[Clipart] Re: nazi flag ban called for in the EU by germany post-harry costume

[Jon Phillips]

Jon Phillips wrote:
> Bryce Harrington wrote:
> 
>> It sounds like the general concensus is:
>>
>>    * OCAL will not reject images that are legal in most countries just
>>      because they are illegal in a minority of countries.
>>
>>    * Keywords to identify controversial/objectionable/illicit images 
>>      are definitely acceptable.
>>
>>    * There are probably other controversial topics besides the NAZI
>>      symbology that should be so marked
>>
>>    * Distributing multiple monthly packages (one complete, others
>>      trimmed) would be ok, given the tools to produce them.
>>
>>    * Not many of the current OCAL participants have a desire to work on
>>      this, so it would be more likely to succeed if additional people
>>      who care about it can assist with it.
>>
>> Where more work is needed is in finding a good scheme for what keywords
>> to use for determining which images should get them.  Also, better tools
>> for manipulating keywords is needed.
> 
> 
> I think I will add these to the guidelines on the website. Any objections?
> 
> Jon

I updated the guidelines to the best of my ability by taking ppl's arguments 
into consideration. Please check the list and make your own alterations.

http://openclipart.org/guidelines.php





> 
>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, David Illsley wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Apologies. I hadn't seen this idea brought up (using keywords in a 
>>> minimalist way - I think the bigger keywords proposals have major 
>>> issues with internationalisation etc.)
>>> But looking over the discussion (Which I have been following) I can't 
>>> see that any firm decision was made and the fact that It was 
>>> re-ignited I thought I'd put my idea forward.
>>>
>>> I'm more than happy to host any images reject by OCAL on my server 
>>> for freedom of speech reasons.
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 18 Jan 2005, at 09:06, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Well if you had also been following the debate after your first lost
>>>> mail got lost, you would have seen that the answer to your question is
>>>> 'no'. I am more inclined to start sorting suggestions like this one 
>>>> into
>>>> a trash folder called 'controversial'.
>>>>
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2005-01-18 at 07:52 +0000, David Illsley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> I submitted this idea a few days ago but my e-mail got lost somewhere
>>>>> :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not allow a small group of people (possibly even just one) to
>>>>> declare an image "controversial" (marked by that keyword). This 
>>>>> doesn't
>>>>> say that it is illegal, offensive or immoral but that it is
>>>>> controversial with at least 'n' people. Then distribute 2 packages. 1
>>>>> full and the other without any controversial images. It is then up to
>>>>> the package distributor whether they want to look through all the
>>>>> controversial images and pick the ones they want to exclude (for
>>>>> whatever reason) or just exclude them all by basing it on the smaller
>>>>> package.
>>>>> Simple, easy, respects everyone's beliefs.
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18 Jan 2005, at 01:23, Mat Hounsell wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If the appropriateness of images is a concern, then may I suggest 
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> project take a purely (apolitical) technical/librarian stance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you say "we are going to accept any image" then you open yourself
>>>>>> to images
>>>>>> that members will consider inappropriate, even offensive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you block one image then you will find yourself being asked to
>>>>>> block more
>>>>>> and more images. Not to mention being taken to task for blocking
>>>>>> images.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps , rather than refusing images, you are better instituting a
>>>>>> benefit
>>>>>> policy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> E.G.
>>>>>>  A symbol will be accepted if it
>>>>>>  * is specified in a (international) standard [e.g. biohazard]
>>>>>>  * is a professional symbol
>>>>>>  * is a historical symbol [e.g. nazi flag, ussr flag]
>>>>>>  etc
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  An image will be accepted if it
>>>>>>  * conveys a simple universal idea
>>>>>>  etc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it is not terriblely well defined at the moment; but you refine
>>>>>> it as you
>>>>>> go. You look at each image and ask what does this image convey? What
>>>>>> benefit
>>>>>> will it's use give our user?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A simple litmus test:
>>>>>> Could thim image help a high school student with a project?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        
>>>>>> __________________________________
>>>>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>>>>> The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
>>>>>> http://my.yahoo.com
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> clipart mailing list
>>>>>> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> clipart mailing list
>>>>> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> clipart mailing list
>> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Jon Phillips

USA PH 510.499.0894
jon at rejon.org
http://www.rejon.org

Inkscape (http://inkscape.org)
Open Clip Art Library (www.openclipart.org)
CVS Book (http://cvsbook.ucsd.edu)
Scale Journal (http://scale.ucsd.edu)