[Foundation-l] Commons:Sexual content

[Andre Engels]

On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:23 AM, Kim Bruning <kim at bruning.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:23:28AM +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
>> Being educational should be just another word for being in scope, and
>> in scope are, in my opinion, in the first place those files that are
>> usable for the projects. That is the first thing that we should be
>> judging things by.
>
> I've already emphasized that a bit already on the page, but more from
> the WARNING angle.

That only says that pictures that are _used_ should not be deleted
indiscriminately. Used and usable are not the same.

> Could you edit or comment on the page in a way that reflects what you
> just stated? :-)

Hardly. The page as it is now seems to go from the point of view that
we should not host any pornography, then restricts itself by trying to
get a narrow definition of 'pornography'. For me, whether or not
something is pornographic is at best a secondary issue.

-- 
André Engels, andreengels at gmail.com