Author Topic: Faces of (wikipedia) FREETARDS ! (Read 41927 times)

donding · « **Reply #50 on:** July 16, 2012, 10:05 »

I always research the subject I am looking for. Wiki is just the starting point. A person would be foolish not to do the research of sources. Not all information is inaccurate on Wiki. Unless you are an expert in the field then how would you know the correct answer, that's why people do the research and how would you really know the correct answer unless you were the expert. So many search results come up with a google search and many sources vary in their information. It's really subject to interpretation on the researcher's part. How would you know what is correct and what is not?

antistock · « **Reply #51 on:** July 16, 2012, 12:41 »

thanks for your answers but i stand my case.

ShadySue · « **Reply #52 on:** July 17, 2012, 04:34 »

Quote from: antistock on July 16, 2012, 12:41

thanks for your answers but i stand my case.

Which, when the straw men, smoke and mirrors are done away with, seems to be that you think people should not be able to choose to work pro bono. All the rest was just waffle.

antistock · « **Reply #53 on:** July 17, 2012, 11:01 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 17, 2012, 04:34

Quote from: antistock on July 16, 2012, 12:41
thanks for your answers but i stand my case.
Which, when the straw men, smoke and mirrors are done away with, seems to be that you think people should not be able to choose to work pro bono. All the rest was just waffle.

working pro bono and volunteering are a wonderful thing.

but when it becomes an organization recruiting 1000s of unpaid volunteers and making 100s of million dollars $$ on their skin
sorry but that's quite another story.

wikipedia, linux, apache, mysql, wordpress, joomla, just to name a few ... the guys at the top are all rich millionaires, and the ones who wrote the code and the content never got a single dollar back.

that's what the freetard cult is all about, a scam to dupe the gullibles.

antistock · « **Reply #54 on:** July 17, 2012, 11:04 »

the next step is USER generated content.

facebook, flickr, pinterest, IMDB, etc etc etc

they give you a small free something, and once they've millions of users they make millions with advertising, upsells, and paid services.

it's a freemium model, basically the same scam but smarter.

fujiko · « **Reply #55 on:** July 17, 2012, 14:25 »

WOW!

You don't know anything of open source projects or free software, do you?
Saying that linux, apache, mysql or other similar projects are programmed by unpaid volunteers is just plain wrong.

About the other sites you mention, they sometimes fail even if they are free. It's not easy to monetize on user generated content even if you get it for free. Many sites failed and faded away. Even Facebook has trouble monetizing the content.

But really, why do you post your opinion here for free? Some experts and journalists try to earn a living giving their opinion on TV, newspapers, radio, podcasts and many other media. Why are you giving your opinion for free? You are ruining their business giving your opinion for free.

antistock · « **Reply #56 on:** July 18, 2012, 00:44 »

what do i know after all .... i just contributed to a few open source projects years ago.. just to give up quickly realizing it was modern day enslaving, i can tell you how it works, the guy at the top make the money when it's the moment to sell or licence the software to the big boys or to get the fundings from a VC, you the idiot volunteer coder get nothing, not even a thank you and if you complain they will tell you you're greedy and you should not think that way if you believe in freedom and yadda yadda.

thanks god i haven't lost much time on it, i basically needed some more function for some apps i was using already and i said what the F we can as well join their team.

sites with UGC struggle to make profits ? of course because it's junk content, but some still make millions and this is unfair.

ShadySue · « **Reply #57 on:** July 18, 2012, 06:26 »

Quote from: antistock on July 17, 2012, 11:01

Quote from: ShadySue on July 17, 2012, 04:34
Quote from: antistock on July 16, 2012, 12:41
thanks for your answers but i stand my case.
Which, when the straw men, smoke and mirrors are done away with, seems to be that you think people should not be able to choose to work pro bono. All the rest was just waffle.

working pro bono and volunteering are a wonderful thing.

but when it becomes an organization recruiting 1000s of unpaid volunteers and making 100s of million dollars $$ on their skin
sorry but that's quite another story.

wikipedia, [snip] ... the guys at the top are all rich millionaires, and the ones who wrote the code and the content never got a single dollar back.

that's what the freetard cult is all about, a scam to dupe the gullibles.

Would you care to explain how Jimmy Wales is making loads of money directly or indirectly from Wikipedia? (from what I can see, his wealth has been gleaned from other enterprises, but you may have other sources).

antistock · « **Reply #58 on:** July 18, 2012, 07:11 »

he first made millions with Bomis Inc. , part of the online porn industry.

secondly he launched NuPedia, a fiasco, then hired Larry Sanger, who is the inventor of wikipedia actually, later fired for ideological reasons, he now runs a peer-reviews clone of wikipedia called Citizendium.

the millions in funding come from Unesco and many other organizations that he managed to lure into supporting wikipedia.

on top of this he periodically begs for donations to his users.

you can find tons of more detailed info about this guy on the web, apart on wikipedia itself as he locked his personal page to downplay his past time in the porn business and his millionaire status and to make him look as a champion of freedom democracy and bla bla bla.

you know why i hate these things ? because i'm so F sick of NGOs and charities and free-something organizations telling us they're free and freedom and bla bla bla bla bla and then they have millions of dollar pouring from their as-s but they treat employees like sh-it, if and when they even pay them actually !

at the very least, it's an ideological scam, the fact there are freetards having done such a massive work for free for many years just show that there's indeed a su-cker born every minute.

ShadySue · « **Reply #59 on:** July 18, 2012, 07:54 »

Moving away a bit from Wikipedia, things aren't always what they seem. A charity I have a little involvement with is sometimes criticised as being a 'wealthy' charity. At any given point, they do seem 'relatively' wealthy, compared to small local groups. However, their policy is a 'rolling ten weeks' - i.e. they maintain their activities so that they have approximately enough to maintain their work for ten weeks; so if income stopped totally, they'd be defunct after ten weeks.
They have paid staff and volunteers. Arguably too many volunteers, as often unemployed people volunteer to get it on their CV, and they're hardly trained up and they're off to get a different sort of work experience on their CV. Also recently retired people who want to 'do something useful', but either only want to give limited time or want to work flexibly 'as and when' (the paid staff have regular commited hours).

Hummingbird · « **Reply #60 on:** July 18, 2012, 08:32 »

Quote from: grafix04 on July 15, 2012, 08:02

Who knows, maybe that pizza guy is an ex professor but judging from the misinformation spread on wiki, I'm leaning towards thinking he's just some uneducated bum delivering pizzas and edits these incorrect articles for free to give some meaning to his uneventful life.

The silver lining is that the Pizza Delivery page on WP is probably rock-solid accurate and a philosophical masterpiece.

Actually, if you read the "talk" page of the Pizza Delivery page... one of the photographs isn't a pizza but a disc of dough with brown soup on it... the article is considered America-centric... and there are disputes over the amount of tipping.

antistock · « **Reply #61 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:15 »

Quote from: Hummingbird on July 18, 2012, 08:32

Quote from: grafix04 on July 15, 2012, 08:02
Who knows, maybe that pizza guy is an ex professor but judging from the misinformation spread on wiki, I'm leaning towards thinking he's just some uneducated bum delivering pizzas and edits these incorrect articles for free to give some meaning to his uneventful life.

The silver lining is that the Pizza Delivery page on WP is probably rock-solid accurate and a philosophical masterpiece.

