On Nov 6, 2007 11:31 AM, Philip Sandifer <snowspinner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Mine, at least, is to point out that we seem to be
having no problems
skyrocketing in the Alexa rankings and in popularity despite this.
That does not mean we should not fight vandalism. But it does mean
that our userbase seems relatively accepting of the fact that
sometimes you'll load an article on Earl Grey tea and get a picture of
a man's distended anus. Yes, we get a few upset e-mails from people
who are not accepting of this every day at OTRS. But it doesn't seem
to be having a crippling effect on our perceived usability at present.
The trivial counter to your argument is that there have been plenty of
products that caused harm slowly enough or at a infrequently enough
rate that LOTS of people still purchased/used them.
It's not that people who smoke think "I don't mind cancer", it's
that
they don't experience the negative effects often enough to encourage
them to make another decision.
Along that line of thinking, on Wikipedia it's not "I don't mind the
fact that looking up a connector on Wikipedia might instead bring up
some child porn that could get me fired from work and investigated by
the police" ... it's either complete unawareness or "it won't happen
to me".
Or maybe I'm just old fashioned in thinking that there are way to
define success or correctness which don't consider popularity. ;)