Overall, good. I'll also be blunt: the 'experiment' speculation at the end
handed her a very strong close for the end of the interview. Everyone's a
critic (and these things are so much easier to second guess after the fact),
yet if another interview such as this comes up it would make a stronger
finish to wonder how many other websites had been blocked by this
organization's dubious assessments without appeal, and ask whether they're
really qualified to play nanny to the public.
-Durova
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
On the radio
interview: I thought David sounded unfair, espousing some
unlikely conspiracy theories suggesting that the IWF chose Wikipedia for
any other reason than the fact that some disgruntled Wikipedian submitted
it to their tip box a few days ago.
The idea that they've blocked Wikipedia but not Amazon because Amazon
has more lawyers sounds pretty plausible to me (what else could they
mean by "pragmatic"?). I thought the bit about it being an experiment
sounded rather unlikely, I think it's far more likely that they just
didn't think about what they were doing and have now got themselves
stuck in a corner.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
http://durova.blogspot.com/