In a message dated 12/10/2010 12:45:46 AM Pacific Standard Time, jayen466@yahoo.com writes:
Apart from summarising COM:PORN*, all that the draft sexual content policy was meant to do, actually, was to address two cases:
- Material that is illegal to host for the Foundation under Florida law
- Sexual images of people uploaded without their knowledge and consent
I would think from the voting, that it's now apparent that this was not conveyed in the draft policy, as simply as you express it here.
How long is the draft policy, and how short is your summary here.
Apparently something else got added or substracted in the meanwhile.
W
--- On Fri, 10/12/10, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
From: WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com
Apart from summarising COM:PORN*, all that the draft
sexual content
policy was meant to do, actually, was to address two cases:
- Material that is illegal to host for the Foundation
under Florida law
- Sexual images of people uploaded without their
knowledge and consent
I would think from the voting, that it's now apparent that this was not conveyed in the draft policy, as simply as you express it here.
How long is the draft policy, and how short is your summary here.
Apparently something else got added or substracted in the meanwhile.
Suggest you read the draft policy, rather than the votes.
A.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org