On Apr 5, 2006, at 6:57 AM, Matt R wrote:
I agree that 'pedophile' might have been a bit strong. Perhaps 'people who believe that Wikipedia has a duty to provide pedophiles with child porn regardless of the law' would be a more accurate, objective description.
\I don't think your description is particularly fair or objective. I support the removal of the image in question, but I recognise that at least some of those who argued for it to be it kept did so out of good faith and a desire to create the best encyclopedia possible. I don't think they were trolling or motivated by a desire to supply pedophiles with child porn.
I agree with Matt. This is not a profitable direction for discussion.