Replacements for Firefox and Thunderbird?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 18:24:05 -0800, rikona wrote:
>post the ORIGINAL DOCUMENT(S)

AFAIK one of the issues with Wikipedia is, that folk memory is not
available by any documents, there are no written evidences available.
It's not a world encyclopedia, it's an encyclopedia of a small part of
the world. Often history wasn't written down, it's told from one to the
next generation. An example is the history of South Africa. The history
written down is the history of white colonialist, it's not the history
of native Africans. A few days ago there was a documentation about this
issue on the television under German public law. It most likely is an
unbiased documentation. I'm unhappy that I missed it and will watch a
rerun, if possible.

The Big Bang is a theory, a guess, an opinion. What is the Bible's
creation story? Some call it a myth, other call it the truth. So even
by posting original documents, there's enough headroom for meaningless
blah-blah and hate. You only rule out folk memory points of view, that
are most likely as vague as the Big Ban theory and the Bible, but
perhaps more entertaining.

Which documents are accepted? I've got a link at hand that underpins,
that Jesus likes [snip], even more, that [snip] is like
Jesus. The source are facts or hate (it lies in the eye of the
beholder) provided by "biased people". [snip] is a very rich person, so
those "biased people" might never have heard from the "eye of a needle"
metaphor. This is like a pointless flame war easily could start,
underpinned with documents.

The lesson is clear:

- folk memory could be interesting, but you can't back up what you say,
  it could be a blatant lie

- documents, are documents, are... Paper doesn't blush. Documents could
  be wrong, at least the content could be mistaken