Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

The Red Pill

The observant among you would have noticed today a new link added to the navigation bar (beneath the logo), to something called ‘The Red Pill‘ (redpill.dailygrail.com). This is the first of our new additions to the site – in this case, a Wiki devoted to all subjects on the stranger side of reality (hence the Matrix-referenced title).

A Wiki is, by definition, a community driven knowledge base – so whether this is a useful resource is completely up to you guys. Get in there and contribute articles on any topics, people or places which interest you. For those new to the Wiki process, take a quick browse of our help file and jump right in (alternately, click the ‘Edit this page’ tab on something like my article on The Solomon Key and see the basics).

There is no such thing as a small contribution – even a three word description is a start to an article, and one which others are likely to build upon. So get in there, and add your two cents. I’ll be adding things regularly, so help me out!

Edit: For those wondering why we decided to start this Wiki, instead of adding our articles to Wikipedia – The Red Pill is a direct result of Wikipedia’s stated desire to not list theories which have not been peer-reviewed, or articles on ‘non-notables’ (a truly subjective term). We thought we’d offer all those rogue ideas and individuals a home…

Editor
  1. Wiki
    One thing I’ve never understood about Wiki is if it’s a first come, first served kind of deal? If somebody has already posted an article about the Dropa Disks for example, does this mean you can’t post your own article (even if the first one is poorly written, and factually wrong)? What’s the etiquette for this?

    With my novels, TDG, and Sub Rosa already on my to-do list, I’ll be needing a few red pills ….

    Ricki Wiki

    1. All in
      Hi Riki,

      No, it’s not first come, first served – wiki articles continually evolve and can be edited and added to by anyone, regardless of who first posted. There is also a history of the edits, so if someone decides to delete all the good stuff and put up some absolute crud, you can roll the changes back to the previous version.

      In fact, it should be pointed out that there is definitely no ‘ownership’ of articles, purely on the reason that all entries should be objective, and not a presentation of an individual’s personal feelings about a subject.

      Wikis rely purely on the strength of the community – their summed knowledge, their goodwill, and their ability to correct and steer articles towards the most objective and helpful version.

      I expect to see that Dropa Disks article up by tomorrow by the way…
      😉

      Peace and Respect
      Greg
      ——————————————-
      You monkeys only think you’re running things

      1. Re: All in
        Ah, I see. I’ll check out Wikipedia, and see how it’s been done in regards to add-ons and editing. Objectivity is the key, and I hope folks post information, facts, evidence and theories, rather than opinions and beliefs. I’m sure there’s room for a little subjectivity, depending on the topic itself. You’re a braver man than I, Greg, but I’m confident this is going to be successful. Most contributors will put the info before their ego.

        [quote=Greg]I expect to see that Dropa Disks article up by tomorrow by the way… [/quote]

        Sir, yes sir! I wasn’t planning on sleeping tonight, anyways … 😉

        Riki (who used to be called Wiki by his little sister many years ago)

        1. hey Rico…..
          you hope folks can only post FACTS……hhmmmm, does that mean something that is an absolute????
          Information is found in an encyclopedia, isn’t it???
          Evidence…..well, if there was evidence on only half of what TDG hosts, then I don’t think there would be a need for a site like this.
          Theories…..this is interesting, personal theories could border on opinion……..or would you like us to stick with the mainstream theories?????

          DISCLAIMER: the opinions and veiws in this post are mine only and are not those of others or of TDG. Any similarities are by chance only.

          1. What???
            It’s pretty simple. Don’t post a theory/opinion as fact/truth. Be objective and unbiased.

            As for “personal theories” … er, they’re opinions, Flop. 😉 For opinions to be theories, you need to present evidence to back-up your claims. If you can’t do that, then you can’t be taken seriously.

            If I’m capable of objective journalism, then anyone can do it. 😉

            I’m cautious, and a little pessimistic. All I’m saying is I’m a wee bit hesitant to trust unknowns to be objective when posting articles. I hope everyone does the right thing. Just because we’re all several degrees removed from the mainstream doesn’t mean we all get along, and that we’re all correct in our opinions. I’ve seen some nasty stuff on other message boards. It’s my hope that the Red Pill will be largely free of egotistical conflicts and prostelytising. We can surely agree to disagree, leave our opinions at the door, and act like mature, objective journalists. I hope!

            Right, I need to do some more work, then get some sleep. My eyes are falling out of my head. Prove me wrong, Flop, and make the Red Pill work. It’s only as good as our contributions.

          2. slim picken’s
            DISCLAIMER: the opinions and veiws in this post are mine only and are not those of others or of TDG. Any similarities are by chance only.

