IRC office hours/Office hours 2011-09-22

sgardner (~sgardner@216.38.130.161) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
Philippe (~Philippe@wikimedia/Philippe) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
StevenW_ hat die Verbindung getrennt (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
Moonriddengirl (~chatzilla@cpe-098-026-120-177.nc.res.rr.com) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
StevenW (~swalling@wikimedia/steven-walling) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Moonriddengirl> Hi, StevenW. :)

<StevenW> Hey :)

ChanServ gibt Voice-Status an sgardner
ChanServ gibt Voice-Status an StevenW
ChanServ gibt Op-Status an StevenW
jps (465bab36@gateway/web/freenode/ip.70.91.171.54) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
grinch (noise@unaffiliated/recognizance) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
Fluffernutter (Fluffernut@wikipedia/Fluffernutter) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Ottava> uh oh, boss people are here

<jps> Ottava: any change of heart on the situation in India?

<StevenW> No boss people at all.

<StevenW> :)

Saibo (~Saibo@wikimedia/Saibo) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
Maryana (~Maryana@216.38.130.166) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
Ottava coughs and points at Fluffernutter
<Ottava> She is the IRC Queen

Fenix2 (~jubo@wikipedia/Juxo) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Ottava> We took a vote earlier

<Fluffernutter> No, Ottava, Looneybin Queen

<Saibo> hi guys! :)

<Fluffernutter> remembeR?

jubo2 (~jubo@a88-114-245-16.elisa-laajakaista.fi) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Ottava> IRC = Looneybin

<Ottava> Hi Saibo

<Fluffernutter> irc is subsumed under "looneybin", but there are looneybin parts that are not irc

<Fluffernutter> for lo, my kingdom is great

<Ottava> Is anyone else unsettled by an op'd up StevenW ;/

<Fluffernutter> no

<grinch> Surely Ottava is at least a member of your court. :-)

<Ottava> grinch - if you read my Meta page you would know my titles :)

Philippe consistently worries about an op'd StevenW.  But I have to sit next to him.
<Ottava> Poor Philippe :(

<sgardner> Good morning folks: how is everybody?

<Ottava> Grinch - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ottava_Rima

<Philippe> Hey sgardner  :)

<jps> ok Sue, how are you?

<sgardner> Philippe, where are you?

<Fenix2> g'evening sgardner

<StevenW> Okay, so do we want to get started?

<Ottava> Morning? San Francentric. :)

<niabot> sgardner: In perfect shape for a little battle in opinions ;-)

<sgardner> LOL, Ottava, where are you?

<Ottava> DC

<Ottava> Unfortunately

Abbajnr (3e186ff8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.24.111.248) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<StevenW> Hey Abbas

<sgardner> niabot: let's try not to murder each other, shall we?

<Philippe> murder is bad.  and stuff.

<sgardner> Ottava, I didn't know that. For some reason I didn't realize you're American.

<niabot> sgardner: We don't need to murder each other. We just need to talk and understand.

<sgardner> Should we start by kicking around some potential topics. What do you folks want to talk about this morning?

<Ottava> sgardner - Most people assume I am Canadian, oddly enough.

<Carbidfischer> Philippe: show us the numbers! ;-)

<niabot> Philippe: +1

<Abbajnr> Hi Steven! hi all

<Theo10011> Yes, hello everyone.

<Romaine> sgardner: evening :p

<jps> I want to ask about the decline in active administrators

WilliamH_UK (~WilliamH_@Wikipedia/WilliamH) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
apergos (~ariel@wiktionary/ArielGlenn) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
Seth_Finkelstein (~sethf@MINT-SQUARE.MIT.EDU) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Carbidfischer> sgardner: i am much more interested in the image filter than in barnstars ;-)

<sgardner> So let's just collect topic areas for a little while.

ChristineM (~chatzilla@wikimedia/Christine-WMF) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Carbidfischer> jps: in what project? en.wp?

<sgardner> Carbidfischer, can you tell me who you are? Are you a Commons person?

GorillaWarfare (~GorillaWa@wikipedia/GorillaWarfare) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<niabot> My most important topic should be clear by now ;-)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: i am one of the guys who discussed with chairman wing in nuremberg

rta (~chatzilla@186.204.243.8) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Carbidfischer> sgardner: there is a video of the discussion on commons ;-)

<jps> Carbidfischer: yes. http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ActiveAdmins_10-11-2009.png is down to 720 at present, and per http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ActiveAdmins_10-11-2009.png the loss rate is 100/year ...relative to editor retention, it looks like a much larger problem

<sgardner> Oh thanks Carbidfischer.

<Ottava> How about recruiting female editors, recruiting editors who are experts in their topic area, and recruiting female experts?

<sgardner> I watched the video, but of course I did not understand much of it.

<Carbidfischer> jps: ok

<Beria> Ottava, to do what?

<Fenix2> Carbidfischer: projects by definition have an end.. I'd call the 'pedia "an effort"

<jps> ... especially since http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-02-14/Features_and_admins#RfAs_and_the_decline_in_active_administrators indicates that RFAs are declining even faster

<Ottava> Beria - whatever those wacky Wiki people do

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: but i think you can grasp some kind of tendency in the video ;-)

<Carbidfischer> Fenix2: depends on your definition

<sgardner> I did, yeah. Were you the person who yelled at Ting? I remember there was a man who was very angry and shouty.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: that might have been me, yes

<sgardner> Oh dear. I thought that was a sad moment: I am hoping we can do better than yelling at each other.

<Fenix2> Carbidfischer: Throwing a project ending party is the responsibility of the project leader to celebrate the end of the project

<niabot> sgardner: He might have been happy that i wasn't there.

<sgardner> Carbidfischer: so you know, I am coming to the German AGM in November.

<sgardner> Niabot, are you in Germany?

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: i am hoping the foundation can do better than making fun of the communities in that way

geniice (~chatzilla@wikipedia/geniice) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Carbidfischer> sgardner: agm?

<StevenW> Hi geni

<sgardner> I would like us all to do the best we can :-)

<niabot> sgardner: Yes I'm from germany.

<sgardner> AGM = annual general meeting. Is that what it's called?

tommorris (~tommorris@wikimedia/Tom-Morris) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<sgardner> I think it's November 18 and 19th.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: me too, but i dread the foundation and especially the board cant do much better

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: ok

<Fenix2> Carbidfischer: if it doesn't have a end it is not a project

<Carbidfischer> Fenix2: ok

<sgardner> I'm coming to Germany because I want to talk with the German community.

<kellerkind71> cool

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: nice

<Fenix2> sgardner: Germans are lovely people

<Philippe> Indeed.  :-)

Philippe was born in Germany
<Ottava> How come no one ever wants to talk to the French or Spanish communities? :)

<niabot> sgardner: Good idea.

jps was too
<sgardner> Most of what I know about what happens in German Wikipedia comes from only a few sources: the people in the office who speak German, some Google Translate work, and what I read in reports from the chapter.

<sgardner> I visited Madrid last year: they were fantastic. It was just before they started the chapter.

<Fenix2> sgardner: And their great contributions to culture.. Guttenberg, Luther, Marx, Weber, Gödel ... the list goes on

<Carbidfischer> Ottava: because they dont do anything sensible ;-)

<StevenW> Isn't there a German version of the Signpost?

<sgardner> And I was in France on holiday last month. Although I did not spend time with any Wikipedians.

<Philippe> Carbidfischer: I'm not so sure that's true.  :)

<Carbidfischer> Philippe: show us the numbers! ;-)

<Saibo> StevenW: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:K

<sgardner> LOL Carbidfischer.

<ChristineM> <--- has a very German last name. does that count for anything?

<Carbidfischer> StevenW: there is a german wikipedia newspaper, look at Saibo

<kellerkind71> StevenW: The Kurier but its a bit different

<geniice> you think de's bad? At least they get included in "oh and the german wikipedia" it on the other hand no so much

RoanKattouw_away ist jetzt bekannt als RoanKattouw
<StevenW> Thanks

<Romaine> sgardner: do you also visit other countries around the time you are in germany?

<sgardner> Okay, listen, why don't we try to start? Do we want to talk mainly about the image filter, or about other things as well?

<WilliamH_UK> that red of the kurier hurts my eyes

<jps> active editors please

<sgardner> Romaine yes. I am probably going to visit the UK, the Netherlands, and possibly Austria.

<Theo10011> Hi Romaine

<Ottava> I want to talk about female recruitment.

<sgardner> Where are you, Romaine?

<Seth_Finkelstein> Well, there's also the new Terms Of Service

<sgardner> Yeah, we can talk about that too.

<Romaine> sgardner: Belgium is close to the Netherlands :) you be welcome

<Ottava> There is a good one, Seth_Finkelstein

<Carbidfischer> WilliamH_UK: the kurier kinda parodies the german newspaper bild which is also quite red on its front page, not in its content

<jps> new terms of service, Seth_Finkelstein? url?

<sgardner> Thank you, Romaine :-)

<sgardner> What else do we have?

<WilliamH_UK> yeah I know :

<Philippe> meta:Terms of use, I believe, jps

<StevenW> We should also have an office with Geoff about the new Terms, at some point anyway

<niabot> Ottava: You can recruit female editors. You will have to make them the offer to participate.

<Romaine> we currently try to set up a chapter in belgium

preilly (~WMF27@216.38.130.164) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
preilly hat die Verbindung getrennt (Changing host)
preilly (~WMF27@wikipedia/preilly) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Ottava> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terms_of_use

<niabot> Ottava: can't

DeltaQuad (~deltaquad@TechEssentials/Staff/DeltaQuad) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<sgardner> (I am thinking we should dedicate chunks of time to particular topics, rather than just do scattershot questions and answers.

<WilliamH_UK> sgardner - if you're in London, would be great if you can make an appearance at the meet

<WilliamH_UK> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetup/London/50

<Seth_Finkelstein> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use

<StevenW> Let's start with the image filter.

<StevenW> Philippe, do you want to give an update about releasing the anonymised data?

<ChristineM> When phoebe does the Open Meetings, she sets 15 minute time periods to each topic. It seems to work pretty well.

<Philippe> StevenW: Sure, thanks....

<Ottava> Is there someway we can give every project besides de the filter?

<Ottava> Or allow for an "opt out"?

<sgardner> WilliamH_UK: I won't be in London then. I'll be there November 14 and November 18, and possibly with a side trip in the middle to the Netherlands. Or something like that. I am asking the chapter to see if they can arrange a meet-up while I'm there. I'm also attending the Board meeting on November 18, I think.

<jps> I agree with dedicating chunks of time, the Image filter will likely drag on.  When can we move on to other topics?

<Philippe> Regarding the release of the full results: the committee is discussing how to handle that now.  I'm the staff's advisor to the committee, but (regretably) it doesn't come with unlimited cosmic powers.  :-)  So, while the committee determines how much they're comfortable releasing (and thank you very much, Niabot, for the great analysis you did), there's not much I can tell you.  It's not entirely in my power.  But in the meantime, I really 

<Philippe> you to know this:  the committee is made up of good people who are trying to preserve the integrity of the ballots, and they're grappling with hard questions.  So they have my thanks.  :)

<RoanKattouw> sgardner: We have a hackathon in Brighton, too, 19-20 November

<sgardner> I think we should give the filter a reasonable chunk of time: it's probably our biggest and most important topic for today.

<sgardner> Roan, I didn't know that, thank you :-)

<StevenW> I'm collecting topics and questions

<RoanKattouw> (And a Wiki Conference in India around that same weekend)

<Romaine> sgardner: in the 10th of November there is a meeting to gove the prizes for WIki Loves Monuments, organized in Brussels

<WilliamH_UK> sgardner: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetup/London/51

<Seth_Finkelstein> I would yield Terms of Use to the image topic.

<StevenW> Just FYI

<Carbidfischer> Philippe: maybe, like, really preparing a somewhat useful referendum might have been a good idea

<Carbidfischer> PhancyPhysicist: perhaps you should try something like that some time

<Ottava> StevenW - did you get mine before? - Is it possible to have an "opt out" for the filter?

<StevenW> I've got the image filter, active admins, the Terms of Use,

<StevenW> got it

<StevenW> anything else?

<sgardner> Romaine: I didn't know that. Who's arranging it? (I will ask my assistant James to find out more about it.)

<Romaine> me

GorillaWarfare (~GorillaWa@wikipedia/GorillaWarfare) hat #wikimedia-office verlassen
<sgardner> Oh very good!

<Romaine> with others

<niabot> Philippe: I still want to see the results anyway. It could really help to understand why the points/results are so different.

<Ottava> James is your assistant? haha :)

<sgardner> Romaine: can you ping my assistant and tell him about it? jowen@wikimedia.org

<Romaine> as I said, this is in prepair for Wikimedia Belgium

<Romaine> sure

<sgardner> Romaine: thanks.

<Theo10011> StevenW, Philippe Is kul around today?

<Carbidfischer> ah, sorry, PhancyPhysicist, tab completion gone wrong

<StevenW> He may be, but not in IRC ;)

<Moonriddengirl> Ottava: that would be James Owen. (<http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors>)

Hedgehog456 (~Hedgehog4@wikipedia/Hedgy456) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Philippe> Theo10011: no idea :)  It's a big office and I haven't been over to that side yet.  :)

<Theo10011> kthanks.

<Ottava> Moonriddengirl - I assumed as much. :)

<sgardner> Okay -- what else about the filter? What other questions, areas do we want to discuss?

<sgardner> I would like to ask some questions too :-)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: lack of professionalism by the foundation and the board

<sgardner> Carbidfischer: not really a question, but okay.

<sgardner> We will probably need to ask you to elaborate on that a little :-)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: no, but a sub-topic

<sgardner> Can I start with a question?

<jps> you just did

<niabot> Go ahead

<sgardner> Who's here who's German -- Carbidfischer, Niabot, who else?

<sgardner> jps: LOL.

<Carbidfischer> kellerkind71

<netAction> sgardner: me

<sgardner> Okay very good.

HaeB waves
<Don-kun> me

<sgardner> Haeb: hello!

<Theo10011> heh forgot HaeB

<niabot> Don-kun (basicaly observing)

<Theo10011> hiya

<sgardner> Great.

<niabot> Liesel as well

Ianusius (~Ianusius@wikipedia/Ianusius) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Saibo> sgardner: and me ;)

Fluffernutter is not german...apparently the only one <_<
<Ianusius> hi Saibo

<sgardner> Can I ask you guys to talk to me about the German view on potentially-controversial imagery. It's probably not a completely fair question, because the German community (and German readers) wouldn't have a single unanimous view.

Ottava is Prussian
derpydoo (b894fb0f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.184.148.251.15) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<sgardner> But can I ask you to talk to me about your view on it. What do you think would be the best way to handle it?

<Theo10011> Ottava is.

the_wub (~chatzilla@94-195-172-164.zone9.bethere.co.uk) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<sgardner> I am interested not just in the filter itself, but also in the principle of least astonishment, etc.

<Saibo> sgardner: the best way to handle what?

<netAction> sgardner: I think Wikipedia is for education and you can not educate people by showing them things they want to see.

<sgardner> What is the best way to handle imagery that is offensive to some people?

<niabot> We have a simple approach. Anything is valid for an article or as a topic if it is educational.

jorm (~bharris@216.38.130.164) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
jorm hat die Verbindung getrennt (Changing host)
jorm (~bharris@wikimedia/jorm) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Saibo> sgardner: the principle of least a.  is indented to be for user interface design - not for encyclopedias.

<sgardner> Keep going :-)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: the best way would have been to handle it in a more professional way ... really ask for input by the projects, really prepare a useful referendum with the help of real polling experts, stuff like that

<Ottava> niabot - even Nazi related material banned under German law?

<sgardner> (I would like to listen for a minute, and let you talk.)

<derpydoo> Howdy gardener from beautiful montréal :)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: now that all that hasn't happened, the best way might be to start again, from scratch

<niabot> Ottava: There is an exception by law for educational content. So there is no problem.

jorm yawns.
<sgardner> derpydoo: Montreal! You are lucky :-)

Ianusius is away: Ich bin beschäftigt.
Ottava puts a muffin in jorm's mouth
<derpydoo> And downtown has been closed to all cars, so it's pedestrian only today :)

<StevenW> Carbidfischer: you mean start over with the opinion polling, or start over with the whole thing?

<netAction> sgardner: We should decide what images we want to show on every article seperately. We do not need a global filter.

<Carbidfischer> StevenW: the whole thing

TorstenK (~tmk@cable-81-173-133-84.netcologne.de) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Ottava> niabot - and who determines when it is "educational" or propaganda? Just like who determines if handing someone hard core pornography is to "educate" them or not?

<sgardner> netAction: please keep going :-)

<Carbidfischer> StevenW: and then, after a year or so of preparation, research and discussion, have a new decision that is supported by majorities on all major projects

<ChristineM> "educational" does not seem to be as cut-and-dry as we hope it would be.

<TorstenK> is there a log of what has happened so far?

<Carbidfischer> TorstenK: there will be

<sgardner> Hi TorstenK :-)

<Saibo> sgardner: a way to handle? -  Same like it was already the hole time. That simple. There is no need for WMF to push in some new feature ;)

<StevenW> We post logs on Meta afterwards

<niabot> Ottava: That depends on the article. Educational content is not the same as propaganda. But could we talk about the real problem?

<netAction> sgardner: In Germany most of the internet access points filter content (for example fashion images). The providers will use the filter to block Wikipedia content too.

<niabot> netAction: WTF?

<netAction> niabot: Deutsche Telekom is the biggest provider and they do it, yes.

<Theo10011> huh?

<geniice> Given the amount of damage pending changes caused on en probably the best approach with the filtered images thing is to walk away now

<Saibo> netAction: which images?

<niabot> netAction: Proof it. NOW!

<tommorris> sgardner: what do you think about having an "all images off" filter as was suggested on Foundation-l recently? It would be culturally neutral, and be actually useful to me as an editor. The other day I was dealing with an image being used on Commons and enwiki that was an image of a man sucking his own penis. I was (as I am now) on the train and wouldn't have rather liked to have dealt with the issues without seeing the image or subject

<HaeB> Ottava, nazi signs are a problem, there are laws against them in germany and austria, and there were a lot of community discussion about their use on wp (especially after a politician tried to bring criminal charges) https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Verwendung_nationalsozialistischer_Symbole

<Theo10011> Godwin's law^

<WilliamH_UK> well and truly

<TorstenK> hi sgardner

<sgardner> you're always on a train, tommorris :-)

<Fluffernutter> and he's not even a train nerd!

<tommorris> sgardner: it is a precondition of working in London

<Hedgehog456> Theo10011: no-one has called anyone else Hitler or a Nazi yet

Ironholds (~bob@wikipedia/Ironholds) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Don-kun> yet!

<tommorris> wait, rephrase: it is a precondition of working in London and not being a millionaire.

<sgardner> Okay. so I think everyone agrees that imagery that's potentially objectionable has a role in the projects, right? We all agree that there is a role for sexual imagery, imagery that's disturbing, and so forth. Right?

<StevenW> netAction: does that mean when say, de put an image up with the vulva article on the Main Page, that the whole Main Page of de was unviewable? Or just the image?

<Ironholds> well, this was a good time to jump in. Thanks, Moonriddengirl ;p

<Theo10011> Hedgehog456, references made. the law stands.

<sgardner> Hello Ironholds! :-)

derpydoo hat die Verbindung getrennt (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
<Theo10011> ohai Ironholds

<Ironholds> hey sgardner, Theo10011

<niabot> sgardner: It plays its role. But we should not treat it any different than anything else.

<sgardner> Niabot, that's the part I would actually like to talk about.

<netAction> niabot, Saibo: Prove: http://www.model-kartei.de/forum/beitrag-924770.html This post sais that whole communities for people photography are blocked by many access points in Germany.

<tommorris> sgardner: given that everythng is potentially objectionable, yes. Wikipedia without potentially objectionable images would be the same as Wikipedia without images.

<Carbidfischer> thx tommorris

<HaeB> netAction, i didn't know that providers in germany are filtering fashion images, can you provide a reference?

<Saibo> netAction: what do you mean by "access points"?

<sgardner> We apply editorial judgement to everything in the projects, right. What role does editorial judgement play in imagery that's potentially objectionable?

<geniice> sgardner officialy none

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: a crucial role, in fact

<sgardner> Go on, Carbidfischer.

<Theo10011> BTW Is HaeB ignoring my greetings?

<netAction> Saibo, HaeB: I mean the WLan access points in Hotels, Airports, Trains and so on.

<Theo10011> :(

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: it's up to the editors what and how many images they include in the articles they write

<niabot> sgardner: We should not bow before people that think that something is objectionable. We represent knowledge as a whole and not the parts that anyone wants to see.

<Saibo> netAction: ah - small private access providers - i see. May be.

<jps> geniice: not really, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IMAGES#Pertinence_and_encyclopedic_nature is a guideline

<HaeB> much esteemed Theo10011, please feel officially greeted

<Theo10011> Thank you, good sir.

<niabot> sgardner: Thats our mission, the mission of the authors.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: i dont see how building a large-scale filtering infrastructure yields so much better results and is worth all the time, effort and drama connected with it

DeltaQuad (~deltaquad@TechEssentials/Staff/DeltaQuad) hat #wikimedia-office verlassen ("Once you know what it is you want to be true, instinct is a very useful device for enabling you to know that it is")
<WilliamH_UK> i don't either

<netAction> Saibo: Deutsche Telekom is the biggest provider, not a small one.

<geniice> jps guideline only. Have fun with practical aplication

<WilliamH_UK> i see it as merely an implementation of censorship

<Ottava> Why should we impose our values upon the reader? Shouldn't the reader be allowed to determine what they want to see? Who is the project for, us or the reader? If they want a choice between seeing an image or not, why should we deny them that choice?

<sgardner> Do we think it makes sense to shock or upset people? Does that contribute to the mission?

<Carbidfischer> WilliamH_UK: i try to avoid the 'c' word

<netAction> sgardner: no

<Saibo> netAction: a - you meant their wlan hotspots?

<geniice> sgardner well yes

<tommorris> sgardner: yes, sometimes

<sgardner> Go on :-)

<WilliamH_UK> sorry but I'm saying it like it is

<sgardner> (Please.)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: are you trying to be funny here? i thought this was a serious discussion

<netAction> Saibo: yes

<sgardner> No, I'm being totally serious.

<WilliamH_UK> deciding what is and what isn't objectionable...that is a slippery slope

<niabot> Ottava: We don't impose our values onto the reader. He decides if he wants to read about the topics. Only providing him half of the content would be imposing of values to the reader.

<StevenW> Even for yourself only?

<Ottava> Does it make sense to deny an encyclopedic to children because they are in school? In China? Simply because they cannot legally view the images?

<Ottava> Should we deny 1/3 of the world access because a few people feel they are being censored?

<Don-kun> ottava: y should the reader impose his values upon us? he is free to use wikipedia or not

<Ironholds> can I point out - our mission is to make educational and encyclopedic material available to all. This isn't doable if large numbers of people find themselves unable to view the entirety of our work due to a small number of problems.

<WilliamH_UK> yes

<Ironholds> don't look at it as censorship - look at it as WIDENING the people we can reach

<geniice> sgardner our biology articles are peppered with ramdon references to evolution. Serious blasphemy right there

<Carbidfischer> WilliamH_UK: and i see how much people are fighting for categories that dont have any real significance ... i dont want to imagine the fighting over categories that actually influence what readers see

<Saibo> sgardner: if people do not like what we show in our articles they should decide not to read - that simple. Or should decide to switch off images in their browser. Their own decision.

<Beria> Ottava, wikipedia is blocked in china since like forever ;)

<Ironholds> or, widening the breadth of people. Not widening the people, that normally requires two strong men and an iron maiden

<WilliamH_UK> Carbidfischer exactly

<Ottava> Jimbo once said that the mission of Wikipedia is to ensure everyone has access. If the law keeps them from having access, how can we fulfill our mission? We must cater to the law. Otherwise, we would host any image no matter what the copyright.

<Philippe> Beria, no, I believe we're unblocked there

<Moonriddengirl> Don-kun: how does it impose values on you if a reader chooses not to see an image? He is not choosing to remove it from the article. </confused>

<Philippe> and have been for years.

<StevenW> Or at least since the last Olympics

<geniice> Ironholds I think you mean and rack and in any case macdonals usualy adresses that issue

<Ottava> Beria - and in Iran

<WilliamH_UK> I was recently helping an individual in #wikipedia-en-help who complained about the pictures in the article on Suicide Girls, saying that they were soft pornography

<aude> hi sgardner

<grinch> Beria: China is a poor example. Muslims are more along the lines of what Ironholds was talking about.

<netAction> sgardner: We do not want to upset people. Therefore we will decide on each page if we want to keep some images.

<Theo10011> The point stands, when an outside dictatorial regime does it is one thing, but would we be assisting them in this now?

<WilliamH_UK> my advice is that if you do not wish to encounter soft pornography, don't look up articles on soft pornography

<sgardner> I guess what I'm saying is that we exercise editorial judgement all the time, about all sorts of things. Is X source reliable enough, is X fact important enough to include, etc. And I am wondering what role the people here think should be played by "is X image likely to upset or shock people.'

Fae (~Fae@host-2-99-66-16.as13285.net) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
Fae hat die Verbindung getrennt (Changing host)
Fae (~Fae@wikipedia/Fae) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<sgardner> I'm not talking about censorship. I'm talking about editorial judgement.

<Theo10011> Also grinch, Racist!

<tommorris> okay, how about this as a thought experiment: if someone were to develop a filter that allowed you to enter a URL pointing to an off-site list of images that would then be shuttered, and it met all the other requirements for deployment on wikimedia.org sites, who would object?

<Ottava> WilliamH_UK - So if someone wants to research rape, they must be exposed to pictures of it? If someone wants to look up the holocost, they must see dead bodies?

<WilliamH_UK> sgardner that is more to do with the integrity of the encylopaedia

<Carbidfischer> WilliamH_UK: not the worst advice you can give

<grinch> Theo10011: Behave, please.

<Ironholds> WilliamH_UK: image issues are also to do with encyclopedic integrity

<StevenW> WilliamH_UK: that's an interesting case, since the article topic itself is about porn. It's not really a case where we can say we ever did wrong and surprised someone unnecessarily.

Ianusius hat die Verbindung getrennt (Quit: Verlassend.)
<Ironholds> again, our objective is not just to build a database, it is to build one people can USE

<sgardner> WilliamH_UK: what about putting the Vulva image on the homepage of the German Wikipedia. People weren't looking up the article on the Vulva, it was just there.

<Theo10011> sgardner depending on the context, they might be synonymous.

<Seth_Finkelstein> Sgardner, can you give any indication of how much analysis made it "up the line" to the Boards and you? That's is painfully well-trod ground.

