[Foundation-l] News from Germany: White Bags and thinking about a fork

Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com
Sat Oct 22 20:11:22 UTC 2011

Why should we open a brain storming section to think about something 
that is seen as unacceptable in the first way? What is left is a simple 
"No Images/All Images" solution. Anything else could not be justified. 
You would have to respect this points:

* categorization should not be influenced by viewpoints (e.g. "this 
is/might be offensive, lets move it to somewhere else.") Commons 
policies violate this already!

* no available content should be treated different then something else, 
as long the reader does not define it for itself. That essentially means 
no presets for filtering made by someone else then the reader itself.


Am 22.10.2011 21:58, schrieb Erik Moeller:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Dirk Franke
> <dirkingofranke at googlemail.com>  wrote:
>> And people who talked privately about a fork for some time, start to think
>> and say it loud.
> Thanks for the update, Dirk. I think it's good that people are
> seriously discussing what it would mean to fork and how it would be
> done. Forking the project if WMF policies or decisions are considered
> unacceptable is one of the fundamental ways in which Wikimedia
> projects are different from most of the web; it's a key freedom, one
> which should be exercised judiciously but which should be preserved
> and protected nonetheless.
> With that said, I also think it's important to remember that Sue has
> explicitly affirmed that the development of any technical solution
> would be done in partnership with the community, including people
> who've expressed strong opposition to what's been discussed to date.
> [1]
> The vote in German Wikipedia, and most of the discussions to date,
> have focused on the specific ideas and mock-ups that were presented as
> part of the referendum. But as Sue has made clear, those ideas and
> mock-ups are just that, and the Board resolution creates room for
> different ideas as well, ranging from the simple (disabling/blurring
> all images) to the complex (like a category-based filtering system).
> Some of these ideas are explored here:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Next_steps/en#Potential_models_for_hiding_images
> Is there a similar brainstorming page on dewiki already? If not, would
> you be interested in organizing some community discussion on whether
> there are solutions within the scope of the resolution that the dewiki
> community would find acceptable, or whether the prevailing view is
> that the resolution itself should be scrapped altogether?
> Thanks,
> Erik
> [1]http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-October/069472.html
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list