On 18 June 2012 12:29, Tobias Oelgarte <[email protected]> wrote:
> I guess Tom misunderstood my comment. I wrote down a simple plan how an > external solution could work and how to minimize the effort to maintain it. > If there is a community (it might overlap with our community) that would run > such a "filter portal" (or even multiple portals) then it should be even > more sufficient as if we would implement filters inside Wikipedia itself. > They could really block images and make a child-save zone after their own > definition, while we could continue as usual without having the burden to > avoid conflicts. The Board acted according to the Harris report, which just said to do it on the site itself: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content:_Part_Two It's still not clear to me (looking over part two or part one) why it has to be on the site itself and no post-site solution is acceptable. Presumably someone interested can dredge through part one and pick out the sentences that back this position as opposed to post-site filtering. - d. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
