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

[Kim Bruning]

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 01:25:32PM +0530, Bishakha Datta wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 6:45 AM, David Goodman <dggenwp at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > I want to ask you something else. It's been suggested several times at
> > various places that the present resolution is justified as a
> > compromise to prevent a considerably more repressive form of
> > censorship.
> 
> 
> This implies that the proposed image hiding feature is a less repressive
> form of censorship. I do not see the proposed feature as censorship - all
> the images remain on the site. Nothing is removed. Nothing is suppressed.
> Everything remains. 

The image hiding feature itself is not a form of censorship, as far as
I'm aware of.

The data used to feed the image hiding feature can be classified as a
"censorship tool"  (Source: ALA... Read The Fine Thread for details). 

Even if we *never* build the image hider itself, but just prepare special
categories for it, we would be participating in (stages of) censorship.

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