On 18 June 2012 12:41, Thomas Morton <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18 June 2012 12:39, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The Board acted according to the Harris report, which just said to do >> it on the site itself: >> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content:_Part_Two >> It's still not clear to me (looking over part two or part one) why it >> has to be on the site itself and no post-site solution is acceptable. >> Presumably someone interested can dredge through part one and pick out >> the sentences that back this position as opposed to post-site >> filtering. > Utility; hiding a filter on a lower order site does not make it useful. > Incorporating it into the main site (prefferably client side) makes it the > most accessible for our community. That's not from the Harris report. What was the justification in the report? - d. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
