Being upset about a RationalWiki entry being unfair and negative is… like being upset about Ambrose Bierce’s The Devil’s Dictionary being linguistically inaccurate. It doesn’t really matter and that’s not really what they do.
Hm....The Devil’s Dictionary is not actually a dictionary, and RationalWiki is....not actually rational! Works for me.
They are a “wiki” only in the sense that they use technology for collaborative content. But if you ever try to register an account and make edits, you will quickly see you contributions reverted, however factually accurate they may be (see e.g. the history page of the ‘effective altruism’ entry).
So I think it’s fair to say that RationalWiki is like the Holy Roman Empire: neither rational, nor a wiki.
Hm....The Devil’s Dictionary is not actually a dictionary, and RationalWiki is....not actually rational! Works for me.
At least RationalWiki is a wiki, so they got 50% right.
I wonder if the Devil’s Dictionary is truly intended for, belonging to, or written by a Devil then.
They are a “wiki” only in the sense that they use technology for collaborative content. But if you ever try to register an account and make edits, you will quickly see you contributions reverted, however factually accurate they may be (see e.g. the history page of the ‘effective altruism’ entry).
So I think it’s fair to say that RationalWiki is like the Holy Roman Empire: neither rational, nor a wiki.