On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Dirk Franke <dirkingofra...@googlemail.com> wrote: > And people who talked privately about a fork for some time, start to think > and say it loud.
Thanks for the update, Dirk. I think it's good that people are seriously discussing what it would mean to fork and how it would be done. Forking the project if WMF policies or decisions are considered unacceptable is one of the fundamental ways in which Wikimedia projects are different from most of the web; it's a key freedom, one which should be exercised judiciously but which should be preserved and protected nonetheless. With that said, I also think it's important to remember that Sue has explicitly affirmed that the development of any technical solution would be done in partnership with the community, including people who've expressed strong opposition to what's been discussed to date. [1] The vote in German Wikipedia, and most of the discussions to date, have focused on the specific ideas and mock-ups that were presented as part of the referendum. But as Sue has made clear, those ideas and mock-ups are just that, and the Board resolution creates room for different ideas as well, ranging from the simple (disabling/blurring all images) to the complex (like a category-based filtering system). Some of these ideas are explored here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Next_steps/en#Potential_models_for_hiding_images Is there a similar brainstorming page on dewiki already? If not, would you be interested in organizing some community discussion on whether there are solutions within the scope of the resolution that the dewiki community would find acceptable, or whether the prevailing view is that the resolution itself should be scrapped altogether? Thanks, Erik [1]http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-October/069472.html _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
