Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Yann Forget
Hello, To me, this shows that the search engine is badly configured, or has a major problem. So fix it instead of creating a filter, which would have unwanted side effects. Having a good search engine would be within the WMF mission, creating a filter is not. Regards, Yann 2011/10/12 Andreas

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Hubert
Dear Andreas, This is, what I wanted to express. But it is not only a quite different etymology, it is also a definition of gender-related positions to be interpreted and applied. But what we care about minorities - as I always say - as long as they representing only women, children, homosexuals

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Hubert
Am 10.10.2011 21:16, schrieb Sue Gardner: On 10 October 2011 11:56, Möller, Carsten c.moel...@wmco.de wrote: Sue wrote: It is asking me to do something. But it is not asking me to do the specific thing that has been discussed over the past several months, and which the Germans voted

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Hubert
+1 h Am 11.10.2011 03:20, schrieb Bjoern Hoehrmann: * Sue Gardner wrote: This is how the system is supposed to work. The Board identified a problem; the staff hacked together a proposed solution, and we asked the community what it thought. Now, we're responding to the input and we're going

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Denis Barthel
Am 13.10.2011 09:54, schrieb Hubert: Meanwhile, I prefer the following solution: Everyone, who will not understand and perceive the world so as it is, should unsubscribe his internet connection - just like his newspaper subscription, radio and television and - of course - any advertising on

[Foundation-l] Image filtering without undermining the category system

2011-10-13 Thread WereSpielChequers
-- Message: 7 Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 11:07:54 -0300 From: Andrew Crawford acrawf...@laetabilis.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Image filtering without undermining the categorysystem To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread MZMcBride
David Levy wrote: Andreas Kolbe wrote: Again, I think you are being too philosophical, and lack pragmatism. We already have bad image lists like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Bad_image_list If you remain wedded to an abstract philosophical approach, such lists are not neutral.

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread David Levy
I wrote: Apart from the name (which the MediaWiki developers inexplicably refused to change), the bad image list is entirely compliant with the principle of neutrality (barring abuse by a particular project, which I haven't observed). MZMcBride replied: Not inexplicably:

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Andreas Kolbe
From: David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com In an earlier reply, I cited ultra-Orthodox Jewish newspapers and magazines that refuse to publish photographs of women.  If this were a mainstream policy, would that make it neutral? Please answer the above question. NPOV policy as

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread David Levy
I wrote: In an earlier reply, I cited ultra-Orthodox Jewish newspapers and magazines that refuse to publish photographs of women. If this were a mainstream policy, would that make it neutral? Andreas Kolbe replied: NPOV policy as written would require us to do the same, yes. The

[Foundation-l] The image filter: Thoughts on the German/English question

2011-10-13 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Having thought about the very divisive image filter discussions here, on de:WP, Meta, and elsewhere, including the August referendum and the more recent editor poll in the German Wikipedia, I would like to draw the Board's and other editors' attention to some fundamental differences between the

Re: [Foundation-l] Image filtering without undermining the category system

2011-10-13 Thread Andrew Crawford
It need be no more complex than http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist In my opinion, it will need to be far simpler than that if it is to address the needs of the casual reader. We simply can't expect them to make any significant investment in understanding

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Andreas Kolbe
bla From: David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 14 October 2011, 3:52 Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content I wrote: In an earlier reply, I cited ultra-Orthodox Jewish

Re: [Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

2011-10-13 Thread Andreas Kolbe
David,  I just noticed that I left a bla at the top of my reply to you. That wasn't a comment on your post: my e-mail editor often doesn't allow me to break the indent of the post I'm replying to. My work-around is to type some random unindented text at the top of my editor window, and then

Re: [Foundation-l] The image filter: Thoughts on the German/English question

2011-10-13 Thread Michael Snow
On 10/13/2011 8:43 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: My impression, from reading several articles in this topic area in both projects, is that this is quite a representative example, illustrating fundamental differences in approach between the German and English Wikipedias, with the German Wikipedia

Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraising Community Appeal

2011-10-13 Thread Megan Hernandez
Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, there are people who work on social media year round (not just for the fundraiser). During this year's fundraiser, we will be putting out more messages across social media sites and actively participate in the conversation that's taking place there. During our