User:BobCMU76/Censorship
|
|
The right of the leadership of a group to restrict the speech of its members ought be limited to that which fosters the purpose for which the group was formed. In the case of a representative government, the purpose of recognizing and representing the sovereignty of the people from which its just powers derive is betrayed by any form of restriction, except against the most egregious forms of speech, and then only with greatest caution.
In the case of a group formed to exercise the diversity of talents among its members to create an authorative, democratic, comprehensive reservoir of encyclopedic knowledge, significant rights and duties are established to evaluate and enforce a 'reasonable person' standard, permissively interpreted of what is unauthorative, anti-democratic, and idiosyncratic. I think Wikipedia is showing good standards in this regard and a well-developed system of due process which restricts as well the idiosyncracies of its administrators. Since the system by which a self-determining Board sustains itself and extends itself tends to promote clique formation and systematic prejudice of thought and action, I hope to advocate for new and better ways for non-Admin Wikipedians to challenge policies as they are revealed by the actions of Administrators. BobCMU76 23:58 May 14, 2003 (UTC)