We do have values and <grin> my arguments are solid </grin> what I find
lacking is any argument whereby you try to convince us what I am missing.
Let me be blunt. I hate the way people abuse political sentiments and try
to convince us that they are enough to not see the facts that are in front
of us. What I find is that we do not care for arguments, only when they are
"our" own are they accepted. "Us" is only the small group "we" belong to.
For me the fact that some policy exists does not mean that it is the final
word on anything. When employees of the Wikimedia Foundation cannot come
and go to the place where their family is, it is the strongest possible
argument that there is a problem. A problem we cannot ignore, a problem we
should not ignore. I positively hate policies because they are used to stop
people from thinking.
You attribute "political positions" to me. That is ok except I am not part
of your USA political system. I cannot vote there but it does affect the
movement I dearly love. So my position is not based on the power plays that
happen in the USA. My position is based on the effect it has on our
movement. Our movement is based on objective facts, sources, equal play for
any position and equal representation of cultures and countries in our
encyclopedia. To be honest we should do better.
PS we can not maintain that what we do has a neutral point of view when
much of the equalities mentioned fail to materialise.
On 5 February 2017 at 12:27, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Andrea Zanni <zanni.andre...@gmail.com>
> > On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Yair Rand <yyairr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "Wikipedia is something special. It is like a library or a public park.
> > It
> > > is like a temple for the mind. It is a place we can all go to think, to
> > > learn, to share our knowledge with others."
> > >
> > The point is,
> > you are implicitly assuming that a public park or a library,
> > the right to have "a temple for the mind", "a place we can all go to
> > to learn,
> > to share our knowledge with others",
> > are thing that are not inherently political.
> > You're simply wrong.
> No. As others have, you are attacking an argument that is not being made.
> Yair did not claim that the Wikimedia movement's goals are apolitical; he
> has simply asked that its political activity be restricted to its mission,
> as the WMF's own internal policy evidently requires. While permitting free
> travel for those with valid visas is certainly within that scope, it's
> unclear how free movement for refugees can be.
> GerardM claims that "we" have common values, and seems to be utterly
> convinced as to what those values are - and lucky for him, they perfectly
> match his own. I suppose that means there is no place in Wikimedia for
> anyone who would happily support the movement mission but disagrees with
> Gerard's other unrelated political positions. If the WMF's voice continues
> to be used to declare its position on this or that (and there will be many
> opportunities and entreaties to do so), that is the message some will draw.
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org