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

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > Actually, I am quite appalled by the article. Whether one wants to see > something positive in pirating or not, the Wikimedia servers are not meant > for this purpose (for good reasons). Breaking rules and taking abuse

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

Motherboard today has a fairly comprehensive report on this: Angola’s Wikipedia Pirates Are Exposing the Problems With Digital Colonialism http://motherboard.vice.com/read/wikipedia-zero-facebook-free-basics-angola-pirates-zero-rating On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Mwaoshe Njemah

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

Personally I'd say "it's 100% wrong" but "not 100% to blame". I've just made https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T130761 IMHO we need to address the problem form a technical point of view, implicitly discarding "block'em all" options. Vito 2016-03-23 19:42 GMT+01:00 Keegan Peterzell

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

Actually, I am quite appalled by the article. Whether one wants to see something positive in pirating or not, the Wikimedia servers are not meant for this purpose (for good reasons). Breaking rules and taking abuse of an opportunity is not a goal by itself. Kind regards Ziko Am Mittwoch, 23.

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

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > >> Actually, I am quite appalled by the article. Whether one wants to see >> something positive in pirating or not, the Wikimedia

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

This is an important issue and how Wikimedia and the community handles it is very important. I would caution that even those who are pirating and sharing copyrighted materials are not "bad actors," they are people who have no other file sharing options who have found a creative solution in the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

Thanks SJ. I largely agree with you there. There is a complicated backstory about the hats, but I think it's safe to say that we in Cascadia aren't especially interested in running our own merch store. However, given the years of delays of getting the hats into the WMF store, it would be nice if

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

On 3/22/16 6:18 PM, Lodewijk wrote: > Hey Jimmy, thanks for this commitment. I would definitely be interested. > Were you successful in getting clarity? Still waiting to see if the board allows another board member to publish something that will then allow me to publish further. But I did

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

Hi Jimmy, Thanks for the general pointer, but given the high amount of discussions on your talkpage, I'm uncertain which comment you are referring to? Lodewijk On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > On 23 March 2016 at 10:01, Jimmy Wales

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

Hey John et. al Apologies for the delaying in responding to the last few emails. I want to try and cover a couple of the points that been raised. I'll first start with the history. I am very much aware of the background surrounding merchandise, in particular the chapters and the changes in the

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

Hi! On 03/17/2016 07:22 PM, Erik Moeller wrote: > I can see three potential benefits from a more federated model: > > 1) Resilience. If any one organization experiences a crisis, other > independent organizations suffer to a lesser degree than departments > within that organization. > > 2)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

On 23 March 2016 at 10:01, Jimmy Wales wrote: > But I did publish something on my user talk page that is relevant. Diff, please. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,