Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMUA chapter mailing list switched to 'read-only' mode
When one reads the links offered by Pavlo, the picture is clearer. The board is trying to suppress on-list criticism with this step, claiming people (no doubt including Pavlo) are trolls and spammers. I think we all know things are often not black and white, and that accusations of trolling are sometimes used by people to brand legitimate opponents (and sometimes people really are trolls). I can't presume to know whether Pavlo is a troll or not, or what the subtance of his criticism is, and how justified it may be. WMUA's current leadership elected to (try to) halt the debate rather than face the criticism (no doubt they have engaged in multiple previous rounds as well), and we can assume the WMUA membership will judge their action as they see fit. But let's not pretend this is a question of a sudden need to set up a new mailing list. That's not what this is about. A. On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.comwrote: WikimediaCH-l list to become a closed list due to some issues we had with private information (unwillingly) disclosed on that list. Nobody questioned that change. The said WMUA mailing list from the moment of creation was closed for anybody else but WMUA members. I was one of the members, who questioned that but after explanation private information might be (unwillingly) disclosed otherwise I decided that it's not really a matter (or an important one) and stopped questioning. the chapters community / members have an appropriate place to conduct their work Yours wording is exactly like that (above) while what Nemo questioned is: do the member of the chapter have a suitable and working place where to discuss among themselves to carry out their duties and rights as members of the chapters? The main issue is what is work for you (and duties for Nemo)? The point of WMUA Board is that members MUST do their work (carry out their duties) and execution of Board ruling is part of that. So any critics of Board (or separate Board members) is distraction from the work :) The Nemo mentioned and rights in his questioning, so I believe his perception is closer to mine (while critics or at least questioning - is one of the rights for me and I guess for Nemo as well). On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Manuel Schneider manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch wrote: Am 18.08.2013 17:47, schrieb Pavlo Shevelo: is there any precedents known, when chapter Board do some alike rulings? all precedence known to me have been much less restrictive actions, such as the WikimediaCH-l list to become a closed list due to some issues we had with private information (unwillingly) disclosed on that list. Nobody questioned that change. Does it seems appropriate? My personal opinion is that the board may decide so, under consideration of what Nemo questioned: That the chapters community / members have an appropriate place to conduct their work. This may be disputed as it was the formerly open and public list which has been closed but it could also be considered that WikiUK-l could act as such place as well. So from my point of view it is really up to the community at WikimediaUA-l and WikiUK-l whether WikiUK-l is an appropriate replacement or if another list is needed due to this change. /Manuel -- Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! https://donate.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Block evasion might be a federal offense
http://feedly.com/k/14WeLcY I wish I was grossly misrepresenting the situation here. If I am, please do set me straight. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Block evasion might be a federal offense
http://feedly.com/k/14WeLcY I wish I was grossly misrepresenting the situation here. If I am, please do set me straight. You're not wrong, but getting the attention of a federal prosecutor would be easier for jaywalking in a National Park. It applies only to extreme situations. Fred ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMUA chapter mailing list switched to 'read-only' mode
I'm really grateful for your note, Asaf You comprehend my messages 100% right. Perhaps even more than that, as I'm just unable to verify whether I'm a troll (or not, hopefully). But as to the best of my belief I'm ready to face the fact, that I'm the troll (how can I know that for sure?) so I'm ready to stay against any criticism of being a troll - all kinds of 'duck test' etc., while our board prefers just to *halt the debate rather than face the **criticism* and said transformation of WMUA central mailing list is just one step in a row (a very long one - a chain of that multiple previous rounds). Well, I was not going to complain (or something like that) - I was mainly verifying the precedents as I assured other WMUA members that we have something unprecedented at all (in all Wikipedia movement at least). ...and I'm still not complaining :) Yes it's nobody else but we, WMUA people, should (Have to, MUST) overcome all tough issues by ourselves and a lot of that our problems are rooted in post-USSR situation (I was born in 1956, that's just 3 years after Stalin' death so I know what I'm talking about) hence they might appear to be pretty (or even too) ...*specific** *for Wikimedia CH (so for Manuel), WMNL (so for Ziko) etc. - with all due respect to Manuel, Ziko and others. And please, PLEASE don't think that WMUA is something very bad, and even not all of our Board members (we have 7 of them) have said problems with facing criticism ;) Now we're in 'full ahead' mode to start WLM'2013 and preparing to make our Wiki loves Earth (WLE) initiative [1][2][3] really international (it was presented in Hong Kong recently and they say it was estimated rather well) and ... and ... and ... as well ;) ___ Obviously I'm not closing the topic and all and every further comments, insights, ...peer reviews will be highly appreciated! Thanks again, Asaf!!! Sincerely, Pavlo Shevelo Proud member of WMUA [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Earth_2014 [2] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/02/13/wikimedia-ukraine-new-photo-contest-wiki-loves-earth/ [3] http://wle.org.ua/english/ On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:05 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote: When one reads the links offered by Pavlo, the picture is clearer. The board is trying to suppress on-list criticism with this step, claiming people (no doubt including Pavlo) are trolls and spammers. I think we all know things are often not black and white, and that accusations of trolling are sometimes used by people to brand legitimate opponents (and sometimes people really are trolls). I can't presume to know whether Pavlo is a troll or not, or what the subtance of his criticism is, and how justified it may be. WMUA's current leadership elected to (try to) halt the debate rather than face the criticism (no doubt they have engaged in multiple previous rounds as well), and we can assume the WMUA membership will judge their action as they see fit. But let's not pretend this is a question of a sudden need to set up a new mailing list. That's not what this is about. A. On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.com wrote: WikimediaCH-l list to become a closed list due to some issues we had with private information (unwillingly) disclosed on that list. Nobody questioned that change. The said WMUA mailing list from the moment of creation was closed for anybody else but WMUA members. I was one of the members, who questioned that but after explanation private information might be (unwillingly) disclosed otherwise I decided that it's not really a matter (or an important one) and stopped questioning. the chapters community / members have an appropriate place to conduct their work Yours wording is exactly like that (above) while what Nemo questioned is: do the member of the chapter have a suitable and working place where to discuss among themselves to carry out their duties and rights as members of the chapters? The main issue is what is work for you (and duties for Nemo)? The point of WMUA Board is that members MUST do their work (carry out their duties) and execution of Board ruling is part of that. So any critics of Board (or separate Board members) is distraction from the work :) The Nemo mentioned and rights in his questioning, so I believe his perception is closer to mine (while critics or at least questioning - is one of the rights for me and I guess for Nemo as well). On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Manuel Schneider manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch wrote: Am 18.08.2013 17:47, schrieb Pavlo Shevelo: is there any precedents known, when chapter Board do some alike rulings? all precedence known to me have been much less restrictive actions, such as the WikimediaCH-l list to become a closed list due to some issues we had with private information (unwillingly) disclosed on that list. Nobody
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Questions for the Board post-Wikimania
On 08/14/2013 01:52 PM, Steven Walling wrote: Would the Board consider recruiting expert seats with more experience in engineering and product development? With or without expert seats, I believe the whole tech planning process would improve if our tech volunteers (tech ambassadors?) would be more involved since the beginning. This might mean a longer discussion, but also more transparent and with a better community backing since the beginning. Moving some discussions early in the planning process might save a lot more time and energy discussing months later, when prototypes and betas start to show up. And by that time it could be the own tech ambassadors the ones defending the plan they helped build. Opinions are mine, etc. -- Quim Gil Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] A proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 1:57 PM, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote: Predicted demographics: 95% women from the global south :) (-: I am personally hesitant about automatic translations, and whether we can achieve the coverage (in language pairs) and the quality (of Wikipedia). But that is only my opinion. A hybrid approach, if we can support it and build it, would obviously be the safest bet, as both endeavors are rather risky. I see a lot of possible space for a hybrid system, as you describe it. +1000 I have a lot of love for this idea in general, and a hybrid approach to this part; thank you for articulating it so clearly. One advantage of my proposal is that it's cost is rather small. For supporting translation I haven't seen yet a sufficiently sketched proposal that allows to estimate the potential cost and potential benefit. As with so many things, it will be hard to assess cost/benefits without making some effort. A safe bet could be to try with an existing pair or develop a pair with an estimated high demand. Is there a pair where some work has already been done? SJ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] WMUA chapter mailing list switched to 'read-only' mode
