Re: [Wikimedia-l] Banners for logged-in users (was:How can we fix the two-stage page loading problem?)

; that then please bring that up in a *separate* thead. > > you're going more and more off topic. I suggest that we return to the > question > at hand: the two stage loading problem. > > lodewijk > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:41 AM, David Emrany <david.emr...@gmail.com

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How can we fix the two-stage page loading problem?

sephsed...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi David, > > I would refer to my answer I gave on the forked thread relating to this > topic. > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017- > September/088570.html > > Regards > Seddon > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 3:4

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How can we fix the two-stage page loading problem?

dew...@effeietsanders.org> wrote: > Hi David, > > Would you mind elaborating on the first point? I vaguely recall test > banners being shown to logged in users, but don't recall seeing one myself > while logged in for a while. > > Best, > Lodewijk > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:16 PM,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How can we fix the two-stage page loading problem?

a) This is incorrect b) how many years would "for several years" encompass? David On 9/5/17, Joseph Seddon wrote: > WMF hasn't shown fundraising banners to logged in users for several years. > > Regards > Seddon ___ Wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2014-2015 now on-wiki

Thanks Lodewikj for your excellent catches. 1. The form-990 covers the period from 01-July 2014 to 30-June 2015. During which the payments of US$ 300,000 to Sue Gardner (SpecialAdvisor) was comparable to Lila Tretikov's (E.D.) 2. The largest contractor was "Jones Day" US$ 1,742,916 (almost 2

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wiki Conference India 2016, logo challenge

You are aware that copyright law of India has specific procedures to be followed for relinquishment or assignment of copyright and which involves Registrar of copyrights or public notice (as defined in Indian law) ? Dave On 5/5/16, sailesh patnaik wrote: > Dear

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should the board do *now*? [was Re: Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal]

Hi Doc Your sig > The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine > www.opentextbookofmedicine.com McAfee Site advisor tags it as a dangerous phishing site trying to steal information. Ploughing through the link leads instead to "a" Wikipedia web book on "health care" which is edited mainly by you.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Zero mass effect on Wikimedia projects

as > it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve. > > What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it but > throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emr..

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Case for Federation: Should Parts of WMF Be Spun Off?

Hi Eloquence Since the "Mediawiki" trademark was lost to WMF the day you and Anthere placed the logo into public domain [1], how can the WMF now spin-off this new organization ?. Am I correct in assuming the Mediawiki software can be forked by anybody interested along with attribution ?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Zero mass effect on Wikimedia projects

Hi Adele Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1] Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Was the Wikimedia Foundation's removal of membership in 2006 legal?

Hi Adam I believe you better understand how the robbery happened by studying the way the composition of the Board and WMF's senior functionaries rotated between 2005 to 2010. You can access these online from the government websites where WMF filed them David On 3/9/16, Adam Wight

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: A conversation?

Oliver I have also been in the movement for over a decade, and I am sick of people on all sides distorting facts, gaming the system / manipulating the community. IMO, this came to a boil in Dec 2006 when WMF altered its structure and purpose and relocated followed by the "COO scandal" [1] and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter: Issues needing addressing by the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees

Philippe There is no public evidence of your misleading statements re years of careful planning.and execution. What there is public evidence of is that the WMF has systematically evaded its enforcement responsibilities under the Terms of Use. To cite 1 specific instance, Sue Gardner was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter: Issues needing addressing by the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees

tate facts with "absolute certainty". Dave On 3/1/16, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote: > On 16-03-01 03:57 AM, David Emrany wrote: >> What nobody is prepared to acknowledge is that only under Lila's term >> some of the most blatant and egregious instances

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a *volunteer* organization

Dear David I respectfully disagree. My point is that the "community" you refer to is not a representative community at all. for eg. voices from Asia and Africa are not properly represented here. The community is incapable of policing itself because (to quote a prominent WP criticism site) "the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter: Issues needing addressing by the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees

be the simplest thing for WMF to insist on verification of WMF user accounts, to ensure that minors cannot edit, or else to ensure that anonymous editors must take responsibility for defamatory/biased content.. David On 3/1/16, Erik Moeller <eloque...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2016-02-29 23:19 GMT-08

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter: Issues needing addressing by the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees

Dear Erik, Wikimovement veterans recall your invaluable assistance in arranging the 3 million grant from the Sloan Foundation to WMF, so reading your email, we also recall these quotes from the time of the Stanton Foundation fiasco ? [1] "The Executive Director and Chief Revenue Officer agree

Re: [Wikimedia-l] I am going to San Francisco

Dear Anne As a community member *I* am interested in knowing if WMF (or Jimmy) is selling to Google - or to anybody else ... like the Chinese.[1] David [1] http://wikipediasucks.boards.net/post/762 On 3/1/16, Risker wrote: > On 29 February 2016 at 20:43, Andreas Kolbe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a *volunteer* organization

Hi David, It would be even nicer if we have more editors editing voluntarily instead of driving them away. In the present scenario a University of Minnesota report by Aaron Halfaker says "The declining number of editors is not due to the site's inability to keep longtime editors contributing.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a *volunteer* organization

Hi Brion When you refer to patches with other movements / affiliates, are you proposing that WMF sponsors more Gibraltrapedias ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibraltarpedia Have we forgotten so soon the adverse media publicity about these stealth PR campaigns "Once Wikipedia becomes a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

I am appalled that anybody is seriously suggesting "paid editing" be institutionalized. The real issue to be addressed are the large number of trustees, staff, Arbcom members, and administrators who are undisclosed paid editors and who ensure that uninterested editors are driven away. What do