Comments on: Destroying Wikipedia from the Inside Out

By: Mihaela Lica

Mihaela Lica — Thu, 15 May 2008 13:49:34 +0000

This sounds very reasonable to me, Erica.

By: Erica

Erica — Thu, 15 May 2008 00:51:53 +0000

Perhaps creating another domain or maybe subdomain will be much better.

By: Mihaela Lica

Mihaela Lica — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:00:31 +0000

You are right, Bronn, I really attributed Patricia’s comment to you. Sorry about that, I sincerely apologize.

About government censorship, my article has nothing to do with that, Bronn. The discussion is focused on general public opinion whether Wikipedia is the right place for adult hardcore, particularly for gay porn. It was also a heads up to parents who are not aware of the fact that Wikipedia hosts such content.

You see, we go on and on debating an issue that has nothing to do with the topic of the article.

By: S Bronn

S Bronn — Wed, 14 May 2008 15:52:39 +0000

If by my highlighting of Mr. Butler’s comments was personally insulting, my apologies, that was not my intent. I was merely trying to show the example of the unconscious opinion of those who will take advantage of regulating internet censorship to government. It’s a Pandora’s Box your messing with.
Even though i was offended by Mr. Butler’s personal attack on me with his “Walmart sales” comment, I refrained from steeping to that level. Yet you yourself chose to call me boring (another biased insult) and reprimand me. IMO, I believe you may have read Patricia’s “get a grip and get a life” comment and contributed that to me.
If you are looking to control attacks personally, i suggest you do it immediately after it occurs and not wait until someone you have bias against comments.
I sincerely was hoping that this forum would be unique in its debate, but again, as with others, it has fallen victim to propagandizing a point of view. Shame.
I debated on leaving this additional comment but here i am still with hope. I do appreciate my level of intelligence, not so much on the issue of pornography, but more on the ramification of government censorship and believe it or not, others do appreciate my posts on other blogs/forums. Maybe your objective is only to capture a specific audience, those equal to your own educated level or those with a doctorate obtained education on the subject. Pardon me.

By: Mihaela Lica

Mihaela Lica — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:54:49 +0000

This is not one-sided, Bronn, I just don’t like the tone this discussion started to have. It makes me sad to see intelligent people fighting - even verbally - against each other, when constructive would be to analyze the topic “in depth” and not based on some isolated cases as you pointed out in one of your comments.

Personally I do not consider censure removing pornographic content from an general audience rated site. You should also think that if the FBI is investigating the issue, things are probably more serious than we grasp. The images I linked at are not “what I consider pornography” - they are what even the Wikipedia editors who published them there consider pornography. They are described as pornographic content, Bronn. Links from innocent topics like Valentine’s Day lead there. We stumble upon those images whether we like it or not. You see, I have nothing against pornography, but let it be where appropriate and not on websites open to the general public. You will not see such content in the New York Times for example. Please use some logic and please, please try to use a moderate tone.

This goes for everyone who replies to other commentator’s ideas from now on. I will not tolerate verbal violence - this is a private blog after all. Thank you for understanding.

By: S Bronn

S Bronn — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:47:09 +0000

Fair enough. My apologies for being a bore to your one-sided groups forum. My intent in no way was to be a ‘troll’ but, oh well, one less advocate for the other side of the issue, the better. I did what i could (boring as it was) to speak against the damage caused through unnecessary censorship.
Please remove my account. I’d wish you luck, but of course i do not support more censorship laws. No need to consider posting my comment as well. If you consider it at all.

By: Mihaela Lica

Mihaela Lica — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:38:53 +0000

I know you are, David, and I sincerely appreciate your position. Negative comments don’t worry me. I am worried about people starting to “fight” against each other when the discussion should be constructive.

By: David Airey

David Airey — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:36:20 +0000

You’ve been very understanding in your responses, Mig. Don’t worry about any negative comments. I’m certainly on your side.

By: Mihaela Lica

Mihaela Lica — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:10:49 +0000

Bronn, you start to bore me. If you don’t have anything valuable to say, please refrain from making comments. So far you managed to point out anything but whether pornography has a right place at Wikipedia or not.

By: S Bronn

S Bronn — Wed, 14 May 2008 13:55:39 +0000

Phil Butler says…
“Madre De Dios! This article is not about establishing hit squads for pornography producers (hmm, but maybe it should be).”
“some guy having [b]a little injustice dealt…[b]”
“Mihaela is not talking about hunting down anyone and beating them (though some people really need it)”
Madre De Dios INDEED! Are you serious?!
You, Sir, scare me. These types of comments are the reason credence is given for xenophobia.