Talk:Lumeniki

Other users can edit this wiki, see [1]. Proxima Centauri 08:39, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

Yes you can. I was able to edit through the Tor network also. Lumenos 04:41, 10 August 2009 (EDT)

Phantom Hoovenator being all block deletion happy

The stuff he was removing did seem a bit odd. Having the owner of a wiki write a rambling stream of consciousness description of their personal goals on a wikiindex article? Is that the norm here? Huw Powell 20:02, 5 September 2009 (EDT)

I wouldn't say it was the norm, but it doesn't strike me as being 'wrong'. ~~ MarkDilley

So, what is it? The "norm"? In which case surely I could "own" the RationalWiki article. Or some freaks could own the Metapedia article. Or is it only "wrong" if... what? Mark, I think you need to figure out what this wiki is doing and get it to work how you want, because right now you are being yanked by your chains by internet freaks. Huw Powell 06:07, 6 September 2009 (EDT)

You got to help me make it look less freaky Huw. We can't have anyone knowing what they are gonna find there. Lumenos 12:07, 6 September 2009 (EDT)

A stream of consciousness, you say? My gosh, I've never heard an outline described as such. When I hear "stream of consciousness" it reminds me of the days when hunters roamed the fruited plain. Huw the musician wouldn't be a fan, would he? Lumenos 14:28, 6 September 2009 (EDT)

In case you want to post your comments/edits here instead of in the article

Huw Powel put this content here originally. I put it in one section. Lumenos 03:21, 10 September 2009 (EDT)

I don't particularly care if you would rather post comments in this article. Don't represent WikiIndex when you do. Lumenos 03:21, 10 September 2009 (EDT)

Or you could post comments here if you prefer. Lumenos 03:21, 10 September 2009 (EDT)

I would also support a Constructive Criticism of Lumeniki as per MarkDilley's suggestion, although that is not ideal to me. I would rather do something like Debates:Lumeniki (or Lumeniki:Debates) which would include criticisms or questions like what is notable enough to include in the article. Lumenos 03:21, 10 September 2009 (EDT)

I would support this for any wiki article. Lumenos 03:21, 10 September 2009 (EDT)

Categories

[[category:ecology]][[category:environment]][[category:appropriate technology]][[category:sustainability]][[category:environmental]][[category:environmentalism]] [[category:conservation]][[category:pollution]][[category:renewable energy]] [[category:spirituality]][[Category:Innovation]] [[category:engineering]][[category:technology]] [[category:personal]][[category:specialInterest]][[category:collaboration]] [[category:culture]][[category:humor]][[category:conspiracy]][[category:mythology]] [[category:knowledge]][[category:philosophy]] [[category:law]][[category:information]][[category:innovation]][[category:institutions]] [[category:self-Promotion]][[category:Miscellaneous]][[category:nonsense]][[category:science]] [[category:cool]][[category:How to]][[category:Hobby]][[category:social]] [[category:politics]][[category:psychology]]

For readers

Current research projects include (see the wiki for more/updated info):

• Home economics:
  • Lumenos interviews an engineer who may be able to develop a more viable method for backyard solar electricity generation using a converted steam engine.
  • Converting waste into food. Mmmm yummy! Gross dude. Seriously.
  • A guide to the cheapest mp3/mp4 players.
  • A guide to booting a normal Windows installation as a virtual machine.
• Philosophy:
  • Value theory: Lumenos invented consequism to define benefit and evaluate moral systems, societies, or gods, according to their benevolence, and to distinguish this sort of evaluation from moralistic fallacy.
  • Lumism describes Lumenos most undeniable perceptions and questions. From this framework is built Lumenosity (an eclectic religion incorporating elements of Intelligent Design, liberal Christianity, shamanism, etc) and Lumentialism (an atheistic philosophy similar to existentialism).

For editors

Is yet another wiki really necessary? Perhaps not. If Lumenos finds other wikis with the following qualities, he may move the content there:

• Lumenism + consequism= You can debate anything at Lumeniki. You may present arguments for (or against): racism, murder, torture, genocide, that the opposing force in a war is better, adult-child sex, human-animal sex, abortion, spousal abuse, rape, incest, assassination, terrorism, anything less controversial so long as it is lumenotable, <your favorite evil goes here>. This is an experiment in free speech.
• Advertising (product and service reviews): The Lumenati business model places our reputation before making a quick buck with propaganda-type advertising. Linking to affiliate sites is allowed on your user page or in appropriate articles. Keep in mind there is no prohibition against editing someone else's user page at Lumeniki. If you have a product or service you believe is the best value in its market, you may request an interview. But these may be subject to intense scrutiny by any editor (even if you are paying for it). This is not an invitation for "spam". Produce a review comparing your product with your toughest competition and include final prices (with shipping charges, etc).
• "Freaks" are welcome. You can be "out of the closet" at Lumeniki. Yes you. Join the costume party and be whoevar you please. Even normies can come and be normal.
• Conflict resolution policies: Lumenos sees policy purely as a means to resolve conflict, therefore the policies are built to respond to the desires of the current users. Lumenos has made a policy development page at WikiIndex, which could be incorporated into Lumeniki, if there are other editors.
• Wikiforum: Editors can quote themselves (as Lumenos does in this article) and ask questions in articles. You don't have to pretend to be the omniscient Wizard of Oz; you can mention something that is noteworthy without presenting it as certainty. You represent yourself not the wiki.
• Copysate license: This avoids many of the totalitarian requirements of default intellectual property rights, but entitles developers to a "royalty" (not necessarily money) on any profits made by anyone else, using their work. ("Lumenos: Some wikis may allow custom licenses for articles. Wikinfo might. I might move some or all the content there but I'm less of a "fan" of Wikinfo now that I have read a little part of it and realize it does not allow criticism (or debate) regarding certain ideas such as abortion.")
• Lumeniki's inclusion policies are not completely decided but Lumenos sees a number of ways to improve on Wikipedia's policies. Wikipedia does not officially consider content to be notable or reliable if it is "original research" or information from self-published sources. "Lumenos: This creates a bias towards commercial content and runs contrary to the very thing that makes Wikipedia good; that it has info that is timely and less censored, than what is usually found in 'published' sources that are supposed to be highly accurate. With the rise of the Internet, self-publishing is the future of publishing and we need ways to evaluate self-published sources rather than excluding them completely."
  • For reliability Lumeniki instead aims to use the articles to evaluate sources and to evaluate wiki editors (editors of Lumeniki or other wikis).
  • For notability Lumeniki suggests a more consensus based approach to establish notability. Some think Wikipedia claims to be about consensus, but this is only consensus as to what "reliable" sources claim. "Lumenos: Editors can do what they want for a while but I've seen some interesting content deleted from Wikipedia."