(CNN takes a look at the ‘wonder’ of Wikipedia’s WikiTrust)

For those of you still stuck in 2003, Wikipedia has released its super-uber “WikiTrust” system for use on all its platform. The  color-coded system will show readers how much Wikipedia trusts the content. The longer the content stays on the page, the more Wikipedia trusts the content, the lighter the color gets around the content. The more Wikipedia trusts the editor, the quicker the editor’s content is trusted.

A blend of Amazon, DMoz, Digg and even Google’s trust systems.

C-HO Mesothelioma Rating: 5 out of 10

Wikipedia continues to try to compete with his older brother, Britannica. Despite all its accomplishments, instead of accepting the fact that it will never be a resource that can be used in news stories and academic works, Wikipedia continues to fight for validity.

And Wikipedia is trying to tighten the reins on its users with procedures. Such procedures create factions. Ask Digg users. If they aren’t liked by the 200-300 members of Digg’s “inner circle,”  their stories never make it to the front of the page no matter how good they are.

And because Wikipedia is using a Google-ish algorithm and trust, the content will be more about how to optimize for Wikipedia than it will be about the content.

So, scamming Wikipedia to get your content a “clear color” will be a little bit Google and a little bit Digg.

1) Build up quality content. Wikipedia tracks their editors content and edits. A good solid history will help your edits. As mentioned before, long-time editors already have this point covered.

2) Get good editors to look over your content. Like Google’s Page Rank, if you get good editors to look over and validate your content your content will be quicker to clear content.

3) Find good editors. Why wait for good editors to find the content when you can (gasp) pay for it? Not every Wikipedia editor is an altruist. Some make a living off of it. Put an add in Craigslist and see what happens.

4) Think twice before giving a sh*t about WikiTrust. Ask yourself, “Is Wikipedia worth the time of day to p*ss about?” WIth DMoz, you can get a backlink. With Digg, you can get backlinks once they trust you. But with Wikipedia, they horde all their Page Rank.

In its attempt to because a trusted academic resource, Wikipedia is creating fraternalization – creating division. If Wikipedia wants to be Britannica, Wikipedia should structure its platform more around Britannica. If Wikipedia wants to keep their platform as an open collective, Wikipedia will have to keep watchdogging the content instead of hoping a system will do it for them.

I’ve recently become aware of a product that redefines awful.  This product is a spin-off from a recognized and beloved brand.  This new product spits in the face of the brand from which it was spawned.  And then it violently sodomizes that brand.

I’m talking, of course, about Chocolate Skittles.

a rather unassuming package...until you realize it contains pure, unfiltered evil.

First, it’s important to recognize the problem with the concept of Chocolate Skittles.  Skittles exist in the candy universe primarily to be an alternative to chocolate.  They are the fruity, chewy yin to the crispy chocolate yang of M&M’s.  For over 30 years, they have embraced and thrived in that role, helping to maintain the delicate balance of CandyLand.  The idea that Skittles can, or should, successfully cross over into the realm of chocolate runs contrary to everything Skittles stand for.  Chocolate Skittles are essentially Hybrid Hummer’s or Gin-less Tonic, i.e. things that can not occur naturally in the world and could only have come into existence through the actions of a demented and sadistic individual, or candy conglomerate.

Eventually, I was able to accept and overcome the gross hypocrisy that allows Chocolate Skittles to exist at all.  However, it is at that point that I was forced to take on the second, more sinister, force that works against the mainstream success of Chocolate Skittles: the taste.
They offer the sensation of eating tiny, vile, candy-coated bits of pure evil.
Chocolate Skittles are the edible (allegedly) incarnation of hatred, pedophilia and pestilence.

Perhaps that description is too abstract.

Instead, I’ll describe the production process:

Chocolate Skittles begin as a long, thin Tootsie Roll, which is sliced into many pea-size pieces.  Then those pieces of Tootsie Roll travel down an assembly line.  The first stop is the Monkey Room, where a team of Ebola-infected monkeys with open wounds drips deadly filovirus-infused rain onto the candy bits.  Next, it’s on to the Orphanorium, where the viral candy is stewed for six hours in the fresh tears of orphans who have just returned from “confession” with their local Vatican-approved benefactors.  After a ten minute pause in the cooling rack, it’s on to the final stage of production: the Mesothelioma Chamber.  This is where the candy pieces are covered in their colorful asbestos shells and stamped with the “S,” for Shit, by which they are best known.  After rolling through another cooling stage, the candies are finally ready to be packaged and shipped, and ultimately consumed by unsuspecting children around the world.

It has been rumored that Chocolate Skittles are actually a bio-terror attack on the American people by Hank Steinbrenner as revenge for forcing his pitchers to bat and run the bases in interleague games, but those rumors have not yet been confirmed.
No matter who the evil mastermind behind these tiny bits of candied hell may be, it is highly recommended that Chocolate Skittles be avoided at all costs.

C-HO Mesothelioma Rating: 5.5 out of 10.