[Commons-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons

Sarah Stierch sarah at sarahstierch.com
Tue May 17 15:17:56 UTC 2011

On 5/17/2011 7:05 AM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
> If we buy this contributions with a loss of liberty. Then yes. Nothing 
> is as worthy as liberty.

We rely on donations - whether small cultural donations or monetary 
donations or major media contributions.  There is always going to be 
some type of "freedom lost" when dealing with all donors of anytime. And 
I'm sure /anyone/ who has worked in the non-profit sector in /the 
majority/ of countries can attest to that.

I assume that if people wish to see those of us who believe in quality 
educational images (hence the Commons mission) 'go away' which has been 
declared multiple times, then perhaps those seeking to showcase images 
with little educational merit and deep creator connection (dare I say 
conflict of interest, it is Tobia's image anyway, so of course he wants 
it up there, who wouldn't in his situation) should perhaps showcase 
their own artwork or personal imagery on their own website.

Or flickr, which I have been using to showcase images I wish to not 
release into CC or images of my self, friends and stupid things, on.

I agree with Gnangarra - one tasteless work, which has been questioned 
by Wikipedians/medians around the world, is not worth the risk of losing 
major donors - whether monetary or culturally.


> Am 17.05.2011 10:22, schrieb Gnangarra:
>> Is this picture worth more than 137,000 news images,
>> Is this picture worth the loss of xontributions from GLAM organisations
>> Is this picture worth the cost of denying other contributors the 
>> opportunity to participate.
>> On 17 May 2011 16:16, Tobias Oelgarte <tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com 
>> <mailto:tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com>> wrote:
>>     Am 17.05.2011 02:34, schrieb Neil Kandalgaonkar:
>>     > On 5/16/11 8:21 PM, Cary Bass wrote:
>>     >> We need an active group of contributors who represent at the
>>     very least
>>     >> some cross-section of not only Commons contributors but of
>>     interested
>>     >> re-users of Commons content to actively monitor and maintain
>>     the POTD.
>>     >> This is not the first time that something inappropriate for
>>     Main Page
>>     >> content has appeared and I doubt it will be the last.
>>     > That is definitely a practical solution. POTD are scheduled long in
>>     > advance, so that could solve the problems here pretty quickly.
>>     The image
>>     > in question is, IMO, unambiguously inappropriate for Commons,
>>     and this
>>     > shouldn't have been a difficult debate.
>>     >
>>     > On the other hand it feels a bit wrong to me. In that case
>>     we're asking
>>     > groups that are relatively underrepresented in Wiki culture to
>>     take on
>>     > the role of policing. I feel like they ought to have some
>>     rights to a
>>     > welcoming environment as a baseline. That said, in a wiki
>>     context, it
>>     > seems to be impossible to achieve such baseline freedoms, as
>>     long as the
>>     > offenders have large amounts of free time.
>>     >
>>     > So some people are going to have to make the sacrifices to
>>     change the
>>     > culture.
>>     >
>>     > Another worry: if there's a "quality control board", officially or
>>     > unofficially, they can start to take that role too seriously or
>>     become
>>     > captured by various radical factions. But I guess we have to
>>     take that
>>     > chance.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     Another board for decisions? Just leave the communities alone.
>>     They can
>>     handle it very well on their own. Any board i know failed in so many
>>     points. An good example from the German Wikipedia is the
>>     "Schiedsgericht". This is the last call if some users can't be
>>     stopped
>>     from offending each other. But this board isn't trusted at all and
>>     constantly breaks down. Just because it is seen as needless.
>>     What im seeing here is the construction of an government which isn't
>>     even democratic, getting very close to a dictatorship. Or as we
>>     said in
>>     the GDR: One party, elected by itself.
>>     Tobias
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Commons-l mailing list
>>     Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>>     https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>> -- 
>> GN.
>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>> Gn. Blogg: http://gnangarra.wordpress.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> Commons-l mailing list
>> Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l


Wikipedia Regional Ambassador, The Nation's Capital 
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art 

Sarah Stierch Consulting
Historical, cultural & artistic research, advising & event planning.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20110517/bd8b0cdf/attachment-0001.htm 

More information about the Commons-l mailing list