Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

wikipedia and dogme and stuff. Again......

Expand Messages
  • Fiona
    Did you read this yesterday in The Observer? http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,,2113739,00.html Interesting, in light of the recent thread here,
    Message 1 of 3 , Jul 2, 2007
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Did you read this yesterday in The Observer?

      http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,,2113739,00.html

      Interesting, in light of the recent thread here, but also, if you read,
      when you get about halfway, you'll start noticing parallels with dogme,
      and with this group. That's what I felt, at least. Dennis came to mind,
      for example.... (NOT as a troll, I hasten to add!) Obviously, dogme
      isn't so huge, or far-reaching, but....... see what you think!

      Hope you're well and warm,

      Fiona
    • Dennis Newson
      Egoistically, I m intrigued why I came to Fiona s mind when she read the article about Wikipedia. As far as I could see, though, the issue of inaccuracy was
      Message 2 of 3 , Jul 2, 2007
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Egoistically, I'm intrigued why I came to Fiona's mind when she read the
        article about Wikipedia.

        As far as I could see, though, the issue of inaccuracy was not mentioned and
        that is what troubles a lot of people in Germany.

        Dennis


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Fiona
        Ah, but I would say that the inaccuracy issue is addressed on two levels. One, by saying that errors or inappropriate stuff such as narcissism and vandalism
        Message 3 of 3 , Jul 2, 2007
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Ah, but I would say that the inaccuracy issue is addressed on two
          levels.
          One, by saying that errors or inappropriate stuff such as narcissism
          and vandalism are picked up so fast that the articles are being nit-
          combed constantly by these truth seekers, many of whom have OCS
          tendencies. Sticklers. Probably truth snobs.
          Anyway, as you can see with this group, you only need to post a
          spelling error and someone'll pick up on it within a `knowledge
          community' like this. I spelt the Russian alphabet wrong and you
          wouldn't believe how many off-list messages I got ....... ;-))

          Secondly, it's also addressed by the philosophical reference (I'm not
          familiar with Friedrich von Hayek, I'm afraid, but his namesake
          Nietzsche had a similar take on truth and reality, as far as I
          recall - long time since university). The fact that truth is the sum
          of partial understandings (or of all possible perspectives) means
          that in any case Truth and Accuracy are elusive. Anything that's
          verifiable is generally checked by the Wikiphiles, and I think you'll
          find that if you watch an article over a few days, it may change.
          Life's like that. Flux. Is any reference book reliable? Why are some
          names more Reliable than others? We have that tendency here in this
          group. If Henry or Peter or Sylvia said it, there must be some truth
          in it, but why are they more of a measuring stick than Dennis or Rob
          or Sue, and so on?

          I'm getting carried away. Accuracy. It's fluency that counts in the
          long run, anyway. At least in my book, as is often probably obvious
          (see the Russian alphabet above – I daren't even try to spell it,
          hehehehe). The rest is space and time.

          Re. `reminds me of you': Don't worry; it was neither 'soft-
          pornography' nor 'yada-yada'. I'm sure lots of others can work it
          out, then the truth will be the sum of.................. yeah. OK.

          Fiona



          > Egoistically, I'm intrigued why I came to Fiona's mind when she
          read the
          > article about Wikipedia.
          >
          > As far as I could see, though, the issue of inaccuracy was not
          mentioned and
          > that is what troubles a lot of people in Germany.
          >
          > Dennis
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.