On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 18:20, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
Given that several Commons admins had dropped out, and bearing in mind the
clean-up campaign called for by the board and Jimbo, I put in an RFA at
Commons, saying I would help clean up pornographic images *that are not in
I'll respond to a few related comments and questions at once:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 12:31 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
It's board members directly asserting control over content. Of
course it's a major issue.
Perish the thought. The Board is not controlling content - I would
Marcus wrote:
Creating a technical solution like that is the task of the foundation.
The _real_ task of the foundation.
Cimon wrote:
Lot of momentum around the idea, is currently most
persistently promoted by the same precise individual
who began the ethical breaching experiment project
I
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Wedrna, later:
The *ONLY* rating and classification system that I can support
is a descriptive one. That is, it describes the nature of the
content, and allows humans or computers to filter it accordingly.
The
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:14 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Wedrna, later:
The *ONLY* rating and classification system that I can support
is a descriptive one. That is, it describes the nature of the
content,
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Wedrna, later:
The *ONLY* rating and classification system that I can support
is a descriptive one. That is, it describes the nature of the
content, and allows humans or computers to filter it accordingly.
The
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:14 AM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:14 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Wedrna, later:
The *ONLY* rating and classification system that I can support
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:06 AM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote:
Mike Godwin wrote:
All metaphors are at least somewhat misleading, and some metaphors are
deeply misleading.
At least no one is comparing Jimbo with Nazis or Hitler yet.
Err, that happened days ago on Jimbo's talk page
Hello all,
the following sentence from me is surely a very stupid sentense. I
apology for it. And thanks for everyone, especially Aphaia and SJ for
pointing this out to me.
Ting
Ting Chen wrote:
Commons, Wikiquote and Wikisource has by themselves no educational
value. They gain their
I thought it might be useful to here if I shared some of my
experiences with commons.
Like many people I've had the experience of bumping into a human
sexuality related commons category or gallery and thinking Holy crap!
Thats a lot of [gallery name]. Freeking teenage pornofreaks!.
But unlike
On 09.05.2010 02:04, Noein wrote:
On 08/05/2010 20:52, Stuart West wrote:
(1) There were some bad actors at work (e.g. hardcore pornography
distributors taking advantage of our open culture to get free anonymous
hosting). (2) As a community (including the Board), we debated the issue
On Fri, May 7, Noein wrote:
I'm powerless. Am I? I think many of us are having these very questions
now. Is it good for the WMF that we're asking them?
Eloquence is power. And it is good that you are asking.
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Noein prono...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with Mike
On 5/8/10 5:11 PM, Mike.lifeguard wrote:
If we believe, as Sue does, that this protection against outside
influence is a good thing, then Jimbo is a weak link so long as he can
enact the changes some outsider wants of his own accord.
Oh, but I can't really. In this case, I was in - and remain
On 5/8/10 10:02 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
The deletions themselves aren't the problem; the manner in which they
were carried out is. As a lawyer you should understand that the due
process is important.
I understand that and apologize for it. There was a crisis situation
and I took action
On 5/8/10 5:38 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:24 AM, MZMcBridez...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Most of the egregiously bad deletions were quickly overturned, and Jimmy
was
the one re-deleting the images. Now that he has agreed to stop, most of the
poor deletions have been
On 05/08/2010 10:23 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Editors are saying, with a straight face, that there is no implied sexual
activity in BDSM images like
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Angel_BDSM.png and that images like
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BDSM_Preparation.png are not
Thank you Greg, for this brilliant and personal overview. Very helpful.
A few thoughts:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
Why might a super-abundance of explicit images be a problem?
(1) They potentially bring the Wikimedia sites into ill repute (it's
I refuse to believe you could read that novel and respond intelligently in
41 minutes.I'm still waiting for the cliff notes version.
^_^
-Jon
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 01:58, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you Greg, for this brilliant and personal overview. Very helpful.
A few
On 5/8/10 3:29 PM, Amory Meltzer wrote:
I recognize that the issue is more about the point and process of the
whole thing, and that it's not just Wales who deleted images, but I
think some perspective is useful.
Jimbo deleted 71 images.
That doesn't call for outright rage.
