On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net wrote:
Phoebe, does this sound familiar? We want you to imagine a world in which
every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That
is our commitment. We're in it for the long haul. (From: Ten
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Mathias Damour
mathias.dam...@laposte.net wrote:
Why would both Associations and Affiliates both need to use Wikimedia
marks ?
Because they might feel a need to identify themselves as part of
Wikimedia. Yes, there is much talk about use of Wikimedia trademarks
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Would you care to explain anything you're talking about?
I don't see anything in the Licensing section that mentions anything
about U.S. copyright law. It says the content is licensed under the GFDL
and CC-BY-SA, and
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
Am I being dense, or are you being silly? Blocking advocacy from a site with
a NPOV policy is a bajillion miles from being censorship.
It may be a bajillion miles, I still think it's closer to it than
giving the
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
If the filter is predefined then it might meet the personal preference
and can be easy to use. But it will be an violation of NPOV, since
someone else (a group of reader/users) would have to define it. That
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
The problem starts at the point where the user does not choose the
image(s) for himself and uses a predefined set on what should no be
shown. Someone will have to create this sets and this will be
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
I neither agree. We decide what belongs to which preset (or who will do
it?), and it is meant to filter out controversial content. Therefore we
define what controversial content is, - or at least we tell the
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Alasdair w...@ajbpearce.co.uk wrote:
So a big objection is that any sets of filters is not so much to the weak
filtering on wikipedia but that such sets would enable other censors to
more easily make a form of strong censorship of wikipedia where some images
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 29.11.2011 14:40, schrieb Andre Engels:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
The problem starts at the point where the user does not choose the
image(s
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you remember your last mail in which you said that my viewpoints are
extreme? I was writing that considering anything controversial or not
are the only neutral positions to take. You opposed it strongly.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the fundamental error in this reasoning is that you seem to under the
impression that this is something new here that is considered, and that there
have only been a few people commenting on these
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 10:43 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 November 2011 09:34, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
Our core mission is making information and knowledge available to
people who want it, not pushing it down their throats against their
will.
Show
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:14 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 November 2011 10:07, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
You're saying that anything that is not wanted by more than a few
people goes against our core mission?
No, and nor did I say anything that could
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:58 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
At this point you appear to be stretching to keep a flame war going.
Stretching? It seemed like a valid chain of reasoning to me. But if
you don't agree, please give your line of reasoning as to how your
statement was a
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
wrote:
Not sure if this is appropriate for this list, but just for lulz. A
finnish member of
parliament just got caught for his speech being a word for word piece of
snippets from a Finnish Wikipedia article. No
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.comwrote:
we recently did some practice on italian wikipedia, are we going to protest
IP legislation in US by taking down English Wikipedia?
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Peter Damian
peter.dam...@btinternet.comwrote:
A general question: is there a Wikipedian ideology? What is it? In
particular, how does the current ideology, if there is one, compare with the
ideology which inspired its founding fathers. And mothers - many of
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Castelo michelcastelobra...@gmail.comwrote:
On 21-10-2011 03:06, Andreas K. wrote:
the
median is always smaller than the average.
There's no such relation between median and average:
{20, 21, 24, 26, 28}: Median (24) Average (23.8)
{20, 22, 24, 26, 28}:
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
What I like about this proposal is its simplicity and elegance. It has the
great benefit of leaving the communities and content writers in charge of
where and to what extent they use the filter, and it also includes
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
That is just completely untrue. The image filter will allow people to
choose what to see and what not to see. We won't be making the
decisions...
Actually, we will be. Depending upon how such a system is implemented,
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 7:07 AM, aude aude.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Rather than 10th birthday for the projects, I think he's talking about as
an
editor. Anyone here who has been editing for 10 years? ;)
Plus a few months, my first edits were from March 2001.
--
André Engels,
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 1:19 PM, WereSpielChequers
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
One of my objections that I hope some others share is that an IP based
system inevitably means one person deciding what others may see - which to
my mind is the point where an image filter becomes a censor.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
I still can't the a rational difference between images included in
articles by the will of the community and text passages included by the
will of the community.
It's much easier to note offensive text
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 3:49 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wikimedia *used* to hold the position that we wouldn't aid China to block
images of the Tianamen Massacre, and went to great lengths to assure
that chinese users of Wikipedia could evade blocks to viewing. I
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 18.09.2011 09:46, schrieb Andre Engels:
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 3:49 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wikimedia *used* to hold the position that we wouldn't aid China
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay. Is there a commitment on the part of the foundation that they will
help
people using our filtering scheme and the usual browser add-ons to Wmake it
impossible to view material on wikipedia from schools
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Oliver Koslowski o@t-online.de wrote:
Am 18.09.2011 13:56, schrieb Andre Engels:
On itself the one who tags the image, but we happen to have a system for
that in Wikimedia. It is called discussion and trying to reach consent.
Who
decides whether a page
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 8:16 PM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote:
I find it strange that you consider this an objection to a filter.
Surely,
giving someone an imperfect choice of what they consider objectionable is
_less_ making a decision for them than judging in advance that
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
You would have to proof that your facts are indeed true. But if you
accept it as a huge difference between cultures, how can you impose a
filter for a culture that doesn't need it or wants it?
Just like
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
I would not have any problems if we would not play in the hands of
censors (local ISPs, a simple proxy, regimes, institutions, ...) by
actually labeling content as objectionable. Which gives away the
Sorry, I dropped some hot food on me as I wrote this, and then apparently
accidentily hit sent.
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
I would not have any problems
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
This would imply that the referendum indeed asked the wrong questions.
If all would have equal values, then i must wonder about the strong
difference in result. We have a referendum which points out that
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Does rebranding change anything then the name or appearance?
Or better asked: Does it help to solve any of our real problems?
It might be useful in reducing confusion - when saying that one is on the
board
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Stephen Bain stephen.b...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:24 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any encyclopedia which have been
classified/banned/bowlderised by any country in the last 50 years?
If Wikipedia is a quality
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Thomas Morton
morton.tho...@googlemail.comwrote:
But as Tom say, online media has quickly found that the traditional
editorial process doesn't work so well on the internet. On the other hand
the net does allow very quick rewrite expansion for a developing
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ruwrote:
Can not you just introduce a flag of a trusted editor, similar to an
autoreviewer? I mean, if the news creator is a en.wp administrator most
probably he/she is not a vandal trying to post junk in the Google News. Why
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 September 2011 11:02, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
On 05/09/2011 10:55 AM, Andrew Gray wrote:
As to why no-one is distributing a filtered version of Wikipedia, I
think that falls more under the general
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
The selection of labels isn't supposed to be unbiased. Users select
whichever labels they want. All you have to do is make sure it's easy
for people to create new labels if none of the existing ones fit their
needs,
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru
wrote:
Did the idea of the second trial get any momentum in the end of the day?
As a en.wp newbie, I could only find the poll that the trial
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a hard
time understanding why people think chapters are representative of the
community. They're representative of people who like to
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Krinkle krinklem...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't fully read the context of this thread, but something that
did cross my
mind recently, why do we treat YouTube-links different from other
links here?
Aren't most of our sources and external linked websites
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:32 AM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinct_language
It is believed that 90% of the circa 7,000 languages currently spoken in
the world will have become extinct by 2050, as the world's language system
has reached a crisis and is
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 12:03 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
The relevant paragraph appears to be
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sokpop#Ontsnappingsclausule
The Google translation is In order to be unblocked, the person behind
the corresponding IP address is a letter
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:07 AM, teun spaans teun.spa...@gmail.com wrote:
None of these 5 seem to qualify as fitting into the gap of death of the
author between 50 and 70 years ago, though for File:Alicebeggar.png and
File:AliceSilvy.png: this is not 100% sure - if the artist was 20 years
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote:
I know I am in the wrong place for this. Normally this kind of thing would/
should go on the discuss pages, but category discuss pages don't attract
much attention.
If you consult Categories: Sailors/ Navigators/
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
Those are preliminary results. We have two chapters (and strategic
focus) in countries of the list above. Inside of the longer list, which
should be verified, we have more chapters. I noted that there are even
two
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 7:13 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
You're missing my point.
All the Latin languages share a common writing system and only differ in
the way the language is spoken.
Address the point that the words within the system have the same semantic
*meaning* and are formed with
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/22/2011 06:41 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
An interesting aside on this would be...
What is the quality of the foreign-language Wiki's that currently exist. For
example; the articles in my specific technical topic area
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Thomas Morton
morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote:
In a number of years things may change, and ultimately the photo will
definitely be out of copyright wherever and whenever published though the
simple passing of time :)
If the US keeps its speed of extending
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Joan Goma jrg...@gmail.com wrote:
As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for formal accomplishing of the
copyright terms is expensive and difficult. But the same happens the other
way around.
I would like to have a clear legal opinion about applying the terms
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Ashar Voultoiz hashar+...@free.fr wrote:
You do have the power! The world as immensely changed in the last few
years thanks to the internet. Internet is just about connecting people
and every little step is a change. Get an idea, get community members
Lowering the edit counts sounds good, it does however also have a
downside, in that it makes it easier to vote using sockpuppets or
meatpuppets.
I agree with voices speaking out against giving voting rights based on
donations; I do also think giving people voting rights based only on
being
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:35 PM, FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote:
During the strategy taskforce, the quality team came to two conclusions that
are similar to some ideas in this thread, but avoid the issues mentioned.
