[Foundation-l] Image filter brainstorming: Personal filter lists

[Tobias Oelgarte]

Am 01.12.2011 10:53, schrieb John Vandenberg:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> <cimonavaro at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> ... The "downstream
>> use" objection
>> was *never* about downstream use of _content_ but downstream use of _labels_ and
>> the structuring of the semantic data. That is a real horse of a
>> different colour, and not
>> of straw.
> Tom thinks that this horse is real, but it has bolted.  I agree with
> Tom that it is very simple for a commercial filter provider, or anyone
> else who is sufficiently motivated, to find most naughty content on WP
> and filter it.  Risker said she had experienced something like this.
> Universities and schools have this too.
>
> I would prefer that we do build good metadata/labels, but that we
> (wikimedia) do not incorporate any general purpose use of them for
> filtering from readers.  Hiding content is the easy way out.  The
> inappropriate content on our projects is of one of two types:
>
> 1. inappropriate content that is quickly addressed, but it is seen by
> some people as it works its way through our processes.  Sometimes it
> is the public that sees the content; sometimes it is only the
> community members who *choose* to patrol new pages/files while on the
> train.
>
> 2. content which is appropriate for certain contexts, is known to be
> problematic but concensus is that the content stays, however readers
> stumble on it unawares.
>
> The former cant be solved.
>
> The latter can be solved by labelling but not filtering.  If you are
> on the train and a link is annotated with a tag "nsfw", you can not
> click it, or be wary about the destination page.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
Thats exactly this kind of pre-judicial labeling the ALA speaks about 
[1] and that can be misused by third parties (ISPs in general meaning). 
This kind of labeling has nothing to do with an encyclopedia. Either we 
include such content or we don't. If we include it, then we don't label 
it. This would be pre-judicial and someone has to do this for others. 
This someone will break with NPOV, since it is _his_ opinion and not 
only that of the reader. I thought category based filtering ('nsfw' is a 
category) is off the table?

[1] 
http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=interpretations&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=8657

nya~