Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

[Danny Horn]

The only log is a temporary debug log, which we're using to investigate
some bug reports. They're only accessible to people with shell access to
the production servers -- Foundation staff, and people who have signed
non-disclosure agreements. We won't retain them for longer than ninety
days.

Danny

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> Neat feature.
>
> Who has access to the logs, and for how long will the logs be retained?
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+
> http://telegram.me/wmlgbt
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Invitation to WMF August 2017 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, August 31, 18:00 UTC

[Lena Traer]

Hello everyone,

The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take
place on Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC
channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be
broadcast as a live YouTube stream.[1]

During the August metrics meeting, we'll hear from staff and community
members about what it means to be a contributor to the Wikimedia movement.
Speakers will present and discuss different methods of contribution to the
movement in addition to research about new editor experiences.

Meeting agenda:

* Welcomes, theme introduction
* Movement update
* Community guest speakers
* New editor experiences research
* Questions and discussion
* Wikilove

Please review
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities_meetings
for further information about the meeting and how to participate.

We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.

Thank you,
Lena

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ7voHFIhRQ

Lena Traer
Project Assistant // Communications // Advancement
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

[Fæ]

Neat feature.

Who has access to the logs, and for how long will the logs be retained?

Thanks,
Fae
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+
http://telegram.me/wmlgbt
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

[James Salsman]

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:
>... regarding the Endowment:
>
> 1) I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment.  As James
> indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and this
> is one of the areas of expertise.  We have been looking at environmental,
> social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against
> the benchmarks financially.  We are going to be publishing more information
> about this soon.

I am very much looking forward to that. I hope the recommendations
will be congruent with https://imgur.com/a/Op5UT

When I look at 
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/08/what-you-need-to-know-about-ethical-investment/
I am not always inspired that the managers' goals are to maximize
years of productive life.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[James Salsman]

Why are we having this RFC prior to the survey which was discussed at
length less than a year ago?

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#Periodic_survey_prototype

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Robert Fernandez
 wrote:
> Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned from the
> list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators regarding
> why they will not do so.
>
> I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect on
> participation here than one of this list's most frequent posters contacting
> your employer because he disagrees with what you have to say.
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
>> Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm that my
>> choice of words were very carefully chosen.
>>
>> And I stand by them.
>>
>> Seddon
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Joseph
>> >
>> > I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that you do so too.  I
>> said
>> > that the proposal "involves", not "is equal to" real-life identity  To
>> the
>> > extent that real-life identities are involved, it is reasonable to ask
>> how
>> > that personal information is going to be handled.  For some reason, you
>> > seem keen to derail that part of the discussion by elevating a quibble
>> over
>> > your hasty misunderstanding of my wording into an accusation, which I
>> > reject, of generalised misconduct.  If you have some comment to make
>> about
>> > the handling of personal information, please do so.
>> >
>> > May I suggest that you withdraw your original posting, apologise to the
>> > membership of this list for the unconstructive nature of your posting,
>> and
>> > to me for its aggressive, insulting and incorrect content.
>> Alternatively,
>> > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is the
>> > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum.
>> >
>> > Reginald
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Joseph Seddon 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Real identity does not equal real-life identity. You can mask your
>> > > pseudonymous identity and pose as a third party similarly pseudonymous
>> > > individual.
>> > >
>> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
>> > >
>> > > Seddon
>> > > ___
>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > 
>> > >
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Seddon
>>
>> *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
>> *Wikimedia Foundation*
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

[Tanweer Morshed]

That's awesome. Thanks to the tech team!

On Tuesday, August 22, 2017, Nurunnaby Hasive  wrote:

> Cool!
>
> Hasive
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Nabin K. Sapkota <
> nboycreationne...@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> > Sound's great :)
> >
> > On Aug 22, 2017 12:13 PM, "James Heilman"  > wrote:
> >
> > > Once again great stuff from the community tech team. Many thanks :-)
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 2:46 AM, Gnangarra  > wrote:
> > >
> > > > thats a great outcome, thanks to those that have made this happen
> > > >
> > > > On 19 August 2017 at 07:19, Todd Allen  > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Great to see this, thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > Todd
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 18, 2017 5:15 PM, "Danny Horn"  > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Community Tech team has released a new security feature this
> > > week:
> > > > > > LoginNotify, which gives you a notification when someone tries
> and
> > > > fails
> > > > > to
> > > > > > log in to your account. This project was wish #7 on the 2016
> > > Community
> > > > > > Wishlist Survey [1].
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here’s how it works:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If someone tries and fails to log in to your account from a
> device
> > or
> > > > an
> > > > > IP
> > > > > > address that hasn’t logged into your account recently, then
> you’ll
> > > get
> > > > an
> > > > > > on-wiki notification at the first attempt. For a familiar device
> or
> > > IP
> > > > > > address, you’ll get an on-wiki notification after 5 failed
> logins.
> > > This
> > > > > is
> > > > > > on by default, but you can turn it off in your preferences; you
> can
> > > > also
> > > > > > turn on email notifications.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It’s also possible to turn on email notifications when there’s a
> > > > > successful
> > > > > > login from a new device or IP address. This is turned off by
> > default,
> > > > but
> > > > > > it might be useful for admins or other functionaries who are
> > > concerned
> > > > > that
> > > > > > their user rights could be misused. This means that you’ll get a
> > > > > > notification every time you log in from a new device or IP
> address.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We want to take this opportunity to thank Brian Wolff for all his
> > > work
> > > > in
> > > > > > writing the underlying extension for this feature.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There’s more information on the feature on the Community Tech
> > project
> > > > > page
> > > > > > on Meta, and please feel free to post questions on the talk page:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/LoginNotify
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS: If you’re wondering what happened to the Syntax Highlighting
> > beta
> > > > > > feature that we deployed a couple weeks ago and then had to roll
> > > back:
> > > > > > it’ll be back soon!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]: 2016 Community Wishlist Survey:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Community_Wishlist_
> > > Survey/Results
> > > > > > ___
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > 
> ?subject=
> > unsubscribe>
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > GN.
> > > > President Wikimedia Australia
> > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Heilman
> > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > >
> > > The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!

[Anders Wennersten]

Thanks, it is a great feature! Especially to easily find the Ref tags.

And it work just fine for me, technically.

Anders


Den 2017-08-23 kl. 20:41, skrev Danny Horn:

Hi everyone,

I've got some good news -- wikitext syntax highlighting is live again, and
I'm almost completely sure it's staying live. :) You can now enable it as a
Beta feature on all LTR wikis.




On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Danny Horn  wrote:


Hi Andy,

Thanks for sending your thoughts, that's the kind of feedback that we
need. People can either write responses in this thread, or post it on the
project's talk page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Tech/
Wikitext_editor_syntax_highlighting

We'll respond as comments come in, making bug fixes and then making a plan
for changes as we see what people have to say. Thanks again.

Danny



On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:07 PM Andy Mabbett 
wrote:


On 3 August 2017 at 23:21, Danny Horn  wrote:


WMF's Community Tech team team is happy to announce that Wikitext Editor
Syntax Highlighting has been released as a beta feature today on all LTR
Wikimedia projects!

I'm all in favour of having syntax highlighting - I teach people to
edit wikicode, and I find it helps them to learn it more quickly.

I've been using the syntax highlighting gadget  en.Wikipedia:

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Remember_the_dot/
Syntax_highlighter

for some time now. I've just disabled, it, and instead enabled the new
beta feature.

My first impression is that it is lacking in contrast - it's far
harder, now, to differentiate the various types of content. Indeed the
colour pairs used (e.g. #8800CC vs. #B3) fail WCAG web
accessibility guidelines for colour contrast.

I realise that choice of styling colours is a "bikeshed" matter, but
contrast ratio is a quantifiable and objective accessibility issue.

Also, because the script does not load immediately, the larger
headings cause the page to "dance" as the script kicks in.

What plans are there to either receive and act on feedback such as
this, or to provide greater user-customisation options?

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!

[Danny Horn]

Hi Peter,

This is the first time I've heard about that happening, thanks for bringing
it up. Can you say more about what you're experiencing? I don't think
syntax highlighting gives an error message like that, so I'm not sure what
you mean.

Danny

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> Good news indeed.
> Is there a way we can stop it from crashing in mid edit and giving
> unhelpful advice like get a faster computer or a faster connection? I would
> not mind waiting a little longer for it to finish the job. It would be
> helpful if there were a user setting which allows longer wait time for
> those of us who cannot get a faster computer or connection for economic or
> geographical reasons.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Danny Horn
> Sent: Wednesday, 23 August 2017 8:41 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've got some good news -- wikitext syntax highlighting is live again, and
> I'm almost completely sure it's staying live. :) You can now enable it as a
> Beta feature on all LTR wikis.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Danny Horn  wrote:
>
> > Hi Andy,
> >
> > Thanks for sending your thoughts, that's the kind of feedback that we
> > need. People can either write responses in this thread, or post it on
> > the project's talk page:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Tech/
> > Wikitext_editor_syntax_highlighting
> >
> > We'll respond as comments come in, making bug fixes and then making a
> > plan for changes as we see what people have to say. Thanks again.
> >
> > Danny
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:07 PM Andy Mabbett
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 3 August 2017 at 23:21, Danny Horn  wrote:
> >>
> >> > WMF's Community Tech team team is happy to announce that Wikitext
> >> > Editor Syntax Highlighting has been released as a beta feature
> >> > today on all LTR Wikimedia projects!
> >>
> >> I'm all in favour of having syntax highlighting - I teach people to
> >> edit wikicode, and I find it helps them to learn it more quickly.
> >>
> >> I've been using the syntax highlighting gadget  en.Wikipedia:
> >>
> >>https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Remember_the_dot/
> >> Syntax_highlighter
> >>
> >> for some time now. I've just disabled, it, and instead enabled the
> >> new beta feature.
> >>
> >> My first impression is that it is lacking in contrast - it's far
> >> harder, now, to differentiate the various types of content. Indeed
> >> the colour pairs used (e.g. #8800CC vs. #B3) fail WCAG web
> >> accessibility guidelines for colour contrast.
> >>
> >> I realise that choice of styling colours is a "bikeshed" matter, but
> >> contrast ratio is a quantifiable and objective accessibility issue.
> >>
> >> Also, because the script does not load immediately, the larger
> >> headings cause the page to "dance" as the script kicks in.
> >>
> >> What plans are there to either receive and act on feedback such as
> >> this, or to provide greater user-customisation options?
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe:
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> >
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Dan Rosenthal]

"Since you are unable to imagine many actions more chilling than reporting
bullying and harassment to an appropriate authority, let me suggest
something that might be equally chilling -- calling for the banning from
the list of someone because you disagree with what they have to say."

That wasn't what Robert said, nor was there "bullying and harassment"
coming from anyone other than you, Rogol. This kind of passive-aggressive
straw-manning is an example of precisely why you have worn out your welcome
here.

-Dan





Dan Rosenthal

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Robert
>
> If someone posts to an email discussion list owned and run by their
> employer, using an email account provided by their employer, with a
> signature block giving the name of their employer and their name and
> position with that employer, and if their line manager is not only a
> regular reader but a participant in discussions on the list, as recently as
> yesterday, then it may reasonably be presumed that they expect their
> employer to be aware of their posting.
>
> Since you are unable to imagine many actions more chilling than reporting
> bullying and harassment to an appropriate authority, let me suggest
> something that might be equally chilling -- calling for the banning from
> the list of someone because you disagree with what they have to say.
>
> Roibéard
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
> > Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned from
> the
> > list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators regarding
> > why they will not do so.
> >
> > I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect on
> > participation here than one of this list's most frequent posters
> contacting
> > your employer because he disagrees with what you have to say.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm that
> > my
> > > choice of words were very carefully chosen.
> > >
> > > And I stand by them.
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Joseph
> > > >
> > > > I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that you do so too.
> I
> > > said
> > > > that the proposal "involves", not "is equal to" real-life identity
> To
> > > the
> > > > extent that real-life identities are involved, it is reasonable to
> ask
> > > how
> > > > that personal information is going to be handled.  For some reason,
> you
> > > > seem keen to derail that part of the discussion by elevating a
> quibble
> > > over
> > > > your hasty misunderstanding of my wording into an accusation, which I
> > > > reject, of generalised misconduct.  If you have some comment to make
> > > about
> > > > the handling of personal information, please do so.
> > > >
> > > > May I suggest that you withdraw your original posting, apologise to
> the
> > > > membership of this list for the unconstructive nature of your
> posting,
> > > and
> > > > to me for its aggressive, insulting and incorrect content.
> > > Alternatively,
> > > > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is
> > the
> > > > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum.
> > > >
> > > > Reginald
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Joseph Seddon <
> jsed...@wikimedia.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Real identity does not equal real-life identity. You can mask your
> > > > > pseudonymous identity and pose as a third party similarly
> > pseudonymous
> > > > > individual.
> > > > >
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
> > > > >
> > > > > Seddon
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > >  unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
> > > *Wikimedia Foundation*
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Rogol Domedonfors]

Robert

If someone posts to an email discussion list owned and run by their
employer, using an email account provided by their employer, with a
signature block giving the name of their employer and their name and
position with that employer, and if their line manager is not only a
regular reader but a participant in discussions on the list, as recently as
yesterday, then it may reasonably be presumed that they expect their
employer to be aware of their posting.

Since you are unable to imagine many actions more chilling than reporting
bullying and harassment to an appropriate authority, let me suggest
something that might be equally chilling -- calling for the banning from
the list of someone because you disagree with what they have to say.

Roibéard

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Robert Fernandez 
wrote:

> Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned from the
> list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators regarding
> why they will not do so.
>
> I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect on
> participation here than one of this list's most frequent posters contacting
> your employer because he disagrees with what you have to say.
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm that
> my
> > choice of words were very carefully chosen.
> >
> > And I stand by them.
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Joseph
> > >
> > > I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that you do so too.  I
> > said
> > > that the proposal "involves", not "is equal to" real-life identity  To
> > the
> > > extent that real-life identities are involved, it is reasonable to ask
> > how
> > > that personal information is going to be handled.  For some reason, you
> > > seem keen to derail that part of the discussion by elevating a quibble
> > over
> > > your hasty misunderstanding of my wording into an accusation, which I
> > > reject, of generalised misconduct.  If you have some comment to make
> > about
> > > the handling of personal information, please do so.
> > >
> > > May I suggest that you withdraw your original posting, apologise to the
> > > membership of this list for the unconstructive nature of your posting,
> > and
> > > to me for its aggressive, insulting and incorrect content.
> > Alternatively,
> > > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is
> the
> > > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum.
> > >
> > > Reginald
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Real identity does not equal real-life identity. You can mask your
> > > > pseudonymous identity and pose as a third party similarly
> pseudonymous
> > > > individual.
> > > >
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
> > > >
> > > > Seddon
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Seddon
> >
> > *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
> > *Wikimedia Foundation*
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Robert Fernandez]

Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned from the
list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators regarding
why they will not do so.

I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect on
participation here than one of this list's most frequent posters contacting
your employer because he disagrees with what you have to say.

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

> Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm that my
> choice of words were very carefully chosen.
>
> And I stand by them.
>
> Seddon
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
> wrote:
>
> > Joseph
> >
> > I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that you do so too.  I
> said
> > that the proposal "involves", not "is equal to" real-life identity  To
> the
> > extent that real-life identities are involved, it is reasonable to ask
> how
> > that personal information is going to be handled.  For some reason, you
> > seem keen to derail that part of the discussion by elevating a quibble
> over
> > your hasty misunderstanding of my wording into an accusation, which I
> > reject, of generalised misconduct.  If you have some comment to make
> about
> > the handling of personal information, please do so.
> >
> > May I suggest that you withdraw your original posting, apologise to the
> > membership of this list for the unconstructive nature of your posting,
> and
> > to me for its aggressive, insulting and incorrect content.
> Alternatively,
> > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is the
> > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum.
> >
> > Reginald
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Real identity does not equal real-life identity. You can mask your
> > > pseudonymous identity and pose as a third party similarly pseudonymous
> > > individual.
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
> *Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Chris Koerner]

Hey Fæ,
Considering your proposal, on one hand I'm not sure using Wikimedia
resources to create Yet Another Forum for discussion would provide any
benefit to the movement. We're fractured enough as it is. Especially
given that this proposal is to make a more inviting atmosphere for
_all_ participants, not create a smaller (frequency, participation)
space to shunt folks into.

On the other hand if a subset of folks need a release valve, and would
use a more appropriate place to discuss than this (IMHO, the
main/primary movement list), then I'm all for that.

A small aside, while "alt" has a long tradition in meaning
"alternative" like alternative rock, [0] my personal history (as a BBS
user) has established its meaning as "Anarchists, Lunatics, and
Terrorists’.” (that's an old BBS joke, by the way). [1]

Less of a joke is the obvious contemporary meaning of the alt- prefix,
which, ugh, I don't think anyone wants to have folks inadvertently
associate our projects with. [2] Naming stuff is hard, but I would
avoid that prefix at the moment. Heck, I have enough difficulty
explaining to friends and family that I don't work on that other leaky
"wiki" project. :p

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_rock
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt.*_hierarchy
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right


Yours,
Chris K.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Joseph Seddon]

Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm that my
choice of words were very carefully chosen.

And I stand by them.

Seddon

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Joseph
>
> I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that you do so too.  I said
> that the proposal "involves", not "is equal to" real-life identity  To the
> extent that real-life identities are involved, it is reasonable to ask how
> that personal information is going to be handled.  For some reason, you
> seem keen to derail that part of the discussion by elevating a quibble over
> your hasty misunderstanding of my wording into an accusation, which I
> reject, of generalised misconduct.  If you have some comment to make about
> the handling of personal information, please do so.
>
> May I suggest that you withdraw your original posting, apologise to the
> membership of this list for the unconstructive nature of your posting, and
> to me for its aggressive, insulting and incorrect content.  Alternatively,
> perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is the
> sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum.
>
> Reginald
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > Real identity does not equal real-life identity. You can mask your
> > pseudonymous identity and pose as a third party similarly pseudonymous
> > individual.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
> >
> > Seddon
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Seddon

*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Fæ]

Getting back to the proposed rules, the list moderators have always had
flexibility to use judgement. Creating extra bureaucracy is unlikely to be
a healthy 'fix', I would much rather first see the mods take whatever
action they feel is necessary to run a welcoming email list, and only start
agreeing new rules if their actions are then thought contentious by the
community.

The proposals on banned users seem draconian to my eyes, however if this
goes ahead I propose we start a more flexible "alt-wikimedia-l" where there
are fewer limitations, readership would be much smaller, and the blocked or
naysayers can still have a voice, so long as they are not using it for
personal attacks. Such an alternative channel would also help users to
draft any critical thoughts before posting to the main list, something that
would definitely help potential whistle-blowers ensure they have text that
is sufficiently fair and robustly written.

A point worth noting is that anyone writing on behalf of a WMF blocked user
risks being blocked by the WMF, based on my own experience.

Thanks,
Fae
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+
http://telegram.me/wmlgbt

On 23 Aug 2017 5:03 a.m., "John Mark Vandenberg"  wrote:

> Hi list members,
>
> The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I, your
> humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent
> posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant atmosphere some
> posters (some of them frequent) create.
>
> It is natural that frequent posters will say specific things that more
> frequently annoy other list members, but often the complaints are due
> to the volume of messages rather than the content of the messages.
>
> We are floating some suggestions aimed specifically at reducing the
> volume, hopefully motivating frequent posters to self-moderate more,
> but these proposed limits are actually intending to increasing the
> quality of the discourse without heavy subjective moderation.
>
> The first proposal impacts all posters to this list, and the last
> three proposals are aimed at providing a more clear framework within
> which criticism and whistle-blowing are permitted, but that critics
> are prevented from drowning out other discussions. The bandwidth that
> will be given to critics should be established in advance, reducing
> need to use subjective moderation of the content when a limit to the
> volume will often achieve the same result.
> --
>
> Proposal #1: Monthly 'soft quota' reduced from 30 to 15
>
> The existing soft quota of 30 posts per person has practically never
> been exceeded in the past year, and yet many list subscribers still
> clearly feel that a few individuals overwhelm the list. This suggests
> the current quota is too high.
>
> A review of the stats at
> https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html show very few
> people go over 15 in a month, and quite often the reason for people
> exceeding 15 per month is because they are replying to other list
> members who have already exceeded 15 per month, and sometimes they are
> repeatedly directly or indirectly asking the person to stop repeating
> themselves to allow some space for other list members also have their
> opinion heard.
> --
>
> Proposal #2: Posts by globally banned people not permitted
>
> As WMF-banned people are already banned from mailing lists, this
> proposal is to apply the same ‘global’ approach to any people who have
> been globally banned by the community according to the
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans policy.
>
> This proposal does not prevent proxying, or canvassing, or “meat
> puppetry” as defined by English Wikipedia policy.  The list admins
> would prefer that globally banned people communicate their grievances
> via established members of our community who can guide them, rather
> than the list admins initially guiding these globally banned people on
> how to revise their posts so they are suitable for this audience, and
> then required to block them when they do not follow advice.  The role
> of list moderators is clearer and simpler if we are only patrolling
> the boundaries and not repeatedly personally engaged with helping
> globally banned users.
> --
>
> Proposal #3: Identity of an account locked / blocked / banned by two
> Wikimedia communities limited to five (5) posts per month
>
> This proposal is intended to strike a balance between openness and
> quality of discourse.
>
> Banned people occasionally use the wikimedia-l mailing list as a
> substitute of the meta Request for comment system, and banned people
> also occasionally provide constructive criticisms and thought
> provoking views.  This proposal hopes to allow that to continue.
>
> However people who have been banned on a few projects also use this
> list as their “last stand”, having already exhausted the community
> patience on the wikis.  Sometimes the last stand is brief, but
> occasionally a banned person is able to maintain 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

[Andrew Lih]

1. You misread en:WP:NOTNEWS . The policy doesn't say news is forbidden. It
is that Wikipedia should consider notability and original research concerns
and not act as a newspaper.

Actual wording: "editors are encouraged to include current and up-to-date
information within its coverage, and to develop stand-alone articles on
significant current events."

2. You misunderstand the Wikimedia Foundation role in these areas. Please
take this discussion to the proper places on Wikipedia [[
Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news]] and/or Wikinews.

Thanks.