          3. Ok..sorry Rico
            that was probably a bit obscure….how about……you can’t swim the ocean if you stay in the net!

            DISCLAIMER: the opinions and veiws in this post are mine only and are not those of others or of TDG. Any similarities are by chance only.

          4. LOL
            Heheh, I know what you’re talking about Floppy. And deep within my sleep-deprived brain I think I agree with you.

            I’m just being overtly cautious. Probably irrationally cautious. But that’s me, I’m cautious. Which is why I never get anything done. So ignore my worrying, and just post articles regardless of my Marge Simpson-like noises of concern — theories, facts, opinions, beliefs, anything. I’ll just have to learn to trust that contributors and readers are smart enough to work it all out for themselves and do the right thing. 😉

            Gods help my kids, if I ever have any …

            Goodnight, and sweet dreams.

          5. Re: What???
            [quote=Rico]As for “personal theories” … er, they’re opinions, Flop. 😉 For opinions to be theories, you need to present evidence to back-up your claims. If you can’t do that, then you can’t be taken seriously.[/quote]

            Not quite. As per Wikipedia’s recommendations:

            It’s OK to state opinions in articles, but they must be presented as opinions, not as fact. Also, it’s a good idea to attribute these opinions, for example “Supporters of this say that…” or “Notable commentator X believes that…

            I don’t think The Red Pill will be in a position to offer evidence to back up all facts. It’s just meant as a catalogue/knowledge base of these things on the stranger side of reality. The main point is not to proselytise with your own point of view. Set out the point of view you agree with, but also set out all the other views which you aren’t crazy about (and without saying “these idiots believe…”).
            😉

            Peace and Respect,
            Greg

          6. Hrmmm
            So that means I’m wrong? Oh well, I can live with that. It’s not the first time I’ve been wrong! Thanks for setting me straight, Greg. 😉

            I think I swallowed the wrong coloured pill last night …

  2. A step forward.
    Outstanding! May TRP be the proverbial candle held in the dark of the unknown. Perhaps illumination will spread amongst the net.

    ” There is no Religion higher than the Truth. “

  3. Re-inventing the wheel?
    I appreciate that a lot of work has gone into creating The Red Pill and as a web developer myself I realise that this type of work is driven by the creator’s enthusiasm and desire for people around the globe to utilise their PCs for something more than simply browsing.

    However, I can’t help but ask why we need this information localised to TRP rather than presenting it to a more global audience at wikipedia.com, which is probably where most people with a question on a related subject would visit.

    I don’t want to upset those who’ve devoted hours or days to getting TRP operational, but is this a case of re-inventing the wheel?

    1. We don’t have a choice.
      Simple. As it’s been stated earlier, Wikipedia isn’t in the business of covering fringe-reality. Do you know why? They left it up to the experts. ;-D

      ” There is no Religion higher than the Truth. “

      1. A global perspective
        >>Wikipedia isn’t in the business of covering fringe-reality.

        But the whole point of Wikipedia is that you can put anything you want on it. Wikipedia doesn’t have a defined coverage; its coverage spreads as far as your imagination.

        Why start up another open and social source of information on the web when there already is one which, by its very nature, is open and community-driven.

        The only difference between uploading your entry on subject x to The Red Pill or to Wikipedia is that the latter will have a much larger audience.

        Also, given that the majority of people who will visit TRP will most likely be of a similar mindset (coming from TDG), TRP may end up with an overly liberal view point.

        I’m not suggesting we invite neo-cons to contribute, but ideally you want as wide and varied opinions as you can get and this is something that comes from having the widest possible audience.

        What I’m trying to say is that by presenting the information on a TDG-derived site we may perhaps – dare I say it – present a slightly jaundiced perspective rather than the ideal global perspective.

        “I don’t know, I can imagine quite a bit” – Han Solo

        1. Preaching to the Converted?
          Hrmmm, I can see your point Andrew. It could be a case of preaching to the converted. It’s still in the early stages though, and Greg said that it’s more a place to archive stuff he’s interested in, but if it takes off like Wikipedia, then that’s an added bonus. We’ll see how Google runs with it too.

          Time will tell.

          Rick

    2. Unfortunately, Greg felt the
      Unfortunately, Greg felt the need to reinvent the wheel, and the entire wagon — the topics TDG covers can no longer hitch a ride on the Wiki wagon. Wikipedia has been seriously editing, censoring, and often deleting, the many subjects TDG deals with. Whether the Wikipedia creators are trying to be taken seriously by the mainstream, for commercial or academic success, or other “experts” and authorities are dictating to Wikipedia what they can and can’t print … either way, alternative theories and information (some of it not even that far removed from the mainstream) isn’t getting a fair hearing on Wikipedia.

      One glaring example is the entry on Graham Hancock. Skeptics dictated what kind of information was posted on Wikipedia about Hancock, and fair, objective and unbiased entries were edited, censored and in a few cases deleted and seriously harassed. Entries on Pseudoscience were similarly corrupted by biased, unfair harassment. It became a soapbox for heavily biased debunkers and skeptics, and anyone who attempted to create a fair and balanced entry were bullied and harassed, and their entry edited or deleted.

      Considering that Wikipedia was created with the intent of free information, and that no one has the right to limit, edit or censor this information … unfortunately Wikipedia has reneged on much of its potential. It’s still a great resource for many things, but on topics such as those the Daily Grail covers, biased bullies have taken over.

      Thus, the Red Pill was born. A place where information is free (so long as it’s fair, objective and unbiased). The Red Pill will be for the alternative what Wikipedia is for the mainstream. It’s up to us, the contributors, to ensure it is a fair and balanced resource, and that we don’t stoop to the same level as the boorish debunkers who bully any they disagree with on Wikipedia.

      Right. Sleep. Goodnight.

        1. Wacky Wiki
          Don’t get me wrong, Wikipedia is a fantastic resource and concept. But there’s been a few things gone wrong lately, the most worrying example being the entries on Graham Hancock and pseudoarchaeology. A few other alternative topics have received the same treatment.

          You can read some reactions and opinions to the Wiki entries at Graham Hancock’s website here. Graham Hancock himself has some interesting things to say about it all (he still supports Wikipedia, for example). Especially this post.

          I think your concerns are valid, Andrew. It’s really up to us to make sure the Red Pill works well. I guess we’ll see in the near future!

          Best wishes,

          Rick

        2. What Rick said
          Hi AndrewJ,

          Thanks for the comments. As Rick, pointed out, the reason The Red Pill was conceived of was exactly because Wikipedia started clamping down on ‘fringe’ issues. The Graham Hancock issue was a case in point. I also witnessed the entry on Walter Cruttenden’s ‘Binary Precession Theory’ being removed from the site because it was not ‘notable’ enough.

          To quote Wikipedia ‘s own words:

          Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Hence, articles should be encyclopedic information about “notable” subjects. What exactly constitutes notability is the subject of constant debate on Wikipedia, but few of us believe that there should be articles about every person on Earth, every company that sells anything, or each street in every town in the world.

          This is also not the place for “original research”—that is, new theories, etc., that haven’t been supported by peer review.

          I’m a great supporter of Wikipedia, and I can understand their desire to move toward being an ‘orthodox encyclopedia’. However, my interest lies in exactly those topics which they now say they won’t cover – i.e. new theories which aren’t (yet, at least) supported by peer review. So I thought I would start a Wiki exactly with that goal. Whether people want to join in isn’t something I can control, but at the very minimum it will be a place for me to record my own ‘knowledge base’ on these topics.

          Peace and Respect
          Greg
          ——————————————-
          You monkeys only think you’re running things

  4. Folklore and Mythology
    I’d like to respectfully suggest that a category entitled “Folklore and Mythology” be added to “The Red Pill.” I feel it would be a good category in and of itself plus it would serve well for topics that don’t exactly fit in another category.

    I also want to point out that just because something is labeled folklore or mythology, it may still be true. For example, it is increasingly found that some folk remedies have great curative efficacy.

    – Hal Siemer
    Member: American Folklore Society
    Editor: Quest Magazine
    http://www.questmagazine.com

    1. Agreed
      I was thinking the same thing, Hal. A Folklore & Mythology section would be fantastic. There are already some great resources on the net for this (Encyclopedia Mythica being one), but I’d still like to see what we can do with it on the Red Pill. Folklore/Myth is a favourite of mine, so I look forward to what yourself and others can contribute.

      I’m currently thinking about connections between Japanese kami and Hopi/Pueblo kachinas. Flood myths ala Graham Hancock would be a good addition too, for example.

      Cheers,

      Rick

      1. Re: Folklore & Mythology
        Rick, like Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell, I think comparative analysis of myth is a great approach. Also, if “The Red Pill” were to launch a folklore and mythology section soon, Christmas traditions and customs could be discussed by looking at their pagan and Christian origins. If you’d like to discuss anything off-site, you can email me at editor@questmagazine.com .

        All the best,

        – Hal

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal