[Foundation-l] Discussion Questions for Potentially-Objectionable Content

[wiki-list at phizz.demon.co.uk]

Tomasz Ganicz wrote:
> 2010/7/25 Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com>:
>>> From: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
>>>> Yes, the devil is in the details, and in working out
>>> the correct parameters for default IP access. Each language
>>> version of any project could make its own determination in
>>> this regard. Arabic, no Mohammed images; India, no sex and
>>> kissing; Dutch and German, the full Monty with no censorship
>>> at all. Whatever.
>>>
>>>
>>> The sum of all human knowledge! Filtered by default to what
>>> we think local prejudices are! And never mind that pesky Neutral
>>> Point Of View.
>> No, not filtered according to what *we* think, but filtered according to what the local editor community in that project think is appropriate to their cultural context.
>>
> 
> I guess in most local editor communities the consensus about this is
> simply not achievable, as long as the entire project is POV and this
> is our real problem with implementing any kind of soft-semi but still
> cenzorship. It simply touches your personal cultural contex, which is
> different for devoted catholic or devoted musilm or the non-religous
> person. Moreover if it comes to pictures we are saying about Wikimedia
> Commons which is by default global. In fact English Wikipedia is quite
> global project as well... Each such person thinks the the general
> cenzorship rules should follow his/her cultural context. But the NPOV
> idea is that Wikipedia content should not be affected by POV coming
> form this or another cultural context, which let contribute to it no
> matter of your cultural contex, as long as you are able to accept
> having in Wikipedia all other's people POV mixed together in NPOV
> style.

I think you are confused. It is not a POV not to display images by
default if those images can be accessed by a simple mouse click, it is
simple good manners. For example I may want to read about 'Tribute
pictures':
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cum%20tribute

it doesn't mean to say that I want to look at some guy's spooge over a
picture of the woman next door.

And as I said earlier just because I'm reading about the Rawandan
geonicide doesn't mean that I want to see images of mutilated bodies.
And were I a Muslim I ought to be able to read about images of Mohammed
without seeing images of him burning in hell.

Of course I may wish to see all such images and so long as I can should
I so desire then it is not censorship nor it a violation of NPOV.