Infogalactic:Galactic boardroom

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
   


Welcome to the Galactic boardroom. This is the place for Galaxians to discuss the technical issues, policies, and operations of InfoGalactic. For resolving disputes with other Galaxians, please visit the Galactic tribunal.

For more lighthearted chatter, head over to the Galactic jazz lounge.


Galactic boardroom
« Older discussions


Contents


Coding For Television Episodes

Hi gang. I've been busy lately, so I haven't caught up yet. I'll be back more soon with more stuff. Meanwhile I just popped in to update a mirror and discovered some coding stuff. I just copied the article from Wikipedia and added this to the top:

This is a Wikipedia article mirror, copy update on 2017 April 08.

So you know - I like to declare at least one of the following declarations in bold italics at the top of every article that I confidently can:

This is an InfoGalactic original article.
This InfoGalactic article has forked from originally being just a Wikipedia article mirror.
This is a Wikipedia article mirror, copy update on...
This is a Wikipedia article mirror.
This article was censored on Wikipedia.

To the point, the code results are drastically different between the source and result:

List_of_Real_Time_with_Bill_Maher_episodes on Wikipedia
List_of_Real_Time_with_Bill_Maher_episodes on InfoGalactic

This looks like a very nice code tool thing that I will learn to use in the future. It'd be great if InfoGalactic could utilize it too. (Full disclosure: I've never updated any episode lists before, on WP or IG, though I have been considering building giant episode lists of all of The Corbett Report episodes and lists.)

I'd like to hear comments about it and be pointed to the usage documentation, especially if InfoGalactic adopts it.

Regarding my failed edit attempts, please simply delete my efforts on the Real Time Episode List, linked above, and revert it to the oldest one and only proper mirror even if it is an outdated copy.

Now that I've made a "thing" of this, I promise I will return to it soon to learn about the coding and to update the episode list in one way or another, high on my to do list.

Thanks in advance for your feedback. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

JasonCarswell, there is no need to revert your edits. The code you copied works perfectly. If you look now, I think the page will look much closer to what you were expecting (though it's unfinished). You will also noticed I have not edited that page at all. Looking into your issue taught me something about transclusion that I did not know, and now I'm chomping at the bit to put it to use myself. The link to wikipedia in the previous sentence is a good place to start. Basicly you're taking parts of one article and inserting them into another. The long and the short of it is, you need to copy several wikipedia pages with names like Real Time with Bill Mahar (season xx) over to Infogalactic to make the list appear as you want it to. Gilgamesh (talk) 13:54, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Some thoughts, more needed

  1. I am not sure what the correct way is to indicate that an article is entirely from Wikipedia or entirely local or a mix of both. Categories look like a way to do it, but we don't want to have to go through all 5M articles and add a category to them. We could default them to showing that the article comes from Wikipedia at the bottom unless they have a category entry saying they are different. However, we have to work on the code for that. Further thoughts are welcome.
  2. The whole transclusion thing and templates are a god-awfull macro language that is hard to understand for normal people ... something better is needed.

-- Crew (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Crew, I would like to partially if not wholly disagree with your point 2 above. One of my biggest frustrations is having to update the same information on multiple pages. For example, Daytona 500 and List of Daytona 500 winners have substantial overlap, including a table of winners. I've thought about building templates (in Template: space) to cover situations like this, but by doing so I would be cluttering up Template space with lots of templates that are only called by a couple of pages each. I hadn't realized until now that I can have one encyclopedia article call another encyclopedia article, saving me a lot of work to update.
For JasonCarswell's issue, he has 3 options.
  1. He can learn about transclusion, and use it future edits.
  2. He can hunt for television-specific documentation on Wikipedia about how to edit episode lists without needing to know how transclusion works. This documentation is most likely one or more subpages of WikiProject Television.
  3. He can simply copy the pages I told him to and trust that some editor at Wikipedia has read this documentation and knows how to use it. Gilgamesh (talk) 17:13, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the transclusion link. I have some reading to do.
You may decide if this idea may be good or bad. Since all articles with only one version in history are direct snapshot copies from Wikipedia, extremely rare exceptions being articles perfectly composed and saved somehow without any need for correction, revision, update, etc. OR extremely new articles yet to be revised. A bot could create a new updated snapshot that would make the formerly unedited snapshot article more current, and more importantly it could add "This is a Wikipedia article mirror, copy update on..." to the top, with whatever coding markers you like, as well as added benefits of collecting more article history documenting growth edits or censorship. Unfortunately it's not copying the entire Wikipedia article history or discussion history, but it's much much better than naught. As for all the other InfoGalactic articles with at least one version in history, the revisions and edits are evidence of human activity likely forking articles in some way(s) or are completely original. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 18:22, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Fast image uploading idea

Why not give every article a direct button "upload images", and have them automatically be put into gallery for that article? For instance if I find that a diagram is hard to understand, I could just browse the article's gallery until I find a photo which makes sense. A good gallery system would be more useful than even google images Hydrargyruum (talk) 14:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

I like brevity, but ...

Forkbot overwrote the article John Lewis (Georgia politician) with a redirect to John Lewis (civil rights leader), so now these two are redirects to each other. For more fun, John Lewis (Georgia) redirects to John Lewis (Georgia politician), so this is now a double redirect. And don't forget that John Lewis (American politician) redirects to John Lewis which is a disambiguation page. Gilgamesh (talk) 00:08, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to our attention. I will make sure that the ForkBot people know. -- Crew (talk) 00:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
OK, the issue seems to be that on W John Lewis (Georgia Politician) redirects to John Lewis (civil rights leader). I am manually importing that page. --Crew (talk) 13:47, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Request for Self-Citation

Can we cite ourselves for witnessed events that may have no other citation but are nonetheless true? I just noticed LastRedoubt included an important fact that he witnessed himself that can't be cited, so he deleted (correctly) the "needs cited" sticker.

I wonder if it would be useful to have a "cite editor" structure, like this:

< ref>{{cite self|first=Last|last=Redoubt|source=Eyewitness|date=.... and so on

(NeitherNor) 00:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
I had a similar problem. Before I was banned off Wikipedia for a year, I was trying to "fix" 9-11 Truth articles, etc. Another angry Truther was defending me. I checked out her(?) profile and saw other things she'd had censored. While I'd heard of Milton William Cooper I new nothing much of significance. Her efforts on his page were refuted but I saw a solution. I simply added "alleged" to the police testimony. Naturally the Wikipedia goons defended the article saying that cops are always truthful etc. Later (somewhere in my email archives) a Milton William Cooper's neighbor wrote me an email with the "real story" of his murder and begged me to put it on Wikipedia. I was banned soon before or after that email, but I added it to InfoGalactic under The Actual Circumstances Of Cooper's Death (with corrected and improved grammar and narrative flow). I replied to that email that I had done this, but received no reply. If there's a better way, I'm all ears. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 21:52, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Search Timeout Problem

For some reason searching for a non-existent page takes forever then gives you an error. I just tried to see if there was already an article for Bill Still - several days ago. Yesterday and today the problem remains. I thought perhaps it was my internet or your server or something. I just thought I'd bring this to your attention if it's a real problem or I could learn why it's not. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 15:34, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I have seen the same thing and was getting timeouts. Eventually it worked. I will work with the support folks to see if we can resolve this. -- Crew (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
I had that problem when I was trying to create the Run for Something article, but it worked when I finally manually edited the URL to create the page, rather than trying to search for the non-existent page. Jean Valjean (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"Authority control"

I wondered what this was, copying or editing articles from Wikipedia Authority control on WP. Initially I thought they were monitoring potentially subversive articles. Does IG use this? Should I add it, delete it, or ignore it? ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 00:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Editing without registration

After almost a year, InfoGalactic is still several times smaller than Wikipedia. I have been thinking about ways to get more new users.

One option would be to allow anyone to create a new article without having to register. They could continue to edit the new article until they deleted their cookies or changed their IP.

Another option would be to allow anyone to create a new version of an existing article without having to register. The different versions of each article could be listed as part of the main article, or shown in the page header. That could be how the differently "biased" article versions get started.

People could be encouraged to create new IG articles about subjects rejected by WP because of notability issues. For example self-published books, clubs, businesses, careers, etc.

Finally, organizations could be encouraged to create Promotional or "official" articles about themselves. No charge for that service, but the article version would be clearly marked as such, with a link to the neutral version.

I think it's important for the editing page to emphasize that whatever an editor posts must be TRUE. InfoGalactic considers the truth to be supremely important. Other editors will of course try to verify all the changes made.

I have some more ideas, will come back later after some thinking. Jack-arcalon (talk) 23:06, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

The problem will most likely be one of managing all the spam and malicious content ... however, I am interested in hearing ideas. -- Crew (talk) 23:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Nice to see some discussion here. The site was just down for a little while today with a "no database connection" error, and I was afraid it was gone for good.
I think the project needs to do some fundraising. How about doing a Reg A+ stock sale at a site like StartEngine.com? Or sell shares as cryptocurrency?
With funding, you could get the technical features like user preference sliders and dynamic updates running, and maybe buy some ads to get traffic.
Also seek deals with alternative search engines like duckduckgo who are trying to create independence from google. SolarFringe (talk) 00:45, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
The project is still alive, but how well is it doing? Three months between posts here at the "boardroom"? Are traffic & edits slowly increasing, or going downhill? SolarFringe (talk) 00:53, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed new policy for Infogalactic

I propose that the IG site settings be modified to allow anyone to create a new article on any subject, without having to register first. My understanding is that Wikimedia software allows that as a standard option.

If this change is made, the new option to start an article could appear on top of every page, next to "Read", "View source", and "View history". Presumably, a "cookie" will be set on their browser, so they can make edits until their browser cache has been cleared. If they later want to make further edits, they may have an incentive to get properly registered.

If spammers create millions of spam articles, the Adminstrator version of the Special:NewPages page might be usable to delete all new articles created within a specified date range. Creators of genuine articles should have kept a copy of the text they posted.

Perhaps this option could be tested on a trial basis for a few days or weeks. Jack-arcalon (talk) 21:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


Mediawiki software could allow anonymous users to create new pages . . .
# Anonymous users can't create pages 

$wgGroupPermissions['*']['createpage'] = false; 
Jack-arcalon (talk) 22:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

May we have some more megabytes please

Infogalactic is suffering from its own success, as the increasing number of users can make it harder to edit pages during heavy traffic hours. Jack-arcalon (talk) 19:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Hypothetical

In the near future, someone may alter an existing article to make it far-left. We don't have the software yet for different versions of the same article. In that case, I think the far-left edited article should become its own similarly-named article. The original version should be restored where the edit was made.

For example:

Someone edits the entry for Mike Pence to make him seem like a radical fascist. These changes should be moved to a newly created page: Mike Pence (far-left interpretation).

On the main Pence page, there should be a link to the far-left version, and vice versa. Jack-arcalon (talk) 22:25, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

I thought corrupt Mike Pence was a radical fascist dressed in Republican fascist clothing, just like corrupt Hillary Clinton is a radical fascist dressed in Democrat fascist clothing? It's totalitarian turtles all the way up and down. (I also address this "narrative multiplicity" below.) ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

automated wiki editing

Eventually, someone is going to invent software that will replace all current encyclopedias. Not necessarily a conservative AI to edit every entry (or add bias warnings without changing the underlying text), but a way to add any amount of data to any article, from comments and opinions to verified citations, and hide or reveal them as needed. Jack-arcalon (talk) 23:54, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Future IG MediaWiki code evolution

Is it possible to add content to an Infogalactic page without changing the article text itself? For example, there could be giant lists of Tag:alleged cuckservatives or Tag:alleged far-right extremists or Tag:alleged SJW converged organizations. For all articles on those lists, Infogalactic could add pre-determined text in each case. That way, Forkbot would continue to update the articles to the latest version, which it would not do if this information was added manually. There could be many different lists of attributes, representing many possible texts that could be added to each such article. Jack-arcalon (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

How about the Special:Categories footer section? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Is Infogalactic being blocked

I'm getting a

Secure Connection Failed

The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.

error when attempting to access Infogalactic directly, I'm currently editing through a proxy. Is anyone else having these problems, either with Comcast or in general?

Thales (talk)

"problems with inpuitW

Hallo. I am told that there are "problems with inpuitW but not told what they are or why my editing function was switched off. Last contribution was about Jonathan Tampico. I don't think it was libelous. It was all sourced. Petronella (talk)

We had a problem with the hosting company last night. I will look at the other issue. Which pages. -- Crew (talk) 21:22, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Community Community Community

I like the ideas listed above in #Editing_without_registration, #Hypothetical, and #Future IG MediaWiki code evolution. Until it becomes burdensome you could allow unregistered users to work with an alert for a InfoGalactic moderator to verify on regular basis that the work is at least not vandalism, or even to editorially clean up as necessary. The latter two I address below.


I see several fundamental problems with InfoGalactic:

Community

For InfoGalactic to grow it needs to be about community. (And not just from the right, libertarians, "alt-right", or whatever (I'm referencing the InfoGalactic News list, and if you want to add more progressives, truthers, conspirophiles, indie media, free thinkers, etc. enjoy my list).) We must embrace alternative communities and let them have their say, even if we don't agree, as long as articles are clear about who's perspective is expressed (see Narrative Duality below).

Voting for someone because they aren't the other guy is not good enough. (All the systems are rigged.) So too, working on InfoGalactic because it isn't the rigged and censored Wikipedia simply is not good enough. InfoGalactic needs to be about more. As SolarFringe stated, what is the traffic like? Can you publish stats? Sometimes I wonder if my work will even be here next week. I need to feel secure to dedicate hours to this. I want a future here.

I know there's an InfoGalactic forum out there that I joined but did nothing beyond that. I have absolutely no clue if anything happens there. It should not be off-site. It should be here, somewhere on this site.

InfoGalactic seems to steel its images from Wikipedia who has very robust copyright and copyleft and commons metadata. I'd like to see that here.

Most image hosting sites claim the rights to your work for perpetuity. This is utter bullshit. If I upload my work on their site they claim the right to make T-shirts or sell it or whatever forever. I want a place where I can retain the rights of my designs, illustrations, graphics, etc. and expressly define the copyright or creative commons copyleft of my choosing.

People with photograph collections can batch upload their unimportant files to Facebook or whatever, but if InfoGalactic allowed single files to be uploaded with this type of copyleft you might attract a community of like minds. It's also a step or few away from merchandising - a whole can of worms that might be worth opening.

In particular, the Steemit community might appreciate images here.

For example, I created my own little User:JasonCarswell/gallery of my old artwork mostly from at least a dozen years ago, formerly on my old website. I could easily triple it. And that's not even counting my more recent work that I won't add without proper copyleft accreditation.

Is my gallery allowed? I haven't seen rules against it. Could this be a "selling point" to attract new community members? I can't see why not.

I have one more bigger idea I will express in a whole new section further down, perhaps today or on another day.

Suppression & Omission

When I first wrote it last year it was #3 on Google but a month ago it didn't even show up on Google for several pages and was politically buried while near the top of the first page on DuckDuckGo. I am pleasantly surprised today that it has been unsuppressed:

My Pedophocracy article on InfoGalactic is at #5 on DuckDuckGo.
My Pedophocracy article on InfoGalactic is at #9 on Google.

(I'd been hearing about this oligarch pedo crap and simply wanted to see a list to verify that it was authentically prevalent as claimed. I searched online but found no lists so I made this article and two lists of the "accused" and the "acknowledged".)

My first troubles with Wikipedia started in 2015 with an article I wrote about James Corbett (journalist). They shut that shit down and I moved it to the semi-rational RationalWiki (where it's since been perverted) before I discovered InfoGalactic. My James Corbett article on InfoGalactic on DuckDuckGo is too far down (behind at least 2 RationalWiki links to my old article (which was linked to by The Washington Post via a CIA fake news Prop-Or-Not site)) as it is on Google. Actually it's absent on DuckDuckGo.

Labels & Updates!!!

InfoGalactic needs to clarify and distinguish articles better with labelling and metadata. AND this should be automated somehow by comparing source Wikipedia history.

I've done this manually on this original Tigole article and this forked mirror KickassTorrents article by declaring at the very top in bold with italics...

This is an InfoGalactic original article.
or
This InfoGalactic article has now forked with new content added on 2018-02-13.
This was a Wikipedia article mirror copied here on 2016-05-31.

While comparing to the source Wikipedia history it makes sense to update the article and images.

An outdated encyclopedia will attract ZERO new users and keeping the encyclopedia current will keep links alive and topics relevant. (Also, Wikipedia is suffering their own problems maintaining their censorship and loosing contributions, expanding less rapidly.)

Narrative Duality (or Multiplicity)

This addresses the #Hypothetical section above.

In addition to various perspectives and historical revisions, there are many ways and layers to getting "woke". This involves knowing the mainstream version and at least one other narrative. A colour coded labeling system might make some of this easier and more clear for newbies and pros alike. (See the image at right I made to start the conversation. The labels don't have to look like those. I can design anything you like if asked.)

Many of the category sections are a mess and many are under utilized. Categories are fine but they're at the foot of the article and we need labels that are far more noticeable and higher on the page like the seriesbox/sidebar that's under the infobox at most article's top right.

It may even be worth locking off articles and/or sections of articles that echo the official corporate media propaganda. For an outdated example of what I'd done in the past you can see at the tops of these articles: InfoGalactic's Pizzagate and the mirrored official story as Pizzagate conspiracy theory.

In another example of narrative duality I simply relabeled a section and added a second narrative section for Milton William Cooper and his Death (according to the "official" Wikipedia version) versus The Actual Circumstances Of Cooper's Death.

Splash Page vs Identity

The layout works. It's almost okay - except it's not original. Maybe InfoGalactic can be similar but not the same. InfoGalactic must become unique.

  • Why not have a little banner statement about who you/we are and why you're here. The Infogalactic:Introduction says nothing and where are we on the Infogalactic:Roadmap that explains absolutely nothing? Technicalities don't count as goals. There is no identity or definition to support - and the pillars and/or cannons don't count.
  • Why not have a statement saying who we want as contributors?
  • Why not be transparent and feature site statistics on the splash page. Traffic, edits, latest edits, number of mirrored, forked, and original articles, etc.
  • There are 5 sections and only 1 is "from Infogalactic News" which is just an aggregation from alternative sources someone selected. I'm not even judging the sources or the selector, but this is not a transparent or democratic process and just some news feed that links off-site and in no way serves the InfoGalactic brand.
  • IF you were able to distinguish between the encyclopedia (filler) mirrored articles and the forked or original articles, say with metadata and labelling, then you'd be able to present InfoGalactic Original content on the splash page.
  • Why not put the "Other areas of Infogalactic" (bottom splash page section) links of the Community portal Galactic boardroom in the giant left hand margin (giant waste of space, would be better as a header) under the InfoGalactic logo.
  • Why not have a video(s) of the day section? You could link YouTube, D-Tube, BitChute, etc. I've seen tonnes and even marked many with A+ A++ and rare A+++ to share one day.

FYI: To whom it may concern. The InfoGalactic logo has transparency issues. If you look at the logo image at right, in my browser with a night filter for eye strain, you can see that there are two "white" bars on either side of the capital "I". These white stripes should be transparent.

Also, the logo to the right and the top left corner is not the same one that is almost half the way up this page at my "#InfoGalactic Logo - a graphics experiment". Up there the top "original" does not have the white bars but it does have a faint white/grey halo around the logo and text like someone using Photoshop selected the white pixels and deleted them for transparency. My "rebuild" has proper transparency around the logo, but the text has the white/grey halo as I simply copied it from the original. If you care, say so, and I can make a screen grab of that with my browser's night filter too.

