From: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org (alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest) To: ammf-digest@smoe.org Subject: alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest V14 #5980 Reply-To: ammf@fruvous.com Sender: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest Monday, February 22 2021 Volume 14 : Number 5980 Today's Subjects: ----------------- The perfect professional drone on a budget. ["DronePro 4K" ] The belly-flattening science. You will get to know what the right spots to hit are. ["Inner-Game" ] The Medicinal plant hiding in your backyard ["Forgotten Power" Subject: The perfect professional drone on a budget. The perfect professional drone on a budget. http://edelixir.buzz/BGrkUenIcvZobdFJPfk2k4Tk88853oub1XHIn0iyOOYkrAdH http://edelixir.buzz/IHWa3Iwdrfcv_2daq1tXfCy-w4nyprUDfh0ND8BmjKxJB5W- earchers from Dartmouth College found that "anonymous and infrequent contributors to Wikipedia are as reliable a source of knowledge as those contributors who register with the site". Jimmy Wales stated in 2009 that "t turns out over 50% of all the edits are done by just .7% of the users ... 524 people ... And in fact, the most active 2%, which is 1400 people, have done 73.4% of all the edits." However, Business Insider editor and journalist Henry Blodget showed in 2009 that in a random sample of articles, most content in Wikipedia (measured by the amount of contributed text that survives to the latest sampled edit) is created by "outsiders", while most editing and formatting is done by "insiders". A 2008 study found that Wikipedians were less agreeable, open, and conscientious than others, although a later commentary pointed out serious flaws, including that the data showed higher openness and that the differences with the control group and the samples were small. According to a 2009 study, there is "evidence of growing resistance from the Wikipedia community to new content". Diversity Several studies have shown that most of the Wikipedia contributors are male. Notably, the results of a Wikimedia Foundation survey in 2008 showed that only 13 percent of Wikipedia editors were female. Because of this, universities throughout the United States tried to encourage females to become Wikipedia contributors. Similarly, many of these universities, including Yale and Brown, gave college credit to students who create or edit an article rela ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 08:19:45 -0500 From: "Manhood Elongation Ritual" Subject: White Wife Finds Elongation Secret From African Tribesmen White Wife Finds Elongation Secret From African Tribesmen http://nervesqrb.buzz/wJk6mlYMBBB_3UeysODq4RcZYjFdB6OSsGuXjuj32B_AxFl8 http://nervesqrb.buzz/VAFzk22LrTPViw4WoeP1lcVP0WPguZ918Z3eUgWn0xPkhIyA ipedia", cited a trend analysis concerning data published by the Wikimedia Foundation stating that "he number of editors for the English-language version has fallen by a third in seven years." The attrition rate for active editors in English Wikipedia was cited by The Economist as substantially in contrast to statistics for Wikipedia in other languages (non-English Wikipedia). The Economist reported that the number of contributors with an average of five or more edits per month was relatively constant since 2008 for Wikipedia in other languages at approximately 42,000 editors within narrow seasonal variances of about 2,000 editors up or down. The number of active editors in English Wikipedia, by sharp comparison, was cited as peaking in 2007 at approximately 50,000 and dropping to 30,000 by the start of 2014. Should this attrition have continued unabated at the quoted trend rate of approximately 20,000 editors lost within seven years, by 2021 there would be only 10,000 active editors on English Wikipedia. In contrast, the trend analysis published in The Economist presents Wikipedia in other languages (non-English Wikipedia) as successful in retaining their active editors on a renewable and sustained basis, with their numbers remaining relatively constant at approximately 42,000. No comment was made concerning which of the differentiated edit policy standards from Wikipedia in other languages (non-English Wikipedia) would provide a possible alternative to English Wikipedia for effectively ameliorating substantial editor attrition rates on the English-lang ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 07:59:24 -0500 From: "Doctors Discovery" Subject: Better than Morphine... Safer than Aspirin? Better than Morphine... Safer than Aspirin? http://stopmal.live/sL0v_1g3rPhBTsqY6VufFou0MwIwlPxdfzWBU7E13hU-rmE0 http://stopmal.live/mySMvrMAlyEv60oMpweMkFXAVAtdyKWyZ0fWQPx26iQa1CYr ses that encyclopedias of any type are not usually appropriate to use as citable sources, and should not be relied upon as authoritative. Wales once (2006 or earlier) said he receives about ten emails weekly from students saying they got failing grades on papers because they cited Wikipedia; he told the students they got what they deserved. "For God's sake, you're in college; don't cite the encyclopedia," he said. In