Hi Ryan,<br><br>A draft template was actually made to augment the mostly recently voted [[COM:SEX]] proposal:<br><a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Consent">http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Consent</a><br>
<br>The proposal closed with no consensus*, but with a few modifications, the template could still be put to good use.<br><br>Toby / 99of9<br><br><br>*Mainly because it included a clause allowing admins to delete out of scope sexual content
directly in a speedy deletion rather than setting up a deletion request. There actually wasn't too much opposition to requiring a statement of consent for identifiable sexual images, although there was some.<br><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Ryan Kaldari <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rkaldari@wikimedia.org">rkaldari@wikimedia.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
I'm both a long-time admin on Commons and an OTRS volunteer. I've been<br>
wanting to chime in on this thread, but haven't really had the time. I'm<br>
worried though that I'm about to see history repeat itself, so I want to<br>
quickly share a few thoughts...<br>
<br>
First, the issue of consent on Commons has been passionately debates for<br>
years, and has a long and tortured history. Before proposing anything,<br>
please make yourself familiar with the previous discussions and their<br>
outcomes. Most notably the discussions surrounding these pages:<br>
<a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sexual_content" target="_blank">http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sexual_content</a><br>
<a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archives/User_problems_7#Privatemusings" target="_blank">http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archives/User_problems_7#Privatemusings</a><br>
<a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people" target="_blank">http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people</a><br>
<a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Nudity" target="_blank">http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Nudity</a><br>
<br>
The point I can't emphasize enough is that if you put forward any<br>
proposal on Commons that implies there is anything possibly problematic<br>
about sexual or nude images in any way, you will be completely shut<br>
down. The only way you have any chance to shape the policies and<br>
guidelines on Commons is if you approach the problem from a<br>
sex/nudity-agnostic point of view. Here's a good example of what NOT to do:<br>
<br>
I think a general statement that permission of the subject is desirable<br>
/ necessary for photos featuring nudity would be a good thing -<br>
thoughts? Privatemusings (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)<br>
I think the horse is beyond dead by now. --Carnildo (talk) 22:46, 8<br>
January 2009 (UTC)<br>
<br>
If the horse was beyond dead in January 2009, imagine where it is now.<br>
That said, there is still lots of room for improvement. In particular...<br>
<br>
Commons already requires consent for photos of identifiable people in<br>
private spaces. In addition, many countries require consent even for<br>
public spaces. (Take a look at<br>
<a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_persons#Country_specific_consent_requirements" target="_blank">http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_persons#Country_specific_consent_requirements</a>.)<br>
The way this requirement works, however, is completely passive and<br>
reactive - there is no impetus to proactively assert consent, only to<br>
assert it when an image is challenged. This is a very inefficient<br>
system. There are no templates or categories or anything to deal with<br>
consent on Commons (apart from Template:Consent which is tied up with<br>
the tortured history of Commons:Sexual_content and can't be used currently).<br>
<br>
I don't think it would be incredibly controversial to introduce a very<br>
simple consent template that was specifically tailored to the existing<br>
policies and laws. This would make things easier for Commons reusers,<br>
professional photographers who use model releases, and admins who have<br>
to constantly deal with these issues. In short, it would be a win for<br>
everyone and it would introduce the idea of thinking proactively about<br>
consent on Commons in a way that isn't threatening to people who are<br>
concerned about censorship.<br>
<br>
As soon as I have some free time, I'll whip up such a template and throw<br>
it into the water. It'll be interesting to see how it is received.<br>
<br>
Ryan Kaldari<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gendergap mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org">Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>