On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Ian Clarke wrote: > So, after looking at people's comments on this issue - how about this as > a way forward: > > We make our policy to select the gateway pages on the basis of how > effectively they provide a starting point in the Freenet network, and on > that basis alone - however, we request that any page we link to spare > the user from any "Adult" content unless they have specifically > requested that they see it by clicking on an "Adult" link. We make it > clear, however, that we are not making this request under threat of > removal from the Gateway page.
This sounds to me like the most sensible way. We should make you some kind of leader or something, Ian. In my own words: 1) We make a policy. Gateway pages should be selected according to: a) Objectively: they must not, themselves, have illegal things b) Subjectively: they should provide an effective starting point 2) We publish the policy. Write it up, make it clear, stick to it. Concerning making the policy, it's a matter of what's in the interest of The Freenet Project. First, I would replace your "Adult", Ian, with "illegal things". I don't see any problem with linking to illegal things, it's *having* the illegal things that matters. Making the policy would also consist of coming up with some reasonable definition of "illegal", "have", so on. Devl-cloud input good. As for publishing the policy, post it to devl when it's finalized. Let it be On The Record. Better yet, I really like the idea somebody had (who was that?) of creating a CHK freesite. Basically, just take the gateway page links and put them on to their own page. Then you could include all the disclaimers (may be illegal, may be offensive, we won't hold your hand from now on, blah blah) and the policy on that page. Then, the CHK is the the only link from the gateway page. The only people affected would be new users (curious reporters, blood-thirsty law enforcement, unsuspecting grandmas). If you know what you want and you're able to handle it, you can add your own bookmarks to the gateway page. It's kind of like the disclaimer that pops up the first time you use Freenet with Internet Explorer. (Or has that been removed now?) The CHK goes away after you gain the minimum of competence necessary to make it go away. If the person has gotten this far, then The Freenet Project can't reasonably be held responsible. Oh, one more thing. > We make it clear, however, that we are not making this request under > threat of removal from the Gateway page. If we make it clear we're not going to enforce the policy, then why make the policy? Perhaps I misunderstood the above statement. -todd _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
