George Herbert wrote:
On 11/28/06, Tony Jacobs
<gtjacobs(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> What definition of "notable" are you using? The only definition of
that
> word that matters at Wikipedia is: "A
topic is notable if it has been
the
> subject of multiple, non-trivial published
works whose sources are
> independent of the subject itself." That's not true of GNAA, ergo
they're
> not "notable", which simply means
that it's impossible to write a
properly
> verifiable article about them. We don't
want to keep an unverfiable
> article
> around, no matter how much "consensus" may hoot and holler for it, so
we
> delete it.
>
> People who want to know about GNAA can still look them up at ED, which
has
no
problem covering topics that we eschew.
The problem with this trend is that it relegates certain aspects of
internet
culture which tend not to get press coverage into
the dustbin.
As much as I hate GNAA and everyone involved in it, it IS notable among
the
realm of internet troll activities.
If we have the (harmless, real, but equally badly documented)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt.fan.warlord entry....
(Offline at the moment, so I can't read the article) - Was Warlord from
MIT?
I don't know where he went to school, but "Warlord of the West" was Dan
Kline at (
in the 1991 timeframe.
The newsgroup came out of UC Berkeley. It was locally newgrouped by as far
as I recall uncredited parties (probably Shannon Appel or one of the local
BIFFsters), spread to other nearby commercial and educational institutions,
and then if I recall right I sent the first global newgroup for it on a dare
in early 1991, though I never was closely involved with the group.
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com