Larry Sanger: Wikipedia's QAnon Cultist Co-Founder

[Without Comfort]

Though this is off-topic, define "early."

Before they start regular school.

I don't know about anybody else, but I just assumed it meant his kids had to wake up at 5:00 AM and get through at least 20 pages of Ayn Rand before they were allowed to have breakfast.

Isn't it Jimbo who likes Ayn Rand?

I'm not great with translating English education vocabulary. Is regular school our First Grade, which comes after Kindergarten? There are plenty of good arguments available for proto-reading activities in preschools. Conversely, there is also research that delaying formal reading instruction until age 8 can result in the process going more quickly and painlessly. I have no idea who is right in that; I only know it's an open discussion. To be clear, the true horror of late reading acquisition comes with the very possible outcome that educational attainment may never catch up.

Sanger started his youngest at age 1 (no idea how many months this young human had been out of the womb, and it's months that matter at that age). He started his oldest on flashcards at age 22 months. He was encouraging someone else using flashcards with their 18 month old.

It's Sanger's lack of expertise in child development that makes me cringe because, sure, maybe his kids liked it and had the natural ability to excel in that exercise. Still, what did those 15 minutes per day replace in his kids' lives? Additionally, he advocates reading to children that young for an hour or two per day. I mean, sure, if the kid wants to hold still and not necessarily interact heavily, that's great and no biggie. However, extrapolating his own experience and advocating the same for people with vastly different children certainly could lead to trouble. I wonder why so many Ph.D. researchers on healthy child development never saw the light that Sanger saw. Hmm.

[Poetlister]

Children in England have to start school on or before their fifth birthday, which I think is a bit younger than in the USA. Most primary schools (i.e. for children up to 11) have reception classes for children from their fourth birthday, and some have nurseries (kindergartens) for even younger children; there are also many free-standing nurseries. Quite a few children are reading to some extent by their fourth birthday, but 18 months is a shade too young.

[Bezdomni]

I don't know about anybody else, but I just assumed it meant his kids had to wake up at 5:00 AM and get through at least 20 pages of Ayn Rand before they were allowed to have breakfast.

If you listen starting from 37 minutes in ( § ) (well after the "In Praise of Rush" section), Sanger discusses his youngest's feat of having read 12 Shakespeare plays at 10 years old of his own unfettered willTM.

Then, after talking about how racism was terrible (42'), he points out that the education he wants his children to receive is free-man / free-woman education (a classical liberal education... leaked from Greco-Roman language labs of yore where the education was, as he points out chuckling, certainly not for the slaves). From these texts, he seems to think children will learn all they need to know about truth, beauty, virtù (T-H-L), & the Oxford comma.

In re: his rejection of the spiritual world and other tuning mechanisms (closer to 52'), I'd suggest perhaps Sanger hasn't read the Dhammapada or Doors of Perception or the Book of the Dead with so open a mind that his brain might fall out. Maybe the gorilla could send him her WarRoom notes on Crowley to help allay his Cartesian fears of being unable to tell the most righteous demons from the leftest of angles....

[Giraffe Stapler]

SANGER: It bothers me, though, of course, when I see these policy disasters unfolding before our eyes at, at, you know school districts around the country, you know, um, the way, for example that, um, like, these first graders are being exposed to all kinds of smut, frankly, um, unnecessarily all out of a desire for openness and inclusion, you know, um, tolerances of differences and so forth.

INTERVIEWER: Can you give an example of what you mean by "smut"?

SANGER: Well, um, when, when uh they start giving details about how and why, um, people, uuh, basically the the whole gay and trans culture works, right? Pride parades for example - that's actually what I have in mind - um, and that, um, there is, there are things that go on that are actually shared with children in their classrooms, um, that shouldn't be. And the only reason that they are, um, you know, like, like a couple of guys dressed in, in, uh, leather, um, or in drag and, uh, miming sexual acts, whatever, that sort of thing,. The kids of course, it's not being explicitly, uh, explained to them exactly what is going on, but it's being normalized to them, isn't it?

Larry Sanger apparently thinks that leather daddies go to schools and mime sex acts for first graders. Which I am sure they do, in his dreams. I left all of the um and uhs in because there are sooo many when he talks about this stuff. Talking about the boring history of Wikipedia, very few.

