2010/5/10 Victor Vasiliev <vasi...@gmail.com>: > On 05/11/2010 12:25 AM, David Gerard wrote: >> Any attempt to "filter" ourselves is not addressing the fact that the >> images exist at all on Commons. > > +1. > > I suggest to ignore them. Or perhaps someone should write more nice > things in the article about FOX news (maintaining NPOV, of course).
May I cite that any angry editor doing this might be under conflict of interest? (Albeit I think this is the most powerful counterattack available :) Anyway, I think they should be just sued. I don't know about US law, but defamation is a criminal offense here. Also, I think their use of the label "illegal content" might be a violation of some other law, too. PS: They talk about nude children, link in the title they say "illegal content". But, are they talking about those kind of images: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturism ? There are nude children there, but I see this kind of image on diaper commercials too, and some other infant products. They are being REALLY mean. -- Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva <tolkiend...@gmail.com> _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l