Merch

Also, what's up with "Dark Lord Designs" at "crypto.fashion"? I'm atheist and anti-dogmaticist and don't believe in much - but many folks do and Dark Lord simply conjures up Satanist and Luciferian and child sacrifice stuff which will put off many people. It's hardly a cool, edgy or even clever name. If that webstore is a part of InfoGalactic I would change it or find one less alienating. I'm not a prude, but potential InfoGalaxians might be.

(Full disclosure: I like/d wicked breakbeats and my nickname is/was Sunshine so I had WickedSunshine.com from about 2000-2010 where I had my graphic portfolio and 9-11 truther stuff, but I wasn't near as woke as I am now regarding so much about conspiracies, false flags and hoaxes, Hegelian dialectics, historical revision, the climate scam, NWO, BIS, The Process Church, etc.)

Sorry Not Sorry

This spiel got longer than intended but I'd been saving it up. I think these are important ideas and may hopefully helpful. Please respond below.

~ JasonCarswell (talk)

RE: Labels & Updates

I am...reluctant. First, there's a faint whiff of narcissism about them, secondly, they "name the competition" (which savvy marketing gurus advise against), and thirdly, any article mirror will be instantly dated by the "hat" tag. -- Let's just concentrate on making a kick-ass encyclopedia that bores in on the truth and makes the l'il piggies squeal.-- Froglich (talk) 20:02, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Please expand upon you reluctance. Either it is well founded, can be explained away, will land between or is something else.
InfoGalactic's foundations and backbone are outdated articles borrowed/stolen/liberated from Wikipedia. There is no shame in that unless you want there to be. If Wikipedia was authentically a "free encyclopedia" (removed from their bookmarks last year around election time) that legitimately represented all views there'd be no need for InfoGalactic. We need to include that in the InfoGalactic identity and brand. Not only that, but InfoGalactic needs to be clear about how it's different that Wikipedia so people will actually want to use it verses the globalist empire's mouthpiece. We must win over hearts and minds for the resistance. If we aren't different, proud (narcissistic?), and worth joining, then why bother?
Every "hat tag" (I really like your/this term) could state something to this effect to explain and justify not only the purpose of the hat tag but also of InfoGalactic.
The graphics can be anything you want. Ignore them if you think they are narcissistic.
I don't know which marketing gurus you're talking to. As a rule of thumb perhaps. This is a very different situation than selling cars, and often it's good to name the competition if you want to put yourself in their league. (I highly recommend watching The Gruen Transfer, a brilliant funny Australian show about the advertising industry and the art of persuasion. One episode goes into this some. (I've been a professional animator across North America for almost 30 years.))
Again, the foundation and backbone of InfoGalactic is the format, structure, and tomb of Wikipedia. Pretending otherwise is delusional. Denying it is irrational. Embracing it is... let's not get carried away. It is what it is. Until it isn't, when all the articles are forked or original and independent.
Yes! Every mirror should be dated by the hat tag! People should know how potentially outdated the content is. It's no different that reading any article elsewhere. New York Times articles on Bill Gates from 1998 or 2008 or 2018 are very different. I wouldn't call it dishonest or even obscurantist, but dating the article adds further transparency and an authentic effort towards legitimacy. We must not shrink from our flaws and weaknesses, but point them out to find solutions, or at least be aware and cautious of them.
There's likely someone better than I am at categorizing and nomenclature that can develop our hat tags. It would be better that someone who knows better where all the effort on InfoGalactic is taking place so it can be better labelled. I've only written a few random articles. (So far from what I understand many of the InfoGalactic people are alternative right (not in the corporate media pejorative alt-right sense, nor in the mainstream retarded right). I'm more of a conspirophile anarchist progressive alternative left (not in the corporate media pejorative alt-left, nor the insane SJW or feminazi, or even the mainstream corporate corrupt democratic retarded left) and haven't seen any of that represented here, though I haven't looked. That said, though I'm for the Green Party, I'd rather vote for anti-war Ron Paul than sheepdog Bernie Sanders, though either would be superior to what's going on now.)
I'm all for making a kick-ass encyclopedia of truth. My unfinished mess of a Truther article draft was censored on Wikipedia. I don't care about squealing piggies except to expose them as they culturally engineer their Machiavellian corrupt rigged systems to rob, exploit, inflict suffering, and exterminate the masses and planet. (Though if you don't mind, please show me / link to how you make them squeal?)
I think we, InfoGalactic, should embrace our "heritage"/origins as well as declare/pronounce/market our differences that make us unique and proudly proclaim that InfoGalactic is the Wikipedia fork that is actually free from corporatocracy censorship, and where they have failed we can succeed, presenting diverse and varied viewpoints.
~ JasonCarswell (talk)
I think hat-tags (Wikipedia term for bracketed codes that generate links and so forth at the tops of articles) are, save when purely functional, gaudy. (Having a slick and professional "manual of style" is the one thing they really got right over there before the SJWs flood-filled in thought-police Gestapo'd the crap out of it.) Imagine how awful Wikipedia would look if all of its articles had those 8-bit eyesores slathered over everything. Well, they're not going to look any better over here.
As far as dating goes, it's a bad idea so long as we have fewer editors. Why? Because it is the reflexive consideration (rightly or wrongly) of the average user who lands here from a search-engine to assume that a wiki with the most recent edits is "better" just because they are more recent and presumably therefore comprehensive. If the average Wikipedia article is edited once or more times per day and the average Infogalactic article is edited much less frequently, it's tantamount to proclaiming that one's articles are "obsolete" if we date the article at the top. (So in other words, I argue that we should not date the articles via hat-tag as a tactic to make them seem "just as fresh" as the other place's.)
"...I'd rather vote for anti-war Ron Paul than sheepdog Bernie Sanders..." --They all lead to the same place; struggling just makes you sink deeper into the tar.--Froglich (talk) 02:20, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I grant you my 8-bit hat tag designs are obviously not perfect or they would have been instantly adopted. That's why I'm trying to discuss them here. Thanks for engaging me. The design can be anything functional. The red-yellow-green idea is simple and clear. My design was just for starting this conversation and can be redesigned by me, you, or anyone, assuming we agree they are as necessary as I do. I profoundly believe the function is very important and perhaps critical to distinction/branding, clarity/functionality, and potential thriving of InfoGalactic.
The function of the mirror-fork-original hat tags is to clarify to everyone what content they are reading. This is the ultimate citation for this mirror/copied encyclopedia (not plagiarized (though without the article's history accreditation is sketchy)). It may also help (us) promote any forked and/or original work. The rest of this encyclopedia is necessary (temporary) mirrored filler to avoid dead links until the mirrored articles can be updated with new information including bias clarifications and declarations (aka multiple narratives/perspectives).
Wikipedia doesn't need those hat tags because:
  1. they aren't mirroring/plagiarizing/forking anything.
  2. they rarely acknowledge various viewpoints nor admit biases.
  3. they already have their own graphics (and some are 8-bit) with an established aesthetic that InfoGalactic is unoriginal and simply copying. (InfoGalactic could do something distinctive as simple as making the background a faint yellow/creme colour so folks won't mistake it for the white/grey Wikipedia. I picked yellow/creme as an example because it's not politically red or blue or purple nor will it clash with the hyperlinks of those colours.)
  4. they are established and don't need to distinguish themselves from any "competition". (We could have a banner that welcomes alt-right, alt-left, truthers, conspirophiles, historical revisionists, etc (edit this list as you see fit) to clarify the purpose and justify the existence of InfoGalactic.)
The date is debatable about it's necessity. A date is simply functionally utilitarian on many levels, like on news articles, and more in the coding besides. A date does not have to be in the hat tag and can be separated, though I think it's better together. It could be off to the side over, inside, or under the infobox. Some articles are years old. (If anyone cares, I think Wikipedia should also feature a "last edited on..." as well.) At a glance it would save anyone from having to check the history. Sometimes the date matters, sometimes not - depending on the topic. I mention it because this is something that can be automated, as can the mirror/fork detection and updating process - should anyone with the coding skills apply this. This is important only on those subjective articles that matter - so I won't dwell further on this.
Anyone who lands on InfoGalactic is NOT looking for the Wikipedia narrative and will not shuffle on due to an old date. This is a straw man. Anyone who thinks new is always better has real money and/or shops at Walmart and avoids antiques, vintage stores, and yard sales - and they don't know much about research. You've therefore presumed the comprehensiveness. Many of Wikipedia's articles have been improved and then savagely cut back. The 9/11 Truther Movement is perpetually undergoing revisions and "defensive" revisions on WP. I rescued Lionel (radio personality) from the butchers at WP (Lionel_(radio_personality)), though I have yet to update it. (What does WP mean by "Authority Control" near the bottom?) Sometimes older versions are better.
I haven't run across SJWs on Wikipedia as I don't read whatever they'd be pushing, but it doesn't surprise me as it's choking the MSM they cite. But I have seem them shut down "truthers", myself being one. You are certainly correct - they got their "manual of style" down pat. I'm trying to help ours here.
I laughed reading your voting link. I'm going to read it again. I'm Canadian and can't vote for Ron or Bernie. Voting is a joke anyway. "If voting were effective it'd be illegal." I won't bother mentioning the Princeton study proving the people's voices are irrelevant, the left-right paradigm and the Overton window, the two major (war) business parties are literally the absolute minimum number of parties (one away from being a one party state like China) when there's 37 brands of cereal, voter registration nonsense, striking votes, vote disposals, vote tampering, multiple voting, dead voters, gerrymandering, super paks, super delegates, rigging from top to bottom, corruption, secret societies and boardrooms, Zionist infiltration, inverted totalitarianist corporatocracy, Vegas slots are more regulated than Diebold machines, Greg Palast, that the tax and voting forms should merge for taxation with authentic representation, or that they should just block chain the whole fucking thing. Oops, I guess I just did.
I'd like to hear yours or anyone's thoughts on re-branding or improving the InfoGalactic brand to distinguish it from WP in order to attract more folks.
~ JasonCarswell (talk)
InfoGalactic (or any other wiki) is not going to distinguish itself from Wikipedia via "branding"; it will distinguish itself by its content, which is to say by not only not being a politically-correct de facto propaganda ministry, but by having an internal control structure designed for immunity to O'Sullivan's Law operational from the word 'go'. -- That's why I am here. Truthfully, it is the only reason I am here, the only reason I suspect most others are here, and it is the reason the site was created in the first place. The InfoGalatic mast icon is the only brand it needs.--Froglich (talk) 11:43, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt response.
By "branding" I don't mean advertising or anything flashy (unless you want that for some reason). I mean definition and distinction.
An example of a simple subtle distinction would be a cream background would be slightly different than the Wikipedia grey background. I don't understand why you wouldn't want to distinguish InfoGalactic from Wikipedia in a visual manner. I also don't understand why you wouldn't want to declare that InfoGalactic is different by some clear definition.
By definition I mean what is InfoGalactic all about. Aside from hints here and there, until your little paragraph above I had no idea where anyone was coming from on here.
Because of those previous hints, I've often stated that I lean left, but try to also point out that I often lean right, yet mostly lean away towards anarchism. All of these are impossible ideals worth striving for, yet none of these will work, and only balance is necessary and sadly lacking. By stating this I don't think I've alienated anyone as there isn't much "community" here I'm aware of, as the sparseness of this page attests.
I can't say if the SJWs have bastardized the articles on toasters, water skiing, or ceramic excavations, but there are probably apolitical articles about that here. They probably don't have date issues of any significance. They also won't likely have any "distinguishing content". I certainly haven't seen any distinguishing content on here, other than your links or my little efforts.
However, just now I searched for Russiagate and had to link it to my old June 2017 untouched Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections article, a variation on the Wikipedia official narrative (another example of dual narratives). Sad. Sad, for a right site (that it wasn't updated).
That O'Sullivan's Law is an interesting extreme article with an unmistakable biased perspective within which it may be correct though not declared, but is actually quite flawed from other perspectives or criticisms of which there are none.
I agree SJWs have become ludicrous. So to with the right and the idle sheeple center and the anarchists who don't realize many need their tribalism and papa/nanny state. We're all be culturally engineered to fight each other while elites get away with murderous wars and vampirically suck the heart out of humanity.
Far above any identity politics or tribal leanings I think of myself as a truther, historical revisionist, and a conspirophile sifting through everything to find the most rational ideas. After I was censored on Wikipedia for being another "polite truther" I first became aware of InfoGalactic when another truther showed me where I could be free. I haven't seen any other truthers here since, nor much of anyone, but this trutherism is why I'm here. I'm certain others might come if we made them welcome, and at least distinguished IG from WP even a little. Do you know of other "tribes" on IG or is it only right wing folks. (Please forgive me if I'm not politically correct. I don't know any alt-right or right wing folks so I don't know what you/they like to be called, and I don't mean any of this in a pejorative or sarcastic manner. On occasion I watch RedIce on YouTube and other stuff, but not enough to be hip to the jargon.)
Clearly I'm not a complete idiot, yet I am still unclear about InfoGalactic's identity, or yours for that matter. Are you an administrator? Do you speak for IG? I'm not challenging you, I'm just asking because I simply don't know. If you are, perhaps you could rewrite some of the pillar/canons to include more information because they are so non-descript that they really demand "rebranding". I almost feel like InfoGalactic is intentionally bland to avoid detection or something, or maybe that's just my tinfoil hat talking.
I have a proposal and project I'm drafting to pitch the IG team. I haven't explained it yet so don't let your imagination go wild - it's not a big deal. But it's because of this I want to know more about this right wing stuff, if IG is stable and has a future, if IG is a good place for my concept, and if the IG team would mind it, and/or others like it. Soon to be explained...
~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Metapedia

What do you folks think of Metapedia? For better or worse, here are some other takes:

I ask because I'm curious to know how InfoGalactic folks, whether speaking for themselves or IG, think of Metapedia, how they might be similar or different.

I generally lean classic "lefty" (not this new SJW or Hillary insanity) but I believe Carbon Tax is a scam dependent on climate change hysteria. Pollution is a problem and so is secret geoengineering (chemtrails). I think that Olympic switched names with the Titanic and it was sunk for an insurance scam while also taking out 3 billionaires leading the way to the Federal Reserve, Income Tax, and World War 1 and it's sequel. Also, sitting empty in the middle of the Atlantic, the California, empty but for 3000 life jackets and blankets failed to catch the rescue signal and it turned into a greater tragedy, by legit accident. To my final point, the Holocaust as we've been told - only since the 1970's - is a scam. I love Jews as much as anyone, ex-girlfriends, relatives, coworkers, bosses, etc. I don't give a fuck. And Arabs, including Palestinians, are legit Semitic too. Many Euro-Jews aren't Semitic. It's the Zionists in Washington and Israel, as well as banks and Hollywood, that I despise. I like my fellow Canadians fine, but I despise the Canadian government, like all governments and "leaders". So too, Hitler was a bad guy as all leaders are but he certainly wasn't what they make him out to be. In fact, Stalin and Mao killed far more folks and as a person who admires many Marxist ideas, they disgust me. Stalinism is not Leninism is not Marxism. But I digress. The Holocaust is a scam for German "reparations". I'm not denying that there were work camps that enslaved Jews as well as Black people, Gay people, journalists, artists, anarchists, dissidents, criminals, etc. but you don't have museums for them in every state. And you don't have Native American Indian museums all across Europe collecting money in the name of Genocide (though I think Native Americans, Asians, and Black communities certainly deserve reparations, more support, and fewer jails). The 6 million number is pure fiction from the 1800s and is actually less than 200k. The number is also impossible to have achieved (simply do a search for "Holocaust math"). The gassing is impractical inefficient terror-fiction. Burning the bodies is ridiculously wasteful in the crisis war time when fuel was short. And the guards were as skinny as the prisoners because the food supply lines were strategically cut. To top it all off, it's illegal to investigate the alleged Holocaust in many countries (because they want to suppress the truth). Sorry this turned into a rant but there is a need for counter-Zionist propaganda narrative corrections. Cultural engineering has us all flinching about everything. Women deserve equal pay but no one talks about how 93% of workplace deaths (and injuries?) are men. I refuse to be shamed because I'm a white male with all the privileges that other people attach to that ignoring the down sides. I also refuse to be proud that I'm white, male and/or Canadian because I had nothing to do with that and did not earn it in order to be "proud". I am far from supreme but I'm not the opposite either. I like every Jew I've met but I despise Machiavellian Zionism. I am a Green anarcho-progressive and I like good Marxist ideas as well as good ideas from the Right, but above all I like reason and truth and new ideas. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

On other wikis

I would personally be OK with a merger of Infogalactic, Conservapedia, and Metapedia if it would triple the number of contributors. Some articles would need to clearly list their various viewpoint and bias levels, as already planned for Infogalactic.Jack-arcalon (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Please tell me/us all more about these bias viewpoint plans.
I'd never heard of Conservapedia. Metapedia has the better name. InfoGalactic was a bad choice.
As I've said before, the left and right are nuts and I'm nuts in different directions - I'm far Green, far Voluntaryist, and an Anti-Establishment Conspirophile. Would these "extremist" views be welcome here on IG and/or any merger? Also, how could/would you become more transparent here on IG and/or a merger so that folks would know it's legit free speech with open management (Unlike Wikipedia or Quora, where you have to bash your head against their walls before discovering how utterly rigged and censored they are.) ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
I don't have the details, but I understand that software is currently in development.
But it may not even be necessary.
Right now, all it takes to create a biased version of an existing article is to list the bias in the title itself.
So if someone wanted to create a left-wing version of the Trump article, they would only have to create "Donald_Trump_(left-wing interpretation)", or some similar title like that.
Jack-arcalon (talk) 06:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Like Russiagate verses Russiagate, official narrative, (reality vs Wikipedia echoing MSM's myth), assuming people are actually admitting their biases, much less including them in hat tags or article titles.
Without sounding too much like Bill Clinton (assuming that is his real birth name) trying to parse what the definition of "is" is, it's actually important to reclaim words and doublethink from MSM perversion and clearly define political stances. What is "left-wing"? Hillary Clinton is a corporate Democrat (like Barack Obama who admits his policies are right of center and Nancy Pelosi who craps on socialism because the USA is a capitalist society), a party that is bought and paid for and designed to fail preferring to lose to Republicans than adopt progressive social ideas. Hillary is in the left-wing party of the oligarchs' inverted totalitarian corporatocracy. Even Democrat Bernie Sanders claims to support many progressive policies as a sheepdog and social relief valve, yet he didn't fight the WikiLeaks proven corrupt biased rigging of Debbie Wasserman Schultz (who was scandalously forced to resign) when it was most critical, and he still supports all the wars - so he's not a legit representation for the people. He's the lesser of three evils. The news dynamic silence tactic kept The Green Party's Jill Stein and Ralph Nader as well as Ron Paul and The Libertarian Party suppressed, demonized, or absent from real debates, and she was even illegally detained handcuffed off-stage to prevent her from debating.
I think I'm "progressive" but I'm not 100% sure what all that entails. I despise SJWs and 3rd Wave Feminists and Hillary who may have claimed she's progressive but everything she says is a lie. They may call themselves "left" or even "progressive" but many won't.
The MSM can't even define what "collusion" is nor provide any proof of it.
So-called "fake news" is a brilliant turd. What is "fake"? Does it mean lying or made up or misinformation or disinformation or false or synthetic or... It's an excuse for censorship used supremely by Trump, inadequately by MSM, and Orwellian-ly by Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc (all deep state funded and connected) to censor any fucking thing they want... including InfoGalactic.
Wikipedia is very organized under their "neutral" official narrative. InfoGalactic is not as organized with a greater challenge with so many views. I guess that's the burden of freedom.
~ JasonCarswell (talk)
I used to read AlterNet a lot between 2004 and 2010 before I found other stuff and changed life patterns. They feature(d) stuff from all perspectives which I really liked. They're now under heavy attack. If you ever choose to fuse encyclopedias with a new name, I would avoid "Altpedia" which might alienate people avoiding the Alt-Right or Alt-Left but I would seriously consider "Alterpedia" or "Alternapedia" to alter history for the better. Alt may or may not be a good word but alternative media embraces the full word. And AlterNet's brand is so strong among those who've heard of it that I wouldn't worry about mistaken affiliations. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

I stumbled into another encyclopedia I'd never heard of before, Everipedia.org. With an extremely brief glance it's "(cc) 2017" content looks like another Wikipedia fork. I like that it looks different but I don't like how they did it, perhaps because I'm not accustomed to it and some of it's features. I dislike their splash page even more than the Infogalactic copy off Wikipedia. I do like that at the bottom of the article is the discussion section, though these may get longer than the article itself - easily fixed with collapsing sections, possibly as default. Comments and opinions? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Cultural Authoritarianism

Maybe you folks can help me. I despise Cultural Marxism for many reasons. I want to bring your attention to the name/title/term/nomenclature. Why wasn't it called Cultural Authoritarianism, Cultural Totalitarianism, or Cultural Communism? Or even Cultural Fascism if you take the contemporary perverted defininition of fascism being about an evil violent dictatorship. It's as stupid as punching Nazis, becoming the thing you think you hate. I am not an expert on Marx but much of it I really like - with balance. (Marxism and socialism have many examples of oligarch rigged perversions communism or a bloated US military or militarized police force waging wars on drugs or in nations that the majority of citizens don't want much less want to be forced to support under threat of violence.) I like Yanis Varoufakis, though he fails to acknowledge the "New World Order" stuff above the governments. I really enjoy Richard D. Wolff and everything he says, especially about worker cooperatives/worker directed enterprises which IMHO is a decent regional decentralized solution to many of our problems the Neoliberals don't want the public to ever have. This tinfoil hat thinking also leads me to believe we're being culturally engineered to have a negative view of Marxism by this negative association to Cultural Marxism, a very different concept. On a grander scale this utterly retarded SJW crap from "lefties" is nonsense to any normal rational person on the left, right, or libertarian angle and if some people are alienated by this Neo-Left insanity that weakens the rational left, greens, progressives, etc that may have legitimate viewpoints and some good ideas - not to mention a much needed counter balance to the Overton window and other things going too far right too quickly. I also really enjoy Jordan B. Peterson and everything he says, even if I don't agree with it all. (Topically I do like this video[1] particularly at 1:52:50.) The point is, all the the centralized powers of banksters, the Washington consensus, Zionists, the Vatican, City of London, BIS, etc... not to mention socialism/communism, fascism/corporatocracy, inverted totalitarian capitalism... they all lead to totalitarianism of one sort or another. And I see that is what much of this SJW Cultural Marxism crap is about, plus the Hegelian dialectic and that as long as we're all punching down on the weaker minorities or fighting each other about whatever they trigger us with, then we're not fighting the elites who are exploiting and orchestrating all us debt slaves with their cultural engineering. Thoughts...? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Very little makes sense until one understands, at the macro-level, the class structure of America.--Froglich (talk) 07:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
I like that. "Looters" is a kind way of putting it. I prefer to think of the obscenely rich as the protected spoiled hyper-exploitative war-happy extinction-enabling psychopath kakistocracy of polished tribal turds. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
Follow the links in that article. Don't let yourself get dragged around by narrative-pushers. (In other words, attend to Francisco d'Anconia's quote on the sidebar in that looter's link from the class structure article, and also follow its Shadow Party link. Put the 2-and-2 together, and now come back and see how you're using the phrase "obscenely rich" in the preceding post. -- You're a fish on a hook, and they're making you flop just the way they like. Everybody: Get off your hook!) --Froglich (talk) 19:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Speak more clearly. What's wrong with calling them obscenely rich? Whether they inherited it or "earned" it in entirely rigged systems they wrote the rules for with unfair justice systems for the lower classes and barely any consequences for the elite class. Don't punch down on the weak, disabled, minorities, immigrants, "lazy" folks who can't afford "bootstraps", etc. That's easy and cowardly - and exactly what "they" want - us fighting each other - anyone but them. Punch up at the elite-rigged systems and their operators that oppresses us. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
You request I speak more clearly, yet hinge upon undefined terms "them" and "they". --These are Ambiguous Collectives. You're using English words, but the dictionaries are so bloated with variant definitions that it's impossible to understand what you're railing against. "Obscene"? According to whom? Why is their opinion relevant? Envy? That's not a reason. The man who builds a better mousetrap should get rich. "...unfair justice system...." --well now you're talking government, and that's a different animal entirely.
Again, follow the links. It's all there.--Froglich (talk) 11:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Almost a nice point about "them" and "they" except I said they are "the obscenely rich" with their rigged systems. I am not envious of them - at all. "They" are the monsters who orchestrate wars, keep people in Venezuela starving, and the recent $160b addition to the defense budget could pay for all American health care AND free college. "They" are fucking us all over royally. I could spew speculative shit about the New World Order or the Illuminati or the Builderbergers but all of that is rumour of secret places we'll never know substantiated by cultural events and patterns that are undeniable yet obscured by the fog of plausible deniability and backroom proprietary knowledge. Instead of those mysterious vague associations I'll simply point to the corporatocracy in plain sight. Bill Clinton deregulated everything to set us up for the media monopoly, the financial disparity, prison industrial complex, etc... Jeff Bezos of Amazon.com got some CIA contract for $600m and bought the WaPo for $200m, and he's on the Pentagon board. Who needs enemies when you're in an inverted totalitarian oligarchy?
A dying man crawls out of the desert and another man with a water bottle stands over him. He has the "right" to not help his fellow man, but morally he's a monster if he doesn't.
I'm not against getting rich. Equality is nonsense. I'm for fairness, in most things. I despise government, but realize that Anarchy is a noble but impossible goal because there will always be tribal people. That's fine and a balance is necessary, and I don't care whatever the society of the day wants for government, big or small, I just want it better. But our voices have never counted.
How was I letting myself be "dragged around by narrative-pushers"?
~ JasonCarswell (talk)
"...keep people in Venezuela starving...." Are you for fucking real? --Froglich (talk) 11:29, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Sargon is sometimes good and sometimes not. He's stuck in binary politics.
Americans can blame socialism and Russians can blame capitalism for the top-down orchestrated strife in Venezuela, a ploy to re-privatize their resources. Government, firemen, soldiers, the NSA, CIA, FBI, and police with their monopoly on violence are paid by socialist means (perhaps too much). Fake socialism took tax payers money and bailed out the banks for the "too big to fail" scam taking homes from millions (cause we're all to small to succeed). Balanced socialism would have returned the tax payers money that they would have put in the banks or surged the economy for a win-win-win raising all boats.
Don't blame socialism - or capitalism - which are both out of balance. Blame the rigged systems that favour the ruling class. Votiing is a joke that is not mean to be effective. If they were serious you wouldn't vote for a corruptible clown who may represent some of your issues or "values", rather, they should merge the over-complicated tax form with the over-simplified voting form so that you could vote on the actual issues for authentic representation in taxation and we'd see how many would vote to spend more on bombs or schools, warfare or healthcare, industrial prison complexes or drug treatment centers, militarized police and gun control or community directed policing policy.
It's not about socialism or capitalism (or anarchism), in balance or not. It's about the totalitarian corporocracy world order and their perpetually new strangleholds and full spectrum domination.
~ JasonCarswell (talk)
"Balanced socialism would have..." -- Where do you pull this nonsense from? There is no such thing as "balanced" government theft. The words you're using are English, but all of the definitions have been horsefucked. Whatever you've been reading, chuck it in the dumpster, because right now you're just speaking Swahili.--Froglich (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Correction, "A more balanced socialist application (whether you like socialism or not) would have..." But you already knew that. Also, if you'd been paying attention I've been saying the balance between tribalist socialism and capitalism and libertarian anarchism and state totalitarianism needs to be better reached for a more fair society that can help everyone, not just the billionaires and trillionaires. I TOTALLY AGREE that it was government theft, as is taxation without representation (with the same archaic system of "elected" corrupt psychopaths that we've been using since it took weeks by horse to get to Washington). Am I still speaking Swahili with English words like Catherine the Great? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

YouTube Censorship of February 2018

This is not good... In Sept 2016 they started wide soft censorship based on polices from Jan 2016 and people have suffered demonetizations since. After the Vegas "shooting" thing they censored a lot temporarily. With this recent Florida school shooting they've ramped up the censorship another notch by banning conversations, low-traffic video producers, and some popular truther channels, like the UK's Rickie Allen Show, which was generally neutral but featured progressive, alt-right, and lots of truther topics (DuckDuckGo search Richie Allen Show YouTube censorship). If they clip off low-traffic users before they can build an audience then we're back at the legacy paradigm of establishment domination under the cultural engineering "official" narratives. If they aren't already, they'll start throttling InfoGalactic too. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

"Your connection is not private"

HTTP works but the HTTPS has not been working for some reason for some time. This is new for me. For whatever it's worth I'm in Windsor, Canada (in the "Truther" North, strong and free) and working on Truther, Pedophocracy, and a few related articles. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

A few hours after the post above, whatever it was has cleared up. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Is this really an encyclopedia?

After Wikipedia I spend a little time on RationalWiki long enough to know they aren't very rational and they have their own community with it's own culture and it's own inside terms and sense of "humour". If they don't like someone they'll focus on something negative ignoring all their other accomplishments. If an article is boring they'll say "needs more goat" which means more whimsy, humour, edge, whatever.

Like them or not, at least Wikipedia and RationalWiki have community, and some people read the talk-page discussions.

I added stuff to the Fall-back propaganda article which was clearly a combination of article and insider whimsy. I know I over added in the "see also" section (ie limited hangout, noble lie, psychological warfare, cultural engineering, etc), in part because there were clear correlations, there were relevant terms missing in the body, and assumed the primary author, Froglich, might trim it back as appropriate - but it was all simply deleted.~ JasonCarswell (talk)

"Deleted with extreme prejudice. (Have you even read "SJWs Always Lie"? How did you get here? Do you even know what this place is for? Who it is for?--Froglich (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I have not read that book. The title is extreme but not entirely untrue. I got here via this Internet thingy. I do not know what this place is for. That's why I've been asking for clarity on this page, and hoping you'll/we'll/Infogalacti will present it the splash page and in the introductory pages because the 7 collumns or whatever doesn't cut it. Maybe I'm an idiot but there are a lot of idiots out there and you need to be clear in this webpage's functions and intentions to them as well as the non-idiots. "Who" is it for?
You didn't explain the "extreme prejudice" deletions. I don't know what SJWs have to do with limited hangouts. I am not an SJW.
I'd only returned to that article because I came across another piece of Bill Clinton presidential distraction dirt to add under Lewinsky, but it'd been deleted. Had I known the article you pointed me to was active I probably would've left it alone. For that I apologize. For my queries and starting this lively "community" discussion, I do not apologize. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

What remains (expanded since my additions/deletions) is a decent but biased article with multiple issues, a lack of citations (possibly forthcoming),...

You plastered an article (that I created, btw) with cite-neededs, and meanwhile you're over there wallowing in Truther stuffing it full of fifteen year-old Active Measures disinfo. I've been leaving that article alone because as long as you're in it you're not anywhere else.--Froglich (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes. I've plastered my own incomplete work with cite-neededs too, as reminders to myself and in remote hopes others might help, even you. Please let me know where my Truther stuff is wrong, including whatever Active Measures disinfo. I'd rather it be correct than "right". In fact, I'd prefer to include all the bad disinfo WITH proof that it's bad so others might learn too. Some of this echoed disinfo originated from ignorance, bad sources, or intentional infiltration to discredit those truthers. I'm simply trying to present a better representation than Wikipedia ever lets happen.
You make it sound like everyone must stay in their own little sandbox to build their own little castles rather than this be a group project. If that's how it is fine. I'll just do my thing. I just never saw anything anywhere clearly saying how this is distinctly different from Wikipedia, other than you're not under the rule of the WP Administrator Mafia (forbidding any other groups on WP). ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

...and what I have most issue with are the unclear coded titles and links in the weird List of fall-back propaganda narratives. Personally, I think they should be clear and say what they're linked to, with your clever description, before, after, or to the side. (And what's with Repo Man?) I don't know if I've ever heard MSM talking about Putin's Reichstag, etc. Kerry is not a commie. He's a capitalist through and through. JasonCarswell (talk)

John Kerry joined VVAW, which was openly pro-communist at the time. Its goals were 100% aligned with the CPUSA and RCP, and circulated a lot of behind-the-scenes personnel with the IPS and other communist-front groups. --You don't know what you're talking about, but you're going to get up in my face and pretend that you do.--Froglich (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
John Kerry may have been a commie or commie infiltrator but he IS anything but now. Nancy Pelosi On Democrats: ‘We’re Capitalist And That’s Just The Way It Is. However…’ ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

He's a sheepdog. Kerry and Bush are cousins, and also members of Skull and Bones, and only once each on MSM before the 2004 elections they were asked about it and refused to say anything. The Cuckservative Donation Fund NRA is a scapegoat,...JasonCarswell (talk)

The NRA is not a "scapegoat"; it's a "heel".--Froglich (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes, "heel" is a far better description. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
"Eat your heart out, Musk."
"Eat your heart out, secret space program skeptics." The OTV-1 Boeing X-37B in April 2010, inside its payload fairing prior to launch.

...well funded but not nearly as "powerful" as they all pretend, much like Russia always was and is. Is "shitbomb" a technical term for sex scandal? You won't catch MSM talking about the NWO, Bilderbergs, or the Kochs anymore, especially since Kochs have started advertising with some of the countless corporations. Bezos won't allow criticism of himself or anyone who advertises with his WaPo, according to leaked accounts.

Whether you like conspiracy theories or not, most of those are taboo topics on corporate media. The corporate media will occasionally debate the moon landing but only with biased straw man discussions. They'll also far too proud to bring you breaking secret footage of UFOs without clarification or follow ups. If it's such secret knowledge then why are they sharing it? For the sheeple idiots who consume their brainwashing programs and can't read or think for themselves.~ JasonCarswell (talk)

<squinty grandpa stare> Oh, so now you'd like to talk about the moon and the UFOs, wouldja? ...And exactly how old were *you* when Apollo 11 thundered off the pad, beating gravity into submission under the sustained roar of five Rocketdyne F-1s pouring out seven and three-quarters million pounds of thrust and you were watching it all in real-time?--Froglich (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
No, I'd rather not. I was regretting it as I wrote it. I know enough not to believe a lot of it but I hardly know enough to defend any of it. I actually tend to avoid UFO shit. I was simply disagreeing with some of what you thought were acceptable vs non-acceptable conpsiracies, presumably according to the MSM.
Not that my age matters, but I was born the next year. I'm not saying there weren't rockets. Were you on the moon to personally witness their landing? Everything has been filtered through MSM for us to believe (or not). The "greatest achievement of mankind" - and they lost the blueprints for the lander and destroyed the original footage? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Encyclopedic viewpoints

Infogalactic allows entries to be created by people with very different or even radically opposing viewpoints. Both extreme left-wing and extreme right-wing articles and everything in between. Even about the same subjects.

In the future, software filters may allow people to choose which versions they want to see. Currently, it is requested that writers state their biases (or the biases of the interpretations being discussed), if any, at the top of the article or article version.

Also, everyone is requested to write as truthfully as they can. Different interpretations are extremely valuable, because if there is one thing we need right now, it is more contributors. Jack-arcalon (talk) 10:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Can you please also develop/add a filter that explains the Wikipedia mirrored article status (and maybe date)? Or something to that effect? Like banners, hats, or tinting the background of WP mirror articles.
Please expand on how to "state their biases...at the top" - ie. instructions. Also we should try to define these filter options and the labels. I'm pretty sure Froglich and I may have different opinions about what some labels may mean. It may not be easy, but if we can all try to develop nomenclature and definitions for a small number of filter option labels, regardless of bias, then that would be terrific accomplishment. Undoubtedly there will evolve sub-filter options, categories, crossovers, and whatevers. Also, "at the top" is okay, but sometimes it may only be relevant to a paragraph or a section. In fact, where possible (ie. short), I'd prefer that an article feature all of the biases is separate labeled sections, rather than linking to separate articles. (My previously mentioned example of two representations in the same article: Death (according to the "official" Wikipedia version) vs The Actual Circumstances Of Cooper's Death .)
Additionally, I'd previously mentioned that a bot that would update mirrored articles would be good, but since most articles aren't looked at that much, even better (perhaps instead) would be a bot that pre-fetch updates when someone goes to that article so they're getting the latest, preferably more quickly for humans (and slower for spiderbots). This would also create a more robust article history, should the Wikipedia mirror sources radically change. (Sometimes the article discussions as well as histories are rich with censored research and perspectives too.) ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Bias disclosures

In the articles I contributed to, about population replacement, or fighting age migrants, or Jim's Blog, or Chateau Heartiste, or Black on White violence, the text itself includes multiple mentions that these subjects are considered politically incorrect, and are considered to be right-wing theories.

You are right that an article could feature all of its biases in separately labeled sections, rather than linking to separate articles. I have avoided creating separate articles, but in a few cases it was necessary, like the great differences we have between the antisemitism article, and the antisemitism (mainstream view) versions, which could be hard to merge. The Milton William Cooper solution is usually better.