[Vigilant]

SANGER: Well, um, when, when uh they start giving details about how and why, um, people, uuh, basically the the whole gay and trans culture works, right? Pride parades for example - that's actually what I have in mind - um, and that, um, there is, there are things that go on that are actually shared with children in their classrooms, um, that shouldn't be. And the only reason that they are, um, you know, like, like a couple of guys dressed in, in, uh, leather, um, or in drag and, uh, miming sexual acts, whatever, that sort of thing,. The kids of course, it's not being explicitly, uh, explained to them exactly what is going on, but it's being normalized to them, isn't it?

I'm fairly certain this is a Rule 34 issue for Larry.

[Without Comfort]

Children in England have to start school on or before their fifth birthday, which I think is a bit younger than in the USA. Most primary schools (i.e. for children up to 11) have reception classes for children from their fourth birthday, and some have nurseries (kindergartens) for even younger children; there are also many free-standing nurseries. Quite a few children are reading to some extent by their fourth birthday, but 18 months is a shade too young.

Sanger's eldest was reading the First Amendment at age 3. It's not whether a thing can be done, it's whether it should be. The four-year-olds who read, like many of us here probably did, are unlikely to have been coaxed into it using flashcards. It likely developed organically from being read to.

[Poetlister]

There's not much point in reading stuff you can't possibly understand. I'd suggest that young children stick to something like Mr. Men (T-H-L).

[Randy from Boise]

Anyone surprised that Sanger went straight down the anti-vax rabbit hole, raise your hands...

Anybody? Anybody at all???

[Poetlister]

#IWillNotComply Trends on Twitter After Joe Biden Orders Vaccine Mandate

The hashtag #IWillNotComply trended on Twitter Thursday after President Joe Biden ordered a COVID-19 vaccine mandate that may affect as many as 100 million Americans. ...

Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger, who falsely claimed that COVID-19 vaccines are "not a vaccine" in an earlier tweet, used the hashtag to agree with podcast host Tim Pool, who had simply tweeted "I will not comply" after the order was issued. "Nor I," added Sanger. "#IWillNotComply"

Newsweek

Will some people imagine that Wikipedia is anti-vax because of Larry's stance?

[Smiley]

Anyone surprised that Sanger went straight down the anti-vax rabbit hole, raise your hands...

Anybody? Anybody at all???

When it comes to cranks, Larry literally wrote the book article.

https://reagle.org/joseph/2010/wp/redux ... 99538.html

[Mason]

Anyone surprised that Sanger went straight down the anti-vax rabbit hole, raise your hands...

Anybody? Anybody at all???

Can you imagine if that guy ends up going the Caleb Wallace route? It’s hard to conceive of a more “hasten the day” result than the co-founder of Wikipedia meeting his demise by believing stupid shit he saw on the internet.

At least with his PhD Larry may be more apt to wait for the human version of ivermectin rather than hitting the Tractor Supply Store.

[Giraffe Stapler]

I am pretty sure Sanger works out of his home. His kids are home-schooled. He probably only goes out to get groceries and fresh tinfoil for the windows.

[Randy from Boise]

When it comes to cranks, Larry literally wrote the book article.

https://reagle.org/joseph/2010/wp/redux ... 99538.html

Great find!

t

[The Adversary]

The person Sanger most reminds me of, is....Rudy Giuliani (T-H-L).

I mean: sort of strange to think about, that they were both, one upon a time, respected public persons........

[Tarc]

Can you imagine if that guy ends up going the Caleb Wallace route? It’s hard to conceive of a more “hasten the day” result than the co-founder of Wikipedia meeting his demise by believing stupid shit he saw on the internet.

I'm having a hard time even believing that Sanger believes half the stuff he spews. Looking down his twitter feed of tweets, re-tweets and likes, you could play Q-Tard Bingo and win within minutes, he just hits box after box;

Antivax
Global child sex rings
Hunter Biden's laptop
Rando anti-China stuff
Hysterics about AOC

Also claims he was the first to use #IWillNotComply

[Poetlister]

Larry is being praised by the Independent Women's Forum, which I assume is a right-wing group:

A better alternative for conservatives is not to stifle innovation but instead build their own competitors to bring wealth for conservative entrepreneurs — people such as Jason Miller, who launched the Twitter-like platform Gettr; Larry Sanger, a Wikipedia co-founder launching a free-speech-friendly competitor;...

[Beeblebrox]

The person Sanger most reminds me of, is....Rudy Giuliani (T-H-L).

