On Sunday 25 August 2002 05:33 pm, you wrote:
Apart from this being utter nonsense (see e.g. http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar11.html for a discussion of these arguments), this most probably violates German Law (Paragraph 130(3) of our penal code, denial of genocide performed by the nazis).
It's time to stop her.
JeLuF
As a red blooded American I think that law is well intentioned but just ranks with anti-free speech totalitarian newspeak and probably does more to encourage Neo-Nazis and their ilk than to discourage them (punishing people just because they have certain views tends to make other people with similar views get the "us vs. them" mentality; which just strengthens their resolve and encourages ideas about "conspiracies" to "get them" that "must be stopped" = the law inadvertently creates a class of people actively opposed to the government when there were only various unrelated people with similar ideas before). We should therefore /not/ even begin to consider banning anyone just because they are breaking such a law.
However, we are trying to build a fact-based and neutral encyclopedia, so if we do /temporarily/ block Helga then the /only/ reason why is because she is a major drain on contributor resources and she is therefore harming the goals and progress of the project.
BTW, people should be able to say whatever they want in everyday life or their personal websites but if any of that is to be in a neutral and fact-based encyclopedia then it must be backed-up with evidence or highly qualified ("such and such says this, but others say that and yet others say the first two are wrong because...").
Oh, I didn't want to suggest to denounce her, I just don't want Jimbo to be arrested when occasionally entering Germany ...
Regards,
JeLuF
Well intentioned reasoning -- the last thing we need is Jimbo behind bars ;). Is this at all a possibility in German law? In the US Jimbo is protected by the fact that he is technically the ISP of wikipedia and therefore has limited liability on what users of his ISP do (not to mention 1st Amendment protections that protect both him and users of his ISP). There is also the German Wikipedia to consider -- I somehow get the feeling that the German Wikipedia is just filled with her nonsense propaganda (smaller project = fewer contributors who can successfully confront and debunk her "work" = Helga has much more power to get her way).
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Daniel Mayer wrote:
We should therefore /not/ even begin to consider banning anyone just because they are breaking such a law.
I agree completely. Since the servers are in the U.S. and since I am in the U.S. and it's impossible to come up with ideas that are illegal to express here, I see no particular reason to even think about such things. Individual contributors living in countries with restrictions on political speech may have their own concerns, of course.
I actually hope people will write things in the encyclopedia that are illegal in some parts of the world. As long as it's NPOV, that's great. I'm sure that there are some simple NPOV facts that are illegal to express in China, and I hope that they can be expressed in a Mandarin Wikipedia.
Well intentioned reasoning -- the last thing we need is Jimbo behind bars ;).
:-) Well, I'd love to visit Germany someday, but I don't think they'll throw me in jail for anything that Helga does.
--Jimbo
On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 12:19:17PM -0700, Daniel Mayer wrote:
On Sunday 25 August 2002 05:33 pm, you wrote:
Apart from this being utter nonsense (see e.g. http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar11.html for a discussion of these arguments), this most probably violates German Law (Paragraph 130(3) of our penal code, denial of genocide performed by the nazis).
It's time to stop her.
JeLuF
As a red blooded American I think that law is well intentioned but just ranks with anti-free speech totalitarian newspeak and probably does more to encourage Neo-Nazis and their ilk than to discourage them (punishing people just because they have certain views tends to make other people with similar views get the "us vs. them" mentality; which just strengthens their resolve and encourages ideas about "conspiracies" to "get them" that "must be stopped" = the law inadvertently creates a class of people actively opposed to the government when there were only various unrelated people with similar ideas before). We should therefore /not/ even begin to consider banning anyone just because they are breaking such a law.
The law considers denying of the holocaust as an insultation of the dead. Insulting someone is not protected by the right of free speech, AFAIK that's the same in the US.
However, we are trying to build a fact-based and neutral encyclopedia, so if we do /temporarily/ block Helga then the /only/ reason why is because she is a major drain on contributor resources and she is therefore harming the goals and progress of the project.
Agreed.
BTW, people should be able to say whatever they want in everyday life or their personal websites but if any of that is to be in a neutral and
DMCA. Your political system decided that telling someone the way how to remove copyright protection is against the law and not free speech. My political system decided that sowing hatred between people is against the law. Hatred is much more dangerous than someone hearing songs of Britney Spears without paying for them, in my opinion.
Oh, I didn't want to suggest to denounce her, I just don't want Jimbo to be arrested when occasionally entering Germany ...
????????Regards,
????????????????JeLuF
Well intentioned reasoning -- the last thing we need is Jimbo behind bars ;). Is this at all a possibility in German law? In the US Jimbo is protected by the fact that he is technically the ISP of wikipedia and therefore has limited liability on what users of his ISP do (not to mention 1st Amendment protections that protect both him and users of his ISP).
It's a little bit unclear. He is probably not responsible for the things Helga writes as long as he is not knowing about it. Knowing about her denial of the holocaust and not doing anything against it might void the protection he has as technical provider.
There is also the German Wikipedia to consider -- I somehow get the feeling that the German Wikipedia is just filled with her nonsense propaganda (smaller project = fewer contributors who can successfully confront and debunk her "work" = Helga has much more power to get her way).
