YSK There’s someone running around Lemmy posting misinformation against Wikipedia
He generally shows most of the signs of the misinformation accounts:
Wants to repeatedly tell basically the same narrative and nothing else
Narrative is fundamentally false
Not interested in any kind of conversation or in learning that what he’s posting is backwards from the values he claims to profess
I also suspect that it’s not a coincidence that this is happening just as the Elon Musks of the world are ramping up attacks on Wikipedia, specially because it is a force for truth in the world that’s less corruptible than a lot of the others, and tends to fight back legally if someone tries to interfere with the free speech or safety of its editors.
Anyway, YSK. I reported him as misinformation, but who knows if that will lead to any result.
Edit: Number of people real salty that I’m talking about this: Lots
Ah yes, spurious. For my part, I deeply regret that I accused him of being a genocidal cult, and posted an article that was all mad about how unreasonable it was that he was was attacking ANI and other governments, like Israel and Donald Trump, to the point that a court had to sanction him for it, and then later another different article about how unreasonable it was that he was kowtowing to ANI by doing what they court-ordered him to do, after some negotiation to make sure it didn't negatively impact his allies, while wholly misrepresenting the terms of that court order and saying that "many" of his allies were abandoning him.
That would be almost as if I didn't care at all about the factual consistency of what I was saying, and was just trying to attack him with anything to hand, for whatever bizarre reasons of my own. That would be crazy, man. It would be toxic as fuck.
it's possible he's wrong and you're still toxic. by pigeon holing him with musk you are creating a perception that has no basis in anything they've said.
What I'm accusing him is not at all just being "wrong." Anyone can be wrong, myself included. The accusation I'm making is that he simply doesn't care about the truth, and is willing to say even diametrically opposed factual statements as long as they both sound bad for Wikipedia. I think we should keep that off the network, or at least talk about it when it happens. That's not toxic. That is being interested in the truth.
What do you mean when you say "researching"? What do you mean when you say I'm pigeon holing him with Musk? I never said anything about Elon Musk at all, that I remember.
So, you don't have a reason, just "shut up shut up shut up." Okay, sounds good. If you have counterarguments that are not some kind of ad hominem, you're welcome to post them.
judging by how the votes seem to be panning out, people seem to think that you’re the one displaying toxic behaviour, and are kinda in favour of OP calling out and defending against genuine misinformation