Ingo Chao wrote: > Rick Faaberg wrote: >> Where do we draw the line on these sites? > > The reason why this did not happen before on the WSG mail list is > because no poster before did have problems in drawing a line for > himself. > > We should not change this unwritten agreement.
Please do not impose your personal morality on this list. I do not believe that we should be censoring materials based solely on content. I *DO* agree that when providing links to examples where the content *may* be of a potentially offensive or questionable content, that it be indicated clearly up front, which did not happen this time. However, the development question it's self was both legitimate and fair game for a list on web standards and web development. What next? No links to religious sites? To pro-choice/anti-abortion sites? To sites dedicated to gay rights and same sex marriage? Who decides where the "line" is drawn? No, I believe posters to this list have a personal and PROFESSIONAL obligation to flag sites containing potentially 'incendiary' content, and then readers can apply their own moral judgment as required (and perhaps this should be added to the List's Guidelines / Rules of Participation: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm, with failure to do so an actionable offense). Anything else is offensive _to me_! JF -- John Foliot Perth, Ontario ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
