Yair, Would you please explain what you mean by damaging?
> To have a huge banner placed over every article on > the whole project linking to 43px-font blatant political > advocacy which can't be reverted, is really damaging. My opinion remains that 43pt blatant advocacy in support of both personal freedom of movement and scientific consensus disputed by fossil fuel interests is extremely helpful to the Foundation, its Mission, and in attracting additional volunteers, especially because those issues have been disfavored by recent political trends brought about by political leveraging of xenophobia and lobbyist money. Why do people think it is reasonable to claim that such advocacy is damaging without presenting any evidence in support of their opinion? Clearly many people do, but why? _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>