The primary reason that several weeks back I became involved in the Common's discussions about sexually explicit content is my work with the strategic planning process for WMF. During the strategic plannings discussions, I became acutely aware of the problems with the lack of diversity among WMF readers and editors. As I considered the topic, I came to the conclusion that WMF hosting an unlimited amount of sexually explicit content could be "one" of the barriers for WMF being more diverse.
The manner that we display nudity and sexually explicit content makes it difficult to avoid. Currently, our policies and practices do not allow for special care when displaying the content (for deletion discussion, categorizing, or links to our sister projects, ...). So, people may unexpectedly see it. In my opinion, the current approach to managing the content is insensitive to many people in the world of many nationalities and religions, and people that access WFM projects through settings where sexually explicit content is inappropriate or not allowed. So, I see a policy that better manages the content as potentially making WMF projects open to more users. I support the clean up effort by Jimmy and the administrators on Commons for the images that have no significant educational value. I also understand that to some editors who are new to thinking about the issue that this may seem abrupt. So, I encourage good communication between all the stakeholders so that we can understand each others concerns and address them. I'm also hopeful that technical solutions will be implemented and will resolve the concerns about hosting images that have an educational value.but are not appropriate for all readers in all settings. Sydney Poore (FloNight) On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Jan-Bart de Vreede <janb...@wikimedia.org>wrote: > Hi, > > Speaking for myself I can state that Jimmy is a part of the community and > that the board statement is in support of both his and the other > administrators who have taken the initiative to clean up commons. > > Also, I would refer you to Jimmy's talk page on commons, as there is an > active discussion going on there. > > Jan-Bart de Vreede > Vice Chair Wikimedia Board of Trustees > Wikimedia Foundation > > On 7 mei 2010, at 21:38, Thomas Dalton wrote: > > > On 7 May 2010 20:30, Jan-Bart de Vreede <janb...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I would like to point you to: > >> > >> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaannounce-l/2010-May/000008.html > > > > My interpretation of that is that Jimmy's unilateral deletions are not > > done with the support of the rest of the board, since the email talks > > about encouraging the community to deal with the problem. Is that > > correct? > > > > _______________________________________________ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
