When I started this thread, after my attention was drawn to this
article during the "Darvon cocktail" discussion, I was uncomfortable
with much of the content of this article but I will admit it was on
something of a theoretical basis in terms of raising the issue whether
the overly detailed analysis of suicide methods belonged on a top ten
website.
However, in the current AfD discussion, which I acknowledge is
trending toward "Keep" again, it is represented that at least one
suicidal individual has ACTUALLY consulted this article for
information on how to kill himself. This multiplies my concern
tenfold.
Newyorkbrad
On 4/19/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/19/07, Doc glasgow
<doc.wikipedia(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
There is a flaw in your moral relativism. Hijacking planes and slamming
them
into buildings, lynching blacks, screwing
pre-pubescent boys, and gassing
Jews have all be considered perfectly valid options by certain people in
certain cultural contexts. Would we list the methods by which one might do
such things in a morally-disinterested manner?
Certainly. Of course we would also list the techniques people have
found effective in preventing the above from happening
Is that what NPOV demands? Is
that responsible?
I think this falls under the security by obscurity debate.
Further, if it is wrong to limit information on
suicide because wikipedia
is
culturally amoral, why should your proviso
"without crippling yourself or
others" stand? It too is a value-judgement? Why not include methods that
are
designed to cause maximum devastation?
We do [[kamikaze]].
Yes, policy says Wikipedia is 'not
censored', but our policies were never
intended to be 'suicide pacts' that had to be followed to their logical
conclusions no matter how absurd. Policy is no substitute for good
judgement. And anyone who thinks we can make decisions in wikipedia
without
using 'subjectivity' just isn't
living in the real world. Or perhaps they
want to programme bots to make content decisions....
Orphanbot has being doing that for ages.
Having said all of that, I'm not sure this
article actually does give me
great cause for concern. But we should retain our basic humanity and
cultural sensitivity when we make decisions like this.
It has been said that information is not intrinsically good or evil
but rather the use.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l