<geniice> sgardner role? how about "yes it happened"  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_Nanking#Rape

<Ironholds> if large groups of people can't look up *any* of our content because of small issues, we've screwed up.

<Ottava> StevenW - How would the user know it is about porn until they look it up? "Suicide Girls" doesn't really have a porn name.

<Seth_Finkelstein> Err, "This is painfully well-trod ground"

<Theo10011> editorial judgement can be considered a euphemism for censorship.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: the people who really look at the main page are actually a minority

<geniice> Ironholds used to be blocked in china remeber?

<tommorris> basically, to use the filter, you'd put in the domain of Your Favourite Brand oOf Censor, and yit'd do the shuttering for you

<aude> sgardner: not specific to filtering stuff, but how about having a link at the bottom of the page to "dis/enable images"

<Ironholds> Theo10011: sure, but that doesn't mean it always is.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: most people get directly to articles

<niabot> sgardner: Yes we do that all the time. But we don't base our decission on sensibilities. We want to describe the topic as accuratly as possible. Therefore we include different opinions and so on. But we decide whats best for the article and not that the content could hurt a reader.

<aude> like for low bandwidth situations?

<netAction> Carbidfischer: right

<geniice> tommorris again adblock pluss can already do that

<sgardner> Theo10011, how is editorial judgement a euphemism for censorship?

<WilliamH_UK> By the way, the Suicide Girls case I mentioned, the individual knew that it contained soft porn

<tommorris> so you could put in focusonthefamily.org/wikimedia_filters.xml and it'd use those filters or wehatejustinbieber.com/wikimedia_filters.xml and you'd get that bunch of filters

<jps> tommorris: that's imho a much better idea than the categories.  You know as soon as the set of offensive categories gets finalized, a handful of miscreants will be tripping over themselves to come up with images that fall into all the categories. Bleh

<sgardner> Censorship is something imposed from outside. Editorial judgement is decisions we make ourselves.

<geniice> tommorris again you've just described adblock plus

<Theo10011> sgardner, an editor with arbitrary higher powers to decide on what content gets through or not.

<Carbidfischer> WilliamH_UK: if you dont want to see pornography, dont buy hustler magazine ;-)

<Seth_Finkelstein> tommorris ands PICSrules before that

<Ironholds> Theo10011: censorship is "you cannot look at this image"

<niabot> sgardner: Do we have something like inside or outside? Everyone can participate.

<WilliamH_UK> that is more sound advice

<Theo10011> could def. be considered a form of censorship.

<Ironholds> this is "you can CHOOSE whether to look at this image"

<netAction> sgardner: No. They will use the filter for censorship.

<tommorris> geniice: no, adblock plus just removes the advert completely. this would only remove the images from a subset of webpages and replace it with a shutter

<Ironholds> which is a service we don't already offer

<sgardner> I am not sure that higher powers are arbitrarily given. If they are, that would be a different problem.

<Ottava> sgardner - their loose definition of censorship would also include removing vandalism, improving pages, or the rest since it is "imposing" the "will" of a "few" upon the "majority"

<geniice> tommorris false

<Theo10011> yes Ironholds or an editor decided this image should be looked at or not.

<Ironholds> at the moment we say "you must see everything". Saying "you can decide if you want to or not" is not censorship.

<Theo10011> it would be relative to the editor.

<jps> tommorris: that's essentially the method that AdBlock Plus uses, and perhaps it's instructive that ABP is the most popular browser extension ever

<Ironholds> Theo10011: no, again, deciding people can choose if people have to look at it

<niabot> Ottava: You should really stop to make accusations you can't proof at all.

<kellerkind71> sgardner: editiorial judgement we do every day

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: that is a somewhat disturbing lie which keeps being told in these discussions

<Ottava> It would be censorship by having the images here. What it effectively does is make certain pages offlimits because of a few images put there by a minority of people.

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: people dont see an image and say, oh, i dont want to see that image anymore

<tommorris> Seth_Finkelstein: I'm fully aware that what I'm proposing isn't new. It's a thought experiment designed to elicit what people's actual objections are. You may prefer having issues being muddy, I'd rather they were less muddy.

<sgardner> kellerkind71: yes, exactly.

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: WE the editors choose images that we think people should not see

<niabot> Ottava: <citation needed>

<sgardner> That's why I'm wondering about the Vulva on the homepage of the German Wikipedia.

<jps> sgardner: so how about tommorris's idea? why not have the ability to use an externally-produced blocklist instead of a set of offensive categories?

<Ironholds> Carbidfischer: we already do that, though

<Ottava> Carbidfischer - editors also choose to vandalize.

<Ironholds> we already say "this image is or not appropriate for an article"

<Theo10011> there is editorial judgement that happens by consensus day-by-day. then there is one sweeping change enacted that would affect everything.

<Saibo> sgardner: because it was a featured article...

<Seth_Finkelstein> tommorris I'd actually prefer people not slog through the mud all over again.

<Saibo> what is wrong about it?

<Ironholds> if you're going to set a false dichotomy of freedom - censorship, we've already crossed that line

<Fenix2> sgardner: There is a saying in Finnish "He who adds knowledge, adds agony" ( i.e. knowing more about some nasty things makes the subject likely feel worse, not better. ergo the motivation of editors to leave nasty things out of articles, call it self-censorship )

<Theo10011> in one go.

AzaToth (~azatoth@wikipedia/AzaToth) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: yeah, but not based on some kind of "culturally neutral" moral grounds

<sgardner> So I read the poll on the German WP. If I understood it correctly, its result was basically this: We will not say that *by definition* potentially objectionable material will be unable to appear on the homepage.

<Beria> jps, who decide what is offensive

<Ironholds> Carbidfischer: we do on occasion

<sgardner> In other words, they said, we reserve the right to make case-by-case decisions.

<jps> Seth_Finkelstein: PICS rules were category-based

<sgardner> Am I understanding the result of that poll correctly?

<Beria> i saw a big fight over wikipe-tan (a doll, for the love of god! A doll)

<Ottava> Beria - individuals, so individuals should be given the ability to avoid things.

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: we dont build a giant filtering infrastructure on it, generally

<Saibo> sgardner: which poll? The last about the filter?

<sgardner> No, no -- the one about Vulva on the home page of the German Wikipedia.

<niabot> sgardner: We don't make decissions based upon sensibilities.

<jps> Beria: anyone who wants to publish a list. You, me, anyone.

<Ottava> niabot - really? Then why don't we have pages filled with cuss words?

<sgardner> Niabot, yeah, that's what I'm interested in.

<Ironholds> Carbidfischer: we do, we just call it Images for Deletion ;p

<Ironholds> niabot: yes, we do

<sgardner> I find myself wondering why we don't.

<niabot> Saibo: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Beschränkung_der_Themen_für_den_Artikel_des_Tages

<Carbidfischer> niabot, sgardner: we cant, realistically, because there are so many of them

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: dont get me started on commons image deletion policy

<Ironholds> niabot: we say "we won't have images that demean or ridicule the subject", for example

<sgardner> So many potentially offensive topics?

<Seth_Finkelstein> jps: And single blacklists are just a simply "deny" category

<Beria> and now because you think wikipe-tan is ofensive i can't see her anymore? ;)

<Ironholds> no, this is en-wiki, Carbidfischer

<Ottava> sgardner - the Japanese Wikipedia made the decision that criminals real life names cannot be printed. Why? Because it conformed to their laws. We should be allowed to give projects the ability to allow for their regional laws to be obeyed.

<sgardner> Ottava, they do.

<jps> Seth_Finkelstein: that is not the usual definition of a category

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: then dont get me started on en.wp ;-)

<Ottava> sgardner - then why is Farsi denied a filter?

<HaeB> (for those who are not familiar with the vulva story: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-03-22/News_and_notes )

<sgardner> The Germans adhere, for example, to the law that requires people to get a fresh start once they've served time in prison for a crime. The German Wikipedia does not publish the names of those people, in deference to German cultural sensibilities.

<Theo10011> thanks HaeB.

<Seth_Finkelstein> jps: I just menat the infrastructure has been discussed for a long time

<niabot> Ottava: Whats that for a conlusion?

<Saibo> Ottava: why do they put the images in their articles if it is against their law?

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: no sensibilities, the law

<Ottava> sgardner - if the German Wikipedia does that, then they "censor" information. So their objection to "censorship" should be flatly ignored based on allowing different cultures to adhere to their laws.

<Ottava> Which requires a filter for most of the world.

<jps> Seth_Finkelstein: I've never seen any discussion of external blocklists before.  Where have they been discussed?

<Ironholds> Carbidfischer: a law built on moral sensibilities.

<sgardner> Carbidfischer: probably both, right. Sensibilities result in law.

<niabot> sgardner: We do that to follow the law and keep the project running, not to protect the individuals.

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: that  is not the point

<sgardner> Ironholds: jinx :-)

<Ironholds> de-wiki is hosted over here, last time I checked

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds, sgardner: we also tend to obey laws that are not built on moral sensibilites

<Ironholds> a British editor posting to a Virginia server owned by a Florida company is not obliged to obey the german law

<Philippe> de-wiki is hosted in the same server farm as the other projects, Ironholds.

