Hi all,
Joseph Reagle, of "Good Faith Collaboration" fame, has a new book project
looking at Wikipedia 20 years after its inception.
There are 20-30 essays up for draft review and comments which are qjuite
diverse and interesting.
Check them out and leave comments:
Hey,
People in the committee have meetings from time to time, so they know each
other but we don't have any "dedicated" person to keep track of real
identities/pseudonym of the members.
HTH
Best
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:55 PM effe iets anders
wrote:
> Hi Amir,
>
> Thanks. I agree with your
Hi Amir,
Thanks. I agree with your assessment.
Probably asking for the obvious: is there someone on the committee that
knows the real world identity (and the other way around, the online
pseudonym) of each member, and could flag a COI/suggest to abstain if need
be? (aside from people refraining
Hello,
(As a member, not talking on behalf of the committee)
The committee is a body of volunteers and they can't be forced to disclose
their real identities. There's no such policy in the CoC and if you think
it should be added, feel free start a discussion on CoC amendment [0] but
in the mean
If you want to see the entire world through the lens of Kafka, be my
guest, but we can't make policy in this movement based on that.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:01 AM Paulo Santos Perneta
wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> I believe you will only keep that opinion until the day you would be subject
> to
Hi Natacha
I am not sure this thread is about whether T action was in order or not.
Aside the recent WP:FRAM, I am not aware of a single instance where T
action's was criticized largely by the community or those you described as
official representative of movement/chapters. Most opinion
Camelia,
My comment was not about harassment, was about systemic and rampant lack of
due process on the part of the WMF.
And it's not drama, it's reality.
Paulo
camelia boban escreveu no dia sexta, 21/06/2019
à(s) 15:24:
> Oh my Gosh Paulo, can you stop this dramma about yourself and your
Oh my Gosh Paulo, can you stop this dramma about yourself and your problem
with everything is connected with WMF?
To others, please have respect for the both parts engaged in this sad story
and do what Geert asked, stop discussing about this specific conflict
publicly.
If you want to talk more
Hoi,
I am afraid that this is a misrepresentation. Romaine is a "self confessed"
person with Asperger. Within our community we have an overrepresentation
with people with a mental health issue. This is to be expected. This is
typically not appreciated hardly ever understood. I have noticed before
False accusation with the respective punishment, that is. If it was just a
false accusation I would not care that much about it, though I obviously
dislike being falsely accused.
Paulo
A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 15:01, Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Hi Robert,
>
>
Hi Robert,
I believe you will only keep that opinion until the day you would be
subject to a false accusation by the WMF, without even knowing it, and
having no way to defend yourself appeal.
Everything is easy to talk about and have opinions while it is only
happening to the others.
At some point we have to decide who this movement and community is
for. Is it for popular individuals to act out in any way they please
and be awarded maximum freedom and lack of accountability? Or is it
so we can insure a friendly space for everyone, including those who
are not popular, who are
You do realize that you can email Romaine privately?
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 1:18 AM Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
>
> Hoi,
> You do not get it. For me this is about saying goodbye. Saying goodbye to
> someone I/we truly value. Saying goodbye to someone who we owe gratitude.
> This was not allowed to
Thank you for a sensible response.
Hopefully Wikimedia Belgium will be able later to publish some agreed
recommendations or conclusions, both for how this case could have been
handled more appropriately, and how the WMF procedures or policies
should improve better to protect the interests of all
Taking everything and their dog as "harassment", without due process to
verify it, and issuing punishments one can't appeal based on that, creates
a feeling of fear and insecurity in the events; and provides a tool easy to
abuse by clever persons who understood how to game the system, as a vehicle
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019, 07:43 Mister Thrapostibongles <
thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Martin
>
>
> > No, I'm saying that it's ridiculous to judge wikipedia on its policy that
> > citing itself is disallowed.
> >
>
> Perhaps, then, rather than telling us what it is that you don't agree with,
The initial message was a private message from Romaine (WMBE Board member)
on his own initiative; not verified, nor approved by (the Board of)
Wikimedia Belgium. Please read this reply carefully in order to try to bring
more clarity.
I have immediately notified Romaine that he abused his function
The main problem happens when someone considers to don't have received a
fair assessment.
I understand that the T must have a certain role, but I am sorry for the
T, the criticisms are part of this role.
Considering that every decision will be accepted unconditionally is not
suitable. To ensure
Questioning is ok - we might indeed need to introduce some oversight, but
to be honest, I doubt this would solve the trust issue as long as some
people demand full transparency where there can never be full transparency.
Speculating and accusing victims of being the actual perpetrators,
believing
How can we BE safe in the movement if we cannot question the decisions of T?
(when they appear questionable and unsafe)
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
Sent: Friday, June 21,
20 matches
Mail list logo
