On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 3:22 AM, Michael Peel wrote:
> On voting transparency: this is a great step forward. However, I would
> encourage the WMF to take a further step, and to explain why trustees voted
> approve/abstain/against. This could potentially be done by (for examples)
> adding notes ne
Thanks for this email Birgitte. I greatly enjoyed reading it, it gives
insight in not just your own motivation, but mine and several others who I
have come to know. I apologize for my following lengthy response as well.
This is a well-articulated, reasoned response, that should stand apart from
the
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 5:10 AM, wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 21, 2012, at 10:07 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
>
> > birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> On Mar 21, 2012, at 8:53 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> >>> Sue Gardner wrote:
> Everybody knows that reversing stagnating/declining participation
> in Wik
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:36 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> That sounds like a great idea for projects where the readership and/or
> editorship is low. On those projects, it is very likely that a reader
> with even a tiny interest in editing can be converted to a good
> editor, and they are worth
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:35 AM, wrote:
> This strikes me as a very oddly articulated concern about a crowd-sourcing
> project. The basic premise underlying the whole model is increasing the
> quantity of contributors increases the quality of the content. Is this
> really disputed?
An astute o
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 1:17 AM, Nathan wrote:
> So a group of chapters, reacting against a perceived effort to centralize
> the movement, create a brand new central body with an extensive (and
> apparently, expensive) bureaucracy? Are there really a lot of people that
> think this is a good idea
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> If you search for "devoirs" (= homework) or "vacances" (= holiday) on
> French Wikipedia, you're presented with a porn video in which a man and a
> woman engage in sex acts (cunnilingus and fellatio) with a dog.
>
>
> http://fr.wikipedia.org
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> If we're discussing this; my name is correctly pronounced "Oliver Keyes,
> God of Delphi, Sol, and all Ethereal Planes Known and As-Yet Undiscovered"
Olly olly oxen free! (with a silent G)
Theo
_
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
> While we're on the topic, here's a public service announcement. It's
> Bishakha Datta, not Bishaka Datta. The single most-frequently
> misspelled name on our lists, AFAICT. Also, Erik Moeller or Erik
> Möller with umlaut. Never Erik Moller wit
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Bishakha Datta wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Florence Devouard >wrote:
>
> >
> > One benefit I can identify from this decision is that we could push
> > forward that
> > * partner organizations are ONLY recognized by Wikimedia Foundation
> > * whilst c
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
> > "Advocacy" is a much more general term in this context than people
> > seem to be taking it as. It does not mean lobbying or fighting for
> > something controversial with outside organi
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Casey Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > However, the issue of advocacy is not generally agreed upon by the entire
> > community. SOPA blackout was the first and official action of its kind,
> > before we
I'm all for a shift from the community department, and dividing focus
between existing community and things like new editor retention. Zack and
the community department, primarily focus on fundraising, with only
indirect involvement with the existing community affairs through Philippe,
Maggie and o
I believe Liam puts it very close to how I read the announcement.
Does this mean Pb is a Chief now? or will that department still be under
community/Zack?
Also, how does the relation between legal come into this. Is Geoff also in
charge of this department or is legal separate from this?
And befo
s the
community elected members are representative of the entire community,
beyond just the individuals that voted. The community elected members
aren't called, the community-who-voted board members.
Regards
Theo
>
> (personal opinion, etc)
>
> On 1 February 2012 23:17, Theo10011
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> The appointed members of the Board are chosen for their specific expertise
> and skill-set. The Board does publicly identify the slots it is trying to
> fill when looking for appointees, and the qualifications that they
> require.
>
Do you know
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Risker wrote:
> In what way do chapter-selected seats improve the running of the WMF,
> Thomas? The Board has no say in who is being selected, and there is no
> basis in fact to say that those appointed by the chapters are any more
> effective or helpful in meetin
Pb, won't it be better to just create the list first? I assume a single
owner won't be elected.
Moderators can be elected when and if, there is active participation in the
list, no?
Regards
Theo
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> Hi everyone -
>
> Sue has asked me to
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > If you read I said "according to recent rulings"
>
> And as far as I can tell, what you claim those recent rulings said, is
> not what the recent rulings sa
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Anthony wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> >> > Well, that was my point, accordin
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Brandon Harris wrote:
>
>I think that trying to school Mike Godwin on Citizens United and IP
> Law is colossally bad idea. But entertaining.
>
>
I agree completely. I love Mike, why on earth would you think I was trying
to "school" him? I was talking about
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > Well, that was my point, according to recent rulings, money is speech and
> > corporations are people
>
> Really? That's weird. What recent ruling said that?
C
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:30 AM, Mike Godwin wrote:
>
> Why do you imagine money spent is the measure of influence? The
> pro-SOPA forces outspent the tech industry three-to-one and still
> lost.
>
Citation needed.
>
> Plus, If money is the measure of effectiveness, what does this say
> about
I find this discussion interesting, although after Sue's clarification, it
might be moot. But I am going to continue it, until someone asks to take
this off-list.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:30 AM, Mike Godwin wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
>
> > D
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
> On 22 January 2012 08:30, Kim Bruning wrote:
> > Wikimedia foundation hires lobbyists on sopa, pipa
> >http://www.politico.com/morningtech/0112/morningtech377.html
> >
> > Interesting. Any details?
>
> I thought we had already discuss
loudest.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
> Theo10011 writes:
>
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
>
> > Am I wrong to assume, that lobbying involves approaching a registered,
> > professional consulting/lobbying firm in Washington
x27;t
that far off either.
Regards
Theo
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > Mike, I completely understand your point on this and where you are coming
> > from. But you made a conflicting point yourself
&
Mike, I completely understand your point on this and where you are coming
from. But you made a conflicting point yourself
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
>
>
> None of this requires that any nonprofit spend the kind of lobbying
> dollars that Google spends -- even if that
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Philippe Beaudette
wrote:
> You trust GOOGLE's interests to align sufficiently with ours, to the
> extent that you're willing to cede government affairs to them?
Yes.
Why won't their interest align on the same side as everyone else ? The
issue is just SOPA and P
Actually, what is WMF technical events specifically? It would be helpful to
mention what those are.
Would this bleed over to Wikimania? That is the largest conference WMF
organizes. It is a bit unclear about the scope. It states that it applies
to "Foundation-organized activities" and then "Wikime
Hi Thomas
I really dont
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>
>
> There were numerous non-Jimmy banners used during the fundraiser because
> they were tested and proved to work well. The Jimmy banners were used
> extensively too because they still perform very well in the tests,
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 3 January 2012 22:36, Theo10011 wrote:
> > WMF started the email campaign last year for the first time I'm assuming,
> > we used it this year as well. We had a period of several months before
> the
> > fund
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 5:34 AM, Domas Mituzas
> wrote:
> > This year pictures at top left, blinking banners, etc - are becoming a
> norm.
>
> This is simply untrue hyperbole. The fader was used in the same way as
> last year, at the same time
ternating message banners work really well on the last couple days
> because there are two different very effective messages in those days. But
> we're always looking for a better way, so maybe next year we won't have to
> do alternating messages at all.
>
> Zack
>
> On
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:
> 2011/12/31 geni :
> > We appear to have actual blinking ads. Unfortunate. Still I suppose
> > the occasion should be marked.
>
> They are not blinking in a manner that is even remotely obnoxious. And
> they a
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Nathan wrote:
> Perhaps, although I hardly think that was part of the nefarious plan
> on the part of Harvard and SciPo. They are both among the institutions
> in the world with the best and most positive name penetration; the
> connection benefits Wikipedia as muc
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> Hey guys!
>
> Another AFT session - this one will be in #wikimedia-office on 2 December,
> at 19:00 UTC. If you're vaguely interested in playing around with
> prototypes, you should attend - we'll have a lot of cool stuff to poke at
> (and t
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Tom Morris wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 08:09, Möller, Carsten wrote:
> > No, we need to harden the wall agaist all attacks by hammers,
> screwdrivers and drills.
> > We have consensus: Wikipedia should not be censored.
> >
>
> You hold strong on that princip
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 8:26 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
> Liam Wyatt wrote:
> > Perhaps we could focus on those practical points - preferably on-wiki -
> > rather than having endless debates about what different people did/didn't
> > mean to say or getting into abstract ideological discussions.
>
> Buz
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Disclaimer: this is my personal opinion, and in no way represents any
> sentiments of the board.
>
> That being said
>
> In the past years I have seen a lot of people spend a lot of time on
> different bids which never made
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Barry Newstead >wrote:
>
> > Hi Katie,
> > Just to build on Moushira's response to tackle your questions a bit
> > further.
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 5:26 AM, aude wrote:
> >
> > > Erik, Sue, Frank,
I read Brion's email. It really worked, I discarded the first draft I wrote
in response, with the same tone and some links to grant pages and something
about conflict of interest, I was completely prepared to entrench. I came
back and re-read but didn't infer anything in Tinu's email to be in the
s
I was not going to comment on this thread again. I am kind of annoyed by
what you are painting me as, but I'll try and remain objective.
First, what mail are you disagreeing with? The last mail I sent on this
thread is 3 days old, the last topic was Achal. I didn't talk about Hisham
directly on an
Nov 12, 2011 at 4:44 AM, Achal Prabhala wrote:
> Hi Theo, I find your tone needlessly rude - do you really think this is the
> best way to communicate?
>
> It makes it very difficult to have a useful conversation.
>
> Best wishes,
> Achal
>
> On 11 November 2011 18:07,
more than welcome to bring any of this up on
Internal-l however, I would be happy to go into much more detail for your
elucidation.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Achal Prabhala wrote:
> Hi Theo
>
> On 11 November 2011 14:10, Theo10011 wrote:
>
> > Ohai Achal
> >
> &
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Barry Newstead wrote:
>
> More directly to your questions...the Trust is an independent org, so
> technically it cannot serve as an "internal" processor for WMF.
>
I meant "internal" as in within the country, as opposed to external, when
Hisham's email said "exte
Ohai Achal
As usual, I disagree. I am a bit more informed of the current situation
than most people, maybe not as much as the current WMF advisory board
member but who knows.
My opinion on this is from a regular community member before much of the
community in other cities was active. I am not af
I meant to ask earlier, since the fundraiser already started and this is
being announced now.
Is this trust set-up to participate in the annual fundraiser? processing
donations on-behalf of WMF internally? or would it seek to do so in future?
I know you mention FCRA and external funding after appr
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:40 PM, wrote:
>
> From personal experience with WCI 2011, we have benefited by having both
> the Chapter and the Foundation in the country.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
> Hi
In the interest of full-disclosure first, please have a look here.[1]
Both the organizers are on WMF
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:45 AM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> Hey guys
>
> Brandon, Howie, Fabrice and I will be holding a second Office Hours session
> on the new Article Feedback Tool on Thursday 3 November. This will be at
> 24:00 UTC, which works out at 4pm PST and 11pm GMT. This timing is designed
2011/11/2 Mateus Nobre
>
> a new IRC group? like #wikimedia-something ?
>
> what's the theme of the group and its name?
>
>
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Group_Contacts
Theo
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscri
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> You seem to be missing my point - that the WL tool serves an ulterior
> function of allowing users who do not understand markup to communicate and
> request help in a way they can understand. I *am* saying that most of those
> with few or no e
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:45 AM, Andreas K. wrote:
> Sounds good. I was going by last year's United Nations University survey,
>
>
> http://www.wikipediasurvey.org/docs/Wikipedia_Overview_15March2010-FINAL.pdf
>
> which is older, but had a much larger sample size (176,000 vs. 5,300,
> comprising
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Andreas K. wrote:
>
> I never assumed that, and it is not consistent with basic Wikipedia
> policies
> that have existed for almost as long as Wikipedia has existed. Wikipedia is
> based on professionally published sources. They are privileged as the most
> (or f
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Andreas K. wrote:
>
> The more we adhere to professional standards, the more professionals we
> will
> be able to attract. You may view abandoning the standards of the male
> teenage/early twenties age group as bending the encyclopedia out of shape;
> I
> view it
I might be from one of the most restrictive cultures, ethnicity and
background than most people on this list. I assumed, it was people from my
part of the world, that the board and WMF was trying to be considerate of.
In all of this, I can't help but wonder where would it stop, there are
probably
Forwarding on behalf of the Organizers.
Theo
---
Hiya,
We are please to announce that
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 12:57 AM, ??? wrote:
> On 16/10/2011 19:36, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
> > Am 16.10.2011 16:17, schrieb ???:
> >> On 16/10/2011 14:50, David Gerard wrote:
> >>> On 16 October 2011 14:40, ???wrote:
> >>>
> Don't be an arsehole you get the same sort of stuff if you sear
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Risker wrote:
> On 10 October 2011 21:26, John Vandenberg wrote:
>
> > Risker,
> >
> > The net nanny software could have been doing a keyword filter on the
> > word "Sex", which would reject every page and image in
> > [[Category:Sexual positions]] because it con
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Ting Chen wrote:
> Hello Tobias,
>
> the text of the May resolution to this question is "... and that the
> feature be visible, clear and usable on all Wikimedia projects for both
> logged-in and logged-out readers", and on the current board meeting we
> decided to
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Rob Schnautz wrote:
> Where would I go for a feature request for Wikimedia websites? I'm
> interested in a cross-wiki watchlist-- a watchlist that combines the
> watchlists from all my globally linked accounts.
>
>
You mean something list this
http://en.wikipedia.o
Possibly relevant update:
http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/news.php?newsid=157111 (might need
translation)
Theo
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Thomas Morton
wrote:
> On 5 October 2011 16:07, wrote:
>
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: emijrp
> >
> >
> > >By the way, our free license
I am sure other people can fill in, but I heard there has been some movement
within the parliament in reaction. They are reconsidering a portion of that
law that might affect us, or so I have been told.
http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/news.php?newsid=157111
Can someone clarify?
Regards
Theo
On
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:49 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Neil Babbage wrote:
> > Yes they are able to strike, but that still doesn't give them the right
> > (legal or moral) to shut down property that doesn't belong to them. In
> > any case, if the servers are loc
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Thomas Morton
wrote:
> This is going to be a PR nightmare :-s
>
> Tom Morton
>
> On 4 Oct 2011, at 20:58, Aaron Adrignola
> wrote:
>
> > Whoever has locked out access to it.wikipedia.org should be immediately
> > desysopped under emergency procedures. This site is
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Nathan wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while
> ago.
> > All content and pages direct to the notice.
> >
> >
For those not following, Italian Wikipedia went into lockdown a while ago.
All content and pages direct to the notice.
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011
Regards
Theo
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Mathias Schindler <
mathias.schind...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Nathan wrote:
>
>
> Hi Giovanni (or Donaldo?),
>
> Has anyone at it.wp been in touch with Foundation staff? Locking a
> major wiki seems like a pretty big step, perhaps they could provide
> some advice or resources? Am I correct in understanding this lock as a
> pr
Hi
There seems to be a situation developing at Italian Wikipedia related to a
local law that would infringe neutrality on Wikipedia. The discussions even
mention a possible blackout/lockdown in reaction.
Is anyone aware of this situation? Is it likely to have any effect on other
projects and outs
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Tom Morris wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 18:24, Theo10011 wrote:
> > Bishakha, call it editorial-content, call it censorship or any other
> > euphemism - at the heart of it, it is deciding what someone gets to see
> and
> > what not.
Hiya Bishakha
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Bishakha Datta wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
>
> >
> > Bishakha, call it editorial-content, call it censorship or any other
> > euphemism - at the heart of it, it is deciding what someone gets t
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 30 September 2011 18:24, Theo10011 wrote:
> > Bishakha, call it editorial-content, call it censorship or any other
> > euphemism - at the heart of it, it is deciding what someone gets to see
> and
> > wh
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Achal Prabhala wrote:
>
>
> On Friday 30 September 2011 11:19 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Achal Prabhala >wrote:
> >
> > How about an encyclopedia? Anywhere?
> >
> > Are you suggesting a
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Achal Prabhala wrote:
>
>
> On Friday 30 September 2011 10:54 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Bishakha Datta >wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Milos Rancic
> wrote:
> >>
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Bishakha Datta wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 16:24, Risker wrote:
> > > Milos, I believe this is exactly the kind of post that Sue was talking
> > about
> > > in her blog. It is aggressive, it is alie
Hi Sarah
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>
> >
> > As a member of one feminist organization, I understand dominant
> > position among feminists toward pornography. It's generally personal
> > (thus, not an ideological
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Sarah wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 14:28, Theo10011 wrote:
> > I doubt that would be enough to satisfy the no original research
> > requirement. The idea linking back to a Wikimedia project as a source is
> not
> > a new one, it has b
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Achal Prabhala wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday 15 September 2011 01:43 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> > On 14 September 2011 21:02, Achal Prabhala wrote:
> >
> >> It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that the world now follows the
> >> Wikinews model.
> >
> > No, you're des
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Achal Prabhala wrote:
>
>
> I've been following the Wikinews discussion, and I've been hesitant to
> comment only because I know so little about it. The little I know tells
> me that it could be something great, and perhaps the reason it's not
> quite there yet is
Hi Milos
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 9:18 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 16:17, Theo10011 wrote:
> > My main point (although I *did* make it clear), was that volunteer-work
> is
> > what this movement is built on. Tell me a single content project that was
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 9:03 PM, wrote:
>
> Zitat von Theo10011 :
> > I don't quiet agree with that analysis. You comparison with professional
> > competitors might have held true in the last age of publishing, the
> playing
> > field has been much more levele
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Lodewijk wrote:
> Am 13. September 2011 13:34 schrieb Theo10011 :
>
>
> >
> > The biggest strength that a Wikinews like project can always have, is the
> > most diverse contributor base anywhere. We have contributors from so many
>
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:37 PM, emijrp wrote:
> I agree with this analysis.
>
> 2011/9/13
>
> > English Wikinews is in a market with many, many professional
> > competitors. Competitors with a paid staff that steadily create
> > reliable news output quick and in most cases _for free_. While goo
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Phil Nash wrote:
> MZMcBride wrote:
> > If someone wants to make Conservative Wikipedia or Kid-Friendly
> > Wikipedia or Tiananmen Square-Free Wikipedia, they're free to. They
> > can even sell it. Contributors made that deal long ago with the open
> > license of
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
> Mani,
>
> A question: when you say that *"**Wikimedia chapters got the least
> favorable
> ratings (6.15) ... In addition, knowledge and involvement with chapters is
> low. 46% of respondents said that they didn’t know if there was a chapter
>
Thanks Geoff. One point that I would like some clarification on-
>- Harassment, threats, stalking, vandalism, and other long-term issues:
> The proposed agreement would make clear that such acts are prohibited.
> Novel for us, the agreement also raises the possibility of a global ban
>
Wow. looks really interesting Pharos. It seems they incorporated a lot of
the project philosophy in the re-branding.
Also, I don't know if the UI they have on the Macbook is part of it or not,
but it all looks great.
Theo
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Pharos wrote:
> I thought folks might be
With all due respect, this sounds almost delusional. The fact is, it is the
restrictive control being exercised at Wikinews to fulfill some internal
quality standards that is choking the idea behind the project.
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 1:03 PM, pi zero wrote:
> Having only a few hours ago been al
English Wikinews has been broken for a while. The entire system is
predicated on the judgement of reviewers, and a handful of rather rude
admins. I saw some rather aggressive posture and a pretty threatening
demeanor employed towards others when I tried contributing early last year.
I once tried t
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> > I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority
> > for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are
> > controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Nathan wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
>
> > Hi Mike
> >
> > I was merely pointing out from what I have seen from some of the other EU
> > chapters. I know as Non-profits they are obligated to comp
In line replies to Nathan.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Nathan wrote:
> Several points in reply to Theo:
>
> 1) You don't need to argue the value of having chapters around the world.
> No
> one debating that. It's accepted that effective global outreach requires
> effective local partners, a
Hi Mike
I was merely pointing out from what I have seen from some of the other EU
chapters. I know as Non-profits they are obligated to comply with local
restrictions, whether those restriction are lax or stringent in comparison
is a matter of opinion but they do exist, is my point. I believe the
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Nathan wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
> > Hi Risker
> >
> > I would like to ask your opinion on WMF's stewardship of the money. The
> > Foundation has fulfilled its legal obligation as a non-profit bu
Hi Risker
I would like to ask your opinion on WMF's stewardship of the money. The
Foundation has fulfilled its legal obligation as a non-profit but as a
community member from english wikipedia, do you feel it has been accountable
to you or spent it on worthwhile activities for the community? the r
Why is everyone trying to kill the thread?
Also, Cool story brah.
Save the thread!
Theo
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 4:39 AM, Liam Wyatt wrote:
> Bring out your dead threads...
>
> It's not dead yet!!
>
> Sent from my phone.
> Wittylama.com/blog
>
> On 24/08/2011, at 13:51, Thomas Morton
> wrote
Hi
The Image file referendum banners are currently running at 100% globally[1],
on all projects (correct me if I'm wrong). It seems rather excessive
considering the banner's size and the subject.
I have no idea, if this issue really needs such an exposure. The scheduled
service outage notice a fe
Hi Ziko
I am not sure if I see the point here. There are 2 issues getting conflated
here, one is representation of languages between national chapters which I
believe, is a much bigger issue. The second issue, where these Language
contact persons serve WMF and the movement in talking about local l
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
> > Hmm, it'd be a neat extension for Commons. I don't think "like" or "+1"
> > should be used, as they're not sufficiently wiki. But something that
> > expresses the same sentiment, that allows users to express approval of
> good
> > pho
Nathan, there is no reason to single out Beria. She at least responded to
the questions. There are a lot of people reading this who didn't and have
far more authority to comment on the matter than her.
Theo
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Nathan wrote:
> Beria, I don't think your views on trans
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