<Seth_Finkelstein> jps: I'm glad you asked that question :-)

<Ironholds> and yet, under de-wiki policy, they must

<Ottava> I do not think that de-wiki has the right to impose their will upon 1 billion Muslims living in over 45 nations and representing 3 continental regions.

<TorstenK> sgardner: that is not entirely correct. The German Wikimedia went to court to remain the right to have the name of a victim online

<StevenW> So we've been discussing the filter for 30 minutes or so, I want to make sure we don't have any questions left for Sue

<niabot> Ironholds: Read about "Schutzlandprinzip", then it should be clear that we have to follow US-lar (provider) and German law (audience)

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: because, as you may have forgotten, the editor is responsible for what he writes, not the foundation

<Ironholds> now, there's no legal reason to prohibit them doing so - they're not at threat from lawsuits, and neither are the foundation - so instead the application of the law is based on morality.

<sgardner> So I just want to say one thing, and then we can move on to more specific questions about the image filter. Sorry to take up time with this piece of it. I would say that throughout this discussion (the general discussion, not this particular discussion), I have found myself wondering if we have some kind of lack of empathy in our projects. Some kind of failure of imagination.

<Ironholds> Carbidfischer: hence my example of a german editor ;p

<Seth_Finkelstein> jps: See my 2002 paper co-written with an EFF attorney "Blacklisting Bytes"  http://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Censorware/20010306_eff_nrc_paper1.html

<Carbidfischer> Ironholds: ...

<tommorris> sgardner: if non-Foundation employees were to run an independent, well-designed survey, would the WMF take it into account? basically, if a few members of the community were to sit down and write a survey that tries to ask questions to elicit clear responses from readers and editors and address what many feel are huge shortcomings in the Foundation survey, would the results be paid attention to.

<tommorris> Ottava: okay, which laws should Latin Wikipedia abide by? Esperanto? Chinese?

<jps> Seth_Finkelstein: Thanks. Anything in the context of WMF images?

<Theo10011> sgardner, failure of imagination?

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: in fact, you have a quite big lack of empathy

<Ottava> sgardner - I would assume it is the same reason why we have "1000 white penises and 1 black penis" according to the survey of images. We are regionally biased with much of it coming from white European in ethnicity.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: to the point that it looks like the foundation is working against the communities

<Seth_Finkelstein> jps: The WMF images argument is a specific case of a very longstanding censorware argument

<jorm> tommorris: I wonder if there would be a change of opinion among many people if we surveyed 100,000 readers and all of them said they wanted a filter.

<sgardner> I think it makes sense for us to give warm and friendly consideration to the views of other people -- people whose views we don't share. The Turkish girl in Germany whose mother wears the hijab. The person reading Wikipedia with his aged grandfather. The guy sitting on the train reading Wikipedia in public.

<niabot> Ottava: Maybe to many black penises got deleted?

<tommorris> jorm: there might be a change of opinion if the survey had that question. ;-)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: perhaps lack of empathy is not the right word, i think my original notion of lack of professionalism is more accurate

<jps> people can talk about vulvas and naked pregnant women all day, and those are valid concerns, but the controversial images which have generated the most lengthy discussions are those of Mohammed, and think about it: jorm didn't even propose a category for religious offensive imagery, because most people are frankly baffled by that idea, but external blocklists could solve that completely

<netAction> sgardner: You want all these people to see a clound instead of the reality?

<Theo10011> Ottava, again with the white penises? srsly?

<Ottava> niabot - pornographic images on commons are derived from ethnic European exhitionists. It is a cultural bias and a cultural bias opposed on much of the world.

<niabot> Ottava: We don't support the deletion of such images if they could be used to illustrate a subject by us or other authors.

<niabot> Ottava: <citation needed>

<sgardner> I think that --as responsible editorial curators of content-- we have a responsibility to try to imagine those people's sensibilities, and what will be most helpful for them. I think that causing surprise and dismay to people is questionable in terms of its ability to help us fulfill our mission. That's what I'm thinking about.

<sgardner> And I think we should be cautious about the limits of our own understanding and knowledge. I think it's dangerous when we think we know what's best for other people.

<tommorris> about the religious imagery stuff, why not just a recursive search of Commons for stuff in Category:Muhammed

<Theo10011> sgardner, I might fit into or close to those people you are talking about.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: who is "we" here? the foundation is not curatoring content, it ist paying for servers

<geniice> sgardner The point has been extensively considered over the years

<AzaToth> Anyone who has any subjective emotional feeling regarding an image shouldn't have any power over it's existance or not

jorm didn't actually propose *any* categories.
<jps> Seth_Finkelstein: well whatever the intellectual thinking was on censorware, the actual fact is that almost all public schools have them installed these days

<Seth_Finkelstein> sgardner, can I ask again, how much material about this common topic made it up to the Board level?

<grinch> The Goatse image was necessary in order to demonstrate the subject and inform them about its shocking nature. (I am, of course, being facetious.)

<sgardner> Sorry Carbidfischer, I was using "we" with me in my role as editor, not my role as ED.

<jps> jorm: s/proposed/mocked up

<Ottava> AzaToth - are you including those who want the images to stay because of emotions? Because of "censorship" -fears- that are emotional?

<Seth_Finkelstein> jps: I know. And libraries. And maybe soon Wikipedia.

<sgardner> grinch: LOL.

<geniice> grinch that debate has been held

<sgardner> Bless you for being funny :-)

<Saibo> sgardner: If we do not want to "causing surprise" we should simply close wikipedia - no more surprise. Granted.   Articles are full of surprise - new knowledge - hopefully.

<niabot> sgardner: That would lead us nowhere. We are here to write an encyclopedia and not an school book for fundamentalists.

<sgardner> We can do some specific questions now: sorry to take up some time with soapboxing.

<StevenW> wait we have two questions for Sue to answer. Tom's about an alternate community run poll, and Seth's about Board discussion.

<jorm> i *really* wish that those mockups hadn't been used.  I made them with the understanding that they were going to only be illustrative of a principle, and that only, like, 8 people were going to see them.

<geniice> sgardner whats LOL? haven't you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Goatse.cx ?

<Ottava> Seth_Finkelstein - libraries have books that are able to inform without shocking pictures. :)

<sgardner> Niabot, try not to stereotype and demonize other people :-)

<sgardner> I have, yeah, geniice.

<Beria> tommorris, that is very bad idea

<jps> sgardner: is there any reason that categories of offensive images are better than blocklists from arbitrary sources?

<jorm> also, that design was built under the criteria "fastest and easiest thing that can be built without developing extensive additional technology."

<AzaToth> Ottava: anyone who can't set aside it's own personal feeling

<Beria> only a few images in one category of http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Muhammad are problematic

<kellerkind71> Ottava: and libraries have books that surely will shock people

<Ottava> AzaToth - we are all humans. No one can set aside personal feelings.

<sgardner> I am reading tommorris's question now.

<Ottava> kellerkind71q - not out in front, not given to children, etc.

<geniice> Beria no all of them are

<Philippe> So first outstanding question is from Tom:  Would the WMF pay attention to an alternative poll?

<geniice> Beria drawings of people see? very bad

<niabot> sgardner: This is not my aim. My aim is to ingore such topics and to write an neutral encyclopedia in which any educational content is welcome the same way as anything else.

<AzaToth> Ottava: meant more "promote" it's personal feeling

<Philippe> And the other was from Seth: How much analysis made it to the Board level?

<geniice> Beria heck there are wikipedia articles that contain music

<Beria> geniice, only the drawings who show him are

<Beria> see the category

<StevenW> Seth: the answer to your question is that the Harris report which is posted on Meta was commissioned by/for the Board

<Beria> there are no drawings in the main category

<StevenW> and there's the resolution of course

<Beria> there are a category for it

<Ottava> AzaToth - all opinions are derived from emotions. We take a subjective view of the world and determine things from experience. :)

<geniice> Beria false. Certian lines of islam ban all drawings of people although most allow photos

<TorstenK> sgardner: I just can imagine a case where the proposed filter could actually work.If you are a chassidic jew, you are probably offended by so many things, the configuration of your filter settings would take hours

<Carbidfischer> there is a nice quote by jose luis borges which i have yet to find in english ... essentially, surprise is the beginning of all understanding

<Seth_Finkelstein> StevenW - do you mean, the Board read nothing besided the Harris Report?

<Beria> geniice, there are no drawings in the main category

<Beria> is that hard to click in the link?

<netAction> Carbidfischer: Great

<TorstenK> sgardner: if you are just arachnophobic, it's much easier not to lookup spiders on Wikipedia

<StevenW> No. But if you're asking about how long they've been paying attention, the answer is a long time.

<geniice> Beria we've also managed to avoid photographing his toomb

<Carbidfischer> StevenW: paying attention to what and whom?

<sgardner> So tommorris. I guess I would say that any further discussion and investigation on this issue would be welcome. I think it's important for us to talk about it as much as we can, because it's only through talking that we can achieve better shared understanding. Sometimes I despair at how hard that is (achieving shared understanding / consensus), but it's the only path to success.

