Thank you Björn,
may have overlooked it otherwise.
and thank you, Sue :-)
dirk
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.netwrote:
* Dirk Franke wrote:
the cultural homogenous group of Germans tends to discuss in German. So to
give you a short update on what is
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 03:36:18PM -0700, Erik Moeller wrote:
Making it easy for editors to say, based on normal editorial judgment
and established practices in their project, Hey, reader, there's
something here you
thank you!
h
Am 29.10.2011 13:31, schrieb FT2:
Having checked the original blog
posthttp://suegardner.org/2011/09/28/on-editorial-judgment-and-empathy/,
I think it's either a rare exception of poorly chosen wording, or shows a
judgment within WMF that I can't agree with.
I remember when
Having checked the original blog
posthttp://suegardner.org/2011/09/28/on-editorial-judgment-and-empathy/,
I think it's either a rare exception of poorly chosen wording, or shows a
judgment within WMF that I can't agree with.
I remember when the director of featured articles on enwiki scrupulously
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 03:36:18PM -0700, Erik Moeller wrote:
Making it easy for editors to say, based on normal editorial judgment
and established practices in their project, Hey, reader, there's
something here you might not want to see ... and BTW, would you like
to remember that choice?
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:57:59AM +1100, Billinghurst wrote:
I do wish that this discussion can just move to implementation. This is about
what I get to filter for what I get to see, or when I get to see it. I have
had
enough of other people believing that they get to make their choices for
On 28 October 2011 20:08, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
I have the impression that most opposition comes from people with an IT
background. That is to say, people who have tried to figure it out, and have
had
some trouble finding a solution. (I may be biased, since that's my own
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 03:13:22PM -0700, Erik Moeller wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
What approaches do you have in mind, that would empower the editors and
the readers, aside from an hide/show all solution?
1) Add a
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 08:49:42AM +0200, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
It is my understanding that parental software is often too overarching
or otherwise inadequate.
... and this despite (very likely) having a larger budget than the foundation
;-)
There's a reason the software is inadequate,
* Dirk Franke wrote:
the cultural homogenous group of Germans tends to discuss in German. So to
give you a short update on what is happening:
A White Bag protest movement against the image filter is forming.
And people who talked privately about a fork for some time, start to think
and say it
Hi Eric,
thanks for your answers. For me they were really helpful, and I hope they
can lead to some understanding-
Some of these ideas are explored here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Next_steps/en#Potential_models_for_hiding_images
Is there a similar brainstorming
With that in mind, I would humbly propose that we kill with fire at
this point the idea of a category-based image filtering system.
+1
d/sp
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
And another one, sorry, I cannot find the mail in which it was proposed. But
generally I think a hide/show-all solution would be acceptable to everybode.
There is still a lot of bad blood going around. And it would certainly be
easier to implement it referring to technical reasons of low bandwith,
On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 22:27 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
On 22 October 2011 22:23, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
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
On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 22:56 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution inadequate? What is
the use case this does not serve?
Are you even trying to pretend to be serious? Use case: me reading an
article.
It is my impression that you are pushing for this
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
Am 23.10.2011 08:30, schrieb Nikola Smolenski:
On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 22:56 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution inadequate? What is
the use case this does not serve?
Are you even trying to pretend to be serious? Use case: me reading an
article.
It is my
Am 23.10.2011 08:49, schrieb Nikola Smolenski:
On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 23:35 +0200, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
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
I completely agree :)
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rswrote:
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
On 23 October 2011 10:01, teun spaans teun.spa...@gmail.com wrote:
I completely agree :)
So you can address my answer, even as Nikola didn't quite.
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On 22/10/11 22:56, David Gerard wrote:
On 22 October 2011 22:51, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
What approaches do you have in mind, that would empower the editors and
the readers, aside from an hide/show all solution?
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution
A cookie-based hide all images/show all images toggle clearly
visible in the toolbar at the top of pages. together with
...
I'd be interested in any arguments that might be made against such a
proposal.
How about the fact that newspaper websites regularly include shocking
images of violence
On 23 October 2011 11:50, Fae f...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
How about the fact that newspaper websites regularly include shocking
images of violence and death on their main pages and have few
complaints as they rely on editorial control rather than built-in
software tricks? This is a solution
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
On 23 October 2011 12:30, Fae f...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
PS clear failure looks like an opinion, not a statement of fact.
