<joke>I have a dream, that one day my four little adoptees will be judged not by their userboxes but by the content of their contributions</joke>
I say we ignore the userbox problem. Seriously. The kind of person who would have userboxes advocating for killing or pedophilia is just the kind of POV pusher that gets burnout or is weeded out through poor behavior. The vast majority of good Wikipedians know that inflammatory userboxes are a bad thing.
On Jan 19, 2008 1:09 PM, Richard Symonds hawkertyphoon@hotmail.com wrote:
Firstly, there's the issue of inflamatory userboxes. It appears that>
userboxes supporting American troops in Iraq are acceptable, but userboxes> supporting the Iraqi insurgensy aren't. Userboxes supporting the killing
of> >Iraqi insurgents are acceptable, but ones that support the killing of>
American troops aren't. Surely both the "support" ones should be
acceptable,> >whilst the ones that support killing should be delete. Then there's the ones> >that advocate peodophilia. Users who have these often argue that we accept> >homosexual userboxes, which is just a stupid argument, but they don't seem> >to be able accept that. >The answer is, of course, to ban all such userboxes and be done with>it. Trying to decide what it is and isn't acceptable to express>support for is just asking for trouble.
Or, of course, to accept them all. As long as the userboxes dont actually *kill* troops, or *engage in* paedophilia, there are no policies against it, are there? We shouldn't have *any* bias here, pro- or anti- anything. _________________________________________________________________ Get Hotmail on your mobile, text MSN to 63463! http://mobile.uk.msn.com/pc/mail.aspx _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l