[Clipart] pron

[Jonathan Leighton]

Daniel Carrera wrote:

> Jonathan Leighton wrote:
>
>> hmmm... I think this is actually a matter that should be discussed. From
>> http://openclipart.org/guidelines.php:
>>
>> "We do not censor the content of the submissions"
>>
>> Now, I'm not saying that we *should* accept porn, but deleting it goes
>> directly against that statement so one or other should be changed. We
>> don't want to end up becoming a porn repository, of course, but there's
>> tasteful nudity (Da Vinci etc.) and there's porn. We should make it
>> clear that we won't accept the latter (I think everyone agrees on that),
>> but perhaps we could accept the former with a "may offend" or "nudity"
>> flag? Something like that?
>>
>> What thinketh the list?
>
>
> I like the way Debian approached the Free Software Guidelines. They
> relize the problem that no set of guidelines will ever be perfect. No
> matter how hard you try, there will *always* be some way to dance
> around the language or leverage a technicality or a definition. So,
> instead of trying to make linguistically perfect guidelines, they make
> it clear that these are *just* guidelines. Ultimately, the decision of
> whether something is considered "Debian free" lies on the hands of the
> Debian-legal list, and no ammount of hairsplitting over the guidelines
> will change that.
>
>
> Perhaps we should do something similar here. Make a "reasonable" set
> of guidelines that will do well for 99% of the cases, and just say
> that it is up to the project leads to interpret the guidelines. This
> way you can write something reasonably simple like "we accept tasteful
> nudity, but not porn" without having to worry about people arguing
> over the definition of "tasteful" and "porn". 

Yeah this is a good point. End of the day, stuff can always be discussed
on-list.

-- 
Jonathan Leighton aka. Turnip
http://turnipspatch.com/ | http://digital-proof.org/