Yeah, Pryzkuta, I know there are lots of debates happening everywhere; that's a
good thing --- obviously talking about all this stuff is good, and people
should use whatever mechanisms work for them. All the discussions are good, and
everybody is bringing useful stuff to the table.
Re Jimmy, my understanding is that he has voluntarily relinquished the ability
to act globally and unlilaterally, in an attempt to bring closure to that
thread of discussion, because he thinks it's a distraction from the main
conversation. Which is, the projects contain, and have contained, material
which many people (different groups, for different reasons) find objectionable.
The main question at hand is: what, if anything, should be done about the
inclusion in the projects of potentially objectionable material. Should we
provide warnings about potentially objectionable material, should we make it
easy for people to have a "safe" view if they want it, should we make a "safe"
view a default view, and so forth.
My view is that Jimmy and others have brought closure to the "scope of Jimmy's
authority" question. In saying that, I don't mean to diminish the importance of
that question -- I realize that many people are angry about what's happened
over the past week, and it will take time for them to be less angry. But I
think Jimmy's goal --which I support-- is to enable people to now move on to
have the more important conversation, about how to resolve the question of
objectionable material.
To recap: it's a big conversation, and it's happening in lots of places. That
may need to happen for a while. I would like to see us move into a synthesis
phase, where we start talking in a focused way, in a few places, about what we
should do to resolve the question of objectionable material. I think the
thread by Derk-Jan is a step towards that. But it may be that we're not ready
to move into a synthesis phase yet: people may still need to vent and
brainstorm and so forth, for a while.
Thanks,
Sue
-----Original Message-----
From: Przykuta przyk...@o2.pl
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 00:16:02
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List<foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l]
Sexual Imagery on Commons: where the d
iscussion is happening
> 1) There has been a very active strand about Jimmy's actions over the
> past week and his scope of authority, which I think is now resolving.
> That's mostly happened here and on meta.
>
Sue - everywhere - mailing lists, IRC channels, village pumps...
We need to talk as Wikimedia Community. There is no authority without
communication - face to face(s); keyboard to keyboard. The biggest fire (RfC
flame) is here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Remove_Founder_flag
400 votes - 400 users <!--- (and probably puppets :p) --->
Maybe the best way will be to start special IRC debate - about past, present
and future. (and again, and again, and again - yeah)
Yes... We have bigger problems, but... maybe not. This is real trouble.
przykuta
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
