--- Geoffrey Thomas <geoffreyerffoeg(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
I see so far three (ok, 2.5) reasons to implement
filters: 1) to
protect the Wikipedia from a site-wide censor, 2)
to protect those
who shouldn't see some content (this point is
debatable), and 3) to
protect those who don't want to see some
content.
I realize now that
the first reason cannot be effectively
implemented
without impeding
the Wikipedia's larger goals. The second,
apparently, is loaded with
too much POV (though I still don't see why we
have
to ''not'' censor
content because some people might censor
''too
much''...). The third
I still believe should be implementable.
I wonder if there is anybody in group 3 at all. Most
people find
Wikipedia through some search engine, click around a
bit, and maybe add
it to their bookmark list. Suppose they come across
an article they
consider objectionable. Do you really think they
would then
investigate, find in some FAQ that registered users
can block
categories, create a user account, learn about the
categories, block
the proper ones, remember to log in each time they
want to use
Wikipedia -- all only so that they won't
accidentally come across an
article that they could have simply ignored?
Furthermore, after going through all this trouble,
their original
search engine will still present links to all
Wikipedia articles,
ignoring the category blocks.
Axel
For that reason, edupedia would make more sense than
having filtering within Wikipedia, although filtering
within Wikipedia should still be available for testing
purposes. Edupedia would be aimed less at end users
and more at schools and parents (using filtering
software).
--LDan
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!