I agree. I recognize the validity of both "antisemitism" articles but I have some recommendations for them.
  1. Have antisemitism link to antisemitism (disambiguation) the way I did with Chomsky earlier today, with brief (cautionary) summaries.
  2. Relabel the RationalWiki article as "the RationalWiki perspective" or "an irreverent satire perspective" or something. It may shock some folks.
  3. I avoid "mainstream" as much as possible and try to use "Wikipedia" with "corporate media" as the origin source with it's bias.
  4. It may not be covered in the articles, but to me (and many anti-Zionists/truthers like me) it's worth clarifying in the hats the distinction between Jews and Zionists.
~ JasonCarswell (talk)

There currently IS a "Forkbot", but it's still slow due to limited resources. When more IG contributors appear there will also be more IG users, and the site could be better funded by donations or advertising. Also, I understand that corporations etc will be allowed to control their own article versions about themselves (clearly marked as such). Jack-arcalon (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

I've dug up my unpublished project proposal I started drafting last year. I'm excited to finally finish it and pitch it here for feedback. I was going to wait until I'd finished my other endless meddling, but now seems as good a time as any. Or tomorrow. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

"...Both extreme left-wing and extreme right-wing articles and everything in between...." -- I loathe and despise that hoary old "right vs left spectrum" nonsense. It means exactly nothing. If I participate here, I will not accept articles I contribute being pidgeon-holed into somebody's idea of what a "conservative" "perspective" is. Let's take the Chomsky article, which I recast by carving out all the shit nobody cares about (because precisely 100% of the people who've wandered there way over to here are well aware of Wikipedia's entry, and would just go there if official narratives were what interested them), and instead aired the dirty laundry. The "Ickypoobad Nogoodwrongthink Original" hat I added made it perfectly clear what was forthcoming.
Today, I see that the article has been moved to a new name, which I loathe, and supported by a new disambiguation page with the following entries:
Noam Chomsky (a conservative perspective), sees Chomsky as supporting communist totalitarian regimes and all their evils.
Noam Chomsky (a liberal perspective), sees Chomsky as supporting socialist corporate Democrats despite all their evils.
Noam Chomsky (a truther perspective), sees Chomsky as a gatekeeper, limited hangout, and government lifetime actor at MIT.
Noam Chomsky (a Wikipedia perspective), with the "official" narrative bias of corporate media.
Ugh. -- What is the point of this? How does it serve truth (and I mean the real thing here, not some scatterbrain's fanciful notions of it)? Let's suppose that all four of these articles are eventually made, and that one of them contains the truth. This would mean that, should every article come to eventually have a similar structure, that 75% of InfoGalactic's database would consist of articles that don't get at the truth, and what truth there is, is a round peg smashed into a square hole someone else has decided to call "conservative" (or whatever). That, frankly, is not acceptable to me.
(See next, new, section entitled "The Purpose of InfoGalactic(?)", which will be up shortly.)--Froglich (talk) 21:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Infogalactic was specifically created in 2016 to allow that sort of thing. We're now learning whether that's possible.
However, the "fact level" of each article was supposed to contain only undeniable and verifiable facts with citations.
It should also be free of all biases still found in Wikipedia versions.
Jack-arcalon (talk) 22:03, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
It's most certainly possible.
"However, the "fact level" ... with citations." I agree. That's why "citations needed" are good and necessary. Myself included, with much much much to fill in. They also help me improve my style and content when I keep in mind I have to (eventually) back it up.
"It should also be free of all biases still found in Wikipedia versions." This is 1) very subjective 2) a ridiculously huge and impossible task - but still worth attempting. I suppose we all just start with the topics that interest us, and by the end of the week we'll all have read over and corrected the entire encyclopedia.
-
It means exactly nothing TO YOU. It means a lot to a lot of people. Many of them are tricked into buying into the left-right thing. Many of them depend on labels and maps to know where they stand. If you want to change it from "conservative" be my guest but don't label it "progressive", "liberal", or the like. I prefer anarchy but some folks demand leaders and groups so I realize that anarchy is a great ideal to strive for but as unrealistic as unfettered capitalism or socialism. So too, people will want to label you if you don't define your own labels. That's why we need to figure out some standardizations for the filters and article titles.
How are politics or perspectives any less valid to categorize as any other doctrine or dogmatic belief?
There are abundant articles about all the religions, legends, mythologies, etc. of the world. There's even different articles on atheism (not a religion). If you happen to believe in God then you are already an atheist to all gods (Zeus, Hanuman, Mithras, etc) with one remaining (unless you believe in many gods). I like the Raven Tales but I don't believe them.
Does every Christianity article about every apostle require including Buddhist perspectives? No. But InfoGalactic is flexible and ready should this kind of stuff arise. Just flip the belief genre to politics.
By placing your "Ickypoo" article under the neutral disambiguation page the user can choose their own poison while offering other perspectives to be filled in or added.
Is an apple 1) red 2) round 3) food 4) a fruit 5) a record company 6) a computer company 7) some of the above 8) all of the above 9) none of the above...? Many truths are subjective.
You don't own "truth". I don't. There is not one "truth". (And as a "truther" writing a "truther" article, I don't claim to know all the "truths" nor ever did. Most truthers will tell you to research yourself and find your own truths. I'm just trying to present the ones I know of and the views of many I come across. It's hella complex, varied, and layered, and I've got far to go.)
Rather than spouting vinegar you might consider integrating some sweet aikido moves into your "true" perspectives. Don't smash the round peg in the square hole. Instead, seduce them, lube it up, then stick it up their ass. Don't come straight on - instead use your opponent's own content (without distorting contexts) against them pointing out their irrefutable inconsistencies. This can be done to all politicians left or right. This can be done to all religions too (though hard-headed circular logic can be tough to crack). Truthers are not exempt. We're all full of contradictions, juxtapositions, hypocrisies, and self delusions. We're all human, with great but limited perspectives.
Maybe "75% of InfoGalactic's database would consist of articles that don't get at the truth" because there is no single truth, or it's buried under decades or centuries of dogma, propaganda, hysteria, and mythology. A legitimate truth doesn't need to be afraid of other ideas if they're all presented fairly so readers may come to their own conclusions.
For the record, while I am technically a "scatterbrain", I prefer that you call me "chucklehead". And I'm not fancy nor are my notions. Maybe a little. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

The Purpose of Infogalactic(?)

Relevant portions boldfaced:

Excerpt From: Vox Day. “SJWs Always Double Down: Anticipating the Thought Police (The Laws of Social Justice Book 2) (sequel to “SJWs Always Lie“)

Chapter 9: Building SJW-Free Organizations

In SJWs Always Lie, I noted that if you visit the Wikipedia page devoted to anyone who has been successfully attacked by SJWs, you will find that a significant portion of their page is dominated by the so-called news of their downfall. It doesn’t matter if they are otherwise notable for discovering DNA, winning Nobel Prizes, or writing science fiction novels, the SJWs utilize Wikipedia as a primary means of ensuring that every time anyone looks up information about the individual, one of the first things they will see is the fact that the SJWs successfully attacked them.

How does one counteract that when the vast majority of Wikipedia’s Administrators are hard-core SJWs fully intent on using their power to discredit people they don’t like, and of whom they don’t approve?

The answer, as I suggested in this book’s predecessor, was to pursue the strategy of building alternative institutions that will compete with the SJW-infested ones. I believe this to be a winning strategy in the long-term due to the aforementioned Impossibility of Social Justice Convergence; the converged institutions have to serve the interests of social justice first, whereas our alternative institutions can focus solely on their primary functions.

In 2015, Wikipedia was at the top of my personal list, due to it being both influential and vulnerable. I wrote, “It is influential because it is the first place that practically everyone in the media begins their research. It is vulnerable because as an open-source project, its current offering can easily be forked, and because its SJW affiliation is maintained by a mere 562 volunteer admins, half of one percent of whom are camped on my page.

“Since then, 6.6 percent of its admins have gone inactive, and with the help of 176 of my readers, in October 2016 I forked Wikipedia and established Infogalactic: the Planetary Knowledge Core. Funded by donations provided by the Original Galaxians and the Burn Unit, Infogalactic is an SJW-free zone where people are allowed to edit pages without the constraints of having to abide by the SJW Narrative or rely upon the SJW-approved “reliable sources” in lieu of directly citing the relevant evidence. And because it is not a static, one-time fork, but a dynamic one that is constantly scanning Wikipedia’s changes and bringing over new pages and updated ones that do not conflict with its own editors’ edits, Infogalactic is in no danger of becoming out of date despite its much smaller number of regular editors....

So far, so good. The purpose of this place is nominally clear: It is an SJW-free zone. ...which of course begs the question: "What is an SJW"? Taken literally, they are "warriors" for "social justice". So...what is "social justice"? What it is, is the most recent euphemastic newspeak label that a certain ideological cadre has chosen to label themselves. Like all such language hijacks, the definitions are bastardized. I.e., these people are neither sociable nor interested in real justice. This label is just a conceit, of course. SJWs are very plainly socialists. Do SJWs Always Lie? Of course they do. Why? Because they are socialists, and that's what socialists do. Lie. Their goal, unchanged since the Reign of Terror, is to acquire power over others and steal, both impossible to do by telling the truth. All of the revelations of Vox Day's books were on display over two hundred years ago. This is a very, very old Cold War (of which the post-WWII Soviet phrase is but a small portion) that we are still in the midst of.

...More importantly, the Infogalactic team is building the DONTPANIC engine which will replace the very old and very outdated MediaWiki engine that powers Wikipedia and is held together with little more than string, chewing gum, and massive quantities of memory caching. When it is introduced in 2018, it will permit every user of Infogalactic to set his perspective filters according to his own preferences, thereby allowing him to act as his own Admin and see the version of the subject page that most closely approximates those preferences, rather than the version the admins have decided represents the one true reliably-sourced, SJW-approved page. Infogalactic’s perspective filters provide for the genuine possibility of drawing off the greater part of Wikipedia’s audience, and in a way that Wikipedia, due to its convergence and its centralized structure, will never be able to match. Combined with the Verified pages that permit subjects to present their own side of their own story...

And here is our problem: This is at odds with the stated goal (getting rid of SJWs) laid out just previously. --The purpose of an encyclopedia should be to codify expertise, not be a My Little Pony whose hairstyle each reader adjusts to his tastes and accesses via a set of filters. That'd be like marketing a cookbook in which the reader creates the recipes -- there's no point, and I would assert that the intended audience is staying away for that reason, and which is why the place is full of cobwebs a mere two years after launch. (To make a third analogy within one paragraph, nobody wants to be on the boat where no one is at the helm.)

As we have shown, SJWs crave eternal conflict as well as complete control

Because they are socialists.

the former because they need enemies to generate the feelings of superiority that stave off their long-term emotional pain, the latter because being exposed to people and ideas that challenge their current Narrative cause them new emotional pain. That is why they can never live and let live, and that is why they will never voluntarily permit rival perspectives to be freely accessible by their users. Infogalactic is not the only new rival challenging the SJW-converged institutions. In addition to the Brave browser, which is already much faster than Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Safari on both mobile and desktop, Twitter-alternative Gab offers 300-character, editable posts and has raised over one million in donations and private investments. Castalia House, which publishes this book, is growing at a year-on-year rate of 336 percent and sold more books in September 2017 than it did in all of 2014. Quickfund.me is an alternative to GoFundMe. And perhaps most importantly, Freestartr offers an SJW-proof alternative to Patreon, Kickstarter, and IndieGoGo that will permit the funding of more alternatives to converged platforms, organizations, and industries.

These alternatives are necessary even when an organization is not fully converged itself because too many of them have proven to be unable to resist external pressure from SJW swarms. Even mighty Amazon has proven itself susceptible to social pressure from outside, when it joined Walmart, Sears, Google, and eBay in banning the sale of Confederate flag merchandise in the wake of a shooting at a black church in South Carolina. This may seem a little ironic in light of the fact that Amazon still sells Mein Kampf, The Little Red Book: Sayings of Chairman Mao, and Essential Works of Lenin: “What Is to Be Done?” as well as merchandise featuring the face of the murderous Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara, but then, incoherence and inconsistency are a reliable hallmark of an institution under assault by SJWs.

Here's one thing that everyone here needs to understand very clearly, and I don't think most of you do. -- Institutions (using that term as if a volitional ambiguous-collective for the moment) do not fear SJWs. *Period*. What they fear are laws written and enforced by socialists entrenched in bureaucracy. This did not come out of nowhere; -- it goes all the way back to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Let me tell you: Every single one of these worthless, no-talent shitheel parasites would be instantly fired out of a cannon tomorrow were Title IIV to disappear. (This is why you don't see much actual change going on with the Trump administration so far. Title IIV is still law of the land, and the "permanent bureaucracy" will simply wait out this president like it has previous irksome yet ultimately minor irritants to its long-term power.)

Mouse-sized alternatives are presently free to scurry between the ankles of the big corps because they fall under T7's 50 employees size limit. But "mice" can still be harassed by the IRS, and that became an acute problem during the Obama Administration.

As stated previously, this fight is much bigger and has been going on longer than many of you may realize.

But it is important to do more than simply react to SJW attacks on existing institutions by providing alternatives to them. As the American conservative movement has finally learned, the Reagan strategy of trying to hold on until the enemy collapses under the weight of its internal contradictions only works when your taxes are not going to prop the other side up and your children are not. No one has ever decisively won a purely defensive war; even Fabius Maximus was eventually replaced by Scipio Africanus as Rome took the war from Italy to Carthage. Survival is a necessary condition for victory, but the two should never be confused.

FALNcommunists.png

*Bingo*. That right there. Take the war to enemy. Throw them *out*.. -- And that is one of the first things I did after signing up here: I took out this trash (see side-pic). Who are they? All the minor players in the Clinton-pardoned FALN whose pages where cloned over from Wikipedia when the site was mirrored. I wiped their articles and replaced them with redirects to a main article (as I had once futilely attempted at Wikipedia a long time ago for their failing notability guidelines). Within half a day, somebody else had other ideas, and my changes were partially-reverted.

Vox Day was half-right when he described the purpose of Wikipedia as... "a primary means of ensuring that every time anyone looks up information about the individual, one of the first things they will see is the fact that the SJWs successfully attacked them." --The other purposeful half of Wikipedia is to ensure that every single rank-and-file loyal party comrade on the face of the earth has a Wikipedia page. For example, I got into a bloody row over athere a few years ago over some no-name executive-assistant toiletbrush-attendant in Her Majesty's Government who had a page because he had an "award" that was essentially handed out to every single snotwhelp in "public" "service". He'd never done anything, never made anything, never written anything, never spoken anywhere, was never in the news, and was never the subject of anything. But he had a page because some hack at Wikipedia was boilerplate creating pages off a parliamentary employment roster. --At least the individual FALN guys, be they cookie-cutter clones of each other, all took part in criminal operations. To take another example all the way to the bleeding extreme: every direct-to-payview porn star has an article at Wikipedia because "reliable sources" have been created to talk about every one of them, and every performer gets one or more awards for something by one of several entitles. But porn actors aren't SJWs or even that political, you may muse. --But they don't have to be, from the big picture socialist view; what matters is that giving them articles destroys the concept of an "encyclopedia" being a repository of worthy knowledge.

Imagine a Wiki in which every single soldier in the Red Army, and every one of the whores in the baggage-train behind them, had their own page whose very presence signifies them as being as noteworthy as, say, the men who built Saturn Vs in an era when computers ran on vacuum tubes the size of toasters. Now, the internet is certainly infinite in theory, meaning that there's plenty of room for all of this shit, (and shit, like work, can be expected to expand to fill all available space and time), but: does it have to be your wiki that it's on?

I argue, strenuously, *no.*

You are in a war. If you're serious about enjoining it, then the very first thing you need to do is shoot the enemy out of your own house.
--Froglich (talk) 00:23, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Purpose and focus

Very good points. I will be focusing on making many small edits on existing articles from now on, rather than creating different article versions. The more important ones first. Too many entries have not been edited at all, or only by Forkbot.
Later, new software might allow casual contributors to add new paragraphs to existing text. These could be hidden if necessary. -- Jack-arcalon (talk) 20:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Do you have lists of articles? I'm curious to see what you think are important. I made lots of lists on my user page but haven't bothered to touch most of them. I'm not fast nor well focused nor as devoted. I find myself too caught up taking in more new information than documenting it as I go or even trying to catch it all up.
I would avoid hiding things. There are better options to present the material. For example you could create a simple table (with or without borders, etc) with the original text on the left and new comments on the right. Or content can be collapsed/expanded. This brings us to the formatting process of Infogalactic. Where Wikipedia has over a decade of hyper-organized processes, Infogalactic has no guides for any of this. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Furthering discussion...

I was too pissed off to respond properly.
Shortly after the above was posted I spent from just after 10pm until 2am on my (too) long response that discussed, debated, and agreed with the stuff above. I was literally writing my response to the very last sentence when my computer inexplicably and unexpectedly rebooted at exactly 2am. It wasn't just a browser crash or something - it was a full on reboot. I do not let Windows do this. There was no power surge or brownout. My computer stays on for weeks at a time and I only reboot it when it slows down. Was the deep state spying on my genius words and afraid their brilliance might influence people? Has Infogalactic got a secret spyware censorship thingy? Is Microsoft (also deeply connected to the deep state) and all their intentional back doors, secret access, exploits, etc to blame? Was it my RAM or aliens? I didn't care how or why. I was just hella pissed because I was manic on caffeine doing some great work only to be lost in time like tears in rain.
So from March 3 until March 10 I was doing other stuff, using my other computer to browse, and procrastinating opening up my browser on my rebooted main machine, and although I was enjoying the discussion I was going to call it quits anyway after that long spiel for a while to work on other stuff as I don't have time to debate the folly of everything in the left-right paradigm. I only re-started my Vivaldi browser on the 10th to watch the live Jimmy Dore Show. Fortunately, praise the creators, my Vivaldi browser had saved all of my unpublished words in the active editing tab. All that grief was for naught.
I apologize for my delay and shortcomings and without further ado am resuming our discussion with my previous words intact, starting...
I advocate for myself, not the devil, not that I believe in them, nor wish to argue, even for a sake, but I am enjoying this discussion. Just sayin.
Firstly, do you think I'm an SJW? When I first heard of the term, I thought, hell ya, kewl name bra, I'm a "social justice warrior" in the same way now I think I'm a "truth warrior". Then shortly after I sadly learned what "Social Justice Warriors" were really about. I have my own independent ideas and some of them agree with SJWs, though not usually so extremist, but many if not most don't. I have a problem with our binary world. "You're either with us or your with the terrorists." What? No. Can't I be against both the US government and the terrorists? Is your favourite colour red or blue? How about Green or yellow? Or Snickerdoodle beige? (It's a real colour I painted part of my NYC apartment.)
My two cents: "SJW" is used far too often on InfoGalactic for anyone who has a different view, even if they're not SJW's, like me. I suppose it's convenient shorthand, but it's also very limiting and potentially alienating. It's not as annoying when people misuse "socialism" or conflate "socialism", "communism", and "Marxism" and use them interchangeably when they are very different concepts. Similarly it's as annoying as using "right", "libertarian", "alt-right", and "neo-Nazi" interchangeably.
I fully understand the hypocrisy in not liking some labels while asking for other labels to define our articles. "They" have us all twisted up, per their plan.
In addition to the Wikipedia SJW attack tactics, the media also apply dynamic silence. It's not only Wikipedia though. Above you stated that you took out all the regular stuff about Noam Chomsky that folks could find on Wikipedia, so your article is all attack dwelling on the bad (and omitting some). I was upset a year and a half ago by RationalWiki's crapping on truther James Perloff for a book he wrote in the 1990s. Maybe he deserved some of it in a section but not to dwell the whole article on it completely ignoring all of his work and accomplishments (before? or) since then. Religion is a low hanging fruit for those skeptics who can't see through other dogmas.
Sometimes prizes are signs of excellence. More and more often I find they are as political as everything else. Nobel Prizes, Pulitzer's, Oscars - they don't impress me a quarter as much any more.
Are "the vast majority of Wikipedia’s Administrators" really "hard-core SJWs"? I don't think they are. I think they are defenders of the status quo, aka, the establishment, and I wouldn't be surprised if many of them were deep state assets, like the CIA's Operation Mockingbird that has CIA trained puppets like Anderson Cooper controlling the message. I think most SJWs are brainwashed pawns and their leaders are also assets manufacturing their stupid hyper-sensitivity movement designed to justify attacking targets. This is very similar to what was stated but there are distinctions. SJWs and the Alt-Right are at the extremes of the left-right spectrum bipolar paradigm and designed to fence us "normal rational folks" in towards the center - except there's also the up-down scale between small "L" libertarianism/anarchy vs totalitarianism (capitalist empire inverted totalitarianism, communist totalitarianism, or fascist totalitarianism = same results by different means). MSM never discusses this next level shit and I rarely see it here.
(During Jimmy Dore's live show he showed the highest numbers of groups of similar histories in the corporate Democrat party. I don't have the exact figures but something close to 64 of the Democrats had backgrounds in the CIA or military, 49 had history as corporate executives, and 35 were lawyers. I think.)
I really like the idea of counter-action measures. I'm actually tempted to read SJWs Always Lie (I hate the loaded title, but I also hate the Cultural-Communism). I don't know how vulnerable Wikipedia really is. Their rigged rules do not allow themselves to be vulnerable. That's how it works. They complain about not having enough editors to counter the "vandalism". I suspect they'd hire more if it were a legit problem. I hope they don't and they get swamped enough that they have to start allowing more "fringe" and "fancruft" and "alternate views". I'm not holding my breath.
What is the Burn Unit? What is the status of IG's donation funding? Is IG stable and secure? Is it safe to say it will remain online for a year, a decade, a century? (After the NDAA 2012/2013 they have $40m to spend on domestic propaganda trolls and now Google's A.I. is filtering everything to shit, YouTube is purging, and IG's rankings are even lower than ever.)
SJWs do not always lie. In the context of what SJWs are about, they are admittedly largely full of crap. They are brainwashed. It's not because they are socialists, and that's not what socialists do. Politicians lie and steal, regardless of "ism", and they serve the oligarchs - in every country. Socialism is a process, like capitalism or the scientific method, and all these tools can be used for good and be corrupted for evil. A workers coop or worker directed enterprise gets rid of the boss and the workers use socialist democratic processes to determine how they want their workplace to run. Is that evil? If profits are low they don't fire the lowest on the totem pole first to maintain profits that are managed by a select few elites, rather they all cut back their hours and no one goes homeless or whatever and the integrity of the business, the workers, and their community at large is strong. Is that bad? I'll give you the best example of corrupted socialism... the military. Like them or not you're forced to pay for them and their wars that profit the elites but not the public.
I'm not a fan of the filters idea. Most of us are already living in reality bubbles of our own making. We choose to only go to the places that confirm out biases and don't get exposed to different ideas or understand alternative views even if we don't agree with them. This lack of understanding leads to lack of compassion which leads to hate that leads to the dark side of the force... If the filter listed all Noam Chomsky perspectives with your preference listed first, that would be fine and at least you'd be peripherally exposed to the alternatives, but if folks aren't even exposed to the alternatives I can't support that filter idea.
Will the DONTPANIC engine be opensource? And will it let us know when the dolphins leave the planet? Whether it's open source or not you must anticipate that "they" will try to infiltrate and/or hijack it.
"Infogalactic’s perspective filters provide for the genuine possibility of drawing off the greater part of Wikipedia’s audience" - I don't believe that for a second. The majority of stuff people look at on Wikipedia has nothing to do with politics or SJWs or any of this shit. Ceramic pots from Uruguay, various parts of a sailboat, the history of the toaster oven - I doubt any of this tedious stuff is politically bent.
Speaking of centralized structure... I understand the concepts but not the coding - if you could somehow decentralize the InfoGalactic wiki, perhaps (re)building it with blockchain tech, perhaps with Namecoin, ZeroNet (or older Freenet), or the new IPFS InterPlanetary File System, and if you manage not to make it obscure and weird like Steemit for all it's pros and cons - then you might have a social network worth getting excited about. Also collaborating with others you may not politically align with to achieve authentic free speech may be necessary. While I'm at it, Net Neutrality is half the battle. Everyone has been herded into the magical mystery cloud and no longer takes responsibility for their own data. If InfoGalactic, or anyone for that matter, were to develop a new network that stands a chance against corporate monopolies then it has to be decentralized, including it's "cloud" storage. Imagine if every medium and small business had their own plug and play refrigerator-sized mini-mainframe like station that was they gradually filled with FreeNAS storage that was part of the decentralized network - and they got compensated for being part of it, growing it, updating it, allowing some kind of administration and of course the public access and use, part active, part archive. Eventually not just small businesses, but people might have these somewhere in their homes too, bringing the power back to the people - rather than some large silicon farm warehouse station cloud digital heaven thingy somewhere far far away. But I digress...
What are these "Verified pages"? How would they matter if they were just going to be filtered out? (Assuming we can even define filter nomenclature.)
I think you're confused on several counts about "here is our problem".
  1. The stated goal is not to get rid of SJWs, but to counter their bullshit. If the error of their ways makes them obsolete, that's fine too. I don't expect 100% of them will wake up nor do I expect 100% of the right to see the errors in their ways either. Corporate media has been controlling all sides since the beginning.
  2. Censoring SJW or anyone's bullshit is not as effective as including it and pointing out it's long list of errors, among other tactics.
  3. You assume that InfoGalactic is firstly an encyclopedia. Unless the DONTPANIC has some revolutionary changes InfoGalactic is first and foremost a wiki. This wiki is underutilized and I'll expand upon that soon. Within this wiki is the close secondary purpose - the encyclopedia (the majority of which is just an old mirror without a substantive history of development).
  4. You've presumed that "the purpose of an encyclopedia should be to codify expertise". That's so loaded and limited in all sorts of ways.
  5. I like that "codify expertise" article but see little difference between the early days of Wikipedia and InfoGalactic today. We have the advantage of seeing where they went wrong, including the soft or hard censorship of "undesirable" content, and their elitist administrator "expert" bullshit.
  6. That interactive cookbook idea is actually good. Few people are going to bother uploading crappy recipes. Add some social media voting options, and voila. In no time you'll have popular stars of their fields emerging. I wouldn't be surprised if this already existed out there, whether on Facebook, a corner of Steemit, or elsewhere.
  7. I've been asserting that people are not drawn to InfoGalactic for at least a few reasons.
a) Everything about InfoGalactic's appearance is just a knock off clone of Wikipedia. It's splash page layout, it's colours, the article formats, the side margin, etc etc etc.
b) Almost everything about InfoGalactic's content is just an old knock off clone of Wikipedia. I'm guessing 99.9% of it is just smoke and mirrors and maybe 0.1% is original or forked content.
c) It looks the same, it sounds the same, and it acts like a... clone? I don't even know what InfoGalactic is about. The seven pillars or columns don't say anything of substance or authenticity. The "Welcome to Infogalactic" banner doesn't state what the IG values are. Jack-arcalon graced us with a couple paragraphs today and Froglich has presented his "The Purpose of Infogalactic(?)" ideas - and I'm still unclear. So far, we're anti-Wikipedia-corporate-media-limitations and anti-SJWs. You had me at anti-Wikipedia, but most people couldn't give a shit. Especially when they can write articles on Steemit and get paid, with other Social Media 3.0 in development.
(Sometimes I think it'd be better to scrap the majority of the "mirror-body" of InfoGalactive and build some kind of Wikipedia frame, skin, or plugin so that you can use all the regular Wikipedia linked stuff with the additional layer of InfoGalactic over-top for re-contextualization, notes, and even full articles not included or allowed on Wikipedia. Allowing other wikis to fold in would be nice too, even fancruft sites. I'd love the Wikipedia administrators to be frustrated by "fancruft" and "fringe" they can't censor.)
d) Missing: clear labels of description and distinction.
e) I agree. I can't see a helm or any direction. (In addition to the "Recent changes" page we should also have a page to present articles we've finished or are working on for review, discussion, constructive criticism, etc. - especially since the discussion pages are so rarely used here. In this forum we might find an identity, some guidelines, and some solutions.)
The SJWs are pawns of the oligarchy who control the media and fund "movements" and these elites are the ones who "crave eternal conflict as well as complete control". NOT because they are socialists. Because as long as the two sides are fighting each other no one is noticing who's pulling the strings and fighting the elites. The Hegelian dialectic in action - create the problem and chaos (neoNazis or SJWs), counter the problem with more chaos (fight among yourselves), and solution with their new "order" (elites gain power and keep exploiting everyone unnoticed).
This SJW emo shit is a culturally engineered manufactured phenomenon, institutionally supported by schools and the media, particularly noticeable since the "revised NDAA's Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 legalizes the use of propaganda on the American public. The 2013 act rescinded and nullified the 1948 law preventing domestic propaganda campaigns but now legally justifies and allows psychological operations (lies, fake news, and false flag events) to influence public opinion waged upon the American civilian public. In the wake of the passing of this law, a flurry of mass shooting events, real, fake, or part-hoax part-authentic, have been unleashed upon the public, all exploited by corporate media and politicians, as a crisis industry sprang up. The corporate news, once over 50 now under 5 corporate monopoly owners, is a monopoly that refuses to expose the lies, exploitation, suffering, and murder forced upon citizens of the world, applying dynamic silence tactics, or worse, upon alternative media who dare to bravely speak truth to power." (copied from my unfinished Truther article) Don't you miss the days of serial killers to keep us all frightened? Where did they all go? Ever notice that all we get now is lone nut gunmen or lone nut bad drivers? If they die there's no trial or discovery process. It's all bullshit. Also, after 2012 the corporate-Democratic party took the sheeple-left on an insane new course. Many rejected it to support Bernie or Jill Stein to no avail. So too with the resurgence of the ridiculous third wave feminist shit and the counter MRA and MGTOW stuff. Black Lives Matter (too).
I like the Vivaldi browser. That's a nice list of funding options but I think it should be much much longer for far more decentralized and competitive alternatives.
Yes, the "murderous Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara" was a soldier, a doctor, a scoundrel by many accounts, and certainly a murderer. But few say who was his enemy... the hegemonic capitalist western empire that was cultivating coup d'états and installing dictators the world over. Just saying, both sides were evil, one was bigger and a worse bully. How about the murderous Bill Clinton, George Bush, Bathhouse Barry Obama, or Donald Drumpf using drones and bombs and lives up like there's no tomorrow. How come socialist Norway isn't bombing anyone? Your Ambiguous Collective fallacy applies to your use of "socialists" as well as "SJWs" (though they kinda ask for it with their use of the emo-victimhood-bullying tactics of Zionists).
Trump's administration is getting lots done behind the scenes, as did Obama's and others, serving the shadow government, meanwhile like all administrations the ugly theatrics of Washington hem and haw and pretend like they're trying to do this or that but really it's mostly just bullshit for show with no desire for any progress that is not permitted by the puppet masters or the rare occasional slip of chance. Referencing senile puppet Reagan strategies holds no water. The Cold War was rigged from before go.
I'm tempted to re-import all those FMLN pages to counter your blatant censorship bullshit, but I wasn't familiar with that history, I don't know enough to care about their cause, have no affiliation with "commies", don't have the time or energy, nor care for the headache you'd likely cause.
Is the purpose of Infogalactic... a primary means of ensuring that every time anyone looks up information about the individual, one of the first things they will see is the fact that the SJWs were successfully attacked? Perhaps in part, but not entirely.
It's hard to really say since Wikipedia is so vast, but from what I understand, they've been trying to trim the encyclopedia back to be more manageable - thus removing many of the "snotwhelp" entries. In fact, they went on a rampage butchering any truther types that weren't outright deleted (ie Lionel (radio personality) vs on Wikipedia who is "barely notable" despite being on TV, having an Emmy, a book, etc.)
Beside the censorship issue and associated censorship of the "fringe" content, including trutherism stuff, there is also the "fancruft" content that is censored. I think it's fine that porn stars have their own articles. I'm not going to read them, or the Pokemon stuff or most of it. Infogalactic came waaaay to late to the game now to be effective in the fancruft realm when there are countless wikis out there for every fan fetish, Wookiepedia among them. I find it fascinating when there is a very long Wikipedia article about Evil Knevil but they'll keep the deep state articles very short and confusing. If you want to censor fancruft then you might as well start censoring authors and books and religions and architecture and...
I think we should embrace Fringe, fancruft, as well as opinions, essays, and even SJWs but clearly label all of these so people instantly know what they're looking at before they have to read the whole thing to know if it's even what they want to read. Ideally they'd be well cited, though opinions may not require as much as articles.
"A repository of worthy knowledge", according to you? Who decides? I say include it all. Then label it. If you want a different label, add it. If I object I'll add a label objecting to your label. As many labels as you like or as it takes. Worse case rare scenario, after a few objections have been noted/labelled, we live and let live and all the views are represented, good, bad, and ugly, and the reader can decide what they prefer.
I argue, strenuously against your fallacious presumption that this shit will fill the vacuum, *why not?* and *seriously? who's gonna bother?* As is, InfoGalactic attracts FAAAAR too few to make much difference, nor is it particularly attractive. Would you choose a free Rolex watch that does almost everything you want it to, or a free Rolex knock-off that falls a little behind and occasionally rails against and censors SJWs while not censoring the little bits of alt-right or truther stuff? Most folks will go for the original Rolex.
"The very first thing you need to do is shoot the enemy out of your own house." I hope you're talking about all enemies foreign and domestic in our terribly corrupt governments and corporate media. I'd rather expose the clowns and/or lead them to the waters of truth, and even if we can't make them drink it, they'll see it and we can splash them with it, rather than shoot them. Then, I suppose you can shoot and piss on them (a different truth water).
~ JasonCarswell (talk)
Update: My numbers were not accurate when above I mentioned Saturday's 2h51m14s The Jimmy Dore Show Live Stream and the relevant material is cropped in his 13m14s video CIA Agents Running As Democrats In 2018 Elections illustrating how the "left" is bought/soldout/corrupted and being infiltrated by higher powers that don't represent authentic progressives, and specifically references "The CIA Democrats (part one)" article on the "World Socialist Web Site". Quoted out of order for some reason by Jimmy:

One quarter of all the Democratic challengers in competitive House districts have military-intelligence, State Department or NSC backgrounds. This is by far the largest subcategory of Democratic candidates. National security operatives (57) outnumber state and local government officials (45), lawyers (35), corporate executives, businessmen and wealthy individuals (30) and other professionals (19) among the candidates for Democratic congressional nominations.

Of the 102 primary elections to choose the Democratic nominees in these competitive districts, 44 involve candidates with a military-intelligence or State Department background, with 11 districts having two such candidates, and one district having three. In the majority of contests, the military-intelligence candidates seem likely to win the Democratic nomination, and, if the Democrats win in the general election, would enter Congress as new members of the House of Representatives.

The military-intelligence candidates are disproportionately favored by the party apparatus, encouraged to run in districts that are the most likely takeover targets. Military-intelligence candidates account for 10 of the 22 districts selected for the most high-profile attention as part of the “red-to-blue” program, or nearly half. In some cases, military-intelligence candidates have amassed huge campaign war chests that effectively shut out any potential rivals, an indication that the financial backers of the Democratic Party have lined up behind them.

Democratic Party leaders are actively recruiting candidates with a military or intelligence background for competitive seats where there is the best chance of ousting an incumbent Republican or filling a vacancy, frequently clearing the field for a favored “star” recruit.

A case in point is Elissa Slotkin, a former CIA operative with three tours in Iraq, who worked as Iraq director for the National Security Council in the Obama White House and as a top aide to John Negroponte, the first director of national intelligence. After her deep involvement in US war crimes in Iraq, Slotkin moved to the Pentagon, where, as a principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, her areas of responsibility included drone warfare, “homeland defense” and cyber warfare.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has designated Slotkin as one of its top candidates, part of the so-called “Red to Blue” program targeting the most vulnerable Republican-held seats—in this case, the Eighth Congressional District of Michigan, which includes Lansing and Brighton.

The House seat for the district is now held by two-term Republican Representative Mike Bishop. The Democratic leaders are promoting CIA agents and Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. At the same time, such people are choosing the Democratic Party as their preferred political vehicle.

There are far more former spies and soldiers seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party than of the Republican Party. There are so many that there is a subset of Democratic primary campaigns that, with a nod to Mad magazine, one might call “spy vs. spy.”

The House of Representatives is currently controlled by the Republicans, with a majority of 238 compared to 193 Democrats. There are four vacancies, one previously held by the Democrats. To reach a majority of 218 seats in the next Congress, the Democrats must have a net gain of 24 seats.

The DCCC has designated 102 seats as priority or competitive, including 22 seats where the incumbents are not running again (five Democrats and 17 Republicans), and 80 seats where Republican incumbents could be defeated for reelection in the event that polls predicting a sizeable swing to the Democrats in November prove accurate.

This is not just an excuse to blame the left, corporate-Democrats, or SJWs - this is another alarming totalitarian shadow government CIA coup. Watch out after this 4 or 8 year term. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Infogalactic is an "SJW-Free Organization".

Jason: "...SJWs do not always lie...."

Broken clocks do not always tell the incorrect time. --I don't care.

"...I think you're confused on several counts about "here is our problem". The stated goal is not to get rid of SJWs..."

Absolutely 100% INCORRECT --Go back and reread the first few lines of my post above, "The Purpose of Infogalactic", noting this part:

Vox Day. “SJWs Always Double Down: Anticipating the Thought Police (The Laws of Social Justice Book 2) (sequel to “SJWs Always Lie“)
Chapter 9: Building SJW-Free Organizations

InfoGalatic is the "SJW-Free Organization" that is being built here. And how do you know that?

"...in October 2016 I forked Wikipedia and established Infogalactic...." (Vox Day)
"Who decides? I say include it all...."

Well, guess what? You're not in charge. This place has a creator's intent, expressed explicitly in his book, which you need to read. Just because "the cat's away" and some mice (of which you are one) are currently playing doesn't mean that the cat will never return and toss you back as a tasty hors d'oeuvre.

Jason, to me you appear to be a very excitable young man with keyboard diarrhea who frankly has no idea what he's talking about and is spigotting a lot of rubbish from socialist books. Don't get me started, and I mean that, on "socialism versus communism versus marxism being "very different" -- Bullshit. They are all the same at their philosophical premise _core_.

--My suggestion is taking a break and watch a couple dozen Aaron Clarey, John Stossel, and Terrence Popp videos on YouTube. Then watch a couple dozen Sargon of Akkad. Then a couple dozen Jordan Petersons. Then a couple dozen Diversity and Comics (which will give a clear object example of how socialist parasites hollow out and destroy a corporation, as well as always lie). Then go read "The Fountainhead", --the actual novel, not a wiki page or some asshole's negative review. The whole thing. Follow Beck on Facebook. Right now, you are not up-to-speed.

