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

Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com
Wed Oct 19 12:07:56 UTC 2011

Am 19.10.2011 11:07, schrieb Andrew Garrett:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> <cimonavaro at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Yes, but that is not proof of what we as a community understand the
>> principle to mean, it means the board is on crack.
> That's not a helpful contribution to this discussion.
But if i look at the current reactions, some might agree with this point 
of view. So far i did not see any reaction to provide sufficient 
information, so that would strengthen the argumentation of the WMF or 
the Board. All we get represented are assumptions on what the problem 
might be and that it might be existing. There was not a single study 
that was directed at the readers, particularity not a single one 
directed at a diverse, multicultural audience. All we got is the 
worthless result of the referendum.


I asked for this shit multiple month ago. I repeated my request on 
daily/weekly basis. All i got wasn't a T-Shirt, it was nothing. That 
makes people like me very angry and lets me believe that the WMF is 
either trying to hide the facts, to push their own point of view, or 
that they are entirely incompetent. Alternatively they are just busy 
with counting the money...

I lost all trust inside the Foundation and I believe that they would 
sell out the basic idea of the project, whenever possible. Knowledge + 
Principle of least astonishment, applied to everything, no matter how 
the facts are? You truly did not understand the foundation of knowledge. 
Knowledge is interesting because it is shocking. It destroys your own 
sand-castle-world on daily basis.

Hard words? Yes it are hard words, based upon the current situation and 
reactions. All we got are messages to calm down, while nothing changes. 
Now we read at some back-pages (discussions spread out everywhere) that 
there will be a test-run, to invite the readers to flag images. Another 
measure to improve the acceptance if the filter will be enabled, another 
study based on a only English speaking community/audience to make it the 
rule over thumb for every project? It seams to be the case. But where 
does all this will to implement a filter come from? No one said it 
clearly, no one published reliable source ("Harris report", a true 
insider joke) and you expect us to believe this shit?

The referendum was a farce, the new approach is again a farce. The only 
way left to assume good faith is to claim that they are on crack. 
Anything else would be worse.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list