website moderation policy

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

website moderation policy

Brynn
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@.../%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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Victor Westmann
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 <[hidden email]>:
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@.../%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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Ken Moffat
In reply to this post by Brynn
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 07:25:32PM -0600, brynn wrote:
> 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.
>
Hi brynn,

[...]
>
>         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).
>
That's not my call (I can't even persuade my colleagues on the
"distro" I support that inkscape should be built with cmake when
./autogen.sh still works), but it certainly sounds reasonable.

> >> Any other images need to have some relation to Inkscape, the Inkscape Project
> >> (website, forums, hackfest), vector graphics, or marginally, FOSS.  (maybe
> >> not FOSS?)
>

Again, not for me to bike-shed about where the boundary should be,
but FOSS as distinct from inkscape or svg sounds a very marginal
use of the project's resources.

> This would exclude images like these:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/~stacymcgraw@.../%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
>

I can't see the second link (suppressed by moderators, I think it
said, with a no-entry road-sign which might have been created in
inkscape), but AFAICS the others have no relationship to inkscape
unless any of the people in the photos are contributors:-).
> 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  ;-)
>

There are even *free* galleries for people to upload to (free level
at flickr (yahoo) if people can't afford webspace.  The thing is
that webspace essentially costs money (space, bandwidth) so projects
should think carefully before encouraging its use for non-obvious
things.

>         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
>

I'm actually puzzled that you moderators disagreed about this, you
all sound very sensible and focussed people.  That makes me think
I'm missing something.  But as I said, my opinions should count for
nothing here, so please don't let me sway you - I'm only a very
occasional user who sometimes tries to build inkscape and give it
trivial usability-tests.

ĸen
--
 Error: ( : 1) not enough arguments

Don't you just love Tiny scheme ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
C R
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

C R
In reply to this post by Victor Westmann
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
<[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> 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@.../%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
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

William Entriken
I think Just have one or two really good pages following exactly your guidelines. And make them the first entry pages. Police them heavily. People will learn implicitly to make other pages live up to those standards. 



On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 13:34 C R <[hidden email]> wrote:
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
<[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> 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@.../%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
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
In reply to this post by C R
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
<[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> 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@.../%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
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
In reply to this post by Ken Moffat
Thanks for your comments, Ken.

> I'm actually puzzled that you moderators disagreed about this, you
all sound very sensible and focussed people.  That makes me think
I'm missing something.

I probably misstated that.  Martin did not want to discuss policy, because he's
wearing his developer hat (website developer).  And Maren thought the larger
community should be involved in deciding these things.

It felt to me like we might disagree, because so far, I've been on my own in
asking these questions, and wanting to see a change, now that the moderation
features are almost ready to install.

But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs to be
discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation features, and
deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.

Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?  Does
anyone have any comments on that?

Thanks again,
brynn


-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Moffat
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 8:29 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 07:25:32PM -0600, brynn wrote:
> 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.
>
Hi brynn,

[...]
>
>         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).
>
That's not my call (I can't even persuade my colleagues on the
"distro" I support that inkscape should be built with cmake when
./autogen.sh still works), but it certainly sounds reasonable.

> >> Any other images need to have some relation to Inkscape, the Inkscape
> >> Project
> >> (website, forums, hackfest), vector graphics, or marginally, FOSS.  (maybe
> >> not FOSS?)
>

Again, not for me to bike-shed about where the boundary should be,
but FOSS as distinct from inkscape or svg sounds a very marginal
use of the project's resources.

> This would exclude images like these:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/~stacymcgraw@.../%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
>

I can't see the second link (suppressed by moderators, I think it
said, with a no-entry road-sign which might have been created in
inkscape), but AFAICS the others have no relationship to inkscape
unless any of the people in the photos are contributors:-).

> 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  ;-)
>

There are even *free* galleries for people to upload to (free level
at flickr (yahoo) if people can't afford webspace.  The thing is
that webspace essentially costs money (space, bandwidth) so projects
should think carefully before encouraging its use for non-obvious
things.

>         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
>

I'm actually puzzled that you moderators disagreed about this, you
all sound very sensible and focussed people.  That makes me think
I'm missing something.  But as I said, my opinions should count for
nothing here, so please don't let me sway you - I'm only a very
occasional user who sometimes tries to build inkscape and give it
trivial usability-tests.

ĸen
--
Error: ( : 1) not enough arguments

Don't you just love Tiny scheme ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
In reply to this post by Victor Westmann
Thanks for your comments, Victor.

brynn

-----Original Message-----
From: Victor Westmann
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 8:29 PM
To: brynn
Cc: Inkscape-Devel
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy


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 <[hidden email]>:
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@.../%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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Martin Owens-2
In reply to this post by Brynn
On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
> to be 
> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
> features, and 
> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>
> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content? 
> Does 
> anyone have any comments on that?

It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
conduct for brevity:

https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/

It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
enough of it:

https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/

Best Regards, Martin Owens

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
In reply to this post by William Entriken
Thanks for your comments, William.

That sounds like a good idea.  The problem is that members and visitors have all
kinds of choices for how they want the gallery to be displayed on their screens.

For example, if you want to see extensions only, you click on Extensions.  Now
the first 2 pages are very different than before.  Or you can view them from
Last Updated, Most Popular or Most Downloaded.  So the first couple of pages are
different, depending on which option  you choose.

But definitely, the better job we can do with moderating, the less likely people
will be to post images which aren't made with or related to Inkscape.

All best,
brynn

-----Original Message-----
From: William Entriken
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 4:58 AM
To: C R ; Victor Westmann
Cc: Inkscape-Devel
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy


I think Just have one or two really good pages following exactly your
guidelines. And make them the first entry pages. Police them heavily. People
will learn implicitly to make other pages live up to those standards.




On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 13:34 C R <[hidden email]> wrote:
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
<[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> 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@.../%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
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel






------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Eduard Braun
In reply to this post by Martin Owens-2
Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:

> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>> to be
>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>> features, and
>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>
>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>> Does
>> anyone have any comments on that?
> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
> conduct for brevity:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>
> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
> enough of it:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>
> Best Regards, Martin Owens

Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
along the lines of:
Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
obligatory rules: [...]

This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for inclusion.

Regards,
Eduard

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
C R
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

C R
In reply to this post by Brynn
> 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'm happy to do that if the ideas are attractive enough to everyone.
Just trying to get a general feel for the direction we're going, so I
can avoid spinning too many plates at once. :)

> 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.

Well, it's like you said, probably a mix of both is best: post the
guidelines, and make the content submission do some checking of the
contents being submitted.
Doesn't have to be one or the other really. :)

Requiring svg-only limits it to mostly Inkscape stuff right away for example.

> 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.

Oh I definitely agree. I just worry it may not be worth the time to
catch everything. I think generally, posting guidelines will be enough
for most community members.
Maybe it would not be as much work as I'm imagining, though I'd still
like to suggest some things that may help auto-filter out undesirable
content.

>> 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?

500KB is pretty restrictive - for raster graphics (part of the idea).
I was thinking a simple script can see if there are raster graphics
inside an svg. That's one "filter", but also limiting the svg size to
something small will encourage people to use vector graphics only. At
the least it limits the amount of server space required to house
people's massive embedded graphics. :)

> 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).

That sounds more like artist gallery material. I think we should
encourage the use of svg whenever possible. There are plenty of other
websites for posting raster graphics. Anyway, just a thought. Maybe
way off base. It would be hard to show things that don't display
properly in browser anyway, so it may be a bad idea in the first
place. It's possible that different sections of the website host
different kinds of content. This compartmentalisation would help
narrow down the areas that need policing. For example, the website
could have galleries dedicated to:

1. Professional commercial projects: Restrictions - must have been
done in inkscape, single png, with no svg required, photo of finished
products okay. (1MB max upload size for all raster graphics)
2. Home projects: Restrictions - must be done in inkscape, photos of
finished project okay, svg posting encouraged, but optional.
3. Inkscape public domain graphics resources - Must be made in
Inkscape, CC0 public domain graphics only. SVG only.
4. etc.

You can see how each of these areas not only forms different kinds of
contributing communities around them, but also makes it easier for a
visitor to get to the content they want to see quickly.

>> 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?

For public domain graphic resource section, I'd *like* all svg if
possible (though a raster version of the svg along with it would be
beneficial as well for preview of things like mesh gradients and
flowed text). Like we've said, there are plenty of other sites that
host public domain raster graphics. Just another thought. This may be
overly restrictive for artists who just want to show off past projects
without sharing the resources. It really depends on what content we
decide to allow. Just tossing out ideas... feel free to further toss
them out the window. :)

>> 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?

It is to me, but then again I regularly get free computers and laptops
in exchange for rescuing user data... so maybe not. :)

> 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?

My room mate complained that the camera I gave her 6 years ago is
full. I re-compressed all the pictures on the card to make space. She
knows how to get the pictures off and store them elsewhere, but she
also likes to use the camera to look through them. I seriously doubt
she'll take the time to back them up. Fortunately, I offer to do it
for her every few years. I have no doubt other people do exactly the
same thing. It's something techno-savvy people kinda take for granted:
If I don't back up my stuff, I'll lose it! For most everyone else:
"Rats! I lost my data!" Then they learn after the data is already
gone.

> Thanks for your comments, C R  :-)

Always a pleasure, Brynn. :)

-C

>
> 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
> <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>
>>> 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@.../%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
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
>> You'd be welcome to post new feature requests for these things.

> I'm happy to do that if the ideas are attractive enough to everyone.
Just trying to get a general feel for the direction we're going, so I
can avoid spinning too many plates at once. :)

Speaking only for myself, I think the website team needs more people who are
content oriented.  Martin does most of the development, with help from a few
others here and there; but has said he doesn't want to be a content editor (at
least not in a huge or leadership way).  (That's my understanding, but might not
have paraphrased accurately.)

I'm not sure if it would be appropriate, or maybe not even needed.  But I think
it would be helpful to have sort of a team which discusses and creates conten.
I think Mihaela has some ideas similar to yours too -- features which have as
much marketing as a goal, than any other goal, but would serve as positive
reinforcement of preferred content (as opposed to a lot of "don't" rules.  (But
I think she doesn't have time at present).  Although that's going on a different
tangent, for the moment.

> Requiring svg-only limits it to mostly Inkscape stuff right away for example.

I'm not sure if I would agree with that.  For example, AI, along with how many
other programs can create SVG files?  Not to mention people who write the
XML/SVG directly, or like with a....what's it called, API?  Inkscape may be one
of a few, or maybe the only one of it's kind, focussing so strictly on the SVG
standards.  But I'm not sure if it makes up so much of a corner on the market,
that allowing only SVG files would result in only images related to Inkscape.

> I think we should
encourage the use of svg whenever possible.

We already do encourage SVG and/or public domain.  I can't remember exactly how,
but I think it's by having certain category shortcuts on the front page of the
gallery.  The website seems to be getting worked on, as I write this, and
categories are missing at the moment.  But I'm pretty sure that's how it's done.

> This compartmentalisation would help
narrow down the areas that need policing. For example, the website
could have galleries dedicated to:
> ....
> You can see how each of these areas not only forms different kinds of
contributing communities around them, but also makes it easier for a
visitor to get to the content they want to see quickly.

Well, the compartmentalizing would have to be something which users can't
access.  Because already we see spam is getting uploaded into any category.
Spammers don't seem to care much where they put it.  Interesting though - still
mulling over the idea.

Regarding your idea of an award system for various categories, we already have
Favorites.  The images with the most Fav votes are shown on the front page of
the gallery.  But it's not organized by category.  It's just overall.

Well, it is organized by category, in a way.  It just depends on how visitors
choose to display the gallery.  If they want to look at extensions, then Fav
votes determines which ones are shown first.  At least that's how I think it
works.  I could be wrong.

Do you think favorites could help for this?  It seems to me like it would need
to be something more than that.

Thanks,
brynn

-----Original Message-----
From: C R
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 3:58 PM
To: brynn
Cc: Victor Westmann ; Inkscape-Devel
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

> 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'm happy to do that if the ideas are attractive enough to everyone.
Just trying to get a general feel for the direction we're going, so I
can avoid spinning too many plates at once. :)

> 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.

Well, it's like you said, probably a mix of both is best: post the
guidelines, and make the content submission do some checking of the
contents being submitted.
Doesn't have to be one or the other really. :)

Requiring svg-only limits it to mostly Inkscape stuff right away for example.

> 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.

Oh I definitely agree. I just worry it may not be worth the time to
catch everything. I think generally, posting guidelines will be enough
for most community members.
Maybe it would not be as much work as I'm imagining, though I'd still
like to suggest some things that may help auto-filter out undesirable
content.

>> 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?

500KB is pretty restrictive - for raster graphics (part of the idea).
I was thinking a simple script can see if there are raster graphics
inside an svg. That's one "filter", but also limiting the svg size to
something small will encourage people to use vector graphics only. At
the least it limits the amount of server space required to house
people's massive embedded graphics. :)

> 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).

