[WikiEN-l] Deleting the Lolicon picture

[Sam Korn]

On 4/8/06, David Alexander Russell <webmaster at davidarussell.co.uk> wrote:
> Not if we wrote it properly. The only way a policy can be 'gamed' if it
> is written ambiguously or in a way that is down to interpretation (e.g.
> CSD T1 - what exactly 'divisive' means is down to the individual, and
> two people acting in good faith can interpret it in completely different
> ways). If, for example, we simply wrote it as:
>
> Any image depicting children engaged in sexual intercourse or posing
> with sex toys
>
> There is nothing in that (that I can see) which could possibly be
> 'gamed' or misinterpreted.

Apart from people finding an image of child pornography that doesn't
fit into the narrow bands.  It needs to be generally worded, but
explicit inclusions are possible.  For example:

"Any image of child pornography, whether photography, drawing or
computer-generated, including but not limited to any image depicting
children engaged in sexual intercourse or posing with sex toys."

And people wonder why I don't write articles... (they don't, actually,
but it suits my rhetorical point to say they do)

--
Sam