[Foundation-l] Discussion Questions for Potentially-Objectionable Content

[Excirial]

*You have my sympathy to - no matter what the outcome is, some if not many
people will label it censorship, directly or indirectly. "We dont censor"
has been an standard argument so far in any attempt to
regulate upload of images or discussion of features that some people
obviously want.*

Come come, be fair here, this is a two-side issue. What you say is
absolutely correct - but the other side of the coin are the editors who have
screamed ""Intentionally offensive!", "Biased!" and "Morality and
responsibility" as a response to any image kept, with equal attempts to hide
the fact that they simply dislike a single image (but cannot say that). Both
sides are to blame for the current situation we have, and the problem is
that it is nearly impossible to compromise on this issue since there is no
middle ground where each side gives in a bit (Its either everything or
nothing).

I'm strongly supporting the "No censorship" camp, and as of such i am
against any wiki-wide measures that would make content unavailable, with the
argument that people can choose whether or not to look at offensive content,
but people cannot choose to look at content that others deem offensive if it
isn't included. I would, however, strongly support a system that gives users
a choice to censor if they wish. It should be possible to categorize commons
in such a way that certain images can be blocked. For example, a user might
choose to block "images of Muhammad", while allowing surgery related images
(Others might swap there if they wish).

The advantage would be that each user can decide for himself if he doesn't
want to see something, rather then being forced to change this wiki-wide. It
may be difficult to implement such a system for IP users, but it should be
possible to accomplish. It should solve the issue where people don't want to
see something. Of course we still have the issue where people don't want
others to see certain content, but well - save for removing everything that
group can never be appeased anyway (And same for people who would argue that
even offering the option to filter is inherently bad).

~Excirial


On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 8:31 PM, teun spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:

> You have my sympathy to - no matter what the outcome is, some if not
> many people will label it censorship, directly or indirectly. "We dont
> censor" has been an standard argument so far in any attempt to
> regulate upload of images or discussion of features that some people
> obviously want.
>
> kind regards
> Teun Spaans
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>