p://liquidthreads.labs.wikimedia.org
[3] http://liquidthreads.labs.wikimedia.org/wiki/Feedback
--
Andrew Garrett
agarr...@wikimedia.org
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ld of what you need
without us handing you every revision ever deleted on English
Wikipedia (which includes numerous revisions which are damaging to
users' privacy).
--
Andrew Garrett
agarr...@wikimedia.org
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l ma
or the
Wikimedia community, to supervise a child's internet access and/or
usage, and certainly not to make arbitrary rules regarding said usage
on the basis of a single culture's sensibilities on children and
sexuality, especially sensibilities as baseless and harmful as this one.
I strongly support. It will
benefit us in the long run.
The emphasis at present appears to be on presenting us as a place to
go to learn and discover things. This is great, but it does not
necessarily encourage contribution.
--
Andrew Garrett
agarr...@wikimedia.org
http://werdn.us/
__
zilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?product=MediaWiki%20extensions&component=LiquidThreads&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED
--
Andrew Garrett
agarr...@wikimedia.org
http://werdn.us
___
foundati
7;s behalf. The community should be discussing editorial and
administrative reasons for dealing with these images, not legal ones.
--
Andrew Garrett
agarr...@wikimedia.org
http://werdn.us/
Sent from London, Eng, United Kingdom
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
don't all use gmail. And if you're relying on people's mail clients
hiding the original text, why don't you just remove it so that it goes
away for everyone?
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foun
tion made against those reversing his actions.
This isn't an ideal situation. We should have a situation in which
Jimmy's technical power derives from the authority of the board of
trustees or from a community mandate, or we should have a situation in
which Jimmy
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Andrew Garrett wrote:
>> This isn't an ideal situation. We should have a situation in which
>> Jimmy's technical power derives from the authority of the board of
>> trustees or
dren to view on our website. That role is to be discharged
solely by parents and supervisors of those children.
The *ONLY* rating and classification system that I can support is a
descriptive one. That is, it describes the nature of the content, and
allows humans or computers
could be implemented with
parser functions and the page_props table in an afternoon, taking no
more than a week to tweak and review.
If you want this functionality, you should look at implementing it, or
you should lobby the Foundation to support it with staff developer
time.
-
ing posts to check that your comments haven't been
made already.
If you simply enjoy writing unhelpful and toxic comments about other
people's work, then I suggest you refrain from sending them, or send
them to somebody else.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
engineer be permitted to name
anything. We should institute this as a rule in Wikimedia development
in general.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
, then the stated reason for removal would be in serious need of
> urgent review.
I won't speak for the Foundation, but my understanding is that sampled
click-rates were measured on the live site, so it would have been a
representative sample of our visitors.
--
Andre
fair that the best response to what you perceive as a
poor design choice in somebody else's code is not to revert them and
say "There, I fixed it for you. Thank me later.", but perhaps to
discuss it with them first and find a compromise. There's an
imperative to listen and res
I don't know why you bothered putting him on moderation if you were
just going to forward all of his emails to the list. Please, keep the
discussion off this list, in order to prevent the disruption which you
sought to limit by placing Jeffrey on moderation.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://wer
else" proposal.
>>
>
> The bulk of the theft is contemporary works, not the works from 10 years
> ago, but the works that were created last week.
>
> That aside if I invest a bunch of money in some stocks that gives me a
> share in the profits of that companies
a
> corruption.
Whatever syntax is used, we should absolutely not expect users to
remember it and the unique identifier of the cited work. There should
be a "Cite" button in the toolbar that will allow users to look up
(with search suggestions) the correct work, request any further
infor
son.
We can only hope that some day we all become just as sensitised to the
clutter we put on the site ourselves ;-).
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Farsi, Urdu, Pashto, Divehi and many others.
That's very good feedback, thanks for letting me know.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
assume this is because I use English interface in all projects.
There were checks for regular blocks, but none for global blocks. I
figured (inaccurately as it turns out) that globally blocked accounts
were unlikely to qualify. :-)
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.or
blocked and bot
accounts were excluded, but I didn't globally exclude them.
—Andrew
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia
filter them for duplicates
manually :-).
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
translators
next time :-)
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ia.
It's looking like global bots which aren't flagged everywhere are an
edge case that should be addressed next time around.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikime
t? :-)
http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/SecurePoll#Email_spam
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
nor for people who are globally blocked. You
fall into one of these categories, and you received the email despite
your ineligibility for this reason.
My apologies for the confusion and inconvenience.
—Andrew
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
a.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Email/False_positives
[2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubsc
re, at least [1].
Sorry, that list doesn't accept regular expressions. It's a straight
list of account names, which, until yesterday, had to go through about
twenty minutes of preprocessing before it was useful.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
rom (freely licensed, of course) hardcore
pornography.
Sure, there'd need to be some understanding of what's in and what's
out of various categories, and it's not possible to make that
completely objective. But that doesn't mean it's not a useful or
worthwhile exercise.
I don't
necessarily want to see without warning. Even if I'm looking up
'vagina' for whatever reason.
