Clearly, Wikipedia causes teenage pregnancy. Why is anyone disputing that point?
SAFE SEX = NO WIKIPEDIA On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Anthony <wikim...@inbox.org> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:04 AM, David Moran <fordmadoxfr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > It is correspondingly true that there are many people who would more > > comfortably use, or let their children use, regular brick and mortar > > libraries if they could be sure that certain material had been removed > from > > the building. But typically libraries do not cater to people who ask > that > > offensive books be removed, and I don't see any reason why Wikipedia is > > different. > > I'm not sure what your library is like, but the situation at my > library is much more controlled than the one at Wikipedia. Yes, > there's offensive material in it, and some of the offensive material > is in places where children have access, but it's nothing even > remotely approaching what's found in Wikipedia - in terms of how > graphic the material is, in terms of how easily accessible it is to > minors, in terms of the chances of encountering it accidentally, and > in terms of the use of children to decide whether or not to keep it. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
