[WikiEN-l] Can we think about trying the "show" solution?

[Oldak Quill]

On 21/02/2008, Raphael Wegmann <raphael at psi.co.at> wrote:
> Thomas Dalton schrieb:
>
> > On 21/02/2008, The Mangoe <the.mangoe at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >> As long as the two sacred principles of "No pictures!" and "Not
>  >>  censored!" stand in rigid opposition to each other, the conflict will
>  >>  continue. The "show" solution (with an appropriate note) or even
>  >>  putting all the images on the "depictions" page (again, with a
>  >>  prominent note) seem like reasonable solutions. As far as the
>  >>  "depictions" article is concerned, I can't see how that article can
>  >>  exist without images.
>  >
>  > I've yet to see anyone seriously address to issue of how to decide
>  > which images to hide and which not to.
>
>
> If there is an internet petition with 200.000 signatures against
>  an image, I'd say, that it is a good candidate, don't you think?

Why would a petition containing X number of signatures sway us one way
or another about our content? Religious lobby groups quickly put great
numbers behind petitions and letter writing campaigns. That a group of
200 000 were convinced to sign a petition doesn't necessarily mean
very much.

When Jerry Springer: The Opera offended some Catholics' sense of
absolute control over of the concepts "God", "Jesus", "heaven", and
"hell", a letter writing campaign was organised against the BBC. Most
of the letters looked the same, so the fact that there were thousands
of complaints means very little. The BBC aired the opera anyway,
despite receiving more complaints than ever before (on any issue).

-- 
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)