Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource's translation efforts, Babel and Translate extensions
A few nice translation extensions have become mature recently, and are being considered for use on the Projects: John Vandenberg commented recently that Wikisource has been looking to have the Babel extension installed, and Siebrand notes the Translate extension is ready for wider use, say on Meta or Mediawiki.org: Siebrand: have a look at kde.userbase.org for a real-life example of a page translation implementation in a MediaWiki wiki[1]. A description of the features and process is available at translatewiki.net[2]. [1] http://userbase.kde.org/index.php?title=Special%3ALanguageStatscode=nl [2] https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Translating:Page_translation_feature what's keeping it [from being used] currently lies outside translatewiki.net's staff span of control (community voice and WMF resources). For anyone who currently works on direct translations (of help messages, primary sources, c), check out the kde example above. On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 11:01 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote: John, if you don't mind, can we move this thread to foundation-l? sure. On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:16 AM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: There is also interest in the English Wikisource community. The babel extension doesnt break anything, so I think en.ws would be happy to try it. Yes. That would be grand. I have started a formal vote in the existing discussion https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikisource/en/wiki/Wikisource:Scriptorium#Babel_extension English Wikisource is starting to focus on this for 2011, and knows it needs better software. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:WikiProject_Translation We are considering developing this functionality on top of the proofread page extension that we use. http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ProofreadPage That's great. Wikisource needs its own wiki newspaper to cover the cool things happening there :) we used to have a nice newsletter. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:News/Archives and the multilingual http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:News Main namespace pages on all language Wikisources, rather than being separate language projects, would usually be exact translations of one another... so a future sort of Translate extension might be implemented on all of them. Yea, the primary gap is the ability to translate between subdomains, whereas extension:translate currently only works on a single project. This gap might be reduced by enabling scary page transclusion between wikisource projects for only the 'Page' namespace... -- Samuel Klein identi.ca:sj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] retire the administrator privilege
2011/3/4 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net: On 03/03/11 5:44 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: The name administrator gives the impression of some mythical balance of power, although administrators don't actually administrate - they (un)delete, (un)block and (un)protect, in addition to editing articles and participating in discussions just like everybody else. The name sysop (system operator), used occasionally in English, and more frequently in some other languages (e.g. Hebrew), sounds less like a managerial role, but it's technical and cryptic and requires explanation. Giving user groups exact and real names will likely change the attitude of many users who see these user groups as the powers that be and think that they're impenetrable. You make a strong point. People cherish their titles and the self-esteem. Being able to say I am a Wikipedia administrator, to someone who has never edited Wikipedia gives an impression of importance. Breaking the task into its components leaves each part less prestigious. Most admins with whom i am familiar aren't using their adminship to gain prestige. I'd rather be the guy who wrote a detailed encyclopedic article about every diacritic sign in the Hebrew alphabet than an admin - i find a lot more prestige in it. I am happy about being an admin, not because of prestige, but because having the permission to delete pages without going through some request page is simply useful for writing articles and making the wiki better. Put simply, good admins, who use their permissions to create a better wiki, are not supposed to object to such a change. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
It would seem that the right to license one's own work as one chooses is one of those rights. How does French law resolve that conflict? By declaring that the contract where the contractant chooses to waive a fundamental right is void. You find the same line of thought in Jean Jacques Rousseau's social contract : To say that a man gives himself gratuitously, is to say what is absurd and inconceivable; such an act is null and illegitimate, from the mere fact that he who does it is out of his mind. French : Dire qu’un homme se donne gratuitement, c’est dire une chose absurde et inconcevable ; un tel acte est illégitime et nul, par cela seul que celui qui le fait n’est pas dans son bon sens. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Social_Contract/Book_I#4._Slavery ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
Moral rights is one of the core values which used to be defended at least in the past, at least by a few community members. Things are changing so quickly these days that I can be sure of nothing, but it seems to be still the case today as shown on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:OTRS#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries with wording such as retain the right to be attributed and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights (personnality rights might be something a little different from authorship's moral rights, but the respect of personality rights is also a way of showing respect to universal human dignity) It is even more clear with the French version of that template at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Messages_type with the wording je suis conscient de toujours jouir des droits extra-patrimoniaux sur mon œuvre which is synonymous with I don't waive the moral rights I own on my work. In particular, I remember the following talk we had on the French village pump where we discussed whether it was cruel to require people to agree with the Declaration of consent for all enquiries, with some people expressing that what we are asking them to agree with is too harsh, some of them ending up not wanting to agree to more than a NC (Non Commercial) license : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bistro/archives/avril_2009#Autorisation_OTRS_..._message_standard_..._perception_dramatiquement_r.C3.A9pulsive_pour_l.27internaute_moyen My view is that with a standard GFDL 1.2 or CC-BY-SA 1.0 there is a middle ground with some rights waived and some rights reserved, even if they allow commercial use. I think it is important to convey throughout the reuse chain the feeling that the reusers are grateful to the content creator for having created the content. And that gratefulness or recognition (that someone did a good work, or an average work, but in all events, a work good enough for reuse) is expressed by attribution. There is also another line of doctrine which says that attribution is a tribute, which is the symbolic price paid for the work by the reuser. Under that doctrine, a free work would no longer be called a free as free beer work, but a symbolically paid work. A long