Bureaucrats, Check users, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Administrators, vuser
9,362
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Friday November 22, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchTop 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 15:16, 17 December 2009
, 15:16, 17 December 2009→8. Wikipedia stands aloof from child protection measures.
==8. Wikipedia pollutes the minds of children.==
==8. Wikipedia pollutes the minds of children.==
[[Image:Our_favorite_Wikipedia_image.jpg|thumb|175px|Jimmy Wales trying to extract another donation]] Perhaps you're philosophically opposed to censorship and think this is a daft point. Can you be sure that your shareholders and customers feel the same way? Wikipedia contains graphic material that might be morally contemptible in many countries -- even in the West. This includes images and articles depicting nipple piercings, anilingus, labia piercings, child <s>pornography</s> modeling (erotic), frenum rings, strappado bondage, erotic spanking, incest pornography, smotherboxes, and Courtney Cummz and her directorial debut 'Face Invaders'<ref>Cf [[Worst of Wikipedia]]</ref>.
[[Image:Our_favorite_Wikipedia_image.jpg|thumb|175px|Jimmy Wales trying to extract another donation]] Perhaps you're philosophically opposed to censorship and think this is a daft point. Can you be sure that your shareholders and customers feel the same way? Wikipedia contains graphic material that might be morally contemptible in many countries -- even in the West. This includes images and articles depicting nipple piercings, anilingus, labia piercings, child <s>pornography</s> modeling (erotic), frenum rings, strappado bondage, erotic spanking, incest pornography, smotherboxes, and Courtney Cummz and her directorial debut 'Face Invaders'<ref>Cf [[Worst of Wikipedia]]</ref>.
Imagine notifying a permanent board member of an organization that he founded with the following message:
<blockquote>''<nowiki>[We have learned...]</nowiki> that wiki administrators under the age of 18 are taking routine administrative actions in respect of images which could reasonably be described as pornography (in [http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Masturbating_Amy.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=31818520 this case], the administrator Julian C. is a self identified minor, and the image (which will appear if you click the link) is of a woman masturbating -- the file is called 'Masturbating Amy'. I'd like to see some external advice sought on this matter, and I'd like to see <nowiki>[[</nowiki>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Child_protection Wikipedia:Child protection]<nowiki>]]</nowiki> grow to contain some meaningful ideas for consideration.''</blockquote>
Then, imagine the founder of the non-profit, tax-advantaged organization [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=332094768&oldid=332088177 responding]:
<blockquote>''Hi privatemusings, yes, I'm aware of discussions in this area.--[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jimbo_Wales Jimbo Wales] 18:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)''</blockquote>
The Wikimedia Foundation doesn't care about doing the least thing to protect children. That's the responsibility of parents! Imagine dropping off your young teenager to volunteer with some friends at the soup kitchen one morning, then one of the homeless men starts showing the youngster centerfolds from Hustler, then when you discover this you go to the kitchen's director, and he says, "Yes, I'm aware of problems in this area," and then [http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/99/navigator990218.htm his lawyer says], "I think if parents want to restrict children's access to adult material, that's fine... <nowiki>[but don't]</nowiki> infringe on either adults' rights or minors' rights."
So, if you wish to support young boys administering pornography on a non-profit website, get out your checkbook and send $69 to the Wikimedia Foundation. Hey, what do you expect from an organization that hired as its Deputy Director a young man who promoted the notion during a [http://mashable.com/2008/05/08/erik-moeller-pedophilia/ scandalized] lecture [http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/4/4158/1.html about child pornography] that in the context of children, non-violent porn does no harm ("Gewaltfreie Pornographie schadet nicht")?
==9. Wikipedia is in a legally precarious position.==
==9. Wikipedia is in a legally precarious position.==
