Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Nicholas Knight wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Christiaan,
It is one thing to split articles into two, it is another to castrate
the talk pages and move all things that are not to your liking
elsewhere. Your right to ask for a method to have mechanisms into the
mediawiki software is equal to my right to have an angst of this
first step of introducing censorship into our projects.
THERE. IS. NO. CENSORSHIP.
No need to shout and yes we disagree on that one. The way you lot have
been trampling on my views on this has the hallmarks of censorship. Yes,
in my opinion this proposal is about censorship.
*Your
proposal will make it mandatory to allow for
tags/categorisations so that censorship will work.
Our proposal will make it POSSIBLE for categories to be used by
END-USERS to CHOOSE what they wish to see.
We disagree on this one. For it is not only end users that will choose.
Read your own proposal point 4.
I don't even know what that's doing there or who added it. I'm removing
it now. This proposal has never had anything to do with proxies or IP
ranges. Even if that was part of the goal, it would be a technical
nightmare and would not get the parties implementing such filters
anything close to what they want.
*Your original article title was End-user content
suppression and
decided that this was not "good" renamed it to image suppression
Because the focus was and has always been on images. Whether like
measures need to be taken for text is a different discussion.
Technically it is not different so why should it be a different
discussion ?
It is different both philisophically and technically. The code used to
defer images will not be usable for entire articles.
*There has already been one anonymous coward asking
for using your
censoring mechanism for content.
What?
Right, it is a straw mans argument that one thing leads to the next.
You're still not making sense.
Read the history if you can still find what was said.
It is there.
You brought it up, you point me to it.
<snip strange rantings about meta>
Constructive
criticism is always welcome. Blanket false statements are
not.
Your idea of what is true and false is coloured by where you stand,
where you are from. Your truth is just that. Making me out for a liar
and being not constructive is well, not friendly to say the least.
I don't feel very friendly toward someone that can't articulate
themselves but insists they're right.