Geoff Burling said: What does workplace unsafe actually mean in this context? Whose workplace? Why unsafe? How can a person placing a photograph on a website cause a completely unrelated workplace to become unsafe?

Matt Brown said: Quite.

Stan Shebs said: Not really. To me, it's one of those odd concepts that crop up now and then but never seem to be adequately explained. Clearly we're not talking about some kind of high explosive or even something that can cause software to malfunction. Suppose you put something onto a website, how could you know it was workplace unsafe? Which particular workplace? How can you know?

Sean Barrett said: Thank you. I must say I find the idea that workplace rules should extend outside the workplace in this way, applying to people who don't even work there, very, very puzzling. If these rules are really so important, why do people insist on risking breaching them by visiting internet sites that have terms of use, like the following one applying to craiglist: "You understand that craigslist does not control, and is not responsible for Content made available through the Service, and that by using the Service, you may be exposed to Content that is offensive, indecent, inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise objectionable."

Charles Matthews said: Indeed. I've had my say. No more on this.

Tony Sidaway stated for the record: Attention all: please do not feed the troll. -- Sean Barrett | Legatus est vir bonus peregre missus sean(a)epoptic.com | ad mentiendum Rei Publicae causa.

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Tony Sidaway wrote: This post challenges me in a way I haven't been challenged before: I can express three possible responses, but given the nature of these responses, I feel I am limited to only using one of them. Could someone help me decide which of these three responses should I use? 1. Tony, do you honestly not know what I meant by "workplace unsafe"? Are you, for some reason, unable to point your browser at http://portland.craigslist.com, find the link for "Rants & Raves", then examine the posts there to see what I might mean? The ones with pictures attached are all helpfully marked, so if this is a sinceely pressing question for you, I'd expect you to take a look & see what I meant. And if you have no interest in doing your own research, what is your point for these questions? FWIW, I picked this term "workplace unsafe" because I had only looked at two of the 20 or more posts with pictures on this topic. While both were images of part of an unclothed body, I didn't want to base my assumptions on such an unrepresentative sample & assume that none of the others were more appropriate for a web site named www.pregnantteeniesfuckedbygoats.com. And because I'm sure if I had merely written "pictures of unclothed people", someone would have found the few that were not simply unclothed people, & made the effort to misrepresent my point by accusing me of condoning pictures I might find offensive. 2. I was sincere in describing the exchanges here as intellectual as compared to what usually appears in "Rants & Raves". Even the concurrent exchange about "Rogue Admins" is polite, thoughtful, & restrained compared to the ones I've seen in that spot at Craig's List; over there, telling someone you disagree with "Fuck off and die" is better than half of the exchanges I've read in "Rants & Raves" -- & one reason I don't usually read it, despite the fact there are some very fine posts there (which fortunately make it to "Best of Craig's List"). However, if you want to be disruptive to make a point (something usually discouraged here at Wikipedia), & show that we can be just as nasty & offensive, please don't try to imitate examples of Gay bashing, complaints about fat women, national business chains, or local government. As the joke goes, a single feather can be a lot of fun; the whole chicken is just plain offensive. 3. I am reminded of a Zen Buddhist story, about a Master who has taken a vow of chastity, & his young disciple. One day, as they were travelling along, they came to a river, where a woman was standing, in provocative, yet expensive, clothes. She asked the Master if he would be so kind as to help her across the river; the Master agreed, and carried her across the river on his back. She thanked the Master, & they went their separate ways. This incident troubled the young disciple: why did his master let a woman -- particularly one dressed as she had been -- touch him? Didn't that infringe on his vow of chastity? The disciple thought about about this for a long time, & at last asked his Master about the woman. "I left her back at the river, & have gone on," the master replied calmly. "You appear to still be carrying her." I recall you making a point about the phrase "workplace unsafe" quite eloquently in a discussion some time back, about how you didn't like the phrase & why. I have left that discussion & have gone on. Geoff