On 4/7/06, BJörn Lindqvist bjourne@gmail.com wrote:
Something I feel have been missed is Sam Korn's original assertion that "[The image deletion] process is demonstrably broken" because this image was not deleted by it. I believe the process is not broken at all, but that Sam's approach to it was wrong. If he had stuck with the 100% demonstrably true facts; 1. the image is not free, 2. there is a free replacement, then I believe the image could have been deleted without much fuss. But when you use emotional arguments ("This image is extremely harmful to Wikipedia..."), expect a filibuster.
Some of us feel that even if the image had been free, it still should never have been included in Wikipedia. Concentrating on its copyright status is ignoring the real debate, rather than deciding once and for all how to deal with images that would be perceived by the public to be child porn.
Steve