Debate:The Rationalwiki Reform Society

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(... begins at home.)
(Nay)
Line 38: Line 38:
 
:::::EC Funny you should mention our Therian friend. Looking at the "inactivity" debate, a lot of it seems to be CUR whinging in much the same way MC is. [[User:RaoulDuke|RaoulDuke]] 22:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 
:::::EC Funny you should mention our Therian friend. Looking at the "inactivity" debate, a lot of it seems to be CUR whinging in much the same way MC is. [[User:RaoulDuke|RaoulDuke]] 22:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 
:::::Troll. [[User:MarcusCicero|MarcusCicero]] 22:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 
:::::Troll. [[User:MarcusCicero|MarcusCicero]] 22:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 +
::::::So you don't disagree with that observation, then? Good. Hugs and kisses. [[User:RaoulDuke|RaoulDuke]] 22:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  
 
==Grow Up, Marcus, and Stop Taking Yourself and this Place so Seriously==
 
==Grow Up, Marcus, and Stop Taking Yourself and this Place so Seriously==

Revision as of 22:47, 2 October 2009

Debate.JPG This is a Debate page.
Feel free to add your own spin on the story. Please keep it civil!
Information icon.svg This debate was created by signed users.


The Rationalwiki Reform Society is an organisation of Rationalwikians determined to stem the relentless descent of this website into intellectual insignificance and juvenilia.

Contents

Abstract

The neccessity of creating this society is self evident - several key members have left in the past and the intellectual vacuum has not been replaced. Over the last 6 months, possibly longer, meaningful intellectual discussions have barely occured and usually when they do they fizzle out rather quickly. Rationalwiki is dying, its foundational principles are withering away. This organisation hopes to stem the tide and re-assert the foundational principles of the website with gusto and bombast.

Another pattern, which has always been evident yet not as serious as late, is the descent into juvenilia and the pervasive presence of internet memes in all its various and unfunny forms. there is a relatively small number of members who revel in this, yet they seem to take up the vast majority of recent changes with their irrelevant and childish edits. This must stop with immediate effect if Rationalwiki ever hopes to meet the fine principles she was founded on.

Some might ask why I care, and why I am adopting such a faux serious approach, but this is really quite necessary. I like this place, I even like some of the members but certain things need to change. Otherwise this will continue to be a haunt for teenagers with nothing better to do with their time. Whatever your opinion of me, try to see past it and comment constructively on what I propose. You may not agree, but at the very least you should debate your case with some honesty.

Objectives

  • The rejection of all fringe and crackpot theories - of either the left or right wing variety.
  • The rejection of internet memes in either debate or inter-personal discussions.
  • The rejection of all fake internet authority - This means a determination to see through and accomplish the original meaning of the sysop corps (To in effect, be irrelevant)
  • The rejection of irrelevant internet hierarchies, of either a formal or informal nature.
  • The rejection of religious bigotry.
  • The rejection of personal insults based solely on political or religious beliefs. (Incidentally, personal insults are not only advisable, but compulsory when someone is being bigoted, behaving irrationally, or resorting to any signs of behaviour at odds with the objectives of the Rationalwiki Reform Society)
  • The determination to hold investigations of current affairs, the humanities, the social sciences, philosophy, religion and science to the highest degree of candour and passion.
  • The determination to assert the primacy of reason - not scurrilous deduction or ideologically motivated political stilting - in all Rationalwikian articles and discussion pages.
  • The encouragement of meaningful intellectual discussions on Rationalwiki.

Yea

MarcusCicero

Nay

  • Please read Debate:Inactivity (especially Debate:Inactivity#What is RationalWiki?). Banning unproductive talk talk talk will only result in people going away. Removing the "relatively small number of members who revel in [internet memes]" and "take up the vast majority of recent changes with their irrelevant and childish edits" will not magically increase the number of constructive edits. And even if a user only makes one constructive article edit for every 100 irrelevant and childish edits, they are improving RationalWiki. -- Nx / talk 22:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
This is why these things should be put on the debate page. You have completely misunderstood my point, possibly based on some misinterpretation of the means I propose. The only thing I mention that should be removed is the saloon bar. By rejecting the use of memes and other crap I'm merely saying they should be shunned - not necessarily reverted and bans shouldn't even be countenanced. MarcusCicero 22:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Again, you want it your way. You are getting CUR like. Be a big boy, the saloon bar not going anywhere. You don't have to visit it and you dont have to post any memes. If you dont like it MC then unfortunately thats your issue. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 22:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
? MarcusCicero 22:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
"This must stop with immediate effect" so what if someone doesn't want to stop it? -- Nx / talk 22:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Nothing. Other than the fact they should be shunned. MarcusCicero 22:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Then shun them. You don't need to close down the Saloon bar to do that. -- Nx / talk 22:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Due to the nature of the rejections of the projected closure of the saloon bar, I will remove that objective right now. This whole thing is getting dragged around on a rather insignificant issue. The heart of the proposals aren't even being challenged. MarcusCicero 22:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
EC Funny you should mention our Therian friend. Looking at the "inactivity" debate, a lot of it seems to be CUR whinging in much the same way MC is. RaoulDuke 22:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Troll. MarcusCicero 22:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
So you don't disagree with that observation, then? Good. Hugs and kisses. RaoulDuke 22:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Grow Up, Marcus, and Stop Taking Yourself and this Place so Seriously

  • RaoulDuke 21:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Disband the Saloon? That wont work, this is a mobocracy dude. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 21:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • You're turning into CUR, stop now. Have a look at Debate:Inactivity. Totnesmartin 21:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • I was under the apprehension that MC was a troll, given that he seems to appear at random in order to hurl strings of insults. Is this not the case? PubliusTalk 22:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
He has a point, though I don't agree with his proposed solution (or whether we need to do anything about it). Dismissing him by calling him a troll is not going to help. -- Nx / talk 22:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Goat

Merged debate

The mainpage has this plastered at the top left corner:

'Our purpose here at RationalWiki includes:

  1. Analyzing and refuting pseudoscience and the anti-science movement.
  2. Analyzing and refuting crank ideas.
  3. Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism. 

We welcome contributors, and encourage those who disagree with us to register and engage in constructive dialogue. '

Presently this is a lie. It is simply untrue. The reform society aims to change Rationalwiki and bring it into line with what it was intended for. MarcusCicero 21:45, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Just for the sake of simplicity, can we discuss this on the relevant talk page, where a discussion is already happening, as opposed to here? RaoulDuke 21:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
No. The basic premise of the debate is above. I think the talk page is revolving around calling me an emotional CUR re-incarnation. Or something. MarcusCicero 21:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Added delete as there is discussion elsewhere. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 21:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The actual society is not being discussed over there. MarcusCicero 21:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Not much of a society with only one guy in it. RaoulDuke 22:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Would you ever just settle the head? Your personal attacks are just grating when you haven't even the balls to actually make a case. At least have some honesty, TOP. This is just a weird grudge you have for some reason. MarcusCicero 22:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

... begins at home.

For someone who wants to lecture everyone else on how they ought to behave, you haven't done anything about it yourself. In your entire history here you've barely touched any articles, and when you do it's usually to vandalise them.

Why don't you start your reforms with yourself? Instead of proposing grandiose rules that will just alienate people from RW, do what you're proposing yourself. Write the articles. Start the discussions. Until you do that, you're just a concern troll. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 22:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Says the guy who insults me in the Nuclear thread, then ducks off to work on his sig. I make no secret of my past, but time and time again I've come up against a childish internet culture which is at odds with how this website is supposed to be. Either change the mission statements and the about section or admit the need to actually reform the place. MarcusCicero 22:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support