time ago, people used to pay works with wikimoney. It may look a bit childish, or a waste of time, but I think the symbolic message of wikimoney is great : http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikip%C3%A9dia:WikiMonnaieoldid=8160930 . Is conveying gratefulness feelings to other human beings a waste of time ? I think reusers should keep in their minds that the wikimoney is the attribution. If you attribute the work correctly and follow all the other license's requirements (like adding a link to the legal code on the creativecommons.org website) you are symbolically paying some wikimoney for the work. But I think it is not possible to promote such values and at the same time be friends with the people who create and promote the CC Zero license. I think it is extremely embarassing to see the Creative Commons website promote CC Zero for the Open Clip Art library. What wrong have SVG graphic designers done to be treated in such a harsh way ? Enabling anybody to build upon their work with no duty to share alike ? Enabling anybody to reuse their work without crediting them ? Why isn't there anybody defending them ? Don't they deserve that minimal symbolic payment that is attribution ? Are they such under-citizens that they don't even deserve the minimal rights ? http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_use_for_data#Open_Clip_Art_Library I also think it is difficult to be friends with Open Street View, given the so strange way they use a creative commons attribution license. Attribution means providing the name that identifies the creator personally. Writing the sentence Individual OSM mappers do not request a credit over and above that to “OpenStreetMap contributors” is an act of dehumanization. They don't actually request this. They are compelled to choose between agreeing with this harsh treatment or not participate at all. They are never asked what they really want, if they would like to be personally attributed or not. And they are never taught that as a human being they deserve that minimal recognition feeling which is attribution. If you don't teach people that they have rights, they will never be able to be strong and defend themselves. So there is a big need to educate people that as content creators, they have the right to be attributed. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
2011/2/27 Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com: No one wants to attack French moral rights, or the attack the idiosyncrasies of any particular legal jurisdiction. What we want to do is curate a large international collection of free content that will remain free content 300 years from now after all of us are dead and can no longer be personally vigilant regarding those who might try to restrict the descendants of our collected content from others. What is it that you want to do? Birgitte SB No one ? I would not say so. I would rather say that 75.8% (1) want to attack moral rights, which are not French only (3), and, as I showed in my previous mail, are a value taken into account in Wikimedia projects in such documents as http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:OTRS#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries It might have become a core value of the Wikimedia communities. But if community leaders lead the community into the wrong way... you end up with a 75.8 majority going into the wrong way. you hereby agree that such credit is sufficient in any medium (2) means that creators are no longer attributed personally. (1) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update/Result (2) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update (3) For example Spanish copyright law article 14 derechos irrenunciables e inalienables (...) Exigir el reconocimiento de su condición de autor de la obra http://civil.udg.es/normacivil/estatal/reals/Lpi.html They are also provided an international recognition in the Berne Convention Article 6bis : Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html#P123_20726 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote: In my opinion, the people who want to attack this, are on a sloppery slope where the next step is when they request you to waive your human rights. Are you quite serious? --vvv ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
On 4 March 2011 11:05, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote: No one ? I would not say so. I would rather say that 75.8% (1) want to attack moral rights, which are not French only (3), and, as I showed in my previous mail, are a value taken into account in Wikimedia projects in such documents as http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:OTRS#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries It might have become a core value of the Wikimedia communities. But if community leaders lead the community into the wrong way... you end up with a 75.8 majority going into the wrong way. See, when most people have an overwhelming majority against them they consider the possibility they might be in the wrong community. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource's translation efforts, Babel and Translate extensions
John Vandenberg commented recently that Wikisource has been looking to have the Babel extension installed, and Siebrand notes the Translate extension is ready for wider use, say on Meta or Mediawiki.org: Babel is great and i'd love to see it enabled everywhere, but there's a little odd bug that should be fixed: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23034 I tried to fix it myself, but got lost in the language code tables. Another i18n extension that has matured recently is Interlanguage: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15607 Enabling it will: * stop the countless interwiki bot edits and clean up Recent Changes * allow resolving interlanguage links conflicts easily and efficiently * help clean this backlog: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_synchronization -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace. - T. Moore ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] retire the administrator privilege
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:57:37 -0800, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: There are huge flaws in the decision making process. The process of proposal, considered favorable response, overwhelming negative vote is common. It repeats itself, and that too becomes a part of the problem. There are always enough individuals to feel that their immediate rights or prospective rights are threatened to come out and give a sufficient vote to kill any reform proposal. Those of us who would want a more liberal and more flexible policy framework have become jaded. We see the pattern repeat itself, and can no longer be bothered when it comes up again ... if we haven't left Wikipedia altogether. We don't want to wade through the entire Encyclopedia of Witlessness before showing our support for a good reform proposal. A single paragraph of explanation should be enough. But even more, when we have heard the arguments so often, and have seen so many votes, we have no way of knowing that an important vote is happening. The reformers need to make a better effort of canvassing their support. Ray Actually, my experience, based on solely Russian Wikipedia, says that making new policies becomes progressively different. Recently I tried to summarize a discussion which aimed at removing the inconsistency of two long-standing policies. I spent a lot of time trying to reconcile the parties, but failed, and in the end had to state that there have been no consensus reached to alter any of the policies, and the inconsistency will stay as it was. (My summary has been disputed bu one of the users, but this is a different story). Indeed, I feel that better and better explanations are needed to get even the policies which have been long-needed to get seriously discussed. And I do not think this is a matter of canvassing (in Russian Wikipedia, we do not vote, we count and weight arguments, so that the number of meatpuppets is irrelevant), it is just in my opinion the community has grown beyond some critical point. Cheers Yaroslav ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Storyteller job opening
