Erik Moeller wrote: > 2009/1/16 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <[email protected]>: > >> Erik Moeller wrote: >> >>> * The attribution terms should avoid requiring specific reference to >>> Wikipedia, so that it's clear that there is not necessarily a tie >>> between the project in which collaboration currently happens, and any >>> future use of the content. If someone creates a better alternative to >>> Wikipedia where the content is used, why should it be continued to be >>> attributed to Wikipedia, rather than the authors? >>> >>> >> I must be a moron or at least functionally illiterate, since >> I simply cannot parse the previous paragraph in a way >> that makes logical sense. >> > > :-) > > I whole-heartedly apologize to you for previously intimating that your ability at humour is at the native level of Germans everywhere around the globe.
:-))) > Imagine that: > > 1) The Wikimedia Foundation is taken over by evil reptilian kitten eaters; > > 2) Wikipedians join forces to fork Wikipedia into Freependium, which > has an explicit policy to not eat kittens (FP:DONOTEAT); > > 3) Two years later, nobody uses Wikipedia anymore except for a few die > hard kitten eaters; > > 4) Yet, millions of Freependium users need to continue to reference > the kitten eating Wikipedia because of the attribution requirements. > > Unlikely? Perhaps - though some people say that the evil reptilian > kitten eater takeover has already begun. The way around this is to > formulate attribution requirements that do not require specific > reference to Wikipedia, but only to the individuals who contributed > the text. > I really laughed at this. Still waiting for a substantive reply though. Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
