Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Peter Southwood
Some _are_ better at it than others. Also some are better at editing then 
dealing with other people, and some are just unable to deal with other 
people in an environment where to a large extent, one is not held 
accountable for one's actions. This is the downside of anonymity. en:WP is 
in general not a very friendly environment. I am not saying that the 
majority of editors are unfriendly, but there is enough of an impact from 
the antisocial side to make the average experience unclude some significant 
unpleasantness. Not everyone is prepared to tolerate that when doing unpaid 
work. When the unnecessary unpleasantness is dealt out by adminitrators, 
people leave. When enough people leave, the progect stagnates and eventually 
collapses. Fortunately it is likely that the pieces will be picked up by 
another project, so the work will not be lost.

Cheers,
Peter Southwood

- Original Message - 
From: Josh Lim jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com

To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 6:01 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


I think what we need to consider here is where the loyalties of many of 
these so-called problematic editors reside, whether their dedication to 
maintaining the content where their expertise has been valuable has been 
harmful to the overall health of the community. While I think we are all on 
the side of Wikipedia here and we all have a genuine interest in improving 
the encyclopedia for everyone, we have gone to the point where we have 
started to perpetuate the idea that some are better at it than others, 
similar to that declaration in Animal Farmthat all animals are equal, but 
some are more equal than others.


There are many reasons as to why this is the case, but I guess we need to 
reiterate the need for us to break down barriers here, both between 
ourselves as editors (step away from compartmentalizing ourselves into 
spaces where everyone else will agree with us because we are familiar with 
them), and between ourselves as people. The latter, however, is very 
difficult to do, and it is one of the challenges that we have to face if 
we will want to assure Wikipedia's future success.


Regards,

Josh


JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
Block I1, AB Political Science
Major in Global Politics, Minor in Chinese Studies
Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines

Trustee (2010-2013), Wikimedia Philippines
Member, Ateneo Debate Society
Member, The Assembly

jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com | +63 (927) 531-8301
Friendster/Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
http://akira123323.livejournal.com




From: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2013 5:08 AM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


Greetings to All

Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not compared 
to
people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long 
list

of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.

In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the
project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore having to
fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.

In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis is
fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of people
previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the 'outsider'
that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets 'good
advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to 
temper
his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is round 
at
a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is making 
the

WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.

And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.

I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
encounters when you include something negative about certain big
corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and everbody
else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we know
there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear you!.

Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly - was
anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are legions
out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know that
they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here,
http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles

I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word
downgrade to refer to people using 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
I don't think it is possible, in a worldwide organization like the Wikis, to be 
reliant on where the loyalties of many of these so-called problematic 
editors reside. I think that the Wiki-organization in itself must be 
responsible that the Wiki-users are not abused or harassed, just because they 
do not belong to the same group as these  problematic editors do.

I think that the contemporary organization (or lack of organization) reflects a 
very naive view of how people interact in a society. It is like believing that 
you don't need a police organization in an ordinary society because people can 
handle all conflicts among themselves. That is very naive and has often led to 
the creation of criminal organizations like the Mafia and worse.

Also the Wiki-world needs to protect its inhabitants from abuse and mobbing, 
and therefore needs an organization that can fulfil these duties.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: Josh Lim jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 6:01 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

I think what we need to consider here is where the loyalties of many of these 
so-called problematic editors reside, whether their dedication to maintaining 
the content where their expertise has been valuable has been harmful to the 
overall health of the community.  While I think we are all on the side of 
Wikipedia here and we all have a genuine interest in improving the encyclopedia 
for everyone, we have gone to the point where we have started to perpetuate the 
idea that some are better at it than others, similar to that declaration in 
Animal Farmthat all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

There are many reasons as to why this is the case, but I guess we need to 
reiterate the need for us to break down barriers here, both between ourselves 
as editors (step away from compartmentalizing ourselves into spaces where 
everyone else will agree with us because we are familiar with them), and 
between ourselves as people.  The latter, however, is very difficult to do, and 
it is one of the challenges that we have to face if we will want to assure 
Wikipedia's future success.

Regards,

Josh

 
JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
Block I1, AB Political Science
Major in Global Politics, Minor in Chinese Studies
Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines

Trustee (2010-2013), Wikimedia Philippines
Member, Ateneo Debate Society
Member, The Assembly

jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com | +63 (927) 531-8301
Friendster/Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
http://akira123323.livejournal.com




From: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2013 5:08 AM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


Greetings to All

Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not compared to
people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long list
of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.

In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the
project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore having to
fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.

