On 5/7/2010 5:30 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
On 7 May 2010 16:07, Kim Bruningk...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 12:30:18PM -0700, Michael Snow wrote:
announce-l still has issues. The Board of Trustees has directed me to
release the following statement:
Just
Another great post.
You are right: this is a separate issue from the original censorship/content
filtering debate, but it is an important issue that the proposed Sexual
content policy on Commons should address.
Recapping some thoughts around this:
*No image showing an actual living person
When I read and edited the English language wikipedia this morning, I
saw that the logo had changed. I had a strange feeling, at first not
being sure if this was only a feeling of surprise or if there was some
real problem with that new logo. After performing my editing tasks, I
had a closer look
* the diameter of the sphere has become shorter than the Wikipedia
word below (some harmony is broken).
* It is darker.
* It is fuzzier (while the older one was brisk, with contrast)
Strongly agree. The most painful is that it's small :(
Akos Szabo / Glanthor Reviol
*The roots of the problem*
Michael, if the Board is analyzing the issue then it should address the
roots of the problem.
The fact that recent discussion has taken place around sexual images has the
advantage that sex raises a lot of interest from everybody.
But from my point of view the issue
Stevan Harnad in the American Scientist Open Access Forum:
On Sat, 15 May 2010, Barbara Kirsop [Electronic Publishing Trust for
Development] wrote:
What is very confusing about [the SAGE survey's] call for feedback is
the title [Open Access Publishing].
On 05/15/2010 06:22 AM, Klaus Graf wrote:
So there we are: OA's biggest canard and nemesis, being daily,
cumulatively, canonized and amplified by Wikipedia, riding the recursive
tide of its own notability and notoriety (as an infectious virus,
cheerfully propagated by the denizens of
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 6:22 AM, Klaus Graf klausg...@googlemail.com wrote:
Stevan Harnad in the American Scientist Open Access Forum:
On Sat, 15 May 2010, Barbara Kirsop [Electronic Publishing Trust for
Development] wrote:
What is very confusing about [the SAGE survey's] call for feedback
Hi all;
Solving captcha during registration is mandatory. Can this be replaced with
a sound captcha for visual impairment people? It is a suggestion to the
usability project too. Thanks.
Regards,
emijrp
___
foundation-l mailing list
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM, William Pietri will...@scissor.com wrote:
Of course, if somebody, those folks included, think they can build a
better encyclopedia, I'd encourage them to try. And I don't mean that in
a snotty way; it would be useful to Wikipedia to have some serious
Some background:
When I was a librarian open access was one of the principal things I
worked on. Stevan has been for over 10 years an acknowledged leaders
in this field, and his propaganda for open access has been a key
factor for the considerable success it has had--by now all major US
and UK
On 05/15/2010 02:27 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
But we do have serious competition, and it is scary and thrilling - it
also happens to be published entirely in Chinese (hudong, baike). But
even if you don't know how to read Chinese, you can see how they
display portals and amin pages; images,
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 5:27 PM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
Solving captcha during registration is mandatory. Can this be replaced with
a sound captcha for visual impairment people?
In theory, yes. Someone needs to provide the code, though. For now,
people who want to sign up and can't
On 5/15/2010 4:34 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
*The roots of the problem*
Michael, if the Board is analyzing the issue then it should address the
roots of the problem.
We would like to. Roots are sometimes difficult to get at.
The fact that recent discussion has taken place around sexual images
14 matches
Mail list logo
