New Wiki Site Exposes Pseudo-Skepticism! Excellent!

[Scepcop]

Hi all,
There's a new Wiki site called WikiSynergy that exposes Pseudo-Skepticism. It's like Wikipedia for truth seekers, without the pseudo-skeptics' censorship. It looks excellent and informative so far. Have a look at these entries there.

About Pseudoskepticism
http://www.wikisynergy.com/~wikisyne/w/ ... skepticism

Why skeptics lose
http://www.wikisynergy.com/~wikisyne/w/ ... ptics_lose

The owner and I are considering collaborating on some projects together. He plans to give the skeptics a level playing field and refuting them on rational grounds, to set the record straight.

Any ideas?

Vinstonas

[antiskeptic]

This is a good website. I have to say that I do not agree with the notion of giving skeptics a level playing field. These people are very mean, they are liars, they don't do the proper level of research, and they generally behave in a very dishonest manner. Until they can learn to play by the rules their actions should be restricted to prevent them from behaving dishonorably. I believe that a level playing field is warranted for opponents that can be trusted to behave honorably. You will not find such individuals within the skeptic movement.

[Purple Scissor]

This is a good website. I have to say that I do not agree with the notion of giving skeptics a level playing field. These people are very mean, they are liars, they don't do the proper level of research, and they generally behave in a very dishonest manner. Until they can learn to play by the rules their actions should be restricted to prevent them from behaving dishonorably. I believe that a level playing field is warranted for opponents that can be trusted to behave honorably. You will not find such individuals within the skeptic movement.

Glad you like the site! About the level playing field, that's the good thing about wikis: you can police it pretty well. The "level playing field" you mention is an intellectually level field. They get to post their arguments. And if they post bad arguments that just makes them look dumb. If they post good ones, we need them. But the behaviors you mention, and also the common behavior of ganging up like you see on Wikipedia is either impossible under our rule structure or else it would get them banned. A level playing field is different from a level battlefield where one side has chemical weapons.

[Purple Scissor]

Yes, I'd like people's ideas on how to collaborate. WikiSynergy is set up for most controversial subjects, not just the paranormal. There are two main reasons for having it be a wiki instead of a normal website: first the obvious, that it is easy for everyone to use it. But second because when both sides can edit we can claim an extra measure of authoritativeness. The only excuse for an accusation of overall bias is the laziness of the accuser .

One idea I'm kind of working on at the moment is duplicating some of the material of SCEPCOP. That sounds stupid, but in reading through this site, they are mixing more complex or nuanced arguments with cut-and-dried ones. What I would like to have eventually is an automatic system of dealing with every pseudoskeptical argument, just give the link. However, that means I have to use only the simplest arguments (which are usually enough). It would be almost a computer program for anti-pseudoskepticism. I'm thinking of the batch script kinds of things:

if errorlevel 1 (
goto antipseudoskepticalargument1) else (
goto eof
)


However, WS is set up to handle all sorts of different projects.

[Scepcop]

How would skeptics post on wikisynergy? By starting new entries? I'm afraid that if they feel that the content is controlled by you, they probably won't want to participate. They won't even participate on this forum. They prefer skeptic sites where they have homefield advantage.

You can create a database of info, but it would take a ton of work, and to use citations and references would be even more. Just start with the basics for now.

[antiskeptic]

if errorlevel 1 (
goto antipseudoskepticalargument1) else (
goto eof
)

You're going to need some seriously strong artificial intelligence to handle such a thing. Might not be impossible, but still very difficult.

[Purple Scissor]

How would skeptics post on wikisynergy? By starting new entries? I'm afraid that if they feel that the content is controlled by you, they probably won't want to participate. They won't even participate on this forum. They prefer skeptic sites where they have homefield advantage.

You can create a database of info, but it would take a ton of work, and to use citations and references would be even more. Just start with the basics for now.

Yes, well there is a skepticism project. And it is not so important that they participate, as that they have the chance. There are two formats they could use, one is to participate in criticism and response articles, where they would have control over their points. The other is to write articles. I also observe that they will not participate anywhere that the playing field is level.

[Purple Scissor]

if errorlevel 1 (
goto antipseudoskepticalargument1) else (
goto eof
)

You're going to need some seriously strong artificial intelligence to handle such a thing. Might not be impossible, but still very difficult.

Not that kind of program (; Rather, in an argument one could say that they are using argument X. In discussion, one repeats and repeats, and it does no good because the other person is not listening. So if you're going to argue at all you aren't really speaking to the pseudoskeptic, but to an outside reader. And it saves a lot of time to just have all the arguments written out.

BTW, data mining by computer is why parapsychology and UFOs and such will not remain a mystery for (my guess) more than another 20 or 30 years.

[Purple Scissor]

If SCEPCOP is really to be the anti-pseudoskeptic CSICOP, then this
http://www.dailygrail.com/news/skepcop- ... ment-40583
made me think that we would indeed have to find a way to avoid CSICOP's mistakes. I do think we would be in danger there.

[Scepcop]

Purple Scissors,
I just added a quote from your Wikisynergy site on my home page intro. Check it out!

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com

[Purple Scissor]

Purple Scissors,
I just added a quote from your Wikisynergy site on my home page intro. Check it out!

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com

It's great! I saw it a day or two ago when you first put it up. Are you getting your email? I said something about it (: