[WikiEN-l] Sorted

[Jimmy Wales]

Mathias Schindler wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Alex G <g1ggyman at gmail.com> wrote:
>> And by the same strong argument there is no reason to keep them there. Sure,
>>  we're not censored, but that doesn't mean we need to be stubborn when a
>>  (sort of) uncensored solution exists.
> 
> Wouldn't "solution" require the petitioners to agree to the idea that
> showing drawings of people they consider to be prophets can shown when
> the title of the page is called "depiction of X"?

I would certainly say that this is a valid question, and I would be 
interested to hear a good answer.  (I.E. an answer by someone who 
doesn't really have an axe to grind here.)

That is to say, is there any "loophole" which would satisfy the more 
intelligent and thoughtful of the protestors.  (Obviously some people 
are just spoiling for a fight, and nothing will satisfy them.)

Or is any depiction at all going to end up offending just as much.

If there is something about *how* we are displaying the image which is 
offensive, then there is hope for a mutually beneficial compromise.

--Jimbo