On Wednesday 24 December 2008 20:30, David Gerard wrote: > 2008/12/25 Fred Bauder <[email protected]>: > > Hard to keep things straight isn't it when the object is to make a point. > > I speak of Red China, still controlled by Mao's heirs. > > Well, yes. (Who thankfully are not gross incompetents at the actual > management to the degree he was.) And it turns out that remaining > politically neutral is one of the best things we can do as well as the > cheapest and easiest, because we have the moral high ground and we're > not going away.
I fail to see how your conclusion follows from your premises. > And as economics shifts to information, we have > credibility to the skies. "Information wants to be free" means "it > leaks like a gas" and "running a Great Firewall is like trying to > carry air in a bucket". What does this have to do with anything? > > Abandoning neutrality as a general operating principle (manifested as > NPOV on Wikipedia, variants on other projects where that doesn't make > direct sense) would be a disaster. Why? I don't deny its usefulness and appropriateness for SPECIFIC PROJECTS, but why must it be universal across all WMF projects? -- Kurt Weber http://blog.kurtweber.us <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
