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

[phoebe ayers]

On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 1:20 AM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 August 2011 09:04,  <DGGenwp at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 26, 2011 11:12am, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 26 August 2011 16:06, David Goodman dggenwp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> > This labeling is proposed to be done on the basis not of the regular
>>> > commons categories, but of special ones designed for the purpose; not
>>> > on the regular WP editors, but a special committee.
>
>>> Ooh, *really*. Then this initiative will be bitterly resisted at every
>>> turn.
>
>> I am not sure if your wording implies that I am being excessively negative
>> or skeptical. But yes, I very definitely think it should be resisted at
>> every stage of implementation. What else can we do, if the people who
>> should be providing services to us, try to run things for us. the community
>> is sometimes wrong; the board is sometimes right. I would rather go wrong
>> with the community , than right with the board.T, there is no other way of
>> preserving the values of independence and spontaneity which are the essence
>> of our projects. The distinctiveness of Wikipedia is that we are a
>> community-directed project, and no person or group--even groups of our own
>> choosing-- has the authority to lead us.
>
>
> That's what I meant - plans for a special committee, and not a
> community decision, had somehow escaped my notice. That's just a
> ridiculously, amazingly, bad idea. The community is frequently on
> crack, but a special committee for this job can only be worse.
>
> Is it in fact the case that the job is to be handed to a special
> committee? If so, who thought this was a good idea and why?
>
>
> - d.

This is the first I've heard of a special committee :) Not sure where
that idea came from...

-- phoebe