And I deleted
On 5/8/10 5:06 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
We were about to be smeared in all media as hosting hardcore pornography
and doing nothing about it. Now, the correct storyline is that we are
cleaning up. I'm proud to have made sure that storyline broke the way
it did, and I'm sorry I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/05/2010 02:12, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Noein prono...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm surprised it is apparently needed to be said, but I'm here too
because I have faith in universal values. In fact I've been attracted
On 5/9/10 3:16 AM, Casey Brown wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Mark Ryanultrab...@gmail.com wrote:
I have to agree with you, Anthere. It's starting to look like over
time the role of the board has evolved from broad guidance and
administration to some sort of twisted version of enwp's
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the Founder flag.
I appreciate this step, but the community has now firmly rejected your
continued status as Founder flagged-- you have not been
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Alec Conroy alecmcon...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the Founder flag.
I appreciate this step, but the community has now
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
In the interest of encouraging this discussion to be about real
philosophical/content issues, rather than be about me and how quickly I
acted, I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the
On 9 May 2010 07:30, Samuel J Klein s...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 12:31 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
It's board members directly asserting control over content. Of
course it's a major issue.
Perish the thought. The Board is not controlling content - I would
On 9 May 2010 02:20, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
Given that several Commons admins had dropped out, and bearing in mind the
clean-up campaign called for by the board and Jimbo, I put in an RFA at
Commons, saying I would help clean up pornographic images *that are not in
use by
On 9 May 2010 07:45, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
True. The resignations are deeply unfortunate, and I hope those who
have left will still contribute to the ensuing discussions - their
opinions are among those badly needed to find the right way forward.
deeply unfortunate is, far
Thanks for your prompt response, Ting. Fine to see we come to
agreement so quickly :)
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de wrote:
Hello all,
the following sentence from me is surely a very stupid sentense. I
apology for it. And thanks for everyone, especially Aphaia
On 9 May 2010 06:09, K. Peachey p858sn...@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Bugzilla 982[1] MediaWiki should support ICRA's PICS content labeling.
From my understanding without reading much about it, It [ICRA] is ment
to be a international or at least a standard for these things which
most people seem to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/05/2010 05:46, Jimmy Wales wrote:
On 5/8/10 10:02 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
The deletions themselves aren't the problem; the manner in which they
were carried out is. As a lawyer you should understand that the due
process is important.
I
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:09 AM, K. Peachey p858sn...@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Bugzilla 982[1] MediaWiki should support ICRA's PICS content labeling.
From my understanding without reading much about it, It [ICRA] is ment
to be a international or at least a standard for these things which
most
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
In the interest of encouraging this discussion to be about real
philosophical/content issues, rather than be about me and how quickly I
acted, I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 10:46:50AM +0100, Jimmy Wales wrote:
In the interest of encouraging this discussion to be about real
philosophical/content issues, rather than be about me and how quickly I
acted, I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the
On 9 May 2010 09:50, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
On 5/8/10 5:38 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:24 AM, MZMcBridez...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Most of the egregiously bad deletions were quickly overturned, and Jimmy
was
the one re-deleting the images. Now that he has
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 04:36:19AM -0400, Samuel Klein wrote:
On Fri, May 7, Noein wrote:
I'm powerless. Am I? I think many of us are having these very questions
now. Is it good for the WMF that we're asking them?
Eloquence is power. And it is good that you are asking.
I always knew
Дана Friday 07 May 2010 12:53:59 Milos Rancic написа:
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 6:33 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Milos Rancic wrote:
The MMORPG Ryzom goes Free Software [1]. Although it was just a matter
of time, this event is very important for shaping our future. MMORPG
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
I was just about to post about the need to assure the commons community
that there would be no repeat performance.
That need is still there, Kim.
Just in case anyone hasn't noticed, Jimbo kept his power to give
himself
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 12:29 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 May 2010 07:45, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
True. The resignations are deeply unfortunate, and I hope those who
have left will still contribute to the ensuing discussions - their
opinions are among those
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 6:23 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 May 2010 07:30, Samuel J Klein s...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Perish the thought. The Board is not controlling content - I
would oppose any Board action that did so.
The Board does not support this - although individuals
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 04:17:29AM -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
I thought it might be useful to here if I shared some of my
experiences with commons.
== It has begun.==
En.wp has moved -and the motion seems likely to carry- that all images
deleted by Jimmy Wales on commons be reuploaded to
On 9 May 2010 13:26, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 6:23 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
The overriding question will be the editorial role of the board.
The Board has no editorial role, on Commons or on any other Project,
nunless you consider
Дана Sunday 09 May 2010 10:53:23 William Pietri написа:
On 05/08/2010 10:23 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Editors are saying, with a straight face, that there is no implied
sexual activity in BDSM images like
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Angel_BDSM.png and that images
like
Hi, Kim.
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
En.wp has moved -and the motion seems likely to carry- that all images
deleted by Jimmy Wales on commons be reuploaded to en.wikipedia.
That discussion was started over a day ago; now that images which were
in
Lost in the recent email flood: pediapress is fully working for English.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/06/wikipedia-and-pediapress-now-allow-you-to-create-books-from-content-in-english/
Does anyone have photos of prototype hardcover books?
Sam.
___
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 08:42:16AM -0400, Samuel Klein wrote:
Hi, Kim.
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
VISIONS OF DRAMA
Actually, things seem to be settling down, and admins are returning to
Commons. (though I'm sure you can find more drama if
This message is CC'ed to other people who might wish to comment on this
potential approach
---
Dear reader at FOSI,
As a member of the Wikipedia community and the community that develops the
software on which Wikipedia runs, I come to you with a few questions.
Over the past years Wikipedia has
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
In the interest of encouraging this discussion to be about real
philosophical/content issues, rather than be about me and how quickly I
acted, I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
Lost in the recent email flood: pediapress is fully working for
English.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/06/wikipedia-and-pediapress-now-allow-you-to-create-books-from-content-in-english/
Does anyone
On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 09:46:02PM -0400, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:22 PM, The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com wrote:
Hooray for letting American prurience and Larry Sanger's oddities shape the
project.
The tolerance of sexual imagery on Wikimedia is a byproduct of Western
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 10:11:40AM +0100, Jimmy Wales wrote:
On 5/8/10 3:29 PM, Amory Meltzer wrote:
I recognize that the issue is more about the point and process of the
whole thing, and that it's not just Wales who deleted images, but I
think some perspective is useful.
Jimbo deleted
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
I would like to point out that the board's position and power is somewhat
precarious at this point in time. They need to move quickly but
*carefully*, should they wish to retain it. The cannot afford to get
back on
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 12:29:28PM +0100, Peter Coombe wrote:
On 9 May 2010 09:50, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
This is absurd. You wheel-warred to re-delete numerous images, and had
threatened to desysop anyone restoring them. You even said they
couldn't be discussed until June!
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Alec Conroy alecmcon...@gmail.com wrote:
Here here.
300+ users have ordered the removal of Jimbo's founder powers. Not
some of those powers, not half of those powers, ALL of those powers.
He doesn't get to negotiate his own remedies-- the community wants
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 10:14:26AM -0400, Alec Conroy wrote:
Any statements in between are only going to add to the crisis. It's
community vs jimbo day. WE hoped this day would never come, but it's
here. Who trumps who? The board needs to decide in no uncertain
terms and enforce its
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Peter Coombe thewub.w...@googlemail.comwrote:
On 9 May 2010 09:50, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
On 5/8/10 5:38 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:24 AM, MZMcBridez...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Most of the egregiously bad deletions
Derk-Jan Hartman wrote:
This message is CC'ed to other people who might wish to comment on this
potential approach
---
You asked for comments... Here is one we prepared earlier...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_censorship#ICRA
In other words, we have been here, we have
I noticed Jimbo has also sysadmin flag recently. The change was about 2
months ago on enwikiversity.[1] The reason was need to view deleted
revisions, but sysadmin group does hold no rights about deleted revisions.
Instead they have globalgroup[permissions/membership].
Originally, Jimbo doesn't
On 9 May 2010 10:46, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
In the interest of encouraging this discussion to be about real
philosophical/content issues, rather than be about me and how quickly I
acted, I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the Founder
I think it's time to back away from this issue. Jimbo may,
technically, be able to restore his powers, however, if he decided to
use them in order to make another controversial action, they wouldn't
last five minutes.
Let the man save a little face, by doing this voluntarily instead of
having
I agree that this ends the need for any immediate action by the
community in this aspect of things.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 May 2010 10:46, Jimmy Wales
This may seem overly melodramatic but I want to quote from Gore Vidal:
Tiberius, when he became Emperor, the Senate sent him a message saying that
whatever he wanted enacted would become law. And he sent it back to them and he
said, 'Now don't be stupid. Suppose the Emperor has gone mad.
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the Founder flag. I even removed my ability to edit
semi-protected pages! (I've kept permissions related to 'viewing' things.)
The community
Florence Devouard hett schreven:
To be fair, I am *extremely* disturbed by the above statement.
Since when is the board DEFINING the scope and basic rules of the
projects ?
As a reminder, the WMF was created two years after Wikipedia. The scope,
the basic rules did not need WMF to be
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Pedro Sanchez pdsanc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Alec Conroy alecmcon...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Adam Cuerden cuer...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's time to back away from this issue. Jimbo may,
I am afraid we will never be able to label our content properly. There will be
no chance to keep NPOV regardless how implemented labels will be. Our content
is free. If somebody needs labeled content he can label it himself in his own
copy of Wikimedia projects.
It is a bad idea. Let's not do
You are definitely not alone in that regard.
Steven
On Sunday, May 9, 2010, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
...who hopes posting limits will be enforced this month?
-Chad
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
I certainly hope limits are enforced. 120-ish messages in the time I was
asleep.
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.comwrote:
You are definitely not alone in that regard.
Steven
On Sunday, May 9, 2010, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
...who hopes
On 9 May 2010, at 17:57, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the Founder flag. I even removed my ability to edit
semi-protected pages! (I've kept permissions
Robert Rohde wrote:
Personally, I tend to see ICRA labeling as just another kind of
categorization, albeit one with definitions that were defined
elsewhere.
This is precisely and completely absolutely wrong.
Labeling is enabling censorship. Labeling images
is the worst kind of enablement of
Hi guys,
As everyone can see, the list is a-flurry with discussion about
Jimmy's recent actions on Commons. (And whatever other topics people
want to spin the situation into.)
I'm not commenting on the topic itself, but I would like to urge
everyone to direct their comments to the appropriate
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
...who hopes posting limits will be enforced this month?
-Chad
Yes. I received a ridiculous amount of messages about the same silly
topic. move along people..
user:alnokta
___
On 5/9/10 4:18 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
I notice you have kept protect and undelete. Is that intentional?
If so, can you explain your thinking behind that decision?
I just removed undelete, manage global groups, and edit membership to
global groups. I did that before I saw your note, so I
On 5/9/10 4:27 PM, Carl Lindstrom wrote:
Jimbo has allegedly removed some of his rights on Commons but he
still has his founder flags and can restore all his rights if and
when he pleases.
No, actually, I can't.
Again, I may sound melodramatic but I
gues just like Wikipedia too much to see
On 5/9/10 4:10 PM, Woojin Kim wrote:
I noticed Jimbo has also sysadmin flag recently. The change was about 2
months ago on enwikiversity.[1] The reason was need to view deleted
revisions, but sysadmin group does hold no rights about deleted revisions.
Instead they have
On 9 May 2010 18:56, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
On 5/9/10 4:18 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
I notice you have kept protect and undelete. Is that intentional?
If so, can you explain your thinking behind that decision?
I just removed undelete, manage global groups, and edit membership
On 5/9/10 3:41 PM, Anthony wrote:
Sure, he tricked the press into thinking the images were permanently
removed, then when the story blew over, you added them back. Everything
went perfectly according to plan.
Right Jimmy?
Of course not. We are engaged in a process that will lead to some
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
We are engaged in a process that will lead to some
much-needed changes at Commons, including the continued deletion of some
of the things that we used to host.
Where? Behind the scenes? On one of the internal mailing
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Derk-Jan Hartman d.j.hart...@gmail.com wrote:
This message is CC'ed to other people who might wish to comment on this
potential approach
---
Dear reader at FOSI,
As a member of the Wikipedia community and the community that develops the
software on which
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Derk-Jan Hartman d.j.hart...@gmail.com
wrote:
This message is CC'ed to other people who might wish to comment on this
potential approach
---
Dear reader at FOSI,
As a member of
Den 09. mai 2010 19:59, skrev Jimmy Wales:
I don't think I have the ability to change that, but I'll email the
stewards and ask them to sort out any remaining details.
Sysadmins have the ability to change all rights on all wikis (not just
from meta), but I have removed that group from you
This is the first step towards censorship, and we should not take it.