February 2007, an article in The Harvard Crimson newspaper reported that a few of the professors at Harvard University were including Wikipedia articles in their syllabi, although without realizing the articles might change. In June 2007, former president of the American Library Association Michael Gorman condemned Wikipedia, along with Google, stating that academics who endorse the use of Wikipedia are "the intellectual equivalent of a dietitian who recommends a steady diet of Big Macs with everything". In contrast, academic writing[clarification needed] in Wikipedia has evolved in recent years and has been found to increase student interest, personal connection to the product, creativity in material processing, and international collaboration in the learning process. Medical information See also: Health information on Wikipedia On March 5, 2014, Julie Beck writing for The Atlantic magazine in an article titled "Doctors' #1 Source for Healthcare Information: Wikipedia", stated that "Fifty percent of physicians look up conditions on the (Wikipedia) site, and some are editing articles themselves to improve the quality of available information." Beck continued to detail in this article new programs of Amin Azzam at the University of San Francisco to offer medical school courses to medical students for learning to edit and improve Wikipedia articles on health-related issues, as well as internal quality control programs within Wikipedia organized by James Heilman to improve a group of 200 health-related articles of central medical importance up to Wikipedia's highest standard of articles using its Featured Article and Good Article peer-review evalua ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 05:46:22 -0500 From: "Ear Cleaner" Subject: Rotating ear cleaner-clean your ears without hurting yourself! Rotating ear cleaner-clean your ears without hurting yourself! http://windseason.buzz/HD5x3vidMnoUFb5dS8rHz37bv2GIoVCpKa-dTeEJVY2vyTpa http://windseason.buzz/_VZqGhUZjsZVGCj9vgAtivam1U8giqFHVFSnLLL_pn5jItK_ ome game engines only provide real-time 3D rendering capabilities instead of the wide range of functionality needed by games. These engines rely upon the game developer to implement the rest of this functionality or to assemble it from other game-middleware components. These types of engines are generally referred to as a "graphics engine", "rendering engine", or "3D engine" instead of the more encompassing term "game engine". This terminology is inconsistently used, as many full-featured 3D game engines are referred to[by whom?] simply as "3D engines". Examples of graphics engines include: Crystal Space, Genesis3D, Irrlicht, OGRE, RealmForge, Truevision3D, and Vision Engine. Modern game- or graphics-engines generally provide a scene graph - an object-oriented representation of the 3D game-world which often simplifies game design and can be used for more efficient rendering of vast virtual worlds. As technology ages, the components of an engine may become outdated or insufficient for the requirements of a given project. Since the complexity of programming an entirely new engine may result in unwanted delays (or necessitate that a project re-start from the beginning), an engine-development team may elect to update their existing engine with newer functionality or compone ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 13:52:24 +0100 From: "MR James Mcgregor" Subject: Working Together Greeting to you I am James Mcgregor,my principals wish, to make huge financial investment in your home country . Please, I will provide more details about the transaction if you are sure you can handle classified information and also let me know your entitlement for the solicited role, I shall be expecting your quick response mrjamesmc6@gmail.com Best Regards, James Mcgregor - -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 05:23:38 -0500 From: "Inner-Game" Subject: The belly-flattening science. You will get to know what the right spots to hit are. The belly-flattening science. You will get to know what the right spots to hit are. http://edelixir.buzz/3x-cWeR17CJZe93VuRbnZg41A8WBZB14rULAl2Oo9od9RAUv http://edelixir.buzz/2PvIMvStY9kiceRTHbF3Mxr2TxZi-9m5JmjFYQ4zdv1oB-Vb tors in good standing in the community can run for one of many levels of volunteer stewardship: this begins with "administrator", privileged users who can delete pages, prevent articles from being changed in case of vandalism or editorial disputes (setting protective measures on articles), and try to prevent certain people from editing. Despite the name, administrators are not supposed to enjoy any special privilege in decision-making; instead, their powers are mostly limited to making edits that have project-wide effects and thus are disallowed to ordinary editors, and to implement restrictions intended to prevent certain persons from making disruptive edits (such as vandalism). Fewer editors become administrators than in years past, in part because the process of vetting potential Wikipedia administrators has become more rigorous. Bureaucrats name new administrators solely