there are however generic internet filters - foundations which serve as internet provider and filter out "unsafe" pages (usually with a religious foundation). These usually have problems though, because they are recognized as open proxy, and thus blocked. this is a popular service in parts of NL - and potentially keeps editors away because they have no on-site way of filtering. But maybe some think we shouldn't want those people as editors anyway... (yes, that last is sarcasm)
Please note that the group wikipedians, authors, is somewhat self selected, and we're just running a self fulfilling prophecy. Wikipedians will often be relatively more liberal - but why should we force liberal views upon other people? I don't like the filters, and i wouldn't want them (except when someone comes up with a troll-filter) - but I do think that people have the right not to see/hear things, just like you should have the right to say them. I do however not understand why we are having the fundamental discussion all over again. I think it is pretty clear there is a large group of people who want the technology developed - we could next discuss where we want it implemented (it seems dewp isn't too excited about it for example, others might be). Let us focus on having a good implementation rather than the things that (whether we like it or not) already seem to have been decided for us. Lodewijk Am 5. September 2011 18:00 schrieb Andre Engels <andreeng...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 5 September 2011 11:02, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote: > > > > > On 05/09/2011 10:55 AM, Andrew Gray wrote: > > > > As to why no-one is distributing a "filtered" version of Wikipedia, I > > > > think that falls more under the general heading of "where are the > > > > major third-party reusers that anyone actually cares about?" - the > > > > non-existence of a commercial filtered version is less of a surprise > > > > when we consider the dearth of commercial packaged versions at all... > > > > > > You'd think a "safe" version would be a valuable service that many > would > > > be willing to pay for, given the hordes of people beating down our > doors > > > demanding just that... > > > > > > oh, wait. > > > > > > > > > > They already exist, and have for years. We call them "mirrors. > > > > Yes, but most mirrors are just that - mirrors. As far as I know, there is > no > Wikipedia mirror that actually contains extra functionality - like improved > searching, wisiwyg editing, automatic translation, image filtering, or > whatever else one could think of. > > > -- > André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > 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
