[Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Tobias Oelgarte <
tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com> wrote:

> Am 07.03.2012 23:41, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
> 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.
>


You not seeing it doesn't mean it ain't happening. :) It's just that these
are the discussions where you choose to hang out.



> He said himself that he isn't the same person, while Geni has no evidence
>> however.
>
>

The English Wikipedia's arbitration committee has looked into it and upheld
the block – re-issued it in fact, under its own authority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Beta_M



> 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.
>
>

You were simply gratified that I thought you had come up with a great idea,
which you have. :) You know what annoys me? That we still have not had one
developer commenting on your proposal at

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Controversial_content/Brainstorming#Clustering_for_search_results_on_Commons

It's a good proposal, and would go some way towards alleviating a Wikimedia
problem that's been discussed on the Internet for half a year now.

http://tch516087.tch.www.quora.com/Why-is-the-second-image-returned-on-Wikimedia-Commons-when-one-searches-for-electric-toothbrush-an-image-of-a-female-masturbating

Perhaps you would like to complain, along with me, that your proposal is
not getting the attention it deserves.

Andreas