On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 03:34, Marc A. Pelletier <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/09/2011 3:19 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: >> I realized that I started to participate in this madness when I asked >> for some data from the results. And now, community is asked to >> participate into the "Next steps" [3] > > Milos, I think you're stepping out to the backyard there. I'm probably > one of the more vocal (and arguably acerbic) opponents of that entire > filter idea, and the fact that (at least some members of) the board is > actually willing to now listen to concerns is a _good_ thing.
I think that damage produced by this <whatever> should be localized. The target is English Wikipedia, Board is not especially interested in other Wikipedia editions and other projects in English; which means that it should be localized on English Wikipedia. By stating that it will affect just English Wikipedia and just other projects which explicitly said that they want that filter, many concerns would be addressed. After that, significant period of time will have to pass up to the filter implementation and there will be plenty of time for discussing about particular details. Without that localization, we have now serious problems: * It is not yet clear would that filter be implemented or not. Board said "yes", but, obviously, Censorship committee didn't recommend its implementation. That question requires simple yes/no answer and someone should make that decision. Note that even the most moderate regulations of sexually explicit images doesn't have chance to pass any community confidence [1]. At the other side, Board wants that and there are just two options for the Board: to say yes or to say no. Any of the answers is better sooner than later: "no" would finish the drama; "yes" would intensify it for a couple of days and then the discussion about details could be continued. Otherwise, more emotions would be involved and as "yes" is likely to be the answer, just more people would be more frustrated with the outcome. * Strong opposition inside of the second-largest community. If not addressed immediately, referendums like that one on German Wikipedia could be sparked all over the projects and we would have just more problems. * Note that the whole thing around image filter is not well understood out of US and Australia. The most of the world knows to live with "rouge images" and censorship isn't usually imposed by people themselves, but by governments. Including others in internal issues of US society triggers just more emotional reactions. We need to stop wasting time and energy on personal wishes of two Board members. As it isn't about removing the content, any solution is better than wasting willingness on one nonconstructive and decadent project. If that time and energy was spent on rewriting Parser, we would have WYSIWYG editor a year or two ago. [1] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Sexual_content/Archive_6#Second_poll_for_promotion_to_policy_.28December_2010.29 _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
