Re: NEWSWEEK: Manipulating Wikipedia to Promote a Bogus Business School

Ratnendra,

Perhaps you are reading too much between the lines.Did I write anywhere
that the entire class businessmen, entrepreneurs, industrialists are
perpetrators and evil, and entire middle/lower class (economically and
socially) strata of society needs protection from the evil class or
anything of that sort, where government is to play a role ? Where is this
"warfare" ? I hope you are not trying to side step the what I'd questioned
that boils down to:
- Why should 'free-speech' be prerogative of some while not be of others ?
That's pretty feudalistic, come to think of it, and it is what draws the
class lines.
- Why should government not protect the weak ?

Strange, don't you think that governments goes out on an arm and a leg to
protect sick industries (bailouts), weak businesses built on wrong premises
and false promises, yet should not come to the protection of the masses it
represents when they need protection. Real world is clearly not digital,
i.e. far from being "binary", it is based on system of "irrational numbers"
(mathematically speaking).

I see no reason to view economy and governance with polarized glasses,
where you can see certain things bright when viewed one way, and same
things dark when viewed another way. There are honest businesses, who do
business with integrity and then there are others who do it at a great
economic and social cost in a highly unfair manner. On one hand, you
question "society" (and I hope you'd not disagree that Sarbajit, Peri etc.
are part of this society) from raising voice as per the same free-speech /
freedom-of-expression that you seem to espouse (which is a good thing), but
on the other hand also question "government's" role to keep the
checks-n-balances in place. Now who wouldn't like to 'bake the cake and
have it too', eh ? :-) However, there is a need to be fairer than that.

cheers,
Banibrata

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Ratnendra Pandey <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Ok Banibrata,  so this discussion has already degenerated into a class
> warfare, between the haves and have nots? I am assuming next you will say
> you need government to protect have nots. Even though the experience points
> to the fact that when govt control is strong, a few rich, wealthy, and
> politically connected people contole govt machinery rendering the middle
> class and poor at the mercy of government killing free enterprise and risk
> taking.
>
> Why can't communusts and socialists understand that rich and powerful
> eventually take control and hide behind the government machinery ?
> Giving  government enormous power only makes life difficult for have nots
> and Middle class. Weaker the government, weaker the control rich have over
> have nots.
> Look for these two word
>
> Regulatory capture
> Corporatism
>
> Sincerely,
> Ratnendra Pandey
>
> ------------------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 01:33:39 +0530
>
> Subject: Re: [india-gii] NEWSWEEK: Manipulating Wikipedia to Promote a
> Bogus Business School
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]; india-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>
> Wish I could unlearn to reach a childlike stage of innocence to believe
> the following statement to be true, alas many of use are doomed by what
> life has taught us.
>
> "...when information is allowed to flow freely, good information and bad
> information clash and force people to evaluate them and go by what works
> for them..."
>
> Sorry, hate to burst that little utopian bubble, especially in context of
> India (and perhaps much of the world as we know it today). That is, in all
> probability, a just a convenient little argument that seeks to protect the
> "information control", while it is still in the hands of the haves. The
> have-nots shall remain "fools", for the information deliberately presented
> to them has been "coloured" by those who could. Government needs the
> businesses, and the businesses need worker ants. Information (and
> intelligence) is what keeps the control, in the present form.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:57 AM, Ratnendra Pandey <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> From the belief system that you are operating from, you expect government
> to protect fools. It is just not possible even if you put a zipper on
> everyone's mouth.
>
> What you cannot seem to appreciate is that when information is allowed to
> flow freely, good information and bad information clash and force people to
> evaluate them and go by what works for them. Users of the information
> generally cross check quality of information with their own experience and
> with information from others. This is how false hoods are challenged and
> smashed.
>
> Yes, People with higher sense  of superiority and carrying some kind of
> divine burden to help fools do cause more damage.
>
> Free flow of information makes it easy to fight falsehood. It also makes
> people, including the fools,
> smart user of information once they learn how to analyze and critique an
> information.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ratnendra Pandey
>
> ------------------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 00:42:41 +0530
>
> Subject: Re: [india-gii] NEWSWEEK: Manipulating Wikipedia to Promote a
> Bogus Business School
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]; india-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>
> Is it not government's job to protect the ordinary citizen against harm ?
> I do not see, how suing a city that allows snake-oil salesman to operate is
> wrong ?
> Where is the sense of superiority in doing something that one considers
> the right thing to do ? One doesn't need to be an expert in calling a spade
> a spade !
> And is Sarbajit the first one to do so ? Shivam Vij, Maheshwar Peri,
> Outlook360, Caravan, IBN-Live are wrong in their assessment ?
> Fair enough, it is possible that all of them are wrong, but why did IIPM
> sue Google ? It's a search engine. If that isn't asinine, then I fail to
> understand, how is suing city is -- given that the city (government) had an
> obligation.
>
> Refresher:
>
> http://ibnlive.in.com/news/dot-orders-blocking-of-73-urls-with-content-critical-of-iipm-including-a-ugc-notice-report/373152-11.html
>
> http://www.livemint.com/Specials/13TE2UEtexMf1GDeEt5rCP/Maheshwer-Peris-long-way-around.html
>
> Wasn't the 'freedom of speech and expression' of Shivam, Maheswar etc.
> infringed upon ? Taking away the freedom of someone engaging in highly
> questionable business, just by raising questions is not defamatory. If the
> raised questions have believable answers, there is no reputation tarnished
> and no damage done. I am no expert in jurisprudence, but my casual reading
> of material around the 'First Amendment' and it's relation to the
> 'Defamation' laws seems to indicate the superiority of the former, in the
> latter being no 'excuse'... And, BTW, I've to admit that I did have to
> refresh myself regarding this matter using Wikipedia :-)
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Ratnendra Pandey <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Banibratta, the problem is some one with heightened sense of superiority
> thinking of himself snake oil expert taking absurd step like asking all
> snakes to be killed. Or worst, suing city for allowing a snake salesman to
> open a shop on footpath and holding it responsible for fake oil.
>
> There are way to fight false information. But over legislation and taking
> away others freedom is not one of them.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ratnendra Pandey
>
> ------------------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 23:57:32 +0530
>
> Subject: Re: [india-gii] NEWSWEEK: Manipulating Wikipedia to Promote a
> Bogus Business School
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]; india-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>
> Somehow reading this response gives me the impression that  calling out
> someone selling snake-oil is a bad thing. If someone is making money by
> hook or crook, it is their prerogative (thanks to their superior, even if
> sinister intelligence) and that it is none of your business to meddle with
> it ! Pretty much sums up 'capitalism in it's present form -- BTW' !! I hope
> that I've misunderstood the intent and the jist.. :-)
>
> Your last statement is what I find no fault with, and tend to agree every
> bit - strangely, with every passing year, we only seem to grow closer in
> our attempts to emulate the country of 'milk n honey' (or the 'corn fed
> democracy'), where what is free-speech and who is free to indulge in
> free-speech is determined by who has the money (& wields the stick).
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Ratnendra Pandey <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Banibratta, personally I believe no one is idiot. But, there are many who
