NYT: Can Wikipedia Survive?

sparkzilla · Unread post by **sparkzilla** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 2:01 am

Andrew Lih asks "Can Wikipedia Survive?" in the New York Times. Unfortunately, there's no comment section to say, "no".

There's the beginning of a discussion on Hacker News.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 2:51 am

Lih's general piece is a fine broad outline for general readers with no grounding in WP contemporary history, but he overstates the number of core volunteers across all projects by a factor of 5 or so and incorrectly declares that the count of volunteers has been down for seven straight years. In actual fact, it has been more or less a plateau for four years, with a significant downtick in 2014 that seems to have more or less recovered.

Of course, it's all a matter of whom one counts as a core volunteer and who is actually a casual corrector of a few typos, etc. Still, I would argue that he is way off on the count and substantially wrong in his conclusion about the dynamics of the population of active volunteers.

RfB

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 2:56 am

P.S. It's not the "New York Times" asking if WP can survive, but Andrew Lih provocatively asking the question in an op ed. Big difference.

RfB

Ross McPherson · Unread post by **Ross McPherson** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:45 am

In an age of Internet giants, this most selfless of websites is worth saving.

How can Wikipedians be selfless when they haven't sold their time or their skills? I have never encountered a more selfish and opinionated group of people anywhere.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:36 am

This article of Lih's repeats the standard WMF thinking that Wikipedia's "survival" depends on ever-increasing recruitment of volunteers, and doesn't mention anything about the possibility of bringing in professional reviewers or ombudsmen, improvements in automation, and perhaps most importantly, the continued existence of a favorable legislative and regulatory environment.

He then says Wikipedian-in-Residence programs are "vital opportunities for Wikipedia to tap external expertise and enlarge its base of editors," and that they could help solve their gender gap problem. These are actually nothing more than perks for especially grasping members of The Faithful; they do nothing for recruitment at all. I'm not sure why he would even try to suggest that it's anything else - even if he wants one of these gigs for himself, describing them in that fashion isn't going to increase the number of institutions willing to sign up.

He then states flatly that the worst-case scenario is a "long, slow decline in participation, accuracy and usefulness," as if the first of those three thing is somehow necessary for them to have the last two. In fact, it might not even be related.

Then there's the conclusion:

No effort in history has gotten so much information at so little cost into the hands of so many — a feat made all the more remarkable by the absence of profit and owners.

The first part of this may be technically true in some respects, but it completely ignores the role of Google in making Wikipedia what it is today, not to mention the fact that "profit and owners" would have made Wikipedia's current popularity practically impossible.

I won't go to the extent of saying the article is complete nonsense, because it does give a decent-enough summary of the foundation-vs.-community situation, but there's still plenty of dishonesty in it.

sparkzilla · Unread post by **sparkzilla** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:56 am

No effort in history has gotten so much information at so little cost into the hands of so many — a feat made all the more remarkable by the absence of profit and owners.

Cost to whom? The time and emotional cost is far out of proportion to the output. The wiki system must be one of the least efficient content creation systems ever, and certainly the most divisive. 15 years of operation and yet so very few quality articles. The infinite money theory comes to mind.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 7:38 am

sparkzilla wrote:Cost to whom?

Hmm. My assumption was that this was an oblique reference to the "starving child in Africa," but you're right, the vagueness of the statement could suggest that Lih wanted people to interpret it as "cost to produce." Either way though, it still seems to imply a financial cost more than an opportunity cost in terms of time, effort, personal commitment, and psychological trauma.

Still more likely, at least in my opinion, he was just desperate to finish the column on a positive note and resorted to standard Wikipedian boilerplate.

sparkzilla · Unread post by **sparkzilla** » Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:09 pm

15 years of operation and yet so very few quality articles. The infinite money theory comes to mind.

That should be "infinite monkey theory".

mac · Unread post by **mac** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 6:13 am

sparkzilla wrote:
15 years of operation and yet so very few quality articles. The infinite money theory comes to mind.

That should be "infinite monkey theory".

Freud always wins.

Ross McPherson · Unread post by **Ross McPherson** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 6:58 am

mac wrote:
sparkzilla wrote:
15 years of operation and yet so very few quality articles. The infinite money theory comes to mind.

That should be "infinite monkey theory".
Freud always wins.

The infinite monkey theory can never apply to Wikipedia. It needs just one lucky monkey to type up a play by Shakespeare but no monkey lives long enough to type up all Wikipedia’s articles.

SB_Johnny · Unread post by **SB_Johnny** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:34 pm

It still works if restated.

"Given an infinite amount of time and an infinite number of monkeys, a subset m of monkeys will during some hour H simultaneously type all of the articles on Wikipedia as those articles stood at any given time t."

Ross McPherson · Unread post by **Ross McPherson** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 7:19 pm

SB_Johnny wrote:It still works if restated.

"Given an infinite amount of time and an infinite number of monkeys, a subset m of monkeys will during some hour H simultaneously type all of the articles on Wikipedia as those articles stood at any given time t."

No this is wrong because now you are selecting monkeys, which is editorial interference in what was supposed to be a completely random event. Also, unlike Shakespeare's plays, Wikipedia isn't finished yet. Your monkeys must keep editing each other's work and I'm not sure if an infinite number of especially selected monkeys can keep up with the present state of things. The present moment is an infinite set of possibilities, requiring an infinite number of sets of infinite numbers of monkeys if any subset is to keep up with the free encyclopaedia randomly moment by moment.

The Joy · Unread post by **The Joy** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 9:50 pm

SB_Johnny · Unread post by **SB_Johnny** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 11:08 pm

Ross McPherson wrote:
SB_Johnny wrote:It still works if restated.

"Given an infinite amount of time and an infinite number of monkeys, a subset m of monkeys will during some hour H simultaneously type all of the articles on Wikipedia as those articles stood at any given time t."
No this is wrong because now you are selecting monkeys, which is editorial interference in what was supposed to be a completely random event. Also, unlike Shakespeare's plays, Wikipedia isn't finished yet. Your monkeys must keep editing each other's work and I'm not sure if an infinite number of especially selected monkeys can keep up with the present state of things. The present moment is an infinite set of possibilities, requiring an infinite number of sets of infinite numbers of monkeys if any subset is to keep up with the free encyclopaedia randomly moment by moment.

Actually that still works, and no, I wasn't selecting monkeys. Infinite sets make for "unexpected possibilities" that can be radically counter-intuitive if you don't know much about infinite sets.

Of course you might have to throw the whole thing out if you had infinitely many sets of infinitely many monkeys working on infinitely many wikipedias, but that barely stands thinking about.

Ross McPherson · Unread post by **Ross McPherson** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 1:39 am

@ SB Johnny

How do the the monkeys in the subset m manage to work together if you haven't organized them into that set specifically to arrive at that outcome? Do they have user names or will anonymous IP addresses do?

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 3:03 am

Ross McPherson wrote:@ SB Johnny

How do the the monkeys in the subset m manage to work together if you haven't organized them into that set specifically to arrive at that outcome? Do they have user names or will anonymous IP addresses do?

The selection is not of the monkeys—but of the best output, which then defines set m. It's basic nuclear physics if you substitute neutrons randomly traveling through a matrix of fissionable material for monkeys typing.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 3:08 am

Zoloft wrote:
Ross McPherson wrote:@ SB Johnny

How do the the monkeys in the subset m manage to work together if you haven't organized them into that set specifically to arrive at that outcome? Do they have user names or will anonymous IP addresses do?
The selection is not of the monkeys—but of the best output, which then defines set m. It's basic nuclear physics if you substitute neutrons randomly traveling through a matrix of fissionable material for monkeys typing.

So, you're advocating for irradiating and accelerating the entirety of the en.wp community in the hopes that they eventually write a decent encyclopedia article?

Worth a try!

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 3:31 am

Vigilant wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Ross McPherson wrote:@ SB Johnny

How do the the monkeys in the subset m manage to work together if you haven't organized them into that set specifically to arrive at that outcome? Do they have user names or will anonymous IP addresses do?
The selection is not of the monkeys—but of the best output, which then defines set m. It's basic nuclear physics if you substitute neutrons randomly traveling through a matrix of fissionable material for monkeys typing.
So, you're advocating for irradiating and accelerating the entirety of the en.wp community in the hopes that they eventually write a decent encyclopedia article?

Worth a try!

Well that or using a beryllium reflector and perhaps a dab of polonium-210 in a teeny little pit. For, um, flavor.

Ross McPherson · Unread post by **Ross McPherson** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:20 am

Zoloft wrote:The selection is not of the monkeys—but of the best output, which then defines set m...

Selecting the best output is editorial interference. We never see that at Wikipedia. Some monkeys at Wikipedia are preferred over others, whatever the quality of the output, which is a more random, more monkey-like phenomenon than the infinite monkey scenario being considered here, I think.

sparkzilla · Unread post by **sparkzilla** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:24 am

These particular monkeys just like to fling poo at each other.

Notvelty · Unread post by **Notvelty** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:35 am

Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Ross McPherson wrote:@ SB Johnny

How do the the monkeys in the subset m manage to work together if you haven't organized them into that set specifically to arrive at that outcome? Do they have user names or will anonymous IP addresses do?
The selection is not of the monkeys—but of the best output, which then defines set m. It's basic nuclear physics if you substitute neutrons randomly traveling through a matrix of fissionable material for monkeys typing.
So, you're advocating for irradiating and accelerating the entirety of the en.wp community in the hopes that they eventually write a decent encyclopedia article?

Worth a try!
Well that or using a beryllium reflector and perhaps a dab of polonium-210 in a teeny little pit. For, um, flavor.

Eeewwww.. Who uses Po-210 with Be? Po-188, I could understand, but... ewww.. what kind of tasteless epicurean monster are you? This is what comes of those cooking shows.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:48 am

Notvelty wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Ross McPherson wrote:@ SB Johnny

How do the the monkeys in the subset m manage to work together if you haven't organized them into that set specifically to arrive at that outcome? Do they have user names or will anonymous IP addresses do?
The selection is not of the monkeys—but of the best output, which then defines set m. It's basic nuclear physics if you substitute neutrons randomly traveling through a matrix of fissionable material for monkeys typing.
So, you're advocating for irradiating and accelerating the entirety of the en.wp community in the hopes that they eventually write a decent encyclopedia article?

Worth a try!
Well that or using a beryllium reflector and perhaps a dab of polonium-210 in a teeny little pit. For, um, flavor.
Eeewwww.. Who uses Po-210 with Be? Po-188, I could understand, but... ewww.. what kind of tasteless epicurean monster are you? This is what comes of those cooking shows.

Next up on Hell's Linear Accelerator...

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:12 am

If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.

Notvelty · Unread post by **Notvelty** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:27 am

thekohser wrote:If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.

I believe Mike Orange is otherwise occupied.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:43 pm

Notvelty wrote:
thekohser wrote:If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.
I believe Mike Orange is otherwise occupied.

Ugh, that lame attempt at a joke missed the mark by 2.5 barnsides...

RfB

Notvelty · Unread post by **Notvelty** » Wed Jun 24, 2015 12:22 am

Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
thekohser wrote:If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.
I believe Mike Orange is otherwise occupied.
Ugh, that lame attempt at a joke missed the mark by 2.5 barnsides...

RfB

No making fun of the comrades, huh?

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:37 am

Notvelty wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
thekohser wrote:If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.
I believe Mike Orange is otherwise occupied.
Ugh, that lame attempt at a joke missed the mark by 2.5 barnsides...

RfB
No making fun of the comrades, huh?

Comrade Lowry is good folks. Be nice to him.

RfB

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed Jun 24, 2015 3:09 am

Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
thekohser wrote:If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.
I believe Mike Orange is otherwise occupied.
Ugh, that lame attempt at a joke missed the mark by 2.5 barnsides...

RfB
No making fun of the comrades, huh?
Comrade Lowry is good folks. Be nice to him.

RfB

There are many things we will agree on, Tim, but this will never be one of them.