On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> In a recent blog post, "No, we’re not in a post-fact world. On Wikipedia,
> facts matter.", the Foundation referred to Wikipedia editors"sharing
> breaking news in record time".  It is true that the English-language
> Wikipedia is increasingly carrying articles about newsworthy events, and
> this in spite of its WP:NOTNEWS policy.
>
> Has the Foundation made a conscious decision to promote Wikipedia as a
> source of news, and if so, what were the results of its discussions with
> the Wikipedia and Wikinews communities?  Will the Foundation allocate any
> extra resources to this effort?
>
> Rognvald
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

[Sam Wilson]

Peter,

Fair enough, I agree that the idea that Wikimedia would have been a
success if it'd be made commercial is crazy. "Has it crossed my mind how
much we could have made if it had ads? Sure. But it wouldn’t be the
same." reads to me as just a hypothetical "if it were as it is today
*and* had ads", rather than any serious suggestion that that would ever
have been the case. I reckon it makes sense to the non-editor people
it's aimed at.

Anyway, about my grammar nickpicking? ;-)

—Sam

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, at 05:06 PM, Peter Southwood wrote:
> Sam,
> I can't get back to the banner for some reason, so I risk misquoting it.
> Please take this into account.
> What I find offensive is the implication that the foundation would even
> have Wikipedia if they were doing it commercially. I and a significant
> number of other contributors would not have helped make it what it is
> today if it had been a commercial site. To support this opinion, there do
> not appear to be any commercial projects of this type even vaguely
> approaching the success of Wikipedia. The banner implies that there would
> be a roughly equivalent project available to sell. This I find offensive
> as it denigrates the voluntary contributions done by all the unpaid
> contributors.
> I see this as misrepresentation and disrespect to the crowd that is the
> source of the product, therefore offensive.
> It is possible that I am alone in this opinion, but I suggest that a
> survey of the people who actually created and maintain the content of
> Wikipedia would show that I am not. 
> At this point, I suggest that WMF do just that, run a survey to find out
> who builds the encyclopaedia, and how they feel about this. The golden
> rule of crowdsourcing is don’t alienate the crowd, especially when they
> are doing your work for free. The one thing we ask in return for our work
> is a little recognition and respect, and to know that we do a thing
> intrinsically worth doing. Again, I realise I do not necessarily speak
> for everyone, but suspect that I speak for many.
> Cheers,
> Peter
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Sam Wilson
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 10:26 AM
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up
> 
> "Offensive" seems a bit over the top! Who's it offending? Seems pretty
> okay to me, personally. :-)
> 
> Anyway, the only thing I notice with it is that it starts with "We
> will..." and then says "When I made..." etc. Shouldn't these pronouns
> agree?
> 
> —Sam.
> 
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, at 04:07 PM, Peter Southwood wrote:
> > The old style is excessively large and in your face. The new style is 
> > almost, but not quite as bad. The content remains offensive and 
> > misleading Cheers, Peter
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Joseph Seddon
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 5:02 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up
> > 
> > Hey Wikimedia-l
> > 
> > Apologies for the short notice.
> > 
> > I wanted to give you a heads up on a banner test that will soon be 
> > going live.
> > 
> > We've been working on a new style of banner that is specifically 
> > designed to have the same native look and feel as the rest of the site 
> > and interface. It's intended to be understated and you'll see is very 
> > different to our currently best performing banner:
> > 
> > Current:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_d
> > sk_p1_lg_dsn_cnt=1=US=QA
> > 
> > New Native feel:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_dsk_p1_lg_dsn_native=1=US=QA
> > 
> > Any feedback is welcome.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > --
> > Seddon
> > 
> > *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)* *Wikimedia Foundation* 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!

[Peter Southwood]

Good news indeed.
Is there a way we can stop it from crashing in mid edit and giving unhelpful 
advice like get a faster computer or a faster connection? I would not mind 
waiting a little longer for it to finish the job. It would be helpful if there 
were a user setting which allows longer wait time for those of us who cannot 
get a faster computer or connection for economic or geographical reasons.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Danny Horn
Sent: Wednesday, 23 August 2017 8:41 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!

Hi everyone,

I've got some good news -- wikitext syntax highlighting is live again, and I'm 
almost completely sure it's staying live. :) You can now enable it as a Beta 
feature on all LTR wikis.




On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Danny Horn  wrote:

> Hi Andy,
>
> Thanks for sending your thoughts, that's the kind of feedback that we 
> need. People can either write responses in this thread, or post it on 
> the project's talk page: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Tech/
> Wikitext_editor_syntax_highlighting
>
> We'll respond as comments come in, making bug fixes and then making a 
> plan for changes as we see what people have to say. Thanks again.
>
> Danny
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:07 PM Andy Mabbett 
> 
> wrote:
>
>> On 3 August 2017 at 23:21, Danny Horn  wrote:
>>
>> > WMF's Community Tech team team is happy to announce that Wikitext 
>> > Editor Syntax Highlighting has been released as a beta feature 
>> > today on all LTR Wikimedia projects!
>>
>> I'm all in favour of having syntax highlighting - I teach people to 
>> edit wikicode, and I find it helps them to learn it more quickly.
>>
>> I've been using the syntax highlighting gadget  en.Wikipedia:
>>
>>https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Remember_the_dot/
>> Syntax_highlighter
>>
>> for some time now. I've just disabled, it, and instead enabled the 
>> new beta feature.
>>
>> My first impression is that it is lacking in contrast - it's far 
>> harder, now, to differentiate the various types of content. Indeed 
>> the colour pairs used (e.g. #8800CC vs. #B3) fail WCAG web 
>> accessibility guidelines for colour contrast.
>>
>> I realise that choice of styling colours is a "bikeshed" matter, but 
>> contrast ratio is a quantifiable and objective accessibility issue.
>>
>> Also, because the script does not load immediately, the larger 
>> headings cause the page to "dance" as the script kicks in.
>>
>> What plans are there to either receive and act on feedback such as 
>> this, or to provide greater user-customisation options?
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ 
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: 
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

[Peter Southwood]

Sam,
I can't get back to the banner for some reason, so I risk misquoting it. Please 
take this into account.
What I find offensive is the implication that the foundation would even have 
Wikipedia if they were doing it commercially. I and a significant number of 
other contributors would not have helped make it what it is today if it had 
been a commercial site. To support this opinion, there do not appear to be any 
commercial projects of this type even vaguely approaching the success of 
Wikipedia. The banner implies that there would be a roughly equivalent project 
available to sell. This I find offensive as it denigrates the voluntary 
contributions done by all the unpaid contributors.
I see this as misrepresentation and disrespect to the crowd that is the source 
of the product, therefore offensive.
It is possible that I am alone in this opinion, but I suggest that a survey of 
the people who actually created and maintain the content of Wikipedia would 
show that I am not. 
At this point, I suggest that WMF do just that, run a survey to find out who 
builds the encyclopaedia, and how they feel about this. The golden rule of 
crowdsourcing is don’t alienate the crowd, especially when they are doing your 
work for free. The one thing we ask in return for our work is a little 
recognition and respect, and to know that we do a thing intrinsically worth 
doing. Again, I realise I do not necessarily speak for everyone, but suspect 
that I speak for many.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Sam Wilson
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 10:26 AM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

"Offensive" seems a bit over the top! Who's it offending? Seems pretty okay to 
me, personally. :-)

Anyway, the only thing I notice with it is that it starts with "We will..." and 
then says "When I made..." etc. Shouldn't these pronouns agree?

—Sam.

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, at 04:07 PM, Peter Southwood wrote:
> The old style is excessively large and in your face. The new style is 
> almost, but not quite as bad. The content remains offensive and 
> misleading Cheers, Peter
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On 
> Behalf Of Joseph Seddon
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 5:02 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up
> 
> Hey Wikimedia-l
> 
> Apologies for the short notice.
> 
> I wanted to give you a heads up on a banner test that will soon be 
> going live.
> 
> We've been working on a new style of banner that is specifically 
> designed to have the same native look and feel as the rest of the site 
> and interface. It's intended to be understated and you'll see is very 
> different to our currently best performing banner:
> 
> Current:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_d
> sk_p1_lg_dsn_cnt=1=US=QA
> 
> New Native feel:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_d
> sk_p1_lg_dsn_native=1=US=QA
> 
> Any feedback is welcome.
> 
> Regards
> 
> --
> Seddon
> 
> *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)* *Wikimedia Foundation* 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

[Rogol Domedonfors]

In a recent blog post, "No, we’re not in a post-fact world. On Wikipedia,
facts matter.", the Foundation referred to Wikipedia editors"sharing
breaking news in record time".  It is true that the English-language
Wikipedia is increasingly carrying articles about newsworthy events, and
this in spite of its WP:NOTNEWS policy.

Has the Foundation made a conscious decision to promote Wikipedia as a
source of news, and if so, what were the results of its discussions with
the Wikipedia and Wikinews communities?  Will the Foundation allocate any
extra resources to this effort?

Rognvald
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

[Peter Southwood]

Robert,
We were warned, so it would be very strange if we did. 
You should survey a different sample to get realistic results. 
Or is this a rhetorical question?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Robert Fernandez
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 4:54 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Is anyone actually confusing the banner with article content, or are they just 
assuming others will do so?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

[Sam Wilson]

"Offensive" seems a bit over the top! Who's it offending? Seems pretty
okay to me, personally. :-)

Anyway, the only thing I notice with it is that it starts with "We
will..." and then says "When I made..." etc. Shouldn't these pronouns
agree?

—Sam.

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, at 04:07 PM, Peter Southwood wrote:
> The old style is excessively large and in your face. The new style is
> almost, but not quite as bad. The content remains offensive and
> misleading
> Cheers,
> Peter
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Joseph Seddon
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 5:02 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up
> 
> Hey Wikimedia-l
> 
> Apologies for the short notice.
> 
> I wanted to give you a heads up on a banner test that will soon be going
> live.
> 
> We've been working on a new style of banner that is specifically designed
> to have the same native look and feel as the rest of the site and
> interface. It's intended to be understated and you'll see is very
> different to our currently best performing banner:
> 
> Current:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_dsk_p1_lg_dsn_cnt=1=US=QA
> 
> New Native feel:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_dsk_p1_lg_dsn_native=1=US=QA
> 
> Any feedback is welcome.
> 
> Regards
> 
> --
> Seddon
> 
> *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)* *Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

[Peter Southwood]

The old style is excessively large and in your face. The new style is almost, 
but not quite as bad. The content remains offensive and misleading
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Joseph Seddon
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 5:02 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Hey Wikimedia-l

Apologies for the short notice.

I wanted to give you a heads up on a banner test that will soon be going live.

We've been working on a new style of banner that is specifically designed to 
have the same native look and feel as the rest of the site and interface. It's 
intended to be understated and you'll see is very different to our currently 
best performing banner:

Current:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_dsk_p1_lg_dsn_cnt=1=US=QA

New Native feel:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein?banner=B1718_0823_en6C_dsk_p1_lg_dsn_native=1=US=QA

Any feedback is welcome.

Regards

--
Seddon

*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)* *Wikimedia Foundation* 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Rogol Domedonfors]

Anna

Thank you for your thoughtful response -- I regret that numerous other
posters have not chosen to take the same approach.  You are quite right
that I believe the the Foundation and its projects need radical change --
revolution if you will -- to become successful.  I do not dispute the
goodness of the intentions that you list, but rather whether the current
organisational structure, culture and ethos of the Foundation are able to
deliver them.  Over the past few years I have sadly come to the conclusion
that they are not.  To the extent that the work of the Foundation supports
its mission I wish to support it -- to the extent that it undermines its
mission then I wish to undermine it.  Is that so surprising?

