2008/12/8 Tim Starling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Thomas Dalton wrote: >>> On the radio interview: I thought David sounded unfair, espousing some >>> unlikely conspiracy theories suggesting that the IWF chose Wikipedia for >>> any other reason than the fact that some disgruntled Wikipedian submitted >>> it to their tip box a few days ago. >> >> The idea that they've blocked Wikipedia but not Amazon because Amazon >> has more lawyers sounds pretty plausible to me (what else could they >> mean by "pragmatic"?). > [...] > > In the interview, Sarah Robertson said "as I understand it, the only > report we received of this content as of Friday was the content on > Wikipedia." > > I'll assume stupidity rather than malice. "Pragmatic" could mean anything.
Yeah, but if I were blocking a webpage I would read the webpage first. The article gives all the information someone would need to find out that the image is available elsewhere. > If they wanted this to be a test case, why would they have handled it so > ineptly? Because they're inept? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
