actually - might a WMF 'code of conduct' for projects be a good idea? (as in something perhaps a dollop more pragmatic than 'comply with our mission statement'!) - sounds like an idea for the strategy wiki... :-)
(which just in case folk haven't seen is here --> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and looks really good to me!) cheers, Peter, PM. On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxw...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Milos Rancic<mill...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:41 AM, private musings<thepmacco...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Well yeah Milos - but we probably won't - will we! - Seems a bit silly. > >> > >> I was hoping we could have a thread about the principle of discussing / > >> evaluating some of the various voluntary codes of conduct out there - > >> perhaps someone is aware of a US standard (is that what you're getting > at, > >> Geni - that the location of the servers is probably the most important > >> factor?) > > > > I don't see any reason why should we follow any law which we don't > > have to follow. > > We don't have to follow the internet norm that making your web page > text BLINKING YELLOW ON BLUE is something you don't do… and yet we do. > > Don't think of this has "obeying laws", think of it that there are > some things we don't have to do, which aren't in conflict with our > mission, and which would be in our interests. > > Although the starting premise that we don't comply with a (multitude > of) code(s) of conduct is a bit flawed. The projects clearly do— > though they may not be ones written down by third parties and they may > be inadequate... > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l