|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
| Mooby |
Thu 15th March 2012, 3:56pm
Post
#81
|
![]() Neophyte Group: Contributors Posts: 18 Joined: Sat 10th Mar 2012, 6:16am Member No.: 76,737 |
I just read the Larry Sanger piece. Larry points out that WP's vulva article has a lot of vulvas on it. Boy, does it ever! There are like 20 of the things, not counting the cave drawing that looks like Pac-Man. There's even this Brady-Bunch style collage with 9 of them, except where, in the Brady Bunch, you'd have Ann B. Davis in the middle, here there's just another vulva. But yeah, I have to agree with Larry that it's pretty messed up that they canceled the opt out filter due to higher priorities. Like, the MoodBar, I guess? Maybe if enough people register and click the "Editing Wikipedia made me sad because..." MoodBar button and add "...I didn't like seeing what that dog did that to that nun" they'll bump the priority up a bit? Or not, probably. -Mooby |
| Mooby |
Thu 15th March 2012, 4:33pm
Post
#82
|
![]() Neophyte Group: Contributors Posts: 18 Joined: Sat 10th Mar 2012, 6:16am Member No.: 76,737 |
There's even this Brady-Bunch style collage with 9 of them, except where, in the Brady Bunch, you'd have Ann B. Davis in the middle, here there's just another vulva. Mooby is my new favorite guy on Wikipedia Review. I know he's a guy, because only a guy would make the Ann B. Davis reference in such a hilariously sardonic way. Ha ha! Thanks Kohs. It occurs to me that they have a free image of ABD on there, so one could indeed swap her in the middle of that collage (as sort of a palate-cleanser from the crotch barrage, a little island of taste and restraint in the sea of exhibitionism) and still remain fully compliant with their CC image derivatives policies. But of course I doubt she'd like being there, so obviously no one should do that. Robert Reed, maybe, if he was looking upwards. That might work. I'm getting a little off-topic, but it does underline the dangers of CC, I think... you've got no control over what people do with your images (or images that other people took of you and released CC), whether it's scouts on a spanking site or a Hollywood Squares-style collage of body parts. -Mooby Ah, crap, did I post to the wrong place? Sorry mods, feel free to move/delete/whatever. --Mooby |
| Selina |
Thu 15th March 2012, 4:45pm
Post
#83
|
![]() Cat herder ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Staffy Posts: 1,513 Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm Member No.: 1 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
(Mod note: Offtopic discussion about moderation moved to Wikipedia Review where it belongs as people know, here! )
|
| carbuncle |
Thu 15th March 2012, 4:53pm
Post
#84
|
![]() Fat Cat ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Regulars Posts: 1,601 Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm Member No.: 5,544 |
Ha ha! Thanks Kohs. It occurs to me that they have a free image of ABD on there, so one could indeed swap her in the middle of that collage (as sort of a palate-cleanser from the crotch barrage, a little island of taste and restraint in the sea of exhibitionism) and still remain fully compliant with their CC image derivatives policies. But of course I doubt she'd like being there, so obviously no one should do that. Robert Reed, maybe, if he was looking upwards. That might work. Robert Reed? I don't think he was a big vulva fan, actually... |
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd 5 13, 7:17am |