Yesterday, in an unprecedented decision, Wikipedia's court-like body ArbCom handed down a project-wide ban of all IP addresses owned by Scientology for disruptive editing and coordinating their edits to maintain their status quo including "persistent point-of-view pushing and extensive feuding over sources on multiple articles"This is the first time that an entire organization's IP address block has been banned from editing Wikipedia, despite individual IPs being blocked in the past from other organizations, such as the US DoJ in 2008.
Arbitrators voted 10 to 0 (with one abstention) in favour of the ban, however individual editors may request IP block exemption if they wish to contribute from the blocked IP addresses. The case also resulted in the restriction of a further 15 editors from Scientology-related articles or, in some cases, the entire encyclopaedia.
The decision, which comes as a French court starts a trial that could dissolve the French chapter of the organisation, was the result of the longest running arbitration case in Wikipedia's history.
It's because they were consistently and frequently violating Wikipedia's editing rules.
I'm thankful that was why, and why I'm still confident in this form of action despite Wikipedia's "Free for anyone to edit" stance. That was always with the fine print "if you aren't breaking the editing rules", anyway.
It's because they were consistently and frequently violating Wikipedia's editing rules.
Agreed. While I think that all religions are bad, and I think scientology is bad even compared to all the rest, I still do not believe in censorship. Heck, I could be wrong about this God thing, so I do not want to stop anyone from speaking.
That said, a person/organization should not be allowed to change other person's entries with FALSE data. If I had been warned about bad activities on any forum and still ignored it, then I would expect that I would be banned. It's that simple. Right?
It's because they were consistently and frequently violating Wikipedia's editing rules.
I am aware of that. Still, people are finally taking a stand against it. Governments have been kow-towing to their bullying tactics for the past 20 years, and it appears to finally be coming to an end.
It's because they were consistently and frequently violating Wikipedia's editing rules.
Agreed. While I think that all religions are bad, and I think scientology is bad even compared to all the rest, I still do not believe in censorship. Heck, I could be wrong about this God thing, so I do not want to stop anyone from speaking.
That said, a person/organization should not be allowed to change other person's entries with FALSE data. If I had been warned about bad activities on any forum and still ignored it, then I would expect that I would be banned. It's that simple. Right?
Exactly.
It's a can of worms if one looks at the headline. But once one figures out that this religion keeps editing text to make them look good.... Thats bad. Wikipedia isn't that trustworthy, but it also isn't the opinion website. Fox already has that held up. Wonder if I looked up the KKK or Nazi's and found nothing but propaganda.
It's because they were consistently and frequently violating Wikipedia's editing rules.
Agreed. While I think that all religions are bad, and I think scientology is bad even compared to all the rest, I still do not believe in censorship. Heck, I could be wrong about this God thing, so I do not want to stop anyone from speaking.
That said, a person/organization should not be allowed to change other person's entries with FALSE data. If I had been warned about bad activities on any forum and still ignored it, then I would expect that I would be banned. It's that simple. Right?
Exactly.
Yeah i agree too .... I think they have made the right decision to ban their IPs.
_____________________
Apartments for rent in Dubai
Hey guys, what's going on?!?!
Turn that into a LOL picture
If you think making a fortune off what started out as a joke between Hubbard and some sci-fi writers is fail, then I'd love to fail like that!
Last edited by The Grasshopper on 30 May 2009 - 06:52
No, that's the Christians who do that. Scientologists try to suppress all criticism and any leaks of their secret cult info about their rituals.
I know someone who was a Scientologist briefly. It's harmless, it's about the same as going to a therapist. A therapist who believes in aliens.
Exactly, it's a pretty pointless exercise when you think about it. Even the most novice individuals could find a way around the ban within minutes. Scientologists might be a little odd but, as an organised group, they are far from stupid.
Its good because its real. He was an alien in a past life and scientology help him remember. hehehehe
The Queen's English.
"encyclopaedia " is how you spell it in so called "real English"? And what does "real English" even mean? There are different dialects and there is some variance in spelling in different parts of the world, but it is all "real English".
Just googled it and that makes sense. Learn something new every day.
Real English being English from England
(In all honesty, it's all valid, which is the great thing about English - it has no board to oversee "proper" usage)
He means British English. Some people consider that variant to be the original English language. American is a derivative of it.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia
I knew what he meant, but I find that kind of thinking offensive to the majority of English speakers that live across the world and not just in America.
I love these acuzations of misspells when the whole english is a misspelled lenguage. There are no logical rules in it. So no wonder the foreners have a hard time. Think about it when %90 of born english speakers cant spell. Do you think its us and not the language. Anyways I'm glad that the scios are out of wikie. Encyclo pedia is not for politics and relegions lover afairs.
Most other versions of English do not change the spelling of words from the real English(sorry just taking a stab). Eg New Zealand and Australia.
foreigners
lol
they will put the stuff in your head through telepracy. Mind to mind control like spok. Who needs the damn ip when they got the zapping tom cruze. He will zap you like he did to ophra. Poor woman and her couch getting abused by scio freaks. (Hows my speling an e 1.)
why?.
