[WikiEN-l] Re: Shouldn't we kick paedophiles off Wikipedia?

[Jon]

There are very few views that are viewed as so taboo as paedophilia. And let's be honest here - you wouldn't ask either of those two users to babysit for you, so let's stop the nonsense about "open-mindedness". I'm not open-minded about grown men wanting to have sex with pre-pubescent girls - and I imagine that goes for 99%+ of the population.

As far as you asking me not to be emotive about it - that's silly - who wouldn't be emotive about it (and I'm not even a parent)!

Let me ask the question again - is Wikipedia a haven for paedophiles? If so, I can see many parents banning their children from using it - to the detriment of us all.

 

Jon

 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----Hash: SHA1Jon wrote:> I've recently noticed that we have a small number of self-confessed paedophile Wikipedians - who, as you can imagine, edit paedophile-related articles apologising for paedophilia, encouraging us to accept it as normal. Should we not kick these people out of Wikipedia. At the very least they are encouraging others to commit crimes (by arguing that paedophilia is perfectly acceptable).>  > By way of example - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LuxOfTKGL and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zanthalon.>  > I know Wikipedia is a broad church, full of people with different backgrounds and beliefs. But whichever way you look at it, paedophilia is against societal norms. As it is we have to warn teachers and parents that Wikipedia is not child-safe because of certain explicit images - do we also want to have to tell them it isn't child-safe as we welcome paedophiles as equals?>  > (Incidentally, the developers would be well-advised
 to do IP checks on these users and tell the police whatever they find out, as it is clear that self-confessed paedophiles need to be watched very carefully.)>  > Jon (jguk) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and must remain balanced. We don't saywhether paedophilia is right or wrong, we say what it is, why people maydo it, what causes them to do it, and society's views on it.If these people are making statements saying paedophilia is morallyright, or in fact, morally wrong, then that is not acceptable. If theyare providing encylopediac information relating to why people may bepaedophiles, etc. I think that is beneficial for Wikipedia.Be careful of using emotive language, and banning people for theirthoughts is not what I'd like to see. Ban people for their actions, butnot for what they think.Chris

- --Chris Jenkinsonchris at starglade.org-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.orgiD8DBQFC0AuOEq6+ijeBrJ8RAvceAJ9GOw+isv9G8DUER3JVetKIgcctKQCbBkvJaKfVwAljND/SB2HuPUcv8nE==N9Lm-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


		
---------------------------------
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos