It's 2010, let's move on...........

[Ibwrong]

Binary Anyone:

01001111010010110010000001110100011010000110100101 11001100100000011101000110100001110010011001010110 00010110010000100000011010010111001100100000011101 11011000010111100100100000011101000110111100100000 01100001011001000111011001100001011011100110001101 10010101100100001000000110011001101111011100100010 00000110110101100101001000000100100100100000011001 00011011110110111001110100001000000110010101110110 01100101011011100010000001110101011011100110010001 10010101110010011100110111010001100001011011100110 01000010000001101000011000010110110001100110001000 00011011110110011000100000011010010111010000101110 00101110001000000100011101110101011001010111001101 11001100100000010010010010000001101000011000010111 01100110010100100000011101000110111100100000011000 10011100100110010101100001011010110010000001101111 01110101011101000010000001110100011010000110010100 10000001100010011010010110111001100001011100100111 10010010000001100011011011110110010001100101001000 01

[SnowDrift]

Thats why I use leet in 2010.

It's the future dude.

Leet?

[Ibwrong]

Leet?

leet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[ZR1Vette09]

alright well i loved the hangover but unfortunately i have no memory of movies. once i see it, i forget everything

[GTPluv]

Well I feel dumber now

[SnowDrift]

leet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wikipedia - the liberal dictionary (no thank you - I'm FAR from liberal)

Back to the topic...

[matt5112]

wikipedia - the liberal dictionary (no thank you - I'm FAR from liberal)

Back to the topic...

Wtf.

Its been proven to be more accurate than most sources on the internet, but spotty on history.

Also, its a great resource if you need help with understanding a scientific subject.

[SnowDrift]

Wtf.

Its been proven to be more accurate than most sources on the internet, but spotty on history.

Also, its a great resource if you need help with understanding a scientific subject.

It's a good source of information, for the most part. It's owned by a liberal couple, though, so some of the information is filtered through liberal minds. Just like anything else - it's good to know the source.

[matt5112]

It's a good source of information, for the most part. It's owned by a liberal couple, though, so some of the information is filtered through liberal minds. Just like anything else - it's good to know the source.

I'm well aware of that. Getting the truth is still difficult in this "modern" age.

[JoelW98GTP]

It's a good source of information, for the most part. It's owned by a liberal couple, though, so some of the information is filtered through liberal minds. Just like anything else - it's good to know the source.

see Breaking News | Latest News | Current News - FOXNews.com filtered through conservative minds.

[xDetroitMetalx]

It's a good source of information, for the most part. It's owned by a liberal couple, though, so some of the information is filtered through liberal minds. Just like anything else - it's good to know the source.

Anyone can edit any part of information at any time. How do you figure all of it is filtered through this "liberal couple"?

[SnowDrift]

Anyone can edit any part of information at any time. How do you figure all of it is filtered through this "liberal couple"?

I've read it on several conservative news sources and found it to be true. World Net Daily is only one that cited examples of their liberal bias. Here's another example in this link. Liberal Bias at Wikipedia? | NewsBusters.org

Perhaps Wales is divorced now, so maybe it's not owned by a couple. It looks like his partner, though, left the business because of the political and social agenda it was promoting (assuming what I read about him ON wikipedia is true)

I think this discussion has gotten a little off topic, though, from the original poster's comments. If someone wants to keep ranting about wikipedia, then there should be a new thread started for that specific purpose. Sorry for the hijack.

Respectfully,
SnowDrift

[matt5112]

I've read it on several conservative news sources and found it to be true. World Net Daily is only one that cited examples of their liberal bias. Here's another example in this link. Liberal Bias at Wikipedia? | NewsBusters.org

Perhaps Wales is divorced now, so maybe it's not owned by a couple. It looks like his partner, though, left the business because of the political and social agenda it was promoting (assuming what I read about him ON wikipedia is true)

I think this discussion has gotten a little off topic, though, from the original poster's comments. If someone wants to keep ranting about wikipedia, then there should be a new thread started for that specific purpose. Sorry for the hijack.

Respectfully,
SnowDrift

How is using their "enemies" information getting you a more truthful impressive of them when they sit on other sides of the fence?

Reading that is hilarious, the interviewer gives off the impression that wikipedia is ONLY for the US and should represent them, not other countries...

What people fail to understand is that the people who use and contribute to wikipedia will be the ones who control it.

If you had more conservative than liberal people controlling it, then it'd swing the other way and you wouldn't have a problem with it.

[SnowDrift]

If you had more conservative than liberal people controlling it, then it'd swing the other way and you wouldn't have a problem with it.

You're starting to catch on

[matt5112]

You're starting to catch on

Teach them how the internet works first then we can have a "fair" wikipedia.

YouTube - Ted's Internet Tubes

[SnowDrift]

Teach them how the internet works first then we can have a "fair" wikipedia.

YouTube - Ted's Internet Tubes

I wouldn't be the one for that, my friend. I'm not all that sure how this whole things work, myself

[xDetroitMetalx]

It's all zeros and ones.