{"id":4804,"date":"2009-10-12T13:14:52","date_gmt":"2009-10-12T20:14:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/?p=4804"},"modified":"2009-10-12T13:14:52","modified_gmt":"2009-10-12T20:14:52","slug":"continuing-to-follow-the-work-of-leatherstocking-at-wikipedia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/2009\/10\/12\/continuing-to-follow-the-work-of-leatherstocking-at-wikipedia\/","title":{"rendered":"continuing to follow the work of Leatherstocking at wikipedia"},"content":{"rendered":"

The fascinating lie from Leatherstocking<\/a>, repeated for the umpteenth time.<\/p>\n

The irony is that I am quite ambivalent about LaRouche, but I strongly oppose what I see as the abuse of process that has frequently been employed as a tactic by the team that controls the LaRouche articles. So, I open my mouth (figuratively speaking) and for my troubles I get branded a LaRouchie. —<\/em>Leatherstocking<\/em><\/p>\n

A thought experiment for everybody.\u00c2\u00a0 Let’s pretend that there’s a person making edit attempts and wikipedia arguments at various Star Wars topics, to the exclusion of any other topic — save, perhaps, a tangeantal\u00c2\u00a0slash at\u00c2\u00a0Gene Roddenbury meant to bolster an argument about George Lucas.\u00c2\u00a0 Let’s say that his nom de plome was(and this is an essential point)\u00c2\u00a0“Wookie”.\u00c2\u00a0 See how this reads.<\/p>\n

The irony is that I am quite ambivalent about Star Wars, but I strongly oppose what I see as the abuse of process that has frequently been employed as a tactic by the team that controls the\u00c2\u00a0Star Wars\u00c2\u00a0articles. So, I open my mouth (figuratively speaking) and for my troubles I get branded a Star Wars fan. –Wookie<\/em><\/p>\n

I think JN466\u00c2\u00a0has at the very least developed some degree of plausible deniability in his new found editing attempts.\u00c2\u00a0 At the very least, his edits have caught Leatherstocking’s eye<\/a>.<\/p>\n

I’d like to encourage you to keep editing the article, because your edits seem carefully neutral, and otherwise the process is dominated by disputes between Mr. Beback and myself over article neutrality. —<\/em>Leatherstocking<\/em><\/p>\n

But it looks like JN466 and Leatherstocking have successfully truncated Kronberg from the Larouche wikipedia article, whatever JN466’s motives here.\u00c2\u00a0 A single sentence which gives JN466 away<\/a>.:<\/p>\n

We have 300 words on Kronberg’s death in 2007. Is that really appropriate in this BLP? I don’t see what the connection is to LaRouche personally.<\/strong> —<\/em>JN<\/em><\/span>466<\/em><\/span>\u00c2\u00a0[…]<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

When I get a spare minute, I will go forth and see what the edits here were.\u00c2\u00a0 Unless someone wants to do that for me.\u00c2\u00a0 \u00c2\u00a0This strikes me as important in their ongoing Propaganda Offensive.\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0If someone wants to do my work for me, feel free to leave the alterations in the comments section, on down to 153 words — the words matter more than the quantity.<\/p>\n

Curiously enough, Leatherstocking seems intent on pulling the word tic upward.
\nI have expanded one line, giving a more accurate description of LaRouche’s claims vis-a-vis Molly Kronberg. One possible solution to the problems of this section would be to remove all speculation (from both sides) about the reasons for the suicide, since this seems inappropriate for an encyclopedia.
\n<\/em>Disingenuous as always, the “reasons for the suicide” about that which matter here, and that which is important in the history of the twin set of the cult and its cult leader.\u00c2\u00a0 Mind you, I\u00c2\u00a0would not know how to ferret out internal history and external history here, but the internal certainly spilled out to the external — and the\u00c2\u00a0four biggest news events of the cult in the past decade are: Jeremiah Duggan’s death, Kenneth Kronberg’s death, Obama Hitler Euthanasia Rahm Emanuel blehdebleh, and Neocon Children of Satan Cheney blehdebleh.<\/p>\n

Fun fact about the Fusion Energy Foundation<\/a>:\u00c2\u00a0 The entity now bearing that name<\/a> has nothing to do with the organization.\u00c2\u00a0 Good luck to Will Beback on that article, though.<\/p>\n

