[WikiEN-l] Getting hammered in a tv interview is not fun

[Marc Riddell]

on 3/31/07 2:23 AM, Bryan Derksen at bryan.derksen at shaw.ca wrote:

> Doesn't seem that way to me. Geni is taking a relativist position,
> basically saying (if I interpret him correctly) that if we pick one of
> the many different ethical systems out there and make it an official
> policy we're going to bias Wikipedia and add lots of considerations that
> aren't directly related to our goal. For example, "do no harm" could
> require us to take out or modify articles about homeopathy, or
> marijuana, or maybe even certain political or religious ideologies - and
> "harm" is subjective so different editors would want to take these
> things in different ways. It's a huge and unnecessary kettle of fish to
> open.

This is in response to several recent posts. For the record, the concept of
"do no harm" I was presenting to in WP was related to what information we,
as editors, choose to include in biographies of persons. My point was that
to consciously include gratuitous, tabloid-like junk in a biographical
article is unnecessarily harmful to the person.

And, as far as "choosing a system of ethics" for WP: I don't believe it is
something you shop around for. But, rather, it develops, and is agreed upon,
by the Community of persons in WP itself.

Marc Riddell