Am 23.09.2011 14:03, schrieb me(a)marcusbuck.org:
I think the same is happening here. The majority of
people probably
think that an optional opt-in filter is a thing that does no harm to
non-users and has advantages for those who choose to use it. (Ask your
gramma whether "You can hide pictures if you don't want to see them"
sounds like a threatening thing to her.) But the scepticists voice
their opinions loudly and point out every single imaginable problem.
It's hard
to know what the silent majority of people is thinking. But
it's become fairly obvious what 86% of de-WP's active users are
thinking. And you cannot simply brush their concerns aside. Andf even
those 14% who did not object didn't appear to really support it at least
as far as I've read their comments. Usually it's a simple 'Meh, as long
as it's purely opt-in'. But let's not repeat the arguments here because
they have already been exchanged. It really boils down to the notion
that people who reject the filter idea as it's been decided by the WMF
/will/ mean a lot of work and even more controversy to realize a feature
that doesn't really promise much benefit. So yeah, I am going to
receive fewer tickets from people who demand we remove pictures of
Mohammed, but what's the actual benefit there? Are we really likely to
get more readers, more donations and - much more importantly - more authors?
Regards,
Oliver