Hide background
READ THIS!

Welcome to the Otherkinphenomena forum.

You really have to follow these instructions! Instructions will update as you progress.

If you wish to post on, or access most of the content of our forum and our community, please click here to register first, then follow the instructions below. If you have already registered, please log in, in the above "Hello There, Guest!" box.

Thanks for understanding and see you around.



Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Use it or loose it!!!
celestia
Member is Offline
New
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 15
Points: 145.00
Contribution:

Post: #1
Use it or loose it!!!
Knowledge is power guys!
Seriously, I have been unemployed about a month now and last night I was trying to google something and talk at the same time and my brain was just like fail and I laughed for a little bit too long. It struck me I'm getting kind of stupid from being under stimulated. So, I was wondering what's some favorite educational websites? I'm a big fan of The urban legend reference page <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.snopes.com/">http://www.snopes.com/</a><!-- m -->
2009-12-12 11:46
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
Miniar
Member is Offline
Artist
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 2,042
Points: 10460.00
Contribution: tick tick tick tick 

Post: #2
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
A good library is free to use and a perfectly good way to exercise one's brain.

[Image: Signiature.jpg]
"Those who can't approach discussion with a basic level of intelligence and maturity shouldn't expect to be taken seriously." ~ Qualia Soup
2009-12-12 21:43
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
House Hesson
Member is Offline
cat slave
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 701
Points: 3370.00
Contribution: tick tick tick 

Post: #3
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
How Stuff Works is really useful. In the same vein, Instructables is fun but we tend to browse it more to look at the projects than to make things. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

DailyLit offers a wide range of books in daily (or less frequent if you choose) installments, many of them public domain and offered for free. There are also some free books under the Creative Commons license; that's how we started reading Cory Doctorow.

And, seconding Miniar, libraries are also good. Similarly, you might find some groups on meetup.com that would be educational.

-Rhun

"All knowledge is worth having." -Phedre no Delaunay

"Everything has a price." -Jaenelle Angelline

"I think if you try, that's being your best." -Echo
2009-12-13 0:51
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
Archer
Member is Offline
Suing You
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 2,813
Points: 14165.00
Contribution: tick tick tick tick 

Post: #4
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
Wikipedia FTW

Ubi Dubium, Ibi Libertas

Quote:"I have suffered from being misunderstood, but I would have suffered a hell of a lot more if I had been understood."

[Image: neverforgetm.png]
2009-12-13 1:07
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
skorpio
Member is Offline
Eager beaver
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 340
Points: 1865.00
Contribution: tick tick 

Post: #5
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
Archer Wrote:Wikipedia FTW



I like it but a lot of the stuff on there is bias or just pure crap.

"Think you're escaping and run into yourself. Longest way round is the shortest way home."
- James Joyce
2009-12-14 20:34
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
Archer
Member is Offline
Suing You
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 2,813
Points: 14165.00
Contribution: tick tick tick tick 

Post: #6
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
skorpio Wrote:
Archer Wrote:Wikipedia FTW



I like it but a lot of the stuff on there is bias or just pure crap.

I hear this a lot, but do you have actual concrete examples? The joy of Wikipedia is that while crap can go on quickly . . . it can also get removed very quickly. Unlike printed texts, in which if nonsense slips past the editors it will remain for a very, very long time.

It's an excellent starting point for research into any encyclopedia-worthy topic. Of course it's necessary to check that references are appropriate and foolish to take an article as gospel - but the same is true for every other secondary source.

Ubi Dubium, Ibi Libertas

Quote:"I have suffered from being misunderstood, but I would have suffered a hell of a lot more if I had been understood."

[Image: neverforgetm.png]
2009-12-16 1:03
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
Elinox
Member is Offline
Professional Pirate
Kintype: Lupine & Feline
Otherkin: Yes
Gender: chaotic good
Reputation: 2
Posts: 2,454
Points: 10256.00
Contribution: tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick 

.
Post: #7
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
Archer Wrote:It's an excellent starting point for research into any encyclopedia-worthy topic. Of course it's necessary to check that references are appropriate and foolish to take an article as gospel - but the same is true for every other secondary source.

Agreed. It's also a fantastic place to get info about anything, instantly! Whenever I need to know something fast, Wikipedia is where I go. Granted, if I need serious info I check the references, but no place has more info available so quickly.

[Image: sGaXcqG.png]
Banner by me. If you want one too, see here.

"You're the best kind of crazy." -Murphy, The Dresden Files
2009-12-16 16:59
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
skorpio
Member is Offline
Eager beaver
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 340
Points: 1865.00
Contribution: tick tick 

Post: #8
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
Archer Wrote:
skorpio Wrote:
Archer Wrote:Wikipedia FTW



I like it but a lot of the stuff on there is bias or just pure crap.

I hear this a lot, but do you have actual concrete examples? The joy of Wikipedia is that while crap can go on quickly . . . it can also get removed very quickly. Unlike printed texts, in which if nonsense slips past the editors it will remain for a very, very long time.

It's an excellent starting point for research into any encyclopedia-worthy topic. Of course it's necessary to check that references are appropriate and foolish to take an article as gospel - but the same is true for every other secondary source.

Yes. I do have concrete examples.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism</a><!-- m -->

This isn't meant to be funny.

"Think you're escaping and run into yourself. Longest way round is the shortest way home."
- James Joyce
2009-12-16 21:34
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
House Hesson
Member is Offline
cat slave
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 701
Points: 3370.00
Contribution: tick tick tick 

Post: #9
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
skorpio Wrote:
Archer Wrote:
skorpio Wrote:
Archer Wrote:Wikipedia FTW



I like it but a lot of the stuff on there is bias or just pure crap.

I hear this a lot, but do you have actual concrete examples? The joy of Wikipedia is that while crap can go on quickly . . . it can also get removed very quickly. Unlike printed texts, in which if nonsense slips past the editors it will remain for a very, very long time.

It's an excellent starting point for research into any encyclopedia-worthy topic. Of course it's necessary to check that references are appropriate and foolish to take an article as gospel - but the same is true for every other secondary source.

Yes. I do have concrete examples.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism</a><!-- m -->

This isn't meant to be funny.

It's not crap; it's a legitimately coined word and no different from, say, an article on "google" as a verb. Or "truthiness," or "Festivus." (I notice they took down the page on Zappadan, though; it must not be famous enough.) Even if they never make it into the dictionary, words coined in the wild are part of popular culture and sufficiently noteworthy ones do belong on Wikipedia.

It's also not biased. It could have been another politician - and in fact Slate Magazine now prints "Bidenisms" instead - but no matter whose mouth they come out of, statements like those are still absurd on their face. If you look at the related articles list, you'll find Yogi Berra, who's remembered fondly but certainly said some absurd things in his time. It's also not Wikipedia's place to ignore or downplay cultural phenomena arising from the mocking or criticism of a public figure, regardless of the basis for that activity; it's Wikipedia's job to describe noteworthy and well-known phenomena in the world.

The examples may go on a bit long, and that's a problem we've noticed with other Wikipedia pages. It seems to strike when fanboys/fangirls decide to maintain an article for a subject that doesn't have enough popular visibility to attract stricter editors. (The pages for C.J. Cherryh's Foreigner series and Kushiel's Dart by Jacqueline Carey are two notable offenders we've found, at least as of the dates we last checked them.) They might as well have linked to Slate's collection of Bushisms, or some similar resource, and called it a day.

The better known and/or more scientific the subject, however, the more accurate Wikipedia tends to be, and therefore I'll agree that it's a good place to start if one is interested in learning.

-Svanni

"All knowledge is worth having." -Phedre no Delaunay

"Everything has a price." -Jaenelle Angelline

"I think if you try, that's being your best." -Echo
2009-12-17 0:16
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
Kreyas
Member is Offline
Eager beaver
Kintype:
Otherkin:
Gender:
Reputation: 0
Posts: 384
Points: 1985.00
Contribution: tick 

Post: #10
Re: Use it or loose it!!!
Archer Wrote:
skorpio Wrote:
Archer Wrote:Wikipedia FTW



I like it but a lot of the stuff on there is bias or just pure crap.

I hear this a lot, but do you have actual concrete examples? The joy of Wikipedia is that while crap can go on quickly . . . it can also get removed very quickly. Unlike printed texts, in which if nonsense slips past the editors it will remain for a very, very long time.

It's an excellent starting point for research into any encyclopedia-worthy topic. Of course it's necessary to check that references are appropriate and foolish to take an article as gospel - but the same is true for every other secondary source.

There's a whole website dedicated to the horrific nature of Wikipedia: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.WikiTruth.info">http://www.WikiTruth.info</a><!-- m -->

Even if you want to pass them off as a bunch of nutjobs, just search for any recent discussion on Slashdot.org about Wikipedia for concrete examples from individuals that are likely to be experts in their respective fields.

Co-host of the Pagan Centered Podcast.
2009-12-17 2:35
Find
Quote
Give Thanks
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)