Well, Milos, I wouldn't worry about the lists going dead -- there was
lots of activity this month so far :)
Summaries:
* Foundation-l:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LSS/foundation-l-archives/2008_December_1-15
* Wiki-en-l: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LSS/wikiEN-l-archives/2008_12_1-15
* and sp
Florence Devouard wrote:
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
>
>> Florence Devouard wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I did not mean to suggest we should collaborate with whatever
>>> government. I meant that we could maybe learnt from what happenned and
>>> think about scenarios for different
Where you see tyranny I see beauty. A majority of the people acted (A real
majority!) to speak through their ballots. That is the purest form of
democracy, and that is how California works. We are not a rightocracy. If
people have an issue with that, there are 49 other states to live in. The bes
Hi Sue,
thanks for the report. I was already looking out for it! :) I'd like to join
in with Florences question.
But also have a small additional suggestion. Would it be nice to the
chapters to have somewhere a list of all major software WMF is using? As a
suggestion list? For example, GIMP for p
Sue Gardner wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> Here is the RTTB for October. November will follow soon :-)
>
> Enjoy!
> Sue
>
>
> Report to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> Covering: October 2008
> Prepared by:Sue Gardner, Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation
> Prepared for
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> Florence Devouard wrote:
>> Birgitte SB wrote:
>>
>>> I am strongly against collaborating with Westernish governments to help
>>> make their censorship more effective. I personally don't think we should
>>> help anyone make their censorship more effective. But i
2008/12/15 Ray Saintonge :
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>>> Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
>>> determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
>>> may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
>>>
>>
>> If the country has free and fair elec
Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
>> determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
>> may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
>>
>
> If the country has free and fair elections for its leaders then it
Todd Allen wrote:
> Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
> determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
> may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
>
> Prior-restraint censorship, or blocking people from seeing,
> discussing, and thi
Hi all,
Yes, I know that in large organizations it is uncommon to approve minutes by
email. I however see no fundamental obstacles myself, but I'd love to hear
from them if they are there. Please note that "commonness" is no argument to
me in this case. I understand how we got to the current situa
The chair of the board, Michael, had posted the topics before the
meeting and a short report about resolutions and issues discussed after
the meeting.
Ting
Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
> wrote:
>
>
>> From Sue's report, I understood that the current prac
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2008/12/14 Anthony :
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
> > wrote:
> >
> >> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have
> board
> >> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice tha
2008/12/14 Anthony :
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
> wrote:
>
>> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
>> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
>> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as o
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:49 AM, effe iets anders
wrote:
> From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
> delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is quite
> a long t
Hello Effe,
I think this is a good suggestion. I will put it on the next meeting at
the second weekend of the new year.
Ting
effe iets anders wrote:
> >From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
> minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that
Judson Dunn wrote:
> Make no mistake, the free dissemination of all human knowledge to
> every person on the planet is a fight. The forces that would spread
> ignorance as a means of control, and separation are always fighting
> back. The idea that we should acquiesce in that fight, and censor our
Thomas Dalton wrote:
> It's a democratically elected government making the laws
> and those laws don't prevent free and fair elections, so it isn't
> undemocratic. (Of course, an semi-official and unaccountable agency
> like the IWF enforcing the laws is not a great way to go about it.)
Your adden
>From Sue's report, I understood that the current practice is to have board
minutes approved only on the next board meeting. In practice that means a
delay of several months. In a quickly changing world as ours, that is quite
a long time span.
Would it be possible to decrease this time span someho
> There may be some of that, but it is also true that a lot of experts
> are actually unhelpful (perhaps we could do something to improve that,
> though - a system for experts to review articles, rather than edit
> them, might be good). When experts get involved in editing there are
> often ownersh
19 matches
Mail list logo
