Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> I'm implying nothing. You regularly imply things. It's a rhetorical tool you've used as often as anyone else, including in this debate. > I'm saying it bold and > loud: the W3C is not chartered nor entitled to > represent public interest. Who actually argued that is its role? Surely you're not implying I did? :) "The" public interest is a bit fuzzy as notions go. But I think it's clear that in this case some folk at W3C proposed a policy that's antagonistic to most interests except "BigCo" ones, and that such a tilted playing field is not in "the" public interest. Of course, one can "serve" public interests and yet not try to "represent" them. And not every group claiming to represent public interests (say, the US Congress after today's latest set of votes against the Bill Of Rights :) actually does so. - Dave
|