> disagree with me. They think making laws, suppressing personal freedom,
> fighting frivolous lawsuits, threatening knowledge makers and information
> carriers is their pious duty. Such people operate in belief that somehow
> idiots are incapable of learning on their own. I disagree with that kind of
> thinking. I think everyone should be given an opportunity to learn. We
> should present the facts and logic and let information consumers decide for
> themselves.
>
> Unfortunately, india operates on the false logic of suppressing speech to
> protect idiots, which govt thinks the citizen of India are. Else why do we
> restrictions on books, films, speech and any information that someone
> objects to.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ratnendra Pandey
>
> ------------------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 18:30:57 +0530
> Subject: Re: [india-gii] NEWSWEEK: Manipulating Wikipedia to Promote a
> Bogus Business School
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]; india-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>
>
> Not quite sure which part of the article gives anyone the impression that
> there is any kind of legal sanction against Wikipedia ?
>
> Quality of journalism these days is definitely questionable, and this
> article isn't a shining exception either. However, the article seemed
> factual  and in my view, subtly tells us what "we" already know,
> i.e.everything one reads on the internet is not true (with reality being
> quite to the contrary), and clearly Wikipedia is no exception, however what
> is ?
>
> The fact that people who have had a long association with the internet,
> the IT world, have had access to unlimited flow of conspiracy theories
> (many that seem to be backed by extremely strong reason) have managed to
> overcome their naivety, and are thus careful in trusting "sources of
> knowledge" (including news papers, blogs and collaborative online
> encyclopedias). Heck, for that matter, I think all of us "know better" (or
> we believe that we know better) about what the text-books teach us.
> Manipulating people through misinformation is nothing new. However, are the
> rest really "idiots" ?
>
> India GII is a very tolerant list, which is good. It is a reflection of
> what a good society should be, giving everyone a chance to air their views
> - however it is still no justification for making personal attacks. It
> gives lot more credibility to statements like "misguided activists and
> diabolical legal heads..." if there were anything to substantiate such
> views, else it is nothing more than rant and hot air.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Ratnendra Pandey <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> This news article is more misleading than the advertisement by school in
> question. It seeks to create  an impression of some kind of legal sanction
> against Wikipadea. Am I missing something? At the end of the day it is
> privilege of a website to decide who keeps an admin and editing privileges.
> So what is the issue here?
>
> As for some people duped by the said business school, how is that fault of
> wikipadea? If the said school had a giant billboard next to a road, should
> the state,or pad, or nhai be responsible for what is written on the bill
> board.
>
> God save india from these misguided activists and diabolical legal heads
> like Sarabjit, and the people who write laws that even give some credence
> to the filings by Sarabjit, and allow strained legal system to be further
> strained.
>
>
> I do not see what is so difficult to understand in the idea that you
> cannot legislate intelligence nor you can protect an idiot no matter how
> you regulate. Crooks will find ways to dupe fools. It is in best interest
> of idiots to acquire some intellegence and learn from there own mistakes
> and from those of others.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ratnendra Pandey
>
>
> ------------------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:58:18 +0530
> To: [email protected]
> CC: India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> Subject: Re: [india-gii] NEWSWEEK: Manipulating Wikipedia to Promote a
> Bogus Business School
>
>
> Kudos, for a job well done.
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:40 PM, sarbajit roy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Manipulating Wikipedia to Promote a Bogus Business School
>
>
> http://www.newsweek.com/2015/04/03/manipulating-wikipedia-promote-bogus-business-school-316133.html
> By Alastair Sloan / March 24, 2015 12:20 PM EDT
>
> Vickram and/or veteran Wikimedians on this channel can know that on 13
> March 2015 I had already filed a formal IT Act case concerning
> 'inter-alia' these gangs of rogue extortionate Wikipedia
> administrators hiding behind their anonymity and multiple fictitious
> IDs and who have given Indian Wikimedians a bad name.
>
> In my complaint I have asked for "Wifione" to be unmasked and
> prosecuted for ruining the lives of thousands of Indian students. My
> action was preceded by 2 years of dialog by our side with fellow
> Wikipedians / WMF and a 3 month action in Switzerland brought by WMF
> against me which then gave me a cause of action to file the IT case in
> India.
>
> In our instances, we were subjected to illegal demands and financial
> threats since 2013 and my dialog with Wikimedia Foundation's legal
> counsel repeatedly ran into a brick wall of solid indifference and
> evasions to protect their anonymous admins. It was only thanks to a
> proactive Indian board member that things started moving and 5 old
> time Wikimedia Admins were eventually "globally banned" in December
> 2014 as a result of coordinated efforts between veteran members of the
> WIKIMEDIA community who had seceded in 2008 from the WMF's "projects"
> after realizing what d****b*gs they were.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> _______________________________________________
> India-gii mailing list
> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Banibrata
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
> http://twitter.com/edgeliving
>
> _______________________________________________ India-gii mailing list
> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Banibrata
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
> http://twitter.com/edgeliving
>
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Banibrata
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
> http://twitter.com/edgeliving
>
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Banibrata
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
> http://twitter.com/edgeliving
>
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Banibrata
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
> http://twitter.com/edgeliving
>



-- 
regards,
Banibrata
http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
http://twitter.com/edgeliving

_______________________________________________
India-gii mailing list
India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii