> > > The idea of offering imagine filters on WMF project is much more > > controversial than it is on other internet websites. So, I I think > > that it is fair to suggest that we examine why we are having > > conflicts over this topic when other website don't. One possible > > reason is that our base of editors is different from other websites. > > Websites like Flickr (an example commonly cited) are commercial > endeavors whose decisions are based on profitability, not an > obligation to maintain neutrality (a core element of most WMF > projects). These services can cater to the revenue-driving majorities > (with geographic segregation, if need be) and ignore minorities whose > beliefs fall outside the "mainstream" for a given country. We mustn't > do that. >
Brilliantly put! > One of the main issues regarding the proposed system is the need to > determine which image types to label "potentially objectionable" and > place under the limited number of optional filters. Due to cultural > bias, some people (including a segment of voters in the "referendum," > some of whom commented on its various talk pages) believe that this is > as simple as creating a few categories along the lines of "nudity," > "sex," "violence" and "gore" (defined and populated in accordance with > arbitrary standards). > I think a key part of resolving this is to avoid calling the labels "potentially objectionable". I mean - anything can be potentially objectionable, it depends on the individual. Obviously we cast this in the nudity/Mohammed light, because those are the most high profile examples. But another example; clowns. Some people are terrified of clowns, even their images. You wouldn't describe images of clowns as "potentially objectionable" but it would be great for Coulrophobes to go "oh hey Wikipedia, I don't like clowns so can you hide pics of them for me please? Thanks". Some people are squeamish - so OK let the hides images involving blood/gore. Foot phobia? (that's common enough) Hide images of naked feet. And so on. This should not be about filtering "potentially objectionable" images, but about giving readers a way to filter their experience in a way that makes them feel safe and happy. And that is the light to cast & develop the feature Tom _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