Edit:
He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry. Weeping Jesus on the Cross.
http://www.greatdarkhorde.org/faqs.html

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Wed Jun 24, 2015 4:21 am

Vigilant wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
thekohser wrote:If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.
I believe Mike Orange is otherwise occupied.
Ugh, that lame attempt at a joke missed the mark by 2.5 barnsides...

RfB
No making fun of the comrades, huh?
Comrade Lowry is good folks. Be nice to him.

RfB
There are many things we will agree on, Tim, but this will never be one of them.

Edit:
He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry. Weeping Jesus on the Cross.
http://www.greatdarkhorde.org/faqs.html

There have been times, across the decades, where my path has crossed with members of the SCA. I've always enjoyed these times.

Neotarf · Unread post by **Neotarf** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:48 am

Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
thekohser wrote:If there's a Reward Board in the monkey lab, I'd like to hire an orangutan to work on an article about the Jimmy Wales Foundation.
I believe Mike Orange is otherwise occupied.
Ugh, that lame attempt at a joke missed the mark by 2.5 barnsides...

RfB
No making fun of the comrades, huh?
Comrade Lowry is good folks. Be nice to him.

RfB
There are many things we will agree on, Tim, but this will never be one of them.

Edit:
He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry. Weeping Jesus on the Cross.
http://www.greatdarkhorde.org/faqs.html
There have been times, across the decades, where my path has crossed with members of the SCA. I've always enjoyed these times.

If you can make it through the speeches, the food is well worth it.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:57 am

There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:34 am

Vigilant wrote:There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.

I didn't go to conventions back then. I went to court or to war. Once I went as a sailor from Phoenicia.

Neotarf · Unread post by **Neotarf** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:44 am

Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.
I didn't go to conventions back then. I went to court or to war. Once I went as a sailor from Phoenicia.

Conventions? No, you want tournaments followed by banquets. Bring a sword.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 4:29 am

Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.
I didn't go to conventions back then. I went to court or to war. Once I went as a sailor from Phoenicia.

So, you played with seamen?

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 4:29 am

Neotarf wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.
I didn't go to conventions back then. I went to court or to war. Once I went as a sailor from Phoenicia.
Conventions? No, you want tournaments followed by banquets. Bring a sword.

Where do you think most people encounter the SCA?

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 5:31 am

Vigilant wrote:
Neotarf wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.
I didn't go to conventions back then. I went to court or to war. Once I went as a sailor from Phoenicia.
Conventions? No, you want tournaments followed by banquets. Bring a sword.
Where do you think most people encounter the SCA?

The Mission?????

RfB

Moral Hazard · Unread post by **Moral Hazard** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:
Vigilant wrote:
Neotarf wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.
I didn't go to conventions back then. I went to court or to war. Once I went as a sailor from Phoenicia.
Conventions? No, you want tournaments followed by banquets. Bring a sword.
Where do you think most people encounter the SCA?
The Mission?????

RfB

Gary Gygax's Dungeons & Dragon's credits the SCA for inspiration and tradition.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:41 pm

Moral Hazard wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
Vigilant wrote:
Neotarf wrote:
Zoloft wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are some fun people in the SCA, but these are not the SCA guys who go to conventions.
They are assholes to a man.
I didn't go to conventions back then. I went to court or to war. Once I went as a sailor from Phoenicia.
Conventions? No, you want tournaments followed by banquets. Bring a sword.
Where do you think most people encounter the SCA?
The Mission?????

RfB
Gary Gygax's Dungeons & Dragon's credits the SCA for inspiration and tradition.

While I enjoyed D&D, I'm sure Mr Gygax never spent time with the complete dipshits who rep the SCA at gaming conventions.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:07 am

Vigilant wrote: He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry.

I understand your point, but would you please mind not using the word "faggotry" again?

That's speaking both as myself and as Wikipediocracy's newest forum mod.

Notvelty · Unread post by **Notvelty** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 1:35 am

Hex wrote:
Vigilant wrote: He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry.
I understand your point, but would you please mind not using the word "faggotry" again?

That's speaking both as myself and as Wikipediocracy's newest forum mod.