Over to the attempt, by both Webster Tarpley fans and Larouchies, to slash Webster Tarpley from the listing of related topics<\/a>.\u00c2\u00a0 This is a fascinating convergence of mutual interests.\u00c2\u00a0 Great moments in Movement argumentation!
\nI have no problem with leaving Zepp-LaRouche off the template, along with all other individuals other than Lyndon. –Leatherstocking
\n<\/em>A Movement of one.\u00c2\u00a0 A relevant rejoinder.<\/p>\n

To my knowledge, those would be Jeremiah Duggan, Webster Tarpley, and Kenneth Kronberg. The latter two were members, but their listing is contentious for other reasons. In the case of Tarpley, Mr. IP believes there is guilt by associating him with LaRouche when he has parted company. In the cases of Duggan and Kronberg, it is violation of WP:NOTSCANDAL.–<\/em>Leatherstocking<\/em> (<\/em>talk<\/em>) 00:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC) <\/em><\/p>\n

\n
Tarpley was a members for over 20 years, Krongberg a member for at least 30 years. Will we delete Billington when he leaves or dies too? I hope not. “Mr IP” specifically warns, elsewhere, about Orwell’s “<\/em>memory hole<\/em>“. There’s no gossip on that template, so I don’t know why you’re referring to them as scandals. \u00c2\u00a0 Will Beback<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0 talk<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0<\/strong> 01:03, 9 October 2009<\/em> <\/dd>\n<\/dl>\n

Of course, Leatherstocking’s whole editing purpose is to push various items into the Memory Hole, see too<\/a>:
\nbecause LaRouche is first and foremost an economist and those seem to be his core economic policies
\n<\/em>Comedy Gold!<\/p>\n

In reading through these wikipedia editing attempts, I find myself deliberating with myself whether I should just chunk completely any and all use of wikipedia.\u00c2\u00a0 Sure, we find the obvious — Leatherstocking is generally called out by the editors here as obvious “\u00c2\u00a0Very clearly a POV-based nomination<\/em>“\u00c2\u00a0 in his ongoing “Scandal Mongering” mongering<\/a>.<\/p>\n

One thing to remember, is that when an editor is trying to combat POV-pushing in a certain subject area it can make that editor look like they’re pushing the other side, when all they’re really trying to do is balance the coverage of the topic. Haven’t you ever felt like you were inadvertently in that position? I have. <\/em>Cla68<\/em><\/p>\n

But\u00c2\u00a0ultimately, this is\u00c2\u00a0always a rearguard action from Leatherstocking, and whatever Krusty the Clown repopup comes forth.\u00c2\u00a0 We have seen the odd Columbia University professor comment that taps this topic as the poster child for wikipedia’s limitations, why he warns his students against wikipedia.\u00c2\u00a0 We have, at the same time, seen insta-wikipedia checks that get the necessary guage of their encounter.\u00c2\u00a0 That some clown can sneak out a reference about anti-semitism, sneak in a reference about predicting cataclysmic economic troubles, and obscure events and names \u00c2\u00a0in the cult’s history becomes immaterial.<\/p>\n

In other news, the controversial neoconservative strategist Laurent Murawiec has passed away.\u00c2\u00a0 A check into the Internet reveasl some French language posts (makes sense)\u00c2\u00a0you’d have to check and translate yourself, this item for the National Review<\/a>, and this for Pajamas Media<\/a>.\u00c2\u00a0 This thing to “Britania Radio” is most curious<\/a>, because in the past what’s washed over to me from that site are these items<\/a>.\u00c2\u00a0 One tribute to him is that one can assess\u00c2\u00a0his work without reference to his writing for Executive Intelligence Reivew.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The fascinating lie from Leatherstocking, repeated for the umpteenth time. The irony is that I am quite ambivalent about LaRouche, but I strongly oppose what I see as the abuse of process that has frequently been employed as a tactic by the team that controls the LaRouche articles. So, I open my mouth (figuratively speaking) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4804","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-larouche-challenge"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4804","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4804"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4804\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4806,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4804\/revisions\/4806"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4804"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4804"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4804"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}