In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis is
fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of people
previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the 'outsider'
that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets 'good
advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to temper
his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is round at
a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is making the
WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.

And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.

I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
encounters when you include something negative about certain big
corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and everbody
else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we know
there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear you!.

Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly - was
anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are legions
out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know that
they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here,
http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles

I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Peter Gervai
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.

You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
(honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
good solution seem to exist.

In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but they
would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request (if
the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but a
large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean, one
in a week or month or so.

The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
debates.)

g

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
It is very laudable if you, Peter, tries and help newbies and others that are 
harassed by other users.

I however don't think it is enough in a worldwide organization that you have to 
rely on volunteers and that these will intervene.

As I see it, if you start such an organization you must also take on the 
responsibilities that follows.
You can't just duck and pretend that you can hand over all problems to the 
users.

I still think that an international organization like the Wikis demands an 
instance to which mistreated and mobbed users can turn. An instance with the 
responsibility that normal rules in a society are upheld and with the authority 
to uphold them.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 10:50 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.

You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
(honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
good solution seem to exist.

In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but they
would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request (if
the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but a
large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean, one
in a week or month or so.

The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
debates.)

g

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
That was the purpose of the original arbitration committee. Finding a
mentor is kind of hard nowdays as there are so many users who might help
but probably will not. On the other hand, many requests I have received
and looked into are from people who are making trouble themselves;
sometimes very serious trouble. Giving a second chance to someone who has
been banned by the community after extended discussion seldom works out
well. But that's not a newbie who has run into serious trouble just for
making jokes about Windoze...

Fred

 It is very laudable if you, Peter, tries and help newbies and others that
 are harassed by other users.

 I however don't think it is enough in a worldwide organization that you
 have to rely on volunteers and that these will intervene.

 As I see it, if you start such an organization you must also take on the
 responsibilities that follows.
 You can't just duck and pretend that you can hand over all problems to
 the users.

 I still think that an international organization like the Wikis demands
 an instance to which mistreated and mobbed users can turn. An instance
 with the responsibility that normal rules in a society are upheld and
 with the authority to uphold them.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 10:50 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.

 You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

 At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
 (honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
 debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
 oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
 good solution seem to exist.

 In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
 cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
 who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but they
 would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
 regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
 Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request (if
 the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
 outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but a
 large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

 I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
 a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
 enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean, one
 in a week or month or so.

 The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
 the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
 community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
 them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
 debates.)

 g

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Pavlo Shevelo
Sorry, but I'm not agree with your note, Anders.

My home WP is not en: (it's uk: in fact) but everything being discussed is
very (100%) applicable for our community.

Lucky you are in se:WP that you have no similar issues/problems but perhaps
you've collected some magical know-how how to avoid said troubles. If so
would you please share that knowledge  experience?

Sincerely,
Pavlo


On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Anders Wennersten
m...@anderswennersten.sewrote:

 Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English wikipedia?

 There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
 recognize from my home wp

 Anders




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Anders Wennersten

It is no magic
*yearly reelection of administrators/sysops has meant no bullying types 
are sysops any more
*we are a small community with just a few hundred active. And we have 
decided to treat everyone (who are serious) as valuable individuals,  
and go a very long way to make all feeling welcome, stop behaving as 
overdog/underdog and also to try special solutions for troublesome users 
that enable them to not being blocked but having restrictions on certain 
type of activities. Both people who have temporary maniac periods and 
with autism symptoms can be useful contributers if handled right by the 
communities.


But these experiences can not be extended to everywhere. en:wp have 20 
times the number of contributers then sv:wp and of course this means 
need of different ways of handling problems. I do not pretend to have 
anything to teach en:wp, but as said I find nothing useful for sv:wp 
hearing of the challenges on en:wp


Anders


Pavlo Shevelo skrev 2013-09-05 13:36:

Sorry, but I'm not agree with your note, Anders.

My home WP is not en: (it's uk: in fact) but everything being discussed is
very (100%) applicable for our community.

Lucky you are in se:WP that you have no similar issues/problems but perhaps
you've collected some magical know-how how to avoid said troubles. If so
would you please share that knowledge  experience?

Sincerely,
Pavlo


On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Anders Wennersten
m...@anderswennersten.sewrote:


Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English wikipedia?

There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
recognize from my home wp

Anders





___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread cro0016
I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work now. 
It could use improvement, but the same could be said about everything (and like 
most things, shortages of volunteers make things harder)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 6:18 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:

 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
 
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a 
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work now.
 
 To imagine that groups of people will not try and manoeuvre out persons that 
 they don't like is very naive. 
 That has not happened before in the history of mankind and the Wikis are no 
 exception.
 
