[Foundation-l] Commons:Sexual content

[Noein]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/05/2010 05:51, Andre Engels wrote:
> 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.
> 

Then would the http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Censorship page be
more appropriate?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJL6Eo5AAoJEHCAuDvx9Z6LUW8IAIRl3uSV0wHZ3GP7hUCrWwuR
CEeJnjKuVKW+mIlXfvViUuZIAKiCkNxAgPzxajxf4ng0rn89O/Kz/yZQVlRh1lQe
IaVJUr3C0QSlvp6+Eo8yhwSCMxgV4XBHlkB4w2BeaIIvebFVxJMaASyP0ujy9CrF
E6GPEgODy/HLVlEXTV+1qjtp3jgTmwJSHHkUB0PnRhO+Lsm8NzUl26aq/9zouxIw
grSmmdNyXkTb+QkopMSPh8p27K5rcq9NpiLMIAu9pMguaM0E/XMiCADobajLJ/vv
ex4E3RpUayNrP163tjAzJSHOPnKn9aKPjy9rJ70StAS3n9S3si9P9c1pTdQFISE=
=R83f
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----