Slashdot Mirror


Activists Use Wikipedia To Test Aussie Net Censors

pnorth writes "Editors at Wikipedia have removed a link to a blacklisted web site that sat uncontested for over 24 hours in the main body of the Australian regulator's own Wikipedia entry. The link, which directs readers to a site containing graphic imagery of aborted foetuses, was inserted into ACMA's Wikipedia entry by a campaigner against Internet filtering to determine whether Australia's communications regulator had a double-standard when it came to censoring web content. The very same link motivated the regulator to serve Aussie broadband forum Whirlpool's hosting company with a 'link deletion notice' and the threat of an $11,000 fine. Last night, the link became the subject of 'warring' between several Wikipedia administrators in the lead up to its removal, with administrators saying they didn't want to be used to prove a point."

19 of 330 comments (clear)

  1. Wikipedia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    >Last night, the link became the subject of "warring" between several Wikipedia administrators in the lead up to it's removal, with administrators saying they didn't want to be used to prove a point."

    Petty drama, on MY Wikipedia?

    1. Re:Wikipedia by unlametheweak · · Score: 5, Funny

      Petty drama, on MY Wikipedia?

      Why don't you get an account and then log in and say that, Jimmy Wales?

  2. don't want to be used to prove a point? by liquidsin · · Score: 3, Funny

    i was pretty sure that's what wikipedia is for

    --
    do not read this line twice.
  3. Why they did it. by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Funny

    Using wikipedia to prove this point might endanger their donations. Lack of donations equates to not as many expensive dinners out for the higher ups and that has to be avoided at all costs.

  4. Re:There are some things we shouldn't see by Capsaicin · · Score: 5, Funny

    how much worse off would we be if we didn't have breast feeding in public

    We would be very much worse off! The breastfeeding rate would fall. Child abuse in the form of bottle feeding would become rife, with obvious negative effects on future economic and sporting performance as well as the rise in criminal acitivity among abused children. In cases when mothers resisted such bottlefeeding abuse, we would have an increase in the number of hungry babies crying in public. Worse still some mothers might take their babies into public toilets to feed them, the psychopathological effects of which don't bear contemplating!

    But yeah, you're right ;)

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
  5. Re:You're Trolling... by Hecatonchires · · Score: 4, Funny

    That reminds me, who's up for veal?

    --

    Yay me!

  6. Re:There are some things we shouldn't see by Lieu21 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You broke it.

  7. Re:Links are there and locked, now by Hecatonchires · · Score: 3, Funny

    They enable?

    --

    Yay me!

  8. Re:Most Nerds... by theolein · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..... and that by loving browns and mud people they'll somehow get in the pants of "hip stylish urban women" who love to agonize over the supposed crimes of whites against "oppressed minorities."......

    Sounds very much like you're agonising over the fact that those "hip stylish urban women" won't let you into their pants and you're blaming everyone else for it. Sad, man.

  9. Re:Phirst Poast Tsarkon Reports YODA GREASE UP YOU by fractoid · · Score: 5, Funny

    Troll? It's just a particularly tortuous Slashdot analogy. You see, the Yoda doll is the new internet blacklist, the grease is alleged child porn (allows you to accept the doll more easily), and 'you' represent the Australian public. The improbability of the whole process neatly mirrors the f**king impossibility of this scheme ever working in the real world.

    I concur it was rather obvious but still, it could at least get an 'informative'.

    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  10. Re:There are some things we shouldn't see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I think speech should be free, but seriously, how much worse off would we be if we didn't have people disagreeing and cuss words?

  11. Re:Wikileaks currently unavailable by overbaud · · Score: 3, Funny

    The irony is that many people will see the /. effect as censorship in action.

    --
    Users... the only thing keeping 1st level support from being the bottom feeders.
  12. Re:There are some things we shouldn't see by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dang. And I think this had a shot at being a new Slashdot meme.

    Free speech meme, we hardly knew ye.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  13. Re:There are some things we shouldn't see by Mr_eX9 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Neo-Nazis are good things to have around when you need somebody to ridicule.

  14. Re:There are some things we shouldn't see by daveime · · Score: 2, Funny

    and Travel agents for that matter

    Computer says no ... *cough* ...

    (For those of you in the dark, look up "Little Britain" on youtube).

  15. Re:A history lesson by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

    On a forum like Wikipedia I would propose that it would be (next to) impossible not to have admins that are not anti-censorship

    This article needs a cleanup to remove excessive negatives.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  16. Re:There are some things we shouldn't see by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

    How is plurals of "babby" formed?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  17. Re:your sig by rohan972 · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you're a Muslim, please don't kill me.

    I'm not a Muslim, so I take it this request doesn't apply to me.

  18. Re:A history lesson by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2, Funny

    Oops I'm wrong, they left the link in there, my bad.