Crux of the question, yes. Why do any rules or
policies from 3rd party
websites or services receive enforcement on Wikipedia?
I have a feeling that there may perhaps be some legal invasion of privacy
issue - in the UK at least, it's illegal to record a telephone conversation
without the other person's permission, and I wonder whether that might apply
to IRC too (since it's sort of equivalent).
David
On 24/05/07, Gabe Johnson <gjzilla(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/24/07, Ken Arromdee
<arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Blu Aardvark wrote:
> And of course the use of IRC quotes to discuss their content would
> qualify as fair use. But it's a bad idea. Those who are misusing IRC
> would continue to do so, but would simply move their discussions from
> open channels into more secluded channels. People, for whatever
>
reason,
don't
like being held accountable for what they say on IRC.
Am I missing something here? People can be held accountable for doing
things
without reasons. If they continue the
discussions in secluded channels,
and then act on them, they are acting with no public reason, in effect
with
no reason at all. They can just be treated as
acting with no reason.
That applies too. ~~~~
--
Absolute Power
C^7rr8p£5 ab£$^u7£%y
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l