On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 11:13 AM, stevertigo wrote:
> Stephen Bain wrote:
>>It is not too broad; Commons has always distinguished itself in this
>>way from general purpose photo/media hosting services like Flickr or
>>YouTube.
>
> Andre Engels wrote:
>> I disagree. Pictures should be judged on the
Stephen Bain wrote:
>It is not too broad; Commons has always distinguished itself in this
>way from general purpose photo/media hosting services like Flickr or
>YouTube.
Andre Engels wrote:
> I disagree. Pictures should be judged on their value for Commons, not
> on something else. And that value
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:05 AM, stevertigo wrote:
> Kat Walsh wrote:
>> "Commons should not be a host for media that has very
>> little informational or educational value
>
> This is too broad. Confine the scope toward dealing with what does not
> belong, rather than trying to suggest that every
stevertigo wrote:
> Kat Walsh wrote:
>
>> "Commons should not be a host for media that has very
>> little informational or educational value
>>
> This is too broad. Confine the scope toward dealing with what does not
> belong, rather than trying to suggest that everything be purposed as
>
Kat Walsh wrote:
> I can think of few better places to go than Wikipedia for complete and
> informative coverage of topics that may be shocking or explicit. Most
> other sites which are uncensored are also intended to have
> entertainment or shock value, or to present a culturally or
> politically
On 11.05.2010 06:43, Kat Walsh wrote:
> What I do support are tools and procedures that make it simpler for
> users to choose what they see: I don't think anyone should have to
> avoid Wikimedia projects because they fear that they (or their
> children) will inadvertently see something they didn't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Kat, I'm not used to the level of finesse of your thoughts and
this time I chose to think aloud to help me. The result is this long
mail that other may find useful. Maybe. Please let me know if they're
not, or if I misunderstood you. As for the v
stevertigo wrote:
> Kat Walsh wrote:
>
>> "Commons should not be a host for media that has very
>> little informational or educational value
>>
>
> This is too broad. Confine the scope toward dealing with what does not
> belong, rather than trying to suggest that everything be purposed as
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:05 PM, stevertigo wrote:
> Kat Walsh wrote:
>> "Commons should not be a host for media that has very
>> little informational or educational value
>
> This is too broad. Confine the scope toward dealing with what does not
> belong, rather than trying to suggest that every
Kat Walsh wrote:
> "Commons should not be a host for media that has very
> little informational or educational value
This is too broad. Confine the scope toward dealing with what does not
belong, rather than trying to suggest that everything be purposed as
stated above. "Prurient" and "exhibition
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:04 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Thank you, as ever, for being the one voice of sanity
> on the board of trustees. I hope one day you will find
> the time to be its chairperson.
+1
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation
Thank you, as ever, for being the one voice of sanity
on the board of trustees. I hope one day you will find
the time to be its chairperson.
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: http
First of all, this is entirely my own opinion, not that of the board,
and anyone who quotes it as a statement of the WMF will get promptly
crushed by a giant puzzle globe.
I absolutely sign on to the board statement[1]. Commons should not be
a host for media that has very little informational or e
13 matches
Mail list logo
