[Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people

[Kim Bruning]

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 05:21:23PM +0200, Milos Rancic wrote:
> Board was aware of that, as the first Robert Harris' report included
> very similar text from Canadian librarian association.

I would then like to point out that there is no practical way to
make a value-neutral categorisation scheme to use for filtering.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the scheme is
neutral *or* it contains a value judgement so as to be usable for
filtering. Logic holds that there is no middle ground here. Further
any value judgement once made cannot be culturally neutral in
practice.

I'm going to assume in good faith that the board was not aware of this
minor flaw. But I can't really stretch it much further. 

Could board members please chime in and elucidate?

sincerely,
	Kim Bruning




-- 
[Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment]
gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key  FEF9DD72
5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A  01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72