On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Gnangarra <[email protected]> wrote:

> this discussion appears to be missing some information specifically a link
> to what is being discussed
>
> I checked
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Joseph_Stalin.jpgthat
>  doesnt reflect what Tim is referring to neither does
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Rush_limbaugh.jpgwhich
>  are the only discussion that have been linked in the email I've
> recieved thru commons-l,
>
> If this discussion is going to start throwing around solutions that
> include Commons admins having their tools removed by the foundation, and
> changes to way in which commons chooses its admin and the skill
> requirements of these people then we should have access to the discussion
> that triggered it.
>
> As for not reading OTRS tickets unless you have access you cant read them,
> OTRS agents dont normally(privacy requirements) release the information on
> the ticket so Commons Admins must "assume good faith" in what we are being
> told. The Stalin discussion stated that "*OTRS confirmation* - We have
> received an email from the son of Margaret Bourke-White who is the current
> copyright holder giving permission for the photograph to be used" at  that
> point every commons admin would close the discussion on the assumption of
> good faith in the OTRS agents comment.
>
> When images are transferred from Flickr the only decision is verification
> of license, permissions arent something that can be considered if the
> uploader askes the author they then forward the permission to OTRS so again
> Commons Admins need to AGF to accuse admins of "*Part of the solution,
> ..... If the community is unable to do it, the office should do it. Admins
> are being negligent, collude with breaches of personality rights, and
> enable anonymous individuals to engage in media licensing fraud, whether
> intentionally or by gross incompetence, as here for example*:"  when they
> dont have access to the information is disgusting these people are
> volunteers the Stalin discussion followed Commons policy the decision being
> made were based on available information there was no collusion there was
> no incompetence intentional or otherwise. When other information was
> presented to dispute the decisons the discussion reopened and closed
> according to the new information that is fine example of how Commons
> discussions work
>
> The solution here isnt to alter how Commons admins work, nor how they are
> chosen the issue here is ensuring OTRS agents have the knowledge to process
> permission tickets so that admins can act on requests. When I started on
> OTRS there was no training, or guidence on how to use the system I was left
> to my own devices to learn to answer tickets In the time I was there the
> OTRS wiki was started up, I was dropped off the OTRS list for not being
> active so I cant comment on whats changed since nor how the OTRS wiki works
> now.
>
> Trolling is problem on all wiki's as are witch hunts the system we have
> works very well, yes it has flaws including AGF and Trust but we cant work
> without those, we cant work without admins either yes Commons needs more
> but doesnt every wiki. Whats needed is to drop the creation of policy thru
> witchhunt proccesses because we are always going to have issue with images.
> the current processes work well in most cases, but future changes to way we
> get images from flickr are going to stretch those processess both on
> Commons and thru OTRS we need ways to deal with the effect of these changes.
>


You must've missed SJ's earlier e-mail, where he linked this:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/ObiWolf_Lesbian_Images

Tim's descriptions of the deletion discussions referred specifically to the
ObiWolf images. Reading those discussions and posts to this list, I don't
think you can conclude "the system we have works very well" - at least not
in those cases.
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Reply via email to