2009/2/20 David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>:
> 2009/2/20 David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>:
>> 2009/2/20 Al Tally <majorly.w...@googlemail.com>:
>>> Oh dear. Well, mind posting what you wrote here? I read it, but closed the
>>> tab...
>> I didn't save it myself! I've left another comment asking WTF happened
>> to the first one and asking if they want to phone me for verification.
> All straightened out - they emailed me and I've put up an edited
> version of the comment. (They thought one line was legally dangerous,
> so I took it out.)
> - d.

>This brings up one point: there is no evidence whatsoever that they actually 
>do the job they >claim to.

They claim to provide a list of problematical sites images and
webpages. We know such a list exists. We know that a fair number of
the URLs on it end in .jpg and the like and we know that there are
both single pages and entire sites on the list. So yes it would appear
that they do what they claim to do.


>And there is this piece of evidence that they don't actually know how to. 
>Hamfisted *and* >incompetent.

They probably do it's just there are rather a lot of ways out there of
organising your website and they didn't immediately pick up on which
one wikipedia uses.

What worries me is
"The last audit was performed by [LSE forensics expert] Peter Sommer,
assistant chief constable Stuart Hyde of the West Midlands police,
June Thorburn, professor of social work at the University of East
Anglia, and Jim Warnock, head of operations at CEOP [Child
Exploitation and Online Protection Centre]."

So at least two of their audit team came from organisations that have
other dealings with the IWF (West Midlands police and CEOP)

Peter Sommer appears to be a reasonable choice

June Thorburn I don't know much about.


Wikimedia UK mailing list
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to