On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 22:57, James Forresterja...@jdforrester.org wrote:
Oh, and someone told me to do this, but unfortunately I'm not allowed
to say who instructed me so to do.
Must've been The Voices.
___
foundation-l mailing list
...still, I have to acknowledge that money is the root of Evil, and
it's getting harder and harder as these dollar bills start to pile up
where do they go and why...
...the reports get more and more vague, the report items get more and
more broad, and at the end we start to see hundreds of those
I would really like WikiSpecies to improve their visibility in the
community. Sadly enough, the interwiki-links from Wikispecies to other
projects are already insufficient. Given that we have all those
tax-box-templates I always think that it should be an easy task to write
bots to make links
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Steven Wallingsteven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
Very good question. I'd say two major factors:
1. Support from scientists. Founded by one of the best-known scientists
alive, the EOL automatically gained support from the biological sciences in
academia. Support
John Vandenberg, 26/08/2009 12:07:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Steven Wallingsteven.wall...@gmail.com
wrote:
Very good question. I'd say two major factors:
1. Support from scientists. Founded by one of the best-known scientists
alive, the EOL automatically gained support from the
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:09 AM, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote:
...still, I have to acknowledge that money is the root of Evil
Feel free to send all yours to me.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Nemo_bisnemow...@gmail.com wrote:
John Vandenberg, 26/08/2009 12:07:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Steven Wallingsteven.wall...@gmail.com
wrote:
Very good question. I'd say two major factors:
1. Support from scientists. Founded by one of the best-known
2009/8/26 Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com:
...still, I have to acknowledge that money is the root of Evil
Sure, if world peace is evil.
By the way, you might want to read up on Wikipedia on that phrase,
where it will undoubtedly tell you that it is the *lust* for money
that is the root of all
Hey,
I've read most of the topic on my blackberry so might have missed some
point but I'm surprised of the reactions.
In my opinion there's only two questions Is OM an organisation close
to WMF and supporting other NPO sharing some of WMF goals ? the
answer is yes. So I don't see the problem in
Hoi,
hear hear !!
Thanks,
Gerard
2009/8/26 Christophe Henner christophe.hen...@gmail.com
Hey,
I've read most of the topic on my blackberry so might have missed some
point but I'm surprised of the reactions.
In my opinion there's only two questions Is OM an organisation close
to WMF
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Tisza Gergőgti...@gmail.com wrote:
Nemo_bis nemow...@... writes:
See
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2009/aug/21/encyclopedia-life-species
Where's the problem with Wikispecies?
Moreover, EOL received 33.000 images from individual contributors
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Nemo_bisnemow...@gmail.com wrote:
John Vandenberg, 26/08/2009 12:07:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Steven Wallingsteven.wall...@gmail.com
wrote:
Very good question. I'd say two major factors:
1. Support from scientists. Founded by one of the best-known
2009/8/26 John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Tisza Gergőgti...@gmail.com wrote:
EOL is an encyclopedia, Wikispecies is just a raw taxonomy, which is totally
useless to the average reader. It is also useless to most readers interested
in
taxonomies, because it
Dear Klaus,
You refer to http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Gnom/Wikispecies, which
refers to Wikispecies:Village pump/Archive 24092005, a page which has been
deleted. The discussion on
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:41 AM, James Forresterja...@jdforrester.org wrote:
2009/8/26 John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Tisza Gergőgti...@gmail.com wrote:
EOL is an encyclopedia, Wikispecies is just a raw taxonomy, which is totally
useless to the average
2009/8/26 John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:41 AM, James Forresterja...@jdforrester.org
wrote:
I think the point is that the fundamental design of MediaWiki - around
a single block of unstructured information - is not useful for a
semantic project like WSp; there
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
Here's a simple series of questions:
(1) On which boards of directors (either for-profit or non-profit) has Matt
Halprin been newly seated, since 2006?
(2) To which of those organizations has the Omidyar Network made a
significant financial contribution or investment?
(3) What is the result of
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data
being released, since it allows vote-buying.
What's wrong with vote-buying? It's no worse than seat-buying.
2009/8/26 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data
being released, since it allows vote-buying.
What's wrong with vote-buying? It's no worse than seat-buying.
Greg Maxwell states:
You could register with my site and tell me you want to vote for
M,ABFO,CDEGHIJKLN I then tell you I'll give you $10 if someone votes for
G,M,ABFO,CJ,LN,DEGHIK.
+++
Wow, and I thought *I* was the one with the crack-pot, hare-brained,
wild-eyed conspiracy
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 05:20:39PM +0200, Svip wrote:
2009/8/26 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Tim Starling
tstarl...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data
being released, since it allows vote-buying.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Svip svi...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/26 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data
being released, since it allows
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 03:31:21PM +, Jonathan G Hall wrote:
I think we may all have fallen foul of the fact that sarcasm-over-IP
doesn't work very well. Tim's comment reads as probably sarcastic to me,
at any rate.
I meant Anthony's comment there, and it doesn't appear to have been
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
Nitpicking, but the number of possible unique ballots is much greater
than the factorial because of equality, and equality must be preserved
in order produce the election calculations. The formula mostly easily
2009/8/26 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
2009/8/25 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
How can you have a QA on a topic like this that doesn't even address
the matter than you have sold a seat on the board? Has the WMF
completely lost touch with the community? It should be obvious that
2009/8/26 Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org:
Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data
being released, since it allows vote-buying.
I'm inclined to agree. I just don't see any sufficient benefit to
releasing the data to make it worth the risk. Why do people want this
Hi Thomas,
On Aug 26, 2009, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Those answers don't address the fact that you've just given a seat on
the board to someone that has just given you a big pile of cash. I am
open to being convinced that this is a good thing, but you haven't
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
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
by voters are reduced to the smallest values which still give the same
this subject with the project communities? How does this appointment
have any impact on the activities within the projects?
This question is equivalent to the question:
How does any appointment to the board have any impact on the
activities within the projects?
isn't it?
... or even
How does
Full disclaimer: I contribute in Wikispecies.
First, calling a project as zero quality project, whether it belongs to WMF
or Wikia or somewhere else, is downright assuming bad faith. Second, all of the
discussion links in your boycott section took place in 2005 and 2006, clearly
unable to
Just few questions to make my opinion.
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if I read correctly this page :
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees/Restructure_Announcement_Q%26A
If he has, when ? Before or
Opps, used wrong subject line. So here's what I said about Wikispecies.
From: andrewcle...@hotmail.com
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:49:36 -0400
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Raw data of 2009 Board election ballots
Full disclaimer: I contribute in
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Kropotkine_113 kropotkine...@free.frwrote:
Just few questions to make my opinion.
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if I read correctly this page :
Hi Thomas,
On Aug 26, 2009, at 2:48 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wikimedia is a community driven movement, big decisions should be made
by the community.
Those are undoubtedly interesting assertions. Assuming the second one
is the case (big decisions should be made by
Sebastian Moleski hett schreven:
This may be a heretic question but I'd like to pose it anyway: why
should it be necessary or appropriate for the Foundation to discuss
this subject with the project communities? How does this appointment
have any impact on the activities within the
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.
I just ask few questions. I did not mention conflict of interest nor
community upset in my post. I'm not a high-volume Foundation-l poster
(maybe 1 or 2 posts in three years), but an intensive reader.
About the nominating commitee, in this QA page :
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 12:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.comwrote:
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
2009/8/26 Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com:
Hi Thomas,
On Aug 26, 2009, at 2:48 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wikimedia is a community driven movement, big decisions should be made
by the community.
Those are undoubtedly interesting assertions. Assuming the second one
Hello
[I didn't read the whole thread, apologies if this point has already been made.]
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Those answers don't address the fact that you've just given a seat on
the board to someone that has just given you a big pile of
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.
Guillame said:
A board member (or volunteer, or anyone who goes around and asks
someone to donate money to a cause) has some leverage if they can
answer: « I donated $2 million because I think this cause is worthy.
