private musings wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As a tangent to the national portrait gallery thing, I though I'd raise
> something which I've chatted about previously (possibly here, but certainly
> with various community members) which seems unresolved.
>
> My understanding of the status quo is that when
2009/7/11 private musings :
> It's heartening to hear that the foundation has zapped images in the past -
> presumably because they were potentially illegal?
>
> I'm also heartened by the fact that this isn't actually a huge problem at
> the moment, so can be managed on a case by case basis - is th
It's heartening to hear that the foundation has zapped images in the past -
presumably because they were potentially illegal?
I'm also heartened by the fact that this isn't actually a huge problem at
the moment, so can be managed on a case by case basis - is there a good way
of letting someone app
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 5:45 PM, private musings wrote:
[snip]
> I
> consider the fact that I can write 'Commons administrators will be able to
> see an image here' to be the heart of the problem! I hope the foundation
> might consider a software tweak of some sort to allow for permanent deletion
[
Hi all,
As a tangent to the national portrait gallery thing, I though I'd raise
something which I've chatted about previously (possibly here, but certainly
with various community members) which seems unresolved.
My understanding of the status quo is that when a commons administrator
deletes an im
