garrett said...

A tiny thinning out and I think your response could be passable Wimp Factor 14 lyrics.