Entertaining...bizarre...scary...odd? Real? fake?
Don't get me wrong. If Wikipedia was around when I was 14, I so would have joined WP:Feminism. But, I was a 14 year old riot grrrl using BBSes. ;-)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kim Bruning kim@bruning.xs4all.nl Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:26 PM Subject: [Foundation-l] Larry Sanger tweets about 13 yo in Wikiproject Pornography To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
"Dear Press: a self-described 13 YO joined Wikiproject Pornography. Wikipedians support him. webcitation.org/61v0ykxJe webcitation.org/61v1FfW3K" - http://twitter.com/#!/lsanger/status/117299089439334400
The on-wiki argument is that there are many areas in that project that don't actually involve nudie pics, but rather cover areas of law, etc. <scratches head>
sincerely, Kim Bruning
--
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
Entertaining...bizarre...scary...odd? Real? fake?
Don't get me wrong. If Wikipedia was around when I was 14, I so would have joined WP:Feminism. But, I was a 14 year old riot grrrl using BBSes. ;-)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kim Bruning kim@bruning.xs4all.nl Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:26 PM Subject: [Foundation-l] Larry Sanger tweets about 13 yo in Wikiproject Pornography To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
"Dear Press: a self-described 13 YO joined Wikiproject Pornography. Wikipedians support him. webcitation.org/61v0ykxJe webcitation.org/61v1FfW3K" - http://twitter.com/#!/lsanger/status/117299089439334400
The on-wiki argument is that there are many areas in that project that don't actually involve nudie pics, but rather cover areas of law, etc. <scratches head>
sincerely, Kim Bruning
Even before Sanger got involved in publicizing this to the press, I was suspicious that this was some kind of agente provocateur thing. The supposed 13-year-old hasn't actually been doing much of anything.
What are some questions we could ask the user that only a real 13 year old would know?
Actually, I have a better idea, let's ask him "Who founded Wikipedia?" :)
Ryan Kaldari
On 9/23/11 1:04 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Sarah Stierchsarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
Entertaining...bizarre...scary...odd? Real? fake?
Don't get me wrong. If Wikipedia was around when I was 14, I so would have joined WP:Feminism. But, I was a 14 year old riot grrrl using BBSes. ;-)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kim Bruningkim@bruning.xs4all.nl Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:26 PM Subject: [Foundation-l] Larry Sanger tweets about 13 yo in Wikiproject Pornography To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
"Dear Press: a self-described 13 YO joined Wikiproject Pornography. Wikipedians support him. webcitation.org/61v0ykxJe webcitation.org/61v1FfW3K" - http://twitter.com/#!/lsanger/status/117299089439334400
The on-wiki argument is that there are many areas in that project that don't actually involve nudie pics, but rather cover areas of law, etc.<scratches head>
sincerely, Kim Bruning
Even before Sanger got involved in publicizing this to the press, I was suspicious that this was some kind of agente provocateur thing. The supposed 13-year-old hasn't actually been doing much of anything.
Whether or not the editor is indeed thirteen years old is probably relatively unimportant. What matters is that voices in the RfC generally (about 3:1) oppose the idea of a minimum age of 18 for contributors to the WikiProject. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC:_Should_und...
Andreas
--- On Fri, 23/9/11, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
From: Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] 13 year old joins WP Pornography? To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Friday, 23 September, 2011, 21:24
What are some questions we could ask the user that only a real 13 year old would know?
Actually, I have a better idea, let's ask him "Who founded Wikipedia?" :)
Ryan Kaldari
On 9/23/11 1:04 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Sarah Stierchsarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
Entertaining...bizarre...scary...odd? Real? fake?
Don't get me wrong. If Wikipedia was around when I was 14, I so would have joined WP:Feminism. But, I was a 14 year old riot grrrl using BBSes. ;-)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kim Bruningkim@bruning.xs4all.nl Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:26 PM Subject: [Foundation-l] Larry Sanger tweets about 13 yo in Wikiproject Pornography To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
"Dear Press: a self-described 13 YO joined Wikiproject Pornography. Wikipedians support him. webcitation.org/61v0ykxJe webcitation.org/61v1FfW3K" - http://twitter.com/#!/lsanger/status/117299089439334400
The on-wiki argument is that there are many areas in that project that don't actually involve nudie pics, but rather cover areas of law, etc.<scratches head>
sincerely, Kim Bruning
Even before Sanger got involved in publicizing this to the press, I was suspicious that this was some kind of agente provocateur thing. The supposed 13-year-old hasn't actually been doing much of anything.
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
For legal reasons you have to have a minimum age of 18 and kick off anyone who admits they are under 18 or are somehow exposed as being under 18. (Unless all those opposed want to put up their real names and addresses and personally claim full legal and financial responsibility for any criminal charges.)
The question is, is there a legal duty to verify age of those who do not reveal their age? Or who lie about it, should there be a requirement they reveal it?
On 9/23/2011 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Whether or not the editor is indeed thirteen years old is probably relatively unimportant.
What matters is that voices in the RfC generally (about 3:1) oppose the idea of a minimum age of 18 for contributors to the WikiProject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC:_Should_und... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29#RfC:_Should_underage_editors_be_topic_banned_from_articles_in_the_WikiProject_Pornography_topic_area.3F
Andreas
Here's a question: What if viewing pornography by anyone, of any age, is illegal where you live? Can you join WP:PORNOGRAPHY then? Not saying it's something you should risk, just saying.
From, Emily
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 6:55 PM, carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
For legal reasons you have to have a minimum age of 18 and kick off anyone who admits they are under 18 or are somehow exposed as being under 18. (Unless all those opposed want to put up their real names and addresses and personally claim full legal and financial responsibility for any criminal charges.)
The question is, is there a legal duty to verify age of those who do not reveal their age? Or who lie about it, should there be a requirement they reveal it?
On 9/23/2011 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Whether or not the editor is indeed thirteen years old is probably relatively unimportant.
What matters is that voices in the RfC generally (about 3:1) oppose the idea of a minimum age of 18 for contributors to the WikiProject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC:_Should_und...
Andreas
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap