Tom Morris wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 18:24, Theo10011 <de10...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Bishakha, call it editorial-content, call it censorship or any other >> euphemism - at the heart of it, it is deciding what someone gets to see and >> what not. It should not be our job to censor our own content. The strongest >> argument I read against this has been - it is not something WMF and the >> board should implement and develop, If there was a need to censor/cleanse >> graphic content, there would a successful mirror or a fork of the project >> already somewhere. > > That argument is all too convenient. > > The WMF shouldn't do X because nobody else has successfully done X. > > And the only reason nobody else has done X successfully is because > they don't *really* want it. > > (Not because they actually do want it but don't have the resources. > Not because it is hard for an external body to do but might be easier > for the WMF to do. No, those aren't possible at all.)
Can you explain how investing resources into an opt-in image filter is a good idea? What's the virtue of such a project? Does it serve Wikimedia's mission? Does diverting resources from other projects and activities in favor of this one do more harm than good? I think it makes more sense to focus on these questions, rather than inventing silly tales. MZMcBride _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l