QUOTE(Versa @ Thu 22nd March 2012, 4:12pm)
While looking for something else, I noticed that Ryan Postlethwaite is allowed to have an image of a "Human penis both flaccid and erect" on his user page but no one else allowed to.
This is exactly what I've said about Wikipedia all along: Once you start requiring users to post photos of their penises on their user-profile pages, where does it end? How do you avoid creating a slippery slope? First you'll have people like Ryan Postlethwaite insisting on posting two penis photos, then it'll be three penis photos, then four... until finally there are so many penis photos on everyone's use page that the fundamental vision and purpose
that led them to require the penis photos in the first place has been lost, the entire conceptual rationale in ruins, scattered to the four winds. And what about the tiny number of female
users on Wikipedia - where are they going to get their
penis photos? Will they accept photos of fake penises or dildos, or fanciful drawings, paintings or sculptures of same, in those cases? And what if some enterprising female Wikipedian decides to "push the envelope" by painting a picture of a giant penis
and then claiming it's representative of her actual penis? Even though she isn't supposed to have one in the first place? This sort of downward-spiraling phallic-image one-upmanship can only lead to one terrible, inevitable result: Penis Wars!
Frankly, if I were Jimbo, I'd deal with this problem decisively, by cutting it off at the root.