Mailing List Archive

Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
> I have submitted a new project proposal, at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Soviet_Repressions_Memorial
>
Isn't this the sort of thing we've been in the business of slowly
getting out of, with the move offsite of the September 11 memorial wiki?
The consensus from that move seemed to be that notable victims of the
September 11 attacks get an article on the regular encyclopedia projects
(what constitutes "notable" being a different debate), and non-notable
ones are either redirects to a larger article discussing them or not
there at all, but that in either case we shouldn't be in the business of
hosting victim memorials.

-Mark


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Wednesday 24 December 2008 03:10, Delirium wrote:
> Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
> > I have submitted a new project proposal, at
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Soviet_Repressions_Memorial
>
> Isn't this the sort of thing we've been in the business of slowly
> getting out of, with the move offsite of the September 11 memorial wiki?
> The consensus from that move seemed to be that notable victims of the
> September 11 attacks get an article on the regular encyclopedia projects
> (what constitutes "notable" being a different debate), and non-notable
> ones are either redirects to a larger article discussing them or not
> there at all, but that in either case we shouldn't be in the business of
> hosting victim memorials.

In the proposal, I make my case as to how this is essential to fulfilling the
mission of the Wikimedia Foundation.

--
Kurt Weber
http://blog.kurtweber.us
<kmw@kurtweber.us>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Kurt Maxwell Weber
<kmw@outwardhosting.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 03:10, Delirium wrote:
>> Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
>> > I have submitted a new project proposal, at
>> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Soviet_Repressions_Memorial
>>
>> Isn't this the sort of thing we've been in the business of slowly
>> getting out of, with the move offsite of the September 11 memorial wiki?
>> The consensus from that move seemed to be that notable victims of the
>> September 11 attacks get an article on the regular encyclopedia projects
>> (what constitutes "notable" being a different debate), and non-notable
>> ones are either redirects to a larger article discussing them or not
>> there at all, but that in either case we shouldn't be in the business of
>> hosting victim memorials.
>
> In the proposal, I make my case as to how this is essential to fulfilling the
> mission of the Wikimedia Foundation.

I'm sorry, but I stopped reading at "Understanding the destructive
effects of the most vile, most tyrannical, most despotic, most
murderous, and most capricious regime in human history necessitates
putting a "human face" on its victims."

A project which is motivated in such a way cannot possibly be anything
else than biased...and indeed, the very concept of memorials is
biased: Why should we have a memorial of the victims of Soviet
Repression, when we don't have a memorial of Nazi victims, victims of
the Armenian Genocide, victim of the Rwandan Genocide, victims of
various repression regimes in South-East Asia and China, victims in
Darfur, Chad, the Central African Republic etc. etc.

No one can sensibly suggest that we can have memorial sites for every
"repression" (in lack of a better word) in history and thus, we had
better none, in my opinion. (Yes, in other cases I argued and would
argue that it is better to have "something" than "nothing", but in
this case, I'm afraid I am not convinced of the merits of the proposal
at all and of the propriety of the motives behind it)

MIchael



--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler@gmail.com

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/12/24 Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com>:

> A project which is motivated in such a way cannot possibly be anything
> else than biased...and indeed, the very concept of memorials is
> biased: Why should we have a memorial of the victims of Soviet
> Repression, when we don't have a memorial of Nazi victims, victims of
> the Armenian Genocide, victim of the Rwandan Genocide, victims of
> various repression regimes in South-East Asia and China, victims in
> Darfur, Chad, the Central African Republic etc. etc.
> No one can sensibly suggest that we can have memorial sites for every
> "repression" (in lack of a better word) in history and thus, we had
> better none, in my opinion. (Yes, in other cases I argued and would
> argue that it is better to have "something" than "nothing", but in
> this case, I'm afraid I am not convinced of the merits of the proposal
> at all and of the propriety of the motives behind it)


Yes. However, it could be a valuable wiki to create privately. Generic
hosting is (a) really cheap (b) often includes MediaWiki out the box.
The wiki is unlikely to be vastly overloaded, so cheap hosting would
do for a start.

