Subject: Re: Our Purpose (Re: DRAFT FAQ: Free vs. Open)
From: Rick Moen <>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:35:24 -0800

Quoting Matthew Flaschen (

> I don't know that NPOV is necessarily appropriate here.  OSI /is/ an
> ideological organization, and I think its FAQ should reflect its
> opinions, rather than just any significant opinion on the list (NPOV).


I will add that Wikipedia is a notably poor example to follow in other
particulars, as well: e.g., Wikipedia's occasional use for anonymous
character assassination, its problem of "stealth POV" through
insinuative choices of wording, its acceptance of bad information as
fact as long as it's "sourced" from elsewhere on the Internet, and
its generally impaired-by-design accountability / attribution.

Speaking of accountability / attribution, says nowhere who wrote it.
Substantively, Ernie did, based on his pick of material posted to this
mailing list.  Shouldn't the authorship be indicated on that Web page?