Difference between revisions of "Wikispooks:Editor Undertakings"
(prettier layout) |
m (Not needed to know the history) |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | {{HelpSection|image= | + | {{HelpSection|image=ws_warning.png}} |
'''The existing editors require that all new members of their team agree to act in good faith''', as explained below: | '''The existing editors require that all new members of their team agree to act in good faith''', as explained below: | ||
==Introduction== | ==Introduction== | ||
| − | Spam and vandalism | + | Spam and vandalism led to a registered users only policy for editing. This restriction was not taken lightly, but it is considered necessary because ''Wikispooks is NOT intended to reflect corporate-sponsored worldviews but to facilitate those whose careful study of the evidence has led them to fundamentally question the narratives told by the {{ccm}}.'' Editing this site is a privilege which can and will be removed should this undertaking be persistently breached. The aim of requiring editors to register, and making registration conditional on acceptance of this undertaking, is to exclude those who are fundamentally opposed to the entire [[Project:Site Rationale|site rationale]] and its existence. |
| + | |||
| + | == Enemy images== | ||
| + | Editors should be particularly wary of invoking nebulous [[enemy images]] such as the threat of "[[Russian Propaganda]]". This has been promoted in recent years by [[Propornot]] and a UK counterpart, the [[Integrity Initiative]]. This is not to say that the [[Russian]] [[establishment]] does not engage in [[Russia/propaganda|propaganda]] - but that it is far from the only government to do so, and emphasis should be given on lies by other [[group]]s such as [[NATO]].<ref>For example, a [[NATO]] spokesman denied all knowledge of [[Operation Gladio]], but the group later admitted that this had been incorrect.{{cn}}</ref> | ||
== Party politics == | == Party politics == | ||
{{FA|Party politics}} | {{FA|Party politics}} | ||
[[image:Vote-squeezer.jpg|left|323px]] | [[image:Vote-squeezer.jpg|left|323px]] | ||
| − | The [[deep politics]] illuminated on this site provides evidence that key establishment groups are more or less hopelessly co-opted by [[deep state]] groups. The function of [[political parties]] is to preserve the status quo by promoting | + | The [[deep politics]] illuminated on this site provides evidence that key [[establishment]] groups are more or less hopelessly co-opted by [[deep state]] groups. The occult function of [[political parties]] is to preserve the status quo by promoting endless energy-sapping and distracting disputes between their respective adherents over relative trivia, whilst cultivating a solid consensus on epoch-defining issues - usually by ignoring them totally until they become unavoidable. |
| − | <center>{{QB|<big>'''Neither 'left' nor 'right' is the answer; they are merely two sides of the same [[establishment]] co(i)n''' | + | <center>{{QB|<big>'''Neither 'left' nor 'right' is the answer; they are merely two sides of the same [[establishment]] co(i)n!'''</big>}}</center> |
| − | ''Far from being opposites, Left | + | ''Far from being opposites, Left and Right, in their political sense are both ''de facto'' supporters of the [[establishment]].'' Whether [[war]]s are fought for "[[humanitarian intervention]]", to "fight [[terrorism]]" or whatever other superficial [[casus belli]], makes no difference. The ''real'' reasons - the ''elephants in the room'' - remain hidden in plain sight, as [[third rail]] topics for the {{ccm}}.<ref>Consider, for example, the gulf between [[Barack Obama]]'s campaign promises and his actions on assuming the [[US Presidency]].</ref> |
==No barrier to debate== | ==No barrier to debate== | ||
| − | None of this is intended as a barrier to evidence-based contributions | + | None of this is intended as a barrier to evidence-based contributions intended to refine our collective understanding of [[deep political]] phenomena. It is simply to make it crystal clear that Wikispooks is ''not'' the place for the promotion of [[Project:Definitions|Establishment]] organisations or [[Project:Definitions|official narrative]]s. |
== Editor undertakings == | == Editor undertakings == | ||
| − | By | + | By seeking registration, prospective editors agree and declare as follows: |
| − | #I understand and am broadly sympathetic to the [[wikispooks:Site_Rationale|rationale and purpose of the | + | #I understand and am broadly sympathetic to the [[wikispooks:Site_Rationale|rationale and purpose of the Wikispooks site]]. |
| + | #If there is a page about me I will identify it in my application. | ||
#I will cite appropriate evidence to support my edits where possible. | #I will cite appropriate evidence to support my edits where possible. | ||
| + | #I will seek to avoid the tactics of [[propaganda]] such as [[enemy image]]s or [[polarising perspective]]s. | ||
| + | #I will ''not'' post classified material on this site. | ||
#I will ''not'' edit... | #I will ''not'' edit... | ||
#*i) at the behest of any third party - especially not an "[[Authority|authoritative]]" third party</li> | #*i) at the behest of any third party - especially not an "[[Authority|authoritative]]" third party</li> | ||
