[Wikimedia-l] Facebook goes turncoat on the "squash internet freedom" battle.
cimonavaro at gmail.com
Tue Apr 17 23:46:20 UTC 2012
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:36 AM, Liam Wyatt <liamwyatt at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 April 2012 19:52, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 17 April 2012 20:32, Todd Allen <toddmallen at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Would it be possible to get enough other sites behind another protest?
>> > The last one didn't succeed just because of Wikipedia, it succeeded
>> > because there were so many.
>> I think you're dead wrong there. Wikipedia was the only non-geek site
>> that gave a damn. We swung the public reaction. Without us it wouldn't
>> have happened.
>> - d.
> I would suggest that if we are going to do something specific in
> protest/reaction to CISPA, that it be localised to specifically the USA
> this time. I believe that we could get attention with the "they didn't
> listen to us last time" argument, and that, as David says, we were integral
> to the death of SOPA. However, since this is a USA law, actions should be
> limited to the USA otherwise the world will quickly become tired of what
> may be perceived as "overreactions" to "foreign" laws.
> So (for example purposes) rather than a global blackout on en.wp, a
> USA-geolocated banner on all language Wikipedias would be more appropriate.
> Note: I'm not necessarily arguing that we should make a protest, or when,
> or how, but that *if we do* it should be USA specific.
Quite contrariwise. The last time the legislation affected mostly the USA, but
the block was global. I would be interested to hear any logical argument that
would suggest our position would be strengthened by doing a purely USA
action to counter something with global implications.
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
More information about the Wikimedia-l