3,209
edits
Changes
Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Wikipaedophilia/Boy Scouts are for spanking (view source)
Revision as of 08:14, 12 May 2010
, 08:14, 12 May 2010→'You guys are arguing against freedom'
The complaints sparked the usual protests from the 'free culture' movement on Wales page.
The complaints sparked the usual protests from the 'free culture' movement on Wales page.
:You're missing a detail here. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia. When that photos was uploaded under free use, it became property of anyone and everyone. Uploading it as a free image says "I don't care who uses this and how they use this, as long as we're credited under the GFDL. So, every photo on Wikipedia can be "twisted and exploited" in the long run. Metros (talk) 03:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:You're missing a detail here. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia. When that photos was uploaded under free use, it became property of anyone and everyone. Uploading it as a free image says "I don't care who uses this and how they use this, as long as we're credited under the GFDL. So, every photo on Wikipedia can be "twisted and exploited" in the long run. Metros (talk) 03:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...for_spanking.3F]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...for_spanking.3F]
:You guys are arguing against freedom. Against free speech. Against free culture. Against the free reuse of media. Against WikiMedia and Wikipedia. Go sell your love of slavery elsewhere. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] ([[User talk:WAS 4.250|talk]]) 22:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:You guys are arguing against freedom. Against free speech. Against free culture. Against the free reuse of media. Against WikiMedia and Wikipedia. Go sell your love of slavery elsewhere. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] ([[User talk:WAS 4.250|talk]]) 22:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
:==Freedom, censorship, pics of naked abused children==
:"Freedom, censorship, pics of naked abused children" - "The history of the full frontal nude pic of this naked girl who has been badly burned at the top of this article about her [[Phan Thị Kim Phúc]] might be relevant to your concerns on Jimbo's web page. WR is trying to stir up trouble by throwing mud everywhere and seeing what will stick. Frankly at some point the WikiMedia Foundation might have to sue some of these WR clowns for defamation. Greg in particular seems eager to defame Jimbo for financial profit. I thought he was smarter than that. Maybe he figures any publicity is good publicity, even a defamation lawsuit". User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250 11:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
:I don't understand how copyright and honoring the ethics of personal privacy, especially of pre-pubescent minors, are somehow antithetical to "freedom". People are also "free" to organize boycotts of Amazon.com (#1 investor in Wikia) and to organize boycotts of donating to Wikimedia Foundation. Let's take a poll -- which do you think would win out in the court of public opinion? The fight for copyleft freedom, or the fight against online sites that promote a pro-pedophilia and pro-child-abuse agenda? Choose your sides, people. This is going to be a quick, decisive battle. - Where I chillax (talk) 17:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
:"I don't understand how copyright and honoring the ethics of personal privacy, especially of pre-pubescent minors, are somehow antithetical to "freedom". People are also "free" to organize boycotts of Amazon.com (#1 investor in Wikia) and to organize boycotts of donating to Wikimedia Foundation. Let's take a poll -- which do you think would win out in the court of public opinion? The fight for copyleft freedom, or the fight against online sites that promote a pro-pedophilia and pro-child-abuse agenda? Choose your sides, people. This is going to be a quick, decisive battle. - Where I chillax (talk) 17:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::'''Are you making threats?'''EconomicsGuy (talk) 17:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
::'''Are you making threats?'''EconomicsGuy (talk) 17:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)