Or more specifically, in comparison to what?. to you actual government or with you current religion?.
Or more specifically, in comparison to what?. to you actual government or with you current religion?.
WARNING: SCIENTOLOGIST IN THE HOUSE!
Examples:
http://www.saintswithouthalos.com/s/_d&c.phtml
It's just typical cult tactics.
Weed addicts? What are you talking about? Weed doesn't turn people into fiends or addicts son, learn a little.
Dangerous? Smoking cigarettes, drinking booze and eating McDonalds are more dangerous than smoking weed. Too much of anything will really mess you up, but that is not a problem with weed, that is a problem of the user. If they drank too much water they would also be very unhealthy.
I think you have an unfounded bias against it because that is what your mother or religion told you. It is likely why you wont accept the articles are accurate.
Weed addicts, lulz. You strike me as the sort of person who puts weed or ecstasy on par with heroin/crack, please say I'm wrong?
Perhaps the reason wikipedia doesn't label every drug entry with "YOU WILL DIE!" is because, in point of fact, not every single drug will instantly turn you into a gibbering skag head.
Last edited by GreyWolfSC on 29 May 2009 - 22:55
Excuse me but Tibetans are nowhere near being like scientology or mormons, or a cult. Some of the most peaceful and genuine people on this earth.
Last edited by GreyWolfSC on 29 May 2009 - 22:55
Neither Islam nor Christianity started here, and every religion starts out as a cult. Not pointing any fingers, but I don't recall the last time I saw planes flown into buildings or abortion clinics burnt to the ground in the name of scientology.
Last edited by GreyWolfSC on 29 May 2009 - 22:55
No, they just keep people from seeking help for mental problems, and bilk people out of their money to gain higher rank in the "religion".
The difference is Scientology is quite clearly aimed at making money, and very few would argue that it was entirely fictitious.
Whilst you may have the right to believe what you wish, they should not have the right to brainwash others into believing what suits them, merely as a money making exercise.
;-)
Zombie jew that walks on water, makes wine from water, etc.. isn't much better than these jokers.
Zombie jew that walks on water, makes wine from water, etc.. isn't much better than these jokers.
You think that that is something new????
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm
From a third rate writer at that.
;-)
QFT!!!!!!!!!!!!
^^^^^^^^
The proper term for someone who hates religion is "antitheist".
Yeah, but I don't hate religion. There should be a word for that. I cant be the only one.
I just hate the label "atheist" as they are usually overbearing, nasty people trying to shove their "anti-religion" into the faces of everyone in a much more obnoxious way than they think religious people do. Is there a term for someone who simply doesn't believe, but has nothing against religion otherwise?
Yeah, it's Atheist. You could call your self 'agnostic' or 'humanist' or some BS term like that.
For the truth is theirs...
The sad thing about Scientology is that WE KNOW some nut made it up and people still follow it and pour millions into it. go figure. more evidence for the stupidity of people
Like other religion it preys on one thing, making you believe your a worthless piece of ****!
If your going to ban Scientology then ban all other religions at the same time.
But of course, die to political correctness we can't have that and let us not forget the amount of hate mail Wikipedia would get.
either ban the lot or let them all live on Wikipedia. It is freedom of speech - This is what attracts people to Wikipedia, knowledge and freedom of speech, the truth and most of all a place where knowledge roams free.
ban all religions or leave it as it is.
To all of you who are typing **** such as "**** Scientology" - get your heads out of your damn ******** for one minute, because, compared to Christianity Scientology is the equivalent of a fluffy badger that lick your balls.....
that aside... wikipedia may be a place that has "free speech", but its also a place that is supposed to help & benefit people. it's not supposed to be a site that harbors propaganda for a cult. if wikipedia wants to be a more reliable place to find info, this was a must. also from what has been said here, there is no credible source cited in scientology articles. I find it quite funny how you recognize that wikipedia is a place that contains truth. its only truth when there are multiple sources that can back it up.
you need to realize that even though free speech may be good and all, there needs to be some limits.
-One, this is your house. You could freely kick me out. This is the same for Wiki
-Two, by your rules, there will never be such a thing as defamation.
Freedom of speech is really restricted to the government. It is within everyone else's right to tell people to shut the hell up without infringing on their rights.
And Tommy, read the article. They are not banned because they are a religion. They are banned because they are disruptive with their editing. If a class of 10 year olds edit as those in Scientology did, they too are going be banned. If you see Christians or any religion being disruptive, then fine, they should be banned.
I concur with this. Scientology is the new young 'retarded' kid on the block and the older 'retarded' kids won't let it play with them.
I say this as an agnostic not an atheist.
How so? I must have missed the documentaries on wikipedia where wiki staff stalked half the film crew, threatened people on the show speaking against them and rescinded all offers of interview material once they realised how stupid they looked.
Meh.
Oops going off the subject... Sorry um yep about time, why did they take some long, I think it's because they have some many high rollers onboard they had to go by the book before doing so and make sure all the T and I are dotted and crossed.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.