It was intended not just to challenge the US government, but to be an example for elsewhere,and it has been that.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.wiki@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Seb35 seb35wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Le lundi 10 mars 2014 21:03:20 (CET), Yuri yuri@rawbw.com a écrit :
On 03/10/2014 11:30, Seb35 wrote:
Another point of view is that the knowledge doesn't (shouldn't) depend in any way of the local government -- possibly it can be viewed
differently
from a culture to another but that's a cultural question not related to censorship.
<snip>
I understand your intention with this system, but I find it's not a good response to the problem; I find a better response is to encourage and
help
the free speech associations, like what was done during SOPA/PIPA.
I absolutely agree with your sentiment, as I'm sure most do, but I'm willing to challenge the English Wikipedia SOPA/PIPA blackout as a good example. The community took its content hostage (IMO :) ) in order to prove a point to the US Congress, despite the English Wikipedia serving the world. We've had two years to learn since SOPA/PIPA with other communities. I spoke about it at Wikimania 2012 in a panel discussion and I still don't think that reaction was appropriate.
Knowledge is, as you said, not dependent on government. I don't think the WMF (spoken as a volunteer) or Wikimedians should support community responses to censorship with censorship ourselves. We've had two years to learn since SOPA/PIPA with other communities. Sorry, Yuri, I understand it's best intentions, but education is the magic bullet.
-- ~Keegan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe