[Foundation-l] Jimbo's Sexual Image Deletions

[The Cunctator]

Hooray for letting American prurience and Larry Sanger's oddities shape the
project. To be expected, though.

On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Sydney Poore <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:

> The primary reason that several weeks back I became involved in the
> Common's
> discussions about sexually explicit content is my work with the strategic
> planning process for WMF. During the strategic plannings discussions, I
> became acutely aware of the problems with the lack of diversity among WMF
> readers and editors. As I considered the topic, I came to the conclusion
> that WMF hosting an unlimited amount of sexually explicit content could be
> "one" of the barriers for WMF being more diverse.
>
> The manner that we display nudity and sexually explicit content makes it
> difficult to avoid. Currently, our policies and practices do not allow for
> special care when displaying the content (for deletion discussion,
> categorizing, or links to our sister projects, ...). So, people may
> unexpectedly see it. In my opinion, the current approach to managing the
> content is insensitive to many people in the world of many nationalities
> and
> religions, and people that access WFM projects through settings where
> sexually explicit content is inappropriate or not allowed. So, I see a
> policy that better manages the content as potentially making WMF projects
> open to more users.
>
> I support the clean up effort by Jimmy and the administrators on Commons
> for
> the images that have no significant educational value. I also understand
> that to some editors who are new to thinking about the issue that this may
> seem abrupt. So, I encourage good communication between all the
> stakeholders
> so that we can understand each others concerns and address them.
>
> I'm also hopeful that technical solutions will be implemented and will
> resolve the concerns about hosting images that have an educational
> value.but
> are not appropriate for all readers in all settings.
>
> Sydney Poore
> (FloNight)
>
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Jan-Bart de Vreede <janbart at wikimedia.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Speaking for myself I can state that Jimmy is a part of the community and
> > that the board statement is in support of both his and the other
> > administrators who have taken the initiative to clean up commons.
> >
> > Also, I would refer you to Jimmy's talk page on commons, as there is an
> > active discussion going on there.
> >
> > Jan-Bart de Vreede
> > Vice Chair Wikimedia Board of Trustees
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > On 7 mei 2010, at 21:38, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> >
> > > On 7 May 2010 20:30, Jan-Bart de Vreede <janbart at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I would like to point you to:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaannounce-l/2010-May/000008.html
> > >
> > > My interpretation of that is that Jimmy's unilateral deletions are not
> > > done with the support of the rest of the board, since the email talks
> > > about encouraging the community to deal with the problem. Is that
> > > correct?
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>