Dovi Jacobs schreef:
I suggest the following:
Wikimedia is committed to free software and free content: All of our projects are provided "free as in beer" and licensed to be used freely (as in "free speech"). We are also committed to "free speech" in the traditional sense, namely that fear or threats of censorship will not be allowed to interfere with the development of any existing or proposed Wikimedia project."
If I understand you correctly, you say that Wikimedia projects shouldn't be censored in any way. But isn't censorship a very important part of (at least) Wikipedia? Since all POV remarks in articles are consistently removed. We only allow NPOV contributions. Isn't that censorship as well?
Sincerely, Fruggo
Fruggo (fruggo@gmail.com) [050504 05:55]:
If I understand you correctly, you say that Wikimedia projects shouldn't be censored in any way. But isn't censorship a very important part of (at least) Wikipedia? Since all POV remarks in articles are consistently removed. We only allow NPOV contributions. Isn't that censorship as well?
I so need to write [[Crushing by autofellatio]] for Uncyclopedia.
- d.
Fruggo wrote:
If I understand you correctly, you say that Wikimedia projects shouldn't be censored in any way. But isn't censorship a very important part of (at least) Wikipedia? Since all POV remarks in articles are consistently removed. We only allow NPOV contributions. Isn't that censorship as well?
I think when people equate the concept "editorial judgment" with "censorship" they destroy both concepts.
--Jimbo
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org