 Today noone is accountable for what they do to other Wiki-contributors, they 
 are not even identifiable since they hide behind nome de guerres. Stewards 
 have no authority to protect users from abuses and the same goes for the 
 Ombudsman. (see also Rui Correia's email)
 
 So if the Wikis want to be a safe place for children and old folks alike, and 
 that everybody shall be able to contribute on equal conditions, a more 
 realistic organization to protect the users must be put in place.
 
 
 Regards
 Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
 Gesendet: 1:16 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 
 It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who bump
 up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
 that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.
 
 Fred
 
 I think you are completely right and it is a big problem in the
 Wiki-world that is not being addressed by anyone in a leading position.
 
 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 
 
   Von: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 23:08 Mittwoch, 4.September 2013
 Betreff: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 
 Greetings to All
 
 Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not compared
 to
 people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long
 list
 of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.
 
 In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the
 project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore having
 to
 fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.
 
 In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis is
 fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
 process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of people
 previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
 resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the
 'outsider'
 that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets 'good
 advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to
 temper
 his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is round
 at
 a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is making
 the
 WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.
 
 And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.
 
 I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
 encounters when you include something negative about certain big
 corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and everbody
 else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we know
 there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear you!.
 
 Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly -
 was
 anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are legions
 out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know
 that
 they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here,
 http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles
 
 I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word
 downgrade to refer to people using Windows 8 who wanted to go back to
 XP.
 For a failed product, by Microsoft's own admission, going back to XP is
 an
 upgrade, going back to sanity, not a downgrade.
 
 I was first accused of trolling, then something else, then of offending
 the
 entire community of users of Windows 8. The editor who is adamant - not
 the
 first time - to purge ant-MS from the talkpage violated the 3RR, but
 nothing gets done about it. I reported the 3RR, and it was immediately
 closed, labelled as being relatiatory. There is a backlog of issues on
 that
 page, but my entry was closed within minutes.
 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread MZMcBride
Hi.

The recent draft privacy policy mentions that the Wikimedia blog
(https://blog.wikimedia.org) will soon be hosted by WordPress.com.

Was this discussed anywhere? If so, where?

What is the proposed URL structure of a blog hosted by WordPress.com? I
think there's a reasonable expectation that when a user visits
*.wikimedia.org, we don't simply send his or her browser info to a third
party without his or her consent. This has come up previously with Jobvite
and iframes. It's also come up with the use of tracking tools such as
Google Analytics, which not only affect one-time visitors, but aim to
persist client-side.

How will the blog be backed up? Relying on an external service means not
being in control of the data. Will there be regular backups made to ensure
that if WordPress.com goes away, we won't lose all of our posts?

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
That's Sweden all right, it's like a small town. Thousands of
administrators from scores of countries is another matter. Even requests
for administration is very difficult as, unless you do big time research,
or spend your life monitoring others edits and activity, you just don't
know much. Voting has the same downside; because of the volume you just
don't have enough information to register an informed opinion, at least
about individuals. The people you encounter in daily activities while
editing is only a tiny sliver.

Fred

 It is no magic
 *yearly reelection of administrators/sysops has meant no bullying types
 are sysops any more
 *we are a small community with just a few hundred active. And we have
 decided to treat everyone (who are serious) as valuable individuals,
 and go a very long way to make all feeling welcome, stop behaving as
 overdog/underdog and also to try special solutions for troublesome users
 that enable them to not being blocked but having restrictions on certain
 type of activities. Both people who have temporary maniac periods and
 with autism symptoms can be useful contributers if handled right by the
 communities.

 But these experiences can not be extended to everywhere. en:wp have 20
 times the number of contributers then sv:wp and of course this means
 need of different ways of handling problems. I do not pretend to have
 anything to teach en:wp, but as said I find nothing useful for sv:wp
 hearing of the challenges on en:wp

 Anders


 Pavlo Shevelo skrev 2013-09-05 13:36:
 Sorry, but I'm not agree with your note, Anders.

 My home WP is not en: (it's uk: in fact) but everything being discussed
 is
 very (100%) applicable for our community.

 Lucky you are in se:WP that you have no similar issues/problems but
 perhaps
 you've collected some magical know-how how to avoid said troubles. If
 so
 would you please share that knowledge  experience?

 Sincerely,
 Pavlo


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Anders Wennersten
 m...@anderswennersten.sewrote:

 Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English
 wikipedia?

