Wikipedia Founder Caught in 'Porn Purge' Debate

[idisarmu]

Jane is a porn addict. Either that or just a porn enthusiast who enjoys reading and writing articles about it. lololololol!

 

[PreciousL]

By giving up his admin rights is he just trying to limit his legal liability?

 

[a4mula]

[citation][nom]magicandy[/nom]One thing I've always thought was dumb was the introduction of lolicon comic banning...[/citation]

And when the avid fans of cartoons get tired of looking at fictional content? I think this is a pretty obvious gateway to pedophilia. I see no problem whatsoever in banning this type of perversion. There is a lot of room for freedom of expression and choice, sexual exploitation of children in any form be it real or imaginary is not one of them.

While not a huge fan of Wiki due to its manipulative nature of content I do agree with this move. There are plenty of places to find this type of content without having to introduce it onto a site primarily for education purposes.

 

[joebob2000]

[citation][nom]theroguex[/nom]Stupid Faux News. Of course they have to find a way to smear Wikipedia, since they hate it so much. Education and information - the antithesis of Conservatives everywhere (just go look at Conservapedia!).[/citation]
While I usually try to stay away from partisan crap, this is spot on. Conservatives are trying to push their special "limited edition truth" through outlets like Conservapedia, a disgustingly ignorant web site that doesn't even deserve to share the same vowels and consonants as Wikipedia. They would love to have mainstream media smearing the horrors of Wikipedia just long enough to get their foot in the door so they can reprogram all the e-heathens who have gotten a taste of what unfiltered truth is like.

If anything, Jimbo didn't do enough to stop this from happening. Wikipedia has high standards for fairness and accuracy, but that doesn't mean a thing when it gets blocked by every educational firewall for serving smut.

 

[Usersname]

[citation][nom]kyzarvs[/nom] A single person making decisions smacks of Jobs-like dictatorship and ideally should not be part of how the internet is maintained.[/citation]

Er...the Pope, 'God', 'Allah', 'Muhammad', 'Christ', 'Bhagavan', 'Yahweh'... So, apart from the first mortal and a few historical characters, we allow additional totally fictitious characters to determine internet morality. Given that, I suppose Job's has as much right to talk drivel as anyone else.

 

[Pei-chen]

The People's Liberation Army doesn’t have to be in Washington to make American do things that Beijing approves.

 

[banthracis]

[citation][nom]a4mula[/nom]And when the avid fans of cartoons get tired of looking at fictional content? I think this is a pretty obvious gateway to pedophilia. [/citation]

That makes as much sense as saying people who play GTA will go out into the streets, carjack police cars and then proceed to mow down people with submachines guns...

 

[Zinosys]

Go ahead and rate down my comment, I don't care. I just want to get my opinion out.

Jobs isn't a dictator, he's not evil, etc. He's a businessman who is making decisions for his audience and for the products themselves. When PC manufacturers use a mid tower case and only allow two hard drives, or when microsoft doesn't allow you to downgrade your OS, etc., that isn't compromising freedom?

It's funny that when an article says that Jobs decided not to allow porn on the iPad, people call him a dictator, and when Wales removes pornographic images from wikipedia, people commend him for doing the right thing..

Perhaps not a good example, but seriously. We have to be nonpartisan here.
Cheers.

 

[HalJordan]

Fisrt off, who is raising the fuss? The people who wrote the articles with the questionable photos, the people who uploaded them? Secondly, were these photos truly hardcore porn, e.g. stills of Jenna doing her thing? I think we all know porn when we see it, save Robert Mapplethorpe and his ilk, however, I don't hear anyone yelling about these pictures being art. Third, if it is hardcore, think I'll lock the door for some private time, pornography, then I have to ask who are the sick weirdos posting them to an online encyclopedia?

 

[adipose]

The number of ignorant posters on this topic is astounding, but maybe the reporting on this is the problem. This is not child porn but drawings. Drawings, people! Comics. Cartoons. Or 250 year old sketches.

If there was actual child porn that would be something else.

 

[adipose]

The reason the other founder reported this is because he has a competing site and no one has heard of it. He's hoping to bring wikipedia down for his own benefit.

 

[banthracis]

Fox news is making the fuss.

None of the pictures in question were hardcore porn.

Majority of the fuss was over lolicon, which is a subgenre of japanese porn comics dealing with characters who appear prepubescent.

Specifically, I think it has to do with some comic covers posted in the article as an example of the genre.

Honestly I think it's just Fox news blowing smoke. I personally think it's a weird genre, but I think the same about S&M, and as no actual people are being abused or hurt or taken advantage of in any way, who am I to judge?

 

[sliem]

Ah this is life. But WITH LAYWERS in it, it's HELL.
(because laywers belong in hell... and also parents who sue porn channel because their kids "accidently" watched)

 

[a4mula]

[citation][nom]banthracis[/nom]That makes as much sense as saying people who play GTA will go out into the streets, carjack police cars and then proceed to mow down people with submachines guns...[/citation]

So you're saying that you feel as though people that fantasize about sexual relations with small children are equal to those that play video games?

You see I seem to find a vast chasm of difference between a balanced stable person that finds time to let off some steam playing a game, and one that's letting off steam to the portrayal of sexually abusing kids.

 

[joebob2000]

[citation][nom]a4mula[/nom]So you're saying that you feel as though people that fantasize about sexual relations with small children are equal to those that play video games?You see I seem to find a vast chasm of difference between a balanced stable person that finds time to let off some steam playing a game, and one that's letting off steam to the portrayal of sexually abusing kids.[/citation]

You might want to Google thoughtcrime. Not that I would advocate anyone fantasizing about doing any of the above is 'normal', it's still a damn slippery slope.

 

[banthracis]

[citation][nom]a4mula[/nom]So you're saying that you feel as though people that fantasize about sexual relations with small children are equal to those that play video games?You see I seem to find a vast chasm of difference between a balanced stable person that finds time to let off some steam playing a game, and one that's letting off steam to the portrayal of sexually abusing kids.[/citation]

A balanced stable person that let's off steam by committing virtual MASS murder of innocents is in no way worse than a balanced stable person that let's off steam by viewing CARTOON sex images, even if they are of people supposedly over 18 who look like they're 12.

Both are equally outrageous in my book, but like I said, as long as no REAL person is being harmed, not my job to judge.

 

[omnimodis78]

[citation][nom]Gin Fushicho[/nom]Maybe no more pictures of Penis' now?[/citation]
How about you read the story first, then post a comment...

 

[martin0642]

If you are human, you have 1 of 2 possible sex organs. Maybe 2. How seeing what you have yourself when you look down on another person can cause grievous harm is a mystery to me. Saunas in Europe are full of named people of all ages. Indians were getting busy in the teepee right next to the kids. Everything was fine. Prudery is such a waste of time.

 

[Guest]

This whole article pisses me off. And he didn't even do anything wrong.

 

[stephinsd]

No surprise to see Fox News involved in this. Fox News is the most successful propaganda news outlet there is. They care little about news and only care about getting anti-techno, anti-science, homophobes, haters, etc take control of our government.