He right. Wikipedia has to respect other cultures and not harm them.  
If we did harm them, wikipedia wouldn't be neutral anymore.

Techman224

On 8-Dec-08, at 10:44 PM, J.L.W.S. The Special One wrote:

> I think most participating in the discussion on this mailing list do  
> not
> hold that attitude, thankfully. But I do see quite a few "ZOMG
> CENSORSHIP!"-like comments on IRC and AN. On IRC, an American  
> actually did
> say something like "If the rest of the world want to censor, screw  
> the rest
> of the world".
>
> Wikipedia's stance against censorship seems noble in theory, but in
> practice, it looks more like ideological blindness. It worsens  
> systemic bias
> by giving editors, especially Americans, carte blanche (did I use that
> correctly?) to attack other cultures.
>
> By the way, I agree that the policy against open proxies needs to be
> changed. TOR is the best and most common way to circumvent the Great
> Firewall of China. Why are many established Wikipedians, not at all
> concerned that mainland Chinese. who comprise around 20% of the world
> population, cannot edit Wikipedia?
>
> (I apologise for the anti-Americanism. In my experience, it is usually
> Americans who are like that, although some non-Americans are like  
> that too.
> Many Americans are not like that and I wish to assure them that I am  
> not
> targeting them in this post.)
>
> -- 
> Written with passion,
> J.L.W.S. The Special One
>
> 2008/12/9, Gregory Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 10:28 PM, J.L.W.S. The Special One
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I am concerned by the "only the USA matters, screw the rest of the  
>>> world"
>>> attitude displayed by some American Wikipedians.
>>>
>>> Do we care more about fighting censorship or letting British users  
>>> edit
>>> Wikipedia?
>>
>>
>> I don't think we care all that much about "fighting censorship":  
>> We're
>> not really doing much fighting, we never have. We could do a lot: We
>> could be promoting SSL and TOR, we could be evading the block, we
>> could change Wikipedia to have a black background for censored users
>> with a video from Jimmy explaining why the current situation is
>> harmful. We could be litigating against the IWF and ISPs who are
>> hijacking our traffic, even if we don't think we'd win. etc. We could
>> make readers access to Wikipedia an all or nothing thing. These  
>> things
>> would be fighting censorship.
>>
>> Right now we're just talking politely. At best you can say we're not
>> being instantly cowed by demands by some private organization, over
>> material which as far as we can tell both contributes to our mission
>> (in however minor a way) and which is not illegal. I think this is
>> good because if we were to do otherwise there would be no clear place
>> to stop.
>>
>> The editing problems are purely from the technical incompetence in  
>> the
>> manner in which the UK censorship is being performed, and not from  
>> the
>> censorship itself.  So long as the UK networks use censorship run  
>> in a
>> technically broken way we can have no safety no matter what we host.
>> Your dichotomy is a false one.
>>
>> (1) The blocking should be changed to be the actual image, rather  
>> than
>> the page text. This would remove most of the collateral damage (no
>> more editing problems), and actually do better at accomplishing their
>> goals. Right now the ISPs and IWF claim to be protecting people  
>> from a
>> harmful image, yet they aren't doing that: Instead they are  
>> protecting
>> people from the discussion of the controversy and not stopping the
>> image at all.
>>
>> (2) All of the proxies should be sending the XFF header to avoid the
>> collateral damage. (a few did, and we we accept the header from them
>> now)
>>
>> We've requested both of these things for days now, because of the way
>> the filtering is performed (with each ISP doing its own thing) (2)  
>> may
>> take a while, but I see no technical reason why (1) couldn't be done
>> right away.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

Reply via email to