[Foundation-l] Jimbo's Sexual Image Deletions

[Jan-Bart de Vreede]

Hi,

I would like to point you to:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaannounce-l/2010-May/000008.html

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Vice Chair Wikimedia Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation

On 7 mei 2010, at 21:23, Robert Rohde wrote:

> As some of you may know, Jimbo has recently used his standing in the
> community to dictate that Commons should not host porn. [1][2][3]  He
> has interpreted this to include a wide swath of images both
> photographic and illustrative, and both contemporary and historical.
> 
> In principle, I agree that having a stricter policy on sexual images
> is a good thing, but fundamentally we need to have a clear policy on
> what should be allowed and what shouldn't.  Attempts to write one [4]
> have become a moving target that leaves us without a functional policy
> or community consensus.  Initially, this was based on the
> characteristics of the USC 2257 record keeping laws, but Jimbo has
> gone beyond this by deleting non-photographic and historical works
> that would not be covered by 2257.
> 
> In essence, right now Jimbo is deleting things based on his singular
> judgment about what should be allowed. [5]
> 
> These deletions have continued with little apparent concern for
> whether or not an image is currently in use by any of the projects.
> 
> This is a large change and lack of a clear policy creates a very
> confusing and frustrating environment for editors.  (Multiple Commons
> admins have already stated their intention to resign and/or retire
> over this.)
> 
> Again, I agree that tighter controls on sexual images are generally a
> good thing, but I believe the abruptness, lack of clear policy, and
> lack of a consensus based approach is creating an unnecessarily
> disruptive environment.  Much of the content has been hosted by
> Wikimedia for years, so do we really have to delete it all, right now?
> Can we not take a week or two to articulate to boundaries of what
> should be deleted and what should be kept?
> 
> In general, I would ask that things slow down until some sort of a
> clear policy can be created (either by the community or the WMF /
> Board).  This is especially true when it comes to deleting images that
> are in use on the various Wikipedias.  (Such deletions have already
> been widespread).
> 
> I would also like to ask whether either the WMF or the Board plans to
> intervene?  Because of Jimbo's historical standing and technical
> access, the Commons community is largely impotent to stop him.
> Multiple requests by the community that things slow down or a clear
> policy be crafted prior to mass deletions have thus far been
> ineffective.
> 
> At the very least it would be helpful if the WMF and/or Board would
> express a position on the appropriate use of sexual content?
> 
> -Robert Rohde
> 
> [1] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales
> [2] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Cleanup_policy
> (and following sections)
> [3] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Sexual_content
> [4] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sexual_content
> [5] http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=Jimbo+Wales
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l