I wouldn't get into a blue with him, Vig.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 2:04 am

Hex wrote:
Vigilant wrote: He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry.
I understand your point, but would you please mind not using the word "faggotry" again?

That's speaking both as myself and as Wikipediocracy's newest forum mod.

Check out the big green on Brett.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 2:08 am

You see this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:28_fucking_minutes

From here
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _June_2015

28 fucking minutes. Protonk (talk) 23:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

You rang? 28 fucking minutes (talk) 23:34, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

You see, that's funny shit and Orange Mike is an unfunny dingleberry.

TungstenCarbide · Unread post by **TungstenCarbide** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:03 am

Hex wrote:
Vigilant wrote: He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry.
I understand your point, but would you please mind not using the word "faggotry" again?

That's speaking both as myself and as Wikipediocracy's newest forum mod.

Yeah, Vigilant, don't be a cunt.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:50 am

TungstenCarbide wrote:
Hex wrote:
Vigilant wrote: He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry.
I understand your point, but would you please mind not using the word "faggotry" again?

That's speaking both as myself and as Wikipediocracy's newest forum mod.
Yeah, Vigilant, don't be a cunt.

:chortle:

:hanging my head in shame:

Hey Scott,

Can you get us a couple of new emoticons in here?

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 4:52 am

Vigilant wrote:
TungstenCarbide wrote:
Hex wrote:
Vigilant wrote: He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry.
I understand your point, but would you please mind not using the word "faggotry" again?

That's speaking both as myself and as Wikipediocracy's newest forum mod.
Yeah, Vigilant, don't be a cunt.
:chortle:

:hanging my head in shame:

Hey Scott,

Can you get us a couple of new emoticons in here?

*hisses* That is an admin function.

...und try not to use misogynist phrases. I chust gave a guy a week off for zat.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 8:18 am

Even worse, all this digression into the inappropriateness of these offensive epithets is distracting us from the real problem here, which is that members of the "Society for Creative Anachronism" are dressing up in absurdly-constructed Mongol warrior outfits and, in so doing, making light of one of the most murderous, violent, and indeed genocidal groups in the whole of human history!

(Not that there's anything wrong with that...)

greyed.out.fields · Unread post by **greyed.out.fields** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 8:36 am

Notvelty wrote:
Hex wrote:
Vigilant wrote: He's shitting up the Mongol empire with SCA faggotry.
I understand your point, but would you please mind not using the word "faggotry" again?

That's speaking both as myself and as Wikipediocracy's newest forum mod.
I wouldn't get into a blue with him, Vig.

Hah! Good one Notvelty - I "LOL'd out loud" as they redundantly say redundantly.

(A "blue" is Australian slang for a fight or an argument.)

BTW: love your hair, Hex, sets off your eyes a treat.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 2:08 pm

Notvelty wrote: I wouldn't get into a blue with him, Vig.

Hopefully he'll take it as red...

greyed.out.fields wrote: BTW: love your hair, Hex, sets off your eyes a treat.

Thanks! After I'd done it someone told me that it's apparently a trend... slightly annoying, I never follow trends. But maybe you have to include a beard to count in that.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:13 pm

Hex wrote:
Notvelty wrote: I wouldn't get into a blue with him, Vig.
Hopefully he'll take it as red...

greyed.out.fields wrote: BTW: love your hair, Hex, sets off your eyes a treat.
Thanks! After I'd done it someone told me that it's apparently a trend... slightly annoying, I never follow trends. But maybe you have to include a beard to count in that.

Not to worry, Hex, that trend died in 1997...

RfB

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:20 pm

Midsize Jake wrote:Even worse, all this digression into the inappropriateness of these offensive epithets is distracting us from the real problem here, which is that members of the "Society for Creative Anachronism" are dressing up in absurdly-constructed Mongol warrior outfits and, in so doing, making light of one of the most murderous, violent, and indeed genocidal groups in the whole of human history!

(Not that there's anything wrong with that...)

My problem with that is that they are not cool enough to be Mongols.
There should be a sign with a line, "Must be THIS COOL ----------------- to dress as a Mongol."