Someone explain to me why, when Director Gardner creates an article about some humorist author in Boston or a dozen emo kids who get killed in Baghdad on suspicion of being gay, a bunch of editors pitch in and help her out and tell her what a good job she's doing, but when she writes an article on
hundreds of thousands of homeless kids who have to sell their bodies to survive, it's all crickets?
Don't tell me Wikipedians are perverts. They're almost entirely prudes afraid to face the decay in their own society when they could be arguing over how many animated penises to have on Commons instead. Pathetic.
(IMG:
http://i39.tinypic.com/1zp62og.png)
This post has been edited by jsalsman: