[Foundation-l] Is random article truly random

[Thomas Morton]

>
> That there is a pornography project would be empirical evidence to the
> contrary. That a random page load can load pages with CBT images, genital
> piercings, or ejaculate leaking from or flowing over various body parts is
> also problematic.
>
>
Well, strictly speaking that isn't pornography - because the intent behind
the images is not to arouse, but to inform.

I realise that is being pedantic in definition - but it is important,
because if an image on an article is genuinely "pornography" in the
strictest sense, then it should be removed as un-encyclopaedic :)

All of the images that might be problematic should have educational
validity.

Tom