HELLO, WELCOME,
MY NAME IS ANDREW STERGIOU, I write,
I have been writing online since 1988 when based in New York City I started my first electronic bulletin board system (BBS) Tentra (Art NET spelled backwards) I once was described in an article by James Taranto (now an Associate editor of Wall Street Journal) as an "Internet pioneer of the wacky left" though I would conject that he had (and has) no real idea what is rightwing or leftwing except from how it stands in relation to the political establishment to which belongs and holds allegiance.
This is supposed to be
about me after all its my name my domain of the same name, but looking back at
the difficulties and problems I encountered in dealing with groups like
Wikipedia (mainly Wikipedia) when all I wanted to do was write, that has shaped
me and what I do.
For the most part an organization like Wikipedia in dealing with human
beings, writers, editors and creative people is nothing less than an abusive
hypocritical travesty, a brutal rape of the mind, a mind fuck, antithetically
everything that Wikipedia is, could be, or has refused to be, is what I am but
is not for it is neither collectivist nor an individual though I can be both
without conflict while they cannot:
Wikipedia in relating to me, and contrary to their faithful adherence to an
endless (I mean endless) libertarian anarchist, liberal, bureaucratic
wrangling over what is fit and proper to be published, that kills the writer and
their creative process, has done what other organization has done.
In my hatred of their organizational Joie de vivre (which escapes me as an endless bureaucratic process) that seeks a consensus for editorial approval regarding every thing they have online, every that they ever had on line, everything for what will exist online without regard to the laws of physics, time, space, material existence, right or wrong, or truth, for often (not always) as they can produce some good work and still come up wrong, as the cleanse the world of all its imperfections, defects, and shortcomings they question is who cleanses the world of theirs. Sincerely as they partially inherit a sum total of my animosity of what is wrong with the world, focused at people such as themselves as symbolic they just have no idea what is wrong with what they are doing.
In the bad old days a
writer maybe confronted an editor, and an editor over the focus, the direction
and the contents of what they wrote and submitted, and eventually it is
published by the three arriving at some consensus
and that was it: but based on the Wikipedian model that is all changed, and what
is consensus today is not consensus tomorrow, nor the next day, and the writer
and his/her heirs (if they have heirs) are forced to be forever vigilant and
litigious within the Wikipedian bureaucratic structure for future editorial
excesses for what was once written, but for which those who write for Wikipedia
have no real rights.
Wikipedia allegedly has "a neutral point of view" but in that view it
contradicts its other rule that it "does not have firm rules", ironic
hypocritical, delusional, misplaced, and misdirected Wikipedia and its
collectives of state corporate subsidized writings and work are as surreal as
Winston Smith's work at the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell's novel Nineteen
Eighty-Four* (see below) as they mirror the Ministry of Truth in subjecting
individuals to perpetual conflict, perpetual conflict, perpetual wrangling and
perpetual paradox where the individual becomes
subordinated to the organization in an all consuming process of approvals,
disapproval, acceptance, rejection and distortion.
Preordained by the gender and syntax of its own claims, founded on epistemological roots it can not escape them, there is some what of a success on one hand, and a dismal failure by its own definitions as diverse as the motley collection of those whose graced its pages on the other.
WIKIPEDIA IN ITS OWN WORDS:
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. It incorporates elements of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a webdirectory. It is not a dictionary, newspaper, or a collection of source documents; that kind of content should be contributed instead to the Wikimedia sister projects.
Wikipedia has a neutral point of view. We strive for articles that advocate no
single point of view. Sometimes this requires representing multiple points of
view, presenting each point of view accurately and in context, and not
presenting any point of view as "the truth" or "the best view". All
articles must strive for verifiable accuracy: unreferenced material may be
removed, so please provide references. Editors' personal experiences,
interpretations, or opinions do not belong here. That means
citing verifiable, authoritative sources, especially on controversial topics and
when the subject is a living person. When conflict arises over neutrality,
discuss details on the talk page, and follow dispute resolution.
Wikipedia is free content that anyone can edit and distribute.
Respect copyright laws, and avoid plagiarizing your sources. Since all your
contributions are freely licensed to the public, no editor owns any article; all
of your contributions can and will be mercilessly edited and redistributed.
Wikipedians should interact in a respectful and civil manner. Respect and be
polite to your fellow Wikipedians, even when you disagree. Apply Wikipedia etiquette,
and avoid personal attacks. Find consensus, avoid edit wars, and remember that
there are 3,472,527 articles on the English Wikipedia to work on and discuss.
Act in good faith, never disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, and assume
good faith on the part of others. Be open and welcoming.
Wikipedia does not have firm rules. Rules on Wikipedia are not fixed in stone,
and the spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule. Be bold in updating
articles and do not worry about making mistakes. Your efforts do not need to be
perfect; prior versions are saved, so no damage is irreparable.
ALL THAT ARE MY LIFE'S SUMMARIZING LESSONS,
FOR I
HAVE LEARNED.
IS LIFE WHAT YOU SEE? IS LIFE MERELY WHAT IT IS?
IS LIFE WHAT YOU SAY?
IS LIFE WHAT I SAY,
IS LIFE WHAT WE SAY?
BUT LIFE IS WHAT IS DESPITE ALL THAT,
WOULDN'T IT BE IRONIC
THAT LIFE IS NOT AS WE PERCEIVE?
BUT LIFE IS REALLY SOMETHING ELSE, AND HAD IT'S OWN LIFE
*1. Nineteen Eighty-Four (sometimes written 1984) is a 1949 dystopian novel by George Orwell about an oligarchical, collectivist society. Life in the Oceanian province of Airstrip One is a world of perpetual war, pervasive government surveillance, and incessant public mind control. The individual is always subordinated to the state, and it is in part this philosophy which allows the Party to manipulate and control humanity. In the Ministry of Truth (Minitrue, in Newspeak), protagonist Winston Smith is a civil servant responsible for perpetuating the Party's propaganda by revising historical records to render the Party omniscient and always correct, yet his meagre existence disillusions him to the point of seeking rebellion against Big Brother, eventually leading to his arrest, torture, and conversion.
As literary political fiction, Nineteen Eighty-Four is a classic novel of the social science fiction subgenre. Since its publication in 1949, many of its terms and concepts, such as Big Brother, doublethink, thoughtcrime, Newspeak, and Memory hole, have become contemporary vernacular. In addition, the novel popularized the adjective Orwellian, which refers to propaganda, lies, or manipulation of the past in the service of a totalitarian agenda.
TEMPLE OF REASON
ZITO
GARAGE MUSIC
STUDIOS
THE PUSHED PAWN
MENTAL
PATIENTS LIBERATION FRONT
UNIVERSAL LIVING ARTS INC