2009/1/27 Andrew <orderinchao...@gmail.com>:
> (whoops, pressed send by accident) ... was omitted entirely. The bit they
> did quote ran something like, the needs of the encyclopaedia for neutral
> reliable articles and the needs of the community which maintained the
> articles needed to be balanced, and that there was a risk that in effect we
> might end up favouring one perspective over another based simply on the
> length of time people had been around.
> 2009/1/27 Andrew <orderinchao...@gmail.com>
>> Eek, yes I heard it online via Sydney local radio. I was quoted verbatim
>> but they used the second half of my quote, meaning that the part where I
>> said that BLP was the biggest challenge to the encyclopaedia at present and
>> that this was agreed by most, and that a solution was required, but the
>> question was over the technical merits of this particular proposal.
Don't worry, my quotes were also chopped in half. I guess we just need
to learn to never say anything that requires a caveat. :)
Lulz at being "Wikipedia's Australian President". hehe. not quite.
They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment:
Wikimediaau-l mailing list