Three points:

When I first saw the document, I was exceedingly unhappy, but fortuitously, I was unable to respond at the time due to RL travel. Fortuitous, because my writeup would have been a pale version of Risker's excellent response, so if anyone hasn't managed to read all the posts on this subject, please make sure to read that one. In short, this is an exceedingly bad idea.

My small contribution is to make a positive point - I'm impressed at the number of people who observed that the content very much mirrored their own beliefs, yet they were adamant that this should not be a Wikimedia Foundation document. It might well be an award-winning presentation for some advocacy group, but it doesn't feel right for this Foundation. Some has asked what aspects are disconsonant with the Wikimedia Mission, but that's the wrong question. When one's prime directive is to "given free access to the sum of all human knowledge", almost by definition, no subject is "outside" our mission. It is a different question to determine which subjects best summarize our core mission.

Third, while this discussion has been most illuminating, I share the concerns of those who wonder where we go from here. I don't even know if we are viewing a draft, and there is a potential for change, or if it has already been finalized and we are merely evaluating the mistakes.

Sphilbrick