On 05/02/2008, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/02/2008, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
Not to mention the lack of an objective way to determine whether an image (or anything else) is "potentially-offending" enough that an otherwise reasonable person somewhere might want to opt out of it. It's not our place to make that decision for this or any other content.
That's pretty much my position. I have no real problem with making it easy for people to not see things that would offend them, but I do have a problem with doing it in some cases and not others (it's discrimination), and I don't think it's practical to do it in all cases. Therefore, we are left with no choice other than not to do it at all.
I believe we went through this with, on [[autofellatio]], the photo of a guy sucking his own penis. There was a massive debate about possibly-offensive content, and a detailed straw-poll page which should probably be up somewhere. (Does anyone recall the link?) I think consensus that time around came to "Wikipedia is not censored, we judge content editorially on encyclopedic value and quality and NPOV." Which I suppose means that if you want to have content someone strongly objects to, it behooves you to do the best possible job on the article. Which I can't see as a bad thing.
- d.