On 7/29/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That said, I think "saying no" would cause a
real reduction in bad
images... but if we aren't careful how we say no we will encourage
people to twiddle the knobs until they've left misleading metadata.
I'd rather we have more violations which are tagged somewhat correctly
than fewer violations but with them tagged as free content.
Maybe if there weren't any knobs at all it'd be better.
1) Any logged in user can upload an image, if they include text which
explains why they think the image fits within the policy. A tutorial
can help guide them as to what the policy is, but ultimately anything
can be uploaded with explanatory text.
2) Only after you've convinced us that you know what you're talking
about and aren't lying about everything, then you get a pulldown menu
of choices.
This strategy would probably work best if there were a way to lock an
image so that it can't appear in any article. Who would be able to
add or remove the lock, and whether or not the lock would be on or off
by default (personally I'd say probably off) could be tweaked to find
the best solution. Blatant violations would of course be deleted -
the lock would be for situations where there's just not enough
explanation, or the explanation hasn't been checked.
Anthony