BBC Radio 4 today:
http://spark-in-the-ashes.net/misc/wales-privacy.mp3

It's not "okay" to publish sordid details about Jimbo's sex life, but it is "legal" to do so, and any law that would restrict that allowance is a human rights violation.

To paraphrase Jimbo.

Yet another case of "true, but not useful".

You all love to hammer the Jimmaster, but he's on point here, other than caving in to mispronounce it "PRIV-a-cee"...

t

Then yawn. Why is Jimbo doing all he can to allow Wikipedia to do anything that is legal, including all the non-okay and assholic stuff it does? Should they not try for a higher ethical and moral standard than, say, tabloids, paparazzi, and lawyers? What's the WP:POINT of WP:CIVIL if the rest of your actual behavior is about as uncivil as people can be and still not break the law?

Keep on worshipping appearance over substance, Jimmy. That's how we know it's you. We're pretty sure already that (despite a superficial resemblance and similar origin) you're not Bert the Conqueror.