You are right that putting insulting pictures on Wikipedia was a bad
idea. Why so many of our users have a blind spot regarding this issue
I don't know, but there is a consensus that the pictures ought to be
shown. When a consensus develops, it is best to simply register your
dissent and move on. You do not need to ever agree, but you are not
entitled to keep agitating over the issue.
The need to block a whole bunch of outraged users who would try to
remove the cartoons is one of the consequences of what I think was a
bad decision, but once made, the decision is going to be enforced.
Those who are enforcing the decision are just enforcing a community
decision.
There is a point of view issue, but it is not so much American as one
of free expression, really a part of the zeitgeist, of which
Wikipedia is an expression. While I may not wish to publish the
cartoons because I can anticipate the pain of those who may be hurt
by it, the authority of Islam to forbid expression is generally
rejected.
Fred
On May 27, 2006, at 6:48 PM, Raphael Wegmann wrote:
What do you mean by "even when you are
right"?
Aren't you interested to find out, whether I am right?
If I am right, letting those admins go on blocking editors
would be very bad for Wikipedia as it would shift the bias
even more. To be honest the english Wikipedia would have to
change it's NPOV policy and explicitly state, that it is
"purely and simply, generally sympathetic to an American POV"
(which seems to be very anti-Muslim nowadays).
--
Raphael
Fred Bauder wrote:
> If you raise enough hell you can get in a mess even when you are
> right. Next time just express your opinion and let it go if folks
> don't agree.
>
> Fred