QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Thu 30th September 2010, 3:38pm)
Just curious here: what exactly could Jimbo actually do to fix problems like BLPs, porn, the horribly broken social structure, the elitism in the bureaucracy, and the shady side of the WMF/Wikia relationship? Can he redeem himself, or is it too late? Would anything short of getting a quiet day job be satisfactory?
I have no idea how much power Jimbo has left. But the WMF board could:
*Outlaw all BLP. It can go in a special file, retrievable 1 week after the subject dies. We could discuss a special dispensation for the 1000 most famous living people on the planet. But you know where that would lead. Best not to go there at all. It's work and drama and it's not worth it.
*Offer adminship to all editors with more than 1 year and 5000 non-simple edits (vandal reversion would not count-- content needs to be added and thought needs to be demonstrated). However, for the adminship to activate, admins must agree to edit under their birth name or something linked to a bank account, however, checked by wire transfer donation of $1 dollar to WMF. If Jimbo and David Gerard can do it (edit under their own names), I see no reason why anybody can't do it. At least from the point of personal danger.
*Protect all articles based on prior history of vandalism. Semi-protection does not have to be all-or-none, it can be "dial-a-level". Articles never vandalized would remain IP editable. Each vandalism earns a new level of sprotection (edit count and time editing) along with a comparable and commensurate timelength block of the vandal account (IP accounts included).
* Accounts tracable to schools, libraries, etc, should be automatically soft-blocked in a way to prevent IP editing, but still allow nameuser account creation. So, anybody can edit-- if you don't mind ripening a username for weeks and weeks, even months, only to lose it all, when you vandalize something.
* Any image not PG-13 goes in a separate sections of COMMONs. There might even be R- and X-rated sections as well. There images would simply not show to IP users. Name users would have to have an email address and indicate their age > 13 or 17 or whatever, in order for viewing to be enabled when they view articles that link to these images. IPs and nameusers who haven't done this, would see the same article (the text would be fine), but the image would simply be redacted as "not available to your account". To see the X-rated stuff you have to do the $1 wire-transfer. Good luck with that if you're a minor.
* Something similar would happen to entire articles with a topic of explicit sexual content like bios of porn stars and descriptions of sex acts. On the other hand, the straight medical and anatomical stuff can be left alone for view by anybody. The nudist colony rule: let anybody of any age look at 1000 penises or breasts. Erect human penis photos would be PG-13 at least.
That's a start.