[Clipart] pron

[Bryce Harrington]

On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 10:49:05PM +0000, Jonathan Leighton wrote:
> Bryce Harrington wrote:
> >On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:19:03PM +0000, 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?
> >
> >I think you've pretty much voiced my own thoughts.  I was wondering the
> >same things.
> >
> I don't really know how the system works, but is it *possible* to give
> files a "may offend" flag? (Directed at no-one in particular.) And does
> the list think that would be a good/bad idea?

It is technically feasible to do this; the devil is in the details of
deciding how one decide the definitions.  We'd sort of decided that
doing something like add a keyword "offensive" would be bad because
something that is offensive to one culture may not be to another.  We
thought it would be better to keep it more descriptive.  For instance,
some cultures find separated human body parts to be offensive in general
(fingers, heads, feet...) but those are often use symbolically in
western culture, so an "offensive" label wouldn't make sense.

Anyway, beyond that there's still a lot to be thought through.  I think
to date we've mostly just focused on getting the technical aspects of
handling keywords figured out, now it's a matter of determining what
keywords should be used.  

Bryce