wired.com — On November 17th, 2005, an anonymous Wikipedia user deleted 15 paragraphs from an article on e-voting machine-vendor Diebold, excising an entire section critical of the company's machines. While anonymous, such changes typically leave behind digital fingerprints offering hints about the contributor, such as the location of the computer...
Aug 14, 2007 View in Crawl 4
pedwidgetAug 14, 2007
NEWSFLASH!!!!!!DIGG is infested with Brainwashed Liberal Nutcases who cannot think for themselves.
mmaloneAug 15, 2007
Uh... Is this a joke? Wikipedia has version control, you can revert changes...
blacklabelsarAug 15, 2007
It bothers you that you are starting to realize that We The People are being f**ked. It should bother you. The frustration in realizing this is like pain. Pain tells you that you are being injured and must do something to stop it. Your/our frustration tells us that we need to change something. It is a brave thing to confront a negative reality. At least you won't have panic attacks when denial wears thin. Wake up. You are not alone.
manovaAug 15, 2007
What do expect?!?! Wikipedia is an open forum that ANYONE can edit. If someone made a wikipedia article about you and put in information that you did not agree with, you know you would edit it. I see nothing wrong with it. That is why they track changes. If someone deletes something, you can change it back, simple.
topknotAug 15, 2007
Companies, individuals and governments should never try to protect their reputations. It's not right and they are evil for doing these things. I say this even if the information posted is wrong. The people have spoken and that is all that should count. Now back to reality........
brownspankAug 15, 2007
f**king deja vu.
wizdumAug 21, 2007
They don't. Someone that works there does...