Here's a new Reddit thread
, about the impending SOPA shutdown.
Links to this
Time magazine blog article.
Reddit has announced that it will go dark for 12 hours to protest the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, and Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has said that he hopes to coordinate with the site so that Wikipedia does the same.
There's that "founder" shit again.
Wales writes, “It would be great if we could act quickly to coordinate with Reddit,” though he adds that the community needs a “thumbs up/thumbs down vote” on whether to participate, and “we don’t have the luxury of time that we usually have, in terms of negotiating with each other for weeks about what’s exactly the best possible thing to do.” I suspect the ratio of those in favor of a blackout to those opposed would be greater for a more activist site like Reddit than one that’s more mainstream (and let’s be honest, passive) like Wikipedia.
Heh heh heh.
Let Wikipedia close for the day and generate headlines, while others like Google and Facebook pursue alternative forms of protest that engage their respective audiences. In the end, the more people paying attention, the better.
More of you should be pissed off, that WP can "generate headlines" just by shutting off server access for a few hours. Stupid as it might be, no matter the purpose (and I think protesting SOPA is a very legitimate reason to protest).
And as a commenter says:
There is only one site that you really need to do this: Facebook. If they shut down for even two hours, the internet would scream and cry and you'd have everyone's attention. Sadly, this will never happen, but a man can dream...
Yep, Wikipedia really ISN'T all that "important".This was on the Reddit thread:
[–]therealprotonk 31 points 8 hours ago
Apologies for the top comment hijacking, but anyone with a wikipedia account should go to Wikipedia:SOPA Initiative and leave a comment there. Wikipedians are famously xenophobic--they couldn't care less what people on reddit say about them or their intent. It is discussion on Wikipedia which will sway the decision one way or another.
From my experience I can predict that the most likely outcome if pressure is not placed on them will be delay and bureaucratic nonsense until the time for action has passed. A small number of vocal opponents can stop consensus from emerging almost indefinitely.
[–]Counterman 7 points 7 hours ago
A small number of vocal opponents can stop consensus from emerging almost indefinitely.
Yeah, and there are examples from wikipedia's history that political actors have realized this, realized how important wikipedia actually is, and got their own people into the system. Wikipedia would feel right at home if you're used to sleazy politics.
[–]therealprotonk 2 points 7 hours ago
In this case the vocal opponents are either long term wikipedians (like myself but on the other side) or long term agent provocateurs like Seth Finkelstein, a "journalist" who spends most of his time in wikipedia stirring up shit. I don't think any political actors on the side of sopa understand or could competently navigate the discussion processes around this decision.
Note the "Wikipedians are famously xenophobic" comment. From Protonk
, a famously xenophobic Wikipedia administrator.....This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Fri 13th January 2012, 8:50pm