5 ms·

Here's an idea, Wikipedia could redirect to "Sorry this site is not accessible due to an enforcement action under the Stop Online Piracy Act. (This is a test)"

by willyt 15y ago

Here's an idea, Wikipedia could redirect to "Sorry this site is not accessible due to an enforcement action under the Stop Online Piracy Act. (This is a test)" That would start a debate in the mainstream pretty quickly...

nextparadigms 15y ago
They could just use the embedded code from americancensorship.org that http://techdirt.com http://techdirt.com seems to be using as well. It seems pretty effective (and scary) to me.
- neilk 15y ago
  It was proposed to the English Wikipedia community (late yesterday) and as of now I don't think we have consensus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Participation_in_anti-SOPA_and_anti-PIPA_protests_by_blacking_out_the_Wikipedia_logo_for_one_day_.28TOMORROW.2C_NOV._16th.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposa... By my reckoning, so far at least half the commenters think this would break the "Neutral Point of View" policy. I personally disagree with that, but as an employee of the WMF it's not my place to tell them what to do.
  - chc 15y ago
    Wikipedia editors have to be one of the most frustrating groups I've ever encountered. They typically have all the charm and practicality of a government bureaucracy without the helpfulness. It's like there's a competition among them to find some way the rules can be interpreted as banning anything anybody suggests.
  - gbelote 15y ago
    Was the Italian protest something voted for by the community?
    - neilk 15y ago
      It was agreed upon by the community of the Italian Wikipedia. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma... Note: the Wikipedia community does not usually put things to a vote. They discuss and seek consensus. Although they sometimes do use icons to indicate their position and to get a rough sense of where everyone stands.
  - compman775 15y ago
    If this law really is bad, why would it be a problem for Wikipedia to not be neutral about it?
    - gojomo 15y ago
      I think the bill is awful. I think WMF is right to stand against it. But for Wikipedia itself, either you're committed to the duty of remaining neutral, even on important issues and issues with overwhelming sentiment on one side, or you're not.
dapyx 15y ago
They did something like that for a day on Italian Wikipedia when they discussed in the Italian Parliament a law which, in the case when someone is offended (even if the facts are true!), if a website doesn't respond in 48 hours to the request of removal, the website would have been given a 10,000 euro fine.
- toyg 15y ago
  And it was quite successful, the law was basically mothballed.

by willyt 15y ago

nextparadigms 15y ago

They could just use the embedded code from americancensorship.org that http://techdirt.com http://techdirt.com seems to be using as well. It seems pretty effective (and scary) to me.

neilk 15y ago
It was proposed to the English Wikipedia community (late yesterday) and as of now I don't think we have consensus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Participation_in_anti-SOPA_and_anti-PIPA_protests_by_blacking_out_the_Wikipedia_logo_for_one_day_.28TOMORROW.2C_NOV._16th.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposa... By my reckoning, so far at least half the commenters think this would break the "Neutral Point of View" policy. I personally disagree with that, but as an employee of the WMF it's not my place to tell them what to do.
- chc 15y ago
  Wikipedia editors have to be one of the most frustrating groups I've ever encountered. They typically have all the charm and practicality of a government bureaucracy without the helpfulness. It's like there's a competition among them to find some way the rules can be interpreted as banning anything anybody suggests.
- gbelote 15y ago
  Was the Italian protest something voted for by the community?
  - neilk 15y ago
    It was agreed upon by the community of the Italian Wikipedia. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma... Note: the Wikipedia community does not usually put things to a vote. They discuss and seek consensus. Although they sometimes do use icons to indicate their position and to get a rough sense of where everyone stands.
- compman775 15y ago
  If this law really is bad, why would it be a problem for Wikipedia to not be neutral about it?
  - gojomo 15y ago
    I think the bill is awful. I think WMF is right to stand against it. But for Wikipedia itself, either you're committed to the duty of remaining neutral, even on important issues and issues with overwhelming sentiment on one side, or you're not.

dapyx 15y ago

They did something like that for a day on Italian Wikipedia when they discussed in the Italian Parliament a law which, in the case when someone is offended (even if the facts are true!), if a website doesn't respond in 48 hours to the request of removal, the website would have been given a 10,000 euro fine.

toyg 15y ago
And it was quite successful, the law was basically mothballed.