On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
Their orders would be classified; disclosure of them would be a crime.
Not a problem for us, but a big problem for staff on the ground in China.
Indeed, I believe it may even be outright life threatening to have
strong
Hi James
I went to the page and I see that most of the Portuguese articles have To
evaluate next to them.
About To evaluate is says the following: Article needs to be evaluated by
a Wikipedian in that language ***to determine if translation is needed.
The article on schizophrenia, for
Hoi,
Fred, what is different in your scenario from what happens in the USA ?
Thanks,
GerardM
On 3 September 2013 00:23, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
On 31/08/13 15:17, Erik Moeller wrote:
It could be argued
that it’s time to draw a line in the sand - if you’re
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 10:58 PM, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote:
illegally collect personal data about them and *monetize it *or use to
pressure or
threaten selected individuals, companies or agencies.
Monetize it?
I am in no way going to defend my government on most of this given
Any censor from the United States or European governments that works
directly with us (I have no personal knowledge of this, I just know it
has to be) is concerned with classified information, not someone's
opinions or factual information about historical events or political
personalities.
Fred,
Sorry, there is no us. As far as the United States is concerned they
allowed themselves to spy on any person who is not one of US to be speid
on. Given that our movement is a global movement, the fact that it is based
in the US is incidental.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 3 September 2013
And from that assertion what practical action or policy should follow?
Fred
Fred,
Sorry, there is no us. As far as the United States is concerned they
allowed themselves to spy on any person who is not one of US to be speid
on. Given that our movement is a global movement, the fact that it
On 09/03/2013 08:36 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
Any censor from the United States or European governments that works
directly with us (I have no personal knowledge of this, I just know it
has to be) is concerned with classified information, not someone's
opinions or factual information about
On 09/02/2013 06:17 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
OK, well there's one fairly obvious solution which hasn't been
proposed or discussed.
[collaborating with the PRC]
That's because, ideologically, it would be abhorrent to a very large
segment (possibly even the majority) of editors, staff and
On 09/03/2013 09:45 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
Abusive nonsense does not make that fact go away. Someone,
actually, many someones, need to be trusted.
Доверяй, но проверяй.
I agree with your assessment of the risks of working with the PRC, I
simply think that if you think that those risks do not
This month it is the 4th year that volunteers from Wikipedia and Wikimedia
organize Wiki Loves Monuments, an international photo contest focused on
monuments, the cultural heritage the world has. In 2010 it was organized for
the first time in the Netherlands only. That was big success and was
On 09/03/2013 12:33 PM, Delirium wrote:
I certainly agree with learning from history, but when it comes to
censoring encyclopedias or similar reference works, are there good
examples that might more concretely narrow down the specific type of
thing we ought to be learning from history?
Not
I guess emergencies should not go to legal as there may be a considerable
delay.
Fred
Are there more successful attempts?
It would be difficult to enumerate successful attempts since, by
definition, they would have been successful at not being known. :-)
-- Marc
I once suppressed
Are there more successful attempts?
It would be difficult to enumerate successful attempts since, by
definition, they would have been successful at not being known. :-)
-- Marc
I once suppressed information about a troop movement underway in Iraq
after a request. Troop movements are
On 9/3/13 4:28 PM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
On 09/03/2013 09:45 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
Abusive nonsense does not make that fact go away. Someone,
actually, many someones, need to be trusted.
Доверяй, но проверяй.
I agree with your assessment of the risks of working with the PRC, I
simply
Hi Fred,
Emergencies should go to emerge...@wikimedia.org. Any other concerns
should be directed to le...@wikimedia.org.
Please note that emergency@ should only be used for actual emergencies
(i.e. immediate threats to life, limb, or property).
Thanks!
-Michelle
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:48
To be fair, none of the people receiving requests through legal@ or emergency@
have security clearances either.
Kirill
On Sep 3, 2013, at 1:44 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
Are there more successful attempts?
It would be difficult to enumerate successful attempts since,
The thing is, it's kind of a crapshoot anyways. You might see something that
you think might be classified and report it; but, unless you actually have the
corresponding clearance yourself, you have no way of knowing for certain
whether the material is in fact classified in the first place.
18 matches
Mail list logo
