[Foundation-l] Possible solution for image filter

[Milos Rancic]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 19:10, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> What is the advantage of that compared with the feature as it was
> originally proposed? All you've done is made the URL more complicated.
> You'll still need to use user preferences to determine which images
> are getting hidden, so why can't you just have an "on/off" user
> preference as well rather than determining whether the filter should
> be on or off based on the URL?

* People should have possibility to choose the set of images which
they don't want to see.
* As it's not the main site, but wrapper, it could have turned off
images offensive to anyone, so everybody would be able to see the site
without having to log in. It could lead to "no images" by default, but
that's not my problem.
* They could experiment, as nobody would care about the site. As
Tobias mentioned below, if some text is offensive to someone, they
could add it into the filter.
* Most importantly, that won't affect anything else. Except, probably,
~$1M/year of WMF budget for development of censorship software and
censorship itself, as they will say that they lack of people to censor
images and that they need employees to do that. Although it would be
more useful to give that ~$1M/year for access to Wikipedia from
African countries, I think that it's reasonable price for having
people who want censorship content. Bottom line is that News Corp will
pay all of that and much more by giving us free access to Fox News.