Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

24 Apr 2017

      I hear what you're saying C R.  Better to control the content by emphasizing 
good behavior as opposed to restrictive content.
I'd like to see both being used.  Emphasizing good behavior could help to reduce 
the amount of time moderators have to spend moderating.
...
For example, if we want more graphics that are usable as public domain
vector-only resources, we could set up a prominent area just for that.
We could also have an award system for most used/downloaded inkscape
svg resource, with maybe a monthly draw for some Inkscape item.
You'd be welcome to post new feature requests for these things.  Because they 
would not only need to be written into the policy, but also the features need to 
be built.  I know the website code moved over to gitlab, and I know new bugs are 
reported as Issues.  But I don't know how a new feature request is made.  Maybe 
it's a new Issue too?
...
I know, I know, but who has the time to do that?
A better question is: who has the time and resources to remove all
content that does not conform to guidelines?
I would rather spend the time to do that, and have a great Inkscape-only 
gallery.  Honestly, if the community were to decide that any random photo or 
other image is acceptable, I probably would not volunteer to moderate.
Why?  Because that would make the gallery no different from any of hundreds or 
thousands of galleries around the internet.  There would be nothing special 
about it, and I would rather volunteer my time on some other part of the 
Inkscape project, where my time counts toward making something special, 
something nice, which promotes Inkscape.
...
Reject any and all non-svg content and svgs that contains bitmap
graphics (embedded or linked), with max upload size 500KB, - then you
don't have to manually police it. :)
Wow, that actually seems overly restrictive!  How would it not need policing? 
Wouldn't you have to be opening every SVG file to find out if it has any raster 
graphics inside?
I think that would dramatically reduce new uploads.  Not everyone likes to share 
their SVG files, and prefer to export PNGs (or other raster, or save in other 
format).
...
External links to other websites should be sufficient for users to
post anything else.
You would want people to upload their Inkscape drawings somewhere else, just 
because they don't want to share the SVG file?
...
Care should be taken for our current users who have uploaded content
for years. We may want to contact them directly to explain the new
policies. Some will disagree, but it's better than just removing all
content before they have a chance to back it up.
That's a good point.  Perhaps the policy should not be retroactive?  Although I 
don't really see anyone having uploaded an image to any kind of gallery, that 
they didn't have saved on their hard drive or somewhere else.  Isn't that just 
common sense?
I've never even used a digital camera (yeah, I'm old).  Is it possible to upload 
an image directly from your camera, and not have it saved somewhere?
Thanks for your comments, C R  :-)
brynn
-----Original Message----- 
From: C R
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 4:33 AM
To: Victor Westmann
Cc: brynn ; Inkscape-Devel
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
What might be generally better than a restrictive content policy is to
ask what kind of content we want on the site, and set things up to
encourage contributions in those areas.
For example, if we want more graphics that are usable as public domain
vector-only resources, we could set up a prominent area just for that.
We could also have an award system for most used/downloaded inkscape
svg resource, with maybe a monthly draw for some Inkscape item.
I know, I know, but who has the time to do that?
A better question is: who has the time and resources to remove all
content that does not conform to guidelines?
The policing time would be better spent promoting inkscape, helping
users learn inkscape, and setting up a fun way for users to contribute
cc0 public domain content that can be used anywhere, with no
attribution necessary.
Add a donation link for the artist, and also an external link to their
website, and there's plenty of reason for professionals to post great
content that's not restricted, and usable for the whole community.
Reject any and all non-svg content and svgs that contains bitmap
graphics (embedded or linked), with max upload size 500KB, - then you
don't have to manually police it. :)
External links to other websites should be sufficient for users to
post anything else.
That would be my solution.
Care should be taken for our current users who have uploaded content
for years. We may want to contact them directly to explain the new
policies. Some will disagree, but it's better than just removing all
content before they have a chance to back it up.
Thoughts on this?
-C
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:29 AM, Victor Westmann
<victor.westmann@...400...> wrote:
...
Hi Brynn,
I strongly agree with you on this one. Why should the Inkscape team spend
it's time, resources and bucks to host images that are more photos than
artwork made in Inkscape?
Those should be removed and new guidelines should be added to avoid those
being readded to inkscape website again.
What gives us a good example of this is the following. There are hundred of
really cool and good websites on the internet. But have you guys noticed the
difference of quality in the images that there are in photos inside Pixabay
(www.pixabay.com) and in Morguefile (www.morguefile.com) ?
Morguefile is really friendly and, as soon as you upload images there, they
are publicly available.
On the other hand, when you do the same on Pixabay, upload your images, the
images are analyzed by an expert and they need to match all the website
guidelines. Photos there need to have great bright, contrast, lighting,
colors, no distracting objects on photo and it need to be focused.
+1 for having better guidelines and freeing up resources to promote art made
with/inside Inkscape. :)
Regards,
--Victor Westmann
2017-04-20 18:25 GMT-07:00 brynn <brynn@...3133...>:
...
Hi Friends,
        I've been helping to test some new moderation features which
Martin has
been working on (and Maren helping too), for the website.  We have
realized that
(A) we might have different opinions about what the moderation policies
should
be, and (B) the current CoC might not cover them.  But we all agree that
the
larger community should be involved, if the CoC needs to be edited.
    For convenience, the CoC says this:

