[Advocacy Advisors] Wikipedia Zero and net neutrality

Tue Aug 12 15:56:07 UTC 2014

Dear Lodewijk,

you confusing cause and effect here.

It was Patricio, a member of the board of the foundation, who basically
called everybody who is pro-net neutrality an enemy of human right. Well,
THIS is what I call personal and not al all constructive - So, please, sent
your critic to the foundation, because they started the whole insulting.

As long as there is no apology for this massive insult of calling people
enemies of a human right just becuase they have another opinion on the
subject it doesn't make sense to "debate" with the foundation at all.

Patricio is personally silent for days now - obviously he doesn't care when
he's insulting people with other opinions. AGF is sometimes obviously
mis-used to silence people who just say plainly what has happened - that a
boardmember of the foundation gave us a glimpse of how things are really
handled. It goes like this: Wikimedia is holy, we are the holy
representation of Free Knowledge, without us there is no hope for mankind,
therefore being against things we do is like being against human rights
themselves. These net neutrality thing has to be change or we will ignore
it. Well, this is what I call being NOT "productive and friendly" at all.
So don't wonder about the reactions.

Jens

2014-08-12 17:20 GMT+02:00 L.Gelauff <lgelauff at gmail.com>:

> Dear Jens,
>
> I'm afraid your contributions do come across as angry and personal. It is
> OK to have those emotions, but I don't think they are quite constructive to
> the discussion. Calling someone's opinion 'bullshit' and agressively
> stating that 'an honest debate is not possible' (paraphrased) simply
> because someone gives their opinion in answer to a public question seems
> uncalled for to me.
>
> I will not go into your analyses of emails - I agree with Dimi that that
> is poisonous to the actual topic, but I do have a very practical request:
> please don't use quotation marks when you're paraphrasing. It is confusing.
>
> Several of the statements you qualified as obvious or clear, are very
> non-obvious to me. Maybe you're better placed in this discussion than I am,
> maybe I don't quite get the gist of the discussions.
>
> Stating that someone should apologize for their opinion is in my book by
> the way not the best way to a decent debate. As for stopping all activities
> of Wikipedia Zero, I happily refer you to the page "Wikipedia:The wrong
> version" which probably has a German equivalent.
>
> I sincerely hope we can have a more focused discussion on the topic rather
> than everything surrounding it. Dimi's suggestions seem interesting and
> require at least on my side further thought.
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
>
> 2014-08-12 17:07 GMT+02:00 Jens Best <jens.best at wikimedia.de>:
>
> Hi Dimi,
>>
>> There is now "strawman argument" and even more no "ad-hominem attack"
>> from my side. Please stop these allegations.
>>
>> There was in fact a person of the board of the foundation giving us a
>> rare insight on what the foundation really thinks:
>>
>> "We are a human right, Wikipedia is a human right - therefore we do not
>> have to stick to stupid rules made up for this so-called open web."
>>
>> and
>>
>> "If these net neutrality thing is against Us, the Bringer of the Holy
>> Human Right named Wikipedia, than these net neutrality people are on the
>> wrong side - on the side which stands against human rights."
>>
>> Well, if you ask me, and obviously many others, "assuming good faith"
>> becomes pretty stupid, when spit in the face like this.
>>
>>
>> So if "productive and friendly" means don't mention the clear bullsh**
>> said publicly by a representative of the foundation, there will be no
>> "productive and friendly" bowing to this sick attitude which covers up
>> ignorance with pseudo-debates while doing anyway what they want.
>>
>> Net neutrality is bigger than Wikipedia. As long as Wikimedia is ignoring
>> this simple fact and continuing selling Wikipedia Zero to providers around
>> the world there can be no honest debate which even has a whiff of
>> credibility.
>>
>>
>> So back to the preconditions of a decent debate: Apology for the insult
>> happened at Wikimania & Stopping all efforts pushing WP0 as long there is
>> no decision reached in this very very sensible global matter.
>>
>> best regards
>>
>> Jens
>>
>>
>> 2014-08-12 15:12 GMT+02:00 Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
>> dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov at gmail.com>:
>>
>> Dear Jens,
>>>
>>> Please keep in mind the following things are also pre-conditions for
>>> having an open debate:
>>>
>>> Assuming good faith
>>> No ad-hominem attacks
>>> No strawman arguments (misrepresenting someone's argument to make it
>>> easier to attack)
>>>
>>> Thank you for helping to keep this list productive and friendly!
>>>
>>> Dimi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-08-12 14:53 GMT+02:00 Jens Best <jens.best at wikimedia.de>:
>>>
>>>> Hi Dimi, Hi Lili, Hi Yana, Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Dimi, thanks for listing some factual thoughts on the subject. But
>>>> there are times for factual debate and there are times to get some things
>>>> straight first to make a factual debate possible to start.
>>>>
>>>> What has to be made straight first:
>>>>
>>>> - The foundation has to issue an letter of excuse for this
>>>> incomprehensible assault of Patricio against net neutrality activists.
>>>> Practically calling them enemies of human rights is unacceptable and
>>>> destroys any common ground to discuss further on.
>>>>
>>>> - As insulting as the statement of Patricio was, it gave us a glimpse
>>>> to see the real face of the foundation. It became clear that all this is
>>>> right now a fake-debate.
>>>>
>>>> The foundation isn't willing to have this debate as open outcoming as
>>>> it should be - this means be willing to stop WP0 because it is a clear
>>>> violation of net neutrality. Patricio's statement made it clear what ways
>>>> the foundation is willing to "argue" for keeping their marketing campaign
>>>> called Wikipedia Zero running.
>>>>
>>>> Therefore does a debate about that subject makes NO sense as long there
>>>> is now a clear signal of the foundation that they take the discussion
>>>> seriously. Words are not enough anymore - all efforts pushing Wikipedia
>>>> Zero forward and violating net neutrality even more and wider must
>>>> verifiable stop before any statement/proposal of part of the foundation can
>>>> be taken seriously.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As long these two reasonable preconditions are not met, any talk about
>>>> taking net neutrality seriously AND finding a way to share Wikimedia's part
>>>> of the Free Knowldege of the world to more people is senseless.
>>>>
>>>> best regards
>>>>
>>>> Jens
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
>>>> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
>>> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Jens Best
>> Präsidium
>> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
>> web: http://www.wikimedia.de
>> mail: jens.best <http://goog_17221883>@wikimedia.de
>>
>> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
>> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
>> Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
>> anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
>> Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
>> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>
>

-- 
--
Jens Best
Präsidium
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
web: http://www.wikimedia.de
mail: jens.best <http://goog_17221883>@wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/attachments/20140812/205a7780/attachment-0001.html>