"Dark concepts"? Really? As encyclopedists, it is rarely our job to judge, rather we are here to document from a neutral point of view. Please remember that "darkness" is subjective, I'm sure there are practices you consider "dark" that I do not and probably vice-versa.
Anyhow, David Goodman said "those who support censorship are obviously not going to be our sources of funding", NOT "we will gladly accept funds from anybody who is opposed to censorship".
Mark
On 8/3/09, stevertigo stvrtg@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:24 PM, David Goodmandgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
I'm pleased to accept the epithet. Pro-freedom dogmatist describes me nicely with respect to many areas of life, including both sexuality and access to information. I think it comes close to describing most of the people at Wikipedia in matters of personal life and of information.
I agree with access to information - and further concede that shining light on dark concepts helps to destroy them. I agree also with pro-freedom concepts, though I must ask that you concede my point that being "dogmatic" is not as good as being intelligent. And that's not to mention that "dogmatists" will often do more damage to their cause than help.
Those who support censorship are obviously not going to be our sources of funding.
Well we did turn down that NAMBLA funding for *some reason - was it because they were not "pro-freedom?"
- Stevertigo
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l