Presumably this relates to an official position of the WMF?
An opinion held by several staff on the matter, including the
Executive Director. I consider this
On 23 October 2011 12:38, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 October 2011 12:30, Fae f...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
...
PS clear failure looks like an opinion, not a statement of fact.
Presumably this relates to an official position of the WMF?
An opinion held by several staff on the
On Sun, 2011-10-23 at 10:31 +0200, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
Am 23.10.2011 08:49, schrieb Nikola Smolenski:
On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 23:35 +0200, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
Why? Because it is against the basic rules of the project. It is
intended to discriminate content. To judge about it and to
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:27 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
A neutral all-or-nothing image filter would not have such side effects
(and would also neatly help low bandwidth usage).
It would also make the project useless. I don't want to see the 0.01%
(yes, rhetorical statistics
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 12:58:03 -0700
From: Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l]
The vote in German Wikipedia, and most of the discussions to
date, have focused on the specific ideas and mock-ups that
were presented as part of the referendum.
Erik,
You are
From: Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l]
The literal translation of what was being voted on:
Pers?nliche Bildfilter
(Filter, die illustrierende Dateien anhand von
Kategorien der Wikipedia verbergen und vom Leser an- und abgeschaltet
werden k?nnen,
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Fae f...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
A cookie-based hide all images/show all images toggle clearly
visible in the toolbar at the top of pages. together with
...
I'd be interested in any arguments that might be made against such a
proposal.
How about the
Am 23.10.2011 17:19, schrieb Nikola Smolenski:
On Sun, 2011-10-23 at 10:31 +0200, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
Am 23.10.2011 08:49, schrieb Nikola Smolenski:
On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 23:35 +0200, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
Why? Because it is against the basic rules of the project. It is
intended to
Am 23.10.2011 17:24, schrieb Andrew Garrett:
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:27 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
A neutral all-or-nothing image filter would not have such side effects
(and would also neatly help low bandwidth usage).
It would also make the project useless. I don't want to
On 23/10/11 16:24, Andrew Garrett wrote:
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:27 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
A neutral all-or-nothing image filter would not have such side effects
(and would also neatly help low bandwidth usage).
It would also make the project useless. I don't want to see
On 23.10.2011 19:05, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
The German poll made clear, that not any category based filter will be
allowed, since category based filtering is unavoidably non-neutral and a
censorship tool.
Who the hell are you to forbid me or allow me to use a piece of
software? I want to use
Am 23.10.2011 19:32, schrieb Ilario Valdelli:
On 23.10.2011 19:05, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
The German poll made clear, that not any category based filter will be
allowed, since category based filtering is unavoidably non-neutral and a
censorship tool.
Who the hell are you to forbid me or allow
David Gerard wrote:
On 22 October 2011 23:36, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
With that said, the mobile site already has a generic Disable images
view and something similar would definitely make sense on the main
site as well.
I just tried it. It lacks the click to show feature. Add
Erik Moeller wrote:
With that said, I also think it's important to remember that Sue has
explicitly affirmed that the development of any technical solution
would be done in partnership with the community, including people
who've expressed strong opposition to what's been discussed to date.
* Erik Moeller wrote:
With that said, I also think it's important to remember that Sue has
explicitly affirmed that the development of any technical solution
would be done in partnership with the community, including people
who've expressed strong opposition to what's been discussed to date.
Erik Moeller wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 October 2011 22:51, Tobias Oelgarte
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution inadequate? What is
the use case this does not serve?
Clearly Hebrew and Arabic Wikipedia found a show/hide
* Nikola Smolenski wrote:
Who is this we you are talking about? No one is going to force anyone
to categorize images. If some people want to categorize images, and if
their effort turns out to be in vain, again that is Their Problem and
not Your Problem.
When your filtering or categorization
Dear Mailinglists,
the cultural homogenous group of Germans tends to discuss in German. So to
give you a short update on what is happening:
A White Bag protest movement against the image filter is forming.
And people who talked privately about a fork for some time, start to think
and say it
So, we are going to have virtually two cloned German Wikipedias, one with
image filter extension enabled and other disabled. Not very useful, but it
is your choice.
I hope you enable the Semantic MediaWiki extension in the new fork.
Good luck.
2011/10/22 Dirk Franke
Lets just disable the filter for the german wikipedia and make the decisions
wiki per wiki. Ebe123
On 11-10-22 3:52 PM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
So, we are going to have virtually two cloned German Wikipedias, one with
image filter extension enabled and other disabled. Not very useful,
If something is useful or not, shouldn't be the question. Alt least the
WMF seams to see it that way, because it is very doubtful that the image
filter is useful for the project, for its goals, growth and development.
I would invite the Board to view the movie Schoolbreak Special: The Day
They
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Dirk Franke
dirkingofra...@googlemail.com wrote:
And people who talked privately about a fork for some time, start to think
and say it loud.
Thanks for the update, Dirk. I think it's
On 22 October 2011 20:58, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
If not, would
you be interested in organizing some community discussion on whether
there are solutions within the scope of the resolution that the dewiki
community would find acceptable, or whether the prevailing view is
that
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 1:16 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
This would appear to indicate the opposition is to *any* personal
image filter per the Board resolution, and the category-based proposal
additionally as an example of such rather than as the main topic of
the vote. I think
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
There has always been a consensus that what you are
proposing is evil and against what we as a non-profit free content
site stand for.
What am I proposing, Jussi-Ville? So far, the only material proposal
I've
Am 22.10.2011 22:16, schrieb David Gerard:
Unless nuances of the translation are inaccurate - is this the case?
Do you see wiggle room in the original German phrasing?
There is no room for interpretation. It clearly says that no category
based filtering of any illustrative media will be
Am 22.10.2011 22:21, schrieb Erik Moeller:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 1:16 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
This would appear to indicate the opposition is to *any* personal
image filter per the Board resolution, and the category-based proposal
additionally as an example of such rather
Am 22.10.2011 22:31, schrieb Erik Moeller:
What am I proposing, Jussi-Ville? So far, the only material proposal
I've made as part of this debate is here:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-September/069077.html
And, I don't think you're being accurate, historically or
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
On 22 October 2011 22:23, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
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%
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Dirk Franke
dirkingofra...@googlemail.com wrote:
And people who talked privately about a fork for some time, start to
think
and say it loud.
Thanks for the update, Dirk. I think it's
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
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
No one said it would be evil. But since we already have working
solutions for this projects, why do we need another, now global,
solution, based on categories? Thats when it becomes hairy.
The Board of
Am 22.10.2011 23:44, schrieb Erik Moeller:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
No one said it would be evil. But since we already have working
solutions for this projects, why do we need another, now global,
solution, based on categories?
On 22 October 2011 22:51, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
What approaches do you have in mind, that would empower the editors and
the readers, aside from an hide/show all solution?
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution inadequate? What is
the use case this does
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
What approaches do you have in mind, that would empower the editors and
the readers, aside from an hide/show all solution?
1) Add a collapsible [*] parameter to the File: syntax, e.g.
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 October 2011 22:51, Tobias Oelgarte
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution inadequate? What is
the use case this does not serve?
Clearly Hebrew and Arabic Wikipedia found a show/hide all solution
inadequate.
On 22 October 2011 23:36, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
A show/hide all images function is likely too drastic to serve some of
these use cases well. So for example, if you're at work, you might not
want to have autofellatio on your screen by accident, but you'd be
annoyed at having
Am 23.10.2011 00:13, schrieb Erik Moeller:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
What approaches do you have in mind, that would empower the editors and
the readers, aside from an hide/show all solution?
1) Add a collapsible [*] parameter to
On 22 Oct 2011 at 15:36, Erik Moeller wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 October 2011 22:51, Tobias Oelgarte
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution inadequate? What is
the use case this does not serve?
A show/hide all images
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Isn't that the same as putting some images inside the category
inappropriate content? Will it not leave the impression to the reader
that we think that this is something not anybody should see? Can it be
Am 23.10.2011 01:57, schrieb Billinghurst:
On 22 Oct 2011 at 15:36, Erik Moeller wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 October 2011 22:51, Tobias Oelgarte
And, in detail, why is a hide/show all solution inadequate? What is
the use case this does
66 matches
Mail list logo
