Tony Sidaway wrote:
Chad Perrin said:
Is there anyone that finds that sort of "fix" to the issue inappropriate, inapplicable, incomplete, or otherwise objectionable? Is there any reason to force either visible presence or complete absence of such content on people?
We already have this capability built into our browsers. For those who can't or are simply unwilling to learn how to use their browsers, however, it would be easy enough to adapt MediaWiki to suppress or display all image content by default per user, reversible on a case-by-case basis. I downloaded a copy of MediaWiki the other day and if I find the time I'll write a patch for that.
The statement that "we" already have this capability built into "our" browsers assumes some things about visitors to the site that are not necessarily true. For instance, w3mmee (if I recall correctly) is capable of rendering images and does not include any means of blocking images based on the likelihood of being offensive, even indirectly. Besides, anything less than a one-click method of blocking all images is unlikely to make blocking all images palatable to anyone using a graphical browser. As such, I think that addressing the matter from the server side is rather important, in the long run.
-- Chad