[WikiEN-l] One concern regarding filters

[Christopher Mahan]

--- Erik Moeller <erik_moeller at gmx.de> wrote:
> Theoretically, I have no objections against building an open
> filtering  
> system for Wikipedia, that is, one where several, differing
> standards can  
> be implemented in parallel (such as my team certification model).
> Of  
> course, nobody of the current developers other than myself is
> particularly  
> invested in that idea, so it will probably not get built unless
> some  
> unforseen incident allows me to spend large amount of time on the  
> Wikipedia codebase (particularly one that does not involve a
> kidnapping  
> and programming at gunpoint).
> 
> Practically, there is one problem that has not been sufficiently
> addressed  
> in the previous discussion; Axel touched upon it, and I'd like to
> try to  
> spell it out more clearly.
> 
> F I L T E R S   A R E   B A D.
> 
> OK, here's the complex version. Wikipedia is built by persons with
> a  
> fairly progressive mindset, and I believe most of us agree that
> it's a bad  
> idea to shield young eyes from so-called "dangerous" content,
> *especially*  
> in an encyclopedia, that filters don't work properly etc.
> 
> If we, as Wikipedia, offer a convenient filtering option for
> schools and  
> libraries, we effectively endorse the strategy of having those
> filters in  
> place. We say: "Yeah, we know, you have to operate under these
> standards,  
> so, here's a checkbox you have to click to make sure they are
> followed."
> 
> If we, as Wikipedia, refuse to do so, we effectively challenge
> these  
> schools and libraries to ban an encyclopedia. They may get away
> with  
> banning porn sites easily, but an *entire* encyclopedia? Just
> because it  
> discusses sexual content on some of its pages? I bet the ACLU would
> love  
> to challenge that on first amendment grounds.
> 
> If you dislike mandatory filters for schools and libraries, not
> having  
> them as a part of Wikipedia is a very good strategy to combat them.
>  
> Wikipedia is a highly important project that may well become the
> center of  
> a future lawsuit in defense of free speech. I don't think we should
>  
> effectively endorse the use of mandatory filters just because of
> Jimbo's  
> mother.
> 
> And just to be a little more provocative, the same goes for fair
> use (I  
> don't know what Jimbo's mom has to say about that, though): By
> endorsing  
> fair use, we defend this principle. By rejecting it, we give the
> opponents  
> of fair use an opportunity to say: "Oh well, look at Wikipedia,
> they have  
> built a free encyclopedia of 3 million articles without stealing
> any  
> content with that so called fair use thing. So why not get rid of
> it  
> altogether?"
> 
> Our decisions, our rules, affect the world outside of Wikipedia.  
> Specifically, our openness and tolerance can make the world more
> open and  
> tolerant. Never for a second believe that we are not important
> enough to  
> have such an effect.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Erik


Your opinions mirror mine on these matters.

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com