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 11:26 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: You appear to be generalising from your personal preferences to the world here. This is a common fallacy and a really bad idea in general. I have heard numerous complains from other volunteers who thought that WMF is spending its money irrationally. So I believe those personal preferences are widespread enough. --vvv ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
2011/3/4 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: On 4 March 2011 11:05, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote: No one ? I would not say so. I would rather say that 75.8% (1) want to attack moral rights, which are not French only (3), and, as I showed in my previous mail, are a value taken into account in Wikimedia projects in such documents as http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:OTRS#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries It might have become a core value of the Wikimedia communities. But if community leaders lead the community into the wrong way... you end up with a 75.8 majority going into the wrong way. See, when most people have an overwhelming majority against them they consider the possibility they might be in the wrong community. Thanks for your warm feelings and also for ruling out that anybody can change his/her mind (including myself). That when they have started voting for something, they must go on voting for the same thing their life long. For ruling out that people having different views can live together. That the minority view is the wrong view. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com: 2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com: (...) (3) For example Spanish copyright law article 14 derechos irrenunciables e inalienables (...) Exigir el reconocimiento de su condición de autor de la obra http://civil.udg.es/normacivil/estatal/reals/Lpi.html They are also provided an international recognition in the Berne Convention Article 6bis : Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html#P123_20726 See also the Japanese copyright law article 19 the author shall have the right to determine whether his true name or pseudonym should be indicated or not, as the name of the author, on the original of his work or when his work is offered to or made available to the public. The author shall have the same right with respect to the indication of his name when works derived form his work are offered to or made available to the public http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_1.html#cl2_1+SS2 coupled together with article 59 Moral rights of the author shall be exclusively personal to him and inalienable. Inalienable means they can't be either sold or waived.: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inalienable http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_2.html#cl2_2+S5 So it is not just a crazy French or European thing. How can so many countries' legislatures be wrong ? Until the 2009 license change, there was a narrow path with GFDL, enabling to build Wikipedia in each country without breaking too many laws (1). But with the 2009 license change, WMF is behaving like a bull in a china shop. (1) Even if you did everything right with Moral Rights, the French law is still broken in a couple of places. But this is not a scoop. Remember what Lawrence Lessig said about German law in http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/2/En-5 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
Next thing these people will shutdown wikipedia because the french law says impre*scriptible*, and they will say that because wikipedia uses JS and so is scriptable, it shouldn't be around. What don't you like about the licence anyway? It is my opinion that the laws of the most influentual country apply on the wiki served by it. You can't expect English Wikipedia to respect Japanese laws, can you? Probably 90% don't even know Japanese, let alone live in Japan. The same goes for French and every other one, though the percentages will obviously vary. On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com: 2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com: (...) (3) For example Spanish copyright law article 14 derechos irrenunciables e inalienables (...) Exigir el reconocimiento de su condición de autor de la obra http://civil.udg.es/normacivil/estatal/reals/Lpi.html They are also provided an international recognition in the Berne Convention Article 6bis : Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html#P123_20726 See also the Japanese copyright law article 19 the author shall have the right to determine whether his true name or pseudonym should be indicated or not, as the name of the author, on the original of his work or when his work is offered to or made available to the public. The author shall have the same right with respect to the indication of his name when works derived form his work are offered to or made available to the public http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_1.html#cl2_1+SS2 coupled together with article 59 Moral rights of the author shall be exclusively personal to him and inalienable. Inalienable means they can't be either sold or waived.: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inalienable http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_2.html#cl2_2+S5 So it is not just a crazy French or European thing. How can so many countries' legislatures be wrong ? Until the 2009 license change, there was a narrow path with GFDL, enabling to build Wikipedia in each country without breaking too many laws (1). But with the 2009 license change, WMF is behaving like a bull in a china shop. (1) Even if you did everything right with Moral Rights, the French law is still broken in a couple of places. But this is not a scoop. Remember what Lawrence Lessig said about German law in http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/2/En-5 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FCForum Declaration: Sustainable Models for Creativity
Hello! Hola! Thanks Milos and SJ for openning the question in this e-list. Here below I send a short e-mail (in English, Spanish and catalan version) which inform about the Free culture forum (Fcforum) and the release of the Declaration and how-to manual on new models of sustainability of culture and knowledge in the digital era. It could be a resource to spread the word around. I am co-founder member of the Fcforum. For endorsements to the declaration or if you would like to know more about it, you could reply back to me. Thank in advance for any action for helping to spread the word. Have a nice day! Mayo (English, Spanish, Catalan) Launching: Declaration and how-to manual on new models of sustainability of culture and knowledge in the digital era. Over 40 international organizations endorse the Declaration and how-to manual on new models of sustainability in the digital era that are released today by the Free/Libre Culture Forum (FCForum). Declaration and how to manual on new models of sustainability in the digital era: http://fcforum.net/sustainable-models-for-creativityhttps://red002.mail.emea.microsoftonline.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=94d8af41e4104e0eb659a925b24cd71dURL=http%3a%2f%2ffcforum.net%2fsustainable-models-for-creativity Each year, the FCForum (http://2010.fcforum.nethttps://red002.mail.emea.microsoftonline.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=94d8af41e4104e0eb659a925b24cd71dURL=http%3a%2f%2f2010.fcforum.net) brings together key organization and active voices in the sphere of free/libre culture and knowledge. It responds to the need for an international arena to coordinate a global framework for action to defend and expand the sphere in which human creativity and knowledge can prosper freely and sustainably. As civil society, it is our responsibility to oppose practices that plunder the common heritage and block its future development. The Declaration and How-to manual of new models of sustainability in the digital era that we are releasing today include a review of the current situation of diverse sectors of creativity (music, cinema, digital infrastructure, writing content and online repositories resulting of open collaboration online, among others), list several emerging models and sources of sustainability, and, importantly, argue our conviction that: Copyright, as we currently know it, is counterproductive, and the restructuring of existing business models is inevitable and imperative. Attempts by some entities and corporations to profit through the creation of monopolies, often with the active connivance of government, should be brought to a stop. The sharing and exchange of ideas is of vital importance to culture, knowledge and democracy, and we must work towards maximizing governmental and institutional initiatives that understand and support them. Last but not least, it is necessary and important that people are compensated for their socially valuable creative work. Furthermore, digital commons provided by civic society actors and resulting from citizens' collaboration are increasing in importance and accordingly have to gain visibility and social recognition. The Declaration and How-to manual present some of the many existing and possible models. We should be encouraging and promoting further development and recognition of them. We invite citizens, policy reformers and institutions to take the content of this practical proposal into account and to use its release as an opportunity to discuss our future together. We intend this resource to be useful for initiatives in their promotion of access and creativity of culture and knowledge. We will continue to collect signatures, endorsements and contributions. With them we will be developing new versions as new requirements and new solutions appear. Read, share, spread and participate! Free/Libre Culture Forum (FCForum): http://fcforum.nethttps://red002.mail.emea.microsoftonline.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=94d8af41e4104e0eb659a925b24cd71dURL=http%3a%2f%2ffcforum.net To endorse the declaration write to: i...@fcforum.net : (SPANISH) Declaración y Manual sobre modelos sostenibles para la creatividad en la cultura y el conocimiento en la era digital El Foro de cultura libre (FCForum) (http://2010.fcforum.net/https://red002.mail.emea.microsoftonline.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=94d8af41e4104e0eb659a925b24cd71dURL=http%3a%2f%2f2010.fcforum.net%2f) lanza hoy La Declaración y el “Manual” sobre modelos sostenibles para la creatividad en la era digital: http://fcforum.net/es/sustainable-models-for-creativityhttps://red002.mail.emea.microsoftonline.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=94d8af41e4104e0eb659a925b24cd71dURL=http%3a%2f%2ffcforum.net%2fes%2fsustainable-models-for-creativity Hay muchos modelos que ya están operando o que son posibles. Este documento examina algunos de ellos y pide que se aliente y promueva su desarrollo. Lo que viene a demostrar es que soluciones prácticas las hay. Cosa bien
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
This thread is at a bit too theoretical a plane for me to follow in detail. (As it happens, I'm a lawyer, but of course not a French lawyer.) Can someone give a specific instance (theoretical or historical) where the assertion of droit moral as applied to wiki content beyond what is expressly preserved in the license would actually come up as a practical matter? In my experience, most assertions on-wiki of moral rights have been in the context of editing disputes, but I know there is a deeper philosophical and legal issue involved here than occasional passing legal threats. FWIW, there is some discussion of a related issue in an arbitration decision I wrote (RfAr/Alastair Haines 2). Basically, what we said was that submitting one's work to Wikipedia, by the very nature of our collaborative editing process, means that one is surrendering the ability to preserve the work intact to a greater extent than by submitting it elsewhere. If one believes it's important that one's writing be presented as submitted, without change, then Wikipedia is not the right forum for it, regardless of the merits of the content. Newyorkbrad On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Arlen Beiler arlen...@gmail.com wrote: Next thing these people will shutdown wikipedia because the french law says impre*scriptible*, and they will say that because wikipedia uses JS and so is scriptable, it shouldn't be around. What don't you like about the licence anyway? It is my opinion that the laws of the most influentual country apply on the wiki served by it. You can't expect English Wikipedia to respect Japanese laws, can you? Probably 90% don't even know Japanese, let alone live in Japan. The same goes for French and every other one, though the percentages will obviously vary. On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com: 2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com: (...) (3) For example Spanish copyright law article 14 derechos irrenunciables e inalienables (...) Exigir el reconocimiento de su condición de autor de la obra http://civil.udg.es/normacivil/estatal/reals/Lpi.html They are also provided an international recognition in the Berne Convention Article 6bis : Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html#P123_20726 See also the Japanese copyright law article 19 the author shall have the right to determine whether his true name or pseudonym should be indicated or not, as the name of the author, on the original of his work or when his work is offered to or made available to the public. The author shall have the same right with respect to the indication of his name when works derived form his work are offered to or made available to the public http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_1.html#cl2_1+SS2 coupled together with article 59 Moral rights of the author shall be exclusively personal to him and inalienable. Inalienable means they can't be either sold or waived.: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inalienable http://www.cric.or.jp/cric_e/clj/cl2_2.html#cl2_2+S5 So it is not just a crazy French or European thing. How can so many countries' legislatures be wrong ? Until the 2009 license change, there was a narrow path with GFDL, enabling to build Wikipedia in each country without breaking too many laws (1). But with the 2009 license change, WMF is behaving like a bull in a china shop. (1) Even if you did everything right with Moral Rights, the French law is still broken in a couple of places. But this is not a scoop. Remember what Lawrence Lessig said about German law in http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/2/En-5 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Is the WMF spending its (our or our donors) money irrationally?
Re the numerous complains from other volunteers who thought that WMF is spending its money irrationally. that vvv has heard. Any charity has pretty much by definition an obligation to use the money it is entrusted with rationally and appropriately. In the case of the WMF there has been a lot of flak on this list because of a rather trendy sounding job title and a vague job ad. Personally I think that vague job descriptions are a mildly questionable but routine tactic that many not for profits use to maximise what they can get their staff to do. As for the big financial decisions, I tend to the view that locating our sole data centre in a state known for its Earthquakes was a brave decision, and creating a secondary datacentre an expensive but logical one. I take some comfort from the fact that the debate about use of funds has mostly been about relatively small parts of the budget, and that the big important decisions are mostly uncontentious. Though I welcome such globalisation measures as the Indian and possible middle East offices, I do wonder at the planned total headcount, and I hope that of all the things that came out of the Strategy project, one featured proposal http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Keep_the_servers_running is given due pre-eminence in all WMF planning. But overall my impression is that the WMF spends money rationally, I do see quite a few tests, innovations and new ventures, which I consider a healthy sign. The acid test will be whether the foundation is able to work out which of those are worth continuing, which merit expansion and building on, which need tweaking and which need to be closed down and learned from. WereSpielChequers Message: 2 Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:17:33 +0300 From: Victor Vasiliev vasi...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Storyteller job opening To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: aanlktimyyxa85bo5yxrjzbafwaucsubu77tveyruv...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 11:26 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: You appear to be generalising from your personal preferences to the world here. This is a common fallacy and a really bad idea in general. I have heard numerous complains from other volunteers who thought that WMF is spending its money irrationally. So I believe those personal preferences are widespread enough. --vvv -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 13:41:06 +0100 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is the WMF spending its (our or our donors) money irrationally?
On 05/03/11 01:47, WereSpielChequers wrote: As for the big financial decisions, I tend to the view that locating our sole data centre in a state known for its Earthquakes was a brave decision, and creating a secondary datacentre an expensive but logical one. Our main data centre is in Florida, which is one of the safest states in the US for earthquakes. Only the office is in San Francisco. -- Tim Starling ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is the WMF spending its (our or our donors) money irrationally?
What about hurricanes? ; ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Florida_hurricane_%28pre-1900%29_tracks.jpg 2011/3/4 Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org On 05/03/11 01:47, WereSpielChequers wrote: As for the big financial decisions, I tend to the view that locating our sole data centre in a state known for its Earthquakes was a brave decision, and creating a secondary datacentre an expensive but logical one. Our main data centre is in Florida, which is one of the safest states in the US for earthquakes. Only the office is in San Francisco. -- Tim Starling ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is the WMF spending its (our or our donors) money irrationally?
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 07:59, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote: What about hurricanes? ; ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Florida_hurricane_%28pre-1900%29_tracks.jpg Maybe that's why the new Datacenter is being built in Virginia [1]? The reality is that no where is safe from natural disasters. Everywhere you go, there is going to be some new and creative way for nature to level your datacenter (Hence replication). -Jon [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Projects/Data_Center_Virginia -- Jon [[User:ShakataGaNai]] / KJ6FNQ http://snowulf.com/ http://ipv6wiki.net/ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is the WMF spending its (our or our donors) money irrationally?
On 03/04/2011 03:47 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote: creating a secondary datacentre an expensive but logical one. I agree. Wikipedia's server infrastructure is crazy if you compare it to any other major site. Any effort to professionalize it and make it more reliable (not only in terms of preventing frequent short-time outages, but also in terms of rare events with the potential to bring down Wikimedia for a longer period) is a good investment. That being said, my subjective impression is that the function f: #Employees → Amount of work that gets done is increasing significantly slower than a linear function – which is of course to be expected in any kind of organization (both to the fact that there's overhead and that with few employees you can pick low-hanging-fruits and don't have to tackle projects that are more likely to be difficult or fail). I could however imagine, that this leads to some frustration in the community. --Tobias signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser
Hi, perhaps now that most of the fundraising stress is over, we can discuss the direction WMF should be taking in terms of raising funds. While I'm glad that WMF and most chapters reached or exceeded their fundraising goals, I feel qualmishly about where we're heading. In order to meet a very ambitious goal, standards have shifted in the 2010/2011 fundraiser. Previously, we limited our efforts to text banners. Only if our fundraising goal wasn't going to be met, we used our Joker card Personal appeal by Jimmy Wales. Now the standard for an banner of acceptable efficiency is Jimmy's appeal, and all other banners have to be of comparable efficiency. (This lead to the fact, that almost none of the hundreds of text banners created by the community were used.[1] Not exactly a respectful interaction with Wikimedia's volunteers, as I already wrote on another mailing list.) Our banners are getting more annoying every year. We're being more aggressive. And we're putting words like Urgent[2] on the banners and suggest that we haven't paid our bills for 2010 yet[3] (which is at the very least misleading). We simply can't keep up with expectations of a (nearly) exponential growth in revenue WITHOUT drastically changing the way we raise funds. Since the changes WMF already implemented are undesirable (make the banners bigger and more annoying every year), I think we either have to come up with completely new ways to raise funds, or become aware of what our limits are and at which point WMF needs to stop growing. I'm not a financial analyst, I'm simply a volunteer concerned about the direction Wikimedia is heading at. One comment by a Wikimedia Foundation staff member made me think a lot about this. He said: Asking us to change messaging to something that impacts performance costs the Foundation and the movement real money. These are not theoretical decisions: my coworkers keep their jobs based on our performance on this fundraiser. Chapters that get grants are funded based on the success of this fundraiser. Real people and their families lose money based on the performance of these banners. So yeah, we're doing everything we can to maximize the income. I found that comment to be very disturbing. It makes the Wikimedia staff look like it is mostly concerned with keeping their jobs,[4] instead of making Wikimedia's mission succeed. Money is not something inherently good that we should strive for. It is but a tool, in pursuing our mission. In that regard, I believe we have to think about how we can ensure that we're being friendly and respectful towards our readers and donors, raise enough money, define what 'enough money' is and how all that affects our mission. Best regards, Tobias User:Church of emacs [1] Hundreds of banners, contributions of more than 200 volunteers in 24 languages, over a thousand comments: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2010/Messages [2] e.g. http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NoticeTemplate/viewtemplate=20101217_JA022A_US [3] e.g. http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NoticeTemplate/viewtemplate=20101227_JA045_US [4] I do not believe that they are, but the thought has certainly crossed my mind after reading the aforementioned quote. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] retire the administrator privilege
On 03/04/11 2:04 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: 2011/3/4 Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net: On 03/03/11 5:44 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: The name administrator gives the impression of some mythical balance of power, although administrators don't actually administrate - they (un)delete, (un)block and (un)protect, in addition to editing articles and participating in discussions just like everybody else. The name sysop (system operator), used occasionally in English, and more frequently in some other languages (e.g. Hebrew), sounds less like a managerial role, but it's technical and cryptic and requires explanation. Giving user groups exact and real names will likely change the attitude of many users who see these user groups as the powers that be and think that they're impenetrable. You make a strong point. People cherish their titles and the self-esteem. Being able to say I am a Wikipedia administrator, to someone who has never edited Wikipedia gives an impression of importance. Breaking the task into its components leaves each part less prestigious. Most admins with whom i am familiar aren't using their adminship to gain prestige. I'd rather be the guy who wrote a detailed encyclopedic article about every diacritic sign in the Hebrew alphabet than an admin - i find a lot more prestige in it. I am happy about being an admin, not because of prestige, but because having the permission to delete pages without going through some request page is simply useful for writing articles and making the wiki better. Put simply, good admins, who use their permissions to create a better wiki, are not supposed to object to such a change. Absolutely, but you only get that warped perspective because you deal essentially with good admins. :-P It's the ones that you don't associate with that I would worry about. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is the WMF spending its (our or our donors) money irrationally?
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Jon Davis w...@konsoletek.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 07:59, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote: What about hurricanes? ; ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Florida_hurricane_%28pre-1900%29_tracks.jpg Maybe that's why the new Datacenter is being built in Virginia [1]? The reality is that no where is safe from natural disasters. Everywhere you go, there is going to be some new and creative way for nature to level your datacenter (Hence replication). -Jon [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Projects/Data_Center_Virginia A particularly nasty hurricane could level Florida and continue on to do damage to Virginia as well, but Virginia is more structural damage resistant (peak winds drop rapidly inland). However, odds are low. As someone who does DR and IT dependability professionally, you get the level of redundancy you can reasonably pay for. Nothing can be 100% sure not to have failures. You're more likely to have outages and lose data due to people than anything else. Software failures less than that, Hardware failures less than that. Environment is statistically the least, below 10%. Very complex environments with multiple sites and failover generally don't have single-cause attributable outages, though in rare cases engineering and design missed something and a single point of failure remains and fails. Everything only being in Florida was a major risk factor, but we're long past that. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] (OT) Wael Ghonim TED talk on the Egyptian Revolution
This is not 100% off-topic, since he talks about Wikipedia off the top. But it's worth watching regardless of that: it is a really lovely, inspiring talk. http://www.ted.com/talks/wael_ghonim_inside_the_egyptian_revolution.html Thanks, Sue Some text from his Wikipedia article below: In January 2011, Ghonim persuaded Google to allow him to return to Egypt, citing a personal problem.[12] Ghonim had been running a Facebook fanpage about Mohamed ElBaradei, which was being used to promote democracy and organize protests in Cairo.[13] Ghonim disappeared on 27 January during the nationwide unrest in Egypt. His family told Al-Arabiya and other international media that he was missing. Google also issued a statement confirming the disappearance. Many bloggers like Chris DiBona and Habib Haddad campaigned in an attempt to identify his whereabouts. On 5 February 2011, Mostafa Alnagar, a major Egyptian opposition figure[14], reported that Wael Ghonim was alive and detained by the authorities and to be released 'within hours'.[15] On 6 February 2011, Amnesty International demanded that the Egyptian authorities disclose where Ghonim was and to release him.[16] Ghonim was released on 7 February, after 11 days in detention. Upon his release, he was greeted with cheers and applause when he stated: We will not abandon our demand and that is the departure of the regime.[17] The same day, Ghonim appeared on the Egyptian channel DreamTV on the 10:00 pm programme hosted by Mona El-Shazly. In the interview he praised the protesters and mourned the dead as the host read their names and showed their pictures, eventually rising, overwhelmed, and walking off camera. The host followed.[18][19] In the interview, he also urged that they deserved attention more than he did, and calling for the end of the Mubarak regime, describing it again as 'rubbish'. He also asserted his allegiance to Egypt, saying that he would never move to the United States, the homeland of his wife.[20][21] Becoming a symbol of the revolution in Egypt,[22] Ghonim stated that he is ready to die for the cause.[23] At the end ..., he gathered himself for a few seconds and tried to make the most of the platform [El-Shazly] had given him. 'I want to tell every mother and every father who lost a child, I am sorry, but this is not our mistake,' he said. 'I swear to God, it’s not our mistake. It’s the mistake of every one of those in power who doesn’t want to let go of it.'[18] On 9 February, Ghonim addressed the crowds in Tahrir Square, telling the protesters: This is not the time for individuals, or parties, or movements. It's a time for all of us to say just one thing: Egypt above all.[24] -- Sue Gardner Executive Director Wikimedia Foundation 415 839 6885 office 415 816 9967 cell Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
- Original Message From: Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 5:05:11 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights 2011/2/27 Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com: No one wants to attack French moral rights, or the attack the idiosyncrasies of any particular legal jurisdiction. What we want to do is curate a large international collection of free content that will remain free content 300 years from now after all of us are dead and can no longer be personally vigilant regarding those who might try to restrict the descendants of our collected content from others. What is it that you want to do? Birgitte SB No one ? I would not say so. I would rather say that 75.8% (1) want to attack moral rights, which are not French only (3), and, as I showed in my previous mail, are a value taken into account in Wikimedia projects in such documents as http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:OTRS#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries s It might have become a core value of the Wikimedia communities. But if community leaders lead the community into the wrong way... you end up with a 75.8 majority going into the wrong way. It is not reasonable to believe the underlying desire there is to make an attack French moral rights. Please try to be accurate and stop making such spurious accusations. Birgitte SB ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] (OT) Wael Ghonim TED talk on the Egyptian Revolution
POR FAVOR ESCRIBIR EN ESPAÑOL YA QUE NO COMPRENDO EL INGLES GRACIAS... From: sgard...@wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 13:47:46 -0800 To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Foundation-l] (OT) Wael Ghonim TED talk on the Egyptian Revolution This is not 100% off-topic, since he talks about Wikipedia off the top. But it's worth watching regardless of that: it is a really lovely, inspiring talk. http://www.ted.com/talks/wael_ghonim_inside_the_egyptian_revolution.html Thanks, Sue Some text from his Wikipedia article below: In January 2011, Ghonim persuaded Google to allow him to return to Egypt, citing a personal problem.[12] Ghonim had been running a Facebook fanpage about Mohamed ElBaradei, which was being used to promote democracy and organize protests in Cairo.[13] Ghonim disappeared on 27 January during the nationwide unrest in Egypt. His family told Al-Arabiya and other international media that he was missing. Google also issued a statement confirming the disappearance. Many bloggers like Chris DiBona and Habib Haddad campaigned in an attempt to identify his whereabouts. On 5 February 2011, Mostafa Alnagar, a major Egyptian opposition figure[14], reported that Wael Ghonim was alive and detained by the authorities and to be released 'within hours'.[15] On 6 February 2011, Amnesty International demanded that the Egyptian authorities disclose where Ghonim was and to release him.[16] Ghonim was released on 7 February, after 11 days in detention. Upon his release, he was greeted with cheers and applause when he stated: We will not abandon our demand and that is the departure of the regime.[17] The same day, Ghonim appeared on the Egyptian channel DreamTV on the 10:00 pm programme hosted by Mona El-Shazly. In the interview he praised the protesters and mourned the dead as the host read their names and showed their pictures, eventually rising, overwhelmed, and walking off camera. The host followed.[18][19] In the interview, he also urged that they deserved attention more than he did, and calling for the end of the Mubarak regime, describing it again as 'rubbish'. He also asserted his allegiance to Egypt, saying that he would never move to the United States, the homeland of his wife.[20][21] Becoming a symbol of the revolution in Egypt,[22] Ghonim stated that he is ready to die for the cause.[23] At the end ..., he gathered himself for a few seconds and tried to make the most of the platform [El-Shazly] had given him. 'I want to tell every mother and every father who lost a child, I am sorry, but this is not our mistake,' he said. 'I swear to God, it’s not our mistake. It’s the mistake of every one of those in power who doesn’t want to let go of it.'[18] On 9 February, Ghonim addressed the crowds in Tahrir Square, telling the protesters: This is not the time for individuals, or parties, or movements. It's a time for all of us to say just one thing: Egypt above all.[24] -- Sue Gardner Executive Director Wikimedia Foundation 415 839 6885 office 415 816 9967 cell Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] retire the administrator privilege
POR FAVOR DE ESCRIBIR EN ESPAÑOL ,YA QUE NO COMPRENDO BIEN EL INGLES..GRACIAS Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 12:54:05 -0800 From: sainto...@telus.net To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] retire the administrator privilege On 03/04/11 2:04 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: 2011/3/4 Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net: On 03/03/11 5:44 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: The name administrator gives the impression of some mythical balance of power, although administrators don't actually administrate - they (un)delete, (un)block and (un)protect, in addition to editing articles and participating in discussions just like everybody else. The name sysop (system operator), used occasionally in English, and more frequently in some other languages (e.g. Hebrew), sounds less like a managerial role, but it's technical and cryptic and requires explanation. Giving user groups exact and real names will likely change the attitude of many users who see these user groups as the powers that be and think that they're impenetrable. You make a strong point. People cherish their titles and the self-esteem. Being able to say I am a Wikipedia administrator, to someone who has never edited Wikipedia gives an impression of importance. Breaking the task into its components leaves each part less prestigious. Most admins with whom i am familiar aren't using their adminship to gain prestige. I'd rather be the guy who wrote a detailed encyclopedic article about every diacritic sign in the Hebrew alphabet than an admin - i find a lot more prestige in it. I am happy about being an admin, not because of prestige, but because having the permission to delete pages without going through some request page is simply useful for writing articles and making the wiki better. Put simply, good admins, who use their permissions to create a better wiki, are not supposed to object to such a change. Absolutely, but you only get that warped perspective because you deal essentially with good admins. :-P It's the ones that you don't associate with that I would worry about. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource's translation efforts, Babel and Translate extensions
Samuel Klein wrote: A few nice translation extensions have become mature recently, and are being considered for use on the Projects: John Vandenberg commented recently that Wikisource has been looking to have the Babel extension installed, and Siebrand notes the Translate extension is ready for wider use, say on Meta or Mediawiki.org: Requests for extension review should be listed here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Review_queue If there isn't an associated bug to have the extension enabled on a specific project, family of projects, or all Wikimedia wikis, someone should file one and reference it on the Review queue page. MZMcBride ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource's translation efforts, Babel and Translate extensions
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:35 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Samuel Klein wrote: A few nice translation extensions have become mature recently, and are being considered for use on the Projects: John Vandenberg commented recently that Wikisource has been looking to have the Babel extension installed, and Siebrand notes the Translate extension is ready for wider use, say on Meta or Mediawiki.org: Requests for extension review should be listed here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Review_queue If there isn't an associated bug to have the extension enabled on a specific project, family of projects, or all Wikimedia wikis, someone should file one and reference it on the Review queue page. Thanks for pointing that out. I will do that shortly. -- John Vandenberg ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:50 AM, church.of.emacs.ml church.of.emacs.ml@ googlemail.com wrote: I found that comment to be very disturbing. It makes the Wikimedia staff look like it is mostly concerned with keeping their jobs,[4] instead of making Wikimedia's mission succeed. Money is not something inherently good that we should strive for. It is but a tool, in pursuing our mission. I think he'd tell you he regrets the way he put that. Our jobs don't matter at all if they're not significantly helping the movement. And I know he feels that way too. Two days ago in the Community Department, we had a staff gathering to talk about the values and principles that should inform our thinking. One that I included was: The Wikimedia movement doesn’t owe you a job; You are here to serve the Wikimedia movement; If you want a job, start looking. I'm very serious about that. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Zack Exley zex...@wikimedia.org wrote: I think he'd tell you he regrets the way he put that. Our jobs don't matter at all if they're not significantly helping the movement. And I know he feels that way too. So that we're not hypothesizing, I'll say it: I sincerely regret the way I put that. I was attempting to say that the choices that we make have real world consequences. I used a terrible example to point that out. Philippe ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Zack Exley zex...@wikimedia.org wrote: The Wikimedia movement doesn’t owe you a job; You are here to serve the Wikimedia movement; If you want a job, start looking. I'm very serious about that. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l +1 I'm quite comfortable back in my volunteer skin. -- ~Keegan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