She is not that active on the German wiki as far as I can tell, but I don't know how to check for "User contributions" like it's possible in the English wiki. At least, there are no articles on "Gdansk/Danzig" yet in the German wiki. This might change as soon as Helga is banned, of course.
Best regards,
JeLuF
There is also the German Wikipedia to consider -- I somehow get the feeling that the
German
Wikipedia is just filled with her nonsense propaganda (smaller
project =
fewer contributors who can successfully confront and debunk her
"work" =
Helga has much more power to get her way).
She is not that active on the German wiki as far as I can tell, but I
don't
know how to check for "User contributions" like it's possible in the
English
wiki.
You can take a look at the testsite: http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y2BC21C91
Unfortunately many old revisions have been deleted by the software, so there will be missing some (or many?) of her edits. But it's true that she's not very active on the German WP.
I'm more worried about someone who's been writing articles about Silvio Gesell's theories about "Freiwirtschaft", "Freigeld", etc. (I don't know the English expressions). It seems we don't have anybody with enough experience in economic theories on board, so in my opinion there has been too little critical dispute about it.
At least, there are no articles on "Gdansk/Danzig" yet in the German wiki. This might change as soon as Helga is banned, of course.
:-(
Kurt
Kurt Jansson wrote:
I'm more worried about someone who's been writing articles about Silvio Gesell's theories about "Freiwirtschaft", "Freigeld", etc. (I don't know the English expressions). It seems we don't have anybody with enough experience in economic theories on board, so in my opinion there has been too little critical dispute about it.
I never heard of him before, but seems like an interesting person who influenced John Maynard Keynes, whom many people do respect as an economist. His ideas of free land and free money are described in his principal work, "The Natural Economic Order", which is available on-line in English at http://ccdev.lets.net/neo/neo2.htm Perhaps somebody could translate the articles from the German Wikipedia
Ray Saintonge wrote:
I never heard of him before, but seems like an interesting person who influenced John Maynard Keynes, whom many people do respect as an economist. His ideas of free land and free money are described in his principal work, "The Natural Economic Order", which is available on-line in English at http://ccdev.lets.net/neo/neo2.htm Perhaps somebody could translate the articles from the German Wikipedia
I started translating Freiwirtschaft; I'd say it is a joke, but there are several external links given. So either it is a really big joke, or there really is such a thing. Weird.
Magnus
Magnus Manske wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
I never heard of him before, but seems like an interesting person who influenced John Maynard Keynes, whom many people do respect as an economist. His ideas of free land and free money are described in his principal work, "The Natural Economic Order", which is available on-line in English at http://ccdev.lets.net/neo/neo2.htm Perhaps somebody could translate the articles from the German Wikipedia
I started translating Freiwirtschaft; I'd say it is a joke, but there are several external links given. So either it is a really big joke, or there really is such a thing. Weird.
At the risk of seeming to beg the point, is it the German Wikipedia article which is the joke, or Gesell's economic theories. Gesell certainly did live and write. Whether right or wrong some people were influenced by him; he was even Minister of Finance in a breakaway post WWI independent Bavarian state. That should at least get him an historical footnote, but perhaps not a statue in the Economists' Hall of Fame.
Eclecticology
Daniel Mayer wrote:
Apart from this being utter nonsense (see e.g. http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar11.html for a discussion of these arguments), this most probably violates German Law (Paragraph 130(3) of our penal code, denial of genocide performed by the nazis).
JeLuF
As a red blooded American I think that law is well intentioned but just ranks with anti-free speech totalitarian newspeak and probably does more to encourage Neo-Nazis and their ilk than to discourage them (punishing people just because they have certain views tends to make other people with similar views get the "us vs. them" mentality; which just strengthens their resolve and encourages ideas about "conspiracies" to "get them" that "must be stopped" = the law inadvertently creates a class of people actively opposed to the government when there were only various unrelated people with similar ideas before). We should therefore /not/ even begin to consider banning anyone just because they are breaking such a law.
BTW, people should be able to say whatever they want in everyday life or their personal websites but if any of that is to be in a neutral and fact-based encyclopedia then it must be backed-up with evidence or highly qualified ("such and such says this, but others say that and yet others say the first two are wrong because...").
Oh, I didn't want to suggest to denounce her, I just don't want Jimbo to be arrested when occasionally entering Germany ...
That German law is just plain silly. The Holocaust as an event is a question of fact not of law, and no amount of legislation is going to change the truth (or untruth) of its events. People should be entitled to their illusions and delusions. When the massive power of the state is applied against these folk, they are granted a credibility greater than they could ever have imagined. Germany's law in this regard is probably mild compared to those countries that would ban any kind of outside influences available through the Internet. Obviously, if Helga lives in Germany, she proceeds at her own risk. No ISP should need to worry about a bewildering array of foreign laws; it's quite enough for him to be mindful of the laws of his own country.
The United States is perhaps the worst offender when it comes to the extraterritorial application of its laws, and refusing to conform with international conventions. Witness the situation of the Russian who had developed a device to crack copy protection. He did none of his work in the US but was still arrested when he visited.
Eclecticology
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org