Talk:South America

Thoughts anyone?

Ok, so I'm hesitant to change the contents of the South America article. I know - and I'd be willing to bet most Knoxians know - that South America is not considered a region of Mexico and that more than "certain liberal intellectuals" claim it is a continent, as the article currently states. But would changing that so that it is purely a factual entry go against the spirit of the WikiFire?

I don't want to get into a war of changes with someone. But I'm not sure what to do. Option 1: Leave the inaccuracies intact. Option 2: Change the inaccuracies and risk starting a war of changes with whoever wants to claim South America is considered a region of Mexico. Thoughts?

Bill M. 23:16, 31 October 2007 (CDT)

Jesus Fucking Christ. It's not that complicated. The idea that South America is a region of Mexico is satire in regards to the fact that most Americans call all Latinos "Mexicans." To anyone who is smart enough to get into Knox College (I would hope) it is obvious that South America is a continent. If we've lowered our standards so much that this is in doubt, Jesus Fucking Christ help us. There are a lot of factual inaccuracies on WikiFire. Just off the top of my head, article Alcoholism, which says that no one of college age is an alcoholic. This is untrue. But it is an expression of the Knox zeitgeist. WikiFire is not a substitute for Wikipedia. If some stupid asshole is dumb enough not be familiar with what "South America" is, it isn't WikiFire's obligation to correct them.

It's called irony, dumbass.

hmmm ... this hostility is frightening. I mean, this page would be much more useful if it addressed how the Knox community and South America interact with eachother, but until someone wants to write about that, I don't think it really matters if the page is factual. So, basically, someone who went to a South American program or someone from South America should write something useful. Then this won't really be a problem ... Tfooq 17:42, 1 November 2007 (CDT)

Excuse my hostility, it's just that I have an allergy to every word that Bill Mayeroff writes. Like a peanut allergy, it's not a problem that exists fundamentally with the peanut or the individual with the peanut allergy. But it seems somehow that any time Billymax85 puts Romanesque characters in any sequence that are supposed to represent actual human thought, I feel the need to retch. Usually, I am able to control this impulse. If this were not the case, I would have sent in a 500-1000 word response to every single issue of TKS last year by virtue of its general reporting as well as Billy's own editorials. I managed to show restraint. However I could not control myself in this instance. Apologies!

In summary of my general position: if you want to scour WikiFire of all its factual inaccuracies, than you can count on losing about 35% of your information. Just so you know. Get your priorities in order.