RIP Dictionaries, long live Wikipedia

[Immanuel Can]

Since I don't know what you mean by "proof". You were going to tell me...

Already did. I said it's whatever YOU mean by "proof."

Show what you've got, Ace, or pack it in.

[Skepdick]

Already did. I said it's whatever YOU mean by "proof."

Show what you've got, Ace, or pack it in.

I don't mean anything by it. You introduced the word into the conversation...

It's your word. You don't go around making words up, do you?

Tell me what you expect from me when you are commanding me to "Prove it".

[Immanuel Can]

Already did. I said it's whatever YOU mean by "proof."
Show what you've got, Ace, or pack it in.

Tell me what you expect from me when you are commanding me to "Prove it".

I mean, "Show me what you think you've got." That's unrestricted, and doesn't depend on what I think your 'proof' should be. It only depends on what you think it actually IS.

Again, show what you think you've got...or it's pretty clear you've got nothing that even you can identify, which is more likely how it actually is.

[Skepdick]

I mean, "Show me what you think you've got." That's unrestricted, and doesn't depend on what I think your 'proof' should be. It only depends on what you think it actually IS.

Well, If it only depends on me then I don't think proof is anything more than what I have already shown you.

If you want more then tell me what you want. What are you asking for when you ask for "proof"?

Help me help you.

[Immanuel Can]

Already did. I said it's whatever YOU mean by "proof."

Show what you've got, Ace, or pack it in.

I don't mean anything by it. You introduced the word into the conversation...

You did, actually. You said "better," which implies you have criteria. So give me your criteria...

Never mind. I know you had nothing, and were wrong in the first place. I don't need you to acknowledge it, and I know you won't.

So I'll save myself the time.

[Skepdick]

You did, actually. You said "better," which implies you have criteria. So give me your criteria...

Never mind. I know you had nothing, and were wrong in the first place. I don't need you to acknowledge it, and I know you won't.

You don't have such a criterion? How then have you determined that God is better than Satan?

It would be pretty awkward if you got it backwards.

So I'll save myself the time.

Thank you for sparing us any further idiocy.

[Immanuel Can]

You did, actually. You said "better," which implies you have criteria. So give me your criteria...

Never mind. I know you had nothing, and were wrong in the first place. I don't need you to acknowledge it, and I know you won't.

You don't have such a criterion?

No: apparently, you don't. Apparently, you think "better" means no more than "I like it." I wasn't expecting much, and I got less than I thought I would out of you.

[Skepdick]

No: apparently, you don't. Apparently, you think "better" means no more than "I like it."

I gladly accept your offer to prove that your better is better than my better.

Prove that God is better than Satan.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

You could do with a dictionary instead of a McDikshinry because you can't spell 'sceptic' (if that was your intention).

[Immanuel Can]

No: apparently, you don't. Apparently, you think "better" means no more than "I like it."

I gladly accept your offer to prove that your better is better than my better.

I made no such offer, and am wasting no more time on you.

[attofishpi]

Why do I get the feeling you are waiting for an AHA! moment?

I don't know why you get the feelings that you get. You probably know yourself better than I know you.

What I am waiting for is an answer to my question: Is the entry on democracy in Wikipedia qualitatively better than the entry on democracy in the Oxford dictionary?

Yeah, although I respect British standards, I am going to have to side with Skeppy on this, even though from what I have read he has not addressed WHY, his point is important.

WIKI_P:- is a developing ENCYCLOPEDIA. On the whole its content, though modifiable, is scrutinised apparently volunteers - as well as - peers, who could be specialists in a particular field. So it is a beautiful ongoing flux database of wo.mans knowledge.

THAT is important. (although it could contradict his point if we fail to maintain what 'democracy' ACTUALLY is)

I was on the internet in the early 90s. Whenever I attempted to research NE thing - I ended up with sales pitches for books on the subject, rather than actual information.
So, I LOVE wikipedia - I tend to give them donations when asked - I don't want advertising; although I got rather annoyed when they stated they wanted more money - via an email, and they stated the amount I had donated - rather less than the actual amount, which was likely my fault sort of, because i use multiple email addresses.
In a short email exchange i told them, fine, 'not for profit' SURE, but i understand that employees require payment for their work in maintaining wo/mans database - they insisted they want a repository for all, including those that can't afford it - to which I stated, if people don't donate, put ads for those people....they did not agree.
Mmm.

Who wants to bet that some point in future time, there WILL be ads and some subs based non-ad side to this 'not for profit' org?

btw, i told my nephew off when he stated he changed Brad Pitts birthday to sometime in the 1800s - my response - I don't want to waste my donation money on them having to fix shit like that!

The main thing is, perhaps VT will agree, is that 'US-English' v English spelling should at the minimum be optional in ALL software platforms.

NB:- this website for example, an English based Philosophy forum, using generic PHP code - spell checked 'US English' - F.O. it wouldn't be particularly difikult to implement code to permit the CORRECT English spell check..

[Skepdick]

I made no such offer, and am wasting no more time on you.

So you don't think God is better than Satan then?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I made no such offer, and am wasting no more time on you.

So you don't think God is better than Satan then?

The question makes no sense. 'Better' in what way? The word is meaningless on its own. Is the sun better than the moon? Is green better than blue?

[Skepdick]

The question makes no sense. 'Better' in what way?

Better in the sense of "What if I had to choose between options?"

The word is meaningless on its own.

Which is why I am not using it on its own. There's context.

Is Wikipedia better at elucidating the meaning of "democracy" than a dictionary?
Is God a better moral choice than Satan?

Is the sun better than the moon? Is green better than blue?

It depends.

In what context would I have to choose between those options?