[WikiEN-l] Deleting the Lolicon picture

Mon Apr 10 01:28:57 UTC 2006

G'day Jay,

[Context restored, for what little good it does]

> On 4/7/06, David Alexander Russell <webmaster at davidarussell.co.uk> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Exactly. Child porn images shouldn't be included for moral and 
>> legal reasons but ordinary sexual images (where they are relevant 
>> to the article of course) are perfectly fine. WP:NOT censored for 
>> minors.
> 
> That's ridiculous. Ten minutes of research, even, will clarify to 
> anyone who viewed the image that it is _not_  legally child 
> pornography, no matter how you interpret the PROTECT Act's 
> constitutionality. There's no legal reason to remove a completely 
> legal image.

Three minutes' research shows me that you're committing that cardinal
sin of assuming everybody else is American.  Why should David --- or
anybody else here --- give a flying fuck *what* the PROTECT Act says?
Are you incapable of interpreting country codes, or just persistently
unobservant?

> And morality is entirely subjective. Arguing that a certain image  is
>  "immoral" is *not* a valid argument in the context of Wikipedia, 
> because we have to adhere to WP:NPOV. You, personally, see this 
> drawing as morally wrong. I do not.
> 
> I *do* think censorship is morally wrong, though...

Well, good for you.  Hopefully you've thought that one through a bit
further than "titties and explosions good, children and sensitive women
bad".

(Does "censorship is morally wrong" count as an argument in favour of 
keeping kiddie porn on the servers?)

-- 
Mark Gallagher
"What?  I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!"
- Danger Mouse

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/306 - Release Date: 9/04/2006