[Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

[Thomas Morton]

On 18 June 2012 12:42, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 18 June 2012 12:41, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > On 18 June 2012 12:39, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >> The Board acted according to the Harris report, which just said to do
> >> it on the site itself:
> >>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content:_Part_Two
> >> It's still not clear to me (looking over part two or part one) why it
> >> has to be on the site itself and no post-site solution is acceptable.
> >> Presumably someone interested can dredge through part one and pick out
> >> the sentences that back this position as opposed to post-site
> >> filtering.
>
> > Utility; hiding a filter on a lower order site does not make it useful.
> > Incorporating it into the main site (prefferably client side) makes it
> the
> > most accessible for our community.
>
>
> That's not from the Harris report. What was the justification in the
> report?


Because they were investigating solutions to problems *on* Wikipedia. Seems
rather obvious ;)

Or perhaps you didn't read parts in full, this for example:

For example, all of these sites, as WMF pages do, have internally-generated
> policies that determine what content is permitted on their sites at all.


Or

However, on every one of these sites, they also employ a series of
> user-controlled options (options designed by the site) that allow users to
> tailor their viewing experiences to their individual needs. Unique among
> these sites, at the moment, Wikimedia projects employ no such options.


I'm not sure where you are leading with this line of argument.. but it
seems to be down a black hole :)

Tom