On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:33 PM, wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
I doubt the local basement startup band actually needs to distribute 5MB
songs over a p2p network. That the bandwidth used would hardly trouble
their hosting site.
Its such nonsense by Nesson and others at PK and the EFF
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net wrote:
about the
relationship between the fundraising campaign and actual lawmaking.
That's not entirely your fault, since the writer threw in some filler
about the activity of an administrative agency, apparently because this
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
I strongly disagree. There is a big difference between simple language
and simple concepts. Children need simple concepts (basically, you
can't assume as much prior knowledge because they haven't had time to
learn
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Benjamin Lees emufarm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
If you don't have a strong background in a field then drinking from
the fire hose of full-complexity concepts is hard no matter if you
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
This will NOT get things out of spam that are already in it, though.
Search for in:spam to:lists.wikimedia.org to find them and Not
Spam them manually.
Gah! The search result for that gives me _thousands_ of
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I don't think scapegoating Wikipedia's gender imbalances to biological
differences is especially helpful. And the suggestion that it may not be
possible to dumb-down Wikipedia enough to attract women is ridiculous
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
counter argument in a respectful discussion between colleges we build
If I can't even manage to say colleague without screwing it up, how
can we assume that anything I say was an insult to anything and not
just some kind
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:26 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
There's been discussion of the gender gap among Wikimedia editors on
and off for many years now, and it's a focus of the strategic planning
process. This is a part of a larger issue of how to get members of
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 2:24 AM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
On 2 Jun 2010, at 22:51, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
A tiny benefit to a hundred
million people wouldn't justify making wikipedia very hard to use for
a hundred thousand
Can you justify that the change has now made it very
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hello,
For part 1, see [1].
In his reply to User experience feedback [2], Howief says: the language
links were used relatively infrequently based on tracking data.
Is there any data about their usage since
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Adam Cuerden cuer...@gmail.com wrote:
With respect, the work on the Sexual Content proposal as pretty much
thrown out all of Jimbo's work, and is proceeding from a direction
[snip]
You're linking to something from May 17th. It would be much more
productive to
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote:
So I think it's fine if the name has a positive connotation.
And that connotation should be we're countering inappropriate edits,
not we assume that everything's okay, but we'll humor the concerns.
Of course, I'm not
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@robla.net wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM, William Pietri will...@scissor.comwrote:
That did cross my mind, and it was tempting. But practically, many busy
journalists, causal readers, and novice editors may base a lot of their
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@robla.net wrote:
casual reader, it might as well be called the Hyperion Frobnosticating
Endoswitch. It will be a blank slate as far as journalists and the world
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm preparing a patch against FlaggedRevs which includes changes that Howie
and I worked on in preparation for the launch of its deployment onto
en.wikipedia.org . We started first by creating a style guide
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
I have created a poster suitable for distribution to journalists
http://myrandomnode.dyndns.org:8080/~gmaxwell/flagged_protection.png
I have revised the graphic based on input from Andrew Gray and others.
http
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
implementation, and there's no flagging in the proposed configuration.
Additionally, protection in our world implies no editing whereas this
[snip]
- Must not introduce obsolete terminology (e.g. there's no flagging in
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
WebM is a new open source video codec; That's interesting
with a BSD-ish license; Ok, that's amazing
Google did it; That's huge.
The question to this esteemed community is thus:
Shall we start using it? :-)
Careful
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Noein prono...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for this deep analysis. While claiming that we should not
compromise any of the principles, you didn't address directly the
possibility that we won't reach everybody if we don't compromise.
Reaching every human is a
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:32 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you missed it because it wasn't really discussed before as
part of the vector update... right? I admit I didn't read all the
announcements,
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Kalan kalan@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 22:44, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote:
We've seen a lot of comments about the size of the puzzle globe, and I don't
disagree that it might benefit from being increased in size slightly. I
feel
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure the presence or absence of a legal imperative is fully
relevant to the underlying question. The Commons project has a moral
responsibility to take reasonable steps to ensure that subjects of
sexually explicit media
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
However, I also see the issue from another frame that is not part of
Tim's spectrum. Sexual photographs, especially those of easily
recognized people, have the potential to exploit or embarrass the
people in them.
Wikimania 2011 has come, yet again another location in the middle-east.
It seems to me that every major populated geographic region has a
multitude of sites which could create viable wikimania candidacies—
and this has certainly been supported by the past applications.
A leading application
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:50 PM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote:
It seemed like an opportune moment to take our 2D globe, lovingly created by
WP user:Nohat and improved/modified a cast of many other volunteers back in
2003, and take it to a truly 3D object. If we were going to
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote:
[snip]
But more generally, yes I suppose I may be overstating. Studying
religious views on sex and pornography is interesting, because those
views align closely with the laws and norms of wider society. Unlike
wider
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:
I just had a thought -- what if it were possible for a user to categorically
block views of any images that are not linked to in any project's article
pages? Presumably, those Commons images that are found in articles are
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#An_initial_notice_to_reduce_surprises
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I thought it might be useful to here if I shared some of my
experiences with commons.
Like many people I've had the experience of bumping into a human
sexuality related commons category or gallery and thinking Holy crap!
Thats a lot of [gallery name]. Freeking teenage pornofreaks!.
But unlike
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Derk-Jan Hartman d.j.hart...@gmail.com wrote:
This message is CC'ed to other people who might wish to comment on this
potential approach
---
Dear reader at FOSI,
As a member of the Wikipedia community and the community that develops the
software on which
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 2:55 AM, teun spaans teun.spa...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it stand any chance to file against Foxnews for slaunder?
It seems they are also actively approaching organizations who donated
support to wikimedia.
The recent mass deletions have made it harder to refute their
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote:
I fully endorse every aspect of Mike Godwin's comment.
The Boards statement makes it clear that their view is that Community
discussion is needed to find long term solutions to the issue. And that not
censored should
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 12:37 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't disagree, but I meant what I said about *single* most important issue!
And I'm not sure that's how I'd frame it. The board statement seemed
pretty clear; reaffirming existing policy. I guess it depends a bit on
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 1:07 PM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote:
Samuel Klein wrote:
I don't think this is a technical issue at all. Considering how
flexible and reversible wiki-actions are, it seems eminently
appropriate to me for the project founder to have 'unlimited
technical
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
It comes down to the size of the tent. If you want students in Saudi
Arabia to be able to use Wikipedia it has to be structured one way. If
you want to please gay college students you structure it another way.
[snip]
The
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Victor Vasiliev vasi...@gmail.com wrote:
Think future, not past. Think project, not Jimmy.
We do think future: if Jimmy had already carelessly intervened twice
and caused controversies both time, how can we except the story will
not repeat.
We do think
When I heard that Jimmy had taken an axe to explicit images on commons,
I thought it was good news as I've been frustrated and disappointed by
my own inability to convince the commons community that some things,
like the bulk copying of erotic imagery from flickr— hundreds of
images with little to
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Techman224 techman...@techman224.com wrote:
It has come to my attention that the Wikimedia Foundation through its Office
actions policy removed and oversighted the
signing keys for Texas Instruments calculators under a DMCA takedown notice
on October 7, 2009.
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 7:49 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 March 2010 12:28, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for your copyfight. There is plenty
of reason to exclude this material regardless of the copyright/legal
concerns
Today Wikimedia's world-wide five-minute-average transmission rate
crossed 10gbit/sec for the first time ever, as far as I know. This
peak rate was achieved while serving roughly 91,725 requests per
second.
This fantastic news is almost coincident with Wikipedia's 9th
anniversary on January 15th.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Today Wikimedia's world-wide five-minute-average transmission rate
crossed 10gbit/sec for the first time ever, as far as I know. This
peak rate was achieved while serving roughly 91,725 requests
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 6:51 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Wikimedians,
Austin and I thought it might be fun to have a Secret Santa New Year's
drawing among Wikimedia friends! We're basing it on the MetaFilter
community Secret Santa drawing, which has 256 participants
Geni is speaking of the huge banner on Enwp at the moment featuring Craig of
craigslist. Hit reload a few times if you haven't seen it. It links to a
clearly spoken statement of support for wikipedia.
To avoid you haivng to click and goofing up the counters, here is what it says:
I'm a proud
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Why would you even ask that question, let alone expect an answer? Last
I checked, no Wikimedian also carried the title of majority
shareholder or anything close. You're not entitled to sordid details
of personnel management. Try
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 4:38 PM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
There are ways to optimize all of this. Most users will not want to
download the full history.
Then why are you using git?
___
foundation-l mailing
-- Forwarded message --
From: Sean Moss-Pultz s...@openmoko.com
Date: Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:51 AM
Subject: [openmoko-announce] WikiReader
To: annou...@lists.openmoko.org, List for Openmoko community
discussion commun...@lists.openmoko.org
Dear Community!
Today, with the
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Happy-melon happy-me...@live.com wrote:
[snip]
It's not just that. On a technological level, considerable sections of the
FlaggedRevs code are called on *every* page view, whether the page has
FlaggedRevs behaviour or not. Even if it's eventually saying no,
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Tim Landscheidt t...@tim-landscheidt.de
wrote:
So, should we find a term that is suitable for all six
billion people on this planet, or should we covertly prefer
users who are curious enough to just click on that link to
find out what's behind it?
Obviously
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
[snip]
plan, and Brion is hoping to invest some of his remaining time with it
in helping to get the extension ready for en.wp. It's not trivial: The
scalability concerns at that size are a step more serious than with
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
and we're also concerned about the potential negative impact on
participation.
Please help me understand the implications of this statement.
It simply means that
a) we want to make sure that for the production roll-out,
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Steven Walling
steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
Gregory,
To address:
My leading hypothesis were either that the staff was incredibly
overloaded with new initiatives like usability and strategywiki...WMF's
priorities have become so warped due to petitioning by
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Brion Vibber br...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Of course. But I wasn't expecting a turn up on English Wikipedia yet.
I'm asking why the 25 lines of configuration that EnWP specified have
not yet been added to the test wiki at
its commitments on high
impact community initiatives?
Thank you for your time and consideration.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org Status?
To: Wikimedia
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Erik Zachte erikzac...@infodisiac.com wrote:
Examples are: article views per hour, unique visitors, percentage of
potential audience reached (unique visitors per million speakers). All of
Why are people without computers or reasonable access to computers
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:55 PM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
I would like a professional opinion on the question :
Better stated, I would like your opinion on this, if it is not off topic.
Is wikipedia non commercial or commercial non profit?
Is
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:04 PM, wiki-li...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
It makes no difference. Wikipedia licenses everything on for commercial
use. As you cannot relicense someone else's work, you cannot use a NC
license worked. Most NC licensees probably wouldn't mind wikipedia
reusing stuff,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:19 PM, wiki-li...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
You can't combine a CC-BY work with a CC-BY-SA work without either
imposing a SA limitation on the CC-BY work,
Which anyone can do when combining CC-By and CC-By-SA works by others.
(If you don't want people adding random
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 10:47 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
The key question is whether the full history dump was ever considered
to be a project that needs WMF funding to be allocated, as opposed to
letting it be solved by the normal open source model.
Post the root
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Samuel J Kleins...@wikimedia.org wrote:
[snip]
Speaking of which, I'm also looking for someone to organize the
minutes. [NB: you don't have to be present during the chat to do
this.] Again, pls contact me off-list.
Doesn't the board have a role designated to
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Michael Snowwikipe...@verizon.net wrote:
It does, but this is not an official meeting for the board to conduct
business, it's a meeting to provide people in the community with a
chance to have a discussion with the new board members. As such, I'm not
sure it's
In the thread WMF seeking to sub-lease office space?
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Austin Hairadh...@gmail.com wrote:
(to Gregory Kohs)
[snip]
I've placed you on indefinite
moderation with the goal of improving the signal:crazy ratio.
With something like 40 posts made to that thread after
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Benjamin Leesemufarm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
I propose the foundation-announce-l mailing list be set up with the
following posting rules:
1) One post per person per thread. That includes the
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/28 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Stephen Bain stephen.b...@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:58 AM, Anthonywikim...@inbox.org wrote:
It seems to me to be begging the
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Tim Starlingtstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data
being released, since it allows vote-buying. Even if the numbers given
Although I was trying to avoid advertising it in public this was
something I'm
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Brianbrian.min...@colorado.edu wrote:
This kind of fear mongering attitude is why we can't allow more members of
the community to vote. You'd rather spread FUD about vote buying than design
a system that allows the largest number of community members to vote.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Brianbrian.min...@colorado.edu wrote:
The reason we let such a tiny fraction of the community vote is because of
an irrational and inflated fear of fraudulent votes. The risk has been blown
entirely out of proportion and absolutely no technical measures have
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Guillaume Paumierguillom@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
It is very common for members of the board of a non-profit
organisation to donate money to support this organisation.
It was my understanding that the appointment was of Matt Halprin, not
the Omidyar Network.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote:
I hedged my language because I don't believe it is that simple. I do
believe the money and the seat are linked, but I don't believe just
Thats quite fair, however:
anyone could buy a seat for $2M. For example, I doubt Mr.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Casey Brownli...@caseybrown.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that fits the definition of sell, others
may disagree but it is semantics and is unimportant.
Is it unimportant? We're discussing how
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 9:30 PM, John Vandenbergjay...@gmail.com wrote:
And yet ... this is what every successful wiki does. Wikipedia is
extremely structured. The writers are not always expected to know the
structure; gnomes do the tidying up.
You must have an enormously different idea of
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
I think part of the problem is that there were some odd ideas about
how the Advisory Board would work. For example, it has a chair. I
can't work out why. Why would the advisory board ever meet as a group?
Being an
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Gregory Kohsthekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder what takes so long to upload a small data file?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Board_elections/2009/Votesoldid=1606753
Let's see... August 25 minus August 12 equals nearly two weeks of delay (and
Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to Wikimedia Foundation
SAN FRANCISCO and REDWOOD CITY, Calif., Aug. 25 /PRNewswire/ --
Omidyar Network today announced a grant of up to $2 million over two
years to the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that
operates Wikipedia, one of the
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing I'm curious about... Why did this announcement come from Greg?
I simply saw it on PRNewswire and figured folks here would appreciate seeing it.
I have no clue why it wasn't already posted here but the coordination
of
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:06 AM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
When one downloads a dump file, what percentage of the pages are
actually in a vandalized state?
Although you don't actually answer that question, you answer a
different question:
[snip]
approximations: I considered
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Jimmy Walesjwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
[snip]
Greg, I think your email sounded a little negative at the start, but not
so much further down. I think you would join me heartily in being super
grateful for people doing this kind of analysis. Yes, some of it
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Lars Aronssonl...@aronsson.se wrote:
Kaare Olsen wrote:
What I think is the primary reason for the Danish Wikipedia
being much smaller than the neighbouring languages is that
Danes generally are internationally minded and pride themselves
on being good at
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Svipsvi...@gmail.com wrote:
But that's without mentioning the horrible state of the localisation
in general: Wrong context translations, just wrong translations and
many spelling errors.
Contextual errors I can understand, figuring out all the right
contexts
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Nathannawr...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
certainly see why it would be frustrating for him: he's much more reasonable
in voice chat than over text, and if the audio were widely circulated it's
possible he would have come in a few places higher in the election.
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net wrote:
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Seritaserita@bridgespan.org
wrote:
Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia
entries further down results page. Thoughts?
