2011/9/18 Oliver Koslowski o.nee@t-online.de:
Am 18.09.2011 13:56, schrieb Andre Engels:
On itself the one who tags the image, but we happen to have a system for that in Wikimedia. It is called discussion and trying to reach consent. Who decides whether a page is in a category? Who decides whether a page has an image? Who decides whether something is decribed on a page? All the same.
Our typical system of categories is designed to make it easier to /find/ (related) articles or media. Good luck trying that with a system that is designed to /hide/ things. And this doesn't seem like an awful waste of precious time to you? For a feature that is not all that likely to be popular on a global scale?
+1 At the beginning, I was quite neutral about a filter: I had no idea how it would work, and I wouldn't use it, but what if somebody else wants it?
But after reading nearly all comments on this list, I think that the arguments for a filter do not hold water. The pratical implemention would be a nightmare, and the purpose not really within Wikimedia mission. The thread above on how to create categories for a filter is full of irrational assumptions, impracticable propositions, and impossible solutions. It seems it is time to drop the whole idea...
Regards, Oliver
Regards,
Yann
I agree.
I do support "censorship". There is absolutely no excuse for hosting an image of Mohammad as a dog, but this is a Rube Goldburg boondoggle.
Fred