Anthony wrote:
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Steve Summit
<scs(a)eskimo.com> wrote:
You're entitled to your POV, but please
don't make it sound as if
those who don't share it are irrational.
It's not my intention to claim that anyone who doesn't share "my POV"
(whatever that means)
Your point of view is that supporting Wikipedia through
advertising would clearly and rationally be a win-win-win
situation. Many hold an opposing view. You label their view
as being irrationally based. I believe you are wrong to do so.
"Here's some stuff we give you
altruistically, out of the goodness
of our hearts, use it however you wish" would be an irrational
transaction in the first place.
How so? (It's what *I* do, and I'm one of the most rational
people I know.)
Incidentally, I wonder how you reconcile the position
that this
"stuff" is to use "however you wish" with the fact that you are
arguing to restrict its use to only ad-free uses.
This is a preposterous and meaningless allegation. When I say
that anyone is free to use my altruistically-donated content
however they wish, that includes using it to make money.
I'm not insisting that they don't use advertising; I'm insisting
that I (and, by extension, the rest of the so-minded Wikipedia
community) don't besmirch our altruism by doing so.