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Seritaserita@bridgespan.org wrote:
Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia
entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments?
http://software.silicon.com/applications/0,39024653,39484015,00.htm
[from my comments in
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 5:09 PM, David Goodmandgoodma...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps we should try using the titles for things that other people
use--not for g-rank, but as signs that we recognize that an
encyclopedia is made for the readers.
Eh— It's unsolvable in some cases... People frequently
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:58 AM, Tim Starlingtstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote:
[snip]
Brianna Laugher was receptive to the idea of having
Wikimedia projects hotlink or cache images from galleries.
So there have been a number of statements against doing something like
this, but (unsurprisingly) I
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Steven Wallingsteven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
Thoughts? Am I being too nervous, or do others see that potential too?
I didn't.
Speaking of PARC, does anyone have any contacts with them?
I wrote asking about how they removed vandalism from their revert
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Pavlo Shevelopavlo.shev...@gmail.com wrote:
A full pairwise defeats table will be posted shortly.
Would you please add detailed statistic summary (number of people
voted, %% of eligible wikipedians, dice and slice of those to projects
groups etc.) ?
... I
This paper is making the rounds:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1446862
This is a pilot study of the use of “Flash cookies” by popular
websites. We find that more than 50% of the sites in our sample are
using flash cookies to store information about the user. Some are
using
Betsy Megas be...@strideth.com wrote:
Due to an error in a script that was used to generate the list of
authorized voters for this election, roughly 300 votes were cast by
users who were not qualified based on the posted election rules
(requiring that voters have made at least 600 edits before
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Philippe
Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I'm interested in knowing the nature of the error (understanding is
the key to avoidance in the future!)
I'd also like to know if any users were denied the ability to vote who
should have been permitted on
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/12 Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com:
It is my understanding that the parties incorrectly stricken
previously were not contacted. I believe that an attempt should be
made to contact stricken parties, even
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Tim Starlingtstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
I'm interested in knowing the nature of the error (understanding is
the key to avoidance in the future!)
It was my fault, and it was pretty much identical to the error I made
in 2007, where
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Philippe
Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had
been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of
Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly
struck; if there
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Casey Brownli...@caseybrown.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote:
And is there some data about those numbers from last elections?
A page with a large number of stats[1] was linked from the Results[2]
page last year.
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:38 AM, Gerard
Meijssengerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
This is a huge improvement over the last election where not all projects
were targeted for this type of mail. As a result there is less bias in the
system. So you can opt out if you do not want to receive an
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:41 AM, private musingsthepmacco...@gmail.com wrote:
Well yeah Milos - but we probably won't - will we! - Seems a bit silly.
I was hoping we could have a thread about the principle of discussing /
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Erik Moellere...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Our approach to job titles actually has an emerging basic pattern. :-)
It's not 100% consistent because we sometimes have stuck with commonly
used titles like Office Manager and General Counsel, but generally
one we try to
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Michael Snowwikipe...@verizon.net wrote:
[snip]
I cannot fathom why you would limit media to being released only under
the GFDL unless it was designed specifically for incorporation into a
GFDL work. It's a documentation license, not a media license, and when
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Ryan Lomonacowiki.ral...@gmail.com wrote:
The rules did disenfranchise me, for example. It doesn't bother me that I
can't vote, but that said, I would've liked to vote if eligible. I am not
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brianbrian.min...@colorado.edu wrote:
The second sentence should read: There is no information in the current
heuristic that indicates that editors who are allowed to vote are more or
less familiar with the candidates than those who are not.
Who says there
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/7/24 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu:
In that case they can highlight the attribution and press backspace!
Sure, but we shouldn't make it unnecessarily difficult for people to
reuse our content and tidying up
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Erik Moellere...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Indeed, that's the reasoning behind the proposed approach. We don't
want it to typically be changing constantly for an individual user.
Yes, a sequential run does introduce various problematic biases.
An IP-address based
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
