A developing country perspective is missing in this conversation, so I’m going 
to fill in the gap since I find it odd that we’re talking about "developing” 
countries, when everyone who’s been participating in this discussion so far has 
been from developed countries.

> Wiadomość napisana przez Tim Landscheidt <t...@tim-landscheidt.de> w dniu 1 
> gru 2014, o godz. 09:05:
> 
> Mike Godwin <mnemo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> [...]
> 
>> Trying to understand Wikipedia Zero as some kind of self-interested
>> organizational move is a mistake, in my view. What it is, IMHO, is a
>> logical development based on the core mission statement of Wikipedia.
>> And in the long term it's actually helpful to the advancement of
>> network neutrality without posing the anti-competitive risks that
>> other zero-rated services may pose.
> 
> I think on the contrary Wikipedia Zero illustrates nicely
> why net neutrality is so important: Wikipedia Zero favours
> solely Wikipedia (und sister projects), while contradicting
> or simply other opinions and resources bite the dust.
> 
> This mainstreaming, forming a monopolistic cabal on all
> things information is why I am a strong proponent of net
> neutrality.  The ease with which information can be shared
> nowadays should be used so that more people provide their
> views, not more people consume one view.

As far as I know, Wikipedia tries to synthesize several points of view so that 
we have a neutral approach to a particular topic, not favoring one view over 
the other.  In addition, the fact that you can edit through Wikipedia Zero 
allows for alternative voices to be heard.  I find it hard to believe that 
Wikipedia Zero stifles NPOV, if you’re hinting at people being "forced” to 
consume only one point of view, when even Wikipedia doesn’t aspire to do that.

> And I have severe doubts that Wikipedia Zero fulfils actual
> needs from the perspective of sustainable development.

I don’t know about where you’re in, but I can tell you that in the developing 
world, Wikipedia’s been very helpful in helping us spread the word about the 
projects.

In the Philippines, Wikipedia readership jumped when Wikipedia Zero was rolled 
out.  That’s more readers, and hopefully more editors.  We have a good 
relationship with the Philippines’ largest telecommunications company as a 
result, and they’ve been very supportive of our efforts to bring knowledge to 
more Filipinos.  And you say that that doesn’t contribute to "sustainable 
development”?

I think it’s profoundly important in this discussion that we need to avoid 
generalizing the world as if everyone’s in Europe or the United States.  Yes, 
net neutrality is important.  Yes, I support net neutrality and believe that 
ISPs shouldn’t discriminate against content providers.  But if it means 
bringing more information to more people, I’m willing to sacrifice that for a 
while because I think that Filipinos being given access to free information is 
more valuable — and more important — than what I believe in vis-à-vis net 
neutrality.  I hope everyone else here who doesn’t support Wikipedia Zero 
because of that will actually see the good that it has done for the developing 
world, and that the rest of us find great use for this program.

Regards,

Josh

JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines

jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com <mailto:jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com> | +63 (915) 321-7582
Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
http://about.me/josh.lim <http://about.me/josh.lim>
_______________________________________________
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to