Dear Nathan et al. I answered Josh in the other threat but will copy my answer to him again here below so that anybody interested to continue can do this in the "right" threat.
Nathan, I am disgusted by your comparisons. "colonialist aspect"? "little reminiscent of European Christian missionaries bringing the Bible to the supposedly uncivilized." These allegations - presented as comparisons - are purely insulting. Oh, and actually it was Lila who introduced WP0 to this threat - otherwise I wouldn't have taken the chance to hint Kourosh to this field which was announced to be in his future field of responsibility. I will not continue discussing with people making insulting comparisons to violent christian missionaries or similarily offending rhetoric stuff which in no way helps the discussion. I - as everybody else in this discussion - are not to be judged by my race. Believing just because I am white I could only think and behave in colonistic pattern is an insult and not a contribution to the discussion. cheers Jens 2015-04-01 21:16 GMT+02:00 Nathan <[email protected]>: > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Gilles Dubuc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > To me Josh's point in the other thread settles this argument. I can't > > presume to know better than the people this service is made for what is > > good for them. People in other cultures have values as well. They might > be > > different than ours, but more importantly, they have to be pitted against > > constraints that are completely different than ours. It's perfectly > normal > > that the result of the moral equation people have to solve can be > different > > than ours. It's also logical for it to evolve over time, as the > constraints > > change. Let people in the countries where Wikipedia Zero operates decide > > whether it fits their vision of the movement or not. I'm sure that if > users > > in a given country find it contrary to their beliefs or what they think > to > > be the movement's values, they'll campaign against it on their own > accord. > > > I agree. We've discussed on this list before that for some, including Jens, > the principles of net neutrality haven taken on a religious dimension. Any > deviation from the absolute principle is attacked as immoral, so that some > who expect that Wikimedia is a moral actor (from their perspective) feel > shocked and betrayed when it is apparent that Wikimedia doesn't share this > religious view of net neutrality. > > Josh Lim's e-mail makes it clear that there is a definite colonialist > aspect to this absolutist perspective, more than a little reminiscent of > European Christian missionaries bringing the Bible to the supposedly > uncivilized. Net neutrality activists should not presume to know better > what is right and necessary for all parts of the world; if Wikipedia Zero > is hailed as useful and needed in areas where it is available (and it is), > then we should accept it and even promote it as a moral positive. > > And to Jen's complaint about calling WP0 off topic... Perhaps you > misunderstood, Jens - I wasn't referring exclusively to your reply to > Gerard, but to the clear fact that a discussion about net neutrality was > off topic for a thread welcoming a new executive to the WMF. Incidentally, > I believe it *was* you who introduced WP0 to the thread. > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