--Froglich (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


I stand by what I said. Froglich has stated that IG is to get rid of SJWs. Vox Day obviously does not like SJWs. But nowhere in a banner or even the Infogalactic:Introduction does it state that IG is for free speech, against SJWs, or any such thing. I think it should open with the free speech bit and then deconstruct rather than crap on the SJWs. Then it can get into that fork stuff.
"...in October 2016 I forked Wikipedia and established Infogalactic...." (Vox Day) <- Where is this from? Is it posted on IG? It sure isn't clear to me, and I've been hanging around here for a while. That's why I'm asking so others may know more easily than me pulling it out of you.
"Who decides? I say include it all...." My two cents. No I'm not in charge. Are you? Who are the "corelords"? Is that the same as the Infogalactic:Council? There are too few credits on IG. Listing them would be good. All I know is this Vox Day started/funded this virtual space that is not well defined, has almost no identity, and has tremendous potential. If everyone had to read a book by the creator of every site they go to then we'd never get anything done. I do wish to read the book, even if I don't agree with it all, like many others. However I can't afford to buy it. I recommend that someone share an ebook torrent of it to spread the "good word".
(Also, can someone add the Infogalactic:Introduction, Infogalactic:Galactic_boardroom, and Infogalactic:Community_portal to the left hand margin under the logo and above "Tools"?)
I'm not a mouse. I'm not an SJW. I'm not alt right. I'm not buying into any identity politics bullshit. I know others do and because of that they need stupid clear labels, both for the identity of this website, and for the perspectives of the articles included. I'm pretty sure I'm not a tasty hors d'oeuvre but if Vox comes back and wants to teach me some stuff I'm willing to listen and make up my own mind about it.
I admit I have keyboard diarrhea when I'm trying to successfully communicate complex ideas (unlike some folks with cryptic confusing words).
I do know much of what I speak is also true, especially from some perspectives. You are missing out if you don't know the differences between Marxism, socialism, communism, and all their variations. The do have a lot of good ideas. They also have been terribly corrupted. Like science and markets and all sorts of other invented tools they can be used for good or bad, depending who is using it to what end and at what cost and to whom. The more you know about something, even if you don't agree with it, the better you may argue about it. They are not the same.
I don't want to get you started. In part because most people realize there are pros and cons to being an individual and part of a collective and these positions can be manipulated and abused. But mostly I don't want to get lured into a discussion/debate, no matter how valuable a learning experience or colossal waste of time, because I have other priorities I'd rather focus on. I'm guessing you do to.
I really like Jordan Peterson. I don't agree with his ideas about Marxism etc. I desperately want him and Richard D. Wolff (or even Yanis Varoufakis) to discuss ideas - especially in a series of discussions to get deeper! I actually watched his Joe Rogan thing earlier today. Very good. Went fast. I'm subbed to his YouTube channel, as well as others that quote him.
Sargon is great. I don't agree with everything, again. I'm pissed that he was censored. I watched a bunch of him the last couple years before the Rogan interview then a bit more after about that "scandal". He's long winded, clever but tiresome and repetitive. So I learned some, disagreed a bit, and realized he's just railing against the establishment branches like most, not striking at the roots, like I'm aiming for with a broader non-tribal non-dogma overarching contextual awareness. Left-right is a trap. I'm subbed to his YouTube channels and used to watch them, though not anymore.
I have years of YouTubes downloaded. I download everything of interest, a fraction of which I get around to actually watching. I knew the censorship and purging was going to get worse and will continue to do so.
I used to watch Stossel on TV a couple decades ago. I grew not to like him. That was years and years ago, so maybe I was "nudged" not to like him. Maybe I've grown past whatever that was and maybe he's got a better message. Or maybe I'll still not like him. I'm not going to subscribe to Stossel, Clarey, Popp, or Diversity and Comics, however, if you come across three really worth while introductory or representative videos from each of them, I'll promise to watch all of your recommendations. I'll even give you my two cent review if you're curious to see what I may or may not agree with, perhaps to get truther or SJW or whatever insights I might filter for you. If I like them I'll sub. If I don't, perhaps I'll at least have a better understanding and exposure to their ideas. I'm in no hurry. Share them here as you see fit.
I've had Atlas Shrugged unread on my bookshelf for years now. I thought I also had the Fountainhead but I couldn't find it. I just wanted to see what the hubub was about. I have a lot of books, half are unread. From what I know about her, I like some of what she says and think other stuff is too extreme or inflexible or uncompassionate. I'm for balance in various circumstances. Sometimes Freud was right, sometime Jung was better. It all depends.
I don't do Facebook anymore.
Just because I don't subscribe to everything you do does not mean I'm not "up-to-speed". I'm just not on your path.
~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Froglich responses:
1) "...Froglich has stated that IG is to get rid of SJWs...." --You have misread. I relayed that its founders' intent was to exclude them, because, in his words, they always lie.
2) "...Vox Day obviously does not like SJWs...." --I can't imagine why anyone would disapprove of lying Gestapo thought-police.
3) "...I do wish to read the book, even if I don't agree with it all, like many others. However I can't afford to buy it. I recommend that someone share an ebook torrent of it to spread the "good word"." --I want you look very closely at these sentences of yours, and keep them in mind while I trout you: *Bullshit*. You are lying. *whack!* *splash!*
--SJWs Always Lie' Kindle edition is $5.99, and used print copies are also around six bucks. If you can afford to live in a New York apartment, you can buy these books. If you can get on the net, and I know you're on it, then it takes you like ten seconds to search how much they cost. So: Bullshit.
--Learning how to bittorrent (where you easily spend well in excess of six bucks worth of your time obtaining a copy of Vox Day's books without paying for it) is a very basic IQ test. If you have not passed this IQ text, you quite literally have no business assuming that you're smarter than anyone else on the internet about any subject under the sun, and especially not in the circumstance that they are correcting you.
4) "...nowhere in a banner or even the Infogalactic:Introduction does it state that IG is for free speech...." --"Free speech" only has meaning in a political context. I.e., if a government is harrassing you for voicing your mind in public, then you do not have free speech. This, however, has absolutely nothing to do with private property, and Infogalaxic is private property, not a public space. You are a guest.
--Regards the site's mission-statement, IMO it could stand for considerable improvement, because right now it's aimlessly wandering around like a drunken sailor.
5) '"...I admit I have keyboard diarrhea when I'm trying to successfully communicate complex ideas (unlike some folks with cryptic confusing words)...." --Then you are failing terribly. For starters, nobody here is reading in-their-entirety these gargantuan walls of text you're vomiting up. (Even I am cherry-picking highlights for these point-by-point addressals. And none of this is "complex". It's actually quite rudimentary once reduced to the essentials.) Brevity is a virtue.
6) '"...You are missing out if you don't know the differences between Marxism, socialism, communism, and all their variations...." --You err in assuming that I do not know what their differences are. You simply did not pay attention when I wrote: "They are all the same at their philosophical premise _core_".
7) '"...I really like Jordan Peterson. I don't agree with his ideas about Marxism etc...." -- Karl Marx was a fucking asshole.
8) '"...I'm not going to subscribe to...." --I didn't ask you to subscribe.
9) '"...I've had Atlas Shrugged unread on my bookshelf for years now...." --My friend, that is *obvious*.
-- Pick it up. In fact, you should clear your schedule for it. (I merely recommended The Fountainhead because it is somewhat shorter.)
10) '"...I don't do Facebook anymore...." --Beck's page is public. You don't have to log in.
Now: Stop making excuses.
--Froglich (talk) 10:03, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
1) Fair enough. Again, I point out that InfoGalactic branding and presentation still does not convey this, by accident or intention.
2) I'm with you here.
3) Who has the little fish and who has the big fish? I'm not bullshitting. I used to make six figures. No I've been on disability for seven or eight years and too often spend the last week of every month eating no-brand Kraft Dinner. There's no way I could get a regular job but I'm now climbing out of my pit and trying to get back into animation again. I have no car and rarely go further than a couple blocks. So bullshit on your face. I'm not lying and I'm not a liar. I have no reason to. I looked for a Vox Day torrent last year and found none. I wanted to be informed. Just now I searched and found 6 torrents. So I guess I've got some lazy bullshit smeared on my face too.
I didn't even know the full title before which I prefer by massive orders of magnitude: "SJWs Always Lie, Taking Down the Thought Police".
For what it's worth, I'm happy to see this book being pirated, not just for my own sake, but because many people download stuff they don't get to and if when they do some actually go back and purchase a legit copy to have hard copy, to pay after the meal, or simply in support. Furthermore, people don't share unsuccessful crap, meaning that the book must be somewhat successful to even be shared. The pros and cons and losses of piracy are another moot matter.
4) This whole fucking site is (secretly) political. The internet is a public space. Infogalactic may be privately owned but it's clearly an open source project. Everyone is a guest. I don't know what your point is. I concur the mission-statement needs work and clarification. That's half of what I'm saying.
5) I'm trying. Cherry pick and miss things as you like. Nobody is reading my spiels because few people are even on this site. Other people might get alienated by your aggressive tone, which no one else has. I'm trying to tell you that I'm not on the SJW side or your side or anyone's side. I look at ideas not identities and judge them on their merits, sometimes complex. Most of SJW stuff is nonsense, but what's worse is the worse shit that it leads to. Worse than that is the puppet masters who are pushing these conflicts to distract us from the Zionist corporatocracy agendas. Yes their agendas of domination are simple. Their methods are intentionally complex. Unpacking them is too. I'm not hip to all your shorthand yet. I'd never been on the "right" and I abandoned the "left" more than a few years ago investigating unasked questions that peeled back layers of deception and manipulation. I don't know it all but now I see a greater structure than most are supposed to know about, and how it plays us all.
6) Their cores are not the same.
7) Ya, I saw that when it came out. I can't speak to how true or biased it is. I don't care. Brian Singer is an alleged pedophile, but his X-Men movies are good. Whether Marx was or wasn't a fucking asshole is mostly irrelevant to Marxist concepts.
8) Fine. I'm not going to sift through an entire body of work. Pick your favourites and I'll watch them, so I don't have to find a random mediocre one that may not even be representative of what you're trying recommend.
9) I have no doubt I will learn some concepts with pros and cons from Ayn but she will not convert me.
10) I don't care. I don't do Facebook.
11) There is no 11.
Excuses for what?
~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Other Wiki Projects On Infogalactic

Greets InfoGalaxians, I wanted to check in with you, the IG community first...

InfoGalactic is a tremendous resource not only as a free encyclopedia but also as a wiki.

Most people don't care about politics, distracted by pop media or social media, despondent with political systems or disgusted with political correctness, overwhelmed by the burdens of the common man, or underwhelmed and too busy just doing their own things. Most of the articles on Infogalactic are apolitical, from tea cups to tropical frogs. Sure, everything at some point can get political, but being political is not enough. There are already other encyclopedias leaning right or free and I stumbled across another few recently that I have no idea why they exist. Obviously other fancruft wikis exist for fictional universes and stuff, and of course RationalWiki and Wikispooks exist for their niches. I can't speak to how successful Infogalactic may or may not be according to any measures or whether the creator's goals are being met. But I say that Infogalactic needs community. Maybe it's community is just fine as is, and while the articles get older, and the rankings get lower, at least it's a hold out for some who are definitely against SJWs and for some unexplicitly for free speech.

Besides my abundant previously expressed criticisms of Infogalactic's branding, definition, originality, and/or community charisma or lacks thereof (apparently on deaf ears), this is my little proactive effort beyond just editing here. I refuse to align with any political groups or philosophy the more I learn how absurdly corrupt it all is. Whatever the political roots of IG or it's community may or may not be, I am only here because it is free from censorship, unlike rigged Wikipedia and the corporate media it only cites. This difference will never be enough to compete with Wikipedia or the other censored info giants like Google and Facebook. My hopes are that the InfoGalactic community can grow as a free encyclopaedia as well as its community and social network. In order to build this community IG must offer more than Wikipedia. This is my effort to bring something different to IG as an experimental example of how User Pages can become so much more.

I propose that Infogalactic might allow if not encourage people to develop their own wiki projects here. Every user has a User Page, that if cultivated could be like any other social media home page for the individual. I've been using mine like that to some disorganized degree since I arrived here.

I don't expect people to flock here. Facebook, Twitter, Google, YouTube are not only in bed with corporate interests, the CIA, Hollywood, and the deepstate, sheeple are herded there to be centralized and controlled while everyone else is made the minority fringe, discredited, and disenfranchised. There are dozens of other social media sites, many successful, that are rarely mentioned - intentionally. But if Infogalactic is at least available or even offers it's wiki capabilities, we may gain a few more Galaxians who may do their thing as well as contribute to the greater encyclopedia.

If there are no objections, I intend to utilize InfoGalactic's wiki powers for three very niche but potentially community building projects I'd mysteriously alluded to in February and even earlier last year.

Project #1 : "Trutherism 101"

As a professional animator with almost 30 years experience, I'd like to utilize the InfoGalactic wiki to organize the management and production development of a new animated series. I intend to develop my main project outline, character designs, layouts, scripts, and storyboards, eventually linking to animated revisions and final videos as well as a promotional campaign hosted on other sites (ie. Steemit, D-Tube, BitChute, Gab, Patreon, Voat, Reddit, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc). I intend to copyleft and/or opensource all of my work and by example hopefully attract a production team and/or development community. This is my dream and I'm going for it.

Others may do what they will with my copyleft and/or opensource work, as long as they abide by the copyleft and/or opensource stipulations (yet to be laid out in detail).

What the others may not do is use my name, the name of my production company and part of the title of this show, (undisclosed because I want to eventually licence and get the dot coms, etc.) , and the show title that I can disclose is tentatively called...

"Trutherism 101: Introductory Conspiracies For Dummies"
and/or
"Trutherism: Well Justified Distrust Of Authority In All Things"

The goal is to retain and build a strong brand with my stamp of approval on my work and other work I endorse.

To perhaps the most relevant point:

I intend to thank/promote InfoGalactic and other utilities in the credits of every video. We can even draft a line about how the views and opinions within do not reflect the blah blah blah of Infogalactic etc. Free-ish advertising in exchange for a valuable service. This may attract some people to InfoGalactic. They may embrace "Trutherism" and all that it may entail or they may be critics or even trolls or even spark active efforts towards censorship. It may be a trickle of curious folks, a nonexistent attendance, or an unlikely phenomenon. They may join the encyclopedia community, or only my thing, or start their own projects by my example. Whatever the reaction may be, the content will not be a surprise because it will be openly developed here, starting with the outline, script, hyperlinks, sources, some images, links to videos, etc. There will be no surprises for anyone interested in following the slow progress. I'll also be semi-developing and promoting this project on a few other platforms such as Steemit, BitChute, TheCorbettReport.com members comment section, and other websites that may catch eyes, ideas, and/or support. (Years ago I set up my own abandoned and unused mediawiki here at home but don't have the bandwidth, IT skills, or website administrator savvy to confidently publish a website for my project.)

I can only take responsibility for my own efforts but I intend to clearly outline my intentions and project management wishes. In particular and for example, I do not want to overlap with encyclopaedia material at all. When I edit IG articles, it will be as a IG editor/contributor. I will likely link to articles for reference, context, etc. but I will start development under my userpages. Eventually, after I've produced and published the first "pilot" batch of videos (this could be a year or few away) and actually wish to invite public interactivity, I would like to move the development to a mainspace article "set". For example, "Trutherism 101" may be the lead article with various related articles like "Trutherism 101 development", "Trutherism 101 characters", "Trutherism 101 season 1 episodes", etc. and possibly "Trutherism 101 submissions", "Trutherism 101 chat", etc.

In addition to this virtual-space-based project and community I hope to start a meat-space animation production worker coop here in Windsor, Ontario, Canada because it's easier to work in a studio than to herd cats online. Unless I create some profound magic, and I intend to, this project may only ever just be me doing my own little thing. My highest priority is directing this animation, not team management, office management, cat herding, nor other production worries. I expect that if this manages to be successful some inspired and motivated fans and/or resources will facilitate better management than I can ever provide, and all the hickups, headaches, and hurdles will come and go to be ironed out as they develop. I can't say if this may become a burden. I can say that I intend this wiki-project development to feature forums for discussion and anticipation and resolution of all issues, production related, political, or whatever. If this project becomes a financial burden somehow, then I expect that some fundraising and details can be worked out. Further details will emerge organically. One step at a time.

In addition to potentially drawing in community, this project is not encyclopedic, but it is tangentially related. I'm trying to lay out all of the good, bad, and the ugly about Truthers, their ideas, culture, etc. in the sloppy complex draft of the admittedly biased article I've been working on. I have a Trutherism 101 outline/thesis for a documentary/mocumentary which will be the skeletal map upon which most of the Trutherism 101 episodes should fit. Eventually with enough meat on the bones, with some editing and patching, a mocu/docu may come of this, by my efforts or someone else's. Failing that we'll just have a bunch of fun episodes. Guides and details about episode content development yet to be laid out, but at present every episode must be:

  1. short like a meme, comic strip, advertisement, or music video at maximum
  2. economic in dialogue, animation, and direction for maximum effect
  3. funny, satirical, parody, absurdity, or mockery
  4. educational, profound, thought provoking, and/or irreverent
  5. aesthetically beautiful
  6. unattached to any doctrine, dogma, tribe, or group (but willing to point out pros and cons)
  7. ideally working on multiple levels/layers
  8. ideally falling on the Trutherism 101 outline
  9. ideally not insulting or offensive to anyone, yet unafraid to attack their ideas, and all ideas

Failing any of these criteria demands reconsideration.

A whole marketing strategy must be developed for viral promotion, merchandising, and crowdsourced support, etc. to be in place before the pilot series launch.

My project will be entirely original, as will the scripts, jokes, design, etc. Naturally I intend to reference other sources for inspiration, as all productions do until they're fully developed, but that's not infringement.

The concepts and "theories" will NOT be original. I will not be doing original truther research, theories, exposés, uncovering scandals, etc. or touching on ideas that aren't already out there, if not abundantly so. I hope to support and promote the reasonable theories and educate about the flaws in the unreasonable - ideally with references for folks to follow up with.

Project #2 : Audio & Video Samples Database

As a secondary semi-parallel project, I'd also like to start and share an Audio-Video Samples Database that video editors, sound engineers, etc. may utilize. Allowed under fair use laws, I may use some illustrative samples in my "Trutherism" series. This database will not be my main focus, but I really would like to share my lists, with notes, timecodes, screengrabs, and links to off-site torrents. Much of our culturally engineered military/corporate/consumerist propaganda is forced upon us and I hope myself and others will redigest it and vomit it back in their faces. Maybe the revolution can be televised but as mashed up agitprop.

I intend to chew up our culture and spit out something new, mashing up samples with original content with new analysis and context. As a human in our culturally engineered Western culture open prison I claim and fight for the right to sample, utilize, distort, mashup, and create a new narrative and context of anything I come across for this audio-video presentation - including copyrighted material from our gentrified corporate controlled culture guarded by lawyers of the police state overlords. No matter where I may "pirate" my content from or how I use it, I intend to credit everything so that inclined folks can see the original context of the sampled information and/or entertainment, which may or may not also be considered advertising for that source material.

I expect parts or the entire project may be suppressed under the guise of copyright infringement or something as I attempt to expose lies of the corporatocracy and our engineered culture and promot anti-establishment ideas and resistance solutions, if only to slow the technocratic singularity and extinction of humanity.

If this already exists out there, please let me know. I don't need to reinvent the wheel.

Project #3 : Open Screenwriting

My third project ideas is to host open source feature film script writing development. I haven't developed this concept much but have good ideas to share and not go to waste. This might be a joint project in conjunction with Voat.com for folks to rank story submissions.

Hollywood is terrible, unimaginative, and propaganda. How many cop shows do we need to either respect or fear the police and authority and the "justice" system. How come they never discuss worker coops / worker directed enterprises where the profits are shared and the employees can fire the manager, etc.? How come there are no Earthships in movies? How come it's all about the individual struggle and so few about building and defending communities, etc. etc. etc. They don't offer solutions, whether over the head or subtly in passing.

From concept to complete script we can host interactive open source story summary variations as defined here:

  • Loglines / Elevator Pitch (1 or 2 line plot summary)
  • Outline (1 or 2 paragraph plot summary)
  • Synopsis (1 or 2 page plot summary)
  • Treatment (long form (10 page) summary)
  • Script (usually 90 to 120 pages = 90 to 120 minutes)
  • References & Filmmaking Essays (ie: Pitch, Outline, Synopsis, or Treatment?)
  • Technical Breakdowns + Descriptions

If this already exists out there, please let me know. I don't need to reinvent the wheel.

Bonus

Thanks for reading this far. You've got the gist of it and you may skip the rest or read on to get more details. Much of this was composed last year, then again recently in another instance, then mashed together.

Success or failure, significant or not, this project may be the only "important" thing I ever do with my life. This series is Part 1a and the mocu-documentary is Part 1b. Part 2 is a whole other project - a fictional screenplay/storyboard/graphic novel which should be easier (after writing is finished) relying on the mocu-docu to provide background contextual understanding to support the story. Part 3 would be actual production of the feature film from Part 2.

At best this project will bring InfoGalactic positive attention, appreciation, and growth. At worst this project will be ignored and be a tiny waste of space in a small corner of the InfoGalactic encyclopedia's User Pages.

I will check back here when I can to see what folks think. Meanwhile I'll start the project. Please do not delete the project. If you have issue with it let me know and we can discuss it to find resolution. If you have issue with the content we can discuss that or you may fork your own open source version.

~ JasonCarswell (talk), insane visionary

Re: special project on user pages

Anything that gets more contributors here I am strongly in favor of. And Truthers is a subject that Wikipedia would want to censor. ~ Jack-arcalon

We most certainly have been heavily censored, denigrated, and marginalized. I was banned from Wikipedia for a year for being "another polite truther". At the end of February and continuing into March this year of 2018 there has been a severer "YouTube Purge", not just censoring videos but deleting entire accounts. Less severely, Alex Jones has been completely demonetized, if I recall correctly - something that has been happening since this "soft censorship" demonitization started in 2015 and 2016. Demonitization is a soft way of saying theft of work profits and the denial to earn a living. Anyone with questions, eye witness accounts, deconstructions of the crime scenes in the south and Las Vegas are brutally censored. Most truthers don't claim to "know the truth", rather most truthers claim to "seek answers and the truth", whether they ever find it depends. It is illegal to investigate the Holocaust in many countries in Europe. They are trying to hide the truth that the Holocaust is an exaggerated myth and colossal scam and excuse to be victims while stealing everything from Palestinians. These are not anti-Semitic statements but anti-Zionism truths that are being censored. The tip of oceans of icebergs. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
I say go for it, if there's even a single additional contributor it will be worthwhile. Offsite video bandwidth should make it OK.
However, be sure to back everything up in case your project is determined to be incompatible with IG's purpose. -- Jack-arcalon (talk) 05:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, we can hope. Also, I forgot to mention, I'll find a place to store animation and compositing project files. I don't expect that to be too hard as there are animation communities out there. (I used to be involved in some decades ago but found there were too many newbies and too few pros to consult when you had a real problem.) This project will take years, and aside from that the hardest challenge will be my open-source software conversion. I've only used high end packages for animation but things have come a long way in open source and I'm going to learn Blender to animate and maybe to composite. (FYI: There's a whole conspirophile technocracy back story about GitHub's centralization/control of open-source knowledge worth knowing - ie. they often know about and deal with new status quo challenging software long before it gets popular.)
Good to know, thanks for the warning. It will obviously be open so there should be no surprises. I intend to have fun with all ideas, dogmas, etc including my own, and especially "authority". No group or idea will be spared. I will not go after individuals, except perhaps public figures on rare occasion. Individuals are low hanging fruit (like politicians) and I want to go after the systems, policies, issues, ideas, beliefs. I will be welcoming submissions too, so if you want to think up anti-SJW jokes that will fit my format, feel free. I'll announce here when I reach certain milestones so you can crap on my dreams, praise my genius, contribute ideas and constructive criticism, or simply stay 'tooned.
Beating a dead horse, I hope the "IG's purpose" can be better expressed. Perhaps including these ideas for other expanded wiki projects. And if my project is somehow "determined to be incompatible" I hope someone will let me know so I can either correct, resolve, or remove/retract my work. Initially I'll be doing a lot of writing while also sketching and designing. Eventually I'll start modelling and rigging characters and sets. There may be months where I don't change anything on this wiki. Then I'll share images of the grey models. Then there may be another "dry spell" when I apply textures and lighting rigs, followed by shared work. I haven't planned the audio yet (voice actors, sound effects, music, etc). Thereafter, hopefully, I will be animating episodes on a semi regular basis, with updates and video links.
~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Video Embeds

Is there a way to embed video from YouTube, D-Tube, Bitchute, Vimeo, etc. in wiki pages? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Wayback Machine

Can one of the coder folks please develop a Wayback Machine bot? It would crawl around the Infogalactic original articles, logging their progress, and archiving them to the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, in case one day IG does not exist or is censored or whatever. I always assumed I'd have my WickedSunshine.com forever but stuff happened and I'm sad it wasn't entirely archived. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Froglich reply:

"...I say that Infogalactic needs community...."

I say it doesn't. This is an online wiki encyclopedia, not a discussion forum. I would be perfectly happy if it were administered by a handful of crotchety old farts who knew what they were talking about, and who kicked everyone else out unceremoniously with ZFG.

"...I propose that Infogalactic might allow if not encourage people to develop their own wiki projects here...."
"...I'd like to utilize the InfoGalactic wiki to organize the management and production development of a new animated series...."
"...The goal is to retain and build a strong brand with my stamp of approval on my work and other work I endorse...."
"...What the others may not do is use my name, the name of my production company and part of the title of this show...."

TRANSLATION: "I'd like to leech off Infogalactic's bandwidth instead of springing for my own website and using Linkedin and Facebook, which are really much better for this sort of *advertizing* than a sleepy little niche clone wiki that is barely creaking along as it is right now."

"...I do not want to overlap with encyclopaedia material at all...."

Exactly every bit of what you just suggested is going to do precisely that, which is why my !vote is a solid *no*.

"...Steemit, D-Tube, BitChute, Gab, Patreon, Voat, Reddit, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc). I intend to copyleft and/or opensource all of my work and by example hopefully attract a production team and/or development community. This is my dream and I'm going for it...."

-- Then what in purple-spotted *heck* are you doing *here*? Most if not all of those place have dozens to more than a thousand times the traffic of Infogalactic, and are likely to for quite some time. (And how on earth you're going to attract "management and production" personnel for your "new animated series" without a profit incentive to interest them is another matter. I'd recommend you send $35 to "Asshole Consulting"'s Aaron Clarey for an economist's analysis of your business-proposal, but I already know what his response would be, and will relay it for free: First, he quintuple his rate upon seeing your mile-long walls of text, then he'd relay Samuel Johnson's admonishment that "No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money," then he'd tell you to get your ass out of that sphincter-dilating kleptocratic taxhole that is New York currently-eating-you-alive to the point you can't afford a six-dollar book.) --Froglich (talk) 10:03, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Reply to Froglich reply

1) Your encyclopedia will wither and fade without community to keep it alive. I'm not saying change it from being an encyclopedia. I'm saying expand its potential and possibilities. This very page is an example of the forum capabilities. If this is a curmudgeon site then at least declare it on the banner instead of the the weak confusingly vague mission-statement that includes copyleft open source creative commons stuff. If you are in charge then make it happen. If you aren't in charge then stop talking like you are. Your vinegar doesn't win anyone over to your ideas or side like honey might. (ie. You might try tempting me into animating stuff supporting Vox Day's books.)

2) I care about SJW issues exactly as much as I care about White Nationalist issues. I don't believe anything the corporate media says about anyone. I'd rather find out what they say about themselves and their opponents and make up my own mind. I really like Black Pigeon Speaks (when he's not censored) but I totally don't agree with everything he says, and on occasion the way he says it, but he's very articulate and gets his ideas across clearly. Many things he says I also agree with while also holding a contradictory position. For example: I'm against refugees/immigrants while also being for refugees/immigrants because I understand the issues from both sides, and even some others, and sometimes there is no correct preference. Above the left and right and far left and far right issues I'm more fascinated with the manipulations and levers of power and trying to expose them. Do I give a shit about millionaire athlete OJ Simpson or his coked-up white privileged wife? Hell no. Am I amazed by the corporate media and justice system's determined twisting and manipulations of public perception to make us all think he's guilty - while ignoring the high level cocaine dealing, the systemic racist police, evidence tampering, etc? Hell ya.

3) What is ZFG?

4) Your "translation" is correct. The tone is not. And the translation omitted that I may bring a modicum of attention and contributors, admittedly for better or worse. If I fail in this experiment, then I'll be far more sorry for myself than for "wasting" your public bandwidth with my text and images. To be clear, I never said I'd host videos here, rather linking to them. I can do everything at home, myself, without a website. That's not the point. I cannot do this project on Facebook because they'll censor me. I won't do this on LinkedIn because last time I checked my project isn't for them. I really wish there was a "Trutherwiki" out there but there isn't. Better yet, Wikipedia is great for a lot of reasons and terrible for many more. I'd rather do this there. I like that Infogalactic generally tries to keep the same familiar formats (though the look could change) and I like that it's faster than Wikispooks and more rational than RationalWiki. My articles and project would be censored on Wikipedia and its' sister Wikia. So I am here, as a non-partisan truther revisionist conspirophile and advocate for free speech.

5) This is the beginning of this conversation. I have not said no to anything as nothing has been asked of me. Let's say that a year from now I do my thing here, we look at my Patreon that I'll have to set up and people have donated a million dollars, and suddenly or gradually, Infogalactic decides they want a cut of that. I haven't said no. Maybe IG won't have to ask and I'll donate freely. Maybe I'm a stingy fuck and will make our lawyers battle it out. The possibilities are wide open. Unless they get preemptively shut down.

6) If Infogalactic wishes me to leave, please let me know. If you know of a more appropriate place for me, please let me know. If I can park here until I can't for whatever reason, from me or you or both, fine. I won't retract the credit I intend to put in every video.

7) If Froglich doesn't want contributors but Jack-arcalon does (as I do), then you two may have some stuff to discuss. I don't know who is in charge other than the Infogalactic:Council consisting of Rifleman, Renegade, Fenris, and Crew, not to mention Vox Day who started/funded this thing (though I've never seen a posting or article by him, nor looked). If this information is inaccurate I'd like to be updated, but more so I'd like the Infogalactic to be updated to reflect what's what here.

8) Re: overlap. Read it again. If all of my "Trutherism 101" pages are labelled as such then they are not overlapping or influencing the rest of the encyclopedia. If one fictional day there is an Infogalactic article that lists the "Top 10 animated sensations of 2020" of course they can link to my project, just as Wikipedia would if it weren't censoring my content. I will link to IG articles and external videos, links, Patreon, etc. If I or others contribute to any articles, then they will be as editors. If I have grocery list in my user pages, that does not overlap with the encyclopedia. I don't understand your argument against this.

9) I'm here to contribute general articles, truther articles, and hopefully to develop this project using the wiki, a very flexible format that is not on any of those other sites. Steemit's format sucks ass and is locked up after a week in their proprietary mystery block chain. (Also, I don't trust them as much as I don't trust Infogalactic or any site that isn't my own. Though not as bad as Facebook, Twitter, or Wikipedia banned me for a year and Quora banished me for good for speaking my truth.) I like the openly editable powerful wiki format.

10) Not everything is profit based. This mediawiki software was openly freely developed by SOCIALIST extremists (though infiltrated and managed by intelligence and corporate interests). Oh, the horror. That said, I haven't worked it all out yet. That's why a flexible wiki is better than a locked blockchain. Not only will I develop an online production flow (based on my decades of in-studio work) but there is also potential to organize the management and even rewards systems. Infogalactic may even adopt some ideas, assuming I achieve any success. If I don't flop, perhaps it's integrated with Bitcoin or Patreon or something newer. Perhaps Infogalactic integrates a voting system and a cryptocurrency so people can reward contributions.

11) This crude outline is not a business proposal. I am not a business person. I am an animator and researcher with some stories that I'd like feedback and maybe even some assistance with. If I do it all alone at home that won't happen. If I do it all openly online, there's a small chance I may get a response. After I publish some of the videos there's an even better chance of attracting assistance. If there are unforeseen overwhelming burdens I'll abandon my online process, otherwise I'll continue hoping it may be discovered eventually. Calvin and Hobbes didn't start on the front page. I can aim high and be happy with a fraction of that success. I don't want an economist's permission, approval, or guestimate.

12) Froglich, if that is your real name, are you paid to write for IG and/or dump on my dreams? Or are you also a "blockhead"?

13) I used to live and animate in Manhattan, San Francisco, Austin, Vancouver, Toronto, etc. Now I live in Windsor, Ontario, Canada, south of Detroit, Michigan, and from my window I look across Coventry Gardens and the Detroit River at Belle Isle Park. (I learned something finding these links. Our Peace Fountain as it's commonly known is actually the Charles Brooks (trade unionist) Peace Fountain (disambiguation) named for a guy I'd never heard of before.) I am here, on disability, by default, near my family who I rarely see once every couple years. I'd rather be healthy and living and fucking in Oakland, California, certainly surrounded by Democrat corporate-leftist SJWs, but also by authentic progressives, anarchists, truthers, occupiers, survivalists, free thinkers, DIYers, etc. and the arts and Burning Man communities. Pillette Village isn't even one of the hipper areas of Windsor, which has come a long way in 30 years, but it's still sooo far from being any sort of Mecca for hipsters, much less for animation, trutherism, etc. But at least it's not Detroit, Flint, or Iraq... or Sarnia.

14) I numbered paragraphs again for our convenience. Feel free to skip some.

15) ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

16) The real-left is not the fake-left.

  • Watch Jimmy Dore crap on fake-left news manufacturing consent: Rachel Maddow Slams Peace Talks With North Korea (18m33s).
  • The other day I was thinking of you, Froglich, as I was catching up on: Joe Rogan Experience #1073 - Steven Pinker (2h13m) particularly the part between about 30m and 1h30m. It may take getting used to but I listen/watch everything at 220% to 250% speed and if my computer could go faster I would. Pinker is good, but like always, I don't agree with everything he says. I even disagree with some Jimmmy Dore and James Corbett ideas, who I like above almost all others.

17) I'm not sure "inspired" is the right word, but I'm happy to have the virtual Ayn Rand and Vox Day books, as well as Johann Hari inspired by the recent Rogan interview. I still prefer real books but these days I rarely read. I was pretty darn sure I had The Fountainhead so I checked again. I've lent away about a third of my books, lost forever. This time I moved my "Centenial Edition" paperback super tiny print Atlas Shrugged to my pile of a dozen active books that I read depending on my mood. I can't emphasize how important it is to use the full title of Vox Day's "SJWs Always Lie, Taking Down the Thought Police". Without the second half it's extremely loaded and alienating, even to someone like me. I strongly urge whoever's in charge to modify the advertisement graphic. Last year I also feebly looked for interviews etc on YouTube etc featuring Vox Day. Can anyone recommend some? Today I found this Vox Day -Topic on YouTube. Also, are there audiobooks? That's a market to tap into. Also, I really really really recommend that Vox try to do interviews with Lionel, James Corbett, Jimmy Dore, Joe Rogan, Ed Opperman, Jason Goodman, and of course Molyneux, Sargon, etc. These guys are decent and open minded, sharp and critical, but fair and won't stomp on you or your words. It's never too late to push your latest book. Stephan and Sargon and many others are on your side anyway, not that the others aren't. Why the pseudonym? Is any of his sci-fi good? I ask and mention this stuff because this site seems, obviously not on the surface as my previous criticisms have indicated, this site seems on deeper examinations, perhaps hidden on purpose, very tied to the man who goes by Vox Day and his ideas. I honestly don't know why this stuff isn't forefront. Maybe I'm to naive, or haven't had the fist of a Nazi-puncher in my face, or there's a better reason to keep it on the down low. The far left and far right have far more in common than with the corporate mainstream.

Wiktionary Just Locked Me Out

CENSORSHIP on Wiktionary? Now I am not allowed to make edits due to "tinfoilhattery". I didn't see this coming so soon.

I really like the Wiktionary folks who hadn't been as hung up on this crap, until now. This "Equinox" character seems to be the "decider" because the guys who reverted my edits, maybe his subordinates, didn't lock me out.

They reverted my changes and I modified them, better, then they rolled those back with other changes. This is the game "they" play. As long as the definition is loaded and inaccurate.

I thought we were massaging the definition into a better place until mine was simply reverted. I reverted it back and went to their talk page as requested and left this "I think your rollback is in error because there is a profound lack of clarity and bias in the definition. Let's discuss this on the definition discussion page." But now we can't discuss it as I'm locked out.

Do I like everything about truthers and the truther communities? Hell no.

Then why am I a "truther"? Because, for reasons, the government... all shitty answers when it's complex and there are reasons, valid or not.

Their simplistic definitions (minus the quotes, etc):

  1. Someone who tells the truth.
  2. Someone who believes that the US government was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
  3. By extension, a conspiracy theorist who does not believe the accepted story about some significant event, fact, etc.

My "improvements":

  1. Someone who seeks or tells the truth.
  2. Someone who questions the 9/11 attacks and may believe some in government are responsible with media complicity to increase security and wars.
  3. By extension, a skeptic or conspiracy theorist who does not believe commonly accepted stories or details of significant events, tragedies, facts, etc. that may be psychological operations manufacturing consent for cultural engineering political agendas.

(Not all truthers believe the government did it, it was an inside job, or there was foreknowledge but they let 9/11 happen. Architects & Engineers for 9/11 narrowly question the "collapses" without politicizing it. There are many more suppressed truther groups of professionals focusing on their expertise, ie pilots, military, intelligence, firefighters, etc. (FYI, no modifications to regulations for structural building integrity occurred after 9/11.))

AND I added (to the lists I'd already previously added but weren't deleted): Hypernyms: tinfoilhattery Antonyms: deceiver, faker, liar, manipulator, believer, normie, sheeple, target audience, zombie See also: Berner, and brain-washing, propaganda, psy-ops, tinfoiler, tinfoil hat, tinfoil hatter

I added the pejorative things like "tinfoil hat", etc. to be accurate to modern perception, even if I don't agree, that is how the word is often used, so it belongs in the definition. I am not a flat-earther but I added it because it belongs there.

I admit I added may have a few more antonyms than necessary to convey the point, assuming they may cut some back. I was also ready for "psychological operations manufacturing consent for cultural engineering political agendas" to be cut back to be just "psychological operations" or "for political agendas". Maybe I would not have if I'd known they'd lock me out.

They have definitions that go on and on, but when it's politically sensitive they claim they are "cleaning up" the wiki.

Maybe it's bad timing. I was only thinking of the clearest definition, not recent events. I'm not even following the Vegas and the other shootings. I know for sure things didn't go down the way the mainstream media says because truthers are outing it (haven't really delved into it) and being censored like crazy across all social media platforms. They're all psychological operations, some real tragedies, some not, some mixed, all designed to fuck with us, distract us, and to manufacture consent. You are faaaar more likely to get killed by your police than a terrorist. You're more likely to die from lighting or slipping in the bathtub than a terrorist. You're waaaay more likely to die from a prescription or aspirin. Yet they ignore obesity, fluoride and lead, etc. to focus on trans-rights. This is obvious hyped up sensationalist bullshit on many levels, shifted into high gear since the NDAA 2012.

I'm not asking you to change it back. You can if you want to but it will just keep being remodified and reneutered. Clearly "they" are watching that definition with their rapid changes.

I am asking, what do you think? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

SpeedyDeletion.Wikia.com

Stumbled upon this doing research. Maybe it's helpful.

http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

Marxist economics professor Richard D. Wolff's monthly Global Capitalism videos

The SJW thought police and their cultural totalitarianism (aka cultural Marxism, likely intentionally mislabeled) are clearly the enemies of humanity save for those few who benefit.

