On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Russavia <russavia.wikipedia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I will be of course posting a link to this list on the
DR given the
idiocy and trolling of a Commons admin going on here.
Hey Russavia,
independent of whether there are other reasons to delete these
particular images, can you clarify whether you agree that these types
of images should be deleted if no evidence of consent can be provided?
I'm asking because as an admin, my expectation is that you consider it
your responsibility to enforce Commons policy and Board policy. Admins
are given generally some discretion in the implementation of policies,
but adminship is supposed to mostly be the routine application of
existing policies and community consensus.
The policy that we don't host images from people in private places
where evidence of consent is missing seems pretty clear to me. I think
it's reasonable to give the uploader time to provide evidence of
consent, but it's also reasonable to delete the images after the end
of the DR and undelete if evidence is provided later. Do you disagree?
I don't think the hypothesis that the images are or could be revenge
porn is even relevant to that question. Even if they are uploaded in
good faith ("I put them on Flickr with permission and now I'm
uploading them to Commons"), it's still desirable to ask for evidence
of consent specifically for uploading to Commons, because publishing a
photo of a person in the nude in Flickr's NSFW ghetto is quite
different from having that same photograph on Commons and potentially
used on Wikipedia.
Thanks,
Erik
--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation