Last check 4.7k edits.
“Care to enlighten us?”
Sure. Wikipedia’s strength is that it is perceived as nonpartisan. Wikipedians would be better off as individuals to set up their own dedicated campaign to defeating SOPA, rather then using Wikipedia as their vehicle.
Taking a hands-off approach, but recruiting people through wikipedia accomplishes the same thing - without cutting your nose off to spite your face.
Boycotts are only effective when they have an impact on their target. Dr. King’s bus boycott was effective, because the bus companies were dependent on their patronage. Wikipedia:
1, does not patronize the government or influence the government in such a way that the government would be dependent on them.
2, it raises the question. If SOPA is serious enough to merit ‘intervention’, then why not lefty cause of the day. This isn’t an argument that Wikipedia wants to go down.
3, with the existence of the mirror sites, which are going to be still up, Wikipedia isn’t actually depriving anyone of access to their content. In short, they are adopting the tactics of their enemies and the goal of their enemies, to censor the web.
That’s why it has to be a collaborative, grassroots effort by wikipedians, everyone who has a stake. This, just damages the core purpose of wikipedia.
Okay, fair enough, your activity level far exceeds mine and I will defer to your greater stake. :)
What you wrote makes sense, and I could get behind your suggestion.
Not sure about the link. Heck of a long page, once I added the closing parenthesis missing from the URL. I checked the revision history but didn’t become enlightened... Could you tell me what you meant by the link? Thanks!