Le 22/01/2012 20:04, Mike Godwin a écrit : > Another important lesson about arguing issues in Washington is that > the fight is never over. The content companies have been at war with > technology companies for decades over copyright issues. The fact that > we were heard one day (or even one week) in 2012 is no basis for > complacency.
I agree. Current times require a "wikifreedom" project whose objective would be to fight censorship through sharing knowledge and raising awareness. One of the main branches could be technological know-how to build radios or bypass internet censoring. Giving access to tor-hidden services like an encyclopedia or wikinews can change it ALL for censored peoples. > I believe Kat Walsh deserves credit for pointing out that, while we > strive for NPOV in our encyclopedic content, the very existence of an > encyclopedia -- and a freely available one at that -- signifies a > political position. (Encyclopedists and librarians have known this for > some time.) That's an important fact, but if the communities and donors are to delegate their power to a representant, it must be through a referendum amongst the 300 000 makers of Wikipedia. I think anyone who ever registered should be contacted and informed about such elections. Money is already already dangerous for a cause, political power is even more. « Beware the steward » > This is not an either/or choice. Small, independent voices can be > heard, if you know what you're doing. I agree. In fact, I think the power of Wikipedia and sister projects is not shown in the money, but in the huge and resourceful communities commited to them. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
