This isn't just about the image filter. Try discussing whether or not
porn should be allowed on the Main page of Commons. Let me know if you
get any responses that don't cite [[WP:NOTCENSORED]]. Somehow the
majority of the community there believes that there are only two
possible positions on this issue:
* Save the children
* Protect Wikipedia from censorship
If you can't be shoved into one of those boxes, you're just ignored. The
tone issue is very pertinent in my view. I'm tired of everyone assuming
that every post on this issue has to be either pro- or
anti-censorship—as demonstrated by the responses to Sue's blog post.
Some people actually have nuanced views, and it's important that these
voices aren't excluded from the conversation.
I don't really care much about the image-filter issue, but I'm a big
advocate of presenting controversial content in appropriate contexts.
Thus I am routinely accused of supporting censorship (despite the fact
that I founded WikiProject Wikipedians Against Censorship!).
Ryan Kaldari
On 9/29/11 4:34 PM, David Gerard wrote:
On 30 September 2011 00:28, Ryan
Kaldari<rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Well, when every thoughtful comment you have on a
topic is met with
nothing more than chants of "WP:NOTCENSORED!", the tone argument seems
quite valid.
Really, every single response to every single comment?
It suggests communication has already broken down.
What happens when opponents of the image filter stop bothering to say
anything to the Foundation, and treat them as an obstacle to be worked
around?
- d.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l