[Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

[Thomas Morton]

>
> > The idea of offering imagine filters on WMF project is much more
> > controversial than it is on other internet websites. So, I I think
> > that it is fair to suggest that we examine why we are having
> > conflicts over this topic when other website don't. One possible
> > reason is that our base of editors is different from other websites.
>
> Websites like Flickr (an example commonly cited) are commercial
> endeavors whose decisions are based on profitability, not an
> obligation to maintain neutrality (a core element of most WMF
> projects).  These services can cater to the revenue-driving majorities
> (with geographic segregation, if need be) and ignore minorities whose
> beliefs fall outside the "mainstream" for a given country.  We mustn't
> do that.
>

Brilliantly put!


> One of the main issues regarding the proposed system is the need to
> determine which image types to label "potentially objectionable" and
> place under the limited number of optional filters.  Due to cultural
> bias, some people (including a segment of voters in the "referendum,"
> some of whom commented on its various talk pages) believe that this is
> as simple as creating a few categories along the lines of "nudity,"
> "sex," "violence" and "gore" (defined and populated in accordance with
> arbitrary standards).
>

I think a key part of resolving this is to avoid calling the labels
"potentially objectionable". I mean - anything can be potentially
objectionable, it depends on the individual.

Obviously we cast this in the nudity/Mohammed light, because those are the
most high profile examples.

But another example; clowns.

Some people are terrified of clowns, even their images. You wouldn't
describe images of clowns as "potentially objectionable" but it would be
great for Coulrophobes to go "oh hey Wikipedia, I don't like clowns so can
you hide pics of them for me please? Thanks".

Some people are squeamish - so OK let the hides images involving blood/gore.
Foot phobia? (that's common enough) Hide images of naked feet.

And so on.

This should not be about filtering "potentially objectionable" images, but
about giving readers a way to filter their experience in a way that makes
them feel safe and happy. And that is the light to cast & develop the
feature

Tom