Actually, if you read the "talk" page of the Pizza Delivery page... one of the photographs isn't a pizza but a disc of dough with brown soup on it... the article is considered America-centric... and there are disputes over the amount of tipping.

and rightfully so.
the first photo on the top is a real pizza but the one in box in the bottom is a microvawed cake !

it says enough about the value and authority of your free encyclopedia....

oh my god also a photo of Papa John's ... would you believe there's Papa Johns even in Beijing, China and it's as cr-ap as in the US ?

yes it's US-centric .. AS ALWAYS with english web sites by the way, but don't worry we non-anglos will go on with out lives,
it's business as usual.

do you how many yanks i've met claiming that pizza was invented in america ? a LOT !! and go tell them otherwise.
and when in doubt they will tell you to check your facts on ... WIKIPEDIA !!

antistock · « **Reply #62 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:22 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 18, 2012, 07:54

Moving away a bit from Wikipedia, things aren't always what they seem. A charity I have a little involvement with is sometimes criticised as being a 'wealthy' charity. At any given point, they do seem 'relatively' wealthy, compared to small local groups. However, their policy is a 'rolling ten weeks' - i.e. they maintain their activities so that they have approximately enough to maintain their work for ten weeks; so if income stopped totally, they'd be defunct after ten weeks.
They have paid staff and volunteers. Arguably too many volunteers, as often unemployed people volunteer to get it on their CV, and they're hardly trained up and they're off to get a different sort of work experience on their CV. Also recently retired people who want to 'do something useful', but either only want to give limited time or want to work flexibly 'as and when' (the paid staff have regular commited hours).

there are "real" NGOs, and i've nothing against them.

my chip on the shoulder is with the top-10 ones, the ones who make billions per year, the ones setting foot here
in SE asia to make a business OUT OF POVERTY, and yes they're such a sack of sh-it and i can tell you nobody will publish anything
about them and if you manage to get it out they will sue your as-s big time as they did with a few blogs who had the guts to
point a finger at them, piss-ed off ex volunteers etc... all have been shut down and had to to shut the F up.

search any critic about the top-10 on the web and you find what .. not much .. or nothing ...how can that be considering
they're even making money near where i live with fake orphanages where tourists pay money to get in and make photos and the kids
go back to mama and papa for dinner

?

and this is the TIP of the F iceberg...you've no idea ! no idea !!

antistock · « **Reply #63 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:33 »

NGOs are monetizing poverty.

Pharmacetical multinationals are monetizing illness.

Wikipedia is monetizing "spare time" and volunteering.

they all have a common goal .. making sh-itloads of money on the shoulders of the millions like YOU .. and giving you NOTHING back.

what the F ... i've seen a few super duper hospitals here built by european NGOs .. such a luxury ... and who pays for that ? people who lost a limb because of mines and UXOs ... absolutely pennyless... they give them everything ... and then you ask and they get like 50K or 100K euro per limb ...

and all this tax-free ... and they go in TV asking for donations ... and i see their founder interviewed everywhere, with a long beard, talking like a guru or a pope ...

what ... it's 100K for a plastic prothesys they buy for what ? 5K ? 10K ? .... EU gives them money .. UNesco gives them money ..even the IMF gives them money .. everybody gives them money .. maybe even YOU.

it's all F crazy ... these peasants make 60$/month ... in the city 2-300$ a month ... if highly skilled 5-600$/month ....

and they come here spending like crazy and parking their SUVs in front of the most expensive restaurants and sleeping in the best hotels, the volunteers instead are lucky to stay in a 5$ guesthouse ridden with mosquitoes and eating the local 0.5$ meals !

antistock · « **Reply #64 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:36 »

all the suc-kers complaining here have no F idea of what's going on ... wikipedia is just the "end point" of a bigger ideological and political movement.

and it definetely includes ourselves as photographers as their plan is to kill copyright as it's no more useful for their mission.

they hate us, and they just tolerate us because for a while they still need us.

please wake the F up.

EmberMike · « **Reply #65 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:54 »

Wake up to what? What would you propose that we do?

Poncke · « **Reply #66 on:** July 18, 2012, 13:31 »

Jezus tapdancing *, if you can get so worked up over a pizza boy editing wikipedia, I wonder how you respond if you really get ticked off.... holy mother, warn me before you do and I will get my popcorn out.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Faces of (wikipedia) FREETARDS ! (Read 41927 times)

donding

antistock

ShadySue

antistock

antistock

fujiko

antistock

ShadySue

antistock

ShadySue

Hummingbird

antistock

antistock

antistock

antistock

EmberMike

Poncke

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors