Archive talk:Wikipedia Zero Operating Principles: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Open Source and Free Software: good point |
+abstract version |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Hello, please consider the possibility of changing ''Promoting open-source'' to ''Promoting free software'' or ''Promoting FLOSS''. As Richard Stallman put it [https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html "Open Source misses the point"]. -- [[User:CristianCantoro|CristianCantoro]] ([[User talk:CristianCantoro|talk]]) 10:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC) |
Hello, please consider the possibility of changing ''Promoting open-source'' to ''Promoting free software'' or ''Promoting FLOSS''. As Richard Stallman put it [https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html "Open Source misses the point"]. -- [[User:CristianCantoro|CristianCantoro]] ([[User talk:CristianCantoro|talk]]) 10:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC) |
||
:That's a good point. We'll keep this in mind for the next iteration. [[User:YWelinder (WMF)|YWelinder (WMF)]] ([[User talk:YWelinder (WMF)|talk]]) 17:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC) |
:That's a good point. We'll keep this in mind for the next iteration. [[User:YWelinder (WMF)|YWelinder (WMF)]] ([[User talk:YWelinder (WMF)|talk]]) 17:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC) |
||
== Phrasing so they could be 10 principles of any similar A2K program== |
|||
It would be great to see a version of these 10 principles that don't mention WM explicitly, but define the precepts we follow. Then we could encourage similar projects to follow the same, in contributing to an Access to Knowledge coalition. The case for zero-rating free knowledge is much stronger when it's applied to a constellation of sources. [[user:sj|SJ]] [[user talk:sj|+]] 22:39, 1 December 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 22:39, 1 December 2014
Open Source and Free Software
Hello, please consider the possibility of changing Promoting open-source to Promoting free software or Promoting FLOSS. As Richard Stallman put it "Open Source misses the point". -- CristianCantoro (talk) 10:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- That's a good point. We'll keep this in mind for the next iteration. YWelinder (WMF) (talk) 17:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Phrasing so they could be 10 principles of any similar A2K program
It would be great to see a version of these 10 principles that don't mention WM explicitly, but define the precepts we follow. Then we could encourage similar projects to follow the same, in contributing to an Access to Knowledge coalition. The case for zero-rating free knowledge is much stronger when it's applied to a constellation of sources. SJ + 22:39, 1 December 2014 (UTC)