On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Kevin Gorman kgorman@gmail.com wrote:
Pete: there's not really any point in making this thread a laundry list
of
times that admins and crats on commons fucked up vs times they didn't
fuck
up.
As I said (at Fae's suggestion), there's no reason to clutter the list. If you want to dig into this, I'd suggest setting up a wiki page (or a discussion at, say, the Commons Village Pump). And the reason I suggested it is, as I said, to generate some actual examples, so that we can move away from the sweeping generalizations you have been repeatedly making in this discussion thread.
Admins and crats on commons have also historically made a large number of decisions that fly in the face of WMF board resolutions, often
repeatedly.
David Gerard's point is ringing very true here: you will not make this assertion more true merely by repeating it. Examples, please -- or else please drop it.
A project where people with advanced userrights fairly
regularly make decisions that fly in the face of WMF board resolutions
and
are not censured by their peers is a project with problems.
And then you repeat it again, within the same message. Again, without substantiation.
A lot of the issues Kevin is probably referring to revolve around the 2011 debate, and many of the most blatant problems have since been cleaned up. I haven't looked into it recently, but there was a serious issue years ago with wank galleries, images with questionable provenance, images of potentially underage models, etc. Many of the policies around consent and identity that have been developed in recent years came to Commons partly as the result of huge external pressure and in the face of massive resistance by many (but by no means all or even most) Commoners.