Am 01.12.2011 10:53, schrieb John Vandenberg:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
... The downstream
use objection
was *never* about downstream use of _content_ but downstream use of _labels_
and
the structuring of the semantic data. That is a
Am 01.12.2011 20:06, schrieb Tom Morris:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 09:11, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not a theoretical risk. This has happened. Most famously in
the case of Virgin using pictures of persons that were licenced under
a free licence, in their
I'm pretty sure that the community is against a filter system based on our
commons categories. Those who oppose that type of scheme range from the
idealists who are opposed to censorship in principle to the pragmatists who
are aware of our categorisation backlog and don't want to set us up to fail
It's not spam; it's the mailing list confirmation string.
Obviously didn't quite go right :)
Tom
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 2 December 2011 11:00, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
A fourth area of contention is money and specifically whether this is a
legitimate use of the money donated to the movement. We've already had one
UK board member ask awkward question re this.
Wikimedia
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:55:29 +0200
From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Image filter brainstorming: Personal
filter lists
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
On 2 December 2011 14:36, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
My reading of that is that the board has agreed to drop the idea of a
filter based on our category system, but unfortunately they haven't yet
agreed to drop the idea that someone controlling an IP could censor what
On 2 December 2011 14:50, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 December 2011 14:36, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com
wrote:
My reading of that is that the board has agreed to drop the idea of a
filter based on our category system, but unfortunately they haven't yet
agreed
Hi everyone,
This is a reminder that in about 20 minutes Geoff Brigham, our General
Counsel, will be in #wikimedia-office to answer your questions.
This is Geoff's first office hours, so please take a moment before we start
to read the introduction that he wrote:
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:36 PM, WereSpielChequers
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
We already have a no censorship policy that makes various exceptions. For
Example Paedophilia advocates get blocked on site on EN wikipedia. There
may in the past have been a consensus against any change to
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Steven Walling swall...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Hi everyone,
This is a reminder that in about 20 minutes Geoff Brigham, our General
Counsel, will be in #wikimedia-office to answer your questions.
This is Geoff's first office hours, so please take a moment before
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 09:23:14PM +0300, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
Trying to connect -- anyone else having trouble or is it just me?
It's you. :-)
--
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
Thanks, I figured out the problem, or rather a workaround.
Dan Rosenthal
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 09:23:14PM +0300, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
Trying to connect -- anyone else having trouble or is it just me?
It's you. :-)
Hey guys; the AFT office hours session will be starting at 11:00 (or
whenever Geoff finishes) :). Hope to see you all there!
--
Oliver Keyes
Community Liason, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation
___
foundation-l mailing list
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
HI folks - on-passing this important note from Garfield!
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Garfield Byrd gb...@wikimedia.org wrote:
The audit of the Wikimedia Foundation and frequently asked questions about
the audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 are available at
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
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.
1: pedophiles are being blocked even if they are not advocating, if I
remember correctly
2: they are blocked because their behaviour on the site is agains our
principles
Either they are advocating, or they are not. Either they are inappropriately
trying to contact minors, or they are not.
Hello, I am an independent Lebanese journalist. I am very interested to be your
company representative in Lebanon, with whom I may communicate concerning this
matter? Also I have a project proposal doing internet interaction site for
intellectuals, with whom should I communicate? Thank you.
19 matches
Mail list logo
