The board resolution announcement presently shows that it passed 9-1, with Jimbo's the only voice dissenting:
http://www.webcitation.org/69AyEvzIS On his talk page, however, Jimbo claims that this misrepresents him, and that he voted to scrap the image filter like everyone else: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=502410086#Image_filter_resolution It was an in-person meeting. How can there be any doubt about how someone voted? At any rate, a few weeks ago on Twitter, Jimbo still told Larry Sanger that he strongly supported the filter, and would write it himself and switch it on tomorrow if he could: https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/207750504405667842 https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/207838261689851904 On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 1:53 AM, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote: > Bishakha Datta wrote: > > At its 11 July board meeting, the Board of Trustees passed a resolution > > rescinding its previous direction to implement the personal image hiding > > feature. > > > > The resolution is online at > > > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:_Personal_Image_Hiding_Feature > > Well, all right. I suppose this gives you all some legitimacy (your > resolution won't be flatly ignored) and allows Sue/the Wikimedia Foundation > to focus on more pressing matters. Good job. > > At the moment, I'm mostly of the mind that this is something that outside > groups need to focus on themselves. When you look at the individual > problems > presented here (pornography in search results at school or work, articles > with graphic imagery, etc.), there's simply no good answer. Particular > problems require particular solutions. That's been one of the reasons that > creating a technical tool has been so difficult. There was never any clear > problem, there were a thousand mostly clear problems, each with different > slightly different solutions and complexities. > > If people are truly pining for a School-Safe Wikipedia, there's a small > business waiting to be born, isn't there? There are already similar > projects, e.g., <http://schools-wikipedia.org/>. > > The Wikimedia Foundation should focus its resources on helping the > community > develop quality, free educational content. If someone wants to create > Porn-Free Wikipedia or School-Safe Wikipedia or whatever else, I think we > shouldn't encourage or discourage it. The line should be: the content is > under a free license; do what you want with it. > > That also means exercising reasonable and mature editorial judgment on the > various Wikimedia wikis. This is something that Wikimedians are often > terrible at. It'd be good if there were a way to address this. > > > We are working on a Q&A document that will be published after Wikimania. > > I hope you all include "What has been learned from this?" :-) Lots of good > lessons for all three sides here, I think (staff, Board, and community). > > MZMcBride > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l