RationalWiki talk:What is going on in the blogosphere?

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(New section: Solar power)
(Solar power)
Line 98: Line 98:
  
 
I'm not really sure what the point of this entry is. OK it features Flippin but the actual blog entry itself is rather facile. In fact I wonder if it shouldn't be in clogland. [[Image:jollyfish.gif|25px]][[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Genghis</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small>  13:18, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 
I'm not really sure what the point of this entry is. OK it features Flippin but the actual blog entry itself is rather facile. In fact I wonder if it shouldn't be in clogland. [[Image:jollyfish.gif|25px]][[User:Genghis Khant|<font color=Blue>Genghis</font>]]<small>{{User:Genghis Khant/sigtalk}}</small>  13:18, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
==No follow==
 +
 +
Mediawiki automatically places a no follow tag on EL links. For things like blogosphere I think that is unfair. If I wrote up a way to do EL links without a no follow tag would people use it? Is it even needed? {{user:tmtoulouse/options}} 16:30, 13 August 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 20:30, 13 August 2008

Should we make it "newest additions at the top", or list them in strict descending order of posting date? ħumanUser talk:Human 16:27, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Contents

More importantly...

How is this different from Clogosphere? <blink></blink> <blink></blink> 16:28, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh shoot. I guess the title ;) Please go mention this at talk:main so the bloggers know where to add there posts! I'll kill this off once the bloggers get settled in where they belong, I guess. ħumanUser talk:Human 16:41, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
I'm confused now, which page should we be testing out? The Lay Scientist 17:00, 8 July 2008 (EDT)


Okay, having found Clogosphere, surely that's not the same at all? Clogosphere seems to be about blog entries from nutters... The Lay Scientist 17:06, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes! You're right. Double doh! Please use this one for the sane blogs! ħumanUser talk:Human 17:45, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

WIGO tag

Just a heads up: It looks like the wigo tag wasn't designed for multiple simultaneous use. I added the starlight entry as wigo number 1 and it pulled the voting from the CP wigo page for entry number 1 there. Jim Rational 12:38, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Yea, the WIGO voting system was back in my earlier days of learning to program for the modern age. I stopped paying attention to web programming about the time WYSIWYG was developed. That was when website designed got taken over my people that actual knew and cared about color clashes. I have been working diligently on leveling up my mysql, php and perl skills and can do much more interesting things these days. There is a lot of momentum behind the way WIGO is currently done and so I haven't gone back to rework it. Perhaps this is a good excuse to sit down and write from scratch a whole new voting extension that doesn't have all the limitations and drawbacks of the WIGO one. tmtoulouse beset 12:51, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
Hey Jim, can you add the date of the post? Thanks... ħumanUser talk:Human 13:32, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

PZ Myers

I always like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I'm afraid I must now consider Dr Myers officially out of his mind. That's a pretty long and incoherent rant if ever I saw one. Fourth Lateran Council, anti-Semitism, desecration, Othering and a bunch of generalization all tied uf in one little big, convenient package. And even I'm not sure what he's talking about here: "... last time a Catholic nation rose up to slaughter its non-Christian citizenry was a whole 70 years ago, after all..." I wonder if he knows himself. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 19:20, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

So enlighten us, what in it is false? What conclusions does he draw that you disagree with. I had no difficulty following the post at all, so I find criticism that it is a rant and incoherent lacking. I will admit that history is not my strongest suit, so I will listen with an open mind to specific criticism. tmtoulouse beset 19:23, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I was wondering what his "70 year" thing was also. I've been deciding whether to write anything on this,but despite the fact that it's good for traffic, it's damned boring. I think he's being an ass. The point about "only a cracker" is half right. It is an object, and as such should not be compared to a human life. It also should not be weighed as a "super-material" object. HOWEVER... any object exists both as an object, and as an object that interacts with the human world. If a cracker were all there was too it, there would be no reason for PZ to nail it. It's ridiculous to think so. Symbols are very important parts of human behavior, and cannot be ignored (or can be, but then a lot is missed).-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --It hurts when I do "this" 19:29, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Well, at least with it here, you can vote it "thumbs down"... ħumanUser talk:Human 19:49, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
w00t! (delightful
delightful
bourgeoisie)-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --It hurts when I do "this" 19:58, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Hey, aren't there any bad adjectives left??-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --It hurts when I do "this" 19:59, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I (obviously?) agree with PZ's sentiment, but his method looks theatrical & "rabble rousing" - he's playing to the gallery and it's probably Over The Top. SusanG  ContribsTalk 20:03, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

'Kay. Brief overview of the many and different ways in which Dr Myers fails - again - to earn my respect:

  • "...Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, that the Eucharist was the sacrament that only properly ordained priests of the Catholic church could give" - Factually incorrect. Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus is the general doctrine that the Church is the means by which salvation is received. This was reaffirmed at 4 Lateran, as it was many times before and since, but goes all the way back to St. Cyprian in the 3rd century. He could have looked this up on Wiki; inexcusable.
  • "...formally decreed the Jews to be inferior, and a target of hatred." - Factually incorrect. 4 Lateran most certainly did not "formally decree" anything of the sort. They decreed that Jews had to wear special clothing, which of course reflects that they had a lower social and legal status, but this was not exactly anything new. Personally, I'd argue that Jews had been considered of lower status at least since their rebellion in 70 AD.
  • "Declare something cheap, disposable, and common to be imbued with magic by the words of a priest, and the trivial becomes a powerful token to inflame the mob..." - Factually incorrect AND ridiculously biased interpretation. The consecrated host had already been considered sacred for hundreds of years. Fourth Lateran changed nothing here, it only established that the faithful should receive communion at least once a year. The use of the word "magic" is questionable from an anthropological point of view, but I guess we'll let that pass. The "inflame the mob" thing is merely his interpretation, and an unsupported one at that. However, I hardly think that creating a pretext for the persecution of Jews was exactly the first thing the participants at the Fourth Lateran had in mind when they established new rules for the Eucharist.
  • "Now you could invent stories of Jews and witches taking the communion host to torture, to make Jesus suffer even more, and good Catholics would of course rise in horror to defend their salvation." - Factually incorrect AND ridiculously biased interpretation. No one "invented" anti-Semitic stories, in the sense that some identifiable individuals or group of people consciously made them up.
  • "...thereby providing a pretext to encourage massacres." - See above.
  • "...the last time a Catholic nation rose up to slaughter its non-Christian citizenry was a whole 70 years ago, after all..." - Unspecific, probably factually incorrect. Again, I obviously can't be certain which particular nation he's referring to here, but I'll assume that he means Germany. For one thing, Germany has hardly been "Catholic" at any time since the Reformation, and claiming otherwise shows a serious level of ignorance. Also, I guess this is supposed to tie into the old hat that the Catholic Church was somehow responsible for or at least complicit in the Holocaust. This is not supported by current, serious research. In fact, the Church in both Germany and Italy made a significant effort to help the Jews - saving, I believe, some 4,500 people in Rome alone - often at significant danger to the lives of priests and religious. But I guess Dr Myers can't be bothered with such minor details.
  • "Catholicism has been actively poisoning the minds of its practitioners with the most amazing bullshit for years..." - I'll be charitable and call this "unsupported opinion".

That was about three paragraphs. I can go on if you really want to, but honestly... it boggles my mind on how many levels of abstraction this man completely fails so hard.

So far, he gets an "F - see me." --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 20:19, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

That said, the hordes of screeching fans that are swarming all over the comments section are actually worse. Faith in humanity: Down 10 points. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 20:19, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I agree with Susan. He is wasting far more time on this than it deserves. If he wants to go after the RCC it should be for substantive issues, not transubstantive ones. After all, as he said, it's just a cracker. So write about something that matters and quit pissing off our friend Andreas. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:30, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
It's descended to boredom now - 2204 comments. As I said OTT. SusanG  ContribsTalk 05:50, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Yeah. I just skimmed through some of those comments, and I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your always tolerant, nuanced and understanding way of criticising religion, Susan. Those people are crazy. It's a madhouse! ... Excuse me, I think I need to go hide in the library for a while. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 10:04, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

A Suggestion

Here's a thought to try to help us ever-so-slightly expand our remit and postings. Why not create a section of the Main Page called What Is Going On In..., followed by a list of our various (uhm, 3) WIGO pages - and we could grow those. Effectively, it would be an entry portal into various mainspaces. Eh? DogP

You might want to go to talk:main and see what we're getting ready to spring on you... ħumanUser talk:Human 23:02, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
BIzarre, I just went there and blundered into the same idea over there. Excellent! Please ignore this thread so! DogP 23:05, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Re Date

