This has already been discussed at great length on wiki. We all know you disagree with the conclusion. There is really nothing else to be said.
Michael Dror Kamir wrote: > This discussion was probably discussed before. It has to be discussed > again. I would like the members of this list to express their opinion > about the following: > > > 1. Why are these cartoons on the Commons, considering they educational > value is dubious, as they merely express one person's opinion and are > not documentary in any way or present useful sketches or other > productive material. > > > 2. Why are these cartoons categorized in a way that force user to see > them even if they prefer to avoid them. In particular - why a person who > looks for Allan Dershowitz's portrait should be forced to see a cartoon > that defames him in the most harsh way? (There are other similar > examples, but that's the most critical.) > > > 3. Latuff released his cartoons to the public domain. My attempt to > upload paraphrases of these cartoons was banned by a few administrators. > Is that acceptable on Commons' users? Isn't that a breach of the "fair > play" rules and "no censorship" rules? Why would uploading the Israeli > flag with a ban sign on it and the inscription "no Israel" is okay, > while uploading paraphrases on Latuff's cartoons would be banned? > > > 4. Should the Commons welcome new political cartoons which express > personal opinions about ongoing events, and isn't that a risk to the > project? If the Commons should welcome these cartoons, who has the right > to decide whom of the caricaturists is notable, which of the caricatures > is educational etc.? > > > Please express your opinions, it is highly important. > > > Dror (K) > > > > _______________________________________________ > Commons-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l > > > _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
