I am concerned about this practice of importing external rules into Wikipedia postings - if this is the correct interpretation of the reason we don't post IRC logs. The same logic could be used to consider external links to other sites, some of which even have legal restrictions on access let alone minor rules like "no posting what you read here," to be unacceptable. Anyone have any idea how many links we have to porn sites, all of which restrict access to those over 18 (or in some places even 21)?
Risker
On 5/23/07, Joe Szilagyi szilagyi@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/23/07, Snowolf mtazio@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/23/07, Gary Kirk gary.kirk@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't/didn't the topic on #wikimedia used to say something like "Public logging = permaban"?
Yes, but not on wikipedia, the ban is on IRC, isn't it?
Crux of the question, yes. Why do any rules or policies from 3rd party websites or services receive enforcement on Wikipedia? James F or Kelly or whomever made the rule for the channels, but their authority on Freenode has no applicability on Wikipedia.
Regards, Joe http://www.joeszilagyi.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l