Дана Thursday 14 January 2010 05:59:39 David Goodman написа: > As for the link, showing these in greatly enlarged versions, without > the context of the articles in which they are used, is setting up a > strong bias. We've never engaged in that use of the material, nor
http://wikistics.falsikon.de/2009/wikimedia/commons/ > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:05 AM, private musings <thepmacco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > G'day all, > > I continue to have concerns related to the growing number of explicit > > images on WMF projects (largely commons) - but rather than banging on > > with dull mailing list posts which gaurantee a chorus of groans, I'm > > trying to be a bit less dull, and have made a short video presentation. > > It's my intention to work on this with a few like minded wiki volunteers, > > and probably then make a sort of alternate version for youtube etc. to > > see what the general feeling is out there.... what I'd really like is for > > the foundation to acknowledge that this is an issue where some regulation > > may be necessary (or indeed, where the discussion of potential benefits > > of some regulation is even conceivable) - I hope the board, or the > > advisory board, might also be interested in offering some thoughts / > > recommendations too. I've used a selection of explicit images from > > Commons, so please only click through if you're over the age of majority; > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Privatemusings/WikiPr0n > > ps. I'm also particularly interested if anyone can point me to where > > 'section 2257' (record keeping) issues may have previously been discussed > > - is it the current foundation position that section 230 acts as an > > exemption to these requirements? _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l