QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Thu 6th October 2011, 12:13pm)
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th October 2011, 11:13am)
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Thu 6th October 2011, 9:06am)
Expect the Wikipedioids to take all the credit for whatever changes are made to the bill.
...and to bail if the rights of any non-Wikipedians are impaired.
...and for the WMF to bail even quicker if any of their "editors" actually gets sued. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif)
If I understand what happened (hard with language barrier and all):
- WMF and en.wikipedia softened their initial support for the shut down (Wales: "not well informed")
- The shutdown was not as universally accepted, even on it.wikipedia, as represented.
- The "shut-her-downers" overstated some aspects of the proposed law.
- Either the "shut-her-downers" corrected their misunderstand/exaggerations or the Italian lawmaker clarified the proposed law to apply to only newspaper owned or similar sites, not blogs social media etc.
- The "shut-her-downers" abandoned their efforts, retaining only some click through information about the matter.
So once the world was free for WoW and Transformer articles the "shut-her-downers" turned out to be not so interested in free speech after all. Of course newspapers, already undermined by Wikipedia and social media, are a much more socially important protector from anti-democratic forces. They seem to be on their own as far WP and FKK is concerned.