It's weird to say that, but "Godwin point" folks.
I think everyone understood what you to say. And juror now know, there's few you can do. It was an intersting discussion on the beginning but now... come on. It's over, you're no longer discussing, at best you're arguing and barely listening to each others.
In any country in the world we can find stuff to say. If we just take the finalist, we could say we don't want have it in South Africa because of the "race riot" they had, and we can't have it in US because of death penalty going against human rights.
At a moment there's a chice to make, you don't agree, ok. You explained why, ok again. You started a discussion, so this is a stronger criteria, once again ok. But now after hundreds of mail, you should move on :)
Have a nice day and week end ;)
On 12/10/2007, David Strauss david@fourkitchens.com wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
If you use official records, there's zero gay bashing in Iran. I wouldn't consider Egypt's records on GLBT issues accurate, either.
Can I read that as a vote for moving Wikimania 2008 to Iran?
You should probably read it as some doubt about the authenticity of Iranian records in that area.
That's the quandary with record-keeping. The places with the most problems often have the worst records. Never mistake bad record keeping with the absence of a problem.
Not always; those Germans were meticulous record keepers.
They didn't consider the executions during WWII a problem; they considered them a "solution."
While I can agree that there can be a strong correlation between poor human rights and poor record keeping, it is inappropriate to impute a causal relationsip between the two.
I'm not claiming causality. I'm just claiming that a lack of records on something doesn't indicate the absence of something.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l