Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-16 Thread Gnangarra
Kaya

I know I have contributed to the confusion here and for that I apologize,
thank you Christophe for express better what I was getting at.


Can I suggest that we choose period to put focus on the positive aspects of
the migration over the last 70 years, including the various UN charters and
treaties that have been signed regarding refugee of ways in which new
cultures have influenced or changed our own societies.  A kind of displaced
peoples month, its something every country has experienced, every community
has dealt with whether its transient populations in temporary settlements
or new residents, its global, its neutral and can be shared equally.
Additionally its an opportunity affiliates can use to open Wikipedia up to
new editors who can share their multilingual capacity to share knowledge
across projects


I like to share what an award winning Australian Journalist said about the
way people have responded to the attacks
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/waleed-aly-hits-out-at-isis-over-paris-attacks-calls-them-weak/story-fn948wjf-1227611388541



On 16 November 2015 at 20:25, Christophe Henner  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> My email was an answer to this topic going to the religion ground, sorry if
> it was interpretated otherwise.
>
> More to the point. As a movement, we must never remember that we ARE
> diverse. That is one of the thing I love the most is that twice a year I do
> actually get to meet people from the other side of the world and learn.
> And whatever happens in Paris, I believe, as Wikimedians, this is what we
> should push forward. That no matter what, we cherish that diversity. That
> we're documentin all of knowledge and culture.
>
> To be slightly more blunt, I'm totally unconfortable with giving a focus on
> Paris when, at the same time, people die on a daily basis by the hand of
> the same people in many other countries.
> Sadly, everyday thre are acts of terror all around the world. And the one
> in Paris is not more important in the end. Our westerners bias make it
> looks like more important, but it's not.
>
> So if we could, and I don't know if we could, I would rather see an
> initiative start to digitally document as best as we can every piece of
> culture/architecture/history the're trying to destroy. That would be
> meaningful I think. Though, I have no idea how we could achieve it.
>
> I'm sorry I jumped so quickly, but I'm really pissed of by many many things
> today and seeing that topic going off track berserked me (that is something
> that happens rarely to me :) )
>
> Best,
>
>
> --
> Christophe
>
> On 16 November 2015 at 11:20, Gerard Meijssen 
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Do read about exclusion (a sociology term) and given the people concerned
> > it fits. The reason people give and the mechanisms involved are separate.
> >
> > While we suffer for France, we will suffer the consequences when people
> no
> > longer appreciate that one of the universal human rights is the right to
> > religion. I was amused to learn about Pastafinarians who had a strainer
> on
> > their head for their drivers license.. The point is very much each to
> their
> > own.
> >
> > When it must be ridiculous to call a spade a spade you fail to appreciate
> > that the hate that is directed to Islam is exactly what was intended. So
> > have a ball and help those assholes achieve their goal.
> > Thanks,
> >   GerardM
> >
> > On 16 November 2015 at 09:36, Isarra Yos  wrote:
> >
> > > Isaac David makes good points, and writing it off as racist and
> > > discrimination is ridiculous. The people who did these things may
> indeed
> > be
> > > bloodlusty assholes, but what led them to this is important too, and
> > > denying that will only ensure that it is not understood, not
> addressed. I
> > > don't care if this is the way to tolerance, either - tolerance by
> itself
> > is
> > > meaningless; all you need to do is ignore, and not question, and you
> can
> > > perhaps tolerate anything. What is more difficult is understanding and
> > > love, because for these you have to learn, but these are also what
> > actually
> > > connect people and allow them to help each other, and to help prevent
> > > tragedies like these.
> > >
> > > But if you really don't wish to see this discussed, then simply do not
> > > discuss it. Don't tell people to shut the fuck up, simply let this
> aspect
> > > of the thread die on its own.
> > >
> > > We work on these projects to help people learn, and to learn ourselves.
> > > Fae's proposal was not a bad one to this end, and Gnangarra brings up
> > > related topics that are also of relevance. These should not be at odds,
> > as
> > > these are all important, and all worth working on, covering, building
> > upon.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 16/11/15 07:14, Pierre-Selim wrote:
> > >
> > >> Just +1 on the stfu.
> > >> Le 16 nov. 2015 7:53 AM, "Christophe Henner" <
> > christophe.hen...@gmail.com
> > >> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-16 Thread Christophe Henner
Hi,

My email was an answer to this topic going to the religion ground, sorry if
it was interpretated otherwise.

More to the point. As a movement, we must never remember that we ARE
diverse. That is one of the thing I love the most is that twice a year I do
actually get to meet people from the other side of the world and learn.
And whatever happens in Paris, I believe, as Wikimedians, this is what we
should push forward. That no matter what, we cherish that diversity. That
we're documentin all of knowledge and culture.

To be slightly more blunt, I'm totally unconfortable with giving a focus on
Paris when, at the same time, people die on a daily basis by the hand of
the same people in many other countries.
Sadly, everyday thre are acts of terror all around the world. And the one
in Paris is not more important in the end. Our westerners bias make it
looks like more important, but it's not.

So if we could, and I don't know if we could, I would rather see an
initiative start to digitally document as best as we can every piece of
culture/architecture/history the're trying to destroy. That would be
meaningful I think. Though, I have no idea how we could achieve it.

I'm sorry I jumped so quickly, but I'm really pissed of by many many things
today and seeing that topic going off track berserked me (that is something
that happens rarely to me :) )

Best,


--
Christophe

On 16 November 2015 at 11:20, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Do read about exclusion (a sociology term) and given the people concerned
> it fits. The reason people give and the mechanisms involved are separate.
>
> While we suffer for France, we will suffer the consequences when people no
> longer appreciate that one of the universal human rights is the right to
> religion. I was amused to learn about Pastafinarians who had a strainer on
> their head for their drivers license.. The point is very much each to their
> own.
>
> When it must be ridiculous to call a spade a spade you fail to appreciate
> that the hate that is directed to Islam is exactly what was intended. So
> have a ball and help those assholes achieve their goal.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> On 16 November 2015 at 09:36, Isarra Yos  wrote:
>
> > Isaac David makes good points, and writing it off as racist and
> > discrimination is ridiculous. The people who did these things may indeed
> be
> > bloodlusty assholes, but what led them to this is important too, and
> > denying that will only ensure that it is not understood, not addressed. I
> > don't care if this is the way to tolerance, either - tolerance by itself
> is
> > meaningless; all you need to do is ignore, and not question, and you can
> > perhaps tolerate anything. What is more difficult is understanding and
> > love, because for these you have to learn, but these are also what
> actually
> > connect people and allow them to help each other, and to help prevent
> > tragedies like these.
> >
> > But if you really don't wish to see this discussed, then simply do not
> > discuss it. Don't tell people to shut the fuck up, simply let this aspect
> > of the thread die on its own.
> >
> > We work on these projects to help people learn, and to learn ourselves.
> > Fae's proposal was not a bad one to this end, and Gnangarra brings up
> > related topics that are also of relevance. These should not be at odds,
> as
> > these are all important, and all worth working on, covering, building
> upon.
> >
> >
> > On 16/11/15 07:14, Pierre-Selim wrote:
> >
> >> Just +1 on the stfu.
> >> Le 16 nov. 2015 7:53 AM, "Christophe Henner" <
> christophe.hen...@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> a écrit :
> >>
> >> I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion".
> >>>
> >>> They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing
> more.
> >>>
> >>> It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural
> thing.
> >>> It's hate. Simple and plain hate.
> >>>
> >>> They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that
> jump
> >>> starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better
> >>> culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country.
> >>>
> >>> Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech.
> >>>
> >>> So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to
> >>> make
> >>> it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked :
> >>> tolerance,
> >>> understanding, love.
> >>>
> >>> That would the best answer we could make.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that
> >>> week-end I couldn't restrain myself
> >>> Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David"  a
> >>> écrit :
> >>>
> >>> Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> 
>  a écrit :
> 
>  Hoi,
> > Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who
> > beliefs
> > on one pile.
> >
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-16 Thread Isarra Yos
Isaac David makes good points, and writing it off as racist and 
discrimination is ridiculous. The people who did these things may indeed 
be bloodlusty assholes, but what led them to this is important too, and 
denying that will only ensure that it is not understood, not addressed. 
I don't care if this is the way to tolerance, either - tolerance by 
itself is meaningless; all you need to do is ignore, and not question, 
and you can perhaps tolerate anything. What is more difficult is 
understanding and love, because for these you have to learn, but these 
are also what actually connect people and allow them to help each other, 
and to help prevent tragedies like these.


But if you really don't wish to see this discussed, then simply do not 
discuss it. Don't tell people to shut the fuck up, simply let this 
aspect of the thread die on its own.


We work on these projects to help people learn, and to learn ourselves. 
Fae's proposal was not a bad one to this end, and Gnangarra brings up 
related topics that are also of relevance. These should not be at odds, 
as these are all important, and all worth working on, covering, building 
upon.


On 16/11/15 07:14, Pierre-Selim wrote:

Just +1 on the stfu.
Le 16 nov. 2015 7:53 AM, "Christophe Henner" 
a écrit :


I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion".

They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing more.

It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural thing.
It's hate. Simple and plain hate.

They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that jump
starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better
culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country.

Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech.

So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to make
it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked : tolerance,
understanding, love.

That would the best answer we could make.

Thanks

PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that
week-end I couldn't restrain myself
Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David"  a
écrit :


Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-16 Thread Austin Hair
This thread went to a bad place surprisingly fast, even for this list.

I understand that emotions are high, but please keep your tempers in
check and your discussion on-topic. Whatever you may think of Fæ's
proposal, I don't think it was intended to provoke a religious
argument, which I hope everyone can recognize as being outside the
scope of wikimedia-l.

Thanks,

Austin

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-16 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi,
Do read about exclusion (a sociology term) and given the people concerned
it fits. The reason people give and the mechanisms involved are separate.

While we suffer for France, we will suffer the consequences when people no
longer appreciate that one of the universal human rights is the right to
religion. I was amused to learn about Pastafinarians who had a strainer on
their head for their drivers license.. The point is very much each to their
own.

When it must be ridiculous to call a spade a spade you fail to appreciate
that the hate that is directed to Islam is exactly what was intended. So
have a ball and help those assholes achieve their goal.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 16 November 2015 at 09:36, Isarra Yos  wrote:

> Isaac David makes good points, and writing it off as racist and
> discrimination is ridiculous. The people who did these things may indeed be
> bloodlusty assholes, but what led them to this is important too, and
> denying that will only ensure that it is not understood, not addressed. I
> don't care if this is the way to tolerance, either - tolerance by itself is
> meaningless; all you need to do is ignore, and not question, and you can
> perhaps tolerate anything. What is more difficult is understanding and
> love, because for these you have to learn, but these are also what actually
> connect people and allow them to help each other, and to help prevent
> tragedies like these.
>
> But if you really don't wish to see this discussed, then simply do not
> discuss it. Don't tell people to shut the fuck up, simply let this aspect
> of the thread die on its own.
>
> We work on these projects to help people learn, and to learn ourselves.
> Fae's proposal was not a bad one to this end, and Gnangarra brings up
> related topics that are also of relevance. These should not be at odds, as
> these are all important, and all worth working on, covering, building upon.
>
>
> On 16/11/15 07:14, Pierre-Selim wrote:
>
>> Just +1 on the stfu.
>> Le 16 nov. 2015 7:53 AM, "Christophe Henner" > >
>> a écrit :
>>
>> I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion".
>>>
>>> They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing more.
>>>
>>> It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural thing.
>>> It's hate. Simple and plain hate.
>>>
>>> They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that jump
>>> starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better
>>> culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country.
>>>
>>> Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech.
>>>
>>> So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to
>>> make
>>> it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked :
>>> tolerance,
>>> understanding, love.
>>>
>>> That would the best answer we could make.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that
>>> week-end I couldn't restrain myself
>>> Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David"  a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>> Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen  Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who
> beliefs
> on one pile.
>
> I don't know how anyone could be more explicit on his treatment of the
 problems of making an overt generalisation, yet you attack me personally

>>> on
>>>
 the alleged grounds that I have accused all religious people of being
 violent.

 Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to

> get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that.
>
> I never said so. I don't think so. Jainism serves as a good example of

>>> how
>>>
 faith-based beliefs may be completely harmless depending on what the

>>> claims
>>>
 are. However, I do think  religion is one of the ways some people get
 off
 the rails, and that this is a problem that goes largely underestimated

>>> and
>>>
 unacknowledged, firstly because most people subscribe to a religion and
 second because it is so easy to confuse the criticism of intolerance and
 bigotry with actual intolerance and bigotry. But this is irrelevant as

>>> far
>>>
 as my original reply to Gnangarra and Vandenberg are concerned because I
 didn't even touch that point. All I said is that I find it extremely
 dishonest to claim that these attacks had nothing to do with Islam,
 whatever the extremism and interpretations of ISIS might be and however
 disconnected and offensive their deeds might look like for the rest of
 Muslims.


 As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its

> interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two
> distinct
> questions.
> Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-16 Thread Gnangarra
What I said was I think we should be cautious about linking the items Fea
proposed both because of the generalisations - stereotypes it would elevate
because of Wikipedias online authority.

I pointed out that Wikimedians as a community strectches beyond Western
Europe and North America and that we have contributors across the world who
have been affected by terrorism a case in point there was being reported an
attack in Turkey this morning which is when I posted my comment but there
is no changing of french flags for turkish ones on fb(Yes I know not our
problem). Are we going to single out the French community as being more
important than the Turkish Ukrainian, Filipino, Thai,  Nigerian,
Australian, Tunisian, Pakistani and the many others I havent even mentioned
who have suffered attacks in the last 12 months, then we should be very
careful on why and any association we make

I appreciate Fea's reasoning and commend them

On 16 November 2015 at 15:14, Pierre-Selim  wrote:

> Just +1 on the stfu.
> Le 16 nov. 2015 7:53 AM, "Christophe Henner" 
> a écrit :
>
> > I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion".
> >
> > They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing more.
> >
> > It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural thing.
> > It's hate. Simple and plain hate.
> >
> > They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that jump
> > starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better
> > culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country.
> >
> > Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech.
> >
> > So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to
> make
> > it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked :
> tolerance,
> > understanding, love.
> >
> > That would the best answer we could make.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that
> > week-end I couldn't restrain myself
> > Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David"  a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > a écrit :
> > >
> > >> Hoi,
> > >> Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who
> > >> beliefs
> > >> on one pile.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I don't know how anyone could be more explicit on his treatment of the
> > > problems of making an overt generalisation, yet you attack me
> personally
> > on
> > > the alleged grounds that I have accused all religious people of being
> > > violent.
> > >
> > > Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to
> > >> get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I never said so. I don't think so. Jainism serves as a good example of
> > how
> > > faith-based beliefs may be completely harmless depending on what the
> > claims
> > > are. However, I do think  religion is one of the ways some people get
> off
> > > the rails, and that this is a problem that goes largely underestimated
> > and
> > > unacknowledged, firstly because most people subscribe to a religion and
> > > second because it is so easy to confuse the criticism of intolerance
> and
> > > bigotry with actual intolerance and bigotry. But this is irrelevant as
> > far
> > > as my original reply to Gnangarra and Vandenberg are concerned because
> I
> > > didn't even touch that point. All I said is that I find it extremely
> > > dishonest to claim that these attacks had nothing to do with Islam,
> > > whatever the extremism and interpretations of ISIS might be and however
> > > disconnected and offensive their deeds might look like for the rest of
> > > Muslims.
> > >
> > >
> > > As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its
> > >> interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two
> distinct
> > >> questions.
> > >> Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the scholars,
> > >>
> > >
> > > "Leaving" sounds like a bad idea. What is so great about experts is
> that
> > > they shortcut the access to wisdom, but they shouldn't be used as an
> > excuse
> > > to waive intellectual responsibility. Scholars disagree, scholars make
> > > mistakes , and it will be up to the average person to evaluate the
> > problem
> > > at hand. Scholars seldom enroll into armed conflict, average people do.
> > >
> > > any typical Muslim will disagree with Daesh on many major points.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'm so glad they do and I would like to thank them for it, but this
> > > doesn't change a bit the relationship of Islam as a many-stranded
> > religion
> > > and the attacks at Paris. On the other hand I'm not so comfortable that
> > > said major points don't include things like intolerance for other
> faiths,
> > > specially non-Abrahamic ones, death penalty for adultery, the
> imposition
> > of
> > > Sharia in Western judicial systems and other 

[Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread
As an international community we have an opportunity to respond in a
positive and healing way to the attacks in Paris as well as sharing
our feelings of shock and sympathy.

Perhaps by planning open knowledge events to celebrate Parisian and
GLAM-related Islamic culture, which we could announce in a few weeks
time?

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi,
I blogged earlier ..

Thanks,
  GerardM

http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/11/wikipedia-on-syria-and-iraq-in-light-of.html

On 15 November 2015 at 12:12, Fæ  wrote:

> As an international community we have an opportunity to respond in a
> positive and healing way to the attacks in Paris as well as sharing
> our feelings of shock and sympathy.
>
> Perhaps by planning open knowledge events to celebrate Parisian and
> GLAM-related Islamic culture, which we could announce in a few weeks
> time?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread Gnangarra
Not sure we should be making such  a link as the events in Paris are not
about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not a
reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its unfortunately
its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS.

Wikimedia is a world wide community and the focus on Paris ignores all our
other communities who have over the last week, months. year or longer have
been affected by acts of terrorism, I think we should exercise care when we
adopt activities that elevate events or imply some guilt of association
immortalizing that as fact in a place like wikipedia

On 15 November 2015 at 19:12, Fæ  wrote:

> As an international community we have an opportunity to respond in a
> positive and healing way to the attacks in Paris as well as sharing
> our feelings of shock and sympathy.
>
> Perhaps by planning open knowledge events to celebrate Parisian and
> GLAM-related Islamic culture, which we could announce in a few weeks
> time?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread John Mark Vandenberg
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> Not sure we should be making such  a link as the events in Paris are not
> about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not a
> reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its unfortunately
> its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS.
>
> Wikimedia is a world wide community and the focus on Paris ignores all our
> other communities who have over the last week, months. year or longer have
> been affected by acts of terrorism, I think we should exercise care when we
> adopt activities that elevate events or imply some guilt of association
> immortalizing that as fact in a place like wikipedia

Very much agree broadly with Gnangarra, especially about links with Islam.
The most positive and wiki way to respond is to ensure we're being
neutral, and that the reality of all attacks around the world are
being adequately and accurately recorded in a balanced manner from a
worldwide perspective.

However the attack on Paris is widely viewed as an escalation, not
because a citizen of one country is more valued than another, because
some places are more treasured by larger number of people of the
world, and also we're more shocked as we expect they are better
protected, and that creates an elevation of its own.

I appreciate the Signpost for very tastefully responding, in a measured way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-11-11/Gallery

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread Isaac David


Yes, because there are many nice self-avowed Jewish, Muslims, 
Christians, etc. around the world. Therefore when some bad people do 
something horrible in the name of their cultural and ideological 
identity it actually has nothing to do with the ideas themselves, it's 
always got to be some other historical, social or psychological factor, 
otherwise we would be linking bad guys with good guys.



But who are you to decide who is an actual Muslim and who isn't?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 15:47, John Mark Vandenberg  
a écrit :
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra  
wrote:
 Not sure we should be making such  a link as the events in Paris 
are not

 about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not a
 reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its 
unfortunately

 its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS.

 Wikimedia is a world wide community and the focus on Paris ignores 
all our
 other communities who have over the last week, months. year or 
longer have
 been affected by acts of terrorism, I think we should exercise care 
when we
 adopt activities that elevate events or imply some guilt of 
association

 immortalizing that as fact in a place like wikipedia


Very much agree broadly with Gnangarra, especially about links with 
Islam.

The most positive and wiki way to respond is to ensure we're being
neutral, and that the reality of all attacks around the world are
being adequately and accurately recorded in a balanced manner from a
worldwide perspective.

However the attack on Paris is widely viewed as an escalation, not
because a citizen of one country is more valued than another, because
some places are more treasured by larger number of people of the
world, and also we're more shocked as we expect they are better
protected, and that creates an elevation of its own.

I appreciate the Signpost for very tastefully responding, in a 
measured way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-11-11/Gallery

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi,
Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who beliefs
on one pile. Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to
get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that.

As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its
interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two distinct
questions. Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the scholars,
any typical Muslim will disagree with Daesh on many major points.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 15 November 2015 at 23:09, Isaac David 
wrote:

> 
> Yes, because there are many nice self-avowed Jewish, Muslims, Christians,
> etc. around the world. Therefore when some bad people do something horrible
> in the name of their cultural and ideological identity it actually has
> nothing to do with the ideas themselves, it's always got to be some other
> historical, social or psychological factor, otherwise we would be linking
> bad guys with good guys.
> 
>
> But who are you to decide who is an actual Muslim and who isn't?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
>
>
> Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 15:47, John Mark Vandenberg  a
> écrit :
>
>> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>>
>>>  Not sure we should be making such  a link as the events in Paris are not
>>>  about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not a
>>>  reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its
>>> unfortunately
>>>  its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS.
>>>
>>>  Wikimedia is a world wide community and the focus on Paris ignores all
>>> our
>>>  other communities who have over the last week, months. year or longer
>>> have
>>>  been affected by acts of terrorism, I think we should exercise care
>>> when we
>>>  adopt activities that elevate events or imply some guilt of association
>>>  immortalizing that as fact in a place like wikipedia
>>>
>>
>> Very much agree broadly with Gnangarra, especially about links with Islam.
>> The most positive and wiki way to respond is to ensure we're being
>> neutral, and that the reality of all attacks around the world are
>> being adequately and accurately recorded in a balanced manner from a
>> worldwide perspective.
>>
>> However the attack on Paris is widely viewed as an escalation, not
>> because a citizen of one country is more valued than another, because
>> some places are more treasured by larger number of people of the
>> world, and also we're more shocked as we expect they are better
>> protected, and that creates an elevation of its own.
>>
>> I appreciate the Signpost for very tastefully responding, in a measured
>> way.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-11-11/Gallery
>>
>> --
>> John Vandenberg
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread Isaac David
Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen 
 a écrit :

Hoi,
Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who 
beliefs

on one pile.


I don't know how anyone could be more explicit on his treatment of the 
problems of making an overt generalisation, yet you attack me 
personally on the alleged grounds that I have accused all religious 
people of being violent.



Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to
get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that.


I never said so. I don't think so. Jainism serves as a good example of 
how faith-based beliefs may be completely harmless depending on what 
the claims are. However, I do think  religion is one of the ways some 
people get off the rails, and that this is a problem that goes largely 
underestimated and unacknowledged, firstly because most people 
subscribe to a religion and second because it is so easy to confuse the 
criticism of intolerance and bigotry with actual intolerance and 
bigotry. But this is irrelevant as far as my original reply to 
Gnangarra and Vandenberg are concerned because I didn't even touch that 
point. All I said is that I find it extremely dishonest to claim that 
these attacks had nothing to do with Islam, whatever the extremism and 
interpretations of ISIS might be and however disconnected and offensive 
their deeds might look like for the rest of Muslims.




As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its
interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two 
distinct

questions.
Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the scholars,


"Leaving" sounds like a bad idea. What is so great about experts is 
that they shortcut the access to wisdom, but they shouldn't be used as 
an excuse to waive intellectual responsibility. Scholars disagree, 
scholars make mistakes , and it will be up to the average person to 
evaluate the problem at hand. Scholars seldom enroll into armed 
conflict, average people do.



any typical Muslim will disagree with Daesh on many major points.


I'm so glad they do and I would like to thank them for it, but this 
doesn't change a bit the relationship of Islam as a many-stranded 
religion and the attacks at Paris. On the other hand I'm not so 
comfortable that said major points don't include things like 
intolerance for other faiths, specially non-Abrahamic ones, death 
penalty for adultery, the imposition of Sharia in Western judicial 
systems and other topics which are agreed upon by big fractions of 
Muslims.[1]


By the way, I have no special focus on your religion; it's part of the 
subject of this thread.

Regards

[1]: 
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf


Thanks,
   GerardM

On 15 November 2015 at 23:09, Isaac David 
wrote:


 
 Yes, because there are many nice self-avowed Jewish, Muslims, 
Christians,
 etc. around the world. Therefore when some bad people do something 
horrible
 in the name of their cultural and ideological identity it actually 
has
 nothing to do with the ideas themselves, it's always got to be some 
other
 historical, social or psychological factor, otherwise we would be 
linking

 bad guys with good guys.
 

 But who are you to decide who is an actual Muslim and who isn't?

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman


 Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 15:47, John Mark Vandenberg 
 a

 écrit :

 On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra  
wrote:


  Not sure we should be making such  a link as the events in Paris 
are not
  about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not 
a

  reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its
 unfortunately
  its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS.

  Wikimedia is a world wide community and the focus on Paris 
ignores all

 our
  other communities who have over the last week, months. year or 
longer

 have
  been affected by acts of terrorism, I think we should exercise 
care

 when we
  adopt activities that elevate events or imply some guilt of 
association

  immortalizing that as fact in a place like wikipedia



 Very much agree broadly with Gnangarra, especially about links 
with Islam.

 The most positive and wiki way to respond is to ensure we're being
 neutral, and that the reality of all attacks around the world are
 being adequately and accurately recorded in a balanced manner from 
a

 worldwide perspective.

 However the attack on Paris is widely viewed as an escalation, not
 because a citizen of one country is more valued than another, 
because

 some places are more treasured by larger number of people of the
 world, and also we're more shocked as we expect they are better
 protected, and that creates an elevation of its own.

 I appreciate the Signpost for very tastefully responding, in a 
measured

 way.

 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread Christophe Henner
I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion".

They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing more.

It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural thing.
It's hate. Simple and plain hate.

They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that jump
starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better
culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country.

Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech.

So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to make
it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked : tolerance,
understanding, love.

That would the best answer we could make.

Thanks

PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that
week-end I couldn't restrain myself
Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David"  a
écrit :

> Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen 
> a écrit :
>
>> Hoi,
>> Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who
>> beliefs
>> on one pile.
>>
>
> I don't know how anyone could be more explicit on his treatment of the
> problems of making an overt generalisation, yet you attack me personally on
> the alleged grounds that I have accused all religious people of being
> violent.
>
> Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to
>> get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that.
>>
>
> I never said so. I don't think so. Jainism serves as a good example of how
> faith-based beliefs may be completely harmless depending on what the claims
> are. However, I do think  religion is one of the ways some people get off
> the rails, and that this is a problem that goes largely underestimated and
> unacknowledged, firstly because most people subscribe to a religion and
> second because it is so easy to confuse the criticism of intolerance and
> bigotry with actual intolerance and bigotry. But this is irrelevant as far
> as my original reply to Gnangarra and Vandenberg are concerned because I
> didn't even touch that point. All I said is that I find it extremely
> dishonest to claim that these attacks had nothing to do with Islam,
> whatever the extremism and interpretations of ISIS might be and however
> disconnected and offensive their deeds might look like for the rest of
> Muslims.
>
>
> As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its
>> interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two distinct
>> questions.
>> Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the scholars,
>>
>
> "Leaving" sounds like a bad idea. What is so great about experts is that
> they shortcut the access to wisdom, but they shouldn't be used as an excuse
> to waive intellectual responsibility. Scholars disagree, scholars make
> mistakes , and it will be up to the average person to evaluate the problem
> at hand. Scholars seldom enroll into armed conflict, average people do.
>
> any typical Muslim will disagree with Daesh on many major points.
>>
>
> I'm so glad they do and I would like to thank them for it, but this
> doesn't change a bit the relationship of Islam as a many-stranded religion
> and the attacks at Paris. On the other hand I'm not so comfortable that
> said major points don't include things like intolerance for other faiths,
> specially non-Abrahamic ones, death penalty for adultery, the imposition of
> Sharia in Western judicial systems and other topics which are agreed upon
> by big fractions of Muslims.[1]
>
> By the way, I have no special focus on your religion; it's part of the
> subject of this thread.
> Regards
>
> [1]:
> http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>GerardM
>>
>> On 15 November 2015 at 23:09, Isaac David 
>> wrote:
>>
>>  
>>>  Yes, because there are many nice self-avowed Jewish, Muslims,
>>> Christians,
>>>  etc. around the world. Therefore when some bad people do something
>>> horrible
>>>  in the name of their cultural and ideological identity it actually has
>>>  nothing to do with the ideas themselves, it's always got to be some
>>> other
>>>  historical, social or psychological factor, otherwise we would be
>>> linking
>>>  bad guys with good guys.
>>>  
>>>
>>>  But who are you to decide who is an actual Muslim and who isn't?
>>>
>>>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
>>>
>>>
>>>  Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 15:47, John Mark Vandenberg  a
>>>  écrit :
>>>
>>>  On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra 
 wrote:

   Not sure we should be making such  a link as the events in Paris are
> not
>   about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not a
>   reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its
>  unfortunately
>   its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS.
>
>   

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Parisian culture and libertarianism

2015-11-15 Thread Pierre-Selim
Just +1 on the stfu.
Le 16 nov. 2015 7:53 AM, "Christophe Henner" 
a écrit :

> I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion".
>
> They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing more.
>
> It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural thing.
> It's hate. Simple and plain hate.
>
> They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that jump
> starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better
> culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country.
>
> Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech.
>
> So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to make
> it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked : tolerance,
> understanding, love.
>
> That would the best answer we could make.
>
> Thanks
>
> PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that
> week-end I couldn't restrain myself
> Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David"  a
> écrit :
>
> > Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen  >
> > a écrit :
> >
> >> Hoi,
> >> Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who
> >> beliefs
> >> on one pile.
> >>
> >
> > I don't know how anyone could be more explicit on his treatment of the
> > problems of making an overt generalisation, yet you attack me personally
> on
> > the alleged grounds that I have accused all religious people of being
> > violent.
> >
> > Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to
> >> get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that.
> >>
> >
> > I never said so. I don't think so. Jainism serves as a good example of
> how
> > faith-based beliefs may be completely harmless depending on what the
> claims
> > are. However, I do think  religion is one of the ways some people get off
> > the rails, and that this is a problem that goes largely underestimated
> and
> > unacknowledged, firstly because most people subscribe to a religion and
> > second because it is so easy to confuse the criticism of intolerance and
> > bigotry with actual intolerance and bigotry. But this is irrelevant as
> far
> > as my original reply to Gnangarra and Vandenberg are concerned because I
> > didn't even touch that point. All I said is that I find it extremely
> > dishonest to claim that these attacks had nothing to do with Islam,
> > whatever the extremism and interpretations of ISIS might be and however
> > disconnected and offensive their deeds might look like for the rest of
> > Muslims.
> >
> >
> > As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its
> >> interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two distinct
> >> questions.
> >> Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the scholars,
> >>
> >
> > "Leaving" sounds like a bad idea. What is so great about experts is that
> > they shortcut the access to wisdom, but they shouldn't be used as an
> excuse
> > to waive intellectual responsibility. Scholars disagree, scholars make
> > mistakes , and it will be up to the average person to evaluate the
> problem
> > at hand. Scholars seldom enroll into armed conflict, average people do.
> >
> > any typical Muslim will disagree with Daesh on many major points.
> >>
> >
> > I'm so glad they do and I would like to thank them for it, but this
> > doesn't change a bit the relationship of Islam as a many-stranded
> religion
> > and the attacks at Paris. On the other hand I'm not so comfortable that
> > said major points don't include things like intolerance for other faiths,
> > specially non-Abrahamic ones, death penalty for adultery, the imposition
> of
> > Sharia in Western judicial systems and other topics which are agreed upon
> > by big fractions of Muslims.[1]
> >
> > By the way, I have no special focus on your religion; it's part of the
> > subject of this thread.
> > Regards
> >
> > [1]:
> >
> http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>GerardM
> >>
> >> On 15 November 2015 at 23:09, Isaac David 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>  
> >>>  Yes, because there are many nice self-avowed Jewish, Muslims,
> >>> Christians,
> >>>  etc. around the world. Therefore when some bad people do something
> >>> horrible
> >>>  in the name of their cultural and ideological identity it actually has
> >>>  nothing to do with the ideas themselves, it's always got to be some
> >>> other
> >>>  historical, social or psychological factor, otherwise we would be
> >>> linking
> >>>  bad guys with good guys.
> >>>  
> >>>
> >>>  But who are you to decide who is an actual Muslim and who isn't?
> >>>
> >>>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 15:47, John Mark Vandenberg 
> a
> >>>  écrit :
> >>>
> >>>  On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra