[Foundation-l] Internet nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

[Brian J Mingus]

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Brian <Brian.Mingus at colorado.edu> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Michael Snow <wikipedia at verizon.net>wrote:
>
>> Brian J Mingus wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Michael Snow <wikipedia at verizon.net
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Brian J Mingus wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Tim Starling <
>> tstarling at wikimedia.org
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Give the Nobel Peace Prize to DARPA for designing the Internet. And
>> >>>> they've made so many other excellent contributions to peace, like
>> >>>> unmanned bombers and anti-missile lasers.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Seriously, the only reason I can think of that the committee would
>> >>>> choose "the internet" as a recipient is if they wanted to make an
>> even
>> >>>> more bizarre choice than last year.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -- Tim Starling
>> >>>>
>> >>> I'm actually not sure how unmanned bombers are not a tool for peace
>> given
>> >>> our current situation. As Obama noted very eloquently in his Nobel
>> >>> acceptance speech even though we may dream of world peace it is not
>> yet a
>> >>> reality. The reality is that we have rogue regimes, unstable
>> >>>
>> >> international
>> >>
>> >>> relationships, religious wars, insane people who manage to get elected
>> as
>> >>> POTUS, etc...
>> >>>
>> >> Can we discuss something else, rather than having the list get
>> >> sidetracked into geopolitical debates that aren't at all useful to the
>> >> work we do? Aside from fantasizing about a share of the prize money,
>> >> even the original subject was not especially on-topic for discussion
>> >> here. Thank you.
>> >>
>> >> --Michael Snow
>> >>
>> > Yes, hardly anything is relevant for discussion on this list anymore. It
>> > happens either on internal WMF mailing lists or IRL.
>> >
>> It's not that those discussions wouldn't be relevant to have on this
>> list, and periodically people try and encourage others to move them to a
>> more public setting. It's that when this list continues to show a
>> tendency for conversation to degenerate, as it just did, then it's quite
>> hard to persuade people that they should want to have their discussions
>> here.
>>
>> --Michael Snow
>>
>
> You believe that my reply to Tim is degenerate? That is offensive.
>

 I've decided that this list is no longer useful so I have decided to
unsubscribe. It's been fun. Cheers.