I guess this all confirms what academics have believed for most of the past decade – don’t bother with Wikipedia. It’s still a great timewaster though.

Perhaps more disturbing was that the Australian Dept of Defence was guilty of ‘embellishing’ over 5000 entries, including sensitive info on the Vietnam War and the 9/11 Truth Report.

Mike’s opinion: no one could give a flying f**k.

Believe it or not mate, the internet isn’t just made up of Americans. I happen to give a damn about what happens in my country.

~ MIR –
http://www.mailsiread.com

It’s all shades of gray. Some great content, some poor content, some content that is missing. Take Mike Arrington’s wikipedia entry. No mention of him being a lawyer. And is Achex THE back-end infrastructure for Western Union online? Or is part of the back-end infrastructure for Western Union online. At least I have my doubts.

“Oh, the CIA changed an entry.” Everyone assumes it’s a bad change, but most times it’s been good.

Just because a change comes from a certain organization doesn’t mean it’s always nefarious. They are most of the time useful and help build wikipedia.

From the Oxford

entrap |enˈtrap| verb ( -trapped , -trapping ) [ trans. ]
catch (someone or something) in or as in a trap : she was entrapped by family expectations.

Unfortunately I’m not in the possession of a dictionary that doesn’t define the word as either as legal term or a geological term.

However, you seem to have more definitions — care to share? I love to expand my horizons!

Business as usual guys!!

People sign up on Mahalo to be the “editor mentors” and then he has “part time writers” that get paid if their pages are used…that are checked by approved peopel staffers.

Visit our weblog Biz Wax and find out how Mahalo differs. Watch two videos and read an article quoted by Fast Company.
http://bizwax.wordpress.com/

The government or Internal affairs or England will put under investigation such as corruption, illegal activities, treason, manipulation, lying Aussie authorities, etc…

Take care…

Guppy
incorrect. Rudd’s staff are paid for by the taxpayer, indeed for memory they are all paid via PMC. Standard backbencher gets 4 staffers, and it goes up from there. Rudd would probably have a dozen or so paid staffers (ie paid by the public) in his office. All are eseentially public servants, although in some respects you are correct, staffers are put there to assist the member in anything, including politics. Disclosure: I’ve twice in the past been a Federal staffer

Public servants, on the other hand, are paid for by the taxpayer and aren’t supposed to perform political duties – their responsibilities are administrative.

The line often blurs in practice, but it does exist.