[Foundation-l] video presentation on explicit images on WMF projects

[private musings]

I'm more raising the issue that what could be child pornography remains
available to wmf volunteers with 'oversight' op.s on commons - I don't think
the foundation should facilitate that, and I hope a decent enough system can
be quickly implemented (it's also quite possible that there is in fact a
system in place, but it's unknown to me!) for the depressingly inevitable
'next time'
I'd probably go a step further and say that sub-optimal / insufficient
systems for dealing with predictable problems indicate a general lack of
responsible governance in this area (ie. I'm sadly not surprised that this
issue occurs in this way) - but mileage inevitably varies...
I'm hopeful of hearing of a strong resolution to this one imminently.

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk at eunet.rs>wrote:

> Дана Sunday 17 January 2010 22:13:28 private musings написа:
> > Here's another concerning aspect of management of explicit media on WMF;
> > It's been asserted that images of a 16 year old girl masturbating have
> been
> > uploaded to commons;
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_notic
> >eboard/Incidents&oldid=338426080#User:Misty_Willows_problematic_images The
> > image in question has been deleted from commons;
> >
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Closeup_of_female_mastu
> >rbation_pastel.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 ..and I think it's also been
> > oversighted. Lar, a commons oversighter, muses over on wikipedia review
> > whether or not continuing to fight fires caused by systemic problems is
> the
> > right thing to do;
> >
> http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=28221&view=findpost&p=216
> >072 The general issue is of course important, but I hope in the short
> term,
> > that the image in question can be properly deleted - restricting it to
> > oversighters only remains, in my view, likely to be illegal - it really
> > would be best for that image to be removed by a dev.
> > Maybe this is underway as I type? Hope so!
>
> This is an interesting case, but I don't see what it has to do with
> policies
> on explicit images on WMF projects. Even if the policies would be changed
> to
> be the strictest possible (for example, no explicit images allowed at all),
> the exact same thing could happen.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>