That simply is not what people want when they look for information.

Well, except for those who do. The problem is a use case mismatch. I’d argue, if anything, an encyclopedia should contain the minutiae. Unfortunately, there’s no huge compendium of brief but accurate and sourced synopsis of the same topics. To be fair, we’ve never really had one.

I agree with the editors that embedded AI summaries are not a good idea (at the moment, at least). Users can bring summarizers to the data set of that’s their want, or someone (maybe even wikimedia) will find a way to provide this in a way that preserves the underlying data’s validity. Stripping Wikipedia of its full context seems like a bad idea.

I’m not wrong

Except for this whole part

Nobody knew about it, nobody is backing it, nobody is leading it, there’s no goals, there’s organization, there’s no coordination, there’s literally nothing

Look, I gave it a pass with your snarky restatements. But this is just gaslighting.

I’m actually active in my the efforts of my local community

Good. Hopefully you’re not busy being snide and gaslighting with them.

Let’s set aside the ridiculous bad faith restatement aside as just an emotional reaction.

Here are things that are occurring: https://actionnetwork.org/event_campaigns/ice-out-of-everywhere

This is 10 seconds of typing into a browser to attach to a single organization effort. Yet “nobody knew about it, nobody is backing it, nobody is leading it, etc.”. You’re objectively wrong. You’re willfully ignorant. You would know this if you even attempted to look. It’s the coldest its been and people are in the streets across the country. Get up, go outside, and find out. And repeating this the futility of it all is exactly how you support the current tyranny facing us.

You seem so frustrated that people are patting themselves on the back for sharing jpegs, yet you sit here doing significantly less than the bare minimum. You are working against it.

Nobody’s butthurt here. I’m saying your rhetoric carries water for fascists. And every time you say “it’s just facts”, you reinforce that in everyone’s mind. It’s not about winning an argument about how progress gets made, its pointing out how the way speak identifies our politics. Its ok, lots of people agree with you. And more people will be shot in the streets while you’ll be correct about how progress works.

Yeah, this is armchair, if not just rationalization. Stay proud that it’d all have just worked had they just followed the steps like you told them.

You’re right. We should do nothing until a self-organizing, grassroots, independently funded organization gets enough signatures to get enough permits and consent to formally complain.

You didn’t have to write anything. Instead, you argued semantics. Then you argued that progress needs to be made on your terms. (Also what is the difference between a national reaction and movement if not just time and effort? Most movements are reactions). This is exactly how you counter-message and push people away from the concept of activism.

I do agree that effective long-term change likely comes through critical and organized methods. But that is not to dissuade anyone from participating in resistance or activism. Change is rarely graceful, and does not need to conform to anyone’s prescription.