On Sun, 2 Mar 2014, geni wrote:
On 2 March 2014 08:55, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2 March 2014 02:01, Mark <delir...@hackish.org> wrote:
> I personally would welcome more attention to our actual mission,
> free content, rather than the mission some of our members seem to be
> in, "making the *.wikipedia.org sites look nice in the short term, even
> nobody external can reuse the content".
There seems to be a disconnect between what Commons sees as it's mission:
To be a repository of Free media; and what other projects see as Commons'
mission: To be a repository of media for use on Wikimedia projects.
There is a further disconnect in that Commons is taking an increasingly
ultra-conservative approach to the definition of "Free", whereas most
other projects are working to a definition of "Free for all practical
purposes". It is the latter interpretation that the board, in consultation
with the legal team, are recommending as the way forward but is being
resisted strongly by many on Commons.
These days I wouldn't dare upload an image that was not either my own
work or public doman due to life+100 because I couldn't guarantee that it
wont be delted. Even with my own work I'm wary because of recent cases of
amateur lawyering over the definition of "permanent" for the purposes of
UK freedom of panorama.
The essential things in life are seen not with the eyes,
but with the heart
Antoine de Saint Exupery
Wikimedia-l mailing list