Greens propose Heritage Wiki

Yorick_Hunt said :

… and RubenWiki for some Raiders heritage….

Good call. There should be bipartisan support for the RubenWiki.

Masquara said :

54-11 said :

Masquara said :

54-11 said :

… someone was after information about creepy sites (maybe Masquara’s place would qualify). .

See? I rest my case. Work hasn’t even started on this “heritage wiki” and you are apparently already planning nasty, personal content, that I would have to remove, and eventually possibly request a blocking on such.
Unless it is funded through a formal organisation, it won’t work.
If it is in the hands of Greens-picked volunteers, it will be filtered by self-righteous fascists through oft-hypocritical PC tropes and censored, and slanted.

What a troll…

No case to argue … so you resort to cheap personal shots. If the pro-heritage-wiki folk take your attitude, as I said, it’s stuffed before it’s even being constructed.

Twenty seconds of looking would’ve informed you that the grant is going to the ACT National Trust to establish and maintain the wiki. You didn’t seem able to come up with that yourself yet you apparently have a deep insight into the pitfalls of this wiki. I don’t think so.

You know those biased Greenies you rant about? You do realise you’re the other side of the same coin, don’t you?

Anyway re the wiki I think it’s a good idea and cheap at the price.

Masquara said :

54-11 said :

Masquara said :

54-11 said :

… someone was after information about creepy sites (maybe Masquara’s place would qualify). .

See? I rest my case. Work hasn’t even started on this “heritage wiki” and you are apparently already planning nasty, personal content, that I would have to remove, and eventually possibly request a blocking on such.
Unless it is funded through a formal organisation, it won’t work.
If it is in the hands of Greens-picked volunteers, it will be filtered by self-righteous fascists through oft-hypocritical PC tropes and censored, and slanted.

What a troll…

No case to argue … so you resort to cheap personal shots. If the pro-heritage-wiki folk take your attitude, as I said, it’s stuffed before it’s even being constructed.

Hilarious. What a colossal hypocrite this Masquara is.
“Those who say it can’t be done should get out of the way of people who are already doing it”.
Masquara’d be singing a completely different song if this were a Liberal policy.

54-11 said :

Masquara said :

54-11 said :

… someone was after information about creepy sites (maybe Masquara’s place would qualify). .

See? I rest my case. Work hasn’t even started on this “heritage wiki” and you are apparently already planning nasty, personal content, that I would have to remove, and eventually possibly request a blocking on such.
Unless it is funded through a formal organisation, it won’t work.
If it is in the hands of Greens-picked volunteers, it will be filtered by self-righteous fascists through oft-hypocritical PC tropes and censored, and slanted.

What a troll…

No case to argue … so you resort to cheap personal shots. If the pro-heritage-wiki folk take your attitude, as I said, it’s stuffed before it’s even being constructed.

Masquara said :

54-11 said :

… someone was after information about creepy sites (maybe Masquara’s place would qualify). .

See? I rest my case. Work hasn’t even started on this “heritage wiki” and you are apparently already planning nasty, personal content, that I would have to remove, and eventually possibly request a blocking on such.
Unless it is funded through a formal organisation, it won’t work.
If it is in the hands of Greens-picked volunteers, it will be filtered by self-righteous fascists through oft-hypocritical PC tropes and censored, and slanted.

You do to seem to understand how wikis work.

Masquara said :

54-11 said :

… someone was after information about creepy sites (maybe Masquara’s place would qualify). .

See? I rest my case. Work hasn’t even started on this “heritage wiki” and you are apparently already planning nasty, personal content, that I would have to remove, and eventually possibly request a blocking on such.
Unless it is funded through a formal organisation, it won’t work.
If it is in the hands of Greens-picked volunteers, it will be filtered by self-righteous fascists through oft-hypocritical PC tropes and censored, and slanted.

What a troll…

54-11 said :

… someone was after information about creepy sites (maybe Masquara’s place would qualify). .

See? I rest my case. Work hasn’t even started on this “heritage wiki” and you are apparently already planning nasty, personal content, that I would have to remove, and eventually possibly request a blocking on such.
Unless it is funded through a formal organisation, it won’t work.
If it is in the hands of Greens-picked volunteers, it will be filtered by self-righteous fascists through oft-hypocritical PC tropes and censored, and slanted.

So everyone who gets moderated ‘elsewhere’ can get their revenge on the Heritage Wiki site…

The ‘pride and belonging’ bit is interesting; will anything negative disappear, magically? I hope not, otherwise it would be a tad North Korean. History without negatives is propaganda. (That sentence sounds worryingly like a political slogan…)

Your last aside is interesting; RA does already do this sort of thing, although in a different way, and could, I assume, do more with similar funding to that proposed for this new site, in the form of a grant or whatever. (Filthy gubmint moneys.)

JB’s History Corner…hmmm, maybe not.

Wikipedia angsted and still angsts over censorship.

And yet it works. It’s amazing what grown-ups can achieve.

It’s a multi-multi-million dollar organisation.

And it proposes to hold the sum of human knowledge and be accessed by tens of millions of people every day. Surely you’d agree Canberra and its heritage are just a tad smaller than that. (We might need some extra server space to hold your rants about Eros, though.)

let’s see your practical insights into just how issues can be solved regarding this proposed website as per my outline above.

That breathless, paranoid rant was an outline?

My ‘practical insight’ is ‘it’s $35K – let’s see what happens rather than hitching up our little red wagon full of persecution delusions before it’s started’.

My other insight is that you’re the one with the extraordinary claim that a tried and tested approach won’t work here because Eros censorship orbital mind control lasers, so the burden of proof rests with you.

You simply haven’t considered the issues here.

Are they those scrawlings you called an ‘outline’? Consider them considered.

Masquara said :

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

<
Successful wikis running all over the world every day

There is a massive difference between private wikis and wikis instigated by government. Private wikis can be as political, cynical and partisan as they like. A government funded wiki is an entirely different kettle of fish. You simply haven't considered the issues here.

Rubbish. What this would do is formalise, for example, some of the discussions on RA, where people ask questions of different sites around the Capital. Just in the last few weeks, someone was after information about creepy sites (maybe Masquara’s place would qualify). The many responses would make a great foundation for a wiki entry.

Some of us are now at an age where friends and relatives of a similar generation are passing on, and with them go many memories and knowledge of places. So let’s get these recorded formally in such a wiki while we can.

So what a great idea, at minimal cost. Masquara’s negativity at anything that is not Lib-initiated is very boring.