upon the recommendations from the community. Dispute resolution Over time, Wikipedia has developed a semi-formal dispute resolution process to assist in such circumstances. To determine community consensus, editors can raise issues at appropriate community forums,[note 5] or seek outside input through third opinion requests or by initiating a more general community discussion known as a "request for comment". Arbitration Committee Main article: Arbitration Committee The Arbitration Committee presides over the ultimate dispute resolution process. Although disputes usually arise from a disagreement between two opposing views on how an article should read, the Arbitration Committee explicitly refuses to directly rule on the specific view that should be adopted. Statistical analyses suggest that the committee ignores the content of disputes and rather focuses on the way disputes are conducted, functioni ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 07:49:30 -0500 From: "Penis Elongation Ritual" Subject: Husband Finds Elongation Secret From African Tribesmen Husband Finds Elongation Secret From African Tribesmen http://nervesqrb.buzz/sloopHfdvuokGljEV7Dgm_zgFC0J_C793glAlfsHkX0ya4yl http://nervesqrb.buzz/HcZvQ_PnAUrtpN-tH8n2qPsC5nP4EhJSP5Sa7S0Vt0z8YOL4 ipedia", cited a trend analysis concerning data published by the Wikimedia Foundation stating that "he number of editors for the English-language version has fallen by a third in seven years." The attrition rate for active editors in English Wikipedia was cited by The Economist as substantially in contrast to statistics for Wikipedia in other languages (non-English Wikipedia). The Economist reported that the number of contributors with an average of five or more edits per month was relatively constant since 2008 for Wikipedia in other languages at approximately 42,000 editors within narrow seasonal variances of about 2,000 editors up or down. The number of active editors in English Wikipedia, by sharp comparison, was cited as peaking in 2007 at approximately 50,000 and dropping to 30,000 by the start of 2014. Should this attrition have continued unabated at the quoted trend rate of approximately 20,000 editors lost within seven years, by 2021 there would be only 10,000 active editors on English Wikipedia. In contrast, the trend analysis published in The Economist presents Wikipedia in other languages (non-English Wikipedia) as successful in retaining their active editors on a renewable and sustained basis, with their numbers remaining relatively constant at approximately 42,000. No comment was made concerning which of the differentiated edit policy standards from Wikipedia in other languages (non-English Wikipedia) would provide a possible alternative to English Wikipedia for effectively ameliorating substantial editor attrition rates on the English-lang ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 08:56:09 -0500 From: "Unusual Secret" Subject: Add this to your water ASAP Add this to your water ASAP http://nervesqrb.buzz/nOXnyNJ9rNFvrflJg6rN76avvq327TFaADnuTsTWnyjtGmU http://nervesqrb.buzz/qb6BVvfSlYuFqCL8xZULB3CkkEWnhhp-UlH0VePEOkV9yeo kipedians have criticized Wikipedia's large and growing regulation, which includes more than fifty policies and nearly 150,000 words as of 2014. Critics have stated that Wikipedia exhibits systemic bias. In 2010, columnist and journalist Edwin Black described Wikipedia as being a mixture of "truth, half-truth, and some falsehoods". Articles in The Chronicle of Higher Education and The Journal of Academic Librarianship have criticized Wikipedia's Undue Weight policy, concluding that the fact that Wikipedia explicitly is not designed to provide correct information about a subject, but rather focus on all the major viewpoints on the subject, give less attention to minor ones, and creates omissions that can lead to false beliefs based on incomplete information. Journalists Oliver Kamm and Edwin Black alleged (in 2010 and 2011 respectively) that articles are dominated by the loudest and most persistent voices, usually by a group with an "ax to grind" on the topic. A 2008 article in Education Next Journal concluded that as a resource about controversial topics, Wikipedia is subject to manipulation and spin. In 2006, the Wikipedia Watch criticism website listed dozens of examples of plagiarism in the English Wikipedia. Accuracy of content Main article: Reliability of Wikipedia External audio audio icon The Great Book of Knowledge, Part 1, Ideas with Paul Kennedy, CBC, January 15, 2014 Articles for traditional encyclopedias such as EncyclopC&dia Britannica are carefully and deliberately written by experts, lending such encyclopedias a reputation for accuracy. However, a peer revi ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 06:36:31 -0500 From: "Trump Exposes" Subject: Trump Exposes COVID-19 Hoax Trump Exposes COVID-19 Hoax http://windseason.buzz/UVG17WRU24f6qsijp8QDIMt0IvXWEm6Tm1w_0Yx7GMn9lpm9 http://windseason.buzz/szWaorESWgQZdKMdiT6B2yWxKC0cGsEBxqjRXtcSSetaeI8H ematic editors while allowing potentially productive editors back in to