Comments by "" (@ronjon7942) on "fern" channel.

  1. Whew, good to know. I did a double take on that stat, thinking a nationwide fundraising campaign for the 66% might be a worthy endeavor. Still, even at 20%, it’s hard to grasp the money I spend on a particular vice could double a person’s income.
    2
  2. I’m surprised Russia never just built a mountain over a city.
    2
  3. If they got rid of its activist workforce, their expenses would drop from a hundred million dollars to hundreds of thousands. If they were no longer a far left propaganda outlet and reverted back to their core principles, they’d find it costs peanuts to serve up essentially static web pages, moderated by volunteers, with content created by users. Hosting a bunch of servers to (yawn) serve up a bunch of text that rarely changes does NOT cost much money.
    1
  4. It also has been given an endowment of $240 million, managed by The Tides Foundation. Katherine Maher (of NPR and Signal) made it make a hard left turn, censoring where it deems follows its new direction, making it very biased, and hence completely untrustworthy. Edit: The Tides Foundation exists to advance the far left progressive agenda.
    1
  5. It was great, until Katherine Maher transformed it into to a far left propaganda outlet. Thanks to her, its content is completely untrustworthy.
    1
  6. How about a far left propaganda outlet, pushing a progressive agenda, is extremely biased, and aggressively censors content? Because that’s what it now is. Search The Tides Foundation Search Katherine Maher I’d rather it WAS corporate owned, because then it would be more obvious its an untrustworthy source of information.
    1
  7. It’s supposed to look like a car? It looks like a V2 rocket.
    1
  8. I worked for a handful of rich guys doing boutique airplane work. They were the most frugal and even cheapest people I ever met. Their kids, not so much.
    1
  9. Too bad, since it has now become a tool for far left propaganda.
    1
  10. I refuse to use it. I wish I knew of a way to block any search results from showing up on my DDG search. It was such a brilliant idea, and it worked well, and it was universal. But it’s biased, making it as untrustworthy as any MSM outlet. Too bad Katherine Maher recognized what an effective tool it is for advancing her progressivism ideology.
    1
  11. Yes. Fully agree. Driven into the ground under Katherine Maher, to turn it into to a far left propaganda outlet. Funded with a $240 million endowment managed by The Tides Foundation. It once was great. It’s now a biased source, by intention, and is completely untrustworthy.
    1
  12. Yes. Under Katherine Maher’s leadership, it has become another far left propaganda outlet. It’s not a secret. Their $240 million endowment is managed by the Tides Foundation. It is a blatantly biased, untrustworthy source of information.
    1
  13. Jane Smith? I know Jane. She’s a polyglot. A real renaissance woman.
    1
  14. Yes. The leftist slant - actually, a hard left turn - makes it biased. Its primary focus is the advancement of a particular narrative, rendering all the information suspect at best, but mostly untrustworthy. It was poor form to cite it in the past; to do so now is absolutely irresponsible and wrong. Its previous mandate has been corrupted. I will not use it again, and its time will come.
    1
  15. He’s Indian?
    1
  16. Pseudocidal
    1
  17. It should also stop being censored and moderated by the far left, and quit being a biased outlet for propaganda. It’s becoming completely untrustworthy, where pushing the progressive agenda supersedes unbiased, factual, truth. Elon is also correct in that, like X, getting rid of over 95% of its activist workforce will reduce its appetite for hundreds of millions of dollars, revert it back to its core principles, and become a trusted source of information uninfluenced by any woke, far left agenda.
    1
  18. They’re transparent to the minimum amount required by law. Their $240 million endowment is managed by The Tides Foundation. Under Katherine Maher, Wikipedia has been transformed into a far left propaganda outlet, is extremely biased, and is untrustworthy if one is looking for neutral, factual, truthful, unbiased information. Once the assets are in place, it takes very little effort to run a bunch of servers, serving up mostly static web pages, with content created by users, and edited and moderated by volunteers. At best, hundreds of thousands of dollars. Justifying the $100 million expenses by saying it has 7 billion hits/month is as misleading as any of its biased content. This video SHOULD have been a hit piece discussing what a tool of the far left it has been steered into, intentionally. The agenda is that Wikipedia has become an outlet for far left progressive ideology.
    1
  19. Thanks to Katherine Maher, like NPR, Wikipedia has become an instrument of the progressive far left, immediately making it an extremely biased, and therefore unreliable, information source. It’s unfortunate, but another example of an institution being taken over by the left and turned into a propaganda outlet. Anything remotely related to so-called climate science, the trans movement, the electoral college, Jan6, George Floyd, socialism, marxism, leftist biographies…anything far left is biased favorably or has a false neutrality. Predictably, precisely the opposite is true for anything to the right of Maher’s progressivism - including left leaning moderate and left of centrist views. Just as she’s done with the so-called unbiased NPR with its editorial staff of 87 registered democrats vs 0 registered Independents or Republicans, she has forced wikipedia to take a severely hard left turn. As far as fundraising and funding, Maher has also solicited The Tides Foundation to fund and manage a $240 million endowment. Please go to influence.org to see what Tides is about - it is decidedly NOT for unbiased repositories of information. Remember this endowment the next time you are hassled for a donation. Also remember what you are tacitly supporting by continuing to use Wikipedia as a trustworthy, unbiased, fact based source of information. If you’re curious still, make a change - ANY change - to obama’s bio, and keep track of the elapsed seconds til the change is reverted. Now do the same for President Trump, but make it interesting: edit or add something less than favorable and watch it stick. Now go to J6, find an instance of the word ‘insurrection’ and change it to ‘riot.’ If you’re far left, congratulations - you’ve managed to corrupt another quasi institution. If you’re to the Right (even if you’re a registered ‘classical’ Democrat), I recommend going down the list of search results and picking anything other than wikipedia. I actually blocked the site, but hey, that’s just me. I’m working towards learning how to remove them from my search engine’s results list. I plead others to do likewise. Maher was objectively humiliated in front of Congress. However, she felt no humiliation; she exuded arrogance and elitism, and her contempt for Rep. Gill was palpable. She’s the archetype of the far left and is insidious in her mission to maintain control over the narrative she used at Wikipedia, and continues to use at NPR, as a cudgel against Democracy. Recall, this is the woman who argues (on a TEDTalk) that truth is an obstacle to consensus, there are many truths, not just one objective truth; and that The First Amendment is her number one challenge in censoring bad information, one week after suspending Uri Berliner, who subsequently resigned stating the platform had become an activist organization for far left progressive ideals. “The number one challenge that we see here is, of course, the First Amendment in the United States,” Maher said at the panel hosted by the Atlantic Council's research lab. Of course it is, Katherine, when you are an elitist socialist marxist bent on fostering totalitarianism. Who’s the authoritarian, Katherine? Who’s the fascist, Katherine? Certainly no one I’ve voted for. Would you really condone this woman’s views on Free Speech by using this platform? Can you trust the information within wikipedia is true? Can you trust the platform to replace the self governing original idea, replaced by moderator censorship?
    1
  20. They’ve been gifted an endowment of $240 million, under the auspices of the Tides Foundation. It’s devolved into a far left propaganda outlet, and can no longer be a trusted source of unbiased information.
    1
  21. It’s worse. Under Katherine Maher, it’s become a tool of far left propaganda. It’s no longer trustworthy. She purposely steered it to the far left, just like she did with NPR.
    1
  22. Pornography? On a muslim’s hdd? Obviously fabricated. What would muslim porn even look like? Seeing an ankle? An ear lobe?
    1