[WikiEN-l] Re: Writing about sexual topics responsibly is not censorship

Tue Feb 15 11:08:46 UTC 2005

Christiaan Briggs wrote:
> Nicholas Knight wrote:
> 
>> I understand it, what I don't understand is why you feel sufficiently 
>> strongly about it to feel offended.
> 
> 
> Because I'm sick and tired of corporations and other people attempting 
> to control how I see the world and attempting to replace it with some 
> kind of Disney World. Much the same practice is taking place on our 
> televisions screens with regard to war. People have no idea about the 
> realities of war because unfathomable efforts are made to ensure they 
> get a Disneyfied version of events.

The situations are not even comparable. Linking to an image gives a user 
a clear, visible, and easily made choice. Presenting a user with a 
canned news broadcast with no other options does not give a user a choice.

> I don't want to live in Disney World, I want to live on Earth with all 
> the pain and diversity that entails. I don't see the human body as a 
> vessel of sin and shame. I don't have issues with the human body and 
> what it is capable of. Treating this image differently by in-lining by 
> default is a statement in itself along these lines. Creating a solution 
> that caters to individuals and institutions skirts around this issue by 
> leaving it up to the user to decide.

Linking to the image IS a solution, it's just not the best one we can 
reasonably come up with.

>> The solution has been "created" already. It has not been implemented, 
>> which will require someone with PHP skills. You may have them. I do not.
> 
> 
> What solution is that?

Tag controversial images, preferably into a couple categories (nudity, 
blood/gore, could probably think of one or two other good ones). Let the 
user set a preference for their defaults (maybe give them a toggle they 
can hit at will while browsing to turn all on/off), and then let them 
easily select single controversial images to display. There are several 
options for the last part, Javascript being the easiest, and it can be 
combined with a server-side mechanism for those that have disabled or 
lack Javascript support.

Absent strange coding in the affected areas of MediaWiki, none of this 
should be particularly difficult to implement for someone with the 
neccessary skills.

(Before someone starts complaining about determining what's 
controversial, I don't think we're going to have any trouble figuring it 
out. Just wait for the firestorm; controversial images will essentially 
prove themselves.)