Tim Starling wrote:
Draw the line where good judgement dictates that it
should be drawn.
We're not in the market of making "good" or "bad" judgement -
we're in the
market of building a comprehensive encyclopedia.
Don't
defend a policy on the basis that there exists no better policy that a
robot could understand -- we are not robots.
Although we'd probably benefit from it in a lot of cases.
Wikipedia is not a platform
for free speech, the lack of censorship does not mean we should publish
everything that can possibly be published. We need to select our material
based on more nuanced criteria.
I can't buy into that, I'm sorry. If "nuanced criteria" means
"removing
information that may cause harm to someone," forget it. We have enough
subjectivity already.
-Jeff
--
If you can read this, I'm not at home.