The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

12 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> SOPA and a strike, Jimbo requests comments
The Joy
post Sun 11th December 2011, 9:37am
Post #21


I am a millipede! I am amazing!
********

Group: Members
Posts: 3,838
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 2:25am
From: The Moon
Member No.: 982



QUOTE(mydog @ Sun 11th December 2011, 3:49am) *

(Temporarily)

See the RFC on his talk page.

I think it's bad precedent for Wikipedia to get into politics. I think it makes a mockery of NPOV (not that there current articles don't already, but...). I dunno. It would sure get news, which would be interesting.


QUOTE(Jimbo Wales)
A few months ago, the Italian Wikipedia community made a decision to blank all of Italian Wikipedia for a short period in order to protest a law which would infringe on their editorial independence. The Italian Parliament backed down immediately. As Wikipedians may or may not be aware, a much worse law going under the misleading title of "Stop Online Piracy Act' is working its way through Congress on a bit of a fast track. I may be attending a meeting at the White House on Monday (pending confirmation on a couple of fronts) along with executives from many other top Internet firms, and I thought this would be a good time to take a quick reading of the community feeling on this issue. My own view is that a community strike was very powerful and successful in Italy and could be even more powerful in this case. There are obviously many questions about whether the strike should be geotargetted (US-only), etc. (One possible view is that because the law would seriously impact the functioning of Wikipedia for everyone, a global strike of at least the English Wikipedia would put the maximum pressure on the US government.) At the same time, it's of course a very very big deal to do something like this, it is unprecedented for English Wikipedia.

So, this is a straw poll. Please !vote either 'support' or 'oppose' with a reason, and try to keep wide-ranging discussion to the section below the poll.

To be clear, this is NOT a vote on whether or not to have a strike. This is merely a straw poll to indicate overall interest. If this poll is firmly 'opposed' then I'll know that now. But even if this poll is firmly in 'support' we'd obviously go through a much longer process to get some kind of consensus around parameters, triggers, and timing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=465086832


Jimbo is really stretching it by saying that the Italian Wikipedia's strike had any effect on the Italian law being struck down. I thought that pressure from journalists and free press groups was the main reason for its downfall?

Jimbo really believes that a Wikipedia strike can bend Congress to its will? Sure, it would gain a lot of press, but I do not believe Wikipedia has the power he thinks it has. Jimbo comes off very egotistical and arrogant with this claim. There was a world before Wikipedia, and there still will be a world after Wikipedia. Good gravy, he even admits that the "straw poll is NOT a vote" and is just to see if anyone is interested. In other words, if he thinks the strike should happen, it IS going to happen. Am I reading that right?!?

What exactly is he and other Wikipedians concerned about with SOPA?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TungstenCarbide
post Sun 11th December 2011, 9:42am
Post #22


Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined: Sat 14th Mar 2009, 6:12am
Member No.: 10,787

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(The Joy @ Sun 11th December 2011, 9:37am) *
Jimbo really believes that a Wikipedia strike can bend Congress to its will? Sure, it would gain a lot of press, but I do not believe Wikipedia has the power he thinks it has. Jimbo comes off very egotistical and arrogant with this claim. There was a world before Wikipedia, and there still will be a world after Wikipedia. Good gravy, he even admits that the "straw poll is NOT a vote" and is just to see if anyone is interested. In other words, if he thinks the strike should happen, it IS going to happen. Am I reading that right?!?

What exactly is he and other Wikipedians concerned about with SOPA?

If there is a strike, Jimbo is sure to be interviewed by every major news outlet, his speaking career will be rejuvenated and chicks will throw themselves at his feet. It's a win-win-win.

This post has been edited by TungstenCarbide: Sun 11th December 2011, 9:43am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
radek
post Sun 11th December 2011, 10:12am
Post #23


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 699
Joined: Sat 28th Nov 2009, 10:40pm
Member No.: 15,651

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sun 11th December 2011, 3:42am) *

QUOTE(The Joy @ Sun 11th December 2011, 9:37am) *
Jimbo really believes that a Wikipedia strike can bend Congress to its will? Sure, it would gain a lot of press, but I do not believe Wikipedia has the power he thinks it has. Jimbo comes off very egotistical and arrogant with this claim. There was a world before Wikipedia, and there still will be a world after Wikipedia. Good gravy, he even admits that the "straw poll is NOT a vote" and is just to see if anyone is interested. In other words, if he thinks the strike should happen, it IS going to happen. Am I reading that right?!?

What exactly is he and other Wikipedians concerned about with SOPA?

If there is a strike, Jimbo is sure to be interviewed by every major news outlet, his speaking career will be rejuvenated and chicks will throw themselves at his feet. It's a win-win-win.


To look at the silver lining, the "win" for others here is that this kind of thing really does separate the wheat from the ... idiots and brown nosers. So it makes for a handy list if any of these folks try to run for ArbCom or something. I'm quite disappointed in a couple (Hans Adler). And impressed with one or two. Wehwalt ran for arbcom before didn't he? I can't remember if he dropped out or didn't make it. Anyway, he's one of the few people making sense over there.

I made a list of the dummies, but here are the good comments:

User:Eraserhead1 - "If you feel really strongly about this go and protest in your own time."
User:Townlake - "The sense of entitlement reflected in this proposal is Occupy-grade obnoxious."
User talk:Fox - "What the hell am I supporting? Are we going to wipe the servers for a week or something? If so, don't be so bloody stupid."
User:TCO - too god damn sensible for wikipedia
User:Wehwalt
User:Russavia - holy fucking christ, Russavia is very right and actually insightful about something
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Sun 11th December 2011, 11:08am
Post #24


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,763
Joined: Fri 18th Apr 2008, 5:53pm
Member No.: 5,761

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I've always thought that the most likely event resulting in Wikipedia's complete shutdown would be a copyright infringement injunction or judgement.

Anyway, Jimbo mentions a meeting at the WHITE HOUSE. So, I think he is doing this straw poll so he can announce the results at the big meeting, making it look like he is in touch with the pulse of Wikipedia's regulars and can report that they are NOT HAPPY with the proposed bill.

This post has been edited by Cla68: Sun 11th December 2011, 11:22am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
powercorrupts
post Sun 11th December 2011, 11:39am
Post #25


.
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 716
Joined: Fri 27th Jun 2008, 10:27pm
Member No.: 6,776



QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 11th December 2011, 6:05am) *

QUOTE(powercorrupts @ Sat 10th December 2011, 12:27pm) *

He's showing his contempt for government again.


I didn't see Jimbo show much contempt for government when he was asked to sit in the spotlight in front of Joe Lieberman's committee hearing; nor did I see any contempt for government at all when Jimbo was taking out the catamarans with Tony Blair down in the British Virgin Islands with Branson.


Not sure if they show the opposite (the Blair one at least).

Blair was out of British government and an international playboy by then (hence the company) and had contempt for government himself anyway (he ignored it - or attempted to - all the way through his career). One of my favourite Blair stories is that when he became PM people were astounded how little he actually new about the job. A lawyer by trade, he'd barely bothered to brush up on the basics, despite a lifetime coveting the job with his one-time flatmate Gordon Brown.

I never said Jimbo deoesn't covet power, or wouldn't kiss any politician's arse if it got him his way. He'd also kick it when he's got what he wanted, and generally seems to see himself as above and beyond such inherently-censorious mortals.

This post has been edited by powercorrupts: Sun 11th December 2011, 8:45pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Sun 11th December 2011, 2:00pm
Post #26


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sat 10th December 2011, 10:27pm) *

QUOTE(lilburne @ Sat 10th December 2011, 12:20pm) *

How so? My understanding is that it is targeted at sites whose primary purpose is to enable infringement.

I hope I'm misunderstanding you here, because up until now I've been under the impression that you're not stupid.


How is one going to show that wikipedia's primary purpose is to facilitate copyright infringement? They at least make an effort to remove infringement. In the last month, off their own bat, they speedied a number of my NC-BY licensed photos that some one had uploaded to commons.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Sun 11th December 2011, 2:02pm
Post #27


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sun 11th December 2011, 4:42am) *

QUOTE(The Joy @ Sun 11th December 2011, 9:37am) *
Jimbo really believes that a Wikipedia strike can bend Congress to its will? Sure, it would gain a lot of press, but I do not believe Wikipedia has the power he thinks it has. Jimbo comes off very egotistical and arrogant with this claim. There was a world before Wikipedia, and there still will be a world after Wikipedia. Good gravy, he even admits that the "straw poll is NOT a vote" and is just to see if anyone is interested. In other words, if he thinks the strike should happen, it IS going to happen. Am I reading that right?!?

What exactly is he and other Wikipedians concerned about with SOPA?

If there is a strike, Jimbo is sure to be interviewed by every major news outlet, his speaking career will be rejuvenated and chicks will throw themselves at his feet. It's a win-win-win.

I also wonder if he isn't also revving up the drama for "domestic consumption" (nothing sells like drama on WP). He got far less wikiluv in that little exchange with Cla than he would have gotten a year or two ago, and he's already pissed off most of the non en.wp communities, so he can't let his god status decline on his last remaining front.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Sun 11th December 2011, 2:08pm
Post #28


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Cla68 @ Sun 11th December 2011, 6:08am) *

I've always thought that the most likely event resulting in Wikipedia's complete shutdown would be a copyright infringement injunction or judgement.

Anyway, Jimbo mentions a meeting at the WHITE HOUSE. So, I think he is doing this straw poll so he can announce the results at the big meeting, making it look like he is in touch with the pulse of Wikipedia's regulars and can report that they are NOT HAPPY with the proposed bill.

Perhaps some of the regulators (and senators) he tries to schmooze will look a little more closely at the WMF to see why they're concerned, which couldn't be a bad thing. I don't think he has enough $$$ in the bank to effectively schmooze a DC regulator or senator, but he might manage to piss one off if he forgets to leave the rod and scepter at home.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Sun 11th December 2011, 2:12pm
Post #29


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(lilburne @ Sun 11th December 2011, 9:00am) *

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sat 10th December 2011, 10:27pm) *

QUOTE(lilburne @ Sat 10th December 2011, 12:20pm) *

How so? My understanding is that it is targeted at sites whose primary purpose is to enable infringement.

I hope I'm misunderstanding you here, because up until now I've been under the impression that you're not stupid.


How is one going to show that wikipedia's primary purpose is to facilitate copyright infringement? They at least make an effort to remove infringement. In the last month, off their own bat, they speedied a number of my NC-BY licensed photos that some one had uploaded to commons.

It might come down to how the agencies involved define "governance" of a website. If they decide it's actually the "community", there's certainly a large and influential contingent who take a radical view of "knowledge wanting to be free".
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Sun 11th December 2011, 2:19pm
Post #30


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE
This is my personal request for comment in order to guide my thinking and talking with politicians over the next few days. I am also speaking to the Foundation, Foundation attorneys, our paid lobbyists, fellow traveller organizations, etc. Because the Foundation has requested, reasonably due to negotiations under way and the impact that I might have on that by accidentally creating a public furore, I'm not able to say a lot at this time. Part of my job here is to represent the wishes of the community to all these parties, hence the straw poll. As I said before, nothing here is binding - if and when we would do something like this, there would be a much more formal proposal. Right now, what I'm thinking is that if there is a credible threat that this might happen, this could have a positive impact on the thinking of some legislators. Do not underestimate our power - in my opinion, they are terrified of a public uprising about this, and we are uniquely positioned to start that. Back room politics over cigars and promises, or a vigorous public debate? I know what I want, and I know what the other side wants, and they aren't the same thing.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

IOW:
QUOTE
I'm very important! I mean, uh, we're very important, but I really need to create the impression that I have the support of the serfs before I try to show those regulators how important I am. Uh, I mean how important we are. Yeah, that's it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Michaeldsuarez
post Sun 11th December 2011, 2:57pm
Post #31


Über Member
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon 9th Aug 2010, 7:51pm
From: New York, New York
Member No.: 24,428

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sun 11th December 2011, 4:42am) *

If there is a strike, Jimbo is sure to be interviewed by every major news outlet, his speaking career will be rejuvenated and chicks will throw themselves at his feet. It's a win-win-win.


I'm confident that Jimbo could be interviewed without having a Wikipedia strike. Since Congress doesn't make money from Wikipedia, the only goal of the strike is to gain media attention. Unfortunately for Wales' desire to appear as a revolutionary leader of freedom, I don't believe that a strike would be necessary to gain that media attention. Why couldn't he just go speak to the media outlets about it?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Sun 11th December 2011, 3:33pm
Post #32


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sun 11th December 2011, 2:12pm) *

QUOTE(lilburne @ Sun 11th December 2011, 9:00am) *

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sat 10th December 2011, 10:27pm) *

QUOTE(lilburne @ Sat 10th December 2011, 12:20pm) *

How so? My understanding is that it is targeted at sites whose primary purpose is to enable infringement.

I hope I'm misunderstanding you here, because up until now I've been under the impression that you're not stupid.


How is one going to show that wikipedia's primary purpose is to facilitate copyright infringement? They at least make an effort to remove infringement. In the last month, off their own bat, they speedied a number of my NC-BY licensed photos that some one had uploaded to commons.

It might come down to how the agencies involved define "governance" of a website. If they decide it's actually the "community", there's certainly a large and influential contingent who take a radical view of "knowledge wanting to be free".


I suspect that the law won't be looking into their souls, but at what they do, and how the WMF reacts to it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ottava
post Sun 11th December 2011, 3:45pm
Post #33


Über Pokemon
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,917
Joined: Thu 31st Jul 2008, 6:35pm
Member No.: 7,328

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I can tell you this - a change.org petition wont influence anyone.

And if the WMF does get a lobbyist, seeing their track record of hiring they wont get someone who can have any influence.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Sun 11th December 2011, 3:54pm
Post #34


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Poor Marek's comments (he is our 'Radek') got hatted by Jimbo as 'personal attacks'. Personally I thought they were spot on.

QUOTE

Why is this here? What relevance does it have? Can I start a RfC on *my* user talk page over shutting down Wikipedia for a few days over some pet cause of mine and if there's a couple of "support" votes, we gonna shut down? This is not the venue for this kind of discussion and even less of a venue for what has turned into a voting poll (to put it charitably). So stop freakin' voting. I know you really want to show Jimbo how much you love him but this whole endeavor goes against the fundamental principles of Wikipedia and no matter how many people write an empty "support" on it, there's not going to be a strike.

At the end of the day, we've been told over and over again that policies such as NPOV are fundamental - and this proposal goes right against that. Also, Jimbo has always made a pretense of being "just another editor" (and for the most part has stuck to that, until now). This means that Jimbo has no more right to start this kind of a "poll" on his user talk page than I do. Now, giving Jimbo a charitable interpretation of the events it looks like he posted a comment on his talk page, which he hoped would get taken to another venue (this is AGFing the fuck out of the "Please help me publicize this widely" comment). But a whole bunch of people who think that agreeing with Jimbo is a way to earn brownie points on Wikipedia turned this into a "Poll". That's not how Wikipedia works. You want a 'strike', propose it in an appropriate venue (village pump, ANI, separate RfC page etc.). Stop wasting time here. Go write an encyclopedia. Volunteer Marek 07:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

It was posted on AN and RfC, and you're welcome to post about it anywhere else you think it should be publicized. As for me personally, I've disagreed (in some cases strenuously) with Jimbo on more than one occasion. I couldn't care less about earning "brownie points" with him. I agree with him in this case because I believe he is correct. I believe that is true of most, if not all, of those who have agreed here. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Maybe but people are "voting" here. And yes, it's pretty obvious that a lot of the support votes are due to the simple fact that Jimbo is the one who proposed it. Volunteer Marek 08:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Wow. People who disagree with your particular position are out to earn brownie points with Jimbo? Argumentum ad Hominem much? Maybe you need to read WP:NPA. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 07:47, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Wow yourself. What do you think is happening? Are you being daft or naive? There's absolutely no reason or justification in Wikipedia policies for this kind of proposal ... strike that, Wikipedia policies explicitly prohibit this kind of thing, if it was anyone else but Jimbo trying to pull this kind of a stunt they'd be banned for disruption. Assuming that these aren't naive <1000 edits newbies voting above... yeah, motives do come into question. Volunteer Marek 08:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Wanna start an RfC on your talkpage? Go ahead. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 07:54, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

At best this is a blatant grab for power, naively supported by folks who can't think beyond "Jimbo said it, it must be true" or "SOPA bad, so support" (SOPA might be bad, but two wrong don't make a right). At worst it's a perfect illustration of everything that can be wrong with Wikipedia. Volunteer Marek 08:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

If it bothers you so much go away and ignore it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:02, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

How about you go away and ignore it. What kind of bullying bullshit is that? Obviously this is something that would have very widespread implications across Wikipedia, and affect lots of editors myself included. So, no, I don't think I'm going to ignore it. That's a very nasty thing to say to somebody. Typical though I guess. Volunteer Marek 08:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Typical? You're the one attacking people and ranting when all this is is a poll because Jimbo wants to know what people think. You told him what you think and he'll read it. Other than that, it will not have implications. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:16, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Go away Seb, you're not welcome here and you're embarrassing yourself. More seriously, I just got to ask. If "it will not have implications" what is the purpose of the exercise in the first place? Obviously the reason people are voting here is because they believe - rightly or apparently wrongly - that it WILL have implications. Right? Volunteer Marek 08:22, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

No. At least I didn't. If they do believe that, they got it wrong. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

So apparently there's just an excessive amount of internet ether out there and you're just doing your part in preventing it from reaching some kind of critical mass and blowing up the internets as we know it by wasting bandwith with "comments that have no implications". Kudos. For me, as disagreeable as some of my comments might seem to some, I *do* post them with the hope that they do carry some implications. Volunteer Marek 08:33, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Eppur si muove
post Sun 11th December 2011, 7:05pm
Post #35


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri 28th Nov 2008, 10:50pm
Member No.: 9,171



I know that a bit of bellowing and chest-thumping appeals to Jimbo and his ilk more than actually addressing the problem that apparently makes Wikipedia vulnerable to this legislation but Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations has a backlog of cases stretching back nearly two and a half years. I can't help feeling that the Foundation's appeals on this matter would have a better chance of convincing legislators if they could demonstrate a bigger commitment to tackling this problem.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Sun 11th December 2011, 10:13pm
Post #36


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Ottava @ Sun 11th December 2011, 10:45am) *

And if the WMF does get a lobbyist, seeing their track record of hiring they wont get someone who can have any influence.
Actually, Jimbo implies that they already have paid lobbyists, which I wasn't aware of. Is that a new development?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TungstenCarbide
post Sun 11th December 2011, 10:36pm
Post #37


Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined: Sat 14th Mar 2009, 6:12am
Member No.: 10,787

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sun 11th December 2011, 10:13pm) *
QUOTE(Ottava @ Sun 11th December 2011, 10:45am) *
And if the WMF does get a lobbyist, seeing their track record of hiring they wont get someone who can have any influence
Actually, Jimbo implies that they already have paid lobbyists, which I wasn't aware of. Is that a new development?

that's not implied - he flat out states that the foundation has paid lobbyists (plural) - not that Jimbo's word has a reputation of being accurate.

This post has been edited by TungstenCarbide: Sun 11th December 2011, 10:36pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ottava
post Sun 11th December 2011, 10:49pm
Post #38


Über Pokemon
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,917
Joined: Thu 31st Jul 2008, 6:35pm
Member No.: 7,328

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sun 11th December 2011, 5:36pm) *


that's not implied - he flat out states that the foundation has paid lobbyists (plural) - not that Jimbo's word has a reputation of being accurate.



Lobbyists are public record. All lobbyists are registered (unless they literally make no money or spend almost no time lobbying, which would not make them a real lobbyist). I checked the public database on lobbyist and I do not see anyone registered that is affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation. I was not surprised.

This post has been edited by Ottava: Sun 11th December 2011, 10:49pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Sun 11th December 2011, 11:09pm
Post #39


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,867
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



Taking Wikipedia down even for an hour would prove beyond any doubt the danger of concentrating information in one website, where politics can easily get in the way of the user experience.

It's better it happens now though, before people give up entirely on creating original content and forget how to do it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Sun 11th December 2011, 11:17pm
Post #40


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Emperor @ Sun 11th December 2011, 11:09pm) *

Taking Wikipedia down even for an hour would prove beyond any doubt the danger of concentrating information in one website, where politics can easily get in the way of the user experience.

It's better it happens now though, before people give up entirely on creating original content and forget how to do it.


Love that.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sun 11th December 2011, 11:18pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

12 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 8 17, 3:48pm