This not about censorship this is about, this is about how we present Commons to a wider audience.

This not the work by some recognised artist, nor is it part/segment of from any major work, its just a drawing done by a contributor to Commons. It has no value outside of that context given this it does push the boundaries of commons scope its use elsewhere would certainly be dropped should works of a recognised artist become available. What does show casing this image on the main page contribute to the improvement of Commons.

I asked the question before yet it remains un-answered by anyone is this image so significantly important that by showcasing it on the main page we are willing to sacrific the ability of many to participate in Commons.

I'm working with two archives here to get them to share their archived images under a free license, one of those archives has 137,000 images taken by their professional news photographers covering all major events that have occurred here over the last 20 years. They also have 1million plus images from the 1960's through to 1990 that are yet to be digitised, unfortunately the people that work there(i did at one stage) sign individual contracts which specify that the viewing/downloading of sexually explicit material(this image fits that definition) is grounds for instant dismissal.

When, though now its more "if" they do choose to make the image available there will be significant coverage in the media over here if that one image had been show cased on that day you can be sure that the following day there would be even more coverage of them withdrawning from the contribution and with it the elimination of partnerships with most GLAM organisations across the country. 

Is this image so significantly important that show casing it on the main page is worth the cost to Commons?




On 17 May 2011 03:43, Chris McKenna <cmckenna@sucs.org> wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Cary Bass wrote:

> On 05/16/2011 12:17 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>> The world wide audience is another matter.
>>
> And this audience is not well reflected by the lackadaisical attitude
> toward end users that pervades our otherwise wonderful Commons community.

I don't know where you get the impression that anyone here is promoting
any sort of lackadaiscial attitude?
As far as I read the arguments we have two groups of people, those who
want to censor images that they do not like or that they think other
people will not like; and those that want to actively stand up for the
rights to an uncensored collection of free media.

Commons is not censored, if you want a collection of free media that does
not offend you or someone else then you are in the wrong place.

----
Chris McKenna

cmckenna@sucs.org
www.sucs.org/~cmckenna


The essential things in life are seen not with the eyes,
but with the heart

Antoine de Saint Exupery


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l



--
GN.
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
Gn. Blogg: http://gnangarra.wordpress.com