[Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 58, Issue 39

[James Rigg]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Mike Godwin <mgodwin at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> James Rigg writes:
>
>> I'm not questioning here whether or not there are good reasons for
>> sometimes being non-transparent and hierarchical, I'm just saying that
>> it's interesting that, contrary to its founding ideals, and probably
>> also to how many people think, or like to think, Wikipedia is run, it
>> is not run in a fully transparent and non-hierarchical way.
>
> Similarly, lots of people use the term "freedom of speech" but are
> unwilling to allow other people the freedom to perjure themselves in
> court proceedings, commit libel, or conspire to commit a crime. These
> means those hypocrites are misusing the term "freedom of speech" of
> course. Very dishonest or them, or at least disingenuous.
>
>
> --Mike
>
>

As a member of the Wikimedia staff, using sarcasm - in both the post
title and contents - against another contributor to the list isn't
very professional.

People understand that freedom of speech does not mean that someone
has the right to falsely shout 'fire' in a crowded cinema, but people
also understand that calling an organisation transparent, when it is
in fact semi-transparent, is misleading.

James