[Foundation-l] Conflict resolution on meta Wikimedia

[Christiaan Briggs]

By the way what he actually did was delete the whole page and replace 
it with:
"Obviously you will revert this. This is just an demonstration what 
will happen if content is tagged to indicate material that is not to a 
censors liking."

Christiaan

On 24 Feb 2005, at 6:17 pm, Christiaan Briggs wrote:

> David Gerard wrote:
>
>> That's not even close to vandalism by any reasonable definition. Wht 
>> it has
>> done is concisely outline the actual situation that you appear not to 
>> wish
>> to acknowledge in any way at all.
>
> At best it was "disruption to make a point".
>
>> What Gerard actually did with the above edit was take this paragraph:
>>
>>   This page originated from a discussion on the WikiEN-I mailing list 
>> where
>>   some level of consensus was reached between the free-speech and 
>> content
>>   suppression parties that a technical solution is possible that will 
>> go a
>>   long way towards satisfying most mainstream positions in the debate.
>>
>> - and add the following text:
>>
>>   However, it should be stressed that this page is ''not'' intended 
>> to imply
>>   that this is a <i>fait accompli</i>, but merely an initial 
>> exploration of
>>   the specification and feasibility of a possible solution. The 
>> features
>>   described below are ''not'' currently under development, and will 
>> certainly
>>   not be made live until their desirability has been firmly 
>> established.
>>
>> Are you saying that this is false, and making out that saying this is
>> "vandalism"?
>
> Yes that is false, he did not add the second bit.
>
> Christiaan