On 18/02/2008, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 18/02/2008, Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
To do that, you need to define what the sides
are. We're never going
to completely satisfy everybody. The most unreasonable claims can
obviously be rejected outright (for example, someone mentioned a
demand that only Muslims be allowed to edit Islam-related articles).
We need to decide how unreasonable is unreasonable enough to dismiss
without consideration.
Of course that presupposes that they are being unreasonable which in
itself is a value judgement.
That's pretty much my point. I think everybody here would agree that
demanding only Muslims be allowed to edit the article is unreasonable
(if anyone doesn't agree, please do speak up). Clearly not everyone
agrees that demanding the images not be openly displayed on the
article is unreasonable. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and
exactly where is, as you say, a value judgement, and one we need to
decide upon before we can assess the merits of any given suggestion.