Hoi,<br>If you worry then you should not post arguments as fact and when you post argument as fact you should not say that you are a casual onlooker. Either you know what you are talking about and have an opinion that is founded on whatever or you are just fanning the flames.<br>
<br>If you had paid any attention, you would know that the content of the pikiwiki project is freely licensed. The question is very much about to what extend the i has to be dotted and the t has to be crossed. If anything I think that Commons is doing poorly. It should have at least 10 times the amount of freely licensed content. This is in my opinion not happening because of a broken conception of what Commons is about. It is broken because all kinds of things are conflated in one heap. Conflated are freely licensed, educational, artistic and quality. It is a mess that makes our own projects choose for Flickr.<br>
Thanks,<br> Gerard<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/6/15 Stan Shebs <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stanshebs@earthlink.net">stanshebs@earthlink.net</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">David Gerard wrote:<br>
> 2009/6/15 Rama Neko <<a href="mailto:ramaneko@gmail.com">ramaneko@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
><br>
><br>
</div><div class="im">>> Furthermore, I sometimes have the feeling that contributors of<br>
>> Wikipedia expect us to host all sorts of unacceptable media in return<br>
>> of the service that they provide; while we of course appreciate the<br>
>> service projects, this is a problem, particularly when these files are<br>
>> copyright violations.<br>
>> In the particular case of Pikiwiki, it would of course be very<br>
>> caricatural to say that all their images are copyvios. There are lots<br>
>> of out-of-scope party snapshots, too.<br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> I'd hope this isn't a summary of the views of other Commons admins.<br>
><br>
> Anyone else? Or is the Commons admin community this insular and derisive?<br>
><br>
</div>I don't know if this makes me insular and derisive, but as a casual<br>
onlooker to the Pikiwiki episode, I do worry that there is an attempt to<br>
strongarm Commons into accepting material that would not normally be<br>
able to get in. It worries me because if Commons loses its reputation as<br>
a reliable source of free media, the that loss effectively contaminates<br>
everything in the project - potential users will be unsure if my own<br>
photos were really self-made, or I'm putting free licenses on material<br>
that is not mine to give away.<br>
<br>
For projects that have committed to only using Commons for media, the<br>
pressure to accept borderline material is going to be intense, and it's<br>
always going to be a secondary concern that the files are going to be a<br>
problem for other clients of Commons. Projects experiencing that kind of<br>
pressure should maybe consider re-instituting local uploads, which<br>
allows for more gradual migration of material as it is determined to<br>
meet Commons' standards, and takes away the pressure on Commons admins<br>
to make snap decisions on tricky copyright issues.<br>
<br>
Stan<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Commons-l mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org">Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
</div><a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>