On 23 October 2011 12:02, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 23 October 2011 11:50, Fae <f...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
> The Foundation considers de:wp's careful and thoughtful decision to > put [[:de:vulva]] on the front page of de:wp with a picture was a > clear failure of community judgement sufficient to justify the > imposition of a filter from outside. One can draw a parallel with press regulatory bodies who have a role in interpreting legislative requirements or responding to significant numbers of public complaints. This does not mean that the regulatory body interferes with editorial control, policies or in any other way claims operational responsibility for the content of newspapers. If the WMF wishes to control content, then the role of the Foundation moves from operational support to all content control and hence liability. By increasing the cases where the Foundation makes such decisions, it would be hard to continue to use the rationale that the Foundation does not control content and a host of new and painful legal issues arise. PS "clear failure" looks like an opinion, not a statement of fact. Presumably this relates to an official position of the WMF? Cheers, Fae _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
