• can@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    What the actual fuck

    Edit:

    With Jimmy Wales’ assent, the WMF removed and locked the page. As unhappy as Wikipedians were about it, blocking content can be temporary. If the Foundation reveals these editors’ identities, this is a decision it can never reverse.

    Guess I’ll be watching this one closely.

    • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I would never have become aware that that article existed if not for everyone talking about it being censored. The Streisand effect seems to still be alive.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Jimbo’s justification is that if they don’t do this to the page, they’ll completely lose their chance of arguing in court, and 1. they can always restore it if the court orders something they decide not to do 2. the contents of the article are already archived all over the internet

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      In a recent court proceeding, WMF’s legal team offered a supposed middle path, proposing it take the unusual step of serving summons to the editors itself, thereby revealing their identities only to the court, not the wider public. Wikipedians, however, do not see this as a compromise—it’s capitulation. Last week, Wikipedia editors published an open letter to the Foundation, urging it to protect its volunteers’ privacy regardless of the outcome. It reads in part

      only to the court, not the wider public

      Would this really be that much better? Once the information is out, it’s impossible to hide again

      And the consequences would not end with this case. Compliance may discourage contributions from editors worldwide, not just those under authoritarian rule. WMF submission could encourage other governments to make similar demands, putting Wikipedia in an untenable position and reducing its influence where free knowledge is needed most

      This bit also seemed important

      • can@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Wikipedia has plenty of experience being blocked in the world’s largest country, which was the case until India’s population surpassed China’s in April 2023. If India takes the most drastic step, the Foundation can stand proud in its resolve.

        Sounds easy enough to me.