That sounds more like artist gallery material. I think we should
encourage the use of svg whenever possible. There are plenty of other
websites for posting raster graphics. Anyway, just a thought. Maybe
way off base. It would be hard to show things that don't display
properly in browser anyway, so it may be a bad idea in the first
place. It's possible that different sections of the website host
different kinds of content. This compartmentalisation would help
narrow down the areas that need policing. For example, the website
could have galleries dedicated to:

1. Professional commercial projects: Restrictions - must have been
done in inkscape, single png, with no svg required, photo of finished
products okay. (1MB max upload size for all raster graphics)
2. Home projects: Restrictions - must be done in inkscape, photos of
finished project okay, svg posting encouraged, but optional.
3. Inkscape public domain graphics resources - Must be made in
Inkscape, CC0 public domain graphics only. SVG only.
4. etc.

You can see how each of these areas not only forms different kinds of
contributing communities around them, but also makes it easier for a
visitor to get to the content they want to see quickly.

>> 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?

For public domain graphic resource section, I'd *like* all svg if
possible (though a raster version of the svg along with it would be
beneficial as well for preview of things like mesh gradients and
flowed text). Like we've said, there are plenty of other sites that
host public domain raster graphics. Just another thought. This may be
overly restrictive for artists who just want to show off past projects
without sharing the resources. It really depends on what content we
decide to allow. Just tossing out ideas... feel free to further toss
them out the window. :)

>> 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?

It is to me, but then again I regularly get free computers and laptops
in exchange for rescuing user data... so maybe not. :)

> 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?

My room mate complained that the camera I gave her 6 years ago is
full. I re-compressed all the pictures on the card to make space. She
knows how to get the pictures off and store them elsewhere, but she
also likes to use the camera to look through them. I seriously doubt
she'll take the time to back them up. Fortunately, I offer to do it
for her every few years. I have no doubt other people do exactly the
same thing. It's something techno-savvy people kinda take for granted:
If I don't back up my stuff, I'll lose it! For most everyone else:
"Rats! I lost my data!" Then they learn after the data is already
gone.

> Thanks for your comments, C R  :-)

Always a pleasure, Brynn. :)

-C

>
> 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


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
In reply to this post by Eduard Braun
>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
obligatory rules: [...]

I like that very much!

I'd propose having that to replace:

"Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to the
following rules:"

Anyone else, other thoughts?

Thanks again,
brynn

PS - cross posting into Docs list, to make sure the whole website team sees it.


-----Original Message-----
From: Eduard Braun
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:31 AM
To: Martin Owens ; brynn ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:

> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>> to be
>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>> features, and
>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>
>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>> Does
>> anyone have any comments on that?
> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
> conduct for brevity:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>
> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
> enough of it:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>
> Best Regards, Martin Owens

Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
along the lines of:
Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
obligatory rules: [...]

This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for inclusion.

Regards,
Eduard


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
Hi Everyone,
        I just want to follow up and try to close this issue, so the once the
moderation features are officially online, we have our guidelines to follow.
(They're officially online for blatant things, but not sure about for
everything.)

1 -- I thought the following suggestion from Eduard really does cover everything
I was thinking.  Does anyone have any objections to editing the CoC as follows
(https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/) :

"Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to the
following rules:"

with:

"Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g. created
with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to work with Inkscape,
etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content that does not seem appropriate
or does not adhere to the following obligatory rules:"

If no objections, I'd like to edit the CoC as above.


2 -- Should these changes be retroactive, or not?  I'm thinking not, but I could
go either way.

I don't think it needs to be written into the CoC about being retroactive or
not.  But I'm not sure.  Anyone else have a thought or opinion?


Thank you very much,
brynn


-----Original Message-----
From: brynn
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:49 PM
To: Martin Owens ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email] ; Eduard
Braun
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
obligatory rules: [...]

I like that very much!

I'd propose having that to replace:

"Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to the
following rules:"

Anyone else, other thoughts?

Thanks again,
brynn

PS - cross posting into Docs list, to make sure the whole website team sees it.


-----Original Message-----
From: Eduard Braun
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:31 AM
To: Martin Owens ; brynn ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:

> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>> to be
>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>> features, and
>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>
>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>> Does
>> anyone have any comments on that?
> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
> conduct for brevity:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>
> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
> enough of it:
>
> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>
> Best Regards, Martin Owens

Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
along the lines of:
Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
obligatory rules: [...]

This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for inclusion.

Regards,
Eduard


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
C R
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

C R
Little thing, but "created for use with Inkscape" could cover things
like just regular images... in fact it could cover just about
anything, even things made with Adobe Illustrator. I'd simply cut that
bit out.

The rest is fine to my eyes. Nice work!

If there's a significant amount of undesirable content currently, it's
probably best to make it retroactive. If it's just a few things, then
we should approach the owners about it. Not to be pushy, but to inform
them of the new policy.

-C


On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 8:02 PM, brynn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>        I just want to follow up and try to close this issue, so the once the
> moderation features are officially online, we have our guidelines to follow.
> (They're officially online for blatant things, but not sure about for
> everything.)
>
> 1 -- I thought the following suggestion from Eduard really does cover
> everything I was thinking.  Does anyone have any objections to editing the
> CoC as follows (https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/) :
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to
> the following rules:"
>
> with:
>
> "Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g. created
> with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to work with
> Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content that does not
> seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following obligatory rules:"
>
> If no objections, I'd like to edit the CoC as above.
>
>
> 2 -- Should these changes be retroactive, or not?  I'm thinking not, but I
> could go either way.
>
> I don't think it needs to be written into the CoC about being retroactive or
> not.  But I'm not sure.  Anyone else have a thought or opinion?
>
>
> Thank you very much,
> brynn
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: brynn
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:49 PM
> To: Martin Owens ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email] ;
> Eduard Braun
>
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
>>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
>
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> I like that very much!
>
> I'd propose having that to replace:
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to
> the
> following rules:"
>
> Anyone else, other thoughts?
>
> Thanks again,
> brynn
>
> PS - cross posting into Docs list, to make sure the whole website team sees
> it.
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Eduard Braun
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:31 AM
> To: Martin Owens ; brynn ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
> Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:
>>
>> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>>>
>>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>>> to be
>>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>>> features, and
>>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>>
>>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>>> Does
>>> anyone have any comments on that?
>>
>> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
>> conduct for brevity:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>>
>> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
>> enough of it:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>>
>> Best Regards, Martin Owens
>
>
> Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
> section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
> along the lines of:
> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
> not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
> have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
> always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for inclusion.
>
> Regards,
> Eduard
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Maren Hachmann
In reply to this post by Brynn
1. Sounds very good to me. I'd keep the 'related to' in.

2. Retroactive seems to be unfair to me. There aren't that many
resources of that kind anyway. How about adding a comment, and just
hinting at a change in the CoC, asking the user if they would like to
upload some work that is more suitable?

Thank you, Brynn and Eduard and everyone involved. This was a major
obstacle in getting moderation on the website up and running.

Additionally:

3. We need to make sure that users know about the rules, and find a
place in the django app where to link to them. Any ideas what would be
the best place?

4. We'll need moderators, once the moderation app works again. Would
someone like to recruit volunteers, find out how the system works,
explain it to them (and also accompany them a bit, for their first actions)?

(5. The moderation app needs to work again - javascript isn't my domain,
though.)

Kind Regards,
 Maren

Am 29.04.2017 um 21:02 schrieb brynn:

> Hi Everyone,
>         I just want to follow up and try to close this issue, so the once the
> moderation features are officially online, we have our guidelines to follow.
> (They're officially online for blatant things, but not sure about for
> everything.)
>
> 1 -- I thought the following suggestion from Eduard really does cover everything
> I was thinking.  Does anyone have any objections to editing the CoC as follows
> (https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/) :
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to the
> following rules:"
>
> with:
>
> "Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g. created
> with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to work with Inkscape,
> etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content that does not seem appropriate
> or does not adhere to the following obligatory rules:"
>
> If no objections, I'd like to edit the CoC as above.
>
>
> 2 -- Should these changes be retroactive, or not?  I'm thinking not, but I could
> go either way.
>
> I don't think it needs to be written into the CoC about being retroactive or
> not.  But I'm not sure.  Anyone else have a thought or opinion?
>
>
> Thank you very much,
> brynn
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: brynn
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:49 PM
> To: Martin Owens ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email] ; Eduard
> Braun
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
>>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> I like that very much!
>
> I'd propose having that to replace:
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to the
> following rules:"
>
> Anyone else, other thoughts?
>
> Thanks again,
> brynn
>
> PS - cross posting into Docs list, to make sure the whole website team sees it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eduard Braun
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:31 AM
> To: Martin Owens ; brynn ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
> Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:
>> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>>> to be
>>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>>> features, and
>>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>>
>>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>>> Does
>>> anyone have any comments on that?
>> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
>> conduct for brevity:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>>
>> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
>> enough of it:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>>
>> Best Regards, Martin Owens
>
> Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
> section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
> along the lines of:
> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
> not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
> have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
> always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for inclusion.
>
> Regards,
> Eduard
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel 
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
In reply to this post by C R
> Little thing, but "created for use with Inkscape" could cover things
like just regular images... in fact it could cover just about
anything, even things made with Adobe Illustrator. I'd simply cut that
bit out.

Hhmm.....yes, I see what you mean.  My interpretation of that, is for things
like extensions, filters, or maybe even tutorials.  Maybe there's a better way
to say it?

What about "created to be installed in Inkscape" ?   That would eliminate any
kind of image.  Any other suggestions out there?  Eduard?

> If there's a significant amount of undesirable content currently, it's
probably best to make it retroactive. If it's just a few things, then
we should approach the owners about it. Not to be pushy, but to inform
them of the new policy.

To me, it's a significant amount.  Probably 1 or 2 thumbnails per page of the
gallery are random photos!  Just to help test the moderation features, I went to
the last pages of the gallery and flagged 6 or 8 random photos, and that was
over the last 6 pages of the gallery.

So that's way too many to consider trying to contact them.  Especially since in
every case, that was the only thing they uploaded, just one random (well, random
to us) photo.

You know, since the mail system is currently down, if we deleted them right now
(or in the next few weeks) they'd probably never know.  Under this scenario, I
would delete them.  A little devious?  Yes.  Not "straight up"?  Yes.  Wrong?
Mmmm....not sure.  It's like a "little white lie" as they say.

But if they were going to be notified about it, I would skip it.  Because it
would clearly not be fair to delete them, when the rules were not posted when
they uploaded.

All best,
brynn

-----Original Message-----
From: C R
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 1:13 PM
To: brynn
Cc: Martin Owens ; Ken Moffat ; inkscape-devel ; Eduard Braun
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

Little thing, but "created for use with Inkscape" could cover things
like just regular images... in fact it could cover just about
anything, even things made with Adobe Illustrator. I'd simply cut that
bit out.

The rest is fine to my eyes. Nice work!

If there's a significant amount of undesirable content currently, it's
probably best to make it retroactive. If it's just a few things, then
we should approach the owners about it. Not to be pushy, but to inform
them of the new policy.

-C


On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 8:02 PM, brynn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>        I just want to follow up and try to close this issue, so the once the
> moderation features are officially online, we have our guidelines to follow.
> (They're officially online for blatant things, but not sure about for
> everything.)
>
> 1 -- I thought the following suggestion from Eduard really does cover
> everything I was thinking.  Does anyone have any objections to editing the
> CoC as follows (https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/) :
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to
> the following rules:"
>
> with:
>
> "Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g. created
> with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to work with
> Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content that does not
> seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following obligatory rules:"
>
> If no objections, I'd like to edit the CoC as above.
>
>
> 2 -- Should these changes be retroactive, or not?  I'm thinking not, but I
> could go either way.
>
> I don't think it needs to be written into the CoC about being retroactive or
> not.  But I'm not sure.  Anyone else have a thought or opinion?
>
>
> Thank you very much,
> brynn
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: brynn
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:49 PM
> To: Martin Owens ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email] ;
> Eduard Braun
>
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
>>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
>
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> I like that very much!
>
> I'd propose having that to replace:
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to
> the
> following rules:"
>
> Anyone else, other thoughts?
>
> Thanks again,
> brynn
>
> PS - cross posting into Docs list, to make sure the whole website team sees
> it.
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Eduard Braun
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:31 AM
> To: Martin Owens ; brynn ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
> Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:
>>
>> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>>>
>>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>>> to be
>>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>>> features, and
>>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>>
>>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>>> Does
>>> anyone have any comments on that?
>>
>> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
>> conduct for brevity:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>>
>> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
>> enough of it:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>>
>> Best Regards, Martin Owens
>
>
> Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
> section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
> along the lines of:
> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
> not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
> have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
> always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for inclusion.
>
> Regards,
> Eduard
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Brynn
In reply to this post by Maren Hachmann
> 3. We need to make sure that users know about the rules, and find a
place in the django app where to link to them. Any ideas what would be
the best place?

Arghh!!  I meant to add that in my last reply to you and Martin privately, and
forgot.  We definitely need to put a link to the CoC on all the upload forms!!

> 4. We'll need moderators, once the moderation app works again. Would
someone like to recruit volunteers, find out how the system works,
explain it to them (and also accompany them a bit, for their first actions)?

Recruiting volunteer moderators is probably not my strong suit.  Hey, should we
put it on the To-Do List page?  Call for new moderators?  This moderation system
needs....I'd say maybe 3 to 5 moderators?  It can work with 2, but more would be
better.

Oh, I don't mind hand-holding new moderators at all.  I hate to say "training".
But because of this moderation system, which is unlike any moderation I've ever
seen before, it will take some little practice to get comfortable.  For most
moderation systems, even newbies can be thrown in, and they quickly learn to
swim.  But this is different.  Martin has some serious skills!!

