[WikiEN-l] Jimmy Wales should reconsider

[doc]

George Herbert wrote:>
> Any open source project, content or code or whatever, is subject to or
> at risk of attacks.  This is a fact of life.

Ah, so tough on the people who are being adversely affected, libeled and 
attacked? We tell them that it is a risk we (sorry, they?) have to run. 
A fact of life 9for them)?

> 
> After all the intensive efforts to set and maintain and enforce BLP
> policies, no outsider can reasonably claim we aren't trying.

Sorry, but that's crap. Our 'solutions' are utterly unrealistic.

> 
> No insider is going to claim we're succeeding perfectly, either.
> 
> We can't be perfect.  To attain our project's goals, we have to
> balance technology, people's time, and policies.  Lacking "approved
> version" code, we're doing a pretty good approximation of optimally
> given what our project stands for and the resource constraints.
> 
Do we also have to balance the harm done to bystanders? Or does 
collateral damage not feature in the accounting analysis?

Doc