Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Akolouthos
Sultan
Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
|
Quote Reply
Topic: And Now We Have "Liberapedia". Posted: 31-Aug-2008 at 19:40 |
So much fun was had by all making fun of the ridiculous Conservapedia. In the interests of equal time, I decided to bring to you the equally ridiculous Liberapedia. This just goes to show that ignorance is one of the few things in the world that actually transcends any particular brand of partisanship. Honestly, don't all of these people have better things to be doing with their time -- like posting on AE.
Go ahead. Check it out and have a laugh:
-Akolouthos
|
|
Justinian
Chieftain
King of Númenor
Joined: 11-Nov-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1399
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Aug-2008 at 22:04 |
Most amusing.
|
"War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace."--Thomas Mann
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Aug-2008 at 22:36 |
This is satire.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Aug-2008 at 23:11 |
Originally posted by Recusant
This is satire. |
Exactly. Liberapedia is a humourous website, Conservapedia is dead serious.
|
|
Akolouthos
Sultan
Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 00:11 |
Originally posted by Mixcoatl
Originally posted by Recusant
This is satire. |
Exactly. Liberapedia is a humourous website, Conservapedia is dead serious.
|
I really, really hope you're right -- actually, I hope that both of them are satire. That said, check some of the discussion pages. It seems that they are in a bit of a transition.
-Akolouthos
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 05:14 |
Nice find Akolouthos, but the main page is a dead give away that this is pure satire. Just compare the comments on the two plans for the US parties in the upcoming elections.
On the other hand, conservapedia is really very serious (except for the odd page where someone who dislikes the site makes an entry which is obviously designed to discredit them). Their page on dinosaurs is something I look at from time to time when I'm in need of cheering up. The attempt at providing cave paintings as proof of human coexistence with dinosaurs shortly after the creation of the world a half dozen thousand years before Christ deserves a mix of admiration (for trying very hard) and humorous dismissal.
Still lets watch Liberapedia, she may provide us with some extremist entertainment we can all have a laugh at. Kind of like American Dad.
Edited by Constantine XI - 01-Sep-2008 at 05:14
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 06:14 |
Did'nt consevatpedia start off as a satire.
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 06:23 |
Originally posted by Sparten
Did'nt consevatpedia start off as a satire.
|
I read it began when a US school teacher, disgruntled with "liberal bias" of wikipedia, started up his own wiki. Other things that annoyed him were things like a general acceptance of evolution as true and that some pages contained English in its more "English" form e.g. 'colour' rather than 'color'. He felt the need for a more American and more conservative wiki. Its presence later attracted the creation of inane pages from hostile visitors.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 07:13 |
^
Wonder if he has ever had an MRI scan?
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 08:30 |
Conservapedia was indeed a serious project initially, but it has since been taken over by trolls and it is now literally impossible to distinguish the articles that are intentionally absurd from those that are not.
Liberapedia never appears to have bothered with the pretence in the first place.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 13:05 |
Originally posted by Recusant
Conservapedia was indeed a serious project initially, but it has since been taken over by trolls and it is now literally impossible to distinguish the articles that are intentionally absurd from those that are not. |
From what I gather conservapedia is basically under martial law, they ban people for changing color to colour, or for talking too much on talk pages and too little on articles.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 20:25 |
Originally posted by Mixcoatl
From what I gather conservapedia is basically under martial law, they ban people for changing color to colour, or for talking too much on talk pages and too little on articles.
|
The point is, not even those in charge are able to discern the "honest" articles from the parodies anymore. The quotes in your signature are excellent examples of this; are they serious or satire? It is impossible to say. Sadly, they could just as easily be either.
|
|
hugoestr
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 21:52 |
Originally posted by Sparten
Did'nt consevatpedia start off as a satire.
|
Nope. It has always been a serious project. It started as a project to create a conservative version of wikipedia by a group of homeschooled kids.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 21:55 |
Originally posted by Recusant
Originally posted by Mixcoatl
From what I gather conservapedia is basically under martial law, they ban people for changing color to colour, or for talking too much on talk pages and too little on articles.
|
The point is, not even those in charge are able to discern the "honest" articles from the parodies anymore. The quotes in your signature are excellent examples of this; are they serious or satire? It is impossible to say. Sadly, they could just as easily be either. |
Whether they were added seriously or as satire, the Conservapedia leadership agrees, otherwise they would have been removed. In fact, they call the atheism article the article of the year, so not only do they agree with it, they actually think it's the best they have to offer.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2008 at 22:37 |
Again, one person's heartfelt opinion is another's satire. We'll never know what they were originally. The endorsement of the Conservapedia "masterminds" means very little in this regard. The fact that they can be so easily trolled just goes to show how pathetic the whole business truly is.
I guess that's the only real certainty about the site; it's a joke whether it's intended or not.
|
|
Akolouthos
Sultan
Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 02-Sep-2008 at 01:56 |
Interesting discussion. I would advise everyone to read some of the "talk" pages on Liberapedia, and to watch it as it develops. Things do not always end as they begin, especially when their beginnings are so ill-defined to begin with.
-Akolouthos
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 02-Sep-2008 at 05:39 |
The Amy Winehouse article was brilliantly incisive in a highly politically incorrect sort of way. The truth is so much more appealing when not stifled by paranoid desires not to offend anyone or be the least bit improper.
I look forward to more liberapedia pages of this sort of unabashed honesty.
|
|