And it also sends a message that we bow and scrape to any Paedo Hunt crusader with a bug up their ass who decides that any talk of naughty bits is worth complaining to Google about.
FE, would you please clarify if all wiki content relating to works that portray child molesters in a NEGATIVE light is also being deleted? Because most pages I've worked on for any length of time (Classical Mythology, The Oldest Ones in the Book, The World Of Darkness) at least acknowledge that child molesters exist.
I don't want to dedicate any more hours to editing pages that are going to be deleted.
edited 11th Apr '12 4:53:59 PM by ArcadesSabboth
Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.Then I'm not donating another cent to Tv Tropes and not editing a single page again. I'm here for the R Ps only now. The Wiki has sold it's soul.
The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.@ 868 Shimaspawn: That person was me, here's
what
I said. I think that's pretty accurate.
The standards as Eddie laid them out would not allow Black Bird. I think that means the standards are not useful.
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.I'll say it straight out: please be polite to people who have the power to ban you.
That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful
I am being polite though??
![]()
![]()
![]()
edited 11th Apr '12 4:55:40 PM by Bookyangel2438
Alt account of Angeldog 2437.@ 880: Yeah, thanks. I'm just pissed about this mess.
edited 11th Apr '12 4:56:39 PM by lebrel
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered."Fixed that for you"
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.@Bookyangel: Don't worry, I think you're fine so far. I have a sort of mod radar—I can normally tell when someone's about to get banned. This incident just exploded my radar, with multiple people in quick succession saying things that they have a good chance of getting in trouble for.
@FE: Like I said before, we used to have stuff from people talking about how they tried to whack off to Requiem For A Dream. Our solution wasn't to delete the page, but to delete their comments.
edited 11th Apr '12 4:59:28 PM by feotakahari
That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something AwfulI think I'm going to stop editing here. I've already wasted hours of my life editing pages that will all be deleted now, because somebody got raped in the work. And I can't bring myself to care about the wiki any longer if it's being censored to eliminate any mention that child molesters even exist. I hate pedophilia, but I'm not OK with trying to deny empirical reality like that.
edited 11th Apr '12 5:00:30 PM by ArcadesSabboth
Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.Well be prepared for a large drop off of editors for this Wiki FE. Trying to control my anger but this is something that WILL cause people to leave.
The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.@ FE 888: There's some sicko wacking off to the mere presence of children in a work, no matter the context. We can't just throw one of the most important policies under a bus because of that.
Again: No one is saying the pages should not be kept clean of gushing. In fact, if you want us to lock every single work that mentions pedophilia, I think people can accept that. But nuking the pages outright is just...censorship.
Writing a post-post apocalypse LitRPG on RR. Also fanfic stuff.
FE, please, think about where this train of thought is leading. If your basis for cutting something is "some sicko might be whacking over it", you might as well just shut down the whole site. Rule34, for God's sake.
We can't honestly call ourselves a repository for information on media if we institute a NO EXCEPTIONS ban on entire aspects of it.
edited 11th Apr '12 5:03:39 PM by FringeBenefits
![]()
![]()
That makes sense.
I do not think a blanket ban is the right thing to do.
![]()
I don't like the fact that there is censorship starting to happen.
That makes sense too.
edited 11th Apr '12 5:02:49 PM by Bookyangel2438
Alt account of Angeldog 2437.People in the SE thread are suggesting blanket ban for now, and then we can make an exception for things like Lolita, mythology, etc.
One Piece blog Beyond the LampshadeI really do think this is a bit of an overreaction; I can totally understand wanting to get rid of works that are even remotely pro-pedophilia or even neutral on the subject, but getting rid of pages for works that contain any occurrence of it, even if it's portrayed hugely negatively, is overkill. Nobody is going to assume that this site is pro-pedophilia because we have a page for Lolita.
Could we at least put the mass cuts on the back burner for a few days and mull it over? This whole thing feels really off the cuff, and I think such a massive change bears a bit more consideration.
Reaction Image Repository

But isn't that an assumption I think??
Alt account of Angeldog 2437.