| − | #*ii) for money or any other consideration of personal material benefit</li> | + | #*ii) for [[money]] or any other consideration of personal material benefit</li> |
#If my edits are reversed by another editor: | #If my edits are reversed by another editor: | ||
#*i) I will ''not'' simply re-reverse the edit without launching a discussion on the corresponding talk page; | #*i) I will ''not'' simply re-reverse the edit without launching a discussion on the corresponding talk page; | ||
| − | #*ii) If agreement is not reached, I will | + | #*ii) If agreement is not reached, I will accept arbitration by a site administrator to resolve the issue; |
#*iii) I will at all times maintain a courteous approach to differences of opinion. | #*iii) I will at all times maintain a courteous approach to differences of opinion. | ||
| − | #I understand that although vigorous debate is welcome, ''ad hominem'' | + | #I understand that although vigorous debate is welcome, ''[[ad hominem]]'' attacks are not. |
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| − | {{Template: | + | {{Template:Wikispooks Footer/Policy}} |
| − | [[Category: | + | [[Category:Wikispooks Policy]] |
Latest revision as of 13:33, 20 January 2021
The existing editors require that all new members of their team agree to act in good faith, as explained below:
Contents
Introduction
Spam and vandalism led to a registered users only policy for editing. This restriction was not taken lightly, but it is considered necessary because Wikispooks is NOT intended to reflect corporate-sponsored worldviews but to facilitate those whose careful study of the evidence has led them to fundamentally question the narratives told by the commercially-controlled media. Editing this site is a privilege which can and will be removed should this undertaking be persistently breached. The aim of requiring editors to register, and making registration conditional on acceptance of this undertaking, is to exclude those who are fundamentally opposed to the entire site rationale and its existence.
Enemy images
Editors should be particularly wary of invoking nebulous enemy images such as the threat of "Russian Propaganda". This has been promoted in recent years by Propornot and a UK counterpart, the Integrity Initiative. This is not to say that the Russian establishment does not engage in propaganda - but that it is far from the only government to do so, and emphasis should be given on lies by other groups such as NATO.[1]
Party politics
- Full article: Party politics
- Full article: Party politics
The deep politics illuminated on this site provides evidence that key establishment groups are more or less hopelessly co-opted by deep state groups. The occult function of political parties is to preserve the status quo by promoting endless energy-sapping and distracting disputes between their respective adherents over relative trivia, whilst cultivating a solid consensus on epoch-defining issues - usually by ignoring them totally until they become unavoidable.
Neither 'left' nor 'right' is the answer; they are merely two sides of the same establishment co(i)n!
Far from being opposites, Left and Right, in their political sense are both de facto supporters of the establishment. Whether wars are fought for "humanitarian intervention", to "fight terrorism" or whatever other superficial casus belli, makes no difference. The real reasons - the elephants in the room - remain hidden in plain sight, as third rail topics for the commercially-controlled media.[2]
No barrier to debate
None of this is intended as a barrier to evidence-based contributions intended to refine our collective understanding of deep political phenomena. It is simply to make it crystal clear that Wikispooks is not the place for the promotion of Establishment organisations or official narratives.
Editor undertakings
By seeking registration, prospective editors agree and declare as follows:
- I understand and am broadly sympathetic to the rationale and purpose of the Wikispooks site.
- If there is a page about me I will identify it in my application.
- I will cite appropriate evidence to support my edits where possible.
- I will seek to avoid the tactics of propaganda such as enemy images or polarising perspectives.
- I will not post classified material on this site.
- I will not edit...
- i) at the behest of any third party - especially not an "authoritative" third party
- ii) for money or any other consideration of personal material benefit
- If my edits are reversed by another editor:
- i) I will not simply re-reverse the edit without launching a discussion on the corresponding talk page;
- ii) If agreement is not reached, I will accept arbitration by a site administrator to resolve the issue;
- iii) I will at all times maintain a courteous approach to differences of opinion.
- I understand that although vigorous debate is welcome, ad hominem attacks are not.
References
- ↑ For example, a NATO spokesman denied all knowledge of Operation Gladio, but the group later admitted that this had been incorrect.[citation needed]
- ↑ Consider, for example, the gulf between Barack Obama's campaign promises and his actions on assuming the US Presidency.
| ||||||
|
