I agree!
Pete, Kaldari and others have fought the good fight about that. I think some
Things were developed on Commons and we tried to get more folks involved to no avail. I
can't provide links this second.
I tried my best with model releases (I worked in fashion and photography before I was a
Wikipedian and curator!) but little has seemed to come from it and as alway - I encourage
people to get involved in curating commons of non-educational content. More voices means
more content control.
I had to shift my focus to focus on bringing more women to Wikipedia, which I hope leads
to more curating of content. Don't get me wrong - I think his very Important!!
Sarah
Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)
On May 31, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Sarah <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Sarah Stierch
<sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com> wrote:
... I think it's concerning about
model contracts and so forth, but, I think we have bigger fish to fry at
this point. ...
Hi Sarah, I see your point, but I think the model releases are a major
issue for us. As I look at it, women *are" involved extensively in
Wikimedia, but a big percentage of that involvement comes in the form
of being portrayed naked on Commons. This is very troubling to me. If
in addition it's being done without their consent, then it's something
I really wish we could act on, regardless of the legal requirements.
Sarah
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap