Just a problem to be advised of. I was advocating much the same
position as the person who I replied to, and most people who objected
to it objected for this reason.
The second point isn't that major. Feel free to disregard it. :)
Chris
On 4/14/05, Tom Haws <hawstom(a)sprintmail.com> wrote:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:
Actually, we were discussing this very issue on
IRC earlier. The main
problem we found with this was that it would be a new target for
vandals - to recategorise various images into unrelated categories.
Please forgive me, but this sounds weak. Was this merely a problem to
be advised of or a deal-breaker?
Also, when going through the filter to select
categories that they do
not wish to see, people might find it objectionable to have content
like beheadings or sexual activity available for people to view. I'm
assuming of course that all 'categories' of images like this would be
on by default - also, this would only be practical if it were for
registered users, of which the vast majority of visitors aren't
Can you explain this again? This went right over my head.
Tom