Sorry to those who are tired of the image/consent discussions, but just wanted to bring this to this list's attention as well.
I'm tagging this thread with "[Commons]" and suggest others do the same in future to make it easier for people who do not want to discuss Commons or who feel inundated with the subject matter to filter these messages. Also, if you're using Google Mail, you can "mute" a thread (under the "More" options after you open the thread) and you won't see any future responses in your inbox -- other email clients have similar features.
Quick notes about an interesting development:
* User:Rillke on Commons has started prototyping a gadget that could be used to simplify reporting of various issues with images with a simple "Flag this image" workflow. This discussion is on the Commons Village Pump.
I've brought that discussion to the attention of WMF legal. Note: It's not like the current workflow is completely broken -- the Commons:Contact_us flow is actually pretty good -- but a nicer UI and more prominent placement could help. The current workflow also does not provide an option for consent issues.
* I've summarized the current state of his prototype here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reporting_abuse
On the talk page I've also recommended that consent to be displayed in an image be considered in the reporting options.
I'm sure Rillke would appreciate any active development help with the feature, as well as continued feedback and encouragement (WikiLove?) which is crucial for volunteer motivation.
Cheers, Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Interesting. Thanks for the heads-up! SJ
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
Sorry to those who are tired of the image/consent discussions, but just wanted to bring this to this list's attention as well.
I'm tagging this thread with "[Commons]" and suggest others do the same in future to make it easier for people who do not want to discuss Commons or who feel inundated with the subject matter to filter these messages. Also, if you're using Google Mail, you can "mute" a thread (under the "More" options after you open the thread) and you won't see any future responses in your inbox -- other email clients have similar features.
Quick notes about an interesting development:
- User:Rillke on Commons has started prototyping a gadget that could
be used to simplify reporting of various issues with images with a simple "Flag this image" workflow. This discussion is on the Commons Village Pump.
I've brought that discussion to the attention of WMF legal. Note: It's not like the current workflow is completely broken -- the Commons:Contact_us flow is actually pretty good -- but a nicer UI and more prominent placement could help. The current workflow also does not provide an option for consent issues.
- I've summarized the current state of his prototype here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reporting_abuse
On the talk page I've also recommended that consent to be displayed in an image be considered in the reporting options.
I'm sure Rillke would appreciate any active development help with the feature, as well as continued feedback and encouragement (WikiLove?) which is crucial for volunteer motivation.
Cheers, Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
+1 on SJ's comment, and I think Pete made some excellent points on the talk page. For instance: How would this affect the legal team's paid staff time if we place a big red button under each image? I have cc:ed Geoff since he may not be aware of the question.
But I would also like to say that this is very well worth checking out. This is the template that is suggested right now (feel free to edit):
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:ReportAbuse
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
Personlig blogg Presentation @aliasHannibal
Mobil: 070 - 207 80 05
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål." Jimmy Wales
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 19:58:20 -0400 From: meta.sj@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons] "Flag this image" prototype
Interesting. Thanks for the heads-up! SJ
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
Sorry to those who are tired of the image/consent discussions, but just wanted to bring this to this list's attention as well.
I'm tagging this thread with "[Commons]" and suggest others do the same in future to make it easier for people who do not want to discuss Commons or who feel inundated with the subject matter to filter these messages. Also, if you're using Google Mail, you can "mute" a thread (under the "More" options after you open the thread) and you won't see any future responses in your inbox -- other email clients have similar features.
Quick notes about an interesting development:
- User:Rillke on Commons has started prototyping a gadget that could
be used to simplify reporting of various issues with images with a simple "Flag this image" workflow. This discussion is on the Commons Village Pump.
I've brought that discussion to the attention of WMF legal. Note: It's not like the current workflow is completely broken -- the Commons:Contact_us flow is actually pretty good -- but a nicer UI and more prominent placement could help. The current workflow also does not provide an option for consent issues.
- I've summarized the current state of his prototype here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reporting_abuse
On the talk page I've also recommended that consent to be displayed in an image be considered in the reporting options.
I'm sure Rillke would appreciate any active development help with the feature, as well as continued feedback and encouragement (WikiLove?) which is crucial for volunteer motivation.
Cheers, Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
I have emailed both Philippe, Legal and have asked for comment from Jimmy. Problem is, this is a "Commons problems" and we get no responses from any of them...except Eric has commented after bringing him to Commons. But this is NOT a Commons problem.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sue_Gardner#Child_protection
Legal will not get involved in the copyright issues, etc that IS a Commons problem, but dealing with the limited CP ( < 100 images per year) frankly is a legal issue that should not be thrust onto volunteers in our Community. As to having paedophiles and the like in the Commons community, I defer to the en.wp stance that they should not be part of our communities, but again that is a legal matter that our communities should not be forced to deal with.
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson < l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com> wrote:
+1 on SJ's comment, and I think Pete made some excellent points on the talk pagehttps://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Reporting_abuse. For instance: How would this affect the legal team's paid staff time if we place a big red button under each image? I have cc:ed Geoff since he may not be aware of the question.
But I would also like to say that this is very well worth checking out. This is the template that is suggested right now (feel free to edit):
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:ReportAbuse
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
Personlig blogg http://mrchapel.wordpress.com Presentation http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anv%c3%83%c2%a4ndare:Hannibal @aliasHannibal https://twitter.com/AliasHannibal
Mobil: 070 - 207 80 05
*"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskaphttp://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Huvudsida. Det är vårt mål.*" Jimmy Wales
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 19:58:20 -0400 From: meta.sj@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons] "Flag this image" prototype
Interesting. Thanks for the heads-up! SJ
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Sorry to those who are tired of the image/consent discussions, but just wanted to bring this to this list's attention as well.
I'm tagging this thread with "[Commons]" and suggest others do the same in future to make it easier for people who do not want to discuss Commons or who feel inundated with the subject matter to filter these messages. Also, if you're using Google Mail, you can "mute" a thread (under the "More" options after you open the thread) and you won't see any future responses in your inbox -- other email clients have similar features.
Quick notes about an interesting development:
- User:Rillke on Commons has started prototyping a gadget that could
be used to simplify reporting of various issues with images with a simple "Flag this image" workflow. This discussion is on the Commons Village Pump.
I've brought that discussion to the attention of WMF legal. Note: It's not like the current workflow is completely broken -- the Commons:Contact_us flow is actually pretty good -- but a nicer UI and more prominent placement could help. The current workflow also does not provide an option for consent issues.
- I've summarized the current state of his prototype here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reporting_abuse
On the talk page I've also recommended that consent to be displayed in an image be considered in the reporting options.
I'm sure Rillke would appreciate any active development help with the feature, as well as continued feedback and encouragement (WikiLove?) which is crucial for volunteer motivation.
Cheers, Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hi Lennart,
Thank you for calling this out. You raise an extremely valid point. I have asked Luis to follow this project, so I am including him here so he can follow. I'm also including Michelle, who historically has been dealing with these kinds of reports for legal.
Appreciate your raising the issue,
Geoff
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson < l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com> wrote:
+1 on SJ's comment, and I think Pete made some excellent points on the talk pagehttps://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Reporting_abuse. For instance: How would this affect the legal team's paid staff time if we place a big red button under each image? I have cc:ed Geoff since he may not be aware of the question.
But I would also like to say that this is very well worth checking out. This is the template that is suggested right now (feel free to edit):
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:ReportAbuse
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
Personlig blogg http://mrchapel.wordpress.com Presentation http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anv%c3%83%c2%a4ndare:Hannibal @aliasHannibal https://twitter.com/AliasHannibal
Mobil: 070 - 207 80 05
*"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskaphttp://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Huvudsida. Det är vårt mål.*" Jimmy Wales
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 19:58:20 -0400 From: meta.sj@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons] "Flag this image" prototype
Interesting. Thanks for the heads-up! SJ
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Sorry to those who are tired of the image/consent discussions, but just wanted to bring this to this list's attention as well.
I'm tagging this thread with "[Commons]" and suggest others do the same in future to make it easier for people who do not want to discuss Commons or who feel inundated with the subject matter to filter these messages. Also, if you're using Google Mail, you can "mute" a thread (under the "More" options after you open the thread) and you won't see any future responses in your inbox -- other email clients have similar features.
Quick notes about an interesting development:
- User:Rillke on Commons has started prototyping a gadget that could
be used to simplify reporting of various issues with images with a simple "Flag this image" workflow. This discussion is on the Commons Village Pump.
I've brought that discussion to the attention of WMF legal. Note: It's not like the current workflow is completely broken -- the Commons:Contact_us flow is actually pretty good -- but a nicer UI and more prominent placement could help. The current workflow also does not provide an option for consent issues.
- I've summarized the current state of his prototype here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reporting_abuse
On the talk page I've also recommended that consent to be displayed in an image be considered in the reporting options.
I'm sure Rillke would appreciate any active development help with the feature, as well as continued feedback and encouragement (WikiLove?) which is crucial for volunteer motivation.
Cheers, Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Was there any more input from legal about this? The page currently has a note that legal is looking at it, but it seems Rilke is waiting on that feedback.
Regards, Sam
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Geoff Brigham gbrigham@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Lennart,
Thank you for calling this out. You raise an extremely valid point. I have asked Luis to follow this project, so I am including him here so he can follow. I'm also including Michelle, who historically has been dealing with these kinds of reports for legal.
Appreciate your raising the issue,
Geoff
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com wrote:
+1 on SJ's comment, and I think Pete made some excellent points on the talk page. For instance: How would this affect the legal team's paid staff time if we place a big red button under each image? I have cc:ed Geoff since he may not be aware of the question.
But I would also like to say that this is very well worth checking out. This is the template that is suggested right now (feel free to edit):
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:ReportAbuse
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
Personlig blogg Presentation @aliasHannibal
Mobil: 070 - 207 80 05
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri tillgång till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål." Jimmy Wales
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 19:58:20 -0400 From: meta.sj@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons] "Flag this image" prototype
Interesting. Thanks for the heads-up! SJ
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
Sorry to those who are tired of the image/consent discussions, but just wanted to bring this to this list's attention as well.
I'm tagging this thread with "[Commons]" and suggest others do the same in future to make it easier for people who do not want to discuss Commons or who feel inundated with the subject matter to filter these messages. Also, if you're using Google Mail, you can "mute" a thread (under the "More" options after you open the thread) and you won't see any future responses in your inbox -- other email clients have similar features.
Quick notes about an interesting development:
- User:Rillke on Commons has started prototyping a gadget that could
be used to simplify reporting of various issues with images with a simple "Flag this image" workflow. This discussion is on the Commons Village Pump.
I've brought that discussion to the attention of WMF legal. Note: It's not like the current workflow is completely broken -- the Commons:Contact_us flow is actually pretty good -- but a nicer UI and more prominent placement could help. The current workflow also does not provide an option for consent issues.
- I've summarized the current state of his prototype here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reporting_abuse
On the talk page I've also recommended that consent to be displayed in an image be considered in the reporting options.
I'm sure Rillke would appreciate any active development help with the feature, as well as continued feedback and encouragement (WikiLove?) which is crucial for volunteer motivation.
Cheers, Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Geoff Brigham General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6750 gbrigham@wikimedia.org
California Registered In-House Counsel
This message might have confidential or legally privileged information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. For legal reasons, I may only serve as an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation. This means I may not give legal advice to or serve as a lawyer for community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
As it's currently drafted, I believe this approach is a complete non-starter (for the reasons that Rillke and I described on the talk page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Reporting_abuse ).
I do think there is a possible version of this that would work, and think it's a good avenue to pursue. But it seems to me that putting the resources of technical implementation or legal evaluation in is very premature. What we need is a revised proposal that will work without massively scaling up the amount of staff time devoted to evaluating requests (practical concern) or substantially shifting the editorial function of evaluating requests from volunteer to staff (philosophical concern).
