Call me an optimist -- I retain the hope that such discussions may not remain circular forever, but eventually might come to resemble a spiral, with some upwards movement, as has happened in other areas like BLP.
In discussions around these issues, it is easy for people on both sides of the argument to get very defensive. And some arguments appear to be based on the belief that [[WP:NOTCENSORED]] states, as a fundamental WP policy, "We shall never do anything that lessens offence caused to others." [[WP:NOTCENSORED]] does not actually say that, nor would most of us live our private lives that way. [[WP:NOTCENSORED]] says that we will not remove content just because it is objectionable. It does not say that we cannot exercise editorial judgment in how we present that content, or that we must always choose the way which has maximum shock value, or causes maximum offence. A. --- On Thu, 10/6/10, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > From: David Gerard <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > This has been discussed many times on many occasions. > > It comes up every year or two, in accordance with the > typical 18-24 > month cycle of Wikipedia contribution. The discussion is > pretty much > the same every time. > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
