[Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo

[Nathan]

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Phil Nash <phnash at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Peter Damian wrote:
>> I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this.
>> Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by
>> Chinese judicial
>> departments for violating Chinese law
>> http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876  His own community has
>> delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal.  He deserves 'fair
>> treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia
>> deserve so-called 'fair treatment'.  Those who violate community
>> norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the
>> disruptive elements who create havoc on the project
>> by their offensive comments and offsite attacks.  The Chinese
>> government
>>> imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right.  This is
>>> exactly what
>> would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk
>> pages and email access.  More power to the community!
>>
>> Peter
>
> This is so naive a post that I can only believe that someone has hijacked
> your account, and I can't wait for your amendments to
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolpuddle_Martyrs
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi
>
> I expect you might have an apology and weakly-argued defence tomorrow, when
> you might have sobered up, but right now you are on thin ice in
> epistemological terms and are closer to a 17-year old newly-"radicalised"
> student than a considered scholar.
>
> Shame on you, and that's without discussing the legal system of China.
>
>
>

You understood, I'm sure, that he was making an exaggerated comparison
between the Chinese government's approach to public debate and
Wikipedia's governance? He clearly believes that Liu Xiaobo has been
mistreated (which he has been), and also that he and others have been
mistreated by Wikipedia in a conceptually similar fashion. If you
think he actually believes Liu Xiaobo is a criminal deviant, I think
you missed the point.

Nathan