geni said:
I've
posted there a lot in the past (nicely, and they liked me a lot).
I know what they're like.
Appel to authority logical fallacy.
What? I'm just explaining that I know what they're like. I was once a
regular there.
You haven't explained why they
shouldn't just link to a mirror of a shock site for a much more
effective effect.
It isn't my argument that Wikipedia is the most effective shock site. I
just demonstrated how it is, nevertheless, very easy to use as one in a
manner that would be undetectable prior to first use--the user page
wouldn't show in the "what links to" list for more than the few seconds it
took for the miscreant to blank it.
People who are that easily shocked may get upset
at movies, period.
It is notoriously difficult to tell the content of a movie from its
name. And you just pointed out yourself that movie ratings in one
country may mean nothing in another.
They may get shocked at movies but they will not expect to get shocked
by encyopedia articles.
If they're shocked by a boob or two I think it's fair to say that they'll
be used to being shocked by encyclopedias. There is nothing we can do
about this. My 1950s Britannica has boobs, I don't expect things have
changed much on that score in the past 50 years.