[snip]
First, let me apologize beforehand for sounding too cynical, but I
have
I may sound negative, as said, I know much has been tried, and little
succeeded. I do really hope this does work, and am well willing to
think along to try to make it that way. In fact, it is not that far
from ideas that I have developed myself or with other users on IRC as
well - although I was
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
That's precisely the problem. Being able to remove the right to edit BLPs
from a user, irrespective of whether they have been uncivil etc., just
based on the nature of their edits, is the only thing that will solve it.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
I can see where this ends: biased editors in control; no discussion, no
appeal, disagree and you're history.
That is indeed a risk. There seems to be no way out. Either you treat
trolls as deccent editors, or you treat
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
Mi ne havas kontraŭstaron pri Esperanto en ĉi tiu specifa temo. Bedaŭrinde
mankas Google traduki en ĉi tiu lingvo!
Machine translation from Esperanto to English or Hungarian is possible
at http://traduku.net
--
André
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any checkusers that aren't admins already? Checkuser is an
extra tool given to admins, not a tool given out independantly of
other tools.
On Dutch Wikipedia we currently have 5 checkusers, only 2 of which
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 5:49 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, raw data is a primary source and therefore likely unsuitable for en:wp.
The raw data is, however, US government public domain and therefore
suitable for Wikisource as an important historical text (which it is).
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 6:26 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 11/28/2010 9:06:36 PM Pacific Standard Time,
russnel...@gmail.com writes:
Yes I agree, the policy is extremely vague.
We may be struck by lightning, we may be abducted by aliens, we may be
sentient beings.
May
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
My precise question is: Does US law follow local copyright laws in
relation to the works published locally and by authors with local
citizenship? Or not?
No, many countries apply the 'law of shorter term' (that is, works
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Lennart Guldbrandsson
wikihanni...@gmail.com wrote:
Did you know that less than a third of the users who create an account on
English Wikipedia make even *one* edit afterwards? Two-thirds of all new
accounts never edit! Interestingly, this percentage vary very
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 Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Muhammad Yahia shipmas...@gmail.com wrote:
Acehnese Wikipedia is ready to boycott Wikipedia if there is fatwa from
competent ulama.
In addition to trying to have a dialog with them and explain NPOV and the
rest of the pillars, I think someone should explain
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:25 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 July 2010 17:58, Excirial wp.excir...@gmail.com wrote:
If a culture sees these images as highly offensive, and if the main
complement of editors / readers agrees with this i wouldn't object to such a
rule, as long as
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:14 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
That there is ambiguity at the edges does not disprove NPOV. Day fades
into night, but they're different things. This template is blatant
advocacy to violate NPOV, and indeed to do so across all Wikimedia
sites. They had
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.com wrote:
So? Is every single rule on Wikipedia completely determined by NPOV?
As to the best of my understanding
Each and every single rule on Wikipedia is completely determined by
WP:5P (and NPOV is one of them) in sense
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Bod Notbod bodnot...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
As to the best of my understanding
Each and every single rule on Wikipedia is completely determined by
WP:5P (and NPOV is one of them) in sense
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Samuel J Klein s...@wikimedia.org wrote:
PGDP has a very strict and arduous workflow... The
result is quality, however only the text is sent downstream.
Why not send images and text downstream?
Because PGDP produces for Project Gutenberg, which publishes
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:24 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
Good question! ;-)
Storage is one issue.
It would be interesting to estimate the storage requirements of
Wikisource if we had produced the PGDP etexts.
I think it is the main reason; however, a back-of-the-envelope
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:17 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
When I go to YouTube, the number of videos which are some bad amateur
singer trying to sing some good song far outweigh the number of original
videos
of that song/group. The amount of free content in music, in general is
rapidly
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Jeffrey Peters
17pet...@cardinalmail.cua.edu wrote:
Austin,
Maybe you didn't realize but I am the top organizer of Wikiversity. Gerard's
call for political activism against that organization is completely
unacceptable and harms projects like my own that have
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Jeffrey Peters
17pet...@cardinalmail.cua.edu wrote:
Austin,
Maybe you didn't realize but I am the top organizer
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 2:07 AM, Jeffrey Peters
17pet...@cardinalmail.cua.edu wrote:
Thank you for clarifying. I put forth another email based on the expectation
of the point you just made (so, thus, I am sorry for assuming you were
speaking against the law and not in support of the license
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
I love those proofreading features, and the new default layout for a
book's pages and TOC. Wikisource is becoming AWESOME.
Do we have PGDP contributors who can weigh on on how similar the
processes are? Is there a way
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Aphaia aph...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing we can do would be to make contributors' names more visible.
