[Foundation-l] Wikinews - not so much a state of the wiki

[Thomas Dalton]

On 04/12/2007, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2007 4:58 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The courts have already ruled that what an anonymous contributors
> > > posts to an online message board is not the responsibility of the
> > > owners of that message board. An online version of the New York Times,
> > > if it's open for anonymous submissions, would fall under the same
> > > category.
> >
> > No-one is disputing that. I'm talking about an online newspaper taking
> > submissions from the public, not a public message board. The key
> > difference is that the newspaper selects stories it thinks are good
> > from the submissions.
>
> an online X where anonymous contributors may post materials that are
> not explicitly moderated or  approved prior to public display. In this
> case, "X" can really be a "online newspaper", "message board",
> "forum", "newsgroup", etc. Terminology really doesnt make a difference
> in the method of the post nor the net effect of it.

We are explicitly discussing the case where content *is* moderated and
approved, so why are you talking about the opposite? I think everyone
on this list is familiar with CDA 230's implications for unmoderated
public contributions to websites, since it's brought up at least once
a week.