[WikiEN-l] Peodophiles and wikipedia

[Ray Saintonge]

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>   
>> Tony Sidaway wrote:
>>     
>>> On 24/12/2007, Steven Walling <steven.walling at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Bottom line is wikipedia isn't a free speech zone. It is a project to
>>>> write an encyclopedia.    
>>>>         
>>> Amen.
>>>       
>> Free speech and writing an encyclopedia are not mutually exclusive.
>>     
> But they really are, if we understand what is meant in this context by 
> "a free speech zone".
>
> The question here is "time, place, and manner" restrictions.  If you 
> want to advocate for racism (for example), you are certainly welcome to 
> do so: just not here, not at Wikipedia.
The question is really what we intend when we use the term "Wikipedia" 
in this kind of thread.  If you use the term in its narrowest sense as 
what the passive information-seeking public sees you are closer to being 
right.  For most people who have been active contributors it is much 
more than that.  For them "Wikipedia" includes all the various 
namespaces where difficult problems are hammered out.  Some might even 
see the mailing lists and IRC as a part of the greater Wikipedia.  Free 
speech is essential to hammering out the problems, and it follows from 
this that without free speech NPOV is unattainable.

Maybe this is what you mean by "time, place and manner", but that's not 
what's coming across.  What's being communicated is a highly restrictive 
environment where there is no place provided in which to express a 
different opinion, or at least not one that is  contrary to received 
wisdom.  Advocacy, like advertising  goes beyond free speech  We have a 
history of dislike for advertising even for the most benign of 
products.  Repeated claims on behalf of these products by the same 
person will stand him in no better stead than if he was promoting racism.

Remember too that most of us who take a more liberal view on dealing 
with these explosively controversial subject would still not dream of 
doing so in an article.  Sometimes it pays to give people credit for a 
little more sophistication than a simplistic black-and-white duality 
between Wikipedia and free speech.

Ec