I think anything that distances Wikimedia from a company which used to distribute spyware and has attracted opposition from a number of groups and people that I respect would be a good thing, and I definitely support Brion's action on this.
However, what stance WM-AU specifically takes on it, given we are such a small part of the organisation and WP and various other WM projects have already opted out, would amount to simply making a statement in broad terms about the kind of Web we want to operate within, rather than having any real or measurable impact. I wouldn't oppose that, either, although I'm not sure that it would be necessary. But that's a matter for the Committee. cheers Andrew 2009/4/30 David Gerard <[email protected]> > 2009/4/30 Brian Salter-Duke <[email protected]>: > > > I would certainly support you doing this and I do not think it will be > > disputed as the WMF and larger chatpers with more web presence have done > > so. However, perhaps the committee needs to discuss it. > > > Most of the point of doing so is to do so publicly, so that it can be > stated "The board resolved that wikimedia.org.au should be opted-out > of Phorm and requested Angela Beesley to send the opt-out notice." > Then ORG can mention lots of chapter opt-outs on their blog and we all > look good, ORG looks good and Phorm continues to look like Phorm ;-) > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediaau-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l >
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
