On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 11:59:05PM +0100, WereSpielChequers wrote:
> Hi Kim,
>
> For example you still use the word censorship when talking about the image
> filter, now to me censorship is about somebody deciding for someone else
> what they can or can't see or hear. As long as the image filter is about
> enabling me to make choices about what I see then I don't consider that as
> censorship, and I'm happy for others to also have that choice.
If you actually read what I write, you'll see that I don't actually use the
term censorship when refering to the image filter at all.
> > * There's nothing wrong with the filter program itself
Ok, so you actually literally just quoted me saying that.
I know you can do a lot better, I've seen it! :-) Please try!
> I would hope that the developers will now be told to try and write something
> that finesses as much as possible of the feedback.
I think we should definitely consult with the community a bit more, and
do so properly.
There are multiple fork-risks if the foundation pushes forward, rightly
or wrongly.
sincerely,
Kim Bruning
--
[Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment]
gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key FEF9DD72
5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A 01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
