de10011 at gmail
Oct 5, 2011, 8:16 AM
Post #98 of 126
I am sure other people can fill in, but I heard there has been some movement
within the parliament in reaction. They are reconsidering a portion of that
law that might affect us, or so I have been told.
Can someone clarify?
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:06 PM, User:Matthewrbowker <
matthewrbowker.wiki [at] gmail> wrote:
> Of all the ways to protest the law, I think it.wp chose the most noticeable
> way. If something like a sitenotice were implemented, many people would
> just scroll past it. Even if not, they would only read it a couple times,
> because people access Wikipedia for the content. OTOH, just locking
> Editing privileges would only impact the people who are already aware of
> the proposed law. The protest would have no impact on the readership.
> Just my two cents
> Matthew Bowker
> Sent from my iPod
> On Oct 5, 2011, at 8:03, Domas Mituzas <midom.lists [at] gmail> wrote:
> >> The only thing we truly could do is restore read access. But if the
> >> it.wikipedia community really wants to strike, there's very little we
> >> can do to stop them. :)
> > I sure agree with that. There're plenty of ways to inflict pain without
> terminating the service entirely.
> > Editor strike means not editing, it doesn't mean full service downtime.
> > Full-page banners or whatever else may work, of course.
> > When writers guild went on strike, we could still watch old stuff, right,
> it wasn't pulled ;-)
> > If doctors go on strike, people are still allowed to live, retroactive
> disease correction is not done...
> > How do we deal with an editor who starts deleting his contributions out
> of spite?
> > Domas
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l [at] lists
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists