6 ms·

"All of their money pays for real expenses" Not true, nearly 30% of their budget goes to partisan activism with DEI related initiatives. "Supporting equity re

by txcwg002 11mo ago

"All of their money pays for real expenses" Not true, nearly 30% of their budget goes to partisan activism with DEI related initiatives. "Supporting equity represents the second largest part of our programmatic work" https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2023-2024/Finances#Budget_allocations https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_...

undeveloper 11mo ago
that's a real expense. who else on earth should be doing DEI initiatives if not the goddamn chroniclers of human experience?
- txcwg002 11mo ago
  Definitely not an encyclopedia that is supposed to be objective.
  - a0123 11mo ago
    When you grow up to be an adult, you will understand that "objectivity"is a fiction. And an encyclopedia can absolutely do that and still present factual information based on actual research and facts. You know that just because a lady has blue hair or a person has colored skin does NOT mean that they can't be right about something or do good research. Right? You do know it, right? Because in the end, when you cry about DEI (whatever you believe it to mean), this is the implication that comes with it: that you can't imagine for a second that anyone who doesn't look exactly like you could ever do anything competently. I genuinely wonder if you've ever thought about that for more than half a second after you closed that Charlie Kirk video. If you do believe it, fair enough. I guess you're allowed to believe it. But at least be honest about it.
    - txcwg002 11mo ago
      [flagged]
      - undeveloper 11mo ago
        I really don't mean to be rude but you sound insane. You have spent too much time in whatever insulated twitter space you're in, and you've ended up sounding like an insane person! Please go do independent research on these topics, so you can try not saying things like "DEI virtue signaling white knights". You just strung together 3 separate buzzwords (buzzphrase?)
      - tomhow 11mo ago
        > You and other DEI virtue signaling white knights are engaging in the worst racism of all. A comment like this is completely unacceptable on HN. The guidelines make it clear that we expect better than this here: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - viraptor 11mo ago
    How do you think you can reach anything close to objectivity without aiming for diversity and inclusion? What do you think will happen to an encyclopaedia which is mostly run by Elon fans? We already had that at one of the extremes (and the echos are still here) from the time medicine just didn't bother to study women.

undeveloper 11mo ago

that's a real expense. who else on earth should be doing DEI initiatives if not the goddamn chroniclers of human experience?

txcwg002 11mo ago
Definitely not an encyclopedia that is supposed to be objective.
- a0123 11mo ago
  When you grow up to be an adult, you will understand that "objectivity"is a fiction. And an encyclopedia can absolutely do that and still present factual information based on actual research and facts. You know that just because a lady has blue hair or a person has colored skin does NOT mean that they can't be right about something or do good research. Right? You do know it, right? Because in the end, when you cry about DEI (whatever you believe it to mean), this is the implication that comes with it: that you can't imagine for a second that anyone who doesn't look exactly like you could ever do anything competently. I genuinely wonder if you've ever thought about that for more than half a second after you closed that Charlie Kirk video. If you do believe it, fair enough. I guess you're allowed to believe it. But at least be honest about it.
  - txcwg002 11mo ago
    [flagged]
    - undeveloper 11mo ago
      I really don't mean to be rude but you sound insane. You have spent too much time in whatever insulated twitter space you're in, and you've ended up sounding like an insane person! Please go do independent research on these topics, so you can try not saying things like "DEI virtue signaling white knights". You just strung together 3 separate buzzwords (buzzphrase?)
    - tomhow 11mo ago
      > You and other DEI virtue signaling white knights are engaging in the worst racism of all. A comment like this is completely unacceptable on HN. The guidelines make it clear that we expect better than this here: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- viraptor 11mo ago
  How do you think you can reach anything close to objectivity without aiming for diversity and inclusion? What do you think will happen to an encyclopaedia which is mostly run by Elon fans? We already had that at one of the extremes (and the echos are still here) from the time medicine just didn't bother to study women.