Am 29.11.2011 13:03, schrieb MZMcBride:
Alasdair wrote:
If the feeling is that such a "weak" filter would (regardless of how the pre-populated "filter lists" are created) still attract significant opposition on many projects then I personally don't see how there can be any filter created that is likely to gain consensus support and still be useful - except for one that gives users the option to hide "all" images by default and then click on the greyed out images to load them if they want to see them.
You're confusing the opinions of a few extremists on foundation-l with general consensus. It's unclear what percent of users actually want this feature, particularly as the feature's implementation hasn't been fully developed. A few people on this list have been trying very hard to make it seem as though they're capable of accepting some magical invisible pink unicorn-equivalent media filter, but the truth is that they're realistically and pragmatically opposed to any media filter, full stop. This is an extremist opinion (it's not as though extremist opinions are particularly uncommon around here).
Personally, I want to believe that if the Wikimedia Board is making such a strong push for this feature to be implemented, there are very good reasons for doing so. Whether or not that's the case, I wouldn't look (closely or broadly) at the comments on this mailing list and try to divine community-wide views.
MZMcBride
... And I still want to see the "good reason for doing so". So far i could not find one single reason that was worthy to implement such a filter considering all the drawbacks it causes. That doesn't mean that I'm opposed to any kind of filter. It just that we currently have three models:
* The very simple clean solutions (all/nothing/blured/...), which aren't found intuitive by the filter lovers. * The category/labeling based solutions, which require an immense effort (constantly) and provide data for censors. * The user based solutions, which are most likely unusable, since they require a lot of work by the user himself.
What I'm missing is option four. But as long option four isn't present I'm strongly in favor of options 0 and 1. 0 would be: do nothing.