-----Original Message----- From: David Gerard [mailto:dgerard@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 08:26 AM To: 'English Wikipedia', 'Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List', 'Wikimedia Commons Discussion List' Subject: [WikiEN-l] Publishing group hires 'Pit Bull of PR' to fight open access
(courtesy Mathias Schindler)
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/0,1518,462845,00.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/25/AR2007012501... http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070122/full/445347a.html
Now, is there anything WMF can do to advocate free content? Is that political or entirely in accordance with our goals? Or what can individuals do?
- d.
From the Washington Post article:
"But there is a potential downside to hiring the likes of Dezenhall: If word gets out, you stand to be seen as on the ropes and willing to do anything to win."
Fred
On 29/01/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
From the Washington Post article: "But there is a potential downside to hiring the likes of Dezenhall: If word gets out, you stand to be seen as on the ropes and willing to do anything to win."
They ignored us, they laughed at us, now they're fighting us?
*ahem*
When I describe Commons to journalists, I say "we're not Getty Images yet, but we hope to be, once we get a search function that doesn't suck ..."
(Regular people don't know how significant a statement that is. Journalists understand that's the picture equivalent of Wikipedia replacing Britannica.)
- d.
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, David Gerard wrote:
They ignored us, they laughed at us, now they're fighting us?
It isn't hard to think of a bunch of real-world situations where someone was ignored, laughed at, fought with... and then lost.
Beware of argument by slogan, even if the slogan comes from Gandhi.