"Without such an intermediary, the UK would have a less effective means of controlling images of child abuse on the internet. Yes, that is a form of censorship; but not all censorship is evil. Wikimedia should know that."
If we "must" have censorship in the UK then I want it done by the government. Not that I have any faith in them but at least at that point it's subject to some form of democratic review. Censorship by stealth from self-appointed moral arbiters (puritans and busybodies, it seems) is not my idea of freedom.
I didn't sign up to have my internet filtered by these morons.
And yes, they are to blame for the inability of almost the entire UK population to edit wikipedia. The scheme used passes any request for a page from a recognised "bad" IP address through the IWF proxies.
If the IWF had implemented the proxy scheme correctly (IE used the header to give the originators IP address) this mess wouldn't have happened. Do your damned research properly.
They were also stupid enough to block the article but not the image. Not only are the IWF a bunch of PC morons, they're clearly also technically inept.
Me, I'm getting sick of all this moral panic. Sure, we want to prevent child abuse, but need we be so scared of any form of nudity?