Re David Gerrard's inquiry about publicity plans.
I don't know if anyone has prepared a publicity plan for the image filter,
afterall we don't yet know if this can either be made to work or can get
consent for implementation.
But if it does go ahead this is how I'd suggest handling the publicity:
Step 1
Trial it as an option for registered logged in users on some of the projects
which are most strongly in favour. I'd anticipate this would include Arabic,
Indonesian and Aceh but obviously not DE and probably not EN.
Tell the community what you are doing through Signpost, Wikizine, mailing
lists and site notices on Commons and the wikis in the trial.
Be very clear in the communication that this is a trial of a new feature,
and at this stage we want to make sure the buttons work - it should enable
you to say you never want to see a particular picture again, but avoiding
stuff that you haven't seen yet is more difficult.
If the press ask tell them the truth. We are trialling a new feature on
certain wikis, and no we haven't set an official launch date yet. But yes on
those wikis in the trial it has already got to the point where you can
decide you never want to see a particular image again.
On participating wikis shift the way you handle complaints about
inappropriate images to encourage such complainants to join the image filter
trial.
Step 2
Once any teething troubles are resolved and those who use it report that it
is better than not having a filter; Either allow any wiki that wants it to
join the trial, or if we as a movement decide to make a movement wide
decision on this, allow any registered user to join the trial.
Keep tabs on the effectiveness of it and I'd suggest keep Signpost updated.
So that if the press ask you can say yes the trial continues and we now
have:
??? editors trialling it
on ??? language versions of Wikipedia ?? language versions of wikinews ??
language versions of Wikiquote etc etc.
and according to our latest survey of users in the trial it is now xx%
effective - up from xx% 12 months ago.
If they want to know why IPs are not in the trial and only registered users
can use it; Explain that creating an account is free, but we can't implement
this for IP editors as we have no way of doing that without allowing one
person using an IP address to censor what others at that IP address see.
Step 3
Continue the trial per
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:TIND
Obviously if any journalist wants a demonstration then anyone handling press
relation needs to be able to demonstrate what you see with an account that
has opted to not to see cockroaches and what you see otherwise.
On a highly interrelated aside, if we implement this we need to decide what
information to collect about it. I would hope it would be uncontentious to
collect statistics on:
1. Number of users of this feature per project
2. Number of times per project per month that this blocked an image
3. Number of times per project per month that a user chose to block an
image and not see it again
4. Number of times per project per month that a user chose to override
the filter and look at an image anyway
TTFN
WereSpielChequers
On 19 September 2011 06:28, David Levy <lifeisunfair(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Additionally, if and when the WMF proudly
announces the filters'
introduction, the news media and general public won't accept "bad luck
to those using the feature" as an excuse for its failure.
Oh, yes. The trouble with a magical category is not just that it's
impossible to implement well - but that it's fraught as a public
relations move.
What is the WMF going to be explicitly - and *implicitly* - promising
readers? What is the publicity plan? Has this actually been mapped out
at all?
- d.