On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:44 AM, Erik Moeller <e...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > >> Overall, I think Sue's post was an effort to move the conversation >> away from thinking of this issue purely in the terms of the debate as >> it's taken place so far. I think that's a very worthwhile thing to do. >> I would also point out that lots of good and thoughtful ideas have >> been collected at: >> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Next_steps/en >> >> IMO the appropriate level of WMF attention to this issue is to 1) look >> for simple technical help that we can give the community, 2) use the >> resources that WMF and chapters have (in terms of dedicated, focused >> attention) to help host conversations in the communities, and bring >> new voices into the debate, to help us all be the best possible >> versions of ourselves. And as Sue said, we shouldn't demonize each >> other in the process. Everyone's trying to think about these topics in >> a serious fashion, balancing many complex interests, and bringing >> their own useful perspective. >> >> Erik >> > > > Erik, if you really want to change the focus of the debate, suggest to > Sue and the board that they make a commitment: that an image filter > won't be imposed on the projects against strong majority opposition in > the contributing community. Then you can move on to the hard work of > convincing us of its merits, and we can set arguments over authority > and roles aside. > > Nathan >
Hear, hear! -- -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]] _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
