Obránce svobody

Na Wikipedii působí i stateční obránci svobody. Škoda, že jich je tak málo:

"Thanks for the reply Radouch. I might not work with any editor that called me a fascist, but this not about Vit, although the example may be germane. The crux here, is that I can choose whether to work with the editor or not, on Wikipedia. And so I should; yes, for we should be working together irrespective of our divisions. Suppose you did block an editor who called me a fascist on his blog, why should the community impinge on his freedom of expression to stop him from contributing? The idea that attacks on Wikipedian editors damage the overall good being aimed at is fallacious thinking; namely, the fallacy of composition. The overall good is not comprehensible except in the good of its members, so basically, all you have as a list of the "overall aim or good" is goods attached to the members. Therefore, goods only belong to individuals, and none belong to a group or collective, thus being a fallacy to ascribe a list of goods or a good to a group.

But, my work on Wikipedia here really has no concern with what goes on in my private life, even if a user called me a rapist or a criminal or whatever on a blog. Such insults are nothing more than epithets, and as such, they have that right to expression without fear of reprisals. If it becomes a sustained attack verging on the physical or a threat of some sort, then obviously it becomes a matter for the police, since my safety is endangered, which is obviously way out of Wikipedia's territory. As for your analogy at work, that is different, as the owner of private property has the right to determine what is said upon his property, and he can throw out anyone who is trespassing or causing a nuisance. As for forcing people to not oppose the author, that should be decided by each individual Wikipedian what they shall do as regards the editor, only as regards On-Wiki material, though. That it poisons the atmosphere here is doubtful, on-Wiki attacks are just as likely to poison the atmosphere (if not more so) than Off-Wiki ones. But a "poisonous atmosphere" is what the outside world is, especially with free speech, and people do not have the right to expect not to be offended (Frank Zappa's records would be in the bin, if it were). What people think of editors on Wikipedia as documented on their web pages is not less likely to be true than what other editors think of the abusive editor, just because it is abusive. If the problem is On-Wiki, fine, block the user as per the spirit of the blocking policy, but Off-Wiki, no - that is "quite a leap of logic" as Strom says. --Knucmo2 23:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC)"