Ballpoint Wren Banner

I fought the lawn… and the lawn won

13-year-old internet trolls or Congressional staffers? You decide!

Filed under: Opinionated on Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Not that I want to go all political on you, but I find this awfully funny. Besides, it’s nonpartisan. So there.

Apparently Congressional staffers at the U.S. House of Representatives made more than 1,000 changes to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia; naughty, naughty changes that violate those ethics Wikipedians HOLD SACRED, but which Congressional staffers find as unfathomable as IP addies and Web 2.0.

But what kind of changes, you ask? What kind of violations get you banned from Wikipedia?

“Furthermore, in 2005, Senator Coburn was voted the most annoying Senator by his peers in Congress. This was due to Senator Coburn being a huge douche-bag. In the August edition of Roll Call, the senator was voted “most likely to get his arse kicked by hill a hill staffer over recess”. He gladly accepted this honor saying “I completely expect to get my arse kicked because I suck at life”

Vandalized page for Senator Tom Coburn

Plenty of pages from both sides of the political spectrum were vandalized. Scott McClellan‘s name got added to the definition for “douche.” Virginia Congressman Eric Cantor was noted as smelling “of cow dung.” They described Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist as “ineffective.”

More mean-spirited entries included renaming Senator Robert Byrd to Bobbity Negro Stabby Boid.

For over six months Congressional staffers (identified by IP addresses) changed pages, and for over six months Wikipedia users caught them and chastised them, to no avail.

It’s also apparent from the talk page that many people from the community are exasperated with the Congressional staffers.

Wikipedian conclusion: “Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

Wikipedia also accused the Congressional staffers of a nefarious something called POV:

The Congressional staffers constantly push their unverified point of view (POV) and have no regard with editing policy.

Marty Meehan

  1. “whitewashing” Marty Meehan
    “Meehan is also known nationally as one of the tobacco industry’s toughest critics” – where is the evidence for this?
  2. Removing legitimate content again.

POV-pushing,” Wikipedia

Well, hell-llooo! They are CONGRESSIONAL STAFFERS. That’s what they do: push their point of view, verified or not.

In fact, I think asking Congressional staffers to verify all statements before publishing them is kind of like asking terrorists to give peace a chance. I mean, they really should, but the very nature of their job description kind of goes against the possibility they actually will.

The American public in general knows this, but those Wikipedia guys—they’re just way too idealistic. Way.

At any rate, Wikipedia has found no resolution to this problem, except to periodically ban Congressional staffers from using the encyclopedia.

Obviously no moms were involved in determining this punitive action, because it isn’t harsh enough. If they were MY Congressional staffers, they would’ve lost their MySpace.com accounts, too.


, ,

  1. Well, i for one applaud them for keeping Wikipedia interesting and fun! I say lift the ban and keep on tweaking :)

    Comment by Michelle — 1/31/2006 @ 10:09 pm

  2. is it wrong that I find that too funny? probably…. ;-)

    Comment by Dennie — 2/1/2006 @ 5:48 am

  3. The American public in general knows this

    Really, ya think? Long rant about the gullibility of the average American…omitted.

    Politicians aren’t human and technically not even a sentient species. Therefore, they deserve every bit of lambasting and creative history heaped upon them.

    Comment by pat kirby — 2/1/2006 @ 8:00 am

  4. Too hilarious!

    Comment by M. C. Pearson — 2/3/2006 @ 9:48 pm

(required)

(required but not published)

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

 
My Ecosystem Details Blogrankings