GerardM writes:
With Wikipedia Zero people have access to knowledge that they would not
have otherwise. It is well established that having information readily
available is an important indicator for further development. Not having
Wikipedia available is absolutely a worse situation than
If only my emails were wiki-editable. Thanks for the correction
regarding my affiliation.
Seems to me that in its current form it's just going to drag
along---Zero either needs a clear procedural rethink or it needs to be
would down.
The only two possible choices, eh?
--Mike
On Wed, Apr
Er, Mike, this is a minor point but your signature seems to indicate that
you were general counsel for over a millennium---very impressive!
Personally I think that Zero should be evaluated from an impact
perspective. While it's indisputable that it's strategically aligned with
the WMF mission, if
Dear Gerard,
your arguments are just emotional rhetorics. Saying that white, privileged
and well educated people aren't allowed to critize ways how
first-world-led telecoms (like Orange, Telenor) are spreading a wrong,
non-open internet in developing countries is just plain emotional
rhetoric far
Hi Jens,
In the absence of any meaningful alternative, what should we do then? Close
down Wikipedia Zero and let the developing world languish in the dark? We talk
of a more sustainable way to bring free knowledge (which is far more than
Wikipedia)”, yet we’re not seeing anything coming out
Dear Pierre-Selim,
I look forward to discussing this new metric at the Wikimedia Conference.
I might even take photographs of the deliberations and upload them to
Commons in order to improve my personal pixel metric.
Have you figured out a way to translate pixels into multiple languages?
I
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:
It should be noted that the Federal Communications Commission, in its
recent Report and Order requiring network neutrality for American
telcos and service providers, expressly refused to draw a categorical
conclusion
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se
wrote:
I can agree on the dilemma you present.
But would not a better solution then the close down on Wikipedia Zero, be
to close down the projects that is not run compatible with the values
underlying the idea of a
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Tanweer Morshed wiki.tanw...@gmail.com
wrote:
Welcome to Kourosh! Wikimedians around the world have already been creating
partnerships under various programs including GLAMs and with universities,
institutions etc. This is rational from the sense that this new
Andreas writes:
Prominent organisations campaigning for a free and open web very
strongly disagree with your view.
I said there are no facts, and you responded by citing opinion pieces.
That's cool, but opinions are not themselves facts.
Furthermore, in some circles, I've been considered from
On 15-04-01 01:06 PM, Jens Best wrote:
I will take the time to explain you why [I believe] net neutrality
is more than you suggest and why [I think] we need to be a
little bit less starry-eyed [than I believe we are] when
it comes to the reasons why telecoms are behaving sooo nice
to
Dear James,
your praising of WP0 surely deserves or even needs an appropiated answer,
but as I can't see my answering mail to Gerard's input from yesterday
published in this mailinglist so I will wait until this moderated.
When I see that my email with the answer to Gerard is published in the
Jens,
Why do you say net neutrality has anything to do with price? It's about
best-effort delivery of packets without censorship or, for example,
treating packets that say do you want to join our radical fundamentalist
agnostic cell, the same way as we treat packets that say, do you want to
On Apr 1, 2015 6:03 PM, Josh Lim jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi Jens,
In the absence of any meaningful alternative, what should we do then?
Close down Wikipedia Zero and let the developing world languish in the
dark? We talk of a more sustainable way to bring free knowledge (which is
far
Hi Nathan and everybody,
Last time I checked my mail (containing my repsonse to Gerard) wasn't
published and as I sent it yesterday morning I'm suprised that it took that
long to arrive.
Also, I would like you to stop your wrong assumptions about off-topic -
As Gerard made a statement to
(reminder: This is a prank, for April Fools Day. Please feel free to
ignore this issue entirely, or at any rate don't waste your time responding
to this or getting upset/excited by it.)
A.
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Wikipedia Signpost
wikipediasignp...@gmail.com wrote:
News and
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Gilles Dubuc gil...@wikimedia.org wrote:
To me Josh's point in the other thread settles this argument. I can't
presume to know better than the people this service is made for what is
good for them. People in other cultures have values as well. They might be
To me Josh's point in the other thread settles this argument. I can't
presume to know better than the people this service is made for what is
good for them. People in other cultures have values as well. They might be
different than ours, but more importantly, they have to be pitted against
I love today.
On Apr 1, 2015 5:28 PM, quiddity pandiculat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
wrote:
On 15-04-01 03:58 PM, Pierre-Selim wrote:
This is only the beginning: next step is the measurement of cute pixels,
encyclopedic pixels
OK, you say 'There must be another way to work for the value of free knowledge
for the people', so what is it?
