[Foundation-l] inadequate frame Re: Statement on appropriate educational content

[Kim Bruning]

On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 12:30:18PM -0700, Michael Snow wrote:
> Having said that, the Wikimedia projects are intended to be educational 
> in nature, and there is no place in the projects for material that has 
> no educational or informational value. In saying this, we don't intend 
> to create new policy, but rather to reaffirm and support policy that 
> already exists. We encourage Wikimedia editors to scrutinize potentially 
> offensive materials with the goal of assessing their educational or 
> informational value, and to remove them from the projects if there is no 
> such value.

I'm reading this fairly carefully. Is this the entirety of the board position?

This statement by itself is not sufficient to create the frame 
that Jimmy Wales would require to be able to operate the 
way he is doing on wikimedia commons at this moment in time. 

Jimmy Wales is a very public figure.

I would recommend that we either redefine the existing frame , so
that it is more in line with  Jimmy Wales' actions, or Jimmy Wales 
needs to bring his actions in line with the existing frame.

Somewhere in-between those two options: If Jimmy Wales were to switch to 
promoting a PROD-like approach for commons, this would make a lot 
of people a lot happier. (commons rules get changed, jwale's behaviour
changes, a reasonable compromise is reached, and people can get to work)


Earlier, I had already emphasized that people needed to be
very careful about dealing with in-use images, because this
could cause issues with inter-wiki politics. Apparently 
this was ignored, and now there are several complaints coming in
from wikis outside commons.

sincerely ,
	Kim Bruning

-- 
[Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment]
gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key  FEF9DD72
5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A  01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72