<sgardner> I would also say

<StevenW> Carbid: it was in answer to Seth's question

<Theo10011> heh reminds me of Sarah's post on ML when she was surprised to see a picture of Vagina on an article about vagina.

<Theo10011> Figure that.

<Carbidfischer> StevenW: i understood that, but i had a new question

<jps> if you're arachophobic, an external blocklist would be easier and a lot more likely than a separate "spiders" category

<Seth_Finkelstein> StevenW, sgardner - No, I'm not asking about how long the've been paying attention. I'm asking if they paid attention to the extensive material about the way this topic tends to be discussed.

<Carbidfischer> Theo10011: hehe

<Beria> so incredible Theo10011 :P

<TorstenK> sorry "can't imagine", not "can imagin"

<tommorris> Beria: yeah, but the point of the filter that has been missing is that if it doesn't PREVENT you from viewing the image (you just click and it pops back into the page) the cost of an image being removed is low, therefore it doesn't matter if there are false positives

<Theo10011> Beria updated the picture to a more descriptive one thanks to that post, if I remember.

<sgardner> That it's not obvious that the answers lie in us, in the group that we are today. Because it is a fairly narrow group, and it's possible we've self-reinforced our narrowness over time. I think that when we're talking about these issues, it makes sense for us to encourage and listen carefully to minority views. Which in our case probably includes women, people from other cultural backgrounds (non-Western) and so forth. I think it makes sense t

<sgardner> o not demonize and stereotype those people, but instead try to understand their POV.

<jps> and blocklists would likely be easy to generate from categories

<geniice> sgardner we've discussed it for over a decade and reach as close as we are going to get to a conclusion. effort would be better spent elsewhere

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: perhaps you should talk to the board and especially its chairman about your ideas about consensus and stuff

<Seth_Finkelstein> StevenW, sgardner - Did they read my and EFF attorney 2002 paper, for example?

<StevenW> No

<Beria> tommorris, but your categorization system don't do that

<StevenW> Not that I know of

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: they dont seem to know very much about working together to achieve such a thing

<sgardner> So I think that the truth, and the best answers, aren't necessarily going to reside in polls. But I think they are worth doing.

<Beria> if you want to do that at least get the time to do it right

<tommorris> if I'm on the train and I don't want pictures of men sucking their own willies on my screen, I'm not too bothered if occasionally there is an image of a woman sucking a lollipop that doesn't come up

<sgardner> Does that answer your question, tommorris?

<tommorris> sgardner: yep, thanks

<geniice> tommorris so use lynx

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: npov does ring a bell, right? ;-)

<jps> next time test the poll questions on a small subset of respondents so you don't end up with heavily bimodal responses

<niabot> sgardner: What i really want to see is a study on how many readers are actually offended by our articles with "offensive" images. A rough comparison of data showed me that 0,001% of the readers feel actually offended by some content.

<Theo10011> +1 to geniice BTW

<Carbidfischer> + 0.9 to jps

<Beria> +2 to niabot

<Ottava> A poll of this room would find that more than .001% of users are offended by some content

<Carbidfischer> jps: next time, let real polling guys and real statisticians do the work

<tommorris> geniice: when I have a few hours, I might write a JavaScript thing that lets you turn images on and off on a particular WM site

<AzaToth> sgardner: the only cultural and sexual neutral standpoint is to avoid any moral categorization and censorship (mandatory or optional) at all

<netAction> niabot: Great ide!

MF-Warburg (~chatzilla@Wikimedia/MF-Warburg) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<sgardner> Carbidfischer, I knew it was a mistake to write POV, LOL.

<jorm> Not having a foreign policy is still having a policy.

<Theo10011> Ottava, anyone on commons can't be surprised by much. ;)

<jps> it would be great if the Foundation hired someone with polling experience

<Carbidfischer> tommorris: that was essentially my proposal in nuremberg 10 days ago

<sgardner> But the truth is, we all have a POV.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: hehe

<tommorris> Theo10011: I read Commons for the metadata.

<Theo10011> heh

<Ottava> Cultural neutral would not mean to avoid moral categorization, because that would be imposing a cultural minority over the majority

<Ottava> >.<

<HaeB> lol

<TorstenK> sgardner: that is the definition of POV. Everyone has one

tommorris made that joke the other day.
<StevenW> So we're coming up on 10 minutes left

<jps> can we please move on to other topics now?

<Ottava> Cultural Neutral would be to allow for all people to not be offended.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: thats why we are trying so hard with this npov thingy

<niabot> Ottava: Not a poll on opinion. A real questioning with examples/articles.

<Fae> sgardner: Re: "worth doing"; could you openly publish the full costs of the last poll and its analysis before commissioning the next one?

<Theo10011> I spent the week voting on stuff on commons that would put me in jail in most countries.

<geniice> tommorris again that could be done with adblock plus in about 30 seconds. Just kill anything int he domain ending in .png .jpg or .tff (and .ogv and .ogg if you want to be complete)

<AzaToth> Ottava: no, the reverse

<Ottava> niabot, I can give you over 2,000 images right now that are offensive on Commons.

<Ottava> AzaToth, no, it isn't neutral to offend everyone but you.

<AzaToth> Ottava: everyone will be offended by something

<Ottava> Not at all.

<niabot> Ottava: That is not the point

<Beria> Ottava, i would like to see you try to offend niabot

<TorstenK> Ottava: have you counted? :-)

<Ottava> Beria - I offend niabot by existing.

<Carbidfischer> Beria: me too :-)

<niabot> Ottava: XD

<StevenW> Fae: the cost is time of one employee and maybe half of another. For a few weeks.

<Ottava> TorstenK - I looked at the Category number :)

<sgardner> TorstenK yes. And I think we go off track when we forget that ours is just one opinion. I'm not necessarily saying that everyone's POV is equally valuable. But there's a world of difference between total cultural relativism, and "I am the only one who is right."

<tommorris> geniice: yes, but the UI of AdBlockPlus doesn't easily let you distinguish between "viagra ad I don't want to see EVER" and "pic on Wikipedia that I don't want to see while on the train". There isn't afaik a way to easily handle the latter with a good UI

<Beria> you offend the whole world by existing, Ottava :)

<Philippe> part* of the time of one employee :-)

<sgardner> (reading for a minute, catching up)

<Carbidfischer> StevenW: thats exactly what the referendum looked like ;-)

<Ottava> Beria :P

<tommorris> geniice: plus I don't have AdBlockPlus on every device, nor do I have synchronisation of my AdBlockPlus block list

<Theo10011> don't be mean to Ottava!

<TorstenK> sgardner: right

Beria is sorry :P
<geniice> tommorris So just edit the text file

<Fae> StevenW: Yes I have had other vague estimates, for a project with such impact I would be more confident with an openly published budget and actual costs being officially reported.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: i am not sure why our core principles, or five pillars or whatever, dont seem to count any more

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: encyclopedia, free, npov, that kind of stuff

<Ottava> sgardner - how about this - We are trying to be an encyclopedia right? What does Britannica do regarding images? - We are trying to give everyone access right? How do we address countries that deny access because of images?

<jorm> I think that suggestions of "ad blockers" are pretty full of fail, frankly, because the solution doesn't target a huge percentage of our readership - the less-technically savvy.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: if people cant handle that, their bad. were not mandatory or something, they can look someplace else

<Ottava> We should ignore personal ideologies and instead try to fix the overall problem to readership

<netAction> sgardner: I am not sure why people in the train should be FORCED not to see many images. As you know the providers in trains often do censorship.

<Seth_Finkelstein> Sigh. I get the feeling that this summarizes what happened - http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/90q3/theplan.html

<AzaToth> I would say it should be an scientifical point of view, i.e. that everything should be pure fact

WilliamH_UK (~WilliamH_@Wikipedia/WilliamH) hat #wikimedia-office verlassen
<AzaToth> a*

<Ottava> A vocal minority is still a vocal minority, and a lot of shouting can lead you down the wrong path.

<jps> jorm: you think there's no way to show a list of blocklists and let newbies select the ones they want?

<Philippe> Because facts are never in doubt, AzaToth? :)  Or misunderstood or debated? :)

<TorstenK> I just can't see someone in rural India or Brasilia or Alabama click through 2000 categories filter everything that he himself finds offensice. This just won't happen.

<Carbidfischer> Ottava: thats  almost exactly what happened

<Ottava> jps - it would not address a block by a school board or a country.

<Theo10011> BTW off-topic sgardner, are you attending Wikiconference in India in November?

<AzaToth> Philippe: that's part of the scientifical process

<niabot> Carbidfischer: +1

<Ottava> Carbidfischer - it is exactly what should happen.

<AzaToth> ツ

<Carbidfischer> Ottava: beg pardon?

<jorm> i think that saying "go download this extra software and then install it and add this configuration line to it just so you don't have to see penises on the world's largest encyclopedia" is a bit too much for someone like my mother to be able to do.

<kellerkind71> :)

<jps> it would be so much easier to show ~30 optional blocklists which could have spiders and Mohammed, as opposed to categories which probably wouldn't

<Ottava> I would rather trade 500 German users leaving and having access to 2 billion more people than to deny them access because a few people felt censored.

<Beria> She is not Theo10011

<sgardner> Carbidfischer, I respect what you're saying. Obviously I do: we are working on the same project, for the same goals. But when you say "if they can't handle it, they should go somewhere else." Honestly, if I were one of those people that would make me feel terrible. We want to help people, we want to serve people. Driving them away doesn't help them.

<Ottava> We need to be utilitarian here.

<Carbidfischer> jorm: well, than she should look at the articles fluffy kittens or microwave ovens, and not at the article human penis

<jorm> jps: yes, it would.

<AzaToth> jorm: I hope you are not planning to use the "think of the children" card

<Beria> Her assistent send a mail to India ML saying she is not attending

<jorm> the mockups used categories because that's the technology we have.

<jps> Ottava: there's never been any proposal to give schools or countries control above that of individual users

<TorstenK> Ottava: you won't get any new users with the proposed filter

<jps> jorm: why?

<niabot> Ottava: Definetly not. I don't write content for easily offended people. I write articles. They don't have to like it. They don't have to read it.

<jorm> I don't care about the children.  They can die in a fire.

<TorstenK> Ottava: it's unpractical

<grinch> Be nice.

<jorm> he said, jokingly.

<Theo10011> weee

<Theo10011> what?

<StevenW> jorm: lol

<jps> jorm: nevermind

<Ironholds> jorm is the foundation's Diplomat-in-Residence

<Ottava> TorstenK - actually, I know quite a few just in the US that wont let their children use Wikipedia because of the images.

<sgardner> Hush hush.

<Philippe> For the record, Jorm does not speak for the WMF :)

<Ironholds> he comes to us seconded from the US operation in Iran

<sgardner> :-)

<Ironholds> :P

<jps> can we move on to another topic now please?

<Ottava> Having an opt-out filter would fix that.

<TorstenK> Ottava: the filter won't change this

<jorm> well, there's a problem with "just don't look at the articles about penises"

<sgardner> I'm sorry: I feel like I've missed questions. Are there any specific questions I've missed/.

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: well, you cant have everything ... you cant have the free npov encyclopedia and everyone on the planet being happy with it at the same time

<netAction> Ottava: What you think won't work.

<jps> sgardner: I'm concerned about active editors on English Wikipedia.  There have been a lot of Foundation resources devoted to editor retention, but I don't see any evidence that editors are actually declining instead of leveling off.  On the other hand, there is no question that enwiki is losing 100 active admins per year, and RFAs are declining faster.  Will the Foundation ever try to address the actual problem of active admins?

<sgardner> Carbidfischer: that's correct.

<jorm> because people like to put those photos everywhere.

<TorstenK> Ottava: opt-out filter is not on the table. It's an opt-in filter

<Ottava> netAction it works for yahoo, google, flickr, etc.

<sgardner> But there is lots of grey between those two poles.

<Ottava> TorstenK - sgardner et al can change that.

GerardM- (~chatzilla@dhcp-077-251-103-224.chello.nl) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<tommorris> sgardner: when you gonna write a Wikinews article? I'd review it if you did. ;-)

<Theo10011> hoi

<Carbidfischer> jorm: beg pardon?

<netAction> Ottava: It does not! That is the point! Google shows what you want to see. Not the reality.

<apergos> I thought we had statistics that show that new editors are sticking around less now

<Carbidfischer> jorm: i've seen thousands of penis-less articles in different wikipedias over the years

<AzaToth> jps: got a quote from 2006 regarding that ツ

<TorstenK> Ottava: then she must change the only thing the community agreed on in the "Referendum"?

<Hedgehog456> jorm: "Article on kittens? Human penis image! Article on economic finance? Human penis image!" and so on

<Ottava> sgardner should think about the vast majority of the world and put forth an opt-out filter on every account and on every IP by default. It would conform to Google, Flickr, etc, in their "safe search" filter via default.

<apergos> and that longer term editors are leaving at the same rate as always

<sgardner> Oh wait, sorry. I didn't mean to say that. I believe we can have a free NPOV encyclopedia, that is more inclusive than what we currently have. That does not cause offence for no reason, and no real benefit.

<jps> apergos: http://cloggie.org/pictures/wissewords/wikipedia-retention-vs-active-editors.png looks like leveling off to me

<AzaToth> "I am hard-pressed to find somebody willing to go through the chinese water torture that is RfA on english Wikipedia at the moment. Let alone somebody who'll actually pass the damn thing." -werdna october 2006

<niabot> sgardner: I wrote it above: Can we make an actual study on how many readers are actually offended by our articles or images and for what reasons, based on real examples.

<apergos> contributing to a net decline

<StevenW> jps: it seems like a big part of the problem there is the lack of ability to reform the process for RFA. That's not really the Foundation's job, unless someone asks us.

tommorris finds that if he wants to see cocks, ANI is a far better place to go than the articles
<Carbidfischer> sgardner: so what do you want, the encyclopedia or pleasing to everyone? :-)

<AzaToth> I assume en-wiki RFA still is water torture

<tommorris> AzaToth: yes.

<Carbidfischer> lol Hedgehog456

<netAction> Carbidfischer: +1

<jps> StevenW: there are a lot of PR things the foundation could do to encourage editors to try to become admins

<niabot> Carbidfischer: +1

<sgardner> Carbidfischer, sorry, I misspoke. Read my later comment :-)

<Fluffernutter> Actually, en-wiki RFAs have been going very gently in the past few months

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: i read it :-)

<Ottava> sgardner - how hard would it be to adopt a "safe search" type opt out filter like Google, Flickr, and the rest?

<tommorris> Fluffernutter's experience is not universal. ;-)

<geniice> Fluffernutter thats like 3 RFAs

<StevenW> Says the person who got 100% supports. :D

<sgardner> Carbidfischer: okay.

<jorm> heh.  mediawiki.org's rfa is pretty easy.

<Carbidfischer> AzaToth: nothing compared to de.wp rfa

<Saibo> Ottava: flickr is not opt-out for Germany - it is fully censored.

<Theo10011> Fluffernutter, you were the exception.

<jorm> "Hey, I need admin to do this thing here."   Done

<Theo10011> Also stop gloating.

<Fluffernutter> tommorris, not just me. There's been like 4 or 5 passes this month, all overwhelming

<AzaToth> Ottava: if wmf adopted optout, then most of the contributors will jump the ship

<sgardner> niabot, it's so funny. We have lots of people saying we have spent too much money on this already, and other people calling for more research.

<Ottava> Saibo - and do you know why?

<HaeB> Carbidfischer, jorm may have been talking about vandals adding them to off-topic articles. that's why the bad image list was created

<jps> also the Foundation could ask the community to try to address the problem, with specific proposals for example.  Such as, the Foundation could ask Chapters to hold competitions or similar to run their members in RFAs

<apergos> that seems to be a slow but steady declinne

<Ottava> AzaToth - to be honest, I think that we would lose very few good writers.

<Saibo> Ottava: because flickr is stupid - they lost quite many contributors therefor

<jorm> i was, but also referring to a tendency to add as much nudity as possible to pages wherever possible.

<Theo10011> ok I have a hard time following if we're talking about penises or RfAs.

<Ottava> It would mostly be people who have no real business being on an encyclopedia

<apergos> there are actual numbers I remember being reported.  I guess howie would have those

<Carbidfischer> HaeB: thats why we have rc patrols and patrolled versions, right?

<niabot> sgardner: It would be a shame to implement it based upon the opinion of a very loud minority.

<Beria> both Theo10011

<Fae> sgardner: People might thing you had not spent to much money if you could answer clearly how much WMF had actually spent.

<Carbidfischer> HaeB: i dont think filtering images on commons will solve that problem any better

Abbajnr hat die Verbindung getrennt (Quit: Page closed)
<Fluffernutter> Theo10011: RFAs are populated by dicks. The issues are identical :D

<Theo10011> heh

<geniice> sgardner killing bad ideas through shear attrittion is a well established practice when the normal methods don't work

<AzaToth> Ottava: it's a cultural thing. I assume Americans hasn't much against optout as they are custom to it, but here in Sweden, optout is frowned upon

<Theo10011> gender-gap!!!

<jorm> Pregnancy is a good example.

<Fluffernutter> oh lordy

<Fluffernutter> THAT

<sgardner> Honestly, I don't think more research would solve the basic question. We don't need research to tell us that some of our imagery is offensive to some people. We have lots of letters about the Muhammed imagery and so forth: it's obvious that some of our material is going to be upsetting for some groups. The question is what do we want to do about that.

<Ottava> AzaToth - I highly doubt that.

<HaeB> Carbidfischer, just wanted to clear up the confusion (<Carbidfischer> jorm: beg pardon?)

molliug (~guillaume@wikimedia/guillom) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<AzaToth> Ottava: why so?

<Theo10011> what?

<Carbidfischer> HaeB: thx

<geniice> sgardner nothing.

<jps> apergos: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ActiveAdmins_10-11-2009.png is down to 720 active admins at present, but the trend from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-02-14/Features_and_admins#RfAs_and_the_decline_in_active_administrators is more troubling

<sgardner> Niabot: what is the "very loud minority"?

<Ottava> sgardner - how hard would it be to adopt an opt out filter like Google, Flickr, and the rest?

<AzaToth> Ottava: optout is outlawed here I belived even

<sgardner> geniice: I am well aware of that :-)

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: honestly, i think it would be nice to do any research that deserves that name at all

<Theo10011> Pregnancy article needs its own session.

<Fluffernutter> srs

<Ottava> AzaToth - Ridiculous claim.

Marlus_Gancher (~chatzilla@p3EE3740B.dip.t-dialin.net) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Carbidfischer> sgardner: apart from the useless referendum and the harris-and-his-daughter report

<niabot> sgardner: It is to proof if it exists and if it is minority or not.

<apergos> do we have a graph of the number of new admins approved each year vs the number that leave?  I guess I would want that per month

<Fluffernutter> jorm has a daughter?

<jorm> what? no!

<geniice> sgardner we've found doing nothing about the Muhammed imagery to be an excelent solution. gets the job done and doesn't set people up for false expectations later

<Beria> oh fot the love of God :P Pregnancy is not a problem :P

<Carbidfischer> Theo10011: might take up to 9 months, that pregnancy thing

<Philippe> apergos: we don't.  it would have some artificial stuff represented too.

<Theo10011> the researcher Fluffernutter.

<jps> the problem with active admins is that they have been declining LINEARLY for the past three years.  Unlike editors, editor retention, edits, etc., which are all clearly leveling off, which is what you would expect when the encyclopedia is in equilibrium with new facts and changing facts

<apergos> congratulations jorm!  what's her name? :-D

<Philippe> there was a policy change midway through, apergos, which would have to be normalized.

<Theo10011> Controversial content study.

<apergos> (I *will* tweet this)

<sgardner> AzaToth: The plan for our filter has always been completely opt-in (and reversible). But just for factual accuracy -- don't the Swedes experience the same opt-out versions of Flickr, Google Images etc., as everybody else?

<sgardner> Opt-out is the convention.

<jorm> yer gonna get me in trouble.  somehow.

<apergos> Philippe: let's make the notes and normalize the dat; it would be helpful

<netAction> Ottava: Wikipedia has the power to do something against censorship. If we enable the filter we will lose that power and feed the censors.

<Ottava> netAction - Wikipedia is not a political platform.

<Carbidfischer> + 1 netAction, wikipedia could make a difference concerning all this freedom and stuff

<apergos> jorm:  you betcha :-D

<Ottava> I am tired of people trying to make it otherwise.

<niabot> sgardner: Personally i would do nothing about it. We are here to write an encyclopedia. We don't have to please the audience at all cost like flickr will have to. Thats one of the things that made us come so far. It was the basic idea.

<AzaToth> sgardner: I think places like flickr and google has optout, but local system might require optin, though I'm not certain if I remember correctly

<netAction> Ottava: This talk IS political!

<sgardner> Nobody is arguing that we should handle this like Flickr and Google Images do.

<Ottava> sgardner - allowing people to use it to push a political agenda is one of the greatest threats to the encyclopedic integrity

<StevenW> Alright, well it's time for us to wrap up.

<Ottava> sgardner - I argued it. :)

<StevenW> I'll post the logs on Meta etc.

<sgardner> Oh sorry Ottava! :-)

<netAction> sgardner: You can't avoid

<Carbidfischer> niabot, sgardner: we dont depend on ad revenue or something, we depend on people who think we are changing the world for the better

<jps> what was the point of collecting topics if we never moved on? Can we go longer?

<Ottava> If Google, Flickr, etc, are used by millions of people without any problem, why shouldn't Wikipedia conform? Why should we be called "pornopedia" and the rest?

<HaeB> Carbidfischer, btw that video on the panel discussion about the filter at wikicon did not show the low attendance - only between 20 and 25 people (of 170 at the whole event, and compared to around 70 at the closing event shortly afterwards). any ideas how one could have generated more community interest for the debate?

<sgardner> Carbidfischer: I know. I totally agree.

Liesel (~Liesel@wikimedia/Liesel) hat #wikimedia-office verlassen
<Ottava> Would it delete the images? No. Would it keep them from being visible if wanted? No.

<Ironholds> Carbidfischer: and the more people able to see our content, the more people who think we're changing the world for the better.

<Ottava> One simple extra click.

<Philippe> HaeB, that's intetresting....

<apergos> Ottava: actually Wikipedia is deeply political: the idea that every one n matter their religion, social class, race, gender, educational status, caste, economic condition or technological access sohuld have access to the sum of all human knowledge, is nothing *but* political

<Ironholds> at the moment we've got segments of the world unable to see ANY of it

<Ottava> The drama created by a small few is ridiculous.

<Carbidfischer> HaeB: i cant say anything about that, i've not been to the closing event

<netAction> Ottava: There already is a problem with Google's censorship. Did you ever search an offending word in Germany?

<Ottava> apergos - no, that is called "sales".

<apergos> ah, and *free* access

<Carbidfischer> HaeB: but i was surprised at how well-prepared the audience was

<HaeB> Carbidfischer, but you have been to the panel ;)

<sgardner> Carbidfischer, and the other Germans here: let's think about how we could structure a conversation at your AGM that would be useful.

<Ottava> Wanting everyone to buy your product, even free, is not political

<Saibo> Ottava: as said before - flickr censorship not gone "with a click"

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: it is not mine, i am not a member of the german verein

<AzaToth> Which countries are vocal in this "pornopedia" argument? i.e. who need to have it censored to feel good?

<Ottava> Saibo - and this one clearly would .e

<Ottava> be*

molliug (~guillaume@wikimedia/guillom) hat #wikimedia-office verlassen ("All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.")
<Saibo> sgardner: what is AGM?

<HaeB> (closing event was just a comparison, one coudl also have compared it to the panel the evening before, in the same hall, which saw about five times as large an audience)

<Carbidfischer> HaeB: i think people still dont realize the importance of the topic

<sgardner> But you'll attend, Carbidfischer? Do you know?

<apergos> much of what happens on this planet is an attempt by peopel in power to control information content and access to it.  Wikipedia's vision statement is diametrically opposed.  Obviously we have a long way to go, but it is the vision

<Ottava> AzaToth - Middle East, Most of Africa, etc.

<Philippe> AGM = Annual General Meeting

<Carbidfischer> sgardner: most likely i wont

SarahStierch (~sarahvain@wikipedia/SarahStierch) hat #wikimedia-office betreten
<Philippe> Membership meeting :)

<sgardner> Ah, okay.

<AzaToth> Ottava: and USA I assume

<Carbidfischer> nice one apergos

<tommorris> thanks sgardner for answering questions tonight

<Saibo> Ottava: yes, currently - if you are lucky and do not get filtered by your inet provider...  and still - it requires a click (or two)

<Ottava> apergos - we do not host copyrighted information.

<Seth_Finkelstein> Yes, thanks

<apergos> it's what keeps me going, Carbidfischer

<sgardner> Happy to talk about this. I wish we'd had more time.

Struensee hat die Verbindung getrennt (Quit: KVIrc KVIrc Equilibrium 4.1.1, revision: 5507, sources date: 20110110, built on: 2011-03-07 17:15:32 UTC 5507 http://www.kvirc.net/)
<Ottava> apergos - we do not host copyrighted images.

<Ottava> apergos - our job is to give free information that caters to laws and ethical norms.

<Saibo> huh?

<Carbidfischer> apergos: it was what kept me going, too. i used to believe that kind of stuff

<AzaToth> Ottava: uh?

<sgardner> Thanks everyone for participating. I appreciate us all trying to stay calm and focused.

StevenW hat die Verbindung getrennt (Quit: Bye!)
<niabot> Ottava: huh?

<AzaToth> Ottava: every-non-PD image is copyrighted

<Saibo> Ottava: we host millions of copyrighted images

<Theo10011> StevenW left?

<netAction> Ottava: You really believe that the creation of a list won't be used by censors? WTF!

<sgardner> Bye folks. See you next time :-)

<Philippe> Theo10011: yeah, he has a meeting :)

<apergos> no.  but we work (well various groups of wikpedians work) with foundations, museums and other groups to get images freed

<Theo10011> I miss him already.

<Philippe> Thanks everyone… :-)

<Philippe> Theo10011: I'll let him know :P

<Carbidfischer> Ottava: there are millions of copyrighted images on commons alone

<tommorris> sgardner: I might write a long post at the weekend. got too much work at the moment

<Theo10011> ;)

Philippe hat die Verbindung getrennt (Quit: Philippe)
<Carbidfischer> bye sgardner

Maryana hat die Verbindung getrennt (Quit: Leaving)
<sgardner> tommorris, if you write it, I will read it :-)

<Theo10011> and there goes Philippe

<apergos> others work on getting things like the freedom of panorama accepted in their countries

<sgardner> Thanks folks.

<niabot> bye

<Theo10011> bye sgardner