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