Now I'm not condoning pedophilia or anything of the sort. It's deplorable to the
last. But to disallow editing based on this (given that they don't parade around
their POV in articles) strikes me as immediately arbitrary. I daresay that we've had
criminals of all sorts edit Wikipedia.
--Ryan
From: Conrad Dunkerson
<conrad.dunkerson(a)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: No more blocking people for who they
*are*?
Ryan W. (Merovingian) wrote:
Although I think you're right, I don't
think any admins blocked people just
for believing certain things. Those who were blocked were acting in a way
that justified their I-hate-to-call-it-punishment.
I think you might be wrong about that.
Carbonite: "The userbox Template:User pedophile (edit · talk · links ·
history · watch) is a great way of identifying those users who consider
themselves to be pedophiles. I plan on indefinitely blocking any user
who includes this template. I've already blocked the only user to
include this template, Joeyramoney (talk contribs page moves block
user block log). Wikipedia has no obligation to permit deviants to edit."
Jimbo Wales: "They said that pedophiles should be banned from editing
Wikipedia. That's a very respectable position."
--
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE!