On 28 February 2014 08:27, Delirium <delir...@hackish.org> wrote:

> But the other Wikimedia projects are *also* supposed to share that goal: of
> producing a Free-as-in-freedom encyclopedia whose contents can be safely
> reused and adapted by a wide range of other people and organizations, who
> should be able to assume that it is legal to do so without exhaustive
> case-by-case investigation. The movement's main job is not merely hosting
> the websites *.wikipedia.org, putting up whatever we find useful to put up,
> and taking down things when we get complaints or lawsuits.

You're justifying the observed, serious problems with current actions
by saying "but they should work in theory!"

The trouble is that

(a) there's no natural limit of caution - we could question every
single file on Commons and require OTRS for every single one *years*
after the fact (as is happening with many of the files the current
issue is about) - but we don't. Why is that?
(b) the Commons community has already gone way past the limits *the
WMF has explicitly said are fully OK*.

I can't speak to the claims of selective zealotry in caution, but the
effects are clear enough.

- d.

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

Reply via email to