Re: [Bug-gnupedia] Self-censorship and XML data.

[Hook]

> I disagree slightly, in that as it is a "free" project
> I think any article that is slightly informative
> should go in. So even if it contains nudity, or
> ideologies, or large opinions, I think it should be
> in. Afterall, if you want a simple "definition" style
> article you can always go to Nupedia. It'd be cool if
> Alexandria gave a researcher a really in depth,
> diverse resource for their subject. And I don't think
> it should be a "vote" or you'll lose all the
> marginalised ideas and works, and it will become a
> reflection of the people who vote. If you simply say
> every article just needs one "yes" vote to get
> through, then nonsense and blatant porn etc. won't get
> through, but anything else will.
> It would make Alexandria a veyr rich resource.

Sorry Tom, I'm playing devil's advocate here .. but define nonsense?  I
could point you to a large number of Usenet posts which (to me) fit the
bill, but I just know that others with different beliefs have different
views.

Differntiating between unpopular views - creation/evolution, UFOs/natural
phenomena etc - and opinions which, to most people, would seem to be so far
away from reality that they rank as fiction isn't as easy as it sounds.

And don't get me started on the "what is porn?" issue !!  :-)  We all know
that one's cultural.

Paul