[Foundation-l] Reflections on the recent debates

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Sydney Poore <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:
> I fully endorse every aspect of Mike Godwin's comment.
>
> The Boards statement makes it clear that their view is that Community
> discussion is needed to find long term solutions to the issue. And that "not
> censored" should not be used to halt discussions about the way to manage
> content.
>
> The clean up project initiated by Jimmy on Commons has brought much needed
> attention to a long standing problem. Now is the time for the Community to
> focus on cleaning up Commons and writing a sensible policy about managing
> sexual content.


I think the question weighing heavily on everyone's mind is why
Wikimedia didn't simply ask for this first before taking such direct
and hasty intervention?

I've not personally seen _too much_ of the "not censored" being used
to halt discussion, commons does mostly have a working understanding
that there are compromises— though the compromises have largely fallen
too far to one side in my opinion.

Simply re-emphasizing "educational resource" and "not a porn host"
would probably have been enough to spur action at commons, even though
that wouldn't be enough to move some of the less well functioning
communities, and it would avoid the current drama, and the disruption
and damage to the projects as in-use images were deleted out from
under them.


On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Mike Godwin <mnemonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
>> On 8 May 2010 16:48, Mike Godwin <mnemonic at gmail.com> wrote:Most of the
>> debate has been
>> about Jimmy, not about Commons policy on non-educational images.
> So fix it.

Moreover,  Jimmy specifically directed us not to discuss these
deletions until June 1st.  This is hardly a good way to assist in
writing a sensible policy.


On the subject of a sensible policy, Sydney, perhaps you could direct
us to the EnWP policy that makes short work of this issue?