>Al,
> I am going to defend john's point of view on what he is saying about Steve and his wiki. Is the Wiki steve's? Yes. But do people on the wiki contribute to financing the site through donation ? Not sure. While the domain, server and software belong to steve, Isn't the wiki actually the property of the community that donated the material ?

Interesting that you use the word "donate" - IMO it's extremely apt. If I donate $20 to the Salvation Army, do I own that $20? Clearly, the content of the Wiki belongs to Steve.

>
>Steve put the wiki out so that the VFP community has a forum for posting content that is useful by all members of the community. The topic that I know JVP is miffed about is the one about the last version of VFP. This is not a normal wiki article/topic but a kind of wiki threaded message. I contributed to this topic along with Mike Helland, Steve Black, Joe Kuhn, JVP and others.
>
>Steve took it upon himself to edit our all of JVP's contribution to the post. Is it not up to the community to decide whether John's contribution was valuable or not ?

Not having seen the content of the "thread" in question I can't comment directly. Do you have a link to anything that might be left?

Update - if it's http://fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~FoxFinalVersion then I've now read what's left.

However, I do know there is considerable animosity between Messrs. Petersen and Black, and also lately between Messrs. Petersen and Helland. This is pure speculation, but I think that Mr. Black may feel he must take steps to prevent material that is libelous, or be construed as such, being posted on his site. If I were in his position I would do the same.

Because of this I believe a freely-editable forum like the Wiki demands a very high standard of behaviour by its participants.

Since you have seen this content, can you say that JVP's posts contained no (possibly or undoubtedly)libelous material (for brevity, call it "offensive")? If they did, what is Mr. Black to do with them? If I were JVP I would not allow a bitter foe to edit my posts. So, IMO Mr. Black's only option would be to delete any "offensive" posts in their entirety. Of course, I'd expect the same to be true of "offensive" posts by any other contributors to that "thread".

Update - what's left of that "thread" seems quite civilized.

So, my question to you - IYO could JVP's posts have been construed as "offensive" as defined above? Did he adhere to a reasonable code of behaviour?

>
>This situation reminds me of Orwell's 1984 where people are made non-persons, in this case JVP was made a non person.
>
>Like it or not JVP is a valuable member of the community, and to some his opinions are valuable.
>
>The purpose of sites like www.foxforum.com , fox.wikis.com , www.levelextreme.com, www.leafe.com and other are to provide a forum for different opinions. In the case of the wiki one person was silenced. How will you feel if you are next ?

IMO you've blown this way out of proportion. In Orwell's "1984", once someone was made a non-person there was no alternative. That is hardly the case on the Internet, arguably the ultimate bastion of free speech. You've chosen not to address one of my main questions, i.e. why doesn't JVP build his own Wiki? He could quite literally be the "master of his domain". I really can't fathom why such an opinionated individual would not have already done this.

As far as how I would feel if I were "silenced" by an individual opinion site, I don't give a flying fargle. I don't have a messiah complex - I don't have a screaming need to spread my opinions as far and wide as possible, and inflict them on those who may disagree or not wish to listen. AFAIC, if a site "silences" me it's their loss. If I cared enough about a given issue, I'd put up my own site. And you know what? If someone posted material on my site that I didn't feel met my code of conduct, or could be libelous, I'd delete it. And if I thought that person might damage other content on my site in obvious or subtle ways, I'd do everything I possibly could to deny access to that person.

Now I'll expand further on another point I made, and you chose not to address. JVP's message footer is a rant - nothing but unproven allegations. IMO it's very inconsistent that JVP is nominally studying to become a lawyer, yet he argues like this. He does not seem to understand that the job of a lawyer is persuasion, and in order to persuade you have to be convincing. Evidence, combined with well-thought-out arguments, help a lot. Based on what I've seen posted by him lately, there's no way I'd ever hire him as a lawyer.

How hard would it have been to put in his message footer, "Wiki Breaks its own Code of Conduct! More info: xxx.WorldWideJVP.com/OpinionPageXXX " and, at that URL, present a fact-based and reasoned argument? Well, it's harder than putting up a rant. But, you reap what you sow.