husband father artist geek lay buddhist musician modeller developer nerfherder goddamn sailor node.js html5 blender gimp atom wannabe chef woodworker zymurgist cybershaman american heteroaf fullyvaccinated-pfizer KI5SMN
Actually, so would I for almost everything - except journalism. Why? because wikipedia was never intended to be used that way. Reading news there is like searching for a palimpsest on a roll of recycled toilet paper. Sure, it could be there, but why would you ever think to look there for it?
Wikipedia has a big part to play, but this kind of thing just brings the information war right up onto the pages of what is arguably the best reference we have.
Curation suggests that we should protect it from becoming involved in an ideological tug of war lest it be damaged in the process.
The solution is real simple, don’t turn to wikipedia on matters that are politically charged. Get your news from a news outlet, instead of expecting that a crowdsourced online encyclopaedia might be up on current events.
I've been 'inhabiting' mastodon.social since about the beginning. I've often been frustrated by the limitations imposed by 500 characters of text.
It's just not enough to really express a literate view without splitting up a post among several posts.
Clearly, there are ways to circumvent the limitation, which illuminates it as a futile attempt to control the expression of others.
I know that was never the intention of Mastodon developers. I will reserve judgement as concerns Twitter.
Anyway, since the beginning of the 'great exodus' of mastodon.social users to their own community instances, I've been trying to sort out where I 'belong'.
Well, actually it just might be here :)
It suggests to me, given certain other things I’ve been hearing, that perhaps there is not a unified resolve among the various heads of the armed forces to conduct this…‘exercise’, that perhaps the head of the Russian Air Force is not entirely on board, as it were.
I was trying to bring attention to my desire with something resembling a sense of humor; it’s all too easy to sound like a demanding arse when all you really hope to do is contribute a little encouragement.
It’s ok though, because I wasn’t really attempting to make a response to the article per se, so much as reacting to another example of a trope that was introduced by the MSM mere hours before the invasion began in earnest.
FTR, I don’t think any of this can be taken entirely at face value, except perhaps for the suffering being inflicted on regular folk just trying to get along in their lives.
Actually, so would I for almost everything - except journalism. Why? because wikipedia was never intended to be used that way. Reading news there is like searching for a palimpsest on a roll of recycled toilet paper. Sure, it could be there, but why would you ever think to look there for it?
Wikipedia has a big part to play, but this kind of thing just brings the information war right up onto the pages of what is arguably the best reference we have.
Curation suggests that we should protect it from becoming involved in an ideological tug of war lest it be damaged in the process.