participate. Therefore, the committee does not dictate the content of articles, although it sometimes condemns content changes when it deems the new content violates Wikipedia policies (for example, if the new content is considered biased). Its remedies include cautions and probations (used in 63% of cases) and banning editors from articles (43%), subject matters (23%), or Wikipedia (16%). Complete bans from Wikipedia are generally limited to instances of impersonation and anti-social behavior. When conduct is not impersonation or anti-social, but rather anti-consensus or in violation of editing policies, remedies tend to be limited to warnings. Community Main article: Wikipedia community File:Wikimania - the Wikimentary.webm Video of Wikimania 2005ban annual conference for users of Wikipedia and other projects operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, was held in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, August 4b8. Each article and each user of Wikipedia has an associated "talk" page. These form the primary communication channel for editors to discuss, coordinate and debate. File:Editing Hoxne Hoard at the British Museum.ogv Wikipedians and British Museum curators collaborate on the article Hoxne Hoard in June 2010 Wikipedia's community has been described as cultlike, although not always with entirely negative connotations. The project's preference for cohesiveness, even if it requires compromise that includes disregard of credentials, has been referred to as "anti-elitism". Wikipedians sometimes award one another "virtual barnstars" for good work. These personalized tokens of appreciation reveal a wide range of valued work extending far beyond simple editing to include social support, administrative actions, and types of articulation work. Wikipedia does not require that its editors and contributors provide ident ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 00:13:45 +0300 From: "Mr. Tayeb" Subject: You won donation Hello, My name is Tayeb Souami, I am an accountant and native of Little Ferry, New Jersey, United States. I am a winner of $ 315.3 million jackpot winner in the USA Powerballb" lottery. Your email was randomly selected from the world email database among many other emails and you have been selected to receive $ 3,600,000.00. To confirm my winning, please visit: https://abcnews.go.com/US/lucky-jersey-man-wins-3153-million-powerball-jackpot/story?id=55748114 https://twitter.com/NJLottery/status/1005181676937531392 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YtG6HFQYmY You are very lucky too to be a beneficiary of $3,600,000.00. - -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 09:09:46 -0500 From: "Forgotten Power" Subject: The Medicinal plant hiding in your backyard The Medicinal plant hiding in your backyard http://stopmal.live/DpzXjRe3mx5jP_Tr0btiEw6SZMYf9gvlBr5G8o92e4fNlesr http://stopmal.live/f9DA_9kvPyvsC0wbg6wzccRW_EfOBV8Rbi8JmLF01aMYpsq_ nnica by the science journal Nature found few differences in accuracy, and concluded that "the average science entry in Wikipedia contained around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three." Joseph Reagle suggested that while the study reflects "a topical strength of Wikipedia contributors" in science articles, "Wikipedia may not have fared so well using a random sampling of articles or on humanities subjects." Others raised similar critiques. The findings by Nature were disputed by EncyclopC&dia Britannica, and in response, Nature gave a rebuttal of the points raised by Britannica. In addition to the point-for-point disagreement between these two parties, others have examined the sample size and selection method used in the Nature effort, and suggested a "flawed study design" (in Nature's manual selection of articles, in part or in whole, for comparison), absence of statistical analysis (e.g., of reported confidence intervals), and a lack of study "statistical power" (i.e., owing to small sample size, 42 or 4 C 101 articles compared, vs >105 and >106 set sizes for Britannica and the English Wikipedia, respectively). As a consequence of the open structure, Wikipedia "makes no guarantee of validity" of its content, since no one is ultimately responsible for any claims appearing in it. Concerns have been raised by PC World in 2009 regarding the lack of accountability that results from users' anonymity, the insertion of false information, vandalism, and similar problems. Economist Tyler Cowen wrote: "If I had to guess whether Wikipedia or the median refereed journal article on economics was more likely to be true after a not so long think I would opt for Wikipedia." He comments that some traditional sources of non-fiction suffer from systemic biases and novel results, in his opinion, are over-reported in journal articles and relevant information is omitted from news reports. However, he also cautions that errors are frequently found on Internet sites and that acade ------------------------------ End of alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest V14 #5980 **********************************************