A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
following an earlier post by her to [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=47...
Jimmy mentioned that the image filter is on the agenda of this week's board meeting again.
Andreas
On 2 February 2012 08:35, Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
And we are supposed to care about Facebook pages, why?
following an earlier post by her to [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=47...
I would not consider any part of that pornography. Isn't pornography supposed to get your fluids going rather than ... well not?
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:35:10 +0000, "Andreas K." jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
If I read it correct, she opened a Facebook group since, as she states, she could not find anybody on Wikipedia who would share her opinion. I do not see why we should worry about this. There are many people with their own agenda who could not find anybody on Wikipedia to share their agenda and go to promote it elsewhere.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ruwrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:35:10 +0000, "Andreas K." jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
If I read it correct, she opened a Facebook group since, as she states, she could not find anybody on Wikipedia who would share her opinion. I do not see why we should worry about this. There are many people with their own agenda who could not find anybody on Wikipedia to share their agenda and go to promote it elsewhere.
Well, it's relevant to the extent that she came across a masturbation video while looking for something completely different. (I think she said she was looking up "roll over".) Some people don't like that. It's a problem we've discussed before:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Controversial_content/Problems
The situation is still unchanged.
A.
Yes, and some people don't like the fact that we tell the truth about, say, the Taiwan situation (or at least we try our very best to), or the Tienanmen Square protests of 1989.
I think it's very stupid to equate "people don't like this" to "this is a problem".
So yes, the situation is still unchanged, but in my opinion it is a GOOD thing that it's still unchanged. The advertising situation on Wikipedia is "still unchanged", but unchanged situations don't have to be bad, and in this case I am a firm believer that the status quo is far better than what this woman (and many image filter proposals) is proposing.
2012/2/2 Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod@mccme.ru
wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:35:10 +0000, "Andreas K." jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
If I read it correct, she opened a Facebook group since, as she states, she could not find anybody on Wikipedia who would share her opinion. I do not see why we should worry about this. There are many people with their own agenda who could not find anybody on Wikipedia to share their agenda and go to promote it elsewhere.
Well, it's relevant to the extent that she came across a masturbation video while looking for something completely different. (I think she said she was looking up "roll over".) Some people don't like that. It's a problem we've discussed before:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Controversial_content/Problems
The situation is still unchanged.
A. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Perhaps a better example is the article on Santa Claus. If you look at the talkpage, you'll find a couple of people protesting that it isn't a "child-friendly" article, by which they really mean that we don't "play along" with the Santa charade like NORAD, Google and countless other prominent examples. Of course, not playing along is the CORRECT course of action, that is what our principles tell us to do - we shouldn't be knowingly providing false information to anybody, whatever our intention. (In my opinion, the Santa Claus article doesn't state clearly enough that Santa Claus is not a real person, due to the persistent efforts of two or three editors who want the article to be more "child friendly")
So yes, lots of people think what we're doing is wrong, but so what? You can never please anybody. That is why you need to choose a set of principles and stick with them. At least that way, when people don't like what you're doing, you can point to your principles and say "Hey, we've always been this way" and you get credibility from having had the same policy or position all along.
2012/2/6 M. Williamson node.ue@gmail.com
Yes, and some people don't like the fact that we tell the truth about, say, the Taiwan situation (or at least we try our very best to), or the Tienanmen Square protests of 1989.
I think it's very stupid to equate "people don't like this" to "this is a problem".
So yes, the situation is still unchanged, but in my opinion it is a GOOD thing that it's still unchanged. The advertising situation on Wikipedia is "still unchanged", but unchanged situations don't have to be bad, and in this case I am a firm believer that the status quo is far better than what this woman (and many image filter proposals) is proposing.
2012/2/2 Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod@mccme.ru
wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:35:10 +0000, "Andreas K." jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
If I read it correct, she opened a Facebook group since, as she states, she could not find anybody on Wikipedia who would share her opinion. I
do
not see why we should worry about this. There are many people with their own agenda who could not find anybody on Wikipedia to share their agenda and go to promote it elsewhere.
Well, it's relevant to the extent that she came across a masturbation video while looking for something completely different. (I think she said she was looking up "roll over".) Some people don't like that. It's a problem we've discussed before:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Controversial_content/Problems
The situation is still unchanged.
A. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:57 PM, M. Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
So yes, lots of people think what we're doing is wrong, but so what? You can never please anybody. That is why you need to choose a set of principles and stick with them. At least that way, when people don't like what you're doing, you can point to your principles and say "Hey, we've always been this way" and you get credibility from having had the same policy or position all along.
Only if you state what your policy or position actually is. What is the principle?
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:52 AM, M. Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, and some people don't like the fact that we tell the truth about, say, the Taiwan situation (or at least we try our very best to), or the Tienanmen Square protests of 1989.
So if members of the public looking for a sound file of tolling bells in Commons get http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Masturbation_Techniques_-_tolling_of_... as their first search hit in Commons, this somehow strikes a blow for freedom in the way our coverage of the Tiananmen Square protests does?
I think it's very stupid to equate "people don't like this" to "this is a problem".
So yes, the situation is still unchanged, but in my opinion it is a GOOD thing that it's still unchanged. The advertising situation on Wikipedia is "still unchanged", but unchanged situations don't have to be bad, and in this case I am a firm believer that the status quo is far better than what this woman (and many image filter proposals) is proposing.
2012/2/2 Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod@mccme.ru
wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:35:10 +0000, "Andreas K." jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
If I read it correct, she opened a Facebook group since, as she states, she could not find anybody on Wikipedia who would share her opinion. I
do
not see why we should worry about this. There are many people with
their
own agenda who could not find anybody on Wikipedia to share their
agenda
and go to promote it elsewhere.
Well, it's relevant to the extent that she came across a masturbation
video
while looking for something completely different. (I think she said she
was
looking up "roll over".) Some people don't like that. It's a problem
we've
discussed before:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Controversial_content/Problems
The situation is still unchanged.
A. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Finding nudity offensive is not a cultural universal. Members of some cultures may be offended by looking at certain animals full-on or in photographs; what if those animals popped up in search? Where does it end? Where do we draw the line?
What do we hide (or erase) and what do we keep unhidden? If you look at it from a monocultural perspective, the answer seems not so hard - perhaps we just hide everything showing sexual organs (but then does this include female breasts?) and violence. Some people may advocate hiding images that contain words like "fuck".
Of course, in other cultures other things are offensive, and there are literally thousands of different cultures on this planet with differing sensibilities and different ideas of what is right and what is wrong. The only strategy I support is one in which we allow the unrestricted display of everything that is legal and include disclaimers that we are not intended as a children's site and that adults should make careful use of their own judgement about letting their children read Wikipedia. It is not our responsibility.
2012/2/9 Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:52 AM, M. Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, and some people don't like the fact that we tell the truth about,
say,
the Taiwan situation (or at least we try our very best to), or the Tienanmen Square protests of 1989.
So if members of the public looking for a sound file of tolling bells in Commons get
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Masturbation_Techniques_-_tolling_of_... as their first search hit in Commons, this somehow strikes a blow for freedom in the way our coverage of the Tiananmen Square protests does?
I think it's very stupid to equate "people don't like this" to "this is a problem".
So yes, the situation is still unchanged, but in my opinion it is a GOOD thing that it's still unchanged. The advertising situation on Wikipedia
is
"still unchanged", but unchanged situations don't have to be bad, and in this case I am a firm believer that the status quo is far better than
what
this woman (and many image filter proposals) is proposing.
2012/2/2 Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod@mccme.ru
wrote:
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:35:10 +0000, "Andreas K." jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
A Wikimedian has just started a Facebook page "Stop pornography on Wikipedia"
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-pornography-on-Wikipedia/307245972661745
If I read it correct, she opened a Facebook group since, as she
states,
she could not find anybody on Wikipedia who would share her opinion.
I
do
not see why we should worry about this. There are many people with
their
own agenda who could not find anybody on Wikipedia to share their
agenda
and go to promote it elsewhere.
Well, it's relevant to the extent that she came across a masturbation
video
while looking for something completely different. (I think she said she
was
looking up "roll over".) Some people don't like that. It's a problem
we've
discussed before:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Controversial_content/Problems
The situation is still unchanged.
A. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org