Rutherford

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Anna Stillwell 
wrote:

>  Rogol,
>
> Good evening.
>
> In my mind, constructive dialogue is about making *something* work better,
> not about making others feel worse. The tricky part is, other people get to
> decide whether we make them feel worse. That one is not up to us. Critique
> and truly constructive dialogue should be in service of a better
> outcome. Now, that’s not always attainable. We all know I have my days, but
> it’s good as a general marker.
>
> Additionally, constructive dialogue isn’t just whether everybody plays by
> some explicit and implicit interpersonal rules--though social rules really
> do matter--it’s about whether we accomplish something important together,
> something significant. Whether it's creating and enjoying The Cuteness
> Association  Association>,
> building the next generation of content on women scientists
> , delivering used laptops
> to people who create free knowledge [1], or making verifiable medical
> information available on the ground during an outbreak of ebola
> , most
> volunteers would like to accomplish good things together. My hope is that I
> can do my part to help make it enjoyable enough for them. Hey, a girl can
> dream.
>
> I’ve read your penned letters on Wikipediocracy (yes, I know WP: NO BEANS
>  >,
> but establishing intent and faith is relevant). In your posts you make it
> clear that your entire aim is to undermine the work of the foundation.
> Readers could not interpret your intent otherwise because you spell it out
> and offer a how-to-guide
>
> I am asking you to shift your intent. Your obviously a bright guy, who has
> considerable cognitive gifts at his disposal. You can truly reason, it's
> plain as day. And we need all hands on deck, all able minds working toward
> the development of free knowledge and building an open infosphere for
> future generations. You seem like a guy uniquely fit to help, so I
> am asking you to build with us.
>
> There have been a number of times on this list where I’ve valued your point
> of view and your insights. It would be much easier to trust and receive
> your insights if I knew your intent matched your other good gifts.
>
> Good evening,
> /a
>
> [1] Thanks Eliza, Asaf, and everyone behind the laptop brigade.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Craig Franklin  >
> wrote:
>
> > Joining the pile-on here.  The focus on nitpicking semantics rather than
> > substantive issues, passive-aggressive grandstanding ("May I suggest that
> > you withdraw your original posting"), and the threat to tattletale on
> > someone to their boss for expressing a perfectly reasonable perspective
> are
> > exactly the sort of toxic conduct that is outside of the community's
> > expectations and outside of what I believe the community wants to see on
> > this list.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Craig
> >
> > On 24 August 2017 at 12:05, Robert Fernandez 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Agreed.  This sort of thinly veiled threat towards someone, whether the
> > > Foundation is their employer or not, should be grounds for moderation
> or
> > > banning.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Dan Rosenthal 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey Rogol:
> > > >
> > > > "Alternatively,
> > > > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is
> > the
> > > > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum."
> > > >
> > > > This is the kind of "unconstructive" behavior the list is talking
> > about.
> > > I
> > > > fail to see how threatening to tattle to someone's manager, because
> > they
> > > > disagreed with you about the wording of your posts in public, is
> either
> > > > constructive or the "sort of behavior" one would "expect you to
> exhibit
> > > in
> > > > a public forum." But then again, I'd venture to guess you knew that
> > > > already.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers.
> > > >
> > > > Dan Rosenthal
> > > >
> > > > On 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Isaac Olatunde]

May I respectfully ask why Rogol is not on moderation already?

Regards,

Isaac.

On Aug 24, 2017 5:31 AM, "Craig Franklin"  wrote:

> Joining the pile-on here.  The focus on nitpicking semantics rather than
> substantive issues, passive-aggressive grandstanding ("May I suggest that
> you withdraw your original posting"), and the threat to tattletale on
> someone to their boss for expressing a perfectly reasonable perspective are
> exactly the sort of toxic conduct that is outside of the community's
> expectations and outside of what I believe the community wants to see on
> this list.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
> On 24 August 2017 at 12:05, Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
> > Agreed.  This sort of thinly veiled threat towards someone, whether the
> > Foundation is their employer or not, should be grounds for moderation or
> > banning.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Dan Rosenthal 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Rogol:
> > >
> > > "Alternatively,
> > > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is
> the
> > > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum."
> > >
> > > This is the kind of "unconstructive" behavior the list is talking
> about.
> > I
> > > fail to see how threatening to tattle to someone's manager, because
> they
> > > disagreed with you about the wording of your posts in public, is either
> > > constructive or the "sort of behavior" one would "expect you to exhibit
> > in
> > > a public forum." But then again, I'd venture to guess you knew that
> > > already.
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > > Dan Rosenthal
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Samuel Klein 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thoughtful, practical, good. Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 22, 2017 9:03 PM, "John Mark Vandenberg" 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi list members,
> > > >
> > > > The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I,
> your
> > > > humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent
> > > > posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant atmosphere some
> > > > posters (some of them frequent) create.
> > > >
> > > > It is natural that frequent posters will say specific things that
> more
> > > > frequently annoy other list members, but often the complaints are due
> > > > to the volume of messages rather than the content of the messages.
> > > >
> > > > We are floating some suggestions aimed specifically at reducing the
> > > > volume, hopefully motivating frequent posters to self-moderate more,
> > > > but these proposed limits are actually intending to increasing the
> > > > quality of the discourse without heavy subjective moderation.
> > > >
> > > > The first proposal impacts all posters to this list, and the last
> > > > three proposals are aimed at providing a more clear framework within
> > > > which criticism and whistle-blowing are permitted, but that critics
> > > > are prevented from drowning out other discussions. The bandwidth that
> > > > will be given to critics should be established in advance, reducing
> > > > need to use subjective moderation of the content when a limit to the
> > > > volume will often achieve the same result.
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Proposal #1: Monthly 'soft quota' reduced from 30 to 15
> > > >
> > > > The existing soft quota of 30 posts per person has practically never
> > > > been exceeded in the past year, and yet many list subscribers still
> > > > clearly feel that a few individuals overwhelm the list. This suggests
> > > > the current quota is too high.
> > > >
> > > > A review of the stats at
> > > > https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html show very
> few
> > > > people go over 15 in a month, and quite often the reason for people
> > > > exceeding 15 per month is because they are replying to other list
> > > > members who have already exceeded 15 per month, and sometimes they
> are
> > > > repeatedly directly or indirectly asking the person to stop repeating
> > > > themselves to allow some space for other list members also have their
> > > > opinion heard.
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Proposal #2: Posts by globally banned people not permitted
> > > >
> > > > As WMF-banned people are already banned from mailing lists, this
> > > > proposal is to apply the same ‘global’ approach to any people who
> have
> > > > been globally banned by the community according to the
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans policy.
> > > >
> > > > This proposal does not prevent proxying, or canvassing, or “meat
> > > > puppetry” as defined by English Wikipedia policy.  The list admins
> > > > would prefer that globally banned people communicate their grievances
> > > > via established members of our community who can guide them, rather
> > > > than the list admins initially guiding these globally banned people
> on
> > > > how to revise their posts so they are suitable for 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Anna Stillwell]

 Rogol,

Good evening.

In my mind, constructive dialogue is about making *something* work better,
not about making others feel worse. The tricky part is, other people get to
decide whether we make them feel worse. That one is not up to us. Critique
and truly constructive dialogue should be in service of a better
outcome. Now, that’s not always attainable. We all know I have my days, but
it’s good as a general marker.

Additionally, constructive dialogue isn’t just whether everybody plays by
some explicit and implicit interpersonal rules--though social rules really
do matter--it’s about whether we accomplish something important together,
something significant. Whether it's creating and enjoying The Cuteness
Association ,
building the next generation of content on women scientists
, delivering used laptops
to people who create free knowledge [1], or making verifiable medical
information available on the ground during an outbreak of ebola
, most
volunteers would like to accomplish good things together. My hope is that I
can do my part to help make it enjoyable enough for them. Hey, a girl can
dream.

I’ve read your penned letters on Wikipediocracy (yes, I know WP: NO BEANS
,
but establishing intent and faith is relevant). In your posts you make it
clear that your entire aim is to undermine the work of the foundation.
Readers could not interpret your intent otherwise because you spell it out
and offer a how-to-guide

I am asking you to shift your intent. Your obviously a bright guy, who has
considerable cognitive gifts at his disposal. You can truly reason, it's
plain as day. And we need all hands on deck, all able minds working toward
the development of free knowledge and building an open infosphere for
future generations. You seem like a guy uniquely fit to help, so I
am asking you to build with us.

There have been a number of times on this list where I’ve valued your point
of view and your insights. It would be much easier to trust and receive
your insights if I knew your intent matched your other good gifts.

Good evening,
/a

[1] Thanks Eliza, Asaf, and everyone behind the laptop brigade.


On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Craig Franklin 
wrote:

> Joining the pile-on here.  The focus on nitpicking semantics rather than
> substantive issues, passive-aggressive grandstanding ("May I suggest that
> you withdraw your original posting"), and the threat to tattletale on
> someone to their boss for expressing a perfectly reasonable perspective are
> exactly the sort of toxic conduct that is outside of the community's
> expectations and outside of what I believe the community wants to see on
> this list.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
> On 24 August 2017 at 12:05, Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
> > Agreed.  This sort of thinly veiled threat towards someone, whether the
> > Foundation is their employer or not, should be grounds for moderation or
> > banning.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Dan Rosenthal 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Rogol:
> > >
> > > "Alternatively,
> > > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is
> the
> > > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum."
> > >
> > > This is the kind of "unconstructive" behavior the list is talking
> about.
> > I
> > > fail to see how threatening to tattle to someone's manager, because
> they
> > > disagreed with you about the wording of your posts in public, is either
> > > constructive or the "sort of behavior" one would "expect you to exhibit
> > in
> > > a public forum." But then again, I'd venture to guess you knew that
> > > already.
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > > Dan Rosenthal
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Samuel Klein 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thoughtful, practical, good. Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 22, 2017 9:03 PM, "John Mark Vandenberg" 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi list members,
> > > >
> > > > The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I,
> your
> > > > humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent
> > > > posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant atmosphere some
> > > > posters (some of them frequent) create.
> > > >
> > > > It is natural that frequent posters will say specific things that
> more
> > > > frequently annoy other list members, but often the complaints are due
> > > > to the volume of messages rather than the content of the messages.
> > > >
> > > > We are floating some suggestions aimed specifically at reducing the
> > > > volume, hopefully motivating frequent posters to self-moderate more,
> > > > but these proposed limits are actually intending to increasing 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions

[Asaf Bartov]

Perhaps we can agree it is, properly, a *nomination by community
election* process, and lay this thread to rest. :)

A.

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:01 AM Katie Chan  wrote:

> On 23/08/2017 15:32, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> > On 23 August 2017 at 12:32, Katie Chan  wrote:
> >>
> >> Let's go with the broader definition from (en) Wiktionary - "A process
> of
> >> choosing ... or other representatives by popular vote.", or even beyond
> the
> >> first sentence from en Wikipedia - "To elect means "to choose or make a
> >> decision", and so sometimes other forms of ballot such as referendums
> are
> >> referred to as elections, especially in the United States.".
> >
> > The community does not chose the representatives. It merely makes
> > *non-binding* recommendations.
> >
> > The choice - as to whether *or not* to accept them - rests entirely
> > with the board.
>
> The winners are still the chosen representatives of the community even
> if the existing board were not to appoint them to the board for whatever
> reasons or none, there were still an election.
>
> In the 13 years and 10 elections that has taken place, all the winners
> has been appointed by the way as far as I can tell, why the focus on
> that one word? Maybe feedback or suggestion to the overall process [1]
> would be more useful?
>
> Katie
>
> [1]:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mortem
>
>
> --
> Katie Chan
> Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the
> author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the
> author is associated with or employed by.
>
>
> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
>  - Heinrich Heine
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,