Absolute Neutrality

I think beyond the first 4 issues Wikimedia should remain Neutral in all other aspects, No one expects the foundation to engage in issues beyond the free access to information for everyone. Net neutrality seems like an easy decision for any foundation as does censorship, In support of Net neutrality and against Censorship. Copyright would be slightly harder to take a stance on, Wikimedia already has millions of images and files submitted by users, the position has to be in line with the other projects. A Stance on Copyleft and its impact on Fair use of copyright material might have larger impacts, this I believe is an issue that needs to be discussed carefully.

Issues like Environmentalism fall outside the purview of a foundation like Wikimedia, Do people expect Encyclopedia Britannica to have a stance on such issues? wouldn't taking a stance like that be against the POV nature of encyclopedias, to provide unbiased information instead promoting a particular issue or cause no matter how right. I think taking further stances would only undermine the neutrality of Wikimedia, not to mention it would be a slippery slope to go down, where does the foundation stop, which issues to support, what if it offends others, does the foundation change its stance. it would be easy to take up any politically correct cause and support it, but isn't that going against the nature of what the foundation and the projects like Wikipedia should be- Neutral.

Wikimedia can publicly state support for Net Neutrality and opposition for Censorship without fearing much repercussion since both are in line with the foundation's goal and politically correct stances.

I believe the mission requires the WMF to become an international political actor and get involved with lobbying in fields like copyright and education (see: Proposal:Go beyond the Wikis). To grow into that, the WMF must focus on a few core issues. But it can and should endorse related goals and find allies that way.