?

Log in

No account? Create an account

The Toybox

people for the conservation of limited amounts of indignation


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
you don't need wiki for porn, really
children of dune - leto 1
seperis
From Fandom Wank on JF: Drama at Wikipedia

Okay, since I don't participate in the wiki community like, at all, this is all new and fascinatingly convoluted information and also, kind of hilariously appropriate. My understanding of the situation is pretty much as the article states, and I was totally grooving the outrage and community standards and 'think of the children' (I am saying, people who say that really need to like, stop thinking of other people's children. I find this creepy.) and I hit this and it's totes relevant to my interests.

I'm not sure you need too much context, but this is in a discussion of founder Jimbo Wales doing a unilateral mass delete of what he considered pornographic images that started in this thread.
It still works, it's just harder. And I'm totally with you on the
second point. Jimmy got a needed process started. Could he have
started it a different, less dramatic way? Probably. Would that have
been better? Probably. As effective? Probably not. If you're
looking to masturbate, Commons is among the best, most available, and
easiest to navigate sources of material there is - the community can
fix that and decide as a whole what to do, and should, but maybe Jimmy
is playing the maverick and providing a giant leap toward that
discussion.

~A - link

*rubs forehead*

Okay, I know, this wikipedia thing is a big deal and blah blah blah and I'm only about three-quarters through the entire wank, but I had to stop there and boggle. For the record, if you're getting off on wiki commons pictures, for the love of God, what the hell are you using google for? The internet is for porn! As Al Gore, God, and many heavily invested porn companies will assure you. With pictures. Not like it's hard to find.

Also, this is kind of fascinating wank for anyone who ever goes to wikipedia, so you know, I am not being entirely representative of the entire situation. I am just saying, wow. Unless that's like, your kink, which I am totally not judging but admittedly it would be a first to have 'must jerk off to wikipedia', you know?

Carry on.

Posted at Dreamwidth: http://seperis.dreamwidth.org/17381.html. | You can reply here or there. | comment count unavailable comments


  • 1
I admit I love wikipedia, but not like that. LOL.

*nods* I just. *blank* It's like he doesn't know about the internet that isn't within wiki.

Does this mean the sex positions article is gone?! Oh, noes! ::darts off to check:: No, it's still there; am now confused as that's the porniest thing I've seen on wikipedia....

*absolutely baffled blink* Um. Dude? I think... pr0n: ur doin' it wrong?

... man, all I can think of saying if somebody is using Wikipedia for pr0n is 'you just failed at the internets'.

Good grief. This is like running through Chat Roulette trying to get people to flash themselves at you. WHY NOT JUST GO TO XTUBE OR REDTUBE like everybody else?

Then again maybe this is some sort of kink.... Porn in unexpected places?

  • 1