It's been a while since we last got together on IRC, so we'd like to meet again this Wednesday at 6pm pacific time.
Information here on how to join.
We have a very important topic of conversation this week: Political and moral agendas and where (or whether) they fit in with waymarking.
I have always felt as though our personal feelings should not enter into our decision when voting on new categories. Judging by the comments on a recent category submission (Pro-Life Billboards) it appears I may be in the minority. That specific category was denied by Groundspeak but based solely on the nay votes referring to its temporary nature. However, in the future it may be that other categories which are not temporary will also spark outrage on moral grounds.
Here are some examples of potential new categories:
Planned Parenthood. The authors and supporters of the aforementioned category may take offense to listing these locations. However, this is a legitimate organization which has actual brick and mortar locations which can be marked with a GPS. Should we allow this category?
Neo-Nazi Headquarters. Let's assume for a moment that there are hundreds of these offices throughout the world, and under one banner of organization. Should this be a category? (sorry for the
Godwin here)
GLAAD (Gay and *** Alliance Against Defamation). Same argument. Should this be a category?
Disclaimer: I am in no way equating homosexuality or pro life/choice with nazism.You see where this is going. Our goal has always been to organize the world's locations into a useful and interesting database. So far we have a few controversial categories (graffiti, caves, nude beaches) but nothing like what we will see in the future. I think it's important for us to set some ground rules so we know how to react when the time comes.
Hope to see you on Wednesday night!
PS - I setup a non-category-managing group for people who want to be informed by mass email when we schedule these chats.
Please join here!
PPS - The forum filter the word "les.bian"
