Poe, Marshall wrote:
Mark wrote:
And in this case, I don't see how ethical
issues enter into it at all.
Like this: deciding what you are going to say and what you aren't going
to say is on some level an ethical or moral decision. Similarly,
deciding what you are going publish and what you aren't going to publish
is an ethical or moral decision.
The problem with this view is that Wikipedia by nature cannot "decide"
what to publish---we "publish" anything that anyone posts, automatically
and without review, because that is how wikis work. What we *continue*
to publish is the result of the consensus of editors.
I don't, in general, see a problem with this. If something is incorrect
in any way, it should be corrected or removed (whether it is libelous or
not is irrelevant---non-libelous misinformation has no place either).
The "what if [x]" scenarios seem pretty far-fetched.
-Mark