Translators for WMF stuff too (Ting Chen made a good point about the
latter in Alexandria). Many websites gives clear credits to
contributors - not only
I think that we cannot decide this for you, this is typically
something you (that is, the Persian Wikipedia community) have to
decide themselves. Having said that, the best strategy in my opinion
would be to do whatever is usual in Persian texts - which might well
be different for different
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
When you look where what languages have their biggest audience, you will be
surprised. The notion of most likely languages is either based on such
statistics or it is only guess work. The best performance is
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:
Is that possible without putting WMF lawyers in a tight spot?
Sometimes. Sometimes not. (The issue is not so much putting lawyers in a
tight spot as it is one of making WMF more vulnerable, e.g., by revealing
defense
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:05 AM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
Kat Walsh k...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Commons should not be a host for media that has very
little informational or educational value
This is too broad. Confine the scope toward dealing with what does not
belong, rather than
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Noein prono...@gmail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/05/2010 05:51, Andre Engels wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:23 AM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:23:28AM +0200, Andre Engels wrote
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:23 AM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:23:28AM +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
Being educational should be just another word for being in scope, and
in scope are, in my opinion, in the first place those files that are
usable
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Alec Conroy alecmcon...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
I've just now removed virtually all permissions to actually do
things from the Founder flag.
I appreciate this step, but the community has now
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:09 AM, K. Peachey p858sn...@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Bugzilla 982[1] MediaWiki should support ICRA's PICS content labeling.
From my understanding without reading much about it, It [ICRA] is ment
to be a international or at least a standard for these things which
most
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Adam Cuerden cuer...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, I've complained a lot, time to give something back.
I think I've managed to create a sexual content policy that's
consistent with the core values of commons and previous decisions,
such as the artworks of Muhammed,
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:
It wasn't a response -- I hadn't read your comment yet. But when I did see
your comment, I thought it missed the point that Fox was always going to
congratulate itself on its story, regardless of what we did or didn't do in
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
So instead we just give in to them? We get attacked and decide to just
sit up like a good dog?
No one is acting like a good dog. Bad metaphor. When
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:28 PM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
Guys,
Lets get back to one point : terms of service.
We are talking about copyright here the whole time, but the contract
agreement in the terms of service are much more binding, they override
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:19 PM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com wrote:
I would say claiming copyright on a map is legitimate but I think the big
issue here is the geotag's themselves (i.e the locations) since so many
people use google maps or another tool to find the geo location. The
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:36 AM, The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com wrote:
No, this is a profoundly stupid decision that has no logical sense. A free
license is a copyright license.
So? What does that have to do with the post you are quoting, or
anything else in this thread?
On Mon, Mar 29,
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Przykuta przyk...@o2.pl wrote:
Or just use common sense that it's silly for a Wikimedia project to say
it's
not allowed to use a logo own by Wikimedia Foundation
It is not common sense to depend on the relationship between the
project and the hosting
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
While I don't agree that we need to take this away from the community
and hand it to a team of lawyers, I must say that the practical training
caught my eye.
Would it be possible for the Foundation to get Mike--and other
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/1/19 Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com:
Hello dear people,
there's something very very very special about the video at
http://cnn.com/video/?/video/world/2010/01/19/ctw.connector.jimmy.wales.cnn
You can
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Erik Zachte erikzac...@infodisiac.com wrote:
Today I released 4 new reports, which all focus on:
Where do our readers come from?
http://tinyurl.com/yhdej3j http://tinyurl.com/yhdej3j
Going through the countries, another remarkable result in my opinion
is
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
Ziko van Dijk wrote:
Thank you for the numbers, Erik!
I wonder why 40 % of the visitors of ksh.WP (the dialect of Cologne) are
from Japan. And why 25 % of the visitors of eu.WP (Basque) are from Poland?
Bots?
I think
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:23 AM, C F shma...@gmail.com wrote:
With 2 personal phone numbers? Nevermind it seems that one of them has
the wrong area code (although I might be wrong), which suggests that
the phone numbers were the only things intended for that email.
Those are probably just their
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Istvan Soos istvan.s...@gmail.com wrote:
For the sake of example we would like to automatically convert the
page content to a different text and different format (e.g.
automatically create text extracts and compile it into a pdf document)
and sell it as part
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
We've advertised third party for-profits in the past with prominent
matched donations notices before (albeit controversially). This isn't
that different.
As you say, that one was controversial and this one isn't that
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
How about moving the servers (5) from Florida to a cold country
(Alaska, Canada, Finland, Russia) so that they can be used to heat
offices or homes ? It might not be unrealistic as one may read such
things as the solution
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 10:37 PM, George Herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Jake Wartenberg
j...@jakewartenberg.com wrote:
I am not talking about pedophilia activism, but instances where the
individual in question is not disruptively editing.
There are a
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