 There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
 recognize from my home wp

 Anders




 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work. Not 
in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius




 Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List 
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing List 
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work now. 
It could use improvement, but the same could be said about everything (and like 
most things, shortages of volunteers make things harder)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 6:18 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:

 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
 
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a 
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work now.
 
 To imagine that groups of people will not try and manoeuvre out persons that 
 they don't like is very naive. 
 That has not happened before in the history of mankind and the Wikis are no 
 exception.
 
 Today noone is accountable for what they do to other Wiki-contributors, they 
 are not even identifiable since they hide behind nome de guerres. Stewards 
 have no authority to protect users from abuses and the same goes for the 
 Ombudsman. (see also Rui Correia's email)
 
 So if the Wikis want to be a safe place for children and old folks alike, and 
 that everybody shall be able to contribute on equal conditions, a more 
 realistic organization to protect the users must be put in place.
 
 
 Regards
 Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
 Gesendet: 1:16 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 
 It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who bump
 up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
 that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.
 
 Fred
 
 I think you are completely right and it is a big problem in the
 Wiki-world that is not being addressed by anyone in a leading position.
 
 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 
 
   Von: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 23:08 Mittwoch, 4.September 2013
 Betreff: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 
 Greetings to All
 
 Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not compared
 to
 people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long
 list
 of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.
 
 In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the
 project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore having
 to
 fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.
 
 In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis is
 fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
 process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of people
 previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
 resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the
 'outsider'
 that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets 'good
 advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to
 temper
 his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is round
 at
 a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is making
 the
 WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.
 
 And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.
 
 I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
 encounters when you include something negative about certain big
 corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and everbody
 else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we know
 there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear you!.
 
 Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly -
 was
 anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are legions
 out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know
 that
 they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here,
 http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles
 
 I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word
 downgrade to refer to people using Windows 8 who wanted to go back to
 XP.
 For a failed product, by Microsoft's own 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
For a serious discussion to happen you will need to disclose some
examples. The next step is to move beyond anecdote to see if there is a
general problem.

The particular incident Rui brought up has been pretty much explained,
but the question remains about have a new or casual editor who commits a
faux pas can simply be reminded not to rather than being vilified and
being turned away completely. Everyone does dumb stuff, especially at
first. The question is whether they learn anything from it.

Fred

 Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work.
 Not in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius



 
  Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing
 List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work
 now. It could use improvement, but the same could be said about
 everything (and like most things, shortages of volunteers make things
 harder)

 Steve Zhang
 Sent from my iPad



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Pavlo Shevelo
I doubt that scale is only thing which matters.

As to me both enWP and ukWP suffers from lack of community (extremely
important word in Anders' comment) as that despite the fact that fist is
much larger 'town' (even 'city') than svWP, and second is small 'village'.

I mean community solid enough to 'behave' like one organization (Lars
Gardenius pointed to importance of it earlier) .

...and yes, comment
* I'm sure the
 community of editors is rather small, but they must come from very
diverse backgrounds.*
(from later note)
is 100% correct about Ukraine.
...but isn't it similar to enWP, where people come from different
countries, so *diverse backgrounds* as well?
...which this way or another prevent creation of solid community (whatever
is the size of it)

Sincerely,
Pavlo

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

 That's Sweden all right, it's like a small town. Thousands of
 administrators from scores of countries is another matter. Even requests
 for administration is very difficult as, unless you do big time research,
 or spend your life monitoring others edits and activity, you just don't
 know much. Voting has the same downside; because of the volume you just
 don't have enough information to register an informed opinion, at least
 about individuals. The people you encounter in daily activities while
 editing is only a tiny sliver.

 Fred

  It is no magic
  *yearly reelection of administrators/sysops has meant no bullying types
  are sysops any more
  *we are a small community with just a few hundred active. And we have
  decided to treat everyone (who are serious) as valuable individuals,
  and go a very long way to make all feeling welcome, stop behaving as
  overdog/underdog and also to try special solutions for troublesome users
  that enable them to not being blocked but having restrictions on certain
  type of activities. Both people who have temporary maniac periods and
  with autism symptoms can be useful contributers if handled right by the
  communities.
 
  But these experiences can not be extended to everywhere. en:wp have 20
  times the number of contributers then sv:wp and of course this means
  need of different ways of handling problems. I do not pretend to have
  anything to teach en:wp, but as said I find nothing useful for sv:wp
  hearing of the challenges on en:wp
 
  Anders
 
 
  Pavlo Shevelo skrev 2013-09-05 13:36:
  Sorry, but I'm not agree with your note, Anders.
 
  My home WP is not en: (it's uk: in fact) but everything being discussed
  is
  very (100%) applicable for our community.
 
