Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > Brion Vibber wrote: >> >> The challenge here isn't technical, but political/cultural; choosing how >> to mark things and what to mark for a default view is quite simply >> _difficult_ as there's such a huge variance in what people may find >> objectionable. >> >> >> ... >> Generally sexual imagery is the prime target since it's the biggest >> hot-button "save the children" issue for most people -- many parents >> wouldn't be happy to have their kid read "list of sexual positions" but >> would rather they read the text than see the pictures, even if they're >> drawings. >> >> >> Ultimately it may be most effective to implement something like this >> (basically an expansion of the "bad image list" implemented long ago for >> requiring a click-through on certain images which were being frequently >> misused in vandalism) in combination with a push to create distinct >> resources which really *are* targeted at kids -- an area in which >> multiple versions targeted to different cultural groups are more likely >> to be accepted than the "one true neutral article" model of Wikipedia. >> >>
Do you have no shame? Have you any idea how california-centered that sounds? We all stood shoulder to shoulder against Uwe Kils and the Norwegian Vikings, and this is what we get? A more perniciously, smoother talked version of the same old spiel. One would be really excused at this point to wonder if the only reason Uwe Kils got de-adminned was because he couldn't speak the queens english properly. Really! Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
