On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Tom Morris tom@tommorris.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 08:09, Möller, Carsten c.moeller@wmco.de wrote:
No, we need to harden the wall agaist all attacks by hammers,
screwdrivers and drills.
We have consensus: Wikipedia should not be censored.
You hold strong on that principle. Wikipedia should not be censored!
Even if that censorship is something the user initiates, desires, and can turn off at any time, like AdBlock.
Glad to see that Sue Gardner's warnings earlier in the debate that people don't get entrenched and fundamentalist but try to honestly and charitably see other people's points of view has been so well heeded.
My question is, Is this really something that WMF should be spending its time and resources on?
In case of AdBlock, it's a third party extension for browsers. They were designed to fill a need, a need most people here can't seem to find, that compelled the board to enact this. Why has there been no third-party solution or anything close to this filter developed independently?
Why should we spend donor money to develop tools to censor our own content? I thought the goal was gathering the sum of all human knowledge not all knowledge minus controversial content.
Regards Theo