In the meantime, I've nominated a number of files for deletion on grounds of lack of explicit consent, most of which have been successful. I believe a solid collection of decisions based on real-life examples will do a lot to inform any technical or procedural innovations.
I may blog about this soon, since I know this kind of approach ends up being rather opaque to many of the people interested in the issue. I'll inform the list when I get that posted.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Was there any more input from legal about this? The page currently has a note that legal is looking at it, but it seems Rilke is waiting on that feedback.
Regards, Sam
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Geoff Brigham gbrigham@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Lennart,
Thank you for calling this out. You raise an extremely valid point. I have asked Luis to follow this project, so I am including him here so he
can
follow. I'm also including Michelle, who historically has been dealing with these kinds of reports for legal.
Appreciate your raising the issue,
Geoff
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com wrote:
+1 on SJ's comment, and I think Pete made some excellent points on the talk page. For instance: How would this affect the legal team's paid
staff
time if we place a big red button under each image? I have cc:ed Geoff
since
he may not be aware of the question.
But I would also like to say that this is very well worth checking out. This is the template that is suggested right now (feel free to edit):
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:ReportAbuse
Best wishes,
Lennart Guldbrandsson
Personlig blogg Presentation @aliasHannibal
Mobil: 070 - 207 80 05
"Tänk dig en värld där varje människa på den här planeten får fri
tillgång
till världens samlade kunskap. Det är vårt mål." Jimmy Wales
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 19:58:20 -0400 From: meta.sj@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons] "Flag this image" prototype
Interesting. Thanks for the heads-up! SJ
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
Sorry to those who are tired of the image/consent discussions, but just wanted to bring this to this list's attention as well.
I'm tagging this thread with "[Commons]" and suggest others do the same in future to make it easier for people who do not want to
discuss
Commons or who feel inundated with the subject matter to filter
these
messages. Also, if you're using Google Mail, you can "mute" a thread (under the "More" options after you open the thread) and you won't
see
any future responses in your inbox -- other email clients have
similar
features.
Quick notes about an interesting development:
- User:Rillke on Commons has started prototyping a gadget that could
be used to simplify reporting of various issues with images with a simple "Flag this image" workflow. This discussion is on the Commons Village Pump.
I've brought that discussion to the attention of WMF legal. Note:
It's
not like the current workflow is completely broken -- the Commons:Contact_us flow is actually pretty good -- but a nicer UI
and
more prominent placement could help. The current workflow also does not provide an option for consent issues.
- I've summarized the current state of his prototype here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reporting_abuse
On the talk page I've also recommended that consent to be displayed
in
an image be considered in the reporting options.
I'm sure Rillke would appreciate any active development help with
the
feature, as well as continued feedback and encouragement (WikiLove?) which is crucial for volunteer motivation.
Cheers, Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Geoff Brigham General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6750 gbrigham@wikimedia.org
California Registered In-House Counsel
This message might have confidential or legally privileged information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please delete it and
let
us know about the mistake. For legal reasons, I may only serve as an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation. This means I may not give legal advice to or serve as a lawyer for community members, volunteers, or
staff
members in their personal capacity.
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hello Pete,
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
As it's currently drafted, I believe this approach is a complete non-starter (for the reasons that Rillke and I described on the talk page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Reporting_abuse ).
From that page it seems you are worried about the approach but Rillke is not.
As he wrote, "you are welcome to edit the template". He is not fixed on having a "file a takedown request" button, and would likely be ok without it. The interface innovation is having a "report this image" overlay, not the details of the second step. (The page for filing community reports already includes a note about how to file a formal takedown if necessary.)
Rillke also noted on the project page itself that he is waiting on a response from legal. (Though he also noted he is not in a rush :) So it would be polite to let him know the current status, even if it is "we're no longer thinking about this" or "please rewrite in the following way".
But it seems to me that putting the resources of technical implementation or legal evaluation in is very premature. What we need is a revised proposal that will work without massively scaling up the amount of staff time devoted to evaluating requests
A community member is offering to work on the technical implementation, already partly done. Legal evaluation does not seem premature to me. I suggested a simple variation on the talk page that would have minimal staff impact.
Regards, SJ