On 11/10/2011 00:47, MZMcBride wrote: > Risker wrote: > > Given the number of people who insist that any categorization > > system seems to be vulnerable, I'd like to hear the reasons why the > > current system, which is obviously necessary in order for people to > > find types of images, does not have the same effect. I'm not > > trying to be provocative here, but I am rather concerned that this > > does not seem to have been discussed. > > Personally, from the technical side, I don't think there's any way to > make per-category filtering work. What happens when a category is > deleted? Or a category is renamed (which is effectively deleting the > old category name currently)? And are we really expecting individual > users to go through millions of categories and find the ones that may > be offensive to them? Surely users don't want to do that. The whole > point is that they want to limit their exposure to such images, not > dig into the millions of categories that may exist looking for ones > that largely contain content they find objectionable. Surely. >
People that care will filter on broadest categories as those are least likely to change. They may start with category:sex, Category:Depictions of Muhammad, etc. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
