I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Alice in Wickedpedialand


I am appreciating Alice in Wonderland more and more. The Wickedpedian control freaks who have been claiming that violating the Wikipedia rule against using personal blogs as sources is OK so long as the personal blogs are "notable" remind me of the March Hare who put the "best" butter in the Mad Hatter's watch. Here is my retelling of that scene in the Mad Hatter's Tea Party:

"I told you personal blogs wouldn't suit a biography!" the Mad Hatter said, looking angrily at the March Hare.

"They were the most notable personal blogs," the March Hare meekly replied.

"Yes, but some crumbs -- BVD-clad bloggers Ding Elsberry and Sleazy PZ Myers -- got in as well," the Hatter grumbled'

The March Hare took the biography and looked at it gloomily: then he dipped it into his cup of tea, and looked at it again: but he could think of nothing better to say than his first remark, "They were the most notable personal blogs, you know."

Labels: ,

4 Comments:

Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

Wikipedia put only watch parts into the watch. They kept the crumbs,your drivel, out. Great analogy of what you were trying to do; put crumbs into the watch as a matter of "fairness".

Sunday, July 15, 2007 12:43:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

The IRS policy is that Wikipedia, as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit outfit that is not allowed to engage in political campaigning, must let me put lots of crumbs in the watch. In fact, Wikipedia is not even supposed to put watch parts in the watch in the first place.

Sunday, July 15, 2007 7:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

> The IRS policy is that Wikipedia, as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit outfit that is not allowed to engage in political campaigning, must let me put lots of crumbs in the watch. <

It says nothing of the kind.

> In fact, Wikipedia is not even supposed to put watch parts in the watch in the first place. <

What inconsistency! You are saying that they can't report that the watch has parts but must include the glue and sand of nut cases in the watch. No wonder you lost all of your legal cases. You can't read.

Sunday, July 15, 2007 8:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Darwin B. Leaver said...

I take the conventional view,
And think what I read is quite true.
In the 'Wiki' it's said
I must stand on my head,
So I stand on it. What can I do?

Sunday, July 15, 2007 3:51:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home