[Foundation-l] Astonished by the so-called principle of least astonishment

[Teofilo]

My attention being caught by the sitenotice to the image hiding
referendum, I came to read the 29 May 2011 board "Controversial
content" resolution [1]. And I was astonished. I have two main
criticisms.

A) The principle of least astonishment was one compound in a set of
balanced principles, limited to a very specific scope: the management
of redirected titles [2].  It was not meant for contents other than
titles. I am afraid the WMF board is adulterating a good limited
principle into a broad obscurantist ideology. I am afraid some people
will read "content (...) should be presented to readers in such a way
as to respect their expectations" as meaning that they are entitled to
censor anything that does not fit their preconceived ideas.

B) Is there a philosopher aboard the plane ? Did-it not occur to
anybody in the board that astonishment and knowledge are synonymous ?
If you are against astonishment, you are against knowledge. Learning
is about being astonished. When you are told again something you
already know, you are not learning. When you are told something
important you did not previously know, you are astonished. If you
believe that the Earth is the center of the world, and Galileo tells
you that it is not, you are astonished. Galileo raised a controversy
and his theory was a controversial content.  In Plato's dialogues, the
master never stops astonishing his students [3].

[1] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Controversial_content
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Principle_of_least_astonishment&oldid=7719182
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method