As Andrew pointed out, this discussion has spiraled entirely outside the
scope of this list. Discussions on the effects of copyright law with regard
to Wikimedia and its projects are welcome. General discussions on copyright
law and piracy that have little to do with Wikimedia should be taken
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 08:17, Ryan Lomonaco wiki.ral...@gmail.com wrote:
As Andrew pointed out, this discussion has spiraled entirely outside the
scope of this list. Discussions on the effects of copyright law with regard
to Wikimedia and its projects are welcome. General discussions on
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:49 AM, Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
The endowment is not about just about funding, I think it is probably also
symbolic of endurance to many people.
There is a worry about the content remaining available in the long term. If
there is not an endowment to
On 3 July 2010 17:35, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:49 AM, Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
David Gerard writes:
http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2007/04/10/disaster-recovery-planning/
Can we reasonably say that everything else on the list there is a
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
For instance, a clear commitment to maintaining the physical operation
of the projects for the next 50 years, even if all sources of funding
were to dry up. Or a commitment to maintaining this with
infrastructure
On 3 July 2010 18:29, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Hm, well, I think this gets back to David Goodman's point, one which I agree
with.
Yes, the only absolute commitment the WMF has in the grand scheme of things
is to provide the physical resource to host the projects.
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
When Bomis was hosting it, it was just a handful of servers.
Volunteers wouldn't be able to fork the site and keep things going at
anywhere near the level they are at now - if the WMF doesn't have the
funds, neither
On 3 July 2010 18:53, Noein prono...@gmail.com wrote:
If something of similar consequences as the kill switch [1] were
triggered against the WMF in USA, would it still be accessible for the
rest of the world?
The kill switch idea, as I understand it, is about killing the
internet entirely, not
On 07/03/2010 04:47 PM, David Gerard wrote:
Well. not really. He's asking the same question Greg Maxwell and I
asked last month about the language list defaulting to open rather
than closed: If a wiki voted for it, would that override the usability
team's dictates? That was a straight yes or
On 4 July 2010 02:03, William Pietri will...@scissor.com wrote:
On 07/03/2010 04:47 PM, David Gerard wrote:
Well. not really. He's asking the same question Greg Maxwell and I
asked last month about the language list defaulting to open rather
than closed: If a wiki voted for it, would that
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 6:11 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 July 2010 02:03, William Pietri will...@scissor.com wrote:
On 07/03/2010 04:47 PM, David Gerard wrote:
Well. not really. He's asking the same question Greg Maxwell and I
asked last month about the language list
On 07/03/2010 06:11 PM, David Gerard wrote:
That's phrased in terms of dominance. It's in effect asking who's the
bigger monkey. I think that's a conversation worth avoiding where possible.
The dominance element was brought in, as you well know, by Trevor
Parscal's preremptory
12 matches
Mail list logo
