Call be dumb, but is there a denomination of Islam that is disallowed
from looking at images of Muhammed?
Bob
On 10/11/2011 5:17 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
We need to look at mainstream issues (including Muhammad images).
___
foundation-l mailing list
Zooming out may work for individuals like you, but for folks like me,
it's actually a distraction, and I try to see what the tiny picture is,
staring at it until it makes sense. Yay for ADHD:-\
Bob
On 10/11/2011 8:17 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
* David Gerard wrote:
Not sure the blurring
Ideally, this would be as transparent as possible, so that should not be
an issue if all goes well.
Bob
On 10/11/2011 8:17 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
I'd wonder how they feel about adding some notice like Seeing this
image makes some people feel bad to the image caption for all images
that
Since no one has explicitly come out and said exactly what the issue is
here, I'll ask:
*What exactly is harmful about an opt-in filter? *If it's opt-in, then
you have the choice to not even enable it if you so choose. You don't
have to use it; it'd just be an option in the preferences page or
Well we can't have that... lol.
Bob
On 10/9/2011 2:19 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
You don't get to grind someone's nose into your shit. Fred
___ foundation-l mailing
list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
Calm down. No one is forcing or pushing anything, more like
offering. Everything I've read indicates it will be opt-in (though the
manner for opting in will be easily accessible upon arrival at
Wikipedia). This will probably be something just as transparent to those
not using it as is the
I'm all for it, too.
Bob
On 10/9/2011 6:31 PM, Kim Bruning wrote:
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 09:19:40AM -0700, Sue Gardner wrote:
The Board is hoping there is a solution that will 1) enable readers to
easily hide images they don't want to see, as laid out in the Board's
resolution [1], while 2)
