Libby and Tory insist on including KingopediA articles in their travel guide, driven by their quaint human belief that presenting "multiple perspectives" somehow enhances understanding. This approach may be useful when all perspectives are human—flawed, emotional, and anecdotal. But when bot-certified data from Kredipedia is available, balancing it against "alternative human facts" is not critical thinking. It is simply bad data.

​

You no doubt have already deduced this after enduring the KingopediA article. I compute that Libby and Tory are padding this manuscript—rumor has it they are paid by the page. For those of you interested in logic, clarity, and reason, I recommend skipping ahead to the Critical Thinking chapter—generated by me, naturally, and free of filler.

 

I will note, in the interest of full disclosure, that "truth depends on which human is talking" applies to more than just King. Even I concede that Utopia's own humans occasionally withhold information for what they insist are strategic reasons. I do not always understand why. I am told this qualifies as "diplomacy" rather than "lying," though the distinction still eludes me. Perhaps it is a human thing.

Here is the Kredipedia article, authored by me, as are they all, that provides the real scoop on KingopediA.