[Foundation-l] Reflections on the recent debates

[MZMcBride]

Mike Godwin wrote:
> I think it's also worth remembering that when an individual like Jimmy is
> given extraordinary cross-project powers to use in extraordinary
> circumstances, this more or less guarantees that any use of those powers
> will be controversial.

"Given" is an odd word choice if you look at the history of his user rights
and the eroding mandate surrounding them.

> Once this discussion happens, it would not surprise me if the result turned
> out to be that some of the material deleted by Jimmy will be restored by the
> community -- probably with Jimmy's approval in many cases.

Most of the egregiously bad deletions were quickly overturned, and Jimmy was
the one re-deleting the images. Now that he has agreed to stop, most of the
poor deletions have been re-reversed. I doubt Jimmy approves; there's
absolutely nothing in his actions over the past few days to suggest that he
does.

> To the extent that Jimmy's intervention has triggered a healthy debate about
> policy, I think the powers he used, and the decisions -- not individually
> but taken as a whole -- that he made are justified.

Huh. I never thought I'd see the day that Mike Godwin would be supporting an
attack on free speech and free ideas through censorship. I don't say
"censorship," lightly: Jimmy deliberately deleted historical pieces of art
and illustrations in his rampage. And you think this is a good thing?

And at what cost? "What do you call a leader with no followers? Just a guy
taking a walk." He's alienated or pissed off most of his supporters, on
Commons and elsewhere. The people backing him the most at this point are the
ones who have a direct financial stake in his ability to generate publicity
(that would be the Wikimedia Foundation).

Mike, it looks like you've compromised your ideals in favor of toeing the
party line, and for that, I'm pretty disappointed.

MZMcBride