Dear all, as a member of the board in question, i would like to explain more But let's not pretend this is a question of a sudden need to set up a new mailing list. That's not what this is about (q) A. yep. totally agree. this all is about usearching for transparent and convenient forms of communication/u especially within the chapter. but it is really difficult, it seems :(( (if possible at all) ...uand failing/u we (as a community) were discussing: - a new mailing list (with a public archive), for announcements - if it is open, than looking for volunteers is easier, as one can offer help even if (s)he is not a member of the organization - to leave this mailing list (the one, that was 'switched to 'read-only' mode' by the board's decision) for talking - there are some people that are used to solving problems by talking them[problems] out-of-their-wits with a fair lot of letters (so to say) - to use irc channel for those wishing to hear answers ASAP and without being drown by e-letters (and publish these logs afterwards) the need was not sudden, but it was too late expressed. it just irritates people to get lots of letters and it irritates them to hear something critical or unpleasant... unfortunately, people TEND to act on their irritation thus the above-mentioned Board decision was made... (...) and we can assume the WMUA membership will judge their action as they see fit (q) A. and i do believe so best regards, antanana wikimedia Ukraine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMUA chapter mailing list switched to 'read-only' mode
I'm glad that antanana (she don't like capital letters as you can see :) ) joined our discussion. Now is her very first term in the Board (we reelect the board each year) and she brought a lot of 'fresh air' to our Board and proceeds to do so every day and even night (for example she sent her letter at 3:18 AM local time) as Chair deputy and Treasurer (very first one in history of WMUA) and valuable chapter member. ...and she is one of that board members who have no problem to face any issue (criticism included but critic of her activities should be well prepared and ... brave :-P). After I made some introduction of a lady I can return to the topic. I ask to forgive me in advance for some long explanation (my English will make it even less comprehensible, sorry for that) but I believe it might be a good case study for some other chapter(s) so please invest some your patience. Yes, antanana pointed perfectly well that damn 'lots of letters' was the trigger of the situation. But even better her input was in focusing our attention to two sorts/kinds of irritation (that is a state of inflammation or painful reaction to smth. as vocabularies inform): * it irritates people to get lots of letters (especially if people insists to use some mailers less sophisticated in letters grouping, 'foldering' and filtering that Google Mail and alikes) * it irritates them to hear something critical or unpleasant (to some people critical=extremelyunpleasant) In said case the first kind of irritation (inflammation) has place as a consequence of the above mentioned trigger (snowball of a letters), while the first one is much more valuable (for our case study) as cause of a letter snowball appearance. I do believe that many of you know how painful reaction to criticism might be the the cause of mailing 'explosion' (or turbulence will be better metaphor?) if not please see explanation in [1] because I'm just unable to explain better that that (if in English and not in Ukrainian or Russian). So in our case study two Board members were (and still are :) ) irritated by criticism addressed to certain (pointed by critics) their actions and conduct of behaviour (what caused mail turbulence again and again) while two more Board members were inflamed by letter 'snowballs' arriving to their mailboxes. Obviously 2+2 gives 4 (in Ukraine as well :-P) what is majority of 7 so position of 3 other Board members doesn't matter. Period. Sincerely, Pavlo Member of Wikimedia Ukraine [1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-July/127124.html (please read that text out of it context and see the idea of process of reaching unnecessary degree of escalation, when issue snowballs into something much larger) On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 3:18 AM, attolippip attolip...