Re: [Foundation-l] Help Beat Jimmy! (The appeal, that is....)
Liam says: + Somehow, I doubt if making *you* very pleased is a concern that motivates many people, especially on this list. + Be that as it may, Liam, was there any aspect -- any aspect whatsoever -- of my request that would not be happily addressed by any transparent and open non-profit organization with a very public role and responsibility? Greg ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876 His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. He deserves 'fair treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia deserve so-called 'fair treatment'. Those who violate community norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the disruptive elements who create havoc on the project by their offensive comments and offsite attacks. The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Peter ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
Peter Damian wrote: I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876 His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. He deserves 'fair treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia deserve so-called 'fair treatment'. Those who violate community norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the disruptive elements who create havoc on the project by their offensive comments and offsite attacks. The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Peter This is so naive a post that I can only believe that someone has hijacked your account, and I can't wait for your amendments to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolpuddle_Martyrs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi I expect you might have an apology and weakly-argued defence tomorrow, when you might have sobered up, but right now you are on thin ice in epistemological terms and are closer to a 17-year old newly-radicalised student than a considered scholar. Shame on you, and that's without discussing the legal system of China. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
Peter, I've never heard of Wikipedia sentencing anybody to prison. I can't support such a comparison between blocking and real-life prison. Have you ever been jailed yourself? It is not fun. I would much rather be blocked from all Wikimedia projects forever than spend a week in prison, especially in China. If I'm blocked from all WM projects, I can still go for a stroll, visit the library, go to work, choose which food I want to eat, travel freely, spend virtually unlimited time with loved ones, work in the community... prison does not allow for such luxuries. By making such a comparison, you are making light of the experiences of those of us who have ever been deprived of our liberty, including those unlucky enough to find themselves locked in the cold, dark confines of some remote prison with unspeakably inhumane conditions for the majority of their lives, wrongly accused of committing a crime they know nothing about. -m. 2010/10/8 Peter Damian peter.dam...@btinternet.com: I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876 His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. He deserves 'fair treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia deserve so-called 'fair treatment'. Those who violate community norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the disruptive elements who create havoc on the project by their offensive comments and offsite attacks. The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Peter ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
Peter has been placed on moderation as a preventive measure. If future posts are still civil, irrespective of sanity considerations, we'll let them through. Austin On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Peter Damian peter.dam...@btinternet.com wrote: I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876 His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. He deserves 'fair treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia deserve so-called 'fair treatment'. Those who violate community norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the disruptive elements who create havoc on the project by their offensive comments and offsite attacks. The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Peter ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: Peter Damian wrote: I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876 His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. He deserves 'fair treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia deserve so-called 'fair treatment'. Those who violate community norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the disruptive elements who create havoc on the project by their offensive comments and offsite attacks. The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Peter This is so naive a post that I can only believe that someone has hijacked your account, and I can't wait for your amendments to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolpuddle_Martyrs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi I expect you might have an apology and weakly-argued defence tomorrow, when you might have sobered up, but right now you are on thin ice in epistemological terms and are closer to a 17-year old newly-radicalised student than a considered scholar. Shame on you, and that's without discussing the legal system of China. You understood, I'm sure, that he was making an exaggerated comparison between the Chinese government's approach to public debate and Wikipedia's governance? He clearly believes that Liu Xiaobo has been mistreated (which he has been), and also that he and others have been mistreated by Wikipedia in a conceptually similar fashion. If you think he actually believes Liu Xiaobo is a criminal deviant, I think you missed the point. Nathan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
On 8 October 2010 23:45, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: You understood, I'm sure, that he was making an exaggerated comparison between the Chinese government's approach to public debate and Wikipedia's governance? He clearly believes that Liu Xiaobo has been mistreated (which he has been), and also that he and others have been mistreated by Wikipedia in a conceptually similar fashion. If you think he actually believes Liu Xiaobo is a criminal deviant, I think you missed the point. Godwinatiing is still verboten at WMF. If, on the other hand, Peter is actually saying people banned from Wikipedia should have their organs harvested and is volunteering, that is of course a different matter. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
Nathan wrote: On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: Peter Damian wrote: I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876 His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. He deserves 'fair treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia deserve so-called 'fair treatment'. Those who violate community norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the disruptive elements who create havoc on the project by their offensive comments and offsite attacks. The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Peter This is so naive a post that I can only believe that someone has hijacked your account, and I can't wait for your amendments to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolpuddle_Martyrs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi I expect you might have an apology and weakly-argued defence tomorrow, when you might have sobered up, but right now you are on thin ice in epistemological terms and are closer to a 17-year old newly-radicalised student than a considered scholar. Shame on you, and that's without discussing the legal system of China. You understood, I'm sure, that he was making an exaggerated comparison between the Chinese government's approach to public debate and Wikipedia's governance? He clearly believes that Liu Xiaobo has been mistreated (which he has been), and also that he and others have been mistreated by Wikipedia in a conceptually similar fashion. If you think he actually believes Liu Xiaobo is a criminal deviant, I think you missed the point. Nathan He claims to be a philosopher, not a satirist. Meanwhile, any comparison between the Chinese judicial system and Wikipedia can only be [[WP:GODWIN'S LAW|insulting]]. I regard the post as utterly misguided, and not the first I have seen in recent days. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 16:51, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: If, on the other hand, Peter is actually saying people banned from Wikipedia should have their organs harvested and is volunteering, that is of course a different matter. We could start with his brain cells, as there seems to be something of a shortage. :) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
SlimVirgin wrote: On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 16:11, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: I expect you might have an apology and weakly-argued defence tomorrow, when you might have sobered up, but right now you are on thin ice in epistemological terms and are closer to a 17-year old newly-radicalised student than a considered scholar. Shame on you, and that's without discussing the legal system of China. He was being ironic. Jonathan Swift was at least plausible in that regard (although satire rather than irony), because his writing was so obviously pointed that the clever people got the message and the stupids didn't. Damian failed in being inadequately excessive, perhaps, and ended up being plausible without going further. I realise that subtlety is an artform, but it doesn't always show itself in mere words. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
You understood, I'm sure, that he was making an exaggerated comparison between the Chinese government's approach to public debate and Wikipedia's governance? He clearly believes that Liu Xiaobo has been mistreated (which he has been), and also that he and others have been mistreated by Wikipedia in a conceptually similar fashion. If you think he actually believes Liu Xiaobo is a criminal deviant, I think you missed the point. Nathan Well, do we actually prevent some viewpoint from being expressed adequately? How about a list? Fred Bauder ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
Fred Bauder wrote: You understood, I'm sure, that he was making an exaggerated comparison between the Chinese government's approach to public debate and Wikipedia's governance? He clearly believes that Liu Xiaobo has been mistreated (which he has been), and also that he and others have been mistreated by Wikipedia in a conceptually similar fashion. If you think he actually believes Liu Xiaobo is a criminal deviant, I think you missed the point. Nathan Well, do we actually prevent some viewpoint from being expressed adequately? How about a list? Fred Bauder We shouldn't, but a plausible argument, however extreme, if not intended to be so, should not be assumed to be taken seriously without satire/satire tags. Humour and point can be so subtle as to be invisible, and it behoves those making the point to either (a) make it so grossly obvious as to be beyond discussion or (b) flag it. That avoids misunderstanding, and particularly from cheap journalists who will leap upon any apparent infelicity of language to hang an article therefrom. If Damian wanted to make a point, there was no need to couch it in such oblique language; Wittgenstein he is not. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
Well, do we actually prevent some viewpoint from being expressed adequately? How about a list? Fred Bauder I have a better idea. Peter is simply too offensive at times to be an unmoderated list participant. No further discussion is needed... Well, it's not a promising start, but I have, for example heard a few complaints that the views of Lyndon LaRouche were not fully expressed, but of course, the problem is that some of them may not be notable. The views of the politboro of China are secret. I can't say we fall down there. Is there someone out there who is unable to edit due to having unpopular views? I speak not of someone who insists on calling people names and editwarring, but someone who is willing to discuss the matter. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I think it is not fair to censor Peter and then still talk about him and what he said. One or the other can be justified (and should be), but not both at the same time. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMr7CyAAoJEHCAuDvx9Z6L0sEH/RdbZxN7Rco3arDLZReUh0qx i0FfdXX5xzxvxh38+bmNvdmfejddHSLq+vyxRWuiI1LO3qCGbz3ZZMx9s7t1wnoc z0vtOeaz0EU5tg6SagNuhS5K/HiXkumVfeaJepcJjTKHrl3Ulq0L/IG5TPf0YTjV 06AHwRvEg1Siet1rQMZpzay6XmhtU/kTdgnMxnZU9hs8qKk8BD07Mp1v2EoTYE5+ alNNxw3/dD4VwYejRo6QN9aWxmuZKVvzPq0iggTZT125wYO6vWfwbe2qcGCMpz42 3TK5EWopT2Lt02Vnr6p6DoODbTsEtFRHJLU0mIGvqQ/SIWURxF3ZA/XBNSQ05ro= =nAdA -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 17:14, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: Jonathan Swift was at least plausible in that regard (although satire rather than irony), because his writing was so obviously pointed that the clever people got the message and the stupids didn't. Damian failed in being inadequately excessive ... I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law ... His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. ... The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Hard to see how he could have been more obvious. And the result? He's placed on moderation. :D ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
about Liu Xiaobo: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_08 Chinese wikipedia: http://zh.wikipedia.org/ My blog: http://shizhao.org twitter: https://twitter.com/shizhao [[zh:User:Shizhao]] 2010/10/9 Peter Damian peter.dam...@btinternet.com I don't know why such fuss has been made in the media about this. Under Chinese law, Xiaobo is a criminal who has been sentenced by Chinese judicial departments for violating Chinese law http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/461876 His own community has delivered a verdict upon him: he is a criminal. He deserves 'fair treatment' no more than the trolls who have disrupted the Wikipedia deserve so-called 'fair treatment'. Those who violate community norms, such as Xiaobo (in the case of China) or many of the disruptive elements who create havoc on the project by their offensive comments and offsite attacks. The Chinese government imposed a blackout on news of the award: quite right. This is exactly what would happen on Wikipedia, by means of blocks in article space, talk pages and email access. More power to the community! Peter ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Noein prono...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I think it is not fair to censor Peter and then still talk about him and what he said. One or the other can be justified (and should be), but not both at the same time. While Peter's intent surely was not to offend, his comments were inarticulate, and his comparison is offensive. As such, moderation is appropriate. That said, if he has something civil to add to this or any other conversation - including responses to others in this thread - his comments will of course be approved in short order. That said, I think this conversation is going nowhere fast. If there are widespread cases of Wikimedia users being treated unfairly within a community, let them come forward. But in doing so, let's try to avoid hyperbole. -- [[User:Ral315]] ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
On 10/08/2010 08:07 PM, Ryan Lomonaco wrote: On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Noeinprono...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I think it is not fair to censor Peter and then still talk about him and what he said. One or the other can be justified (and should be), but not both at the same time. While Peter's intent surely was not to offend, his comments were inarticulate, and his comparison is offensive. As such, moderation is appropriate. That said, if he has something civil to add to this or any other conversation - including responses to others in this thread - his comments will of course be approved in short order. That said, I think this conversation is going nowhere fast. If there are widespread cases of Wikimedia users being treated unfairly within a community, let them come forward. But in doing so, let's try to avoid hyperbole. I want to get something clear here, however: Is Liu Xiaobo a Wikimedia user and is it possible that he has been banned from zh.wikipedia? If so, that is something legitimate to discuss here and continue this thread. Certainly people of his stature have participated with editing Wikipedia in some capacity or another. Otherwise, this indeed was an inflammatory remark being made here. The moderation certainly is reasonable. Heck, I've been banned from other forums for stuff far less caustic than this and Peter hasn't even really been banned here. - Robert Horning -- Robert Horning Moms Asked to Return to School Grant Funding May Be Available to Those That Qualify. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4cafdc8eae2dc1ab042st05vuc ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Liu Xiaobo
I want to get something clear here, however: Is Liu Xiaobo a Wikimedia user and is it possible that he has been banned from zh.wikipedia? If so, that is something legitimate to discuss here and continue this thread. Certainly people of his stature have participated with editing Wikipedia in some capacity or another. Otherwise, this indeed was an inflammatory remark being made here. The moderation certainly is reasonable. Heck, I've been banned from other forums for stuff far less caustic than this and Peter hasn't even really been banned here. - Robert Horning He's in prison in China. There is an article about him on the English Wikipedia. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
