Le lundi 10 mars 2014 21:03:20 (CET), Yuri <y...@rawbw.com> a écrit :
On 03/10/2014 11:30, Seb35 wrote:
Another point of view is that the knowledge doesn’t (shouldn’t) depend in any way of the local government -- possibly it can be viewed differently from a culture to another but that’s a cultural question not related to censorship.

Moreover it would be a censorship practice close to the Ministry of Truth in 1984 where the newspapers are re-printed afterwards to modify the past History.

This is exactly the point: when local governments attempt to twist the truth, they are currently able to do this for all readers, regardless of the location. This feature would allow to explicitly twist the truth in specific areas where this twisting is legally required, while preserving the real version for everyone else. In a way, it will also keep the registry of altered information, while now there is no such way and alterations are just swallowed.

I’m not convinced by this method (quite difficult technically as said on the bug) because of the abuse ti could lead: if a government doesn’t like a version of an article (example given by Austin Hair), it would be too easy to find a random volunteer in the country to hide the unwanted parts. As a real example in the DCRI affair last year, if such a feature would have existed I guess the affair would have received a smaller attention from the international movement and the "censorship" would have worked better.

I understand your intention with this system, but I find it’s not a good response to the problem; I find a better response is to encourage and help the free speech associations, like what was done during SOPA/PIPA.

~ Seb35

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to