On 26/05/2009, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net>
wrote:
Wikipedia should not provide information that is
likely to lead to
harm.
If there's a rule which says that we must provide it, then that rule is
wrong.
Uh huh. And if it also is possible to use the information to avoid
harm? What if it's only a tiny amount of harm, should it be removed
then? And if not, how much harm does it take, and who gets to judge?
In other words who died and made you head censor?
--
-Ian Woollard
We're all censors, we just vary with respect to what we censor.
Fred Bauder