Is socialism your enemy? It depends. The military is funded by socialist taxation and redistribution, theft without representation some might say. The unaccountable politicians can their pork barrel projects and secret agencies can spy on us all and fund a militarized police state, prison industrial complex, fund Google, Facebook, etc that censor us, and control the broadcast airwaves (There's "left" and "right" news channels, but never anarchist or Libertarian channels on TV). The firefighters protect your communities. Your community leaders take your local taxes and fund their projects while neglecting others, with little recourse for the disenfranchised. Socialism can be a tool for good or bad, depending which end you're on and who's on the other, sometimes both.

Whether it's socialism or capitalism or some other system or tool, the best way to use it or defend against it is to understand the pros and cons, strengths and weaknesses, the praise and the criticisms. If you can't analyse and criticize your thinking, you can't improve it. And the west does not like to criticize capitalism or threaten the system that benefits the one percent.

If you are dead set against socialism, that is fine. As a critical fan of all ideas, I recommend that if you were to stay on top of it with only one show, it would be the monthly "Global Capitalism" series on the YouTube channel Democracy At Work hosted by Marxist economics professor Richard D. Wolff. He doesn't get too caught up in the political theater and dramatic noise of other shows, yet he's a fun speaker with interesting ideas.

In addition to the idea shared above about getting to know your "enemies" (assuming you think socialist/Marxists are) by being exposed to their ideas, I have a couple other reasons to bring this up here.

  1. I generally always agree with his ideas, if not wholeheartedly then at least agree from his points understanding that there are also other equally valid perspectives. He seems to be a rational, easily understandable, and jovial leader worth analyzing.
  2. I'd like to hear contrary perspectives to his ideas, if any exist, if possible. Maybe they will be simply different, or better, or worse, or expressed poorly but with better concepts or vice versa. I'm curious. Sometimes I wonder if my agreement narrows my view, confirms my bias, and strengthens my bubble. Or maybe my bias is valid. Maybe you'll agree on much of what he says, and didn't realize that socialism/Marxism has been demonized, rightly and wrongly.
  3. In this video he only briefly touches on the totalitarian communist corrupted socialist system, without saying it in this way - but don't be fooled, he's said it before and expanded critically upon it (as has socialist Chris Hedges). Communism has pros and cons like any system but I like their countries far less than the west, likely because I'm accustomed to this one, not to mention we've ravaged them all in various ways for decades.
  4. In this 1h36m43s video there's a lot of slightly below average stuff but there are a couple good segments I'd most like to bring to your attention to see what you think. At 1h02m10s-1h05m55s brief Quebec health care example of administrators paid extravagantly to keep the lid on everyone, and the concluding Q&A 1h26m45s-1h36m10s "What do you see socialism doing for the rest of out lives?" which includes a very brief summary of socialism's successes and failures in other top-down countries on a big scale, and how in the 21st century it's understood that it needs to start from the bottom-up with worker coops on a small scale.

The Democracy At Work YouTube video: "Global Capitalism: CUT TAXES, DEPORT IMMIGRANTS, IMPOSE TARIFFS - What it All Means", one in a monthly lecture series featuring Marxist economics professor Richard D. Wolff.

Maybe I'm pissing in the wind, shouting in a vacuum, and/or wasting our time. I'm sharing things here because I intend to be on IG for a while to come. I don't intend to share every monthly Global Capitalism video here, though I'd welcome a monthly critical jam on it. I'll likely next share some interesting anarchist ideas. Feel free to comment as you see fit. Or not. Your silence will also speak volumes.

~ JasonCarswell (talk)

These points could be incorporated both in a new article, which I would be fine with, and in additions (I suggest new paragraphs) to existing articles. Any political bias must be disclosed as per IG policy. For the moment, I will focus more on the most important of the 5 million IG entries that have not been edited yet, some of which display extensive WP bias. -- Jack-arcalon (talk) 04:57, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I'm not interested in writing an article about it. I'm not interested in "promoting" or pushing Marxist ideas on any of you. I am interested in exposing you to some of the best Marxist ideas I see out there, and if the Marxists are your intellectual adversaries then Wolff would be among your greatest "foes" worth understanding and dissecting towards better defense and offense, and most importantly, I'm interested in Galaxians' criticisms of it to better understand any logical arguments against these ideas (outside the Us vs Them mentality identity politics or "just because, reasons" without listing them). Maybe Froglic is correct (who uses weasel words and signals his disapproval of all socialist topics, because... Ayn Rand) in that you can't teach an old dog new tricks, but I can't learn your new tricks if I'm not exposed to these ideas with logic and reasoned criticisms. Maybe Infogalactic isn't the place for this, or maybe it's not the right time with the right folks, yet. You can't catch fish if you don't go fishing. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Transcriptions on Infogalactic?

Here's another wiki project idea for Infogalactic. I don't expect an onslaught of transcriptions to flood the IG traffic, but it might be nice to have the option available for whoever for whatever, assuming nothing offends the IG code of conduct, etc. At present I only intend to do this for one show, in part because it's a good show, in part it's a wealth of information that I'd like to reference.

On YouTube I started this playlist for this show last year noticing there was none and to make it convenient for folks who may like the series. Interviewer Tim Kelly has great guests and authors with interesting ideas, largely anti-establishment, truther, dogma, and esoteric topics. Joseph Atwill is a good guest, author of Caesar's Messiah. This week was their 43rd weekly audio show called Powers & Pricipalities (playlist of all episodes).

If anyone has recommendations for auto-conversion of speech to text please let me know. There's a lot out there, and a lot of garbage apps too.

As a progressive/voluntaryist/atheist/truther I agree with 90% but don't buy everything in Powers & Principalities and I appreciated that they are very clear, knowledgeable, and they're not trapped in the left-right paradigm, explaining how we're all being manipulated at much higher levels with supporting references, some opinions, and the occasional theory.

After starting that playlist I started 3 more for other new series needing playlists, the Tin Foil Hat podcast/vlogcast series with L.A. comedian [Sam Tripoli] who gets it right 80% and spread woo 20%, The Shift with Doug McKenty featuring progressive, truther, and libertarian video interviews, and The Stones Unturned, hosted by author and scholar Thomas Horan, a true crime investigation and analysis audio series. At present I have no plans to transcribe any of these series, much less any other shows.

If/when I get around to transcribing these shows and sharing them online, I'd try to do it on a weekly basis with show releases. I'd also share links in the YouTube comments, as I do with the playlist. I don't know how many people get the show (you can't trust YouTube numbers for shit) or my playlist but I do know some do as I've had comments on the playlist (from gratitudes to criticism that I'd not included topics or was caught up fast enough). I think transcriptions might actually be far more useful and referenced.

Regarding copyright, I would credit Tim & Joe with links back to YouTube. I don't think they'd object to this transcription project as they are always talking about spreading the antiestablishment and anti-SJW message.

Episode #43 about Gender Confusion or the War on Masculinity and Femininity is not their best or worst show. They are all good. But it gives you an idea about their moral stance against cultural engineering. FYI: Kelly is Catholic and Atwill is Christian, but both are aware of a lot of the myths and such of the origins of many religions through the centuries, the manipulations, the changes (ie. Vatican 2), etc. Atwill is still Christian despite his Caesar's Messiah about the Flavian invention of Christianity. One thing I won't call these guys is anarchists as they may reference it from time to time, they don't preach, support, dismiss, nor push those ideas, though in spirit they may be, they don't claim to be nor advance anarchism (or any of it's many flavours), nor Libertarianism, nor dwell on it the way others like James Corbett (journalist) and Derrick Broze of The Conscious Resistance do.

Looking back through the episodes I made a few notes on, I was certain they must have done one on "the SJW problem". They've certainly covered it but they didn't title a show on it. All their shows are good at worst and I've been disappointed in a few (ie. Holocaust, JFK, 9/11, etc) for simply being just good when there is abundant material they could/should have included for a kick ass show. Perhaps because I liked them, my good mood, or because they were new to me I gave these exceptional episodes ratings: A #39 ; A+ #08, #20, #21 ; A++ #16, #30, #33, #35 ; A+++ #27 "The trouble with normies 2". And I still have 6 backlogged to catch up on that may be better than good.

List of new IG articles

This brings me to another idea. As stated several times before, I don't like the IG splash page much. It has no original character when it could be featuring original IG content. (Though not much of mine is polished enough yet.) I'd love to have access to a lists of original IG content, forked content, and new IG content. I don't plan on foiling anyone's articles. That's not my style. (I've tried to contribute but was rejected by Froglich. Fine whatev. Otherwise my record here is just fine.) So why the lists? Simple. I'm curious. These lists articles that are lost in vast oceans of mirrored articles would reflect what IG is obviously really about, or at least what all the editors are up to, besides having the atmosphere of a ghost town.

~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Another milestone in the War on "Fake News"

Whether you like progressive (not the same thing as corporate fake-left SJWs etc) and truther Holly Seeliger or not, we should be aware of these developments by Google, YouTube, and "humble" Wikipedia against free speech. This is only a four an a half minute YouTube video (half that at double speed) by Holly Seeliger's Zoon Politikon, called "Google's Commits $300 Million to Battle 'Fake News' " from 2018-03-27. The CIA enmeshed dominant concentrated corporations are closing/tightening their walls/matrix/network of defenses. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Holly Seeliger is a pro-Antifa SJW, that being obvious to anyone with even most rudimentary search-fu involving ten seconds' worth of free time. Froglich (talk) 22:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
That old article proves nothing you've asserted.
Are you for fascism? If not, then you're AntiFa by your logic. If you're in favour of fascism, then your no better than AntiFa (and the same by different labels IMHO). Just because she's against the rising military police state doesn't mean she's associated with AntiFa, nor does it mean she's an SJW. I've downloaded and watched every Zoon Politikon show since I stumbled upon her YouTube channel last August or September (though I have the last dozen to binge catch-up on). While there may be some things she knows that I don't and vice versa, I'd say we align on 99% of what she's reported on and expressed. To whatever else she might privately think I have little idea. She lives in Portland Maine and I'm in Windsor Ontario. If you like I could ask her what she believes, or you could do it yourself, via email. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
Antifa is a blatant communist-front run by old-line CPUSA academics, and Seeliger is either knowingly complicit or a smug useful-idiot. --Froglich (talk) 23:59, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
I basically agree with the first half of that. I despise communist and capitalist totalitarian governments alike. Seeliger appears neither complicit nor smug and I wonder, are you an idiot or useful? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
"...capitalist totalitarian governments...." --The words you are using are English, but their definitions have been mangled beyond recognition.
KremlinDuck.png
You are babbling Newspeak, and will remain lost to civilization until you can claw your way above the programming.
"...are you an idiot or useful?..." --Well, hello there, Duck. How would we ever hear quacks without you? Froglich 03:25, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
I almost said that "English, but beyond comprehension" to you before. That's why we need to hammer out the definitions and bias labels. But you choose to ignore this issue and harass me without constructive ideas or good points. The circular logic of your duck argument doesn't float. Maybe you're the duck. Should we throw you into the pond and if you don't drown we'll know you're just a ducko? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Objection To Narrative Domination

Whether you like or dislike Noam Chomsky or socialism (ie. government, police, military, firemen, borders, freeways, etc etc etc), I object to the domination of the "Noam Chomsky" article space by the formerly Noam Chomsky (a conservative perspective) article, rather than the redirect to Chomsky (disambiguation) where readers may choose their bias. The article, originally based on material from elsewhere (RationalWiki if I recall correctly), features a cartoon at the top. It's funny to be sure but is inaccurate. I'd like to see citations saying that Chomsky endorses Mao, Pol Pot, Ho, or Castro. Froglich is clearly no fan of socialism nor acknowledges the pros, cons or even the differences of socialist-based ideas. I'm not here to debate nor defend socialism. Rather, I'm complaining for the sake of fairness and against this narrative dominance. Fairness would offer the bias options equally on a disambiguation page, or at the absolute very least offer a link at the top to all alternative views. Is this an issue that riddles throughout InfoGalactic? I have no idea. Do I really care that much about Chomsky? No. He's a gatekeeper limited hangout who won't question JFK or 9/11, the unexamined origins and excuse of our global war on terror. But I won't stand by and let this one piece I know about start the slide down the slippery slope. If for no other reasons, you may want to at least present the facade of fairness when the censorship gets ratcheted up in years to come. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Coin side-A) "...I object to the domination of the "Noam Chomsky" article...."'
Coin side-B) "...Do I really care that much about Chomsky? No...."'
-- If one of those assertions is true, then the other is nonsense, Jason.
And to hell with the "Wikipedia perspective"; if anybody wants that sort of "fair" (in which truth and outright lies are given equal-time in the best of circumstances), then they can go to bloody Wikipedia -- which is right where it's always been: not here. --Froglich (talk) 22:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
I care about the "Narrative Domination" as I indicated by the title. If you do this to Noam then you may do it anywhere or everywhere. Be "tired of my crap" and give me "cold stares" all you want, I'm calling you on your biashits.
You are free to change "the conservative perspective" to whatever better bias label you want and you may change "the Wikipedia perspective" to something else too. If I think it's inappropriate or inaccurate then we may discuss and aim to reach consensus on better nomenclatures.
If people want the Wikipedia version they know where to get it, and they won't be bothering with Infogalactic. However, we have the opportunity to add "Alternative views" sections in every Wikipedia article mirror (the majority of IG articles), and vice versa for comparative bias analysis, should they care to look. Perhaps you should consider Conservapedia or Metapedia. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
The pace is proceeding entirely too slowly for my tastes, but the currently grossly self-contradictory Canons of Infogalactic will eventually be sorted out, and the mission-statement of this place will become much more clear.--Froglich (talk) 23:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
You and I have far more in common than you might admit. As I do, you clearly appreciate "conspiracy theories" by the content of your articles. You have chosen a side while I refuse to, and for that you demonize me. I started reading my Ayn Rand book and I expect it to give me new insights and perspectives on things, but it will not convert me anymore than if I read the Bhagavad Gita, the I Ching , the Wisdom of Confucius, or the Teachings Of Buddha (again). I used to read stuff like that 25-30 years ago because I was looking for better "answers" when I really already kinda knew that religion, like faith in politics, is a dogmatic joke. Executing the non-believers is not the solution you seek, angry person. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
"...You have chosen a side...." -- Incorrect. Your conclusion (in that quotation) was arrived via an *error* in your thought-process. You will continue to flounder around foolishly until you have ascertained what is causing you to make these errors, and address it. Froglich 03:25, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Whatev.

Infogalactic:Open project copyrights

User:JasonCarswell/Infogalactic open project copyrights - This "Infogalactic:Open project copyrights" reference-manual-type-article, or whatever we decide may be a better name for it, should be reviewed, considered, improved, and published (moved from my user space). Obviously I have, or intend to have, a stake in a couple of my media projects (not all of which I need copyright clarification and/or modification), but also for anyone else who has InfoGalactic wiki projects of their own, presently or potentially in the future. I welcome all constructive criticism and am happy handing it over to anyone more suited to properly address the legalese. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)




So after the encouragement on User talk:JasonCarswell/Infogalactic open project copyrights I think I moved:

to
and by association default also moving:
to

BUT IT IS MISSING ! ! !

I changed "User:JasonCarswell" to "Infogalactic" and "Infogalactic open project copyrights" to "Open project copyrights".

I went to the Special:SpecialPages to determine if I should add it there, if there was an obvious place for it, and hopes it might be there. The talk page and history are all gone too.

I have one old tab with it open. I'll try to re-build it based on that. The talk page may be lost.

I hope this is a recoverable bug or one that can be patched.

~ JasonCarswell (talk)




Infogalactic:Open project copyrights is rebuilt and backed up. I'll tidy the article later. Nothing grand was lost on the talk page.

While I was working on it, I remembered something that may be worth fixing, and perhaps was part of the bug that deleted the article. When moving an article, ie from "User" to "Main" space, there is a drop down menu to select those options and others, like "Template" or "Infogalactic" or "Infogalactic Talk". At the time I thought nothing of it, but there was the "Infogalactic" and "Infogalactic Talk" near the top of the long drop down list, AND a "Infogalactic" or "Infogalactic Talk" near the bottom of that drop down list. I didn't know what the difference was so I went with the top one - and lost it all.

Good thing I still had a tab open with it, to at least copy the text to be coded. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

The future and/or funding and/or end of InfoGalactic?

Zeronet logo
IPFS logo

Aside from the stupid SJW and censorship trends, Net Neutrality and corporate domination, there are are plenty of other reasons to be concerned about free speech and the future of InfoGalactic.

I've mentioned before that there are plenty of good options to consider to branching out beyond the Internet, such as ZeroNet or the new InterPlanetary File System. That's why I've asked in the past how large the actual wiki with or without media is?

While the "Dark Web" in the deep web, largely on Tor or FreeNet (both heavily tracked by the government), so far as I know is primarily illegal markets for drugs or weapons with alleged snuff and child porn, though apparently more of it is on the open internet using codes (ie. To buy "candy" or "cheese pizza" instead of child porn, and who know's what's actually delivered). (And FAAAR worse than any digital copies of child porn are the sick villains who actually do evil deeds, including the Pedophocracy who permit it and profit.) Anyway, ZeroNet and IPFS are still young and being slowly developed and actually look promising. While nothing is entirely foolproof some significant milestones are being reached: "Play: A P2P Distributed Torrent Site That’s Impossible to Shut Down".

In a linked "Turkey Can’t Block This Copy of Wikipedia (on IPFS)" article (in the IPFS article) the last paragraphs state:

To check out that TURKISH Distributed Wikipedia on IFPS:

If this were indeed the case, I suppose this World-Wide-Wiki might legitimately be free, and those of use who, for whatever reason, are not using Wikipedia, could potentially return and/or merge back into that fold with vaster resources... However, assuming it's legit free and open (not just marketed as such with totalitarian administrators), just as we'd be able to "return" and add our various "forbidden" perspectives, so too would any vandal... plus the $40 million dollar troll farm, plus the other recent Google censorship army, plus, plus, plus... Meaning anything you post might have to be defended. Maybe. I don't fully understand that IPFS system but it has a basis in trust, somehow. So maybe that might help.

So I just took break to update the ZeroNet and InterPlanetary File System articles and discovered someone had already added that "Play" article link above to the ZeroNet article. I also (sorta) learned a bunch of new stuff about new technologies and crypto currencies while importing a bunch of new tech articles.

Also, I'm astounded that InfoGalactic doesn't even have a single crypto currency to donate to on the Infogalactic:Donations page. If this were my site, (and I'm often reminded it's not), I'd add some crypto options with all other options below the "Donate to Infogalactic" in the margin (a major empty wiki waste of screen space). (Also please add the link to this Galactic boardroom.)

~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Infogalactic:Fundamental terminology

Recently I was told to "be bold", as per the IG guidelines. So I started this "Infogalactic:Fundamental terminology" page, inspired by this interesting content. Like it, or not, there it is. I hope it's appreciated, appended, and applied. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Orbit = peer to peer chat over IPFS

Here and there folks have asked about chat or messaging on IG. That's not really my thing, but whomever may wish to consider Orbit, an experimental, distributed, peer-to-peer chat application built on IPFS. Search DuckDuckGo: IPFS Orbit for more. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)


Possible new guideline about signatures

First of all, I'm a noob named Nathan Explosion. I was reading through the guidelines and the rules on this wiki and saw that the one for signature pointed back to Wikipedia. I thought it might be a good idea to set up our own rules so that we don't have to point back to them, I've started a discussion over here at this talk page . Feel free to join in ! NathanExplosion (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)