Ownage Because when you're nation's government sucks to the point that a mere website can block them...
It is illegal for the government to try and influence public opinion in covert ways like this. You know, like hiring out a bunch of retired miltiary officers as consultants to various media organizations in order to pretty-up the reasons for going to war, like this The DOD aren't the only people guilty of this, a few years ago the Justice department got busted feeding phoney anti-drug news stories also. What's really sad is that even though this is against the law, no one will do anything about it. Welcome to America.
Well, finally they achieved it: I'm not surprized by US Government's actions anymore, definitely that's not good at all. I wouldn't be really amazed if they dropped a bunch of missiles over the Wikipedia HQ in a couple of days...
Screw wikipedia, since they're bleeding money thanks to the founder's lifestyle (read: coke and whores at the foundation's expense) all it takes for someone to have a "clean" as in no-incriminating-shit page is to make a donation or have a friend inside the wiki to make the changes you need and ban any 12 yr old idiot trying to edit it. And about government employees, I still have to hear just one person from any country telling me things are different there. Bureaucracy is everywhere...
Demonstrates precisely why anyone viewing the contents of Wiki should do more than accept what they read, but go and do further reading. Are you surprised that this is going on, because frankly I am not?
Over the years I have reached a single conclusion: there's no such thing as absolute objectivity , but at least one can fairly argue both sides.
It used to be a good source for everything science related, until the biased idiots from the history and politics areas started making pseudoscience pages too, rewriting scientific facts so it wont contradict their crazy theories/cult/religion. But I blame wikipedia itself for all these problems, since they dont really bother on keeping the content as feasible as possible, but to get as much funding as possible to keep blowing it on crazy expenses. That wales guy flies everywhere in first class, always using wikipedia's money. Now that wouldn't be a problem if: A-wikipedia were a successful company that has actual profits. B-Wasn't a foundation, since when people gives money to a foundation they do so on the condition that it will be wisely spent only on said foundation's needs, not to pay some poseur trips around the world.
Actually if it's unrelated to furthering and bettering Wikipedia's business , then a Director using Wikipedia's funds is misaproppriating company funds. This is quite a serious offence and is not dependant on either A or B , Shadow.
Wikipedia is a nice idea, but the internet is full of cretins and perverts. Do we really trust them as a source of factual objective knowledge?
It happens all the time, they just weasel out of it by making sound it like an emergency: "I HAD to buy that Porsche mr.accountant, or else I wouldnt be able to reach the foundation fast enough" That was a joke, but IRL they are barely more serious than that.
Thing is by calling it a "foundation," they make it sound like it's some kind of non-profit type thing trying to solve world hunger or something. That is better I suppose than having big ugly flash ads all over the site, trying to sell me SPAMSPAMSPAMSPAMSPAMSPAM, but still. All too true, all too true. I think this is a good example of what happens to a society that doesn't have an active engagement in it's own politics. Maybe eventually people will get fed up enough with such obvious displays of corruption to do something about it, but not likely. Just being a realist.
