[Foundation-l] 2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content

[Andreas Kolbe]

--- On Mon, 6/12/10, Mariano Cecowski <marianocecowski at yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
> Date: Monday, 6 December, 2010, 19:40
> I'm sorry we are putting more energy
> into what should be banned from commons instead of searching
> for mechanisms to protect those readers who would prefer to
> stay away from such content.
> 
> I mean, I understand the problem with paedophilia, and why
> it needs to be kept outside wikimedia projects, but I think
> it is equally important to provide with the means to present
> the content to users in their desired level of exposure;
> tagging, collapsing and hiding graphic content would do the
> trick, and it is technologically straightforward.
> 
> Cheers,
> MarianoC

Such a system was indeed among the recommendations put forward by the 2010
Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content, paralleling similar systems in 
place at major sites such as Google, youtube and flickr.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content:_Part_Two#User-Controlled_Viewing_Options

As for the Commons sexual content policy poll: there are currently 144 
editors in support, and 138 opposing adoption of the policy. The community 
is almost exactly split down the middle.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Sexual_content#Second_poll_for_promotion_to_policy_.28December_2010.29

Andreas


> --- El lun 6-dic-10, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com>
> escribió:
> 
> > De: phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com>
> > Asunto: Re: [Foundation-l] 2010 Wikimedia Study of
> Controversial Content
> > Para: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Fecha: lunes, 6 de diciembre de 2010, 17:09
> > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:02 AM,
> > private musings <thepmaccount at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I thought I'd note for those interested in the
> latest
> > from the
> > > community side of the 'controversial content'
> > discussions - the
> > > Commons 'Sexual Content' proposal has just gone
> into a
> > polling stage
> > > for the second time;
> > >
> > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Sexual_content#Second_poll_for_promotion_to_policy_.28December_2010.29
> > 
> > thanks for sending this out, and I am glad to see the
> > discussion/vote
> > ongoing and hope to see lots of participation in it.
> > 
> > > I hope Phoebe doesn't mind me copying her in on
> this
> > email, but I'd
> > > also like to follow up an enquiry about the
> working
> > group she
> > > mentioned last month - it's here;
> > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Phoebe#G.27day_Phoebe
> > 
> > And thanks for the prod... we've been slow to put
> together
> > the working
> > group that I mentioned in my last message, but it is
> still
> > happening.
> > In the meantime comments on the recommendations are
> > certainly welcome.
> > More soon, I hope!
> > 
> > best,
> > Phoebe