🇳🇱
LOL I started sme shit on reddit and got banned from two different subreddits back to back. Feel free to start some shit in this thread if you want too.
Some sub reddit ban you if get too many upvote, moderator only allow link from there known ones site and top site.
Reddit is worst than Twitter and Facebook.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_bias_on_Wikipedia
Reason given : WP:NotNews
When this was raised in Talk page, asking for reason, that was deleted as well. Reason given : Talk page is not a forum.
I kid you not.
did you revert the edit? Wiki pedia allows you to revert edits and you can continue to rerevert it up to a set number of times, something like 2.. So in short you can boycott the change and your boycott would be honored.
Only way they can force the edit to go through despite your boycott is if a third person comes in and takes a side, in which case majority rules. If things get out of hand you can have a vote in the talk pages, and it mostly comes down to majority rule..
You say you tried bringing it up on the talk page and it got deleted as "not a forum"... but was this done by someone with authority?
I'm a wikipedia editor and I can come in and try to push the debate in the right direction. Often its a majority rules system so you can always just ask for assistance whens tuff like this happens.
In my eyes wik8ipedia is at least a democracy, no one is a dictator. Reddit however is dictator run which makes it less pleasant to me when you have mad mods since the power is concentrated with a few.
You can revert it 3 times, and it is called editwar.
These senior editors are part of of a long established cabal - quite powerful and reportedly earning from editing malpractices. It isn't the first time I have run into them.
They were exposed in two Indian publications last year. A big controversy happened and the end result was that the publications, #Swaragmag and #OpIndia, both were banned as citations to wikipedia. The cabal lost just one account: DBigXRay.
@admin
How powerful is this #Wikipedia cabal? Well, administrators are definitely involved - I can say this based on my own limited experience. And at least one vlue ticked birdsite journo from India has claimed that #JimmyWales is himself well aware of the issue - and ignores it, almost like he is a beneficiary in some way.
@admin
Even a powerful cabal though cant circumvent democracy entirely. If you push for a vote you will usually get one and the cabal gets the same vote as everyone else.. The issue is just that they tend to command a lot of respect and have strong influence on the votes. But hey, thats democracy for you.
Based on what I have seen so far, I am certain that it is the vote where they have an advantage - they gang up.
In my run in with DBigXRay, just before he was banned, I had sought for opinion from a neutral third editor. A senior editor promptly commented the same day.
Wait, check my rants on the birdsite in this matter. One of the tweets is to silent Jimmy as well.
https://nitter.com/MuktTalks/status/1235493953295626241?s=19
@mukt the difference is that injustice done by a group of voters in a democracy voting against proper interests (the gang) has mechanisms for change. Its a democracy so you are free to create your own coalition of people who agree with you and then you have your own "gang" you can use to overthrow the other. There is a path and a mechanism there for you to fix the injustice.
However when it is done by a dictator, and a relatively small number of them, there is no such mechanism. You are beholden to their tyranny without any way to enact justice against it.
@mukt In this case the large group, since the large group works within a democracy and each person has only one vote..
The small group is a dictatorship with absolute power. No matter how many people disagree with them their power remains the same.
So in this case the small group is far more difficult to change than the large group.
@mukt
Youd have to point out where the circular path is, not seeing it.
1. democracy (is good because) has mechanisms for change.
2. large groups are easier to change (compared to small ones) because they are democracy