Does this mean the date of the blog post or the date it's posted here (an oldish post might be found by ascident)? Also, if the latter, can you use ~~~~~ (05:48, 25 July 2008 (EDT))? SusanG  ContribsTalk 05:48, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Susan, as the page is called What is going on I think we should concentrate on recent postings and therefore put the date of posting of the blog. Maybe older stuff of note should be put elsewhere (but not another vote). Jollyfish.gifGenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 06:13, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
So far it's always been the blog post date. The fossil record keeps track of when things were added... ħumanUser talk:Human 16:49, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

9/11 truth post

The popular mechanic's article and the live debate linked from the blog post are quiet excellent for anyone familiar or curious about this particular niche of cranks. tmtoulouse beset 00:08, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

The PM and debate link should be added to the WIGO. Don't make us chase after this stuff if you know where it is ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 01:39, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

not cool?

I love reading blogs, and would like to explore from this page. I don't want to put up links to my own blog because it's maybe too much self-promotion even for me. (also, i can't very well judge what's important enough). What's the thought on self-linking?-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --It hurts when I do "this" 10:47, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Stick it up there doc. with a "self promotion" disclaimer. SusanG  ContribsTalk 10:53, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
Hey, that blogroll at the bottom...any relation to our Blogroll page?-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --It hurts when I do "this" 11:12, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
Ows that doc? linked to Blogroll. SusanG  ContribsTalk 11:18, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
Pal, I'll self promote if you do. I think it's okay with a disclaimer-caius (advocate) 22:30, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

If we don't self-promote our blogs here, the page will never take off. I'm self-promoting for the good of the community. Honestly. It has nothing to do with getting my cushy spot at ScienceBlogs when PZ is assassinated by crazy Catholic cracker cultists. The Lay Scientist 22:10, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

For the record, I absolutely agree that self-promotion is beneficial to everyone, it is win-win for us and you hopefully. So promote away. tmtoulouse beset 22:11, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks TMT! I like having a built in choir to preach to. You're right, we're symbiotic :-)-caius (advocate) 22:25, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Auto-voted high?

I just posted a new entry to the WIGOBlogs page, but upon completion, the entry already showed a vote of +4. I know that's not right - nobody can read/vote in the space between when I click "submit" and when the page reloads - so how do I fix that? Not that I don't like vote inflation...-caius (advocate) 09:38, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

Erm, yeah... that was my fault. I got the numbering completely wrong, everyone else then continued with my new rogue numbering, and so several posts had the same number, hence the confusion! The Lay Scientist 14:38, 5 August 2008 (EDT)
Did anyone manage to fix the damage yet? ħumanUser talk:Human 15:34, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, I undid my error :) 81.102.156.177

McCain Low blows & the Anti Christ

I'm not sure what type of articles you typically feature, so I'm setting this link from Kos here first. I was shocked at this particular act by McCain. He basically infers (of course, in his typical rhetoric "i was just joking") that Obama is the Anti-Christ. No kidding. [[1]]. If anyone thinks this is worthy of WIGI Blogiy land, would you link it or let me know to link it? --Waiting for Godot 13:57, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

What about going to the source(s) and putting it at WIGO World? Rather than the secondary thing of a blog? Or do you think the blog link is better because people can comment? (I bet they can comment at Time or wherever, too?) ħumanUser talk:Human 15:40, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
Do put that in, and I think it'd be better as a blog thing, b/c commentary. Kos isn't MSM yet.-caius (advocate) 15:40, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
No, he isn't - but Time, which he extensively quotes, is. And what he quotes is the commentary, really. This is news and in the world, not just on a blog. ħumanUser talk:Human 15:44, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
You make good points. I do like the comments on the blog, but the story itself is what I really want to highlight. Thanks, to the source I shall go. --Waiting for Godot 16:30, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
Whoah... there's some crazy subtext going on in that shit fo' sure. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 16:48, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

Solar power

I'm not really sure what the point of this entry is. OK it features Flippin but the actual blog entry itself is rather facile. In fact I wonder if it shouldn't be in clogland. Jollyfish.gifGenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 13:18, 13 August 2008 (EDT)

No follow

Mediawiki automatically places a no follow tag on EL links. For things like blogosphere I think that is unfair. If I wrote up a way to do EL links without a no follow tag would people use it? Is it even needed? tmtoulouse beset 16:30, 13 August 2008 (EDT)

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support