Toby Bartels wrote:
If you spell it out in such a way that it includes
explicity sexual
content but not explicit religious content, then how is this NPOV,
given an earlier poster (Ec?) that considers the latter harmful to
kids. (And if Ec is joking, I have a friend that seriously believes
that about Christianity in particular.)
End users can adjust it however they like, so what's the problem?
If «explicit sexual content» is what you meant all
along by "mature
content", then let's say "explicit sexual content".
No, it isn't what I meant all along. It's by far the biggest problem
category that we have right now, but of course other things can be
included.
But this is
important for Wikipedia the website, not just for
others.
Is it? If we have an Edupedia website built on a Sifter model,
then schools can block Wikipedia as long as they don't block Edupedia.
And that would be very unfortunate, I think.
--Jimbo