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, as a member of the board in question, i would like to explain more But let's not pretend this is a question of a sudden need to set up a new mailing list. That's not what this is about (q) A. yep. totally agree. this all is about usearching for transparent and convenient forms of communication/u especially within the chapter. but it is really difficult, it seems :(( (if possible at all) ...uand failing/u we (as a community) were discussing: - a new mailing list (with a public archive), for announcements - if it is open, than looking for volunteers is easier, as one can offer help even if (s)he is not a member of the organization - to leave this mailing list (the one, that was 'switched to 'read-only' mode' by the board's decision) for talking - there are some people that are used to solving problems by talking them[problems] out-of-their-wits with a fair lot of letters (so to say) - to use irc channel for those wishing to hear answers ASAP and without being drown by e-letters (and publish these logs afterwards) the need was not sudden, but it was too late expressed. it just irritates people to get lots of letters and it irritates them to hear something critical or unpleasant... unfortunately, people TEND to act on their irritation thus the above-mentioned Board decision was made... (...) and we can assume the WMUA membership will judge their action as they see fit (q) A. and i do believe so best regards, antanana wikimedia Ukraine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] law enforcement buying vulnerabilities on black market leaving them unreported for surveillance
While the trickling release of Edward Snowden's revelations from bad to worse in weekly incremental steps has been enormously effective in swaying public opinion, it has made formulating a meaningful response very difficult. A few weeks ago we learned that the FBI has been purchasing personal computer operating system vulnerabilities from gray and black-hat hackers on the black market, often for several tens of thousands of dollars each, and leaving them unreported and thereby unpatched for use in future surveillance operations: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/08/01/how-the-fbi-hacks-criminal-suspects/ Unfortunately, this means that the vulnerabilities remain available to the criminal computer crime underground, affecting everyone including Foundation project readers and contributors alike. Very recently a well respected group of researchers characterized this state of affairs as preferable to the complexity of additional surveillance network and systems infrastructure: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2312107 This is a false dichotomy which directly places Foundation project readers and editors at risk, but does so along with virtually everyone else who uses personal computer or smartphone equipment. However, I think it is an important aspect to address because none of the other recent eavesdropping revelations put people at risk to organized computer crime, blackmail, and extortion in the same way. Is there any reason to exclude action on a particular issue just because it effects everyone else along with our users? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] law enforcement buying vulnerabilities on black market leaving them unreported for surveillance
I'm not sure what is your point here. How exactly readers of Wikimedia projects are at risk here because of that story? Are you trying to say it is the Foundation responsibility to protect the readers from the vulnerabilities of their operating systems? JP Béland 2013/8/19 James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com While the trickling release of Edward Snowden's revelations from bad to worse in weekly incremental steps has been enormously effective in swaying public opinion, it has made formulating a meaningful response very difficult. A few weeks ago we learned that the FBI has been purchasing personal computer operating system vulnerabilities from gray and black-hat hackers on the black market, often for several tens of thousands of dollars each, and leaving them unreported and thereby unpatched for use in future surveillance operations: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/08/01/how-the-fbi-hacks-criminal-suspects/ Unfortunately, this means that the vulnerabilities remain available to the criminal computer crime underground, affecting everyone including Foundation project readers and contributors alike. Very recently a well respected group of researchers characterized this state of affairs as preferable to the complexity of additional surveillance network and systems infrastructure: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2312107 This is a false dichotomy which directly places Foundation project readers and editors at risk, but does so along with virtually everyone else who uses personal computer or smartphone equipment. However, I think it is an important aspect to address because none of the other recent eavesdropping revelations put people at risk to organized computer crime, blackmail, and extortion in the same way. Is there any reason to exclude action on a particular issue just because it effects everyone else along with our users? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