  Lucky you are in se:WP that you have no similar issues/problems but
  perhaps
  you've collected some magical know-how how to avoid said troubles. If
  so
  would you please share that knowledge  experience?
 
  Sincerely,
  Pavlo
 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread cro0016
I've worked extensively with dispute resolution on English Wikipedia (I have 
conducted surveys and so on). If you have specific trends I would welcome 
seeing them (isolated cases where one side is unhappy with the result is not 
necessarily a sign the process is flawed, so I am more interested in overall 
trends but would welcome your opinion.)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 10:59 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:

 Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work. Not 
 in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.
 
 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius
 
 
 Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List 
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
 CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing List 
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
 Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work now. 
 It could use improvement, but the same could be said about everything (and 
 like most things, shortages of volunteers make things harder)
 
 Steve Zhang
 Sent from my iPad
 
 On 05/09/2013, at 6:18 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:
 
  No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
  
  That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a 
  worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work now.
  
  To imagine that groups of people will not try and manoeuvre out persons 
  that they don't like is very naive. 
  That has not happened before in the history of mankind and the Wikis are no 
  exception.
  
  Today noone is accountable for what they do to other Wiki-contributors, 
  they are not even identifiable since they hide behind nome de guerres. 
  Stewards have no authority to protect users from abuses and the same goes 
  for the Ombudsman. (see also Rui Correia's email)
  
  So if the Wikis want to be a safe place for children and old folks alike, 
  and that everybody shall be able to contribute on equal conditions, a more 
  realistic organization to protect the users must be put in place.
  
  
  Regards
  Lars Gardenius
  
  
  
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
  An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
  Gesendet: 1:16 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
  Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
  
  
  It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
  Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who bump
  up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
  that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.
  
  Fred
  
  I think you are completely right and it is a big problem in the
  Wiki-world that is not being addressed by anyone in a leading position.
  
  Regards,
  Lars Gardenius
  
  
  
  
  
   Von: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
  An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Gesendet: 23:08 Mittwoch, 4.September 2013
  Betreff: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
  
  
  Greetings to All
  
  Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not compared
  to
  people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long
  list
  of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.
  
  In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the
  project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore having
  to
  fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.
  
  In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis is
  fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
  process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of people
  previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
  resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the
  'outsider'
  that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets 'good
  advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to
  temper
  his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is round
  at
  a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is making
  the
  WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.
  
  And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.
  
  I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
  encounters when you include something negative about certain big
  corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and everbody
  else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we know
  there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear you!.
  
  Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
I am also more interested in processes than discussing special cases. I think 
that was also the meaning of Rui Correia's letter starting this thread.

To me there is obvious that there are flaws in the construction of the 
Wiki-organization when it comes to mistreatment and mobbing of users. I have 
discussed this question both with the stewards and the ombudsman, both tell me 
that they can't intervene in a Wiki, even if they themselves object to the 
behaviour of certain members of that Wiki.

That means that there is no instance outside of the specific Wiki to which a 
harassed and mobbed user can turn. That is I think an structural error that I 
believe you don't usually find in any other big organization.

I have also studied these pages where dispute resolution is handled. They do 
not impress me much. I agree with Rui Correia, it is the same people quarreling 
about the same things and the result is often nil.

So I still think there need to be structural change to handle this type of 
problems.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de 
CC: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; 
fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net 
Gesendet: 15:15 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 


I've worked extensively with dispute resolution on English Wikipedia (I have 
conducted surveys and so on). If you have specific trends I would welcome 
seeing them (isolated cases where one side is unhappy with the result is not 
necessarily a sign the process is flawed, so I am more interested in overall 
trends but would welcome your opinion.)


Steve ZhangSent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 10:59 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:


Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work. Not 
in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius






 Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List 
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing List 
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work now. 
It could use improvement, but the same could be said about everything (and 
like most things, shortages of volunteers make things harder)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 6:18 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:

 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
 
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a 
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work now.
 
 To imagine that groups of people will not try and manoeuvre out persons that 
 they don't like is very naive. 
 That has not happened before in the history of mankind and the
 Wikis are no exception.
 
 Today noone is accountable for what they do to other Wiki-contributors, they 
 are not even identifiable since they hide behind nome de guerres. Stewards 
 have no authority to protect users from abuses and the same goes for the 
 Ombudsman. (see also Rui Correia's email)
 
 So if the Wikis want to be a safe place for children and old folks alike, 
 and that everybody shall be able to contribute on equal conditions, a more 
 realistic organization to protect the users must be put in place.
 
 
 Regards
 Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
 Gesendet: 1:16 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 
 It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who bump
 up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
 that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.
 
