Quantcast

website moderation policy

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

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
Loading...