On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 23:35 +0200, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: > Am 22.10.2011 23:23, schrieb Nikola Smolenski: > > On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 21:16 +0100, David Gerard wrote: > >> "Both the opinion poll itself and its proposal were accepted. In > >> contrary to the decision of the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia > >> Foundation, personal image filters should not be introduced in > >> German-speaking wikipedia and categories for these filters may not be > >> created for files locally stored on this wikipedia. 260 of 306 users > >> (84.97 percent) accepted the poll as to be formally valid. 357 of 414 > >> users (86.23 percent) do not agree to the introduction of a personal > >> image filter and categories for filtering in German wikipedia." > > I wanted to say this for a long time, and now seems like a good > > opportunity. I see this as a tyranny of the majority. I understand that > > a large majority of German Wikipedia editors are against the filter. But > > even if 99.99% of editors are against the filter, well, it is opt-in and > > they don't have to use it. But why would they prevent me from using it, > > if I want to use it? > > > Why? Because it is against the basic rules of the project. It is > intended to discriminate content. To judge about it and to represent you
No, it is intended to let people discriminate content themselves if they want, which is a huge difference. > this judgment before you have even looked at it. Additionally it can be If I feel that this judgment is inadequate, I will turn the filter off. Either way, it is My Problem. Not Your Problem. > easily exploited by your local provider to hide labeled content, so that > you don't have any way to view it, even if you want to. Depending on the way it is implemented, it may be somewhat difficult for a provider to do that. Such systems probably already exist on some websites, and I am not aware of my provider using them to hide labelled content. And even if my provider would start doing that, I could simply use Wikipedia over https. And if providers across the world start abusing the filter, perhaps then the filter could be turned off. I just don't see this as a reasonable possibility. > If you want a filter so badly, then install parental software, close It is my understanding that parental software is often too overarching or otherwise inadequate. > your eyes or don't visit the page. That is up to you. That is your If I close my eyes or don't visit the page, I won't be able to read the content of the page. > PS: If it wasn't at this place i would call your contribution trolling. It certainly isn't very helpful to good discussion that now I know you would call it trolling were we discussing it somewhere else. > But feel free to read the arguments: > http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Einf%C3%BChrung_pers%C3%B6nlicher_Bildfilter/en#Arguments_for_the_proposal It seems to me that the arguments are mostly about a filter that would be turned on by default. Most of them seem to evaporate when applied to an opt-in filter. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l