"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(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:24 PM, David
Goodman<dgoodmanny(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l