[Foundation-l] Commons:Sexual content

[Andre Engels]

On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Noein <pronoein at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----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?

I have now tried to set down my point of view in
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Sexual_content#Wrong_direction




-- 
André Engels, andreengels at gmail.com