[Foundation-l] Controversial Content Study Part 3

[private musings]

failed at copy / paste - with apologies, here is the link to the image
I would think it best to remove permanently;

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Closeup_of_female_masturbation_pastel.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

cheers,

Peter,
PM.

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 7:59 PM, private musings <thepmaccount at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Robert / all,
>
> I wonder if perhaps folk on the foundation-l mailing list may be able
> to help with this issue I'm hoping to clarify as tangetial, but
> related to the Controversial Content study;
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertmharris#Tangential.2C_but_important
>
> In short, I've had conversations with various volunteers previously
> which indicate that material likely to be child pornography has, in
> the past, been uploaded to WMF sites, and that dev.s have previously
> removed it from servers - what I'm not clear on is whether or not such
> material is routinely reported to external authorities (we may well be
> talking about only 2 or 3 cases, perhaps per year, perhaps ever?) -
> and the process by which a WMF volunteer should follow should such
> material rear its ugly head at some point in the future.
>
> Depressingly, I think we should prepare for such an eventuality, and
> I'll further take the opportunity to encourage whomever is the
> decision maker in such instances to permanently remove the photo at
> commons of a 16 year old girl masturbating - currently only available
> to 'oversighters' here;
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertmharris#Tangential.2C_but_important
>
> I'll heap praise / feedback on the study in general following any
> board action / announcement in the coming days / weeks :-)
>
> best,
>
> Peter,
> PM.
>
> ps. on re-reading I realise it's sensible to add 'alleged' to the '16
> year old girl masturbating' - as ever with this stuff, the intent
> could well have been to disrupt all along, and it could well just be a
> basic copyvio of online material. We can't know.
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 4:08 AM, R M Harris <rmharris at sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> Just to let you know that Part 3 of the Study on Controversial content is
>> now up on its own Meta page
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content:_Part_Three.
>> Thanks to everyone who has contributed to the discussion so far -- it has
>> been expectedly passionate, but very interesting, and illuminating. All
>> three parts of the study, combined together, will be presented to the
>> Wikimedia Foundation Board on Friday, Oct. 8 at their next meeting. Either
>> the Board or we will be following up on that presentation. Thanks again to
>> all for allowing us to enter your "house" as a guest; we've been treated
>> very civilly, and appreciate it. Robert and Dory Harris
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Commons-l mailing list
>> Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>>
>>
>