The reaction that EVula got /is/ disappointing. But so is EVula's reaction
to the reaction. Is it any surprise that someone who proclaims Commons to
be "a fucking joke" and a "cesspool" isn't going to get
congratulated for an
out-of-process deletion?
This is the biggest problem I have. When even Jimbo can't talk about
Commons without disparagement, it undermines everything that we're trying to
do over there. The notion that consent for the photograph is different from
consent to be disseminated on Commons is a new one to many of us (no matter
how much sense it makes), and it takes time for that notion to spread
through the Commons community.
Moreover, the vast majority of Commons contributors - and Commons content,
for that matter - are well outside these controversial areas. It's
extremely discouraging to see all of Commons painted with this broad brush
when we're really dealing with a small number of people who are largely
acting in good faith to defend free content (and, true, an even smaller
number who just like to see pictures of naked people).
Powers &8^]
-----Original Message-----
From: Michelle Gallaway [mailto:mgallaway@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday 18 May 2013 00:40
To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Category:Nude portrayals of computer technology
They look like they're some sort of odd art project on the commoditisation
of female sexuality in the technology industry (for instance, "booth babes"
and magazine ads with half naked women promoting new gadgets), rather than
an outright attempt to titillate. Are random artistic images in Commons
scope?
Of course, a lot of the creepier denizens of Commons probably can't
appreciate that distinction. The reaction that EVula got is really
disappointing.