We have no experience or expertise to determine what content is
suitable for particular users, or how content can be classified as
such.Further, doing so is contrary to the basic principle that we do
not perform original
Greg Maxwell writes:
At the same time, and I think we'll hear a similar message from the
EFF and the ALA, I am opposed to these organized content labelling
systems. These systems are primary censorship systems and are
overwhelmingly used to subject third parties, often adults, to
On 9 May 2010 21:17, Marcus Buck m...@marcusbuck.org wrote:
The tags applied should be clear and fact-based. So instead of tagging a
page as containing pornography, which is entirely subjective, we
should rather tag the page as contains a depiction of an erect penis
or contains a depiction of
On 9 May 2010 21:28, Mikemoral mikemoral...@gmail.com wrote:
By why censor Commons? Should educational material be freely viewed and,
of course, be made free to read, use, etc.
Well, yes. The apparent reason is that Fox News is making trouble.
Categorisation, labeling, etc. won't fix that -
The founder’s flag give to a single man a huge power. I can’t trust on
almost anybody to hold that power. But In less than two days Jimbo has
resigned of this power. By doing this he has proven that he is one of the
sparse people we can trust.
Wikimedia movement is a complex system. Capacity to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
My purpose here is for us to stop chattering about this aspect of
things - which I don't care about. People seem to want to fight me
on it, perhaps expecting me to dig in my heels. Everyone loves a
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Mike.lifeguard mike.lifegu...@gmail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
Lost in the recent email flood: pediapress is fully working for
English.
On 9 May 2010 21:29, marcos tal_t...@yahoo.es wrote:
I want to write here a couple of reflections:
First: Not everything what can be known is worth being known
Second: there have to be a few limits in the free knowledge. These limits
are the Law and the common sense. Though the common
Please, read good. Common Sense. Do you think it´s of common sense delete
this?...
--- El dom, 9/5/10, Peter Coombe thewub.w...@googlemail.com escribió:
De: Peter Coombe thewub.w...@googlemail.com
Asunto: Re: [Foundation-l] On problems in commons
Para: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
We already remove images of children which are considered to be
illegal under US law, and I see no one arguing that we do otherwise.
The recent kerfuffle has been over the broader category of sexual
images. But if we are take account of all religious and moral
sensitivities, where will it end?
But Muhammad's image is not illegal in the US, so why remove them? That has
no point. Why do we have to remove content perfectly legal under US law?
Please educate me why.
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Peter Coombe thewub.w...@googlemail.comwrote:
We already remove images of children which
*That's true. But at the moment we have nothing to defend or excuse
ourselves with. If we had decent tagging we could at least say: You
don't want your pupils to see nude people? Add rule XYZ to your school's
proxy servers and Wikipedia will be clean. You can even choose which
content should be
Thanks, Greg. This is very useful perspective and great background for
those of us without Commons experience.
-stu
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought it might be useful to here if I shared some of my
experiences with commons.
Like many
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Joan Goma jrg...@gmail.com wrote:
The founder’s flag give to a single man a huge power. I can’t trust on
almost anybody to hold that power.
Every steward holds that power. If I remember well, I think that
stewards had a couple of more permissions than founder.
This message was an attempt to gain information and spur discussion about the
system in general, it's limits and effectiveness, not wether or not we should
actually do it. I was trying to gather more information so that we can have an
informed debate if it ever got to discussing about the
Hi folks,
I'm aiming to stay on top of this whole conversation -- which is not
easy: there is an awful lot of text being generated :-)
So for myself and others --including new board members who may not be
super-fluent in terms of following where and how we discuss things--,
I'm going to recap
Okay, I've complained a lot, time to give something back.
I think I've managed to create a sexual content policy that's
consistent with the core values of commons and previous decisions,
such as the artworks of Muhammed, while dealing with the problems and
assuring that any sexual content that
Hoi,
What I am missing is that Iran has blocked the whole Wikimedia domain as
Commons is included in that domain. I understand that the reason is there
being too much sexual explicit content. As a consequence this important
free resource is no longer available to the students of Iran as a
*Please, read good. Common Sense. Do you think it´s of common sense delete
this?...*
Common sense is not
Commonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sense#Use_common_sense.
In the Islamic world depictions of Muhammad are considered to be highly
offensive, akin to western views on child
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
