[Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

[Sydney Poore]

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 16:07, Thomas Morton
> <morton.thomas at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, but guaranteed you're going to end up with readers asking why on
> earth
> > they have to go through and manually implement these filters; they'll
> want
> > some defaults they can "just use". I posit that the majority of people
> > wanting to use this thing will likely want to simply click "Do not show
> me
> > images of X" and leave it there. This is not a scientific study of what
> the
> > reader wants - we do need to do one of those - just my RL experience of
> how
> > web users interact.
> >
> > I recall a message in an previous thread that went into ideas of how to
> do
> > this in a less centralised way (to avoid the idea of it not being our job
> to
> > censor).
>
> That would mean that pornography exists just on Wikimedia Commons.
> Those who censor sexually explicit and other images use censorship
> software.
>
> > The problem I see here is that editors are a biased group to poll in
> > relation to this - this is a tool for readers, and it should be up to the
> > readers to comment on what they would like to see. The editorship has an
> > anti-censorship view, and largely will not approve of using this tool
> > themselves (Not Censored etc.). However I suspect a large number of
> readers
> > do feel differently... if only we knew the figures...
> >
> > I'm not sure why we would necessarily let editors stall that feature
> request
> > - or  why we are primarily polling editors and not readers about this
> > situation.
> >
> > I'd like to see some user studies done to see what the wider response to
> > this idea might be...
> >
> > As an encyclopaedia we consistently forget that for *all* of us the
> readers
> > are our customers, and represent the vast majority of people using
> Wikipedia
> > - and we should be improving the software for them as much as for the
> editor
> > community.
>
> The *first* instance to be asked about such thing are editors, not
> readers. I mean, the first question is "Do *we* want it?". Readers
> opinion could be one of the arguments in discussion; likely one of the
> most important ones; but decision should be on editors. And Board
> should act in opposition to editors just if there is serious threat
> for the project existence. However, nobody gave any reason in favor of
> avoiding editors' will in favor of Board's decision. Nothing rational,
> just personal wishes of a couple of people. And, again, if those
> wishes could pass without a lot of drama, I would be fine with it.
> However, that's not the case.
>

While I'm very interested in hearing the opinion of our current editors, I
disagree that we will can collect and disseminate information in a neutral
way to all the people of world if we continue to  listen solely to our core
group of editors. Our current editors come from much too narrow a
demographic group to think that we are making content decision that
represent a global view.

I realize that change is uncomfortable, but we must find ways to be more
inclusive in order to achieve the WMF core mission.

A WMF offered content filter is one way that we can reach people who
otherwise would not be inclined to read or edit WMF projects. Although I may
not necessarily agree with the viewing options of some of the people who use
the filter, I respect their choice because I believe that they know better
than me what is best for them.

I strongly oppose any decision making process that does not look outside of
WMF for ideas. The surest way for WMF to grow stagnant is to work in an echo
chamber. And it is imperative for WMF staff, WMF Board, and WMF community to
welcome diverse views in our discussions.

On a final note, I ask our regular community members to be welcoming and
tolerant of  people who they think have different ideas from their own.
There is no doubt that I have learned the most when I was in dialogue with
people who had vastly different  opinions from mine.  I think that this will
be true in our community, too.

Sydney Poore
User:FloNight