[WikiEN-l] IRC logging, disclosure

[Risker]

I am concerned about this practice of importing external rules into
Wikipedia postings - if this is the correct interpretation of the reason we
don't post IRC logs. The same logic could be used to consider external links
to other sites, some of which even have legal restrictions on access let
alone minor rules like "no posting what you read here," to be unacceptable.
Anyone have any idea how many links we have to porn sites, all of which
restrict access to those over 18 (or in some places even 21)?

Risker


On 5/23/07, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/23/07, Snowolf <mtazio at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 5/23/07, Gary Kirk <gary.kirk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Doesn't/didn't the topic on #wikimedia used to say something like
> > > "Public logging = permaban"?
> >
> >
> > Yes, but not on wikipedia, the ban is on  IRC, isn't it?
>
>
>
> Crux of the question, yes. Why do any rules or policies from 3rd party
> websites or services receive enforcement on Wikipedia? James F or Kelly or
> whomever made the rule for the channels, but their authority on Freenode
> has
> no applicability on Wikipedia.
>
> Regards,
> Joe
> http://www.joeszilagyi.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>