2009/5/14 Robert Rohde <raro...@gmail.com>: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> 2009/5/14 Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net>: >>> I suggest that Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not include Wikipedia is not a >>> manual of sexual practices. It could be phrased Wikipedia is not the >>> Karma Sutra. >> >> What about pictures of Muhammad? Descriptions of Chinese human rights >> violations? Articles about evolution? etc. etc. etc. >> >> The reason that Wikipedia is not censored is because we cannot censor >> one thing and maintain neutrality without censoring everything else >> that might offend somebody and we would end up without anything left. > > Though technically challenging, I've long believed that the best > answer is to develop some system similar to Categories that could be > used to flag content that is potentially objectionable on various > grounds and then provide the tools to create filtered streams that > remove that content.
That would good. We can't choose what should and should not be seen by our readers without violating neutrality but there is nothing stopping them choosing for themselves. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
