[Foundation-l] Spectrum of views (was Re: Sexual Imagery on Commons: where the discussion is happening)

[Ray Saintonge]

Tim Starling wrote:
> Solution 1: Exercise editorial control to remove particularly
> offensive images from the site.
>
> Standard answer 1: Some people may wish to see that content, it would
> be wrong for us to stop them.
>
> Solution 2: Tag images with an audience-specific rating system, like
> movie classifications. Then enable client-side filtering.
>
> Standard answer 2: This could potentially enable censorship which is
> wrong as per answer 1. Also, we cannot determine what set of content
> is right for a given audience. By encouraging people to filter, say,
> R-rated content, we risk inadvertently witholding information that
> they would have consented to see, had they been fully informed about
> its nature.
>
> Solution 3: Tag images with objective descriptors, chosen to be useful
> for the purposes of determining offensive character by the reader. The
> reader may then choose a policy for what kinds of images they wish to
> filter.
>
> Standard answer 3: This also enables censorship, which is wrong as per
> answer 1. Also, tagging images with morally-relevant descriptors
> involves a value judgement by us, when we determine which descriptors
> to use. It is wrong for us to impose our moral values on readers in
> this way.
>
> The fundamental principle of libertarianism is that the individual
> should have freedom of thought and action, and that it is wrong for
> some other party to infringe that freedom. I've attempted to structure
> the standard answers above in a way that shows how they are connected
> to this principle.
>
>   
Those who rely on "standard answers" don't really exercise freedom of 
thought, only an absence of thought.

Ec