There may be some of that, but it is also true that a lot of experts
are actually unhelpful (perhaps we could do something to improve that,
though - a system for experts to review articles, rather than edit
them, might be good). When experts get involved in editing there are
often ownership
Thomas Dalton wrote:
It's a democratically elected government making the laws
and those laws don't prevent free and fair elections, so it isn't
undemocratic. (Of course, an semi-official and unaccountable agency
like the IWF enforcing the laws is not a great way to go about it.)
Your addendum
From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is quite
a long time span.
Would it be possible to decrease this time span
Judson Dunn wrote:
Make no mistake, the free dissemination of all human knowledge to
every person on the planet is a fight. The forces that would spread
ignorance as a means of control, and separation are always fighting
back. The idea that we should acquiesce in that fight, and censor our
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
effeietsand...@gmail.comwrote:
From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours,
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2008/12/14 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
effeietsand...@gmail.comwrote:
From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have
board
minutes
The chair of the board, Michael, had posted the topics before the
meeting and a short report about resolutions and issues discussed after
the meeting.
Ting
Anthony wrote:
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
effeietsand...@gmail.comwrote:
From Sue's report, I understood
Hi all,
Yes, I know that in large organizations it is uncommon to approve minutes by
email. I however see no fundamental obstacles myself, but I'd love to hear
from them if they are there. Please note that commonness is no argument to
me in this case. I understand how we got to the current
Todd Allen wrote:
Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
Prior-restraint censorship, or blocking people from seeing,
discussing, and thinking
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
If the country has free and fair elections for its leaders then it is
a
2008/12/15 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
If the country has free and fair
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
Florence Devouard wrote:
Birgitte SB wrote:
I am strongly against collaborating with Westernish governments to help
make their censorship more effective. I personally don't think we should
help anyone make their censorship more effective. But if we are to
Sue Gardner wrote:
Hey folks,
Here is the RTTB for October. November will follow soon :-)
Enjoy!
Sue
Report to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
Covering: October 2008
Prepared by:Sue Gardner, Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Prepared for:
13 matches
Mail list logo