And by the way, I'd like to remind everyone that he's built the entire website,
almost entirely on his own, from scratch, starting with nothing, coding the
whole thing!!  He's had some help here and there (Maren, Jabiertxof, Sylvain,
not sure who else).  But most was all him.

Yay for Martin, right?!!

All best,
brynn

-----Original Message-----
From: Maren Hachmann
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 4:09 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy

1. Sounds very good to me. I'd keep the 'related to' in.

2. Retroactive seems to be unfair to me. There aren't that many
resources of that kind anyway. How about adding a comment, and just
hinting at a change in the CoC, asking the user if they would like to
upload some work that is more suitable?

Thank you, Brynn and Eduard and everyone involved. This was a major
obstacle in getting moderation on the website up and running.

Additionally:

3. We need to make sure that users know about the rules, and find a
place in the django app where to link to them. Any ideas what would be
the best place?

4. We'll need moderators, once the moderation app works again. Would
someone like to recruit volunteers, find out how the system works,
explain it to them (and also accompany them a bit, for their first actions)?

(5. The moderation app needs to work again - javascript isn't my domain,
though.)

Kind Regards,
Maren

Am 29.04.2017 um 21:02 schrieb brynn:

> Hi Everyone,
>         I just want to follow up and try to close this issue, so the once the
> moderation features are officially online, we have our guidelines to follow.
> (They're officially online for blatant things, but not sure about for
> everything.)
>
> 1 -- I thought the following suggestion from Eduard really does cover
> everything
> I was thinking.  Does anyone have any objections to editing the CoC as follows
> (https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/) :
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to the
> following rules:"
>
> with:
>
> "Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g. created
> with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to work with
> Inkscape,
> etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content that does not seem
> appropriate
> or does not adhere to the following obligatory rules:"
>
> If no objections, I'd like to edit the CoC as above.
>
>
> 2 -- Should these changes be retroactive, or not?  I'm thinking not, but I
> could
> go either way.
>
> I don't think it needs to be written into the CoC about being retroactive or
> not.  But I'm not sure.  Anyone else have a thought or opinion?
>
>
> Thank you very much,
> brynn
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: brynn
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:49 PM
> To: Martin Owens ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email] ; Eduard
> Braun
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
>>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> I like that very much!
>
> I'd propose having that to replace:
>
> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere to the
> following rules:"
>
> Anyone else, other thoughts?
>
> Thanks again,
> brynn
>
> PS - cross posting into Docs list, to make sure the whole website team sees
> it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eduard Braun
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:31 AM
> To: Martin Owens ; brynn ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
> Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:
>> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>>> to be
>>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>>> features, and
>>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>>
>>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>>> Does
>>> anyone have any comments on that?
>> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
>> conduct for brevity:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>>
>> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
>> enough of it:
>>
>> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>>
>> Best Regards, Martin Owens
>
> Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
> section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
> along the lines of:
> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
> obligatory rules: [...]
>
> This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
> not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
> have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
> always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for inclusion.
>
> Regards,
> Eduard
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: website moderation policy

Maren Hachmann
Am 01.05.2017 um 08:03 schrieb brynn:
>> 3. We need to make sure that users know about the rules, and find a
> place in the django app where to link to them. Any ideas what would be
> the best place?
>
> Arghh!!  I meant to add that in my last reply to you and Martin
> privately, and forgot.  We definitely need to put a link to the CoC on
> all the upload forms!!

- Can you make that a report? It's important, but I fear it might drown
in the current email flood. We have several upload forms where this
would need to be added.

>> 4. We'll need moderators, once the moderation app works again. Would
> someone like to recruit volunteers, find out how the system works,
> explain it to them (and also accompany them a bit, for their first
> actions)?
>
> Recruiting volunteer moderators is probably not my strong suit.  Hey,
> should we put it on the To-Do List page?  Call for new moderators?  This
> moderation system needs....I'd say maybe 3 to 5 moderators?  It can work
> with 2, but more would be better.

- I'd say putting a call out on user mailing list and forums would be a
better option (because experiences with the ToDo list show that, well,
mostly nothing happens...)

> Oh, I don't mind hand-holding new moderators at all.  I hate to say
> "training". But because of this moderation system, which is unlike any
> moderation I've ever seen before, it will take some little practice to
> get comfortable.  For most moderation systems, even newbies can be
> thrown in, and they quickly learn to swim.  But this is different.
> Martin has some serious skills!!

- Yes, he's thinking quite out-of-the-box :)

> And by the way, I'd like to remind everyone that he's built the entire
> website, almost entirely on his own, from scratch, starting with
> nothing, coding the whole thing!!  He's had some help here and there
> (Maren, Jabiertxof, Sylvain, not sure who else).  But most was all him.
>
> Yay for Martin, right?!!

- Right :D

Maren

> All best,
> brynn
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Maren Hachmann
> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 4:09 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>
> 1. Sounds very good to me. I'd keep the 'related to' in.
>
> 2. Retroactive seems to be unfair to me. There aren't that many
> resources of that kind anyway. How about adding a comment, and just
> hinting at a change in the CoC, asking the user if they would like to
> upload some work that is more suitable?
>
> Thank you, Brynn and Eduard and everyone involved. This was a major
> obstacle in getting moderation on the website up and running.
>
> Additionally:
>
> 3. We need to make sure that users know about the rules, and find a
> place in the django app where to link to them. Any ideas what would be
> the best place?
>
> 4. We'll need moderators, once the moderation app works again. Would
> someone like to recruit volunteers, find out how the system works,
> explain it to them (and also accompany them a bit, for their first
> actions)?
>
> (5. The moderation app needs to work again - javascript isn't my domain,
> though.)
>
> Kind Regards,
> Maren
>
> Am 29.04.2017 um 21:02 schrieb brynn:
>> Hi Everyone,
>>         I just want to follow up and try to close this issue, so the
>> once the
>> moderation features are officially online, we have our guidelines to
>> follow.
>> (They're officially online for blatant things, but not sure about for
>> everything.)
>>
>> 1 -- I thought the following suggestion from Eduard really does cover
>> everything
>> I was thinking.  Does anyone have any objections to editing the CoC as
>> follows
>> (https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/) :
>>
>> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere
>> to the
>> following rules:"
>>
>> with:
>>
>> "Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
>> created
>> with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to work with
>> Inkscape,
>> etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content that does not seem
>> appropriate
>> or does not adhere to the following obligatory rules:"
>>
>> If no objections, I'd like to edit the CoC as above.
>>
>>
>> 2 -- Should these changes be retroactive, or not?  I'm thinking not,
>> but I could
>> go either way.
>>
>> I don't think it needs to be written into the CoC about being
>> retroactive or
>> not.  But I'm not sure.  Anyone else have a thought or opinion?
>>
>>
>> Thank you very much,
>> brynn
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: brynn
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:49 PM
>> To: Martin Owens ; Ken Moffat ; [hidden email] ;
>> Eduard
>> Braun
>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>>
>>>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
>> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
>> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
>> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
>> obligatory rules: [...]
>>
>> I like that very much!
>>
>> I'd propose having that to replace:
>>
>> "Art and other content submitted to the Inkscape website should adhere
>> to the
>> following rules:"
>>
>> Anyone else, other thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> brynn
>>
>> PS - cross posting into Docs list, to make sure the whole website team
>> sees it.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Eduard Braun
>> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:31 AM
>> To: Martin Owens ; brynn ; Ken Moffat ;
>> [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] website moderation policy
>>
>> Am 24.04.2017 um 12:02 schrieb Martin Owens:
>>> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 03:52 -0600, brynn wrote:
>>>> But it's more because this would be a change in policy, that it needs
>>>> to be
>>>> discussed.  And before we can start using the new moderation
>>>> features, and
>>>> deleting random type of photos, it must be stated in the CoC.
>>>>
>>>> Or maybe there should be a whole separate policy on website content?
>>>> Does
>>>> anyone have any comments on that?
>>> It's really a use policy, but we've sandwhiched it into the code of
>>> conduct for brevity:
>>>
>>> https://inkscape.org/en/community/coc/
>>>
>>> It could be it's own document like the privacy policy though if we had
>>> enough of it:
>>>
>>> https://inkscape.org/en/about/privacy/
>>>
>>> Best Regards, Martin Owens
>>
>> Why not just add (as the first point or general description) of the
>> section "Guidelines for user-submitted content" some rather general note
>> along the lines of:
>> Content uploaded to the gallery should be related to Inkscape (e.g.
>> created with Inkscape, created for use with Inkscape, showing how to
>> work with Inkscape, etc.). We reserve the right to remove any content
>> that does not seem appropriate or does not adhere to the following
>> obligatory rules: [...]
>>
>> This way we can continue to accept high quality content (even if it's
>> not directly related to Inkscape and would fail stricter guidelines) and
>> have the possibility to grandfather in some already uploaded file while
>> always having the possibility to reject content that is unfit for
>> inclusion.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Eduard
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> 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
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> 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
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 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
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
12