 Fred
 
 I think you are completely right and it is a big problem in the
 Wiki-world that is not being addressed by anyone in a leading position.
 
 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 
 
   Von: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 23:08 Mittwoch, 4.September 2013
 Betreff: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 
 Greetings to All
 
 Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not compared
 to
 people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long
 list
 of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.
 
 In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the
 project. Mostly, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
I don't agree with Anders Wennersten below. I have certainly seen the same kind 
of problems in Sweden as well (at least a couple of years back). There are 
other Swedish Wikis than Wikipedia mind you.

The problem is structural so it is shared by all Wikis.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius






 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 14:39 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

That's Sweden all right, it's like a small town. Thousands of
administrators from scores of countries is another matter. Even requests
for administration is very difficult as, unless you do big time research,
or spend your life monitoring others edits and activity, you just don't
know much. Voting has the same downside; because of the volume you just
don't have enough information to register an informed opinion, at least
about individuals. The people you encounter in daily activities while
editing is only a tiny sliver.

Fred

 It is no magic
 *yearly reelection of administrators/sysops has meant no bullying types
 are sysops any more
 *we are a small community with just a few hundred active. And we have
 decided to treat everyone (who are serious) as valuable individuals,
 and go a very long way to make all feeling welcome, stop behaving as
 overdog/underdog and also to try special solutions for troublesome users
 that enable them to not being blocked but having restrictions on certain
 type of activities. Both people who have temporary maniac periods and
 with autism symptoms can be useful contributers if handled right by the
 communities.

 But these experiences can not be extended to everywhere. en:wp have 20
 times the number of contributers then sv:wp and of course this means
 need of different ways of handling problems. I do not pretend to have
 anything to teach en:wp, but as said I find nothing useful for sv:wp
 hearing of the challenges on en:wp

 Anders


 Pavlo Shevelo skrev 2013-09-05 13:36:
 Sorry, but I'm not agree with your note, Anders.

 My home WP is not en: (it's uk: in fact) but everything being discussed
 is
 very (100%) applicable for our community.

 Lucky you are in se:WP that you have no similar issues/problems but
 perhaps
 you've collected some magical know-how how to avoid said troubles. If
 so
 would you please share that knowledge  experience?

 Sincerely,
 Pavlo


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Anders Wennersten
 m...@anderswennersten.sewrote:

 Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English
 wikipedia?

 There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
 recognize from my home wp

 Anders




 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
As said I think it is an obvious structural problem of the Wiki organization. I 
don't think the intention of this thread was to solve a single issue but to 
point out a general problem.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius




 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 15:09 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

For a serious discussion to happen you will need to disclose some
examples. The next step is to move beyond anecdote to see if there is a
general problem.

The particular incident Rui brought up has been pretty much explained,
but the question remains about have a new or casual editor who commits a
faux pas can simply be reminded not to rather than being vilified and
being turned away completely. Everyone does dumb stuff, especially at
first. The question is whether they learn anything from it.

Fred

 Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work.
 Not in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius



 
  Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing
 List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work
 now. It could use improvement, but the same could be said about
 everything (and like most things, shortages of volunteers make things
 harder)

 Steve Zhang
 Sent from my iPad



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
Lars,

Please put your cards on the table. What are your suggested changes?

Fred

 I am also more interested in processes than discussing special cases. I
 think that was also the meaning of Rui Correia's letter starting this
 thread.

 To me there is obvious that there are flaws in the construction of the
 Wiki-organization when it comes to mistreatment and mobbing of users. I
 have discussed this question both with the stewards and the ombudsman,
 both tell me that they can't intervene in a Wiki, even if they themselves
 object to the behaviour of certain members of that Wiki.

 That means that there is no instance outside of the specific Wiki to
 which a harassed and mobbed user can turn. That is I think an structural
 error that I believe you don't usually find in any other big
 organization.

 I have also studied these pages where dispute resolution is handled.
 They do not impress me much. I agree with Rui Correia, it is the same
 people quarreling about the same things and the result is often nil.

 So I still think there need to be structural change to handle this type
 of problems.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 CC: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org;
 fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net
 Gesendet: 15:15 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself



 I've worked extensively with dispute resolution on English Wikipedia (I
 have conducted surveys and so on). If you have specific trends I would
 welcome seeing them (isolated cases where one side is unhappy with the
 result is not necessarily a sign the process is flawed, so I am more
 interested in overall trends but would welcome your opinion.)


