[Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

[Tobias Oelgarte]

Am 18.10.2011 09:57, schrieb Tom Morris:
> On Tuesday, October 18, 2011, Thomas Morton wrote:
>
>> On 17 Oct 2011, at 09:19, Tobias Oelgarte
>> <tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com<javascript:;>>  wrote:
>>> I have no problem with any kind of controversial content. Showing
>>> progress of fisting on the mainpage? No problem for me. Reading your
>>> comments? No problem for me. Reading your insults? Also no problem. The
>>> only thing i did, was the following: I told you, that i will not react
>>> any longer to your comments, if they are worded in the manner as they
>>> currently are.
>>>
>>> Literary: I'm feeling free to open your book and start to read. If it is
>>> interesting and constructive i will continue to read it and i will
>>> respond to you to share my thoughts. If it is purely meant to insult,
>>> without any other meaning, then i will get bored and fly over the lines,
>>> reading only the half or less. I also have no intention to share my
>>> thoughts with the author of this book. Why? I have nothing to talk
>>> about. Should i complain over it's content? Which content anyway?
>>>
>>> Give it a try. Make constructive arguments and explain your thoughts.
>>> There is no need for strong-wording, if the construction of the words
>>> itself is strong.
>>>
>>> nya~
>> And that is a mature and sensible attitude.
>>
>> Some people do not share your view and are unable to ignore what to
>> them are rude or offensive things.
>>
>> Are they wrong?
>>
>> Should they be doing what you (and I) do?
>>
>
> I share the same attitude. I'm pretty much immune to almost anything you can
> throw at me in terms of potentially offensive content.
>
> But, despite this enlightenment, I am not an island. I use my computer in
> public places: at the workplace, in the university library, on the train, at
> conferences, and in cafes.
>
> I may have been inured to 'Autofellatio6.jpg', but I'm not sure the random
> person sitting next to me on the train needs to see it. Being able to read,
> edit and patrol Wikipedia in public without offending the moral
> sensibilities of people who catch a glance at my laptop screen would be a
> feature. Being able to click 'Random page' without the chance of a public
> order offence flowing from it would also be pretty nifty.
But that is exactly this typical scenario that does not need a category 
based filtering system. There are many other proposed solutions that 
would handle exactly this case, without the need for any categorization. 
The "hide all image" feature would already be an good option. An 
improved version is the "blured images/pixelated images" feature, where 
you enter the "hide/distort/..." mode and any image is not visible in 
detail as long you don't hover it or click on it.

Still, we discuss about filter categories and their need. In your 
example no categorization is needed at all, to provide a well working 
solution.

nya~