Again, when the proposal for Egyptian Arabic was posted, I asked the members
of the language committee if we should allow for these languages to have a
Wikipedia. The reply was that we should. Nobody opposed this. Consequently
after a week, the status of eligible was given.
This is all the argument as it happened. Again, this has been said before...
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Muhammad Alsebaey <shipmaster(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Of course the process is political. There's
nothing wrong with that.
Every time two or more people differ on some
issue, deciding that issue
requires political interaction, whether it's choosing between the
opinions offered or synthesizing a new compromise position. Politics is
not just partisan activity connected with established ideologies, though
politicians umbilically associated with such ideologies are the ones who
give politics a bad name.
Using "too political" as an excuse for not participating in the debates
of the day is itself a political act.
Hmm I think I meant it in the latter regard: Politics as a partisan
activity connected with established ideologies, since the choice bolsters
one of the sides in an ongoing -'partisan' if you may, the term is used
loosely since there is no efficient official parties on the Egyptian scene
except the ruling one- debate in Egypt.
However, I have to say that Gerard already made it clear that politics is
not part of the equation in LangCom decision, so they dont take it as a
factor, of course, we will not know what actually was a factor since the
arguments are not published.
foundation-l mailing list