Hello,
I am not the only one that keep my contributions confidential. There is
another member of the LC who has good personal reasons to have the
contributions not publicly available. The reason is that there may be
repercussions in the professional sphere. When this was discussed in the
Nathan, 26/08/2010 00:01:
It's true that the work of the Language Community stands out as one of
the few areas of community participation (in that the LangCom members
are not employees of the WMF) closed to public or community
observation.
Few? There are some ten private community wikis
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 5:54 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
The backlash had the potential of stopping all new Wikipedias in any
language. To prevent this from happening, the language committee and its
policy were created. This policy was accepted by the board of
On 26 August 2010 04:54, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
I am not the only one that keep my contributions confidential. There is
another member of the LC who has good personal reasons to have the
contributions not publicly available. The reason is that there may be
In the ptwiki case, members of the group eliminate the page themselves.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hoi,
Other members of the LC can confirm to you that there is little need to
discuss things on our list. Most mails are boringly business like.
When you find the explanation provided not enough, then that is tough. At
the time we were really happy to gain a new member with its qualifications.
I
An'n 26.08.2010 14:20, hett Gerard Meijssen schreven:
Hoi,
Other members of the LC can confirm to you that there is little need to
discuss things on our list. Most mails are boringly business like.
If it's boring there is no reason to keep it secret. So no argument for
your position.
When
On 26 August 2010 14:50, Marcus Buck m...@marcusbuck.org wrote:
What has a limited remit to do with transparency? The things you do in
your limited remit are extremely relevant to some groups. Our mailing
lists should be public whenever possible so people have the chance to
object to wrong or
Hoi,
It is opportunistic to drop someone who helped when it was most needed
because of some people arguing for this. In my opinion this is extremely bad
form.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 26 August 2010 15:50, Marcus Buck m...@marcusbuck.org wrote:
An'n 26.08.2010 14:20, hett Gerard Meijssen
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi,
It is opportunistic to drop someone who helped when it was most needed
because of some people arguing for this. In my opinion this is extremely
bad
form.
Thanks,
GerardM
I think this has already
Hello all,
I'm pleased to announce the launch of the Wikimedia Foundation
research committee, with 11 initial members. You can find more
information and bios here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_Committee
The purpose of the committee is to help organize policies, practices
and
Hoi,
That is an argument I do not agree with.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 26 August 2010 19:59, Muhammad Yahia shipmas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi,
It is opportunistic to drop someone who helped when it was
On 26 August 2010 19:13, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this has already been answered. Quoting Marcus below:
You try to make it appear like an attack on a single person. It's not
about removing any person from the committee, we just want them to be
transparent and
Gerard, would you be so kind and post a message on your mailing list
informing your co-members about this discussion and inviting them to
join in with their opinions? Would be especially nice to hear from Karen!
Is that okay?
Marcus Buck
User:Slomox
Hoi,
Blatant: without any attempt at concealment; completely obvious (Wordnet). I
do not need an excuse, I did better; I provided an explanation. An
explanation that you care not to accept. I have also pointed out that I am
unwilling to drop people who have helped out for opportunistic reasons.
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:14 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Can anyone else from the language committee offer a credible
explanation of their special requirement for secrecy? Surely if this
is a requirement, it can be explained, as Gerard did not.
Hello David,
There are some cases
Hi Jesse,
There are some cases where confidentiality is necessary. We routinely
ask external experts for their evaluation of the test project content
before project approval, as Yaroslav mentioned early in this
discussion. These external persons are sometimes in situations where
speaking
-Original Message-
From: Jesse (Pathoschild)
Date: 2010. augusztus 26. 21:29
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Sakha Wikipedia passed 7000 articles
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:14 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Can anyone else from the language
An'n 26.08.2010 21:29, hett Jesse (Pathoschild) schreven:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:14 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
Can anyone else from the language committee offer a credible
explanation of their special requirement for secrecy? Surely if this
is a requirement, it can be
I've just been chatting with Gerard about this issue. He explained in
some detail the concerns for confidentiality - the situation is far
from ideal, but is the present workable solution to getting accurate
quality information without possible retribution drected at those
giving the information
Hoi,
Let us have a sense of history here. When the language committee started,
there were no linguists or other experts members on the committee. We were
really happy when we got someone who is part of the standard bodies that are
relevant to what we do. It meant that we had a way to assess what
I finally understand. User:Karen (I am assuming, based on other ppl's
remarks) opinions might affect her employment, and in an effort to conceal
her opinions, Gerard is keeping his contribution confidential. Thus
rendering it very hard for anyone to follow the threads and deduce what she
may have
On 26 August 2010 22:48, Muhammad Yahia shipmas...@gmail.com wrote:
I personally don't agree with this. I believe a person with such problematic
employment situation is not a good fit for a supposedly community committee.
And even if there is a great need for this person's expertise, other
A tricky bit appears to be when expertise is offered on the basis that
it is confidential, due to fear of attacks on the expert in question
from aggrieved nationalists. It's not clear how to work around that
one.
But is that the case with committee members? I totally understand and agree
An'n 26.08.2010 23:21, hett Gerard Meijssen schreven:
Hoi,
Let us have a sense of history here. When the language committee started,
there were no linguists or other experts members on the committee. We were
really happy when we got someone who is part of the standard bodies that are
An'n 27.08.2010 00:00, hett David Gerard schreven:
On 26 August 2010 22:48, Muhammad Yahiashipmas...@gmail.com wrote:
I personally don't agree with this. I believe a person with such problematic
employment situation is not a good fit for a supposedly community committee.
And even if there
There's a new MacArthur Foundation/MIT Press book out called Peer
Participation and Software: What Mozilla Has to Teach Government that
I think many people here might find relevant interesting. It
describes Mozilla's processes, heavily focusing on the roles of
volunteer developers and evangelists
27 matches
Mail list logo
