RationalWiki (en): Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 24: Line 24:
<br>Example of RationalWiki’s perspective:-
<br>Example of RationalWiki’s perspective:-
<Blockquote>''As a site we have a point of view, and that point of view is that the scientific method and the information gained from its application is better than almost anything else humanity has come up with. We believe that the support of, profiting from and creation of pseudosciences is dangerous and wrong. [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/RationalWiki:Project_Whitewash/What_is_a_RationalWiki_article]''</Blockquote>   
<Blockquote>''As a site we have a point of view, and that point of view is that the scientific method and the information gained from its application is better than almost anything else humanity has come up with. We believe that the support of, profiting from and creation of pseudosciences is dangerous and wrong. [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/RationalWiki:Project_Whitewash/What_is_a_RationalWiki_article]''</Blockquote>   
==Criticism==
==Criticism=
Many of the members, especially admins, admit to having been vandals at many different wikis including [[Conservapedia]]. They have attacked Conservapedia in the following manners
Some members, have admitted to vandalising [[Conservapedia]] in the past. As most of the founding members were blocked from Conservapedia for trying to moderate anti-scientifc content and include more liberal points of view, they have continued to undermine Conservapedia in the following manners:


*Fighting and picking fights;
*Arguing;
*Trying to remove content;
*Trying to remove content;
*Adding content that portrays Liberals as something other than Evil Incarnate;
*Adding content that portrays Liberals as something other than Evil Incarnate;
Line 34: Line 34:
*Showing outright contempt for the site, conservatism in general, Christianity, and family values;
*Showing outright contempt for the site, conservatism in general, Christianity, and family values;
*The insertion of objectionable content, such as porn images and links to porn sites;
*The insertion of objectionable content, such as porn images and links to porn sites;
*Lying, by either including deliberately false article content, suggesting that Conservatives might not be divine beings of immaculate virtue, or lying in their own conduct;
*Lying, by either including deliberately false article content, suggesting that Conservatives might not be divine beings of immaculate virtue who are always right, or lying in their own conduct;
*Vandalism and cyber-terrorist tactics.  Because making malicious edits to a webpage that can be reverted with a single click is the moral equivalent of car-bombing.
*Vandalism and cyber-terrorist tactics.  Because making malicious edits to a webpage that can be reverted with a single click is the moral equivalent of car-bombing.


Anonymous user