Heavy bias in the database

Discussion of the Open Database, its mission, how to recruit editors and contributors, any on-going problems, and any other matters relating to Starfleet Jedi's resident wiki.
StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Heavy bias in the database

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:04 pm

Come on. The database states subjective facts in an absolute, objective tone and words the phrases of the pro Wars side to sound stupid.

What's more, it fails completely to mention the education credentials of Curtis Saxton or Mike Wong.

Admiral Breetai
Starship Captain
Posts: 1796
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Admiral Breetai » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:31 am

why do you DOW's harp on Wongs educational credentials as if they have any merrit what so ever in a fictional debate?

I've seen degreeless gas station employee's on CBR absolutely demolish every single argument ever produced by Wong and parroted bus followers so bad they ran screaming from our forum and cried to Wong himself who could only reply with "herpaderp their stupid"

further more CrossoverManiac demolished him in the flash vs obiwan debate and as far as I know he has no impressive formal education credentials.

to sum it up: only an elitist or a troll considers college degrees important when discussing fiction and either of those two types of individuals are usually useless both in and outside of the net. Ones ability to debate using canon and debate well muster a good argument using feats is all that matters everything else is just meaningless bullshit one sides tries to use to bully the other.

It has no place in JMS database and I doubt Mike or Kor or O or any of the long time debaters here care to list or cite their own education credentials for the simple reason that it matters not.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5808
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Jul 08, 2011 3:20 am

From this article here on the SFJN Database:

Supporters of Saxton and his work point to Saxton's Ph. D in Astrophysics and his authorship of the ICS books as giving him credibility. Supporters may also argue that while Star Wars is not necessarily scientifically accurate, it should be treated that way until proven otherwise, because it is the only non-arbitrary out of universe standard that can be applied.

This pretty much acknowledges Saxon's Ph.D. Furthermore, how does their credentials make their arguements valid? To do so is to commit the fallacy of Appeal to Authority. And another note, most of the entries in the Database are stubs. They're ment to be replaced or expanded upon with more detailed ones. For example, if you get upset at Wong and Saxton's credentials being left out, why do you not get upset over the Gene Roddenberry article failing to mention the Star Trek creator's heroic wartime service in the U.S. Army Air Force in World War II? What about his service in the LAPD? That would put the man head and shoulders above George Lucas, right?
-Mike

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2162
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sun Jul 10, 2011 11:23 am

What Mike says; the Database is pretty sparse at the moment. You're welcome to contribute to articles, particularly stubs. I would ask that you not censor out things that you think are "subjective," and in particular not censor out the arguments you are opposed to, but the Open Database was originally intended to be an arena for debate; some place where any and all relevant arguments could be aired.

In particular, the Soapbox was intended for use as a no-holds-barred rant zone, while the discussion pages were intended for use debating the material on the article pages.

It has slowly evolved a little, but ever since I installed the discussion forums (three months after the wiki), the forums have been the central focus of attention, and the wiki something of an also-ran project.

I'd also like to underline the fact that as much as he makes of them, Wong's education credentials really aren't that impressive. A fairly significant percentage of the adult population of first-world countries can claim a bachelor's degree or better. Somewhere between a third and half of those degrees are in science or science-related fields.

The most impressively credentialed authority to weigh in on the VS debate is without a doubt David Brin, who holds the combination of a doctorate in the physical sciences and several science fiction awards, but that's a topic for another discussion.

Admiral Breetai
Starship Captain
Posts: 1796
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Admiral Breetai » Sun Jul 10, 2011 3:03 pm

wait a sec JMS...for realz? a PHD and a professionally acclaimed writer contributed to this little hobby of ours? on what side? and if he really did then why does every one who cheers wong..harp on his credentials...that guy easily blows 99.9999 percent of the rest of the debate on both sides out of the water...and even then I doubt the guy used his credentials to hide behind when his arguments sucked...like a certain some one

I'd like to add that I think the idea of listing what school a man went to in the database I mean ones education should have no basis what so ever in a debate about fiction..yes or no? especially when one uses it as a cloak to hide behind..or an excuse not to address a persons arguments

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2162
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:17 pm

Yes, he did. One of the SDN "Hate Mail" pages is a response to Brin's much-read Salon article, in fact. Brin has subsequently followed up that critical article with several less widely read online articles and was the prosecutor in Star Wars on Trial. He definitely contributed to the VS debate.

The reasons why the SDN crowd makes such a fuss over credentials are explored in a number of threads here. The long and short of it is that claiming that educated people inevitably agree with the pro-SW side is either a bold lie or desperate delusion. Here are a couple of older ones you may not have seen: 1 2

It is probably worth detailing the normal debate tactics of people in the articles in the Open Database on people.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Sun Jul 10, 2011 6:14 pm

Ah, I missed the mention of Saxton's credentials. Is that in the page on Saxton himself, though?

Admiral Breetai
Starship Captain
Posts: 1796
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Admiral Breetai » Sun Jul 10, 2011 9:48 pm

Jedi Master Spock wrote:
It is probably worth detailing the normal debate tactics of people in the articles in the Open Database on people.
i suppose if you want to chronicle a list of "improper debate tactics made use of by such and such side" but it seems like something one should enter and make a critical annotation on don;t you think so?

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:50 pm

What a great job, guys. Every Trekkie argument you make is stated from an OOU standpoint as if it were right ("Wong is dishonest" instead of "Trekkies argue that Wong is dishonest"), and then you put in stuff like "rightfully" argue blahblahblah (blatant bias term) and outright remove canon statements.

Remember that this is not a debate database. If X canon source says Y, you have to allow Y to be put in unless if a G canon source explicitly refutes this. You cannot say that these are "exaggerated", because this is a fanon opinion. WHETHER OR NOT THE FANON IS RIGHT IS IRRELEVANT!

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 656
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Trinoya » Fri Jul 15, 2011 8:30 am

SWST have you even read the oppositions wiki? It makes this one look like pure bottled sainthood by comparison. The opposing wikia flat out flames this board for existing and has dedicated articles on its members design to do nothing more than misrepresent and insult.

Whatever you found wrong with this wikia, maybe you should look at the opposing one first and apply the same standards to it first. Then tell us which is worse.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:13 pm

I don't care about the SDN database, which makes no attempt to claim that it's fair and balanced. Penn and Teller's Bullshit makes no claim that it's non-biased, but Fox News claims that it's fair and balanced, so they would have to live up to it.

Kor_Dahar_Master
Starship Captain
Posts: 1246
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Kor_Dahar_Master » Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:52 pm

StarWarsStarTrek wrote:I don't care about the SDN database, which makes no attempt to claim that it's fair and balanced.
Concession accepted.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Fri Jul 15, 2011 6:01 pm

Kor_Dahar_Master wrote:
StarWarsStarTrek wrote:I don't care about the SDN database, which makes no attempt to claim that it's fair and balanced.
Concession accepted.
Strawman accepted. You might as well yell at an openly Progressive blogger for being "biased". The SFJ database claims to be neutral, and therefore needs to act that way.

Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3907
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Praeothmin » Fri Jul 15, 2011 6:06 pm

I agree with SWST that the SFJ database, since it claims to be neutral, should be presented that way...
It might be good, for those with the time and the will, to brush up the articles which SWST says are biased, and make sure they are not...

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2162
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Heavy bias in the database

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:01 am

StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Remember that this is not a debate database.
Yes, it is a debate database. As it says on the front page:

Welcome to the Starfleet Jedi Open Database, the open Star Wars/Trek informational and argumentative repository.

Mission statement:

The mission of the Starfleet Jedi Open Database is to develop a comprehensive resource for information pertaining to the ongoing discussion of Star Trek, Star Wars, and other sci-fi franchises among fans.

In large part, we seek for this to become a debate wiki of sorts, extracting useful material from the VS debate and explaining the often-underexplored history, people, places, and theories common to this realm of fan.

At the same time, we wish to develop this as a useful repository of little-known trivia. These two functions we firmly believe go hand in hand.

This is a difficult mission. It requires trust, maturity, and careful organization to keep everything straight.

You cannot say that these are "exaggerated", because this is a fanon opinion.
Do not present original research or fanon as "official" fact. <= Note that fanon has always been expected to be present on the database; you're just not supposed to claim that fanon is canon (which is what is typically done on SDN).
Do not censor arguments you dislike. The Open Database is here to present known arguments, fan views, etc etc. Most articles on arguments will contain at least Pro and Con sections. The Soapbox is excepted from this rule. <= We expect opinions to be presented.
Articles are to be written in a neutral tone, including arguments, as much as possible. All POVs are to be presented as concisely and directly as possible. The Soapbox is also excepted from this rule. <= Yes, a neutral tone is desired - but presentation of multiple opposing (rather than singular neutral) POVs is expected.

I wrote those five years ago. The wiki has not been particularly active, but its mission was not to combine Memory Alpha and Wookieepedia on a new website.

Post Reply