[Foundation-l] 86% of german users disagree with the introduction of the personal image filter

[Milos Rancic]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 19:56, Tobias Oelgarte
<tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Am 16.09.2011 19:13, schrieb Milos Rancic:
> You would have to proof that your facts are indeed true. But if you
> accept it as a huge difference between cultures, how can you impose a
> filter for a culture that doesn't need it or wants it?

Differences between cultures are not so relevant if we are talking
about Wiki[pm]edians. Similar results could be expected everywhere. I
mean, you won't find that one large enough project shows strong
cultural differences in comparison to another. Wikipedian/Wikimedian
culture doesn't necessarily connect people (although it does), but it
creates common set of values. While communities could differ, the
reasons behind the difference are the same, but from different POV.

> How would you expect to find a good compromise in decisions on what to
> filter and what not? Do you intend to put an extremist conservative Arab
> and and the most liberal German inside the same room, close the door, go
> away, come back after two weeks and look if they could find a compromise
> about Yes or No? How should this work?

"Extremist conservative Arab" is not likely a Wikipedian. Pan-Arabist
yes, but "extremist conservative" not. Besides that, there is no
difference between extremist conservative German and extremist
conservative Arab, although the first is more likely Wikipedian than
the second. The main reason for the filter are extremist conservative
Americans, although majority of Americans share libertarian ideas.

But I agree with you in the sense that more permissive cultures
shouldn't suffer because of less permissive cultures. But, again, the
problem is that the Wikimedian culture is dominantly permissive, which
is the main problem with the referendum.

>> * It's likely that staff and Board already know that correlation
>> between the results of German Wikipedia referendum and global survey
>> could be drawn to support previous two conclusions. Thus, they don't
>> want to publish that part of data.
> I doubt that. But if they do, I will call them "assholes for betrayal".
> Just to make it clear. It would also not suite the story onto who has
> access to the data and who has not.

That's not betrayal, but fear. By now, they simply don't know what to
do because they think that all options are bad. But, that's their
problem. I would lie if I'd say that I don't enjoy it.

>> * There is still significant minority of core editors who want the
>> filter at any cost.
> A "significant minority" is a curios choice of words.
>
> "A significant minority tries to abolish the constitution by any cost".
> Now ask yourself if you would follow their wishes. Thats the same
> sentence, you said, with different actors. Still happy with it?

Image filter -- as designed for users -- is not a big deal. Thus, I
don't have strong opinion toward the filter itself. Let them have it
if they want that so much! But, not on the projects which don't want
it.

>> * Board is divided and doesn't know what to decide.
> We don't know what the board thinks. It does not communicate with us
> (the authors), it did not react to the discussions at Meta, it did not
> answer serious questions and in general is somewhere between a legend
> and a forgotten ghost that no one can see, even if present.

It's not so hard to guess if you followed them for some time:
* Ting: ambivalent; would be much more happy without the whole drama
* Jan-Bart: not his business, will support whatever others support
* Phoebe: in favor
* Stu: not his business, will support whatever others support
* Bishakha: slightly in favor tactically, but very hesitant to do
anything against community will
* Matt: doesn't know what's going on as he doesn't read Board's
emails; will support whatever others support, but after phone call
* Sj: would close one's eye to image filter, but against imposing it
against community's will
* Arne: would close one's eye to image filter if it doesn't affect
German Wikipedia (as German Wikipedia rejected it)
* Jimmy: in favor
* Kat: would close one's eye to image filter, but against imposing it
against community's will

>> I would repeat the best possible solution to end this: Implement it on
>> English Wikipedia -- you (those who want that filter) have some
>> numbers which would support that action -- and leave the rest of the
>> projects alone.
> That would imply not to implement it on commons. Otherwise the the
> categorization/labeling/... could be misused by local providers inside
> regions that didn't intended to use this feature.

True. But, they would be able to use it even it'd been implemented
just on English Wikipedia, as it would point to the images at
upload.wikimedia.org. Interesting...

Anyway, that's to hard for me to think. Fortunately, I finished fourth
on last election, so I don't have to think about it.