I mean: sort of strange to think about, that they were both, one upon a time, respected public persons........

His fall from grace is maybe not as epic as Rudy's but followed a similar trajectory. He's a bad joke.

[rhindle]

Is there anyone with a thinner skin than Larry?

He won't even try to engage in a debate. I'm not talking about the "trolls" who ratio him but the initial person he replied to, then blocked when she pushed back. Just like Jimbo reverting any valid criticism or question off his talk page.

I'm sure many could enlighten her about WP though but not the point here.

[Smiley]

[Smiley]

This week in Larryland:



I think I'm the only lefty left on twitter he hasn't blocked yet.

[Randy from Boise]

I think I'm the only lefty left on twitter he hasn't blocked yet.

I made the decision long ago that the ability to read his wackery was more important than making the first peep to him about anything whatsoever.

RfB

[Giraffe Stapler]

This week in Larryland:

Last night I inadvertently ended up reading a Twitter thread discussing this. I knew I was in the wrong place when the hashtag #BlackTerrorism appeared.

[Randy from Boise]

As usual, our esteemed philosopher just makes shit up on the fly...

[Giraffe Stapler]

As usual, our esteemed philosopher just makes shit up on the fly...

"I will apologise profusely" means "I will probably never admit I was wrong, but if I do, I will blame someone else for the misinformation I was spreading".

[Vigilant]

And I'll block anyone who dares to bring it up on my twitter feed.

[Vigilant]

Lordy

[Smiley]

[Mason]

Lordy

Gotta love his follow-up tweet:

I haven't fact-checked the above. Would be interesting if someone would do so though.

Sure would be!

[L.R. Lee]

Is Larry Sanger being called a "Qanon Cultist" for this https://mobile.twitter.com/lsanger/stat ... 9552932864 tweet?

Sanger's "What's my take? I don't know. I'm not a spy or a decoder. If you can mine that information source for real evidence, more power to you. Telling *most* people to go straight to the "Q drops" is pretty obviously a failing strategy" seems a reasonable assessment.

What is unreasonable about his "If you can mine that information source for real evidence, more power to you"? Inferring from "If" to "Qanon Cultist" seems an undue stretch.

[Vigilant]

Is Larry Sanger being called a "Qanon Cultist" for this https://mobile.twitter.com/lsanger/stat ... 9552932864 tweet?

Sanger's "What's my take? I don't know. I'm not a spy or a decoder. If you can mine that information source for real evidence, more power to you. Telling *most* people to go straight to the "Q drops" is pretty obviously a failing strategy" seems a reasonable assessment.

What is unreasonable about his "If you can mine that information source for real evidence, more power to you"? Inferring from "If" to "Qanon Cultist" seems an undue stretch.

Found Larry's new account.

[The Garbage Scow]

What is unreasonable about his "If you can mine that information source for real evidence, more power to you"? Inferring from "If" to "Qanon Cultist" seems an undue stretch.

So what you're saying is he doesn't even have the courage to sign his name to his thoughts and instead shares them in a mealy-mouthed manner, hiding behind non-definitive words like "if". Sounds like every 10 year old bully I've ever known. Or a common social media troll.

[Midsize Jake]

Is Larry Sanger being called a "Qanon Cultist" for this https://mobile.twitter.com/lsanger/stat ... 9552932864 tweet?

He's deleted a lot of relevant tweets since "Q" disappeared last November, and the movement started to peter out and shift into an anti-vax/anti-mask "Trump actually won the election" conspiracy mode.

That said, I'll be honest with you: We spent literally years backing Larry Sanger's claim to be the co-founder of Wikipedia, mostly because Jimbo was insisting on sole credit and most of us thought Jimbo was worse. We helped legitimize him at a time when he sorely needed legitimacy. So what does Sanger do, after all that effort and support? He goes full GQP death-cult on us, and makes a total fool of himself — effectively making us look like a bunch of idiots for ever even taking note of his existence.

So yes, the thread title is somewhat petty and vindictive, but if we came up with a title based on what many of us really feel about him at this point, it would probably be a lot worse (though we'd stop short of calling him a "fascist," barring further evidence at least). Still, by the same token, maybe we should take a cue from him ourselves and reevaluate the thread title based on the fact that QAnon is finally starting to "wither on the vine," so to speak. We could change it to "right-wing death cultist" or "Trump cultist," maybe, since that's closer to what he is right now.

[Mason]

If every mall Santa you see is actually a hired assassin, wouldn’t it make sense to abduct each one and only release them once they reveal who’ve they’ve been paid to whack?

Just asking the question.

[Randy from Boise]

What is unreasonable about his "If you can mine that information source for real evidence, more power to you"? Inferring from "If" to "Qanon Cultist" seems an undue stretch.

I also do not like the title of this thread, which would be pretty defamatory if he were not a public figure and which is inaccurate even if he is.

tim

[L.R. Lee]

I would expect that if there was evidence that Larry Sanger was a "Qanon Cultist" then the person(s) claiming same would be pointing a compilation of Sanger's Qanon sympathies. Where is that compilation? Remember, the Internet is forever.

If indeed, per Midsize Jake, above, Sanger has "deleted a lot of relevant tweets since 'Q' disappeared last November" then I would expect that people would be pointing to archived versions of deleted Tweets and shouting "MEMORYHOLE"! Well? Where is it?

There seem to be sufficient interest, here, in painting Sanger as a "Qanon Cultist" and that commenters would have taken the step of doing a good, well-evidenced, job of doing so.

[Hemiauchenia]

There's some stuff in page three of the thread where he is retweeting some borderline QAnon human trafficking stuff, he's certainly got a mind susceptible to a conspiracies of all sorts.

[AndyTheGrump]

L.R. Lee, it should be noted that this is a Wikipedia criticism site, rather than a Sanger one. Certainly things Sanger says on the subject of Wikipedia are sometimes relevant to the focus of this site, if only because some sections of the media seem to consider him a worthwhile source on such matters. Beyond that though, he's more or less just another of the many things we ramble on about here that are peripheral to the core topic, and not really significant enough that archiving his Twitterings would seem a worthwhile effort. More a matter of entertainment here than anything else. That, and an object of pity...

[L.R. Lee]

@AndyTheGrump:
Given the age, size, and activity of this thread, criticism of Sanger, in addition to criticism of Wikipedia, seems to be a topic of interest. As "the media seem to consider [Sanger] a worthwhile source on such matters [of Wikipedia criticism]" then Sanger's authority/lack of authority to opine on Wikipedia is significant.

IF Sanger is indeed a "Qanon cultist" then I will pay little heed to Sanger's statements. But I need to see good quality EVIDENCE for the "Qanon cultist" claim. And that evidence hasn't been forthcoming. Insofar as I have observed we're just seeing evidence-free anti-Sanger POV-pushing.

Present appropriate evidence and I'll become anti-Sanger too. I'm waiting.

[Mason]

Present appropriate evidence and I'll become anti-Sanger too. I'm waiting.

I fear you may be overestimating the time and effort people on the Internet who don’t know you would be willing to spend convincing you to think any particular way about Larry Sanger.

[tarantino]

I flatter myself that I am too sober and rational to go in for conspiracy theories. But all of the above, from mainstream sources, seems like enough to me to take the claims of Qanon seriously enough to investigate a bit.

Read the linked twitter thread. 52 percent of Larry's 39 thousand followers think Q is right (as of Aug. 2019).

[Giraffe Stapler]

IF Sanger is indeed a "Qanon cultist" then I will pay little heed to Sanger's statements. But I need to see good quality EVIDENCE for the "Qanon cultist" claim. And that evidence hasn't been forthcoming. Insofar as I have observed we're just seeing evidence-free anti-Sanger POV-pushing.

Present appropriate evidence and I'll become anti-Sanger too. I'm waiting.

Do your own research, man!

[Beeblebrox]

Fox News trying to put blame on the democrats for the parade attack because "a democrat" made a shitty tweet about it: link

This democrat has since resigned from her all-powerful position, namely, "social media director of the Democratic Party of DuPage County, Illinois."

[Zoloft]

IF Sanger is indeed a "Qanon cultist" then I will pay little heed to Sanger's statements. But I need to see good quality EVIDENCE for the "Qanon cultist" claim. And that evidence hasn't been forthcoming. Insofar as I have observed we're just seeing evidence-free anti-Sanger POV-pushing.

Present appropriate evidence and I'll become anti-Sanger too. I'm waiting.

Do your own research, man!

Go to Twitter and Facebook, where the proven, non-Biden expertise is.

[L.R. Lee]

Present appropriate evidence and I'll become anti-Sanger too. I'm waiting.

I fear I may be overestimating the time and effort people on the Internet who don’t know you would be willing to spend convincing you to think any particular way about Larry Sanger.

No @Mason. This isn't about me. Judging from the length and content of this thread, there are a number of commenters interested in convincing someone(s) that Larry Sanger is a "Qanon Cultist". If that evidence exists then I'd like to see it.

[L.R. Lee]

I flatter myself that I am too sober and rational to go in for conspiracy theories. But all of the above, from mainstream sources, seems like enough to me to take the claims of Qanon seriously enough to investigate a bit.

Read the linked twitter thread. 52 percent of Larry's 39 thousand followers think Q is right (as of Aug. 2019).

Would you, @Tarantino, please cite the basis for asserting that "52 percent of Larry's 39 thousand followers think Q is right"? That sounds like a demanding analysis to perform.

If Larry Sanger is actually a "Qanon Cultist" then I'd hope that you would be able to provide better evidence for that claim than just invoking, at best, the guilt-by-count-of-Twitter-followers fallacy.

[L.R. Lee]

IF Sanger is indeed a "Qanon cultist" then I will pay little heed to Sanger's statements. But I need to see good quality EVIDENCE for the "Qanon cultist" claim. And that evidence hasn't been forthcoming. Insofar as I have observed we're just seeing evidence-free anti-Sanger POV-pushing.

Present appropriate evidence and I'll become anti-Sanger too. I'm waiting.

Do your own research, man!

I'm not claiming that Larry Sanger is a "Qanon Cultist". Those (e.g. @Tarantino) who are making the "Qanon Cultist" claim bear the burden-of-proof.

Do you own research, @Giraffe Stapler, on how the burden-of-proof works, man!

You can start here —

Philosophical method [Latin: onus probandi] Originating in classical Roman law, an adversary proceeding where one party tries to establish and another to rebut some charge before a neutral adjudicative tribunal. The term has come to refer to a rule concerning the division of the labor of argumentation. Suppose A and B represent two competing views. If A has a favorable position, B will be required to produce strong arguments to defend its less favorable position. This is to say, A sets the burden of proof on B. If B cannot shift this burden, its position is defeated, even though it might be right. On the other hand, if B puts forward arguments that show that its position is stronger than A’s, then it transfers the burden of proof to A. It is a basic rule of dealing with evidence. Normally any position that argues for or against something has the burden. For instance, because common sense bulk term usually has an intuitive appeal prior to argument,any philosophical position standing against commonsense bears the burden of proof. “To say that the burden of proof rests with acertain side is to say that it is up to it to bringin the evidence to make out the case.”

Rescher, Methodological Pragmatism
The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy
Author(s): Nicholas Bunnin, Jiyuan Yu
Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell, Year: 2009
ISBN: 9781405191128,1405191120
http://download.library1.org/main/22500 ... 009%29.pdf

[AndyTheGrump]

L.R. Lee, you appear to be under the misapprehension that Roman Law applies here. It doesn't. People express opinions. If other people disagree with them, they can ask for evidence. Nobody is obliged to provide it though, because this isn't Rome, we don't wear togas, and we rarely settle arguments by ganging up on the boss and collectively knifing him to death.

[FelinaLavandula]

L. R., do you disagree with the assertion that Sanger is a “conspiracy theorist” or are you taking solely issue with the assertion that he is a “QAnon cultist”? Just curious.

[tarantino]

Would you, @Tarantino, please cite the basis for asserting that "52 percent of Larry's 39 thousand followers think Q is right"? That sounds like a demanding analysis to perform.

Okay, 52 percent of the respondents to his survey think Q is right, not that percentage of his followers. Did you read that thread? Do you follow him on twitter?

Larry also thinks that the election was stolen from Trump. Do you agree with that?

Do you think Picasso sucks?

Also, I didn't claim that Larry was a Qanon cultist you doofus. Posts were split from another thread (not by me) and put in a newly titled thread.

[Jim]

IF Sanger is indeed a "Qanon cultist" then I will pay little heed to Sanger's statements. But I need to see good quality EVIDENCE for the "Qanon cultist" claim. And that evidence hasn't been forthcoming. Insofar as I have observed we're just seeing evidence-free anti-Sanger POV-pushing.

Present appropriate evidence and I'll become anti-Sanger too. I'm waiting.

I am trying to eat breakfast...