[Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

[Tobias Oelgarte]

Am 07.03.2012 23:41, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
> Juliana,
>
> You simply don't understand where I am coming from.
>
> I have nothing against Wikimedia websites hosting adult content, just like
> I have nothing against the far greater amounts of explicit adult material
> on Flickr for example. What saddens me though is that Wikimedia is unable
> to grow up, and simply can't get it together to host such material
> responsibly, like Flickr and YouTube do, behind an age-related filter.
> Because that is far and away the mainstream position in society about adult
> material.
Sorry to interrupt you. But as i can see, you constantly rage against 
sexuality in any form. I came to this little conclusion because i saw 
never an example from your side considering other topics. What i see is 
the constant lobbying for a "safepedia", abusing children and crying 
mothers as the main argument, while praising flickr, youtube and co. as 
the ideal that we all should follow. Im absolutely not convinced that 
this is the right way for knowledge. Not a single website that has this 
kind of "service" is dedicated to spread education or knowledge. It's 
quite the opposite.
> And I am saddened that at least some members of the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board lack the balls and vision to make Wikimedia a mainstream operator,
> and instead want to whimp out and give in to extremists.
I hope that they have the balls to follow the good examples. What are 
good examples?
* Equal treatment of content and readers (including children), as most 
libraries in the world do.
* The internet. A place for the free mind and everyone that wants to 
share knowledge and to spread the word.
* Diversity in viewpoints, but acting with respect and tolerance.

> Now, I am aware of your work in German Wikipedia, and I think that German
> Wikipedia generally curates controversial content well. German Wikipedia
> would never have an illustration like the Donkey punch animation in
> mainspace:
>
> http://www.junkland.net/2011/11/donkey-punch-or-how-i-tried-to-fight.html
>
> So to an extent I can understand German editors saying, "There is no
> problem." But only to an extent. Commons and parts of English Wikipedia are
> a joke. Even some people in German Wikipedia have understood this. In my
> view, the editors who cluster around these topic areas in Commons and
> English Wikipedia simply lack the ability to curate such material
> responsibly. The internal culture is completely inappropriate.
>
> The other day e.g. I noticed that Wikimedia Commons administrators
> prominently involved in the curation of adult materials were giving or
> being given something called the "Hot Sex Barnstar" (NSFW) for their
> efforts:
>
> http://www.webcitation.org/65yLm9XpJ
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hot_sex_barnstar.png
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cirt&oldid=67901160#Hot_sex_barnstar
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Saibo&oldid=67973190#The_Hot_Sex_Barnstar
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMattbuck&diff=67910238&oldid=67910067
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stefan4&oldid=67980777#The_Hot_Sex_Barnstar
>
> The editor who designed this barnstar has just been blocked on Commons and
> English Wikipedia by Geni, who (because of the Wikipedia Review discussion
> thread, I guess) believes him to be the person reported to have been jailed
> for possessing and distributing child pornography in the United States in
> this article:
>
> http://sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=13283
He said himself that he isn't the same person, while Geni has no 
evidence however. To me it looks like a witch hunt and i would create 
and give you a barnstar for that. The reason this barnstar (hot n sexy) 
exists is also very simple. It exists because people like you only rage 
against sexual topics and that again, again, again, zZzZz, again and 
again. It is boring and a nuisance for the active community that wants 
to curate Commons.
> The editor has since been unblocked in Commons, while his unblock request
> in English Wikipedia has been denied by the arbitration committee.
>
> Now, this chap has contributed to Wikimedia projects for almost eight
> years. He has been one of the most active contributors to Wikimedia Commons
> in the adult media area, part of a small group of self-selected editors who
> decide what kind of adult educational media Wikimedia Commons should host
> to support its tax-exempt educational brief. In the real world, he
> represents a fringe political position and a worldview that is aggressively
> opposed to mainstream society. In Wikimedia Commons, he is mainstream. That
> is a problem.
>
> WMF is looking to work together with lots of mainstream organisations, from
> the British Museum to the Smithsonian. But this kind of curation of adult
> content is an embarrassment for the Wikimedia Foundation, and a potential
> embarrassment for all the institutions collaborating with Wikimedia. And
> the German community, happy with its largely well curated content in German
> Wikipedia, is hurting the Wikimedia Foundation as a whole by preventing it
> from moving towards the mainstream of society.
>
> Andreas
And the raging, biting and attacking continues, while constructing 
arguments from single examples. Great job as usual. Sorry, but your 
efforts piss me off and i see nothing good coming out of it. In a recent 
discussion i thought that you would be able to have a little bit of 
insight, but i was terribly wrong and I'm ashamed of you and your words.

nya~ (if lobbying is not enough, statute examples...)