[Foundation-l] Blog from Sue about censorship, editorial judgement, and image filters

[Ryan Kaldari]

This isn't just about the image filter. Try discussing whether or not 
porn should be allowed on the Main page of Commons. Let me know if you 
get any responses that don't cite [[WP:NOTCENSORED]]. Somehow the 
majority of the community there believes that there are only two 
possible positions on this issue:
* Save the children
* Protect Wikipedia from censorship
If you can't be shoved into one of those boxes, you're just ignored. The 
tone issue is very pertinent in my view. I'm tired of everyone assuming 
that every post on this issue has to be either pro- or 
anti-censorship—as demonstrated by the responses to Sue's blog post. 
Some people actually have nuanced views, and it's important that these 
voices aren't excluded from the conversation.

I don't really care much about the image-filter issue, but I'm a big 
advocate of presenting controversial content in appropriate contexts. 
Thus I am routinely accused of supporting censorship (despite the fact 
that I founded WikiProject Wikipedians Against Censorship!).

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/29/11 4:34 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> On 30 September 2011 00:28, Ryan Kaldari<rkaldari at wikimedia.org>  wrote:
>
>> Well, when every thoughtful comment you have on a topic is met with
>> nothing more than chants of "WP:NOTCENSORED!", the tone argument seems
>> quite valid.
>
> Really, every single response to every single comment?
>
> It suggests communication has already broken down.
>
> What happens when opponents of the image filter stop bothering to say
> anything to the Foundation, and treat them as an obstacle to be worked
> around?
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l