On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 03:34, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > While I don't find that line of argument to be a fully fledged > straw-horse argument, it > does appear to me to be a cherry-picked argument to *attempt* to > refute. There are > much stronger arguments, both practical and philosophical, at any > attempt to elide > controversial content. Even as such, I am not convinced by the > argumentation, but > would not prefer to rebut an argument that does not address the > strongest reasons > for opposing elision of controversial content, by choice or otherwise. >
My point was not to provide an argument for or against any particular implementation. It was a response to one particularly god-awful argument. -- Tom Morris <http://tommorris.org/> _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
