User talk:173.15.73.108

Open Bias

Editorial on Wikipedia Editorial Positions, Case of Joji vs Mark Dice

Let me preface by stating I was a regular donor, and editor, from various addresses more recently, for about a decade and a half. That is ending without some serious change. Per the multiple stories about Joji_(musician) being involved in suggesting suicide to children, I think we've found a glaring example of hypocrisy by the Wikipedia "Community" or at least utter derangement by some of the editors. You can find a news story verifying this man's involvement. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/youtube-kids-inappropriate-horrified-mom-discovers-suicide-instructions-in-video-on-youtube-and-youtube-kids/ What brings me to my conclusion that I can no longer support this "project" or anything this "project" produces, is not this man's apparent insanity. It's the obvious discontinuity between the treatment of his page, and the absolute Censorship of a political commentator who does half-assed "man on the street" interviews with idiots, but who holds political views in opposition to some people in San Francisco and the rest of a bunch of socialists. Your editors, knowing they have these pages, knowing they could work in equity, have removed Mr. Dice's history, restricted his current events, and the Youtube numbers which exceed most of the "mainstream stars," and have decided that a man who subverted YoutubeKids to suggest that children kill themselves should continue being promoted in this way. It's clear bias. Your editors have lost their handles, or they're exposing the intents you had from the outset. And you're utterly horrible as an entity, to me, as long as this bias continues. Solve it, remove all of these numbers, or let anyone have it. And stop censoring people's profiles from regular updates based on the biases of the editors. And no, I don't know where else to put this, apparently the idea that circles of editors are being openly biased is not worthy of anyone knowing about it. 173.15.73.108 (talk)

Whether you give money to the Wikimedia Foundation or not is up to you,(I've never given a penny) but if Wikipedia content depended on who did or did not donate money, or who bowed to pressure when a "YouTuber" called on his viewers to come here and pressure Wikipedia, it would be just as biased as you claim you are bothered by. If you don't wish to work to correct the issues you state their are with the article, or if your political views prevent you from collaborating with others who may hold different views than you do, you may wish to find a project that is more compatible with your views. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 4 March 2019 (UTC

)

Listen up, open your Ears you consistently insulting troll.

The difference is that even at this moment a man who is telling children to kill themselves, SUBVERSIVELY USING YOUTUBE VIDEOS AIMED AT CHILDREN, is still given numbers based on 3 different accounts combined. Wikipedia has determined that this "service" instead of being universal to all people, should be reserved for a certain set of "celebrity" and in this event, one who tells kids to kill themselves in the middle of videos where only the kids would see it. That you CONTINUE TO CLAIM THIS IS POLITICAL ALONE PROVES THE POINT I'M MAKING. YOU'RE FACTUALLY GIVING MORE ATTENTION TO A GUY WHO TOLD CHILDREN TO SELF HARM. And you're saying this is only because of Dice? I've been here for nearly 15 years as my memory serves, THIS *#&%$#$ BULL#%#$ IS ENDEMIC TO THE CURRENT CULTURE, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM I HAVE. YOU REFUSE TO RESPOND IN GOOD FAITH. SO say it again, tell me how little you need me, cause you're damn right, you need something else. Wikipedia, on the other hand, doesn't need you. But with you, and with this, it's a dead entity. 173.15.73.108 (talk) 19:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I want anyone who is willing to participate, unless they are incapable of expressing themselves civilly and without personal attacks and vulgarities, unlike the above. If you had a change of heart, I would welcome you. I will leave you alone. 331dot (talk) 19:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

This is called PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE. You're not clever, or new. 173.15.73.108 (talk) 19:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Since you decided to erase this from your "clean page" "eeldot," I'll say here, since it maintains the failures of Wikipedia editors, of which you are epitome. Wikipedia could offer a simple template for all Youtube personalities. Place numbers. But they don't. Which inherently means POV. Now that's reasonable in some fashion, there are limits on bandwidth. But there is no clear discussion as to what makes a Youtube personality above this POV bar, and there is a current glaring inconsistency in the values clearly applied in POV to certain articles. You're correct, I have every right to leave, and unless your brain is busted, I told you I'm done editing articles and donating till this is fixed. ::What you don't get, and what is hilarious about your self-righteous stance, if I thought for a second you weren't simply Alinsky acolyte; Wikipedia's current formatting choices have promoted a man who told kids to commit suicide, subversively. You're attached to that. Now you can continue to insinuate this is only political, and in that admission, you tell us it is about your POV. 173.15.73.108 (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

You're talking nonsense. Please stop wasting your time. CoolSkittle (talk) 20:22, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@coolSskittle you're attempting to bait? You don't have to agree, but your dismissal is clearly not in good faith. 173.15.73.108 (talk) 20:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

All I'm saying is that you're pretty much shouting into the void here. My username only has one S by the way. CoolSkittle (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

More passive aggressive behavior. If I was that irrelevant you'd have dropped it. That you haven't proves I scare you. 173.15.73.108 (talk) 15:22, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

---