[Foundation-l] [Wikimania-l] Wikimania 2008 will happen in Alexandria, Egypt

Wed Oct 10 02:21:45 UTC 2007

Just for clarification, I'm not suggesting that the people voting on the
bids weren't aware of Egypt's record. I'm just responding to the
objection that I wasn't vocal enough about the problems.

David Strauss wrote:
> George Herbert wrote:
>> On 10/9/07, David Strauss <david at fourkitchens.com> wrote:
>>> The fact that the voters chose to penalize Alexandria lightly for human
>>> rights issues only came to light *today*.
>> You claimed to have noticed, but not said anything, earlier in the
>> process, because you felt that nobody would possibly vote for
>> Alexandria because the violations were so self-evident and
>> overwhelmingly disqualifying.
>>
>> The time for you to intervene in standards for judging WM2008
>> selection, and argue against Alexandria on that basis, was then not
>> now.  For any reasonable interpretation, you were neglegent in not
>> doing so then if this was such an important issue to you.
> 
> Negligent? You should look up the definition of that word. If anyone
> would be negligent, it would be someone voting on the locations without
> being aware of the human rights records.
> 
> The human rights issues in Egypt have been brought up by others. Are you
> saying I can't speak because others brought up the issue, just not me?
> 
>>>> Gay and lesbian tourists from the US go to Egypt all the time without
>>>> being oppressed; I'm sure some of them are offended by the local
>>>> treatment of their peers, but they vacation in good health and safety.
>>>>
>>>> Westerners visiting Egypt are not, as a rule, bothered by the local
>>>> political issues.  Most of the factions in those agree that bothering
>>>> western tourists is a bad idea, and though there was a spate of
>>>> terrorism it seems to have receded and stayed away.  Alexandria was
>>>> also far from the areas which were affected by that.
>>> I'm quite tired of hearing people justify atrocities on the basis of the
>>> atrocities not affecting them.
>> I am disturbed to find that you believe I'm trying to justify Egypt's
>> oppression.
> 
> You responded to my objections by stating that the problems don't affect
> most Wikimania attendees.
> 
>> We live in a real world.  Some fraction of that has disturbing,
>> uncivilized tendencies.  One can look at that narrowly (Myanmar,
>> Iran's leadership, North Korea) or more widely (East Oakland, Egypt,
>> Guantanamo, etc).
>>
>> Yes, there are things wrong in Egypt.  It's functionally a single
>> party government or a dictatorship, and has some severe social and
>> religious uphevals in progress.  Anyone following events in the middle
>> east or geopolitics on the wider scale should know that.
> 
> So, you would agree than anyone involved in picking the Wikimania
> location would be cognizant of Egypt's human rights record without any
> help from me.
> 
>>>> I would oppose any suggestion of a Wikimania in a Sharia Law area, or
>>>> in a truly dangerous location from participants' health and safety, or
>>>> freedom of information or civil rights perspective.
>>> As stated and cited in my original letter, people have been imprisoned
>>> for criticizing the government. Does that qualify?
>> We just had a vocal heckler tasered a bunch at a political rally in
>> the United States not that long ago.  Does that qualify?  Do we need
>> to rule Florida out of future Wikimania events?
> 
> I've never said any place was perfect. In any case, tasering is
> generally not as severe as years of imprisonment, and blogging is not as
> threatening as vocal heckling (which can be quite aggressive).
> 
>> There is a grey area.  The line for "Yes, there's a problem" is less
>> than the line for "...and we should cut off all cultural and
>> intellectual exchanges...".  Wikimania falls into the latter category.
>>  You're arguing, with no opposition, and my agreement, that Egypt is
>> past the first line.  You are asserting that it's past the second.  I
>> believe that the assertion is unsupported and unreasonably harsh, in a
>> real world context.
> 
> I'm still waiting to hear where you do draw the latter line.
> 
>>>> Rangoon would be
>>>> bad.  Bagdhad would be ... let's just not go there, and I wish any
>>>> Iraqi Wikipedians the best of luck with recovering your civilization
>>>> and country.   Egypt is "travel advisories" and some topical
>>>> sensitivity, not "overwhelmingly oppressive" or "bring your
>>>> Blackwater".
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps future standards should increase the civil rights and
>>>> western-style freedoms issues significance in judging.  But Alexandria
>>>> is a fine choice now.  Arguing to change the selection criteria after
>>>> selection, without having already used the opportunity present to make
>>>> statements or recommendations before selection, is poor process.
>>> The fact that the voters chose to penalize Alexandria lightly for human
>>> rights issues only came to light *today*.
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20071009/a0831336/attachment.pgp 