It's about taking into account the visual preferences of readers
(click to show images like that to avoid being surprised) while still
recognising that
t meaningfully
different article content for every country or point of view, then I
think you'd be justified in bringing this up.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@l
an click on them and have them shown to
me.
Maybe you don't have any problems viewing any image whatsoever, but
there are plenty of people for whom it's more than just a 'preference'
based on some cultural norm that you don't agree with because you're
modern and you tra
e fact that our motives and motives of those who
> supported us lay in our suppressed unconscious part of mind; that it
> shows how deep are our fears to face the real world. But, as we said,
> we've learned the lesson and we'll try to face reality, no matter how
> painfu
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Too bad Wikimedia TOS still labors under the misapprehension that the
> licence doesn't mean what it says.
Can you be specific, to make this into actionable feedback?
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wi
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Yes, but that is not proof of what we as a community understand the
> principle to mean, it means the board is on crack.
That's not a helpful contribution to this discussion.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Found
ative difference,
and any nuanced perspective on this argument should have an
understanding of this. In my opinion it's worth giving a simple way
for people to avoid 90% of the things that they might be offended by.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
_
t quick wins. We can attack a large portion
(that may or may not be exactly 90%) of the problem by offering
readers the opportunity to hide a small number of categories that
people commonly don't want to see.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
_
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> If I may be so blunt. What part of non-negotiable don't people quite grasp?
I'm not sure I understand. Could you tell me what you think is non-negotiable?
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:10 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> Andrew Garrett wrote:
>> My point is about quick wins. We can attack a large portion
>> (that may or may not be exactly 90%) of the problem by offering
>> readers the opportunity to hide a small number of categories th
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:16 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> On 19 October 2011 14:14, Andrew Garrett wrote:
>
>> Well, let's make sure that in any implementation of an image filter
>> that does go ahead, we've thought through and addressed each of those
>> consequ
change their minds. And, as I say, at this point, they've
probably made their arguments as well as they can. I don't think many
people are even reading the discussion any more.
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
fo
the capacity to allow users to make nuanced
decisions about what they do and don't want to see. Why is this a
problem?
--
Andrew Garrett
Wikimedia Foundation
agarr...@wikimedia.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.o
, years and months to give a clue on activity in
> different times; and text/plain vs. html given the frequent discussions
> there are on this topic. :-p
>
> It's probably easier to strip them entirely before pushing them into the
generator, rather than using them as stopword
t; just checked and it seems it would stack ok with individuals' custom
> editnotices for their talk page.
Please no. We have more than enough annoying boxes on Wikipedia as it is.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l ma
x27;s still over 500 return journeys from new
> york to london.
Assuming our staff sleep on sidewalks and beg for food when they travel.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ivial fraction of the contributor
>> community who only edit anonymously.
>
> Indeed.
This is why we Wikimedians are awesome.
The Foundation's audited financial statements are posted, and our main
point of discussion is the accuracy of a tidbit of background
information in the in
;
> I have wrote one a few years ago which might suit your needs. It is in
> the maintenance directory and would need a shell access to run:
>
> maintenance/userOptions.php --usage
>
> On my development Wiki the output is:
>
> Usage for (default: '0'):
>
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
> On 02/11/10 15:03, Andrew Garrett wrote:
>
>> If you wrote it before I rewrote the preferences system in 2009, then
>> it is out of date.
>
> Since it use the internal abstraction layer, I would expect it to still
&g
on, is there any guarantee that it will be a valid one? Given the
> vagueness of the mission statement, how much of a stretch is acceptable?
Shockingly, making decisions like this does not necessarily involve
reasoning, but judgement. Yes, the answers are not simple and logical
— becaus
nd, if my
suspicions are correct, it's not going to be the biggest day of the
fundraiser, either.
So congratulations, and keep up the good work! I and many others will
be watching and hoping that you can make our launch day a Million
Dollar Monday.
--
A
tter.
>
I'm also a huge, huge fan of these new banners. When can we get them in
Australia? :-)
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ity to roll out their best
work quickly, without going through the bureaucratic quagmire of requiring
chapter approval for each special region. The rest of the world is missing
out on the best that they can do.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
nny, but could you not?
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
that card until fairly recently.
We might be growing, but I don't think anybody in the industry would
hesitate to say that we're still "small" and "running on a shoestring
budget". The websites that we compete with run budgets in the hundreds
of
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> Virgilio:
>
> Your userpage claims you speak American English at an en-4 "near-native
> level". Want to try again?
Your messages are deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to
boot. Cut it out, please.
-
g-term established
users who are harassed in the long term, rather than the newer users
who don't get a chance to be harassed in the long term because they
pick up and leave straight away.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing
et you revert an edit in one
click (and requests for adminship that count the number of times you
do so) people are going to click the button instead of fixing
templates.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-
nable, and legitimately useful for
the job.
I'd like to invoke the principle of charity and think that Wikimedia
means the latter, but I can see why somebody might be interpreting it
as the former, since the latter reads a bit more into the words.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/
___
59 matches
Mail list logo