Peter
(also in the global south)
-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Jens Best
Sent:
Everybody always tries to get rid of the content pixels because they beat
up the other pixels, but I tell you what, if you don't give those content
creator pixels what they want they're going to take their RGB and go home
and THEN where will your silly little projects be without any content
Lol j aime pierre selim!!
On Apr 1, 2015 11:52 PM, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com
wrote:
Everybody always tries to get rid of the content pixels because they beat
up the other pixels, but I tell you what, if you don't give those content
creator pixels what they want they're going
I give this project FF out of a possible FF.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Christophe Henner
christophe.hen...@gmail.com wrote:
They are not free pixels.
Only real free pixels deserve to be counted.
Le 1 avr. 2015 23:00, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com a écrit :
As
Hello everyone,
Sorry for cross posting. I'm sending the new issue of This Month in
Education. This month witnessed holding a lot of WikiWomen related events
which has received a lot of media coverage. You will find some of the event
coverage here as well as the updates of successful programs
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
On 15-04-01 03:58 PM, Pierre-Selim wrote:
This is only the beginning: next step is the measurement of cute pixels,
encyclopedic pixels and amazing pixels.
That metric is all wrong, because it presumes that all pixels
Jens - your reply to Gerard on the other thread (where it is surely off
topic) was published a couple of hours ago.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Jens Best best.j...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear James,
your praising of WP0 surely deserves or even needs an appropiated answer,
but as I can't see my
Dear movement fellows,
Impact is crucial for our movement, and although metrics will always be
imperfect, we must strive to reinvent ourselves and always come up with new
innovative ways of measuring what we bring to the Wikimedia projects, to
free knowledge, and to human society.
Measuring
Hi Josh et al.,
as you seemed a bit upset, I want to take the chance to answer you to
better understand my position.
Taking your brutal honesty into account I will try to be the same. I
wasn't sure especially about that point in the discussion, because my
knowledge about the access situations
Dear Nathan et al.
I answered Josh in the other threat but will copy my answer to him again
here below so that anybody interested to continue can do this in the
right threat.
Nathan, I am disgusted by your comparisons. colonialist aspect? little
reminiscent of European Christian missionaries
Well, I was really excited about the Sister project news... :-(
(but I think it's a pretty neat joke)
Aubrey
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote:
(reminder: This is a prank, for April Fools Day. Please feel free to
ignore this issue entirely, or at any
As always, every tool is developed thinking about Wikipedia and Commons,
never all the other sister projects!
What about those poor pixels?
Are they different from Commons pixels??!?!!1!
Luckily, today the WMF said otherwise:
see the Sister projects news here
They are not free pixels.
Only real free pixels deserve to be counted.
Le 1 avr. 2015 23:00, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com a écrit :
As always, every tool is developed thinking about Wikipedia and Commons,
never all the other sister projects!
What about those poor pixels?
Are they
It's nice that someone in the movement still has a sense of humour.
Did you see the English Wikipedia's TFA box?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/requestsoldid=651029553#April_1
Support running as a straight ornithology article, with no attempt to
what Josh Lim wrote in the other threat:
Hi Jens,
In the absence of any meaningful alternative, what should we do then?
Close down Wikipedia Zero and let the developing world languish in the
dark? We talk of a more sustainable way to bring free knowledge (which is
far more than Wikipedia)”, yet
Dear Wikimedians,
We are happy to share with you the draft work plans for the period July
2015 to June 2016 [1]. We have more or less followed the same work plan
templates from last year. Some of these plans have been done in
consultation with the community members. We look forward to
2015-04-01 22:09 GMT+02:00 Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org:
On 15-04-01 03:58 PM, Pierre-Selim wrote:
This is only the beginning: next step is the measurement of cute pixels,
encyclopedic pixels and amazing pixels.
That metric is all wrong, because it presumes that all pixels are
On 15-04-01 03:58 PM, Pierre-Selim wrote:
This is only the beginning: next step is the measurement of cute pixels,
encyclopedic pixels and amazing pixels.
That metric is all wrong, because it presumes that all pixels are
equally valuable. Surely, you should be also assigning weights to
pixels
On 15-04-01 03:57 PM, Jens Best wrote:
For me (and other students) going online wasn't cheap back in the 90s
Perhaps the date is the issue here, but is this some attempt at humour?
Wasn't cheap? Are you seriously comparing your student lifestyle
with the socioeconomic reality of the people
38 matches
Mail list logo
