Forum:Larry Sanger reports Wikimedia to FBI

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Larry Sanger reports Wikimedia to FBI

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5104 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia, who still holds a grudge against ol' Jimbo, wrote a letter a few days ago to the FBI accusing Wikimedia of breaking child pornography laws. My questions are 1) Will this affect us in any way? 2) How can we parody this? -- Kip the Egg Talk Works 09:04, Apr. 16, 2010

It probably won't effect anyone, seeing as people are always throwing little hissy fits over nudity on wikipedia and nothing ever happens. We can parody it by 1) Writing a letter to the FBI accusing Larry Sanger of being a thumb-sucking weenie-boy, 2) Writing a letter to a thumb-sucking weenie-boy accusing the FBI of being Larry Sanger, 3) Writing a letter to Larry Sanger accusing a thumb-sucking weenie-boy of being the FBI, or 4) Do all of those things while wearing potato salad hats. I vote 4. Mainly for the hats. -RAHB 10:58, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

Wait, I'm confused. Who do we report the hats to? --UU - natter 11:06, Apr 16

You report them to me. I am Napoleon after all. -RAHB 11:16, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

I just made it. All I need to do is fix it and make it funnier. |Si Plebius Dato' Joe ang Aussie CUN|IC Kill | 12:48, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

I just checked wikipedia's pages on pedo, NAMBLA, etc., and no pics at all on the pages. Either Larry is having one of his spells or wiki caved like a house of cards. If the latter, then censorship laws aren't even needed as long as wikimedia is around to say "Yes sir" when the inquisition knocks on the door. Al en chains 13:56 16 4 mmx

Ah, ha. And why did you go and "check" those pages? For "research purposes", was it? You filthy pervert, hanging's too good for you! /me goes to get tar and feathers. --UU - natter 13:04, Apr 16

To add to my extensive collection, but alas, nothing there but the marks on the wall where the pictures used to hang. Al en chains 13:06 16 4 mmx

Did you check the article history? Btw, wikipedia probably has of the most valid "using it for informational purposes" defenses on the whole internetz for its gray area content. --Mn-z 02:16, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

And how does the Jailbait Gallery picture in with federal laws? MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 21:23, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure they view it with disdain.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  18 Apr 2010 ~ 00:13 (UTC)

Don't even worry about this

Wikimedia and other Wikis are set up for admins to remove kiddie porn and other stuff, I am sure any lawyer or judge can recognize that. No doubt that it was a Sockpuppet of Larry Sanger who uploaded the Kiddie Pron himself. If so when the FBI investigates it, they will trace the IP that uploaded the kiddie porn back to Mr. Sanger and arrest him. I know how the law works from lawyer and police friends of mine. They have to prove it in a court beyond a reasonable doubt. Now they cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt because of how Wikis work to remove kiddie porn and other illegal stuff. It was not an admin or employee of Wikimedia that uploaded such things, so Wikimedia is innocent on this, and if there are about materials that go against the law, Wikimedia can gladly huff them and then comply with the FBI to give them the email account, name, and IP address of the person or people who did upload that stuff. Also filing a false report to the FBI gets him 10 to 15 years in Federal Prison, where I am sure he will become very popular being rented out for sex in exchange for cigarettes for Big Bubba Jr. and have to do sexual favors for Thunderdick like Osama bin Laden would be forced to or whatever in federal prison. Christopher Chance 13:31, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

On second thought why don't we create an Uncyclopedia article on Larry Sanger if one doesn't exist. I think him filing this report with the FBI and contraversy means he is notable enough for Uncyclopedia without it being vanity, etc. Christopher Chance 14:49, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

the images in question are about this bad

I checked wikipeida's and wikimedia's page on lolicon. They are not anywhere near illegal. Under US law, since the images are not based on actual children, the prosecution would need to prove that they are "obscene", as opposed to merely "indecent". --Mn-z 15:39, April 23, 2010 (UTC)

Heh

Some people take them to court without even reading their policies.--Sir ~HELPME~ ^{Count! Awards! Pee! Help!} 21:12, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Well, actually, they should probably take out that thing about Florida law, as that might get them in trouble.--Sir ~HELPME~ ^{Count! Awards! Pee! Help!} 21:13, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Their severs are in Florida. That is why they are subject to Floridian law. --Mn-z 16:18, April 20, 2010 (UTC)