Err, not really - it's well known that we have a collective morality - for instance, presenting information neutrally is part of our collective morality.
Beyond that, it's as silly to characterise those arguing in favour of some level of image inclusion by the opinions of their most extreme members as those arguing against by their most extreme members. The realistic, moderate position focused on encyclopaedic value probably doesn't favour the exact arrangement of images used current, nor does it favour their complete supression - for the most part, I agree with User:Itaqallah's arguments, although I disagree with him about the importance of non-Muslim representation and Muhammad's importance and influence in the west.
But, in the community's collective will, it seems to believe very strongly that *uncensored* is a moral we simply can't violate - I prod'd people to keep the AfD on the "image-free fork" open longer to allow more discussion, but ... in the end, it was pretty pointless - perhaps the most overwhelming consensus I've seen anyware in this place.
Cheers WilyD
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:38 PM, The Mangoe the.mangoe@gmail.com wrote:
Then surely there must be hundred of thousands of objections to the inaccurate (and overwrought) characterization of the "show" as "censorship". It simply is no such thing.
And your use of the phrase "collective morality" is telling, in exactly the wrong way. We're supposed to be neutral; we aren't supposed to *have* a morality in that sense. Right now, anyone can see that we aren't neutral about depictions of Muhammad.
I've said about what was worth saying in this. Of course, the "show" version is a concession. But what it comes down to at the moment is that making a moral statement about those illustrations is worth fighting over the issue forever. My personal view is that the article shouldn't be caught between the aniconic fundamentalists and the image inclusion fundamentalists.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Wily D wilydoppelganger@gmail.com wrote:
Auto-hidden with "Show" and "Only on a depictions" page have been discussed to death 1000X over and rejected - while I agree with Itaqallah and a few others that the current arrangement it at best "suboptimal", it's simply that case that too many people that censoring such an important article to present it from a non-neutral perspective is simply to intolerable to our collective morality as Wikipedians.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l