Chad Perrin said:
That aside, however, I would like the ability to watch
such things if I
were to change my mind. It might be viewed as "horrifying", but it
might also be viewed as "informative" or "educational".
As such, any solution that does not bar explicit content (as long as
it's not gratuitous), but does allow for opting into a blocking
mechanism (reversible on a case-by-case basis) if that is desired,
sounds like a great idea for me. My question is this:
Is there anyone that finds that sort of "fix" to the issue
inappropriate, inapplicable, incomplete, or otherwise objectionable?
Is there any reason to force either visible presence or complete
absence of such content on people?
We already have this capability built into our browsers. For those who
can't or are simply unwilling to learn how to use their browsers, however,
it would be easy enough to adapt MediaWiki to suppress or display all
image content by default per user, reversible on a case-by-case basis. I
downloaded a copy of MediaWiki the other day and if I find the time I'll
write a patch for that.