How much will you donate? »
+++
How unfortunate for Matt Halprin. As
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote:
However, in this case, even if we
assume the seat was outright bought for $2M, I don't think there are
I'm not sure why people are behaving as
Hoi,
Gregory, at Wikimania people are REALLY busy with the business of our
organisation and your notion that there might be people that are their
answer you in what you consider a timely fashion is at odds with reality.
Realistically if you get a message in the first place, do not expect
anything
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 4:35 PM, Gregory Kohsthekoh...@gmail.com wrote:
Guillame said:
I know my name is unpronounceable to anyone who doesn't speak French,
but I would assume copy/pasting isn't that difficult.
A board member (or volunteer, or anyone who goes around and asks
someone to donate
2009/8/26 Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote:
However, in this case, even if we
assume the seat was outright bought for $2M, I don't think there are
2009/8/26 Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com:
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
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 this action is perceived as
having bought a seat, so I'd say that that
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
My two cents -
The Board telegraphed this ahead of time, not the particulars
(who/when) but the generalities.
The process is not unusual for other charitable organizations.
There are more community members (active or ex) on the Board than any
other category. There still will be even if all the
Hello Kropotkine_113,
since I am on the NomCom I will answer your questions.
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if I read correctly this page :
Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 22:44 +0200, Ting Chen a écrit :
Hello Kropotkine_113,
Hello Ting,
since I am on the NomCom I will answer your questions.
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Has Matt Halprin been designated to the Board by the Nominating Commitee
(NOMCOM) ? This is explicity required if
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 21:26, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
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
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Ok. It would be interesting to explain that more explicitely somewhere
(on meta or on wikimediafoundation's wiki) because It was not so obvious
(or I didn't understain...) when I read the QA page I mentionned.
I agree, we will improve that.
Thank you for all these
I will confirm Ting's explanation here regarding NomCom. There was no list for
2009 appointments. So it is true that Matt was not on the 2009 list. No one
was. Matt was interviewed by Micheal and Sue, who as members of Nomcom, were
aware of our decision to focus on finding expertise in both
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:01 AM, James Forresterja...@jdforrester.org wrote:
2009/8/26 John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:41 AM, James Forresterja...@jdforrester.org
wrote:
I think the point is that the fundamental design of MediaWiki - around
a single block of
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 Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
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
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Experts should sit on the advisory board where they can
advise members of the community who sit on the board of trustees.
I think this is one of the main and very good points the board should
consider in the long run.
I don't mind repeating again. EOL boasts to have large amount of images, but do
you know that according to some of EOL's partner projects, EOL has not handled
any data submitted by its partners for over a year ago? Yes, they do have lots
and lots of images but many are simply sitting in a hard
2009/8/27 Casey Brown li...@caseybrown.org:
The Advisory Board hasn't really been used that well, at least not to
my knowledge. There should probably be more effort placed on taking
advantage of that expertise there, but also keeping in mind the
community-related expertise (ie. this mailing
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
For some background reference,
* original resolution creating the Advisory Board:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Advisory_board
* current Advisory Board with biographies:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Thomas
Wait, wait, wait. I thought we had all formed consensus that the
appointment of Matt Halprin and his $2 million briefcase full of money was
an ideal (or, at least nearly ideal) measure of progress and success for the
Wikimedia Foundation. I was about to announce a call for a standing
ovation,
Kropotkine_113 wrote:
Does he fulfill the Nomitanig Commitee selection criterion : Membership
in the Wikimedia community ?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nominating_Committee/Selection_criteria#General_needed_traits
Ting already answered the rest of these questions, but I will elaborate
on
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 3:52 AM, Andrew Leungandrewcle...@hotmail.com wrote:
..
We often get compared between Encyclopedia of Life (EOL), so I grabbed a
correspondence with someone who shares data to both EOL and Wikispecies
(permission already granted beforehand by these 2 individuals on
69 matches
Mail list logo