See http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam for a memorial
project for victims of the World Trade Center attack, for example.

Although started with a strong POV, such a project could nevertheless
accumulate material of high quality historical and scholarly interest.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Wednesday 24 December 2008 11:02, David Gerard wrote:
>
> Yes. However, it could be a valuable wiki to create privately. Generic
> hosting is (a) really cheap (b) often includes MediaWiki out the box.
> The wiki is unlikely to be vastly overloaded, so cheap hosting would
> do for a start.
>
> See http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam for a memorial
> project for victims of the World Trade Center attack, for example.
>
> Although started with a strong POV, such a project could nevertheless
> accumulate material of high quality historical and scholarly interest.


I still don't see how it's outside the WMF's scope, nor do I see how
presenting a strong POV is necessarily bad.

The WMF's mission is essentially educational, correct? And I submit that to
be truly educated about such an event as this, one needs to see perhaps a
more emotional presentation, to truly understand what it actually did to
people.

One would not say that the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., is
non-educational, though it presents a strong POV and is focused more on
presenting the human effects of the Holocaust than simple factual
information. This is basically the same thing. It fulfills an essential
part of the Foundation's educational mission that to now has been neglected.

--
Kurt Weber
http://blog.kurtweber.us
<kmw@kurtweber.us>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 12/24/08, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/12/24 Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com>:
>
>> A project which is motivated in such a way cannot possibly be anything
>> else than biased...and indeed, the very concept of memorials is
>> biased: Why should we have a memorial of the victims of Soviet
>> Repression, when we don't have a memorial of Nazi victims, victims of
>> the Armenian Genocide, victim of the Rwandan Genocide, victims of
>> various repression regimes in South-East Asia and China, victims in
>> Darfur, Chad, the Central African Republic etc. etc.
>> No one can sensibly suggest that we can have memorial sites for every
>> "repression" (in lack of a better word) in history and thus, we had
>> better none, in my opinion. (Yes, in other cases I argued and would
>> argue that it is better to have "something" than "nothing", but in
>> this case, I'm afraid I am not convinced of the merits of the proposal
>> at all and of the propriety of the motives behind it)
>
>
> Yes. However, it could be a valuable wiki to create privately. Generic
> hosting is (a) really cheap (b) often includes MediaWiki out the box.
> The wiki is unlikely to be vastly overloaded, so cheap hosting would
> do for a start.
>
> See http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam for a memorial
> project for victims of the World Trade Center attack, for example.
>
> Although started with a strong POV, such a project could nevertheless
> accumulate material of high quality historical and scholarly interest.
>

Oh, surely. There are also genuine academic projects 'off-wiki' that
have such aims - it just doesn't fit with my personal vision of the
Wikimedia Foundation.


>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler@gmail.com

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> 2008/12/24 Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com>:
>
>> A project which is motivated in such a way cannot possibly be anything
>> else than biased...and indeed, the very concept of memorials is
>> biased: Why should we have a memorial of the victims of Soviet
>> Repression, when we don't have a memorial of Nazi victims, victims of
>> the Armenian Genocide, victim of the Rwandan Genocide, victims of
>> various repression regimes in South-East Asia and China, victims in
>> Darfur, Chad, the Central African Republic etc. etc.
>> No one can sensibly suggest that we can have memorial sites for every
>> "repression" (in lack of a better word) in history and thus, we had
>> better none, in my opinion. (Yes, in other cases I argued and would
>> argue that it is better to have "something" than "nothing", but in
>> this case, I'm afraid I am not convinced of the merits of the proposal
>> at all and of the propriety of the motives behind it)
>
>
> Yes. However, it could be a valuable wiki to create privately. Generic
> hosting is (a) really cheap (b) often includes MediaWiki out the box.
> The wiki is unlikely to be vastly overloaded, so cheap hosting would
> do for a start.
>
> See http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam for a memorial
> project for victims of the World Trade Center attack, for example.
>
> Although started with a strong POV, such a project could nevertheless
> accumulate material of high quality historical and scholarly interest.
>
>
> - d.

I support this project, and don't think it should get pushed off into
some obscure corner of the internet. We should host it. We should host it
because we stand against totalitarian repression; and reject the position
that some knowledge, knowledge of the consequences of totalitarian
repression, is to be repressed and not readily available.

Fred Bauder



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a memorial project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in his concerns about the motives behind this proposal.




________________________________
From: Fred Bauder <fredbaud@fairpoint.net>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 2:12:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] New project proposal: Soviet Repressions Memorial

> 2008/12/24 Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com>:
>
>> A project which is motivated in such a way cannot possibly be anything
>> else than biased...and indeed, the very concept of memorials is
>> biased: Why should we have a memorial of the victims of Soviet
>> Repression, when we don't have a memorial of Nazi victims, victims of
>> the Armenian Genocide, victim of the Rwandan Genocide, victims of
>> various repression regimes in South-East Asia and China, victims in
>> Darfur, Chad, the Central African Republic etc. etc.
>> No one can sensibly suggest that we can have memorial sites for every
>> "repression" (in lack of a better word) in history and thus, we had
>> better none, in my opinion. (Yes, in other cases I argued and would
>> argue that it is better to have "something" than "nothing", but in
>> this case, I'm afraid I am not convinced of the merits of the proposal
>> at all and of the propriety of the motives behind it)
>
>
> Yes. However, it could be a valuable wiki to create privately. Generic
> hosting is (a) really cheap (b) often includes MediaWiki out the box.
> The wiki is unlikely to be vastly overloaded, so cheap hosting would
> do for a start.
>
> See http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam for a memorial
> project for victims of the World Trade Center attack, for example.
>
> Although started with a strong POV, such a project could nevertheless
> accumulate material of high quality historical and scholarly interest.
>
>
> - d.

I support this project, and don't think it should get pushed off into
some obscure corner of the internet. We should host it. We should host it
because we stand against totalitarian repression; and reject the position
that some knowledge, knowledge of the consequences of totalitarian
repression, is to be repressed and not readily available.

Fred Bauder



_______________________________________________
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

On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:12, Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a memorial
> project for all disasters.

And what, in principle, is wrong with that?

--
Kurt Weber
http://blog.kurtweber.us
<kmw@kurtweber.us>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:12, Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a memorial
>> project for all disasters.
>
> And what, in principle, is wrong with that?
>

Kurt, et al...

In principle, it does not scale well. I can understand a Wikipedia
article on an event (disaster)... but a memorial project?

The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
people around the world to collect and develop educational content
under a free license <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:free_content> or
in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.

The memorial project does not appear to meet the above statement. The
"Wikipedia article" on the tragedy would appear to better meet this
mission statement, as opposed to a "memorial wiki".

And that my friend, is what, in principle, is wrong with that.


Best,

Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklS1sUACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtU2dwCgg+cSXaOPuWY7mA8Mik2dubPN
raYAoLP+Lt7VMy5KACm2eiodRZTv6S3+
=/sfR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a
>> memorial project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in his
>> concerns about the motives behind this proposal.

I'm in some agreement here because my experience of UK charity law is that
it is not generally permitted to have a "political" purpose, and certainly
taking such a strong line on any "repression", "genocide" etc, would appear
to be anathema to a charitable objective. It's OK, I suppose, if the United
Nations has used such terminology, but I don't think we should be seen to be
taking partisan sides in political disputes, because that dilutes the
educational charitable status of the Foundation. It's entirely a different
issue to support humanitarian aid to the victims, however, and I am open to
the idea that such memorial projects might have that idea as a focus.
However, the way it's been put forward seems to militate against that
construction.

>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Fred Bauder <fredbaud@fairpoint.net>
>> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
>> <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 2:12:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] New project proposal: Soviet Repressions
>> Memorial
>>
>>> 2008/12/24 Michael Bimmler <mbimmler@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> A project which is motivated in such a way cannot possibly be
>>>> anything else than biased...and indeed, the very concept of
>>>> memorials is biased: Why should we have a memorial of the victims
>>>> of Soviet Repression, when we don't have a memorial of Nazi
>>>> victims, victims of the Armenian Genocide, victim of the Rwandan
>>>> Genocide, victims of various repression regimes in South-East Asia
>>>> and China, victims in Darfur, Chad, the Central African Republic
>>>> etc. etc.
>>>> No one can sensibly suggest that we can have memorial sites for
>>>> every "repression" (in lack of a better word) in history and thus,
>>>> we had better none, in my opinion. (Yes, in other cases I argued
>>>> and would argue that it is better to have "something" than
>>>> "nothing", but in this case, I'm afraid I am not convinced of the
>>>> merits of the proposal at all and of the propriety of the motives
>>>> behind it)
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. However, it could be a valuable wiki to create privately.
>>> Generic hosting is (a) really cheap (b) often includes MediaWiki
>>> out the box. The wiki is unlikely to be vastly overloaded, so cheap
>>> hosting would do for a start.
>>>
>>> See http://www.sep11memories.org/wiki/In_Memoriam for a memorial
>>> project for victims of the World Trade Center attack, for example.
>>>
>>> Although started with a strong POV, such a project could
>>> nevertheless accumulate material of high quality historical and
>>> scholarly interest.
>>>
>>>
>>> - d.
>>
>> I support this project, and don't think it should get pushed off into
>> some obscure corner of the internet. We should host it. We should
>> host it
>> because we stand against totalitarian repression; and reject the
>> position
>> that some knowledge, knowledge of the consequences of totalitarian
>> repression, is to be repressed and not readily available.
>>
>> Fred Bauder
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.0/1862 - Release Date:
> 23/12/2008 12:08



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:12, Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a
>> memorial project for all disasters.
>
> And what, in principle, is wrong with that?
>
I also want to mention by being outside of the mission statement, it
is outside the WMF scope. I don't feel comfortable with the
foundation taking a political position also.

Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklS2CoACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtXMjwCgiUBjw9kmGTK25kpCSyx0gWiT
AzEAnj6c1no61bdSr/9oCZW7tpJetvY4
=pWp+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:43, Phil Nash wrote:
> Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
> >> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a
> >> memorial project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in his
> >> concerns about the motives behind this proposal.
>
> I'm in some agreement here because my experience of UK charity law is that
> it is not generally permitted to have a "political" purpose, and certainly
> taking such a strong line on any "repression", "genocide" etc, would appear
> to be anathema to a charitable objective. It's OK, I suppose, if the United
> Nations has used such terminology, but I don't think we should be seen to
> be taking partisan sides in political disputes, because that dilutes the
> educational charitable status of the Foundation. It's entirely a different
> issue to support humanitarian aid to the victims, however, and I am open to
> the idea that such memorial projects might have that idea as a focus.
> However, the way it's been put forward seems to militate against that
> construction.
>

I fail to see how simply presenting a list of peoples' names and telling their
stories constitutes "taking partisan sides in political disputes." It's
educating people about the impact of these events, plain and simple.
--
Kurt Weber
http://blog.kurtweber.us
<kmw@kurtweber.us>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:43, Phil Nash wrote:
>> Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>>>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have
>>>> a memorial project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in
>>>> his concerns about the motives behind this proposal.
>> I'm in some agreement here because my experience of UK charity
>> law is that it is not generally permitted to have a "political"
>> purpose, and certainly taking such a strong line on any
>> "repression", "genocide" etc, would appear to be anathema to a
>> charitable objective. It's OK, I suppose, if the United Nations
>> has used such terminology, but I don't think we should be seen to
>> be taking partisan sides in political disputes, because that
>> dilutes the educational charitable status of the Foundation. It's
>> entirely a different issue to support humanitarian aid to the
>> victims, however, and I am open to the idea that such memorial
>> projects might have that idea as a focus. However, the way it's
>> been put forward seems to militate against that construction.
>>
>
> I fail to see how simply presenting a list of peoples' names and
> telling their stories constitutes "taking partisan sides in
> political disputes." It's educating people about the impact of
> these events, plain and simple.
I don't think it is something we should focus on. Let us focus on our
existing projects, perfect them. Reference my earlier rationale.

Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklS4QcACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtVkBACaAn4abhVGuxGKrmy138cTarWH
ahsAn3ClsocopZ59oQdr89NI+oLW7Qi1
=gMRp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Wednesday 24 December 2008 19:25, Jon wrote:
>
> I don't think it is something we should focus on. Let us focus on our
> existing projects, perfect them. Reference my earlier rationale.

Given that these are all volunteer projects, those more interested in
improving existing projects will do so regardless. This provides an
opportunity for those not inclined to work on those projects (or more
inclined to work on this one), to still have an opportunity to help fulfill
an essential part of the WMF's mission.

--
Kurt Weber
http://blog.kurtweber.us
<kmw@kurtweber.us>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:43, Phil Nash wrote:
>>> Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>>>>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a
>>>>> memorial project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in his
>>>>> concerns about the motives behind this proposal.
>>>
>>> I'm in some agreement here because my experience of UK charity law
>>> is that it is not generally permitted to have a "political"
>>> purpose, and certainly taking such a strong line on any
>>> "repression", "genocide" etc, would appear to be anathema to a
>>> charitable objective. It's OK, I suppose, if the United Nations has
>>> used such terminology, but I don't think we should be seen to be
>>> taking partisan sides in political disputes, because that dilutes
>>> the educational charitable status of the Foundation. It's entirely
>>> a different issue to support humanitarian aid to the victims,
>>> however, and I am open to the idea that such memorial projects
>>> might have that idea as a focus. However, the way it's been put
>>> forward seems to militate against that construction.
>>>
>>
>> I fail to see how simply presenting a list of peoples' names and
>> telling their stories constitutes "taking partisan sides in
>> political disputes." It's educating people about the impact of
>> these events, plain and simple. --
>> Kurt Weber
>> http://blog.kurtweber.us
>> <kmw@kurtweber.us>

That would be fine, up to a point. On the other hand, putting all that under
a POV title within the WMF umbrealls is quite a different issue, and not
one, I think, which would be palatable to the WMF, for reasons I've already
outlined. Kurt, as you now should realise, politics at any level is a subtle
and complex business, and my personal opinion is that you should stick to
marching bands.



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:12, Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a
>>> memorial
>>> project for all disasters.
>>
>> And what, in principle, is wrong with that?
>>
>
> Kurt, et al...
>
> In principle, it does not scale well. I can understand a Wikipedia
> article on an event (disaster)... but a memorial project?
>
> The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
> people around the world to collect and develop educational content
> under a free license <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:free_content> or
> in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.
>
> The memorial project does not appear to meet the above statement. The
> "Wikipedia article" on the tragedy would appear to better meet this
> mission statement, as opposed to a "memorial wiki".
>
> And that my friend, is what, in principle, is wrong with that.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Jon

It would be quite educational.

Fred


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 19:25, Jon wrote:
>> I don't think it is something we should focus on. Let us focus
>> on our existing projects, perfect them. Reference my earlier
>> rationale.
>
> Given that these are all volunteer projects, those more interested
> in improving existing projects will do so regardless. This
> provides an opportunity for those not inclined to work on those
> projects (or more inclined to work on this one), to still have an
> opportunity to help fulfill an essential part of the WMF's mission.
>
>
I posit that the "memorial project" is not essential. I think it
would drain resources from our mission.

Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklS560ACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtXD0QCdEmWaYcsB/5T8wwD3MLVgwCyw
cbYAnAuZWdYQZAWgkeYskzZ5oovHzMGq
=epHh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:43, Phil Nash wrote:
>>>> Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>>>>>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a
>>>>>> memorial project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in his
>>>>>> concerns about the motives behind this proposal.
>>>>
>>>> I'm in some agreement here because my experience of UK charity law
>>>> is that it is not generally permitted to have a "political"
>>>> purpose, and certainly taking such a strong line on any
>>>> "repression", "genocide" etc, would appear to be anathema to a
>>>> charitable objective. It's OK, I suppose, if the United Nations has
>>>> used such terminology, but I don't think we should be seen to be
>>>> taking partisan sides in political disputes, because that dilutes
>>>> the educational charitable status of the Foundation. It's entirely
>>>> a different issue to support humanitarian aid to the victims,
>>>> however, and I am open to the idea that such memorial projects
>>>> might have that idea as a focus. However, the way it's been put
>>>> forward seems to militate against that construction.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I fail to see how simply presenting a list of peoples' names and
>>> telling their stories constitutes "taking partisan sides in
>>> political disputes." It's educating people about the impact of
>>> these events, plain and simple. --
>>> Kurt Weber
>>> http://blog.kurtweber.us
>>> <kmw@kurtweber.us>
>
> That would be fine, up to a point. On the other hand, putting all that
> under
> a POV title within the WMF umbrealls is quite a different issue, and not
> one, I think, which would be palatable to the WMF, for reasons I've
> already
> outlined. Kurt, as you now should realise, politics at any level is a
> subtle
> and complex business, and my personal opinion is that you should stick to
> marching bands.

Please be respectful.

Fred



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Fred Bauder wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:12, Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>>>> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have
>>>> a memorial project for all disasters.
>>> And what, in principle, is wrong with that?
>>>
>> Kurt, et al...
>>
>> In principle, it does not scale well. I can understand a
>> Wikipedia article on an event (disaster)... but a memorial
>> project?
>>
>> The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
>> people around the world to collect and develop educational
>> content under a free license
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:free_content> or in the public
>> domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.
>>
>> The memorial project does not appear to meet the above statement.
>> The "Wikipedia article" on the tragedy would appear to better
>> meet this mission statement, as opposed to a "memorial wiki".
>>
>> And that my friend, is what, in principle, is wrong with that.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jon
>
> It would be quite educational.
>
> Fred
>
>
> _______________________________________________ foundation-l
> mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Could you expand a bit more on that... in what way would it be more
educational than say, the article? In a very neutral, factual,
referenced way?

Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklS5/gACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtUF6wCcC9RFtDtYhiffj9gdV3YAa/5C
1HYAn2oSId/WEbpth8In+ttro26H5J7K
=YCn5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 December 2008 19:25, Jon wrote:
>>> I don't think it is something we should focus on. Let us focus
>>> on our existing projects, perfect them. Reference my earlier
>>> rationale.
>>
>> Given that these are all volunteer projects, those more interested
>> in improving existing projects will do so regardless. This
>> provides an opportunity for those not inclined to work on those
>> projects (or more inclined to work on this one), to still have an
>> opportunity to help fulfill an essential part of the WMF's mission.
>>
>>
> I posit that the "memorial project" is not essential. I think it
> would drain resources from our mission.
>
> Jon

If we stood for something, it might serve to invigorate.

Fred



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

>>>
>>> The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
>>> people around the world to collect and develop educational
>>> content under a free license
>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:free_content> or in the public
>>> domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.
>>>
>>> The memorial project does not appear to meet the above statement.
>>> The "Wikipedia article" on the tragedy would appear to better
>>> meet this mission statement, as opposed to a "memorial wiki".

>>
>> It would be quite educational.
>>
>> Fred


> Could you expand a bit more on that... in what way would it be more
> educational than say, the article? In a very neutral, factual,
> referenced way?
>
> Jon

Each of the millions who were starved, imprisoned, tortured, or killed
has a unique story. Each story is more significant and educational than a
Wikipedia article on Hitler or Stalin.

Fred


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/12/25 Fred Bauder <fredbaud@fairpoint.net>:

> If we stood for something, it might serve to invigorate.


You mean, taking a particular political position? I don't see that in
the mission.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2008/12/25 Fred Bauder <fredbaud@fairpoint.net>:

> Each of the millions who were starved, imprisoned, tortured, or killed
> has a unique story. Each story is more significant and educational than a
> Wikipedia article on Hitler or Stalin.


The same applies to the Sep11 wiki. Why was that moved offsite?


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l