Hoi,
That is beside the point. You are against the proposal that is on the
table. It is a compromise. Now the fact that some want much more and you
want much less makes it a compromise.
So what gives, why do you refer to the opposing point of view ? Why not
accept the proposal as is and leave it at that?
Thanks,
Gerard
On 12 March 2012 15:25, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 March 2012 13:55, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > When you consider that the current proposal is for a system where it
> takes
> > one click to see something anyway, I do think the notion that something
> is
> > not knowable is over the top.
>
>
> The rationale is problematic: to appease a target audience of people
> who don't want knowledge to be general anyway. You have read
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Depictions_of_Muhammad/Archive_1 ,
> right? They aren't concerned with images, or indeed text, on Wikipedia
> - they're concerned with it existing *anywhere*.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
