Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Hey Fæ, Considering your proposal, on one hand I'm not sure using Wikimedia resources to create Yet Another Forum for discussion would provide any benefit to the movement. We're fractured enough as it is. Especially given that this proposal is to make a more inviting atmosphere for _all_

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm that my choice of words were very carefully chosen. And I stand by them. Seddon On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors wrote: > Joseph > > I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Getting back to the proposed rules, the list moderators have always had flexibility to use judgement. Creating extra bureaucracy is unlikely to be a healthy 'fix', I would much rather first see the mods take whatever action they feel is necessary to run a welcoming email list, and only start

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

Neat feature. Who has access to the logs, and for how long will the logs be retained? Thanks, Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+ http://telegram.me/wmlgbt ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Robert If someone posts to an email discussion list owned and run by their employer, using an email account provided by their employer, with a signature block giving the name of their employer and their name and position with that employer, and if their line manager is not only a regular reader

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Why are we having this RFC prior to the survey which was discussed at length less than a year ago? https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#Periodic_survey_prototype On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Robert Fernandez wrote: > Since Rogol has followed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

"Since you are unable to imagine many actions more chilling than reporting bullying and harassment to an appropriate authority, let me suggest something that might be equally chilling -- calling for the banning from the list of someone because you disagree with what they have to say." That wasn't

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!

Hi Peter, This is the first time I've heard about that happening, thanks for bringing it up. Can you say more about what you're experiencing? I don't think syntax highlighting gives an error message like that, so I'm not sure what you mean. Danny On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Peter Southwood

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!

Thanks, it is a great feature! Especially to easily find the Ref tags. And it work just fine for me, technically. Anders Den 2017-08-23 kl. 20:41, skrev Danny Horn: Hi everyone, I've got some good news -- wikitext syntax highlighting is live again, and I'm almost completely sure it's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned from the list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators regarding why they will not do so. I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect on participation here than one of this list's most

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

That's awesome. Thanks to the tech team! On Tuesday, August 22, 2017, Nurunnaby Hasive wrote: > Cool! > > Hasive > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Nabin K. Sapkota < > nboycreationne...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > Sound's great :) > > > > On Aug 22, 2017 12:13

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Lisa Gruwell wrote: >... regarding the Endowment: > > 1) I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment. As James > indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and this > is one of the areas of

[Wikimedia-l] Invitation to WMF August 2017 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, August 31, 18:00 UTC

Hello everyone, The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take place on Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be broadcast as a live YouTube stream.[1] During the August metrics

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

The only log is a temporary debug log, which we're using to investigate some bug reports. They're only accessible to people with shell access to the production servers -- Foundation staff, and people who have signed non-disclosure agreements. We won't retain them for longer than ninety days.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions

Perhaps we can agree it is, properly, a *nomination by community election* process, and lay this thread to rest. :) A. On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:01 AM Katie Chan wrote: > On 23/08/2017 15:32, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > On 23 August 2017 at 12:32, Katie Chan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Anna Thank you for your thoughtful response -- I regret that numerous other posters have not chosen to take the same approach. You are quite right that I believe the the Foundation and its projects need radical change -- revolution if you will -- to become successful. I do not dispute the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Rogol, Good evening. In my mind, constructive dialogue is about making *something* work better, not about making others feel worse. The tricky part is, other people get to decide whether we make them feel worse. That one is not up to us. Critique and truly constructive dialogue should be in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

May I respectfully ask why Rogol is not on moderation already? Regards, Isaac. On Aug 24, 2017 5:31 AM, "Craig Franklin" wrote: > Joining the pile-on here. The focus on nitpicking semantics rather than > substantive issues, passive-aggressive grandstanding ("May I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

The old style is excessively large and in your face. The new style is almost, but not quite as bad. The content remains offensive and misleading Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Seddon Sent:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

"Offensive" seems a bit over the top! Who's it offending? Seems pretty okay to me, personally. :-) Anyway, the only thing I notice with it is that it starts with "We will..." and then says "When I made..." etc. Shouldn't these pronouns agree? —Sam. On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, at 04:07 PM, Peter

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Robert, We were warned, so it would be very strange if we did. You should survey a different sample to get realistic results. Or is this a rhetorical question? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Robert

[Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

In a recent blog post, "No, we’re not in a post-fact world. On Wikipedia, facts matter.", the Foundation referred to Wikipedia editors"sharing breaking news in record time". It is true that the English-language Wikipedia is increasingly carrying articles about newsworthy events, and this in spite

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Sam, I can't get back to the banner for some reason, so I risk misquoting it. Please take this into account. What I find offensive is the implication that the foundation would even have Wikipedia if they were doing it commercially. I and a significant number of other contributors would not have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New beta feature: Syntax Highlighting!

Good news indeed. Is there a way we can stop it from crashing in mid edit and giving unhelpful advice like get a faster computer or a faster connection? I would not mind waiting a little longer for it to finish the job. It would be helpful if there were a user setting which allows longer wait

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Peter, Fair enough, I agree that the idea that Wikimedia would have been a success if it'd be made commercial is crazy. "Has it crossed my mind how much we could have made if it had ads? Sure. But it wouldn’t be the same." reads to me as just a hypothetical "if it were as it is today *and* had

Re: [Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

1. You misread en:WP:NOTNEWS . The policy doesn't say news is forbidden. It is that Wikipedia should consider notability and original research concerns and not act as a newspaper. Actual wording: "editors are encouraged to include current and up-to-date information within its coverage, and to