On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:36 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Did you draw that conclusion? > > Your equivocation on this point is wearisome. > I don't know what you mean by "equivocation" here. I'm not equivocating, so far as I know. Perhaps I'm just not understanding what you mean by "this point." > Jimbo's actions were > ridiculously damaging for *no gain whatsoever*. > I understand that you believe this. But it depends on what you mean by "damage" and on what you mean by "no gain." The thesis has been advanced here that Jimmy's actions somehow damaged us in the view of "the whole world." I'm only questioning that particular thesis. Whether "the whole world" would have had a higher opinion of Wikipedia if Fox had run the story they were trying to manufacture -- instead of the lame stories they have run -- is also an interesting proposition, but I hope you will understand why I don't find that proposition particularly credible. --m _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
