[Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

[Thomas Morton]

On 8 March 2012 11:01, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> On 03/07/12 3:29 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
>
>> On 7 Mar 2012, at 23:16, David Gerard<dgerard at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> We're beyond mainstream and are now infrastructure. We're part of the
>>> assumed background. Academia and museums come to us now. While I'm
>>> sure someone can then say "and therefore we must filter", that's
>>> asserting the claim for the *opposite* reason Andreas gives, i.e.
>>> insufficient fame.
>>>
>> We're a mainstream resource, with links to academia. Whilst it is
>> tempting to view the movement as radical and fundamental we are
>> majority ruled, and the majority is mainstream.
>>
>
> What follows from this is the need for mechanisms that avoid the tyranny
> of the majority.


Hmm, so the argument here is to enforce the view of a minority on a
majority?

As I pointed out last time; if anything, that is a worse goal...

Providing global access is a far far cry from enforcing a viewpoint (thank
goodness), which is what a lot of people seem to be advocating here.


>
>  We are progressive, but that is another matter.
>>
>> All of which is irrelevant in considering the desire of the reader.
>>
>
> Which reader?
>

The users of the website.

You know; our main focus! :)


>
> Does our hypothetical reader not have any responsibility in the way he
> interprets what he reads or says?
>
>
Yes. Which is my point entirely.

Tom