On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 2:45 AM, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The complete absence of mentioning the de:wp poll that was 85% against > any imposed filter is just *weird*. Not mentioning it, and not > acknowledging why someone would do that, doesn't make it go away. > > As you say, this blog post reads like someone forced to defend the > indefensible, hence the glaringly defective arguments. This will > convince no-one the post claims to be addressing. > > > - d. > It makes some sense. If you come to the conclusion that your constituency for a particularly important decision is a huge and diverse array of people (i.e. the readers), and then further conclude that opposition to your decision is coming from a very narrow and homogenous slice of that array (i.e. contributors)... Ignoring the opposition in favor of the "larger audience" could then be quite reasonable. Nathan _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
