On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not American, but the other co-plaintiffs seem to be civil rights / > human rights organisations who are firmly at the left-wing/progressive end > of US politics > I am an American, and I'm not so sure about that characterization. Here are the co-plaintiffs: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA PEN AMERICAN CENTER GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN THE NATION MAGAZINE THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE WASHINGTON OFFICE ON LATIN AMERICA The one organization that describes itself as "the flagship of the left" is The Nation magazine; I'm curious why they would be involved, without a balancing conservative publication. Other than them, these seem like non-partisan entities. You might describe a couple as left-leaning, but others might be described as right-leaning. In American politics, it seems to me that there is a similar (if not greater) level of mistrust of the NSA and government surveillance among right wing groups like the Tea Party, as there is among left wing groups.[1] I think it's safe to say this is an issue that has significant resonance across the political spectrum, and it would be interesting to watch any effort to spin it as partisan for one side or the other. I doubt such an attempt would be successful, but I could be wrong...it would be interesting to watch it play out. Speaking for myself, I'm less concerned about public perception of Wikipedia's brand name on something like this, than success. Will this lead to better policy? I'd be interested to hear more about the calculations and predictions that went into it. I believe people's judgments of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia movement, and the Wikimedia Foundation will generally be formed on less politically charged issues. Wikimedia is founded on collaborative practices; I believe the way we treat stakeholders in the context of our various project-focused activities, and the quality and reach of the projects themselves, have a bigger impact on public perception. If the Wikimedia Foundation gets an apparent "win" here, as it did with SOPA, there may be some significant upside. If not, I think the only downside would be expended resources; and (by design), WMF does not have much accountability for poorly spent resources. So I don't see much of a practical downside. Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]] [1] Lawrence Lessig has had compelling things to say about Occupy (generally considered left-leaning) and the Tea Party (right wing): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/19/lawrence-lessig-occupy-tea-party_n_1018844.html _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
