Talk:Technocracy Incorporated

Please do not add your opinion of Howard Scott to this article ... which you apparently source... but give no page number or chapter.. just refer to a book that is not well regarded as far as is known. Leaving a statement like this on the article A personality cult was built up around Scott. which you have written is borderline ridiculous. Please do not add that in again. Also tying a link to your group in the TechInc article is not a good idea... since you are not connected in any way.

This information is inappropriate,,, defaming... and based on information that was falsely put out by the Hearst Corporation and the New York Times to defame Scott.

Please do not add this information back in the article ''A personality cult was built up around Scott. However, discontent with Scott’s leadership lead to a split in the movement during the 1940s. The resulting break away group soon failed. Technocracy Inc. organised a large demonstration in 1947 but its membership began to decline. Scott remained as it leader and chief engineer until his death in 1970. The organisation still exists today and has its HQ in Ferndale, WA, USA.'' To include the defaming aspect of this you should find some real 3rd party confirmation... as it is it is demeaning and as far as I know... not accurate information....

Scott was never the object of a personality cult. Ones persons opinion ... and the way you have phased that material is denigrating to this person.

Also ... You appear to be spamming your book Isenhand editor here by listing your group as notable in context to TechInc.. which it is not... with multiple links in disconnected articles leading to the front end of this Technocracy wikia. NET is not notable in context with TechInc. NET is not part of the original group and not connected idea wise... does not share the same information... is not sanctioned by TechInc. TechInc goes out of its way to state that it is not connected to groups in Europe or elsewhere... that has been their policy since 1934. Trying to gain notability to the group of which you, as an editor here, are the administrator and Director of NET... and promoting your book which is self published and not notable in the main page article is not a good idea. You are in a conflict of interest. It appears you are creating information that leads in a circle to your self... your group... your self published and non notable information which is a commercial enterprise.

The above is biased information that conforms to your book ... in my opinion, your book is apparently sourced by two authors, which one made the comment about Scott ? You always repeatedly list two sources with no real information except to list these two books for every thing you seem to want to prove, the only ones you repeatedly use, that are unrelated to the actual information, and as far as I know... those books are not well regarded. You are using secondary sources mostly of these two books. You are defaming a person here. That is not neutral or a good idea. It appears your information is not correct. You have removed one of the best information links of the early history of Technocracy that is an official document from Technocracy Incorporated and not an opinion made by Scott, it is put out by Technocracy Incorporated... and written by Scott... but the organization ok'd the essay article. Here is the link http://www.technocracy.org/Archives/History%20&%20Purpose-r.htm

It would appear that you are filtering information in a walled garden of articles, or attempting to agree with information you present in your self published book, which you presented on the article page again... and which I have removed for one thing because you are in a conflict of interest... and it is not notable also. You are the Director of a group of about 8 bloggers... and an internet presence only... not a social movement as Technocracy Incorporated is and your group is not endorsed or affiliated with the original group in any way ... also... according to the public record of the finances of your group you have around 8 paying members (In other words you are not only not a social movement... you are claiming to be one, but have about 8 members, that is far from a notable group, really only an internet presence, and to associate yourself in the article here is not a good idea) and you are, contrary to the NET article a Profit group (your self published book sales fund your projects, along with calenders and music tapes)... or at least it says you are making a profit, with your pay pal etc many of the articles on the site you control are devoted to money making schemes

It is noted that the NET article here on wikia.. mentioned membership and open membership outside of Europe etc... which seems like spamming. Here is the public link of NETs finances and membership listed under NET ACCOUNTS... http://en.technocracynet.eu/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=43&Itemid=143 I think it is the second Pdf. there currently... it lists finances and expenses etc... again this is public information, which apparently was demanded by your very limited in number group members. By using the articles to this purpose, for your group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VSCA it is denigrating to the actual group of Technocracy Incorporated. To denigrate Howard Scott as you have done... and try to draw attention to your non notable opinion from your self published book and promote your group that is not connected in any way to the actual notable group... is really not a good idea. Please do not remove the link to History and Purpose of Technocracy. It is official information from the official site which is archived on the Technocracy Incorporated site. Also please do not post your self published and non notable book here again either. That is a conflict of interest. Even if it were posted by someone else, my opinion is that it should be removed as a vanity press book... it is not a good source of information. Here is the official Technocracy Incorporated site with the archived article on it. http://www.technocracy.org/ Tbonepickensetc 04:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)