zlacker

Definitely not an encyclopedia that is supposed to be objective.

>>txcwg0+(OP)
When you grow up to be an adult, you will understand that "objectivity"is a fiction.

And an encyclopedia can absolutely do that and still present factual information based on actual research and facts.

You know that just because a lady has blue hair or a person has colored skin does NOT mean that they can't be right about something or do good research. Right? You do know it, right?

Because in the end, when you cry about DEI (whatever you believe it to mean), this is the implication that comes with it: that you can't imagine for a second that anyone who doesn't look exactly like you could ever do anything competently. I genuinely wonder if you've ever thought about that for more than half a second after you closed that Charlie Kirk video.

If you do believe it, fair enough. I guess you're allowed to believe it. But at least be honest about it.

>>txcwg0+(OP)
How do you think you can reach anything close to objectivity without aiming for diversity and inclusion? What do you think will happen to an encyclopaedia which is mostly run by Elon fans? We already had that at one of the extremes (and the echos are still here) from the time medicine just didn't bother to study women.