"Guidelines for User Submitted Content:
Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to
the
following rules:
     -- Art must be your own original creation or derived from artwork
available
under an open licence. We cannot accept submissions that infringe
copyrights.
     -- No nudity or graphic violence. (Note: we may allow this type of
content
once it is possible to tag it as such, but pornographic and/or illegal
material
would still be disallowed.)
     -- No content that is explicitly discriminatory in nature.
     -- No political agitation or totalitarian symbolism."
    Up until the moderation features are completed, installed and in

use,
the policy for images in the gallery has been this.  As long as the image
doesn't violate those 4 guidelines, it's acceptable, even though it may
have
nothing to do with Inkscape.  After that, the gallery has been relying on
a very
small upload quota for members, to prevent mass spam attacks.
    In my opinion, resources uploaded to the website should bear some

relation to Inkscape.  Or more specifically, those which have no relation
to
Inkscape should not be allowed.  Here's what I propose:
...
...
Images should be made in whole or in part with Inkscape, or depict how
Inkscape was utilized in user projects (such as a photo of a t-shirt
which
design was made with Inkscape).
...
...
Any other images need to have some relation to Inkscape, the Inkscape
Project
(website, forums, hackfest), vector graphics, or marginally, FOSS.
(maybe
not FOSS?)
This would exclude images like these:
https://inkscape.org/en/~stacymcgraw@...1081.../%E2%98%85img-0616
https://inkscape.org/en/~KarenFechter/%E2%98%8520160319-150913+1
https://inkscape.org/en/~lgimenezborges/%E2%98%85vklsd
https://inkscape.org/en/~Astro.C/%E2%98%85three-musketeers
https://inkscape.org/en/~richardkwok0128/%E2%98%85testing+0
The reason I feel this way, is because there must be hundreds, if not
thousands
of galleries on the internet, where people can upload any kind of random
photo.
Why should the Inkscape website waste its resources hosting images which
weren't
made with Inkscape and have nothing to do with it?  If the Inkscape
website is
going to the trouble of creating and maintaining a gallery, it ought to
promote
Inkscape, vector graphics, and maybe FOSS, almost, if not completely
exclusively.  My opinion of course  ;-)
    So I propose the following, or something like it, should be the

first
item in the list of Guidelines for User Submitted Content.  No doubt it
could be
worded better.
-- Images must be created using Inkscape, in whole or in part;  or depict
how
Inkscape was utilized for the user's project (such as a photo of a t-shirt
which
design was created using Inkscape). Or otherwise the image or resource
must bear
some relation to Inkscape, the Inkscape Project, vector graphics (or
FOSS??)
    Does anyone have any thoughts or opinions on this?

Thank you very much,
brynn
PS - Should this be cross posted to the user list too?

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel