[Wikimediaau-l] Conroy - "Measures to improve safety of theinternet for families"

[Kimberlee Weatherall]

Worth noting that both EFA and GetUp are coordinating on this issue: so
Wikimedians who in their personal capacity are interested in getting
involved in the campaign against such laws should get in touch with one
of those organisations...and watch for more.

http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/GreatFirewallOfAustralia
<http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/GreatFirewallOfAustralia?dc=974,577776
,2> 

http://nocleanfeed.com/

 

Kimberlee

 

From: wikimediaau-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimediaau-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andrew
Sent: Wednesday, 16 December 2009 10:44 PM
To: Wikimedia-au
Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Conroy - "Measures to improve safety of
theinternet for families"

 

My own position is very similar to Liam's - personally opposed to the
filter as a free-thinking Australian citizen who believes it should be
up to parents what their kids see and the government has no place
telling adults what they can or can not see. Additionally I think it
could have speed effects and we're already one of the slower countries
broadband-wise in the developed world. I also agree with Liam though
that we need to be clear with the outside world that we are not
Wikipedia, and it is a fine line (promoting something while not being
responsible for it - which is not irresponsible, but rather
acknowledging the responsiblity correctly lies elsewhere).

cheers
Andrew

2009/12/16 Liam Wyatt <liamwyatt at gmail.com>

Yes, indeed this is a good question and an important issue. 
On a personal basis I am completely opposed to the filter and I imagine
most Wikimedians in Australia are. 
However, I would caution that the Chapter cannot be seen in word or deed
to be "responsible for" Wikipedia. 
This was a problem faced by Wikimedia UK in both the "virgin killer" and
the National Portrait Gallery issues - the UK chapter was very careful
not to place itself as the official spokesperson for Wikipedia. 

Of course, the mandate of the Chapter is to advocate for Free Cultural
Works and in that sense being involved in political lobbying is
something that it can/could/should do. We have previously made a
submission to a government inquiry for example. Making a statement about
the filter or similar actions is within the chapter's powers. 

But... in the event that Wikipedia were to become blocked or was "caught
up" in some scandal around this issue, the Chapter can only describe
what Wikipedia policies and practices are - it cannot be seen as
responsible for the content and have a policy for how to make Wikipedia
unblocked or what-have-you. 

my 2 cents, 
-Liam 

wittylama.com/blog
Peace, love & metadata



On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:26 AM, Andrew <orderinchaos78 at gmail.com>
wrote:

	Matt, thanks - good question. As yet, no it doesn't have an
official
	position - I have forwarded this to the committee list so one
can be
	reached promptly.
	
	Cheers
	Andrew

	
	
	
	On 16/12/2009, Matt inbgn <mattinbgn at gmail.com> wrote:
	> Hi all,
	>
	> Does the chapter have a position on this

	>
proposal<http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/115>
	> ?
	>

	> Should it have a position?
	>
	> If it has a position, what should it be doing to advance that
position?
	>
	> Cheers,
	> Matt
	>

	_______________________________________________
	Wikimediaau-l mailing list
	Wikimediaau-l at lists.wikimedia.org
	https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l



_______________________________________________
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l at lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaau-l/attachments/20091217/d8d2da00/attachment-0001.htm