View Single Post
Old 08-12-2008, 17:10   #62
hokkers999
cf.addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 416
hokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to beholdhokkers999 is a splendid one to behold
Re: Six British ISPs are filtering access to Wikipedia

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr,m View Post
Personally I did'nt find the image offensive,but can well see why it's been blocked.For obvious reasons the easiest thing to do would be for wiki to remove the entry.People could take great offence to it.
And then again many people who have a more enlightened attitude to the whole idea of nakedness do not.

---------- Post added at 17:01 ---------- Previous post was at 16:56 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNorm View Post
Maybe I'm overly sensitive (I have have a teenage daughter and nieces), but I think young girls shouldn't be displayed like that. If it takes a child pornography law to stop it, then so be it.
You are overly sensitive. I have two daughters and it didn't offend me. What surprises me is that none of the "I want it banned" brigade have bothered to track down the interview with the girl done several years later. she has no problem with it.

---------- Post added at 17:10 ---------- Previous post was at 17:01 ----------

[Mod Edit (Rob M): Removed]
hokkers999 is offline   Reply With Quote