QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 17th July 2009, 7:54am)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
QUOTE(WMF @ as quoted in El Reg)
"The Wikimedia Foundation sympathizes with cultural institutions' desire for revenue streams to help them maintain services for their audiences. And yet, if that revenue stream requires an institution to lock up and severely limit access to its educational materials, rather than allowing the materials to be freely available to everyone, that strikes us as counter to those institutions' educational mission."
I agree with that view, which is why I don't understand why, last summer, Jimbo declared a Wikiversity-hosted course on media ethics to be "beyond the scope of the project."
In Jimbo's case, it wasn't the revenue stream that triggered his edict, but the fear that a course on media ethics would expose the underlying corruption of portions of the community.
Note that the message from the WMF was not written by Jimbo (thank God, because then it would have included a lot of "so, you see"s and "the way I see it"s and "the way our community looks at it"s). You have to get beyond the unilateral (and therefore foolish) actions of Jimbo on his own.
The dude banned me from Wikipedia for no sound reason, Barry. It took a couple of years for "the community" to realize what a retarded move that was, and to reverse it.