 Steve ZhangSent from my iPad

 On 05/09/2013, at 10:59 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:


 Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work.
 Not in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius






 Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing
 List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work
 now. It could use improvement, but the same could be said about
 everything (and like most things, shortages of volunteers make things
 harder)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 6:18 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:

 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.

 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
 now.

 To imagine that groups of people will not try and manoeuvre out
 persons that they don't like is very naive.
 That has not happened before in the history of mankind and the
  Wikis are no exception.

 Today noone is accountable for what they do to other
 Wiki-contributors, they are not even identifiable since they hide
 behind nome de guerres. Stewards have no authority to protect users
 from abuses and the same goes for the Ombudsman. (see also Rui
 Correia's email)

 So if the Wikis want to be a safe place for children and old folks
 alike, and that everybody shall be able to contribute on equal
 conditions, a more realistic organization to protect the users must be
 put in place.


 Regards
 Lars Gardenius


 
 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 1:16 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who
 bump
 up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
 that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.

 Fred

 I think you are completely right and it is a big problem in the
 Wiki-world that is not being addressed by anyone in a leading
 position.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
   Von: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 23:08 Mittwoch, 4.September 2013
 Betreff: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 Greetings to All

 Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not
 compared
 to
 people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a
 long
 list
 of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.

 In my 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia CH has just hired two new directors

2013-09-05 Thread Frédéric Schütz

Dear all,

I'm very glad to tell you that Wikimedia CH has just hired two new 
directors. Duc-Ahn Chung will be our new Chief Administrative Officer, 
starting in November, and Charles Andrès, our former president of the 
board, will be our new Chief Science Officer. Read on for more details!


When Chantal Ebongué, our CAO and first employee, told us she was 
planning to leave, we set a recruiting committee to replace her. One of 
the reasons she was leaving was that it was difficult to take care of 
both administrative work and project work -- both because of the high 
workload, and because these two tasks require very different 
competences. Thus, while drafting the job description, the recruiting 
committee proposed to the board to hire two people. This was accepted, 
and we now have filled these positions.



Duc-Anh (Anh) Chung, our new CAO, originally studied hotel management, 
and worked as project manager in different hotels around the world. She 
then worked as an executive assistant in a start-up company in Geneva, 
in charge of all administrative matters. Since May 2012, she is 
assistant director in a large non-profit organization in Geneva. In this 
position, she is responsible for all administrative matters, and has a 
wide experience helping a purely volunteer organization transform itself 
into a professional structure.


Among other tasks, Ahn will be in charge of the human resources and the 
finances of our association, including the annual fundraiser and the 
financial side of the FDC application, and will report directly to the 
board.  She will start working for Wikimedia CH on 1 November -- just in 
time for the fundraiser :-)



Charles Andrès, our new CSO, was originally trained as a biologist; he 
received a Master in Genetics followed by a PhD in Cellular Biology in 
France. Since 2007, he has worked as a senior scientist at the 
University of Neuchâtel, where he is a researcher and lecturer in 
biology. He is a Wikipedian since 2007, board member of Wikimedia CH 
since 2010 and the chairman of the board since June 2012.


Charles will be responsible for all the projects conducted inside our 
association, including both support of individual initiatives (members 
projects) and institutional partnerships, and will be responsible for 
the annual FDC application. Among other projects, he will oversee our 
GLAM activities, as well as the development of our education program. He 
will report directly to the board. Charles has started working part-time 
as CSO on 1 September (just in time for the preparation of the FDC 
application :-), and will join us full time in early October.




The choice of a Chief Science Officer (CSO) position

The decision to create a CSO position stems from the fact that many of 
our efforts (current and planned) are focused on scientific projects; 
by this we mean not only that we have established many collaborations 
with academic institutions, but also that we intend to drive our 
projects using a scientific approach, as a tool to improve quality. We 
have received very good feedback on this from many people in the 
Wikimedia community.



--
The choice of two directors rather than one executive director

In our current structure and given our level of development, the board 
still takes care of many tasks traditionally in the hands of an 
executive director. The choice of hiring two directors, each with 
well-defined areas of competences, working closely together and with the 
board, was deemed the best solution (note that despite the title of 
directors, they will not simply delegate the day-to-day work to other 
employees, but will actually perform most of it).


This solution fits well with the Swiss culture, as even the Federal 
government is organized following such a collegial structure 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Council_%28Switzerland%29 ).


We are also glad to have been able to make a balanced hiring: not only 
have we hired one man and one woman, but we have one director who knows 
the Wikimedia movement very well, and another one who will bring a fresh 
pair of eyes. Unfortunately, we have not been able to find a balance 
between the different languages spoken in Switzerland, as we hired two 
native French speakers, but we have made sure that our staff can cover 
adequately the different language communities in the country.



-
Governance and management of potential conflicts of interests

At the time when Chantal left, Charles Andrès had indicated an interest 
in a potential position within the Wikimedia movement. As such, he was 
not part of the recruiting committee who suggested the creation of a CSO 
position and did not participate to the board discussion that approved 
this position. He did not participate either to any of the discussions 
that took 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Anders Wennersten


Lars Gardenius skrev 2013-09-05 15:53:

As said I think it is an obvious structural problem of the Wiki organization.

I  disagree to that statement.

While Fred is about right likening sv:wp to a medium sized town, being a 
bit idyllic, even if persons have feelings here to a get in a conflict 
too (it is the way we, the community,  resolve this that differs)


My message is:Even if en:wp with its size need strong structures around 
administration let us not in general pursue the road of more structures.


Let us instead learn to be more human in our intracommunicaition on the 
wikis (while still being determined to throw out Pov pusher, selfrpomos etc)


Anders


  I don't think the intention of this thread was to solve a single issue but to 
point out a general problem.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius




  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Gesendet: 15:09 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
  


For a serious discussion to happen you will need to disclose some
examples. The next step is to move beyond anecdote to see if there is a
general problem.

The particular incident Rui brought up has been pretty much explained,
but the question remains about have a new or casual editor who commits a
faux pas can simply be reminded not to rather than being vilified and
being turned away completely. Everyone does dumb stuff, especially at
first. The question is whether they learn anything from it.

Fred


Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work.
Not in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius




   Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing
List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work
now. It could use improvement, but the same could be said about
everything (and like most things, shortages of volunteers make things
harder)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a 
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work now.

Where doesn't work is mostly defined as didn't give the result I
demanded.

I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of losing
to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.

When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
exactly what it's been designed for.

Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
and personality conflicts.

There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from the system didn't
let me get my way to the system is broken/dying is all to easy to
make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.

This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront might
prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects of
human nature...

-- Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
Yes, that is pretty much the situation. The howls of outraged anguish
from those who were not able to dictate (really bad) content or practices
form the core of our organized opposition. That does not mean systemic
deficiencies don't exist; just that we must look and think in a noisy
environment.

Fred

 On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
 now.

 Where doesn't work is mostly defined as didn't give the result I
 demanded.

 I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
 came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
 majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of losing
 to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.

 When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
 getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
 exactly what it's been designed for.

 Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
 convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
 side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
 concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
 ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
 and personality conflicts.

 There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
 occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from the system didn't
 let me get my way to the system is broken/dying is all to easy to
 make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.

 This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront might
 prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
 established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
 conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects of
 human nature...

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/05/2013 11:49 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 But if your child is mobbed at a Wiki when he/she tries to contribute, or 
 your grandmother is being abused when she contributes to a Wiki, you want 
 somewhere to turn. As said there is no such instance in the Wikis, there is 
 noone responsible how people are treated and mistreated in the Wikis.

You start from the presumption that those things usually or often happen
for reasons other than trying to push something through against
consensus.  I have rarely seen that happening (and no, the OP is not an
example -- if anything he's an excellent counterexample).

Mind you, there are often cases where the newbie is going against
consensus but doesn't know it.  This is a case for user education.

We /do/ have a problem with the way much of the community handles new
editors, but the existing mechanism in place /do/ work for the most part
(at least, for the more egregious examples).  The rest is a cultural
problem that no enforcement body could fix; you don't make people nice
by beating them up.

-- Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
Sorry but I don't what/who OP is.

And you still misunderstand. This is not a question about consensus over some 
article, it is about normal human behaviour, and that it sometimes is not 
there. If you haven't seen that happening I don't know where you have been 
looking. I think you paint an idealistic and rosy picture of the life in the 
Wikis that many users don't recognize.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
An: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 18:05 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

On 09/05/2013 11:49 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 But if your child is mobbed at a Wiki when he/she tries to contribute, or 
 your grandmother is being abused when she contributes to a Wiki, you want 
 somewhere to turn. As said there is no such instance in the Wikis, there is 
 noone responsible how people are treated and mistreated in the Wikis.

You start from the presumption that those things usually or often happen
for reasons other than trying to push something through against
consensus.  I have rarely seen that happening (and no, the OP is not an
example -- if anything he's an excellent counterexample).

Mind you, there are often cases where the newbie is going against
consensus but doesn't know it.  This is a case for user education.

We /do/ have a problem with the way much of the community handles new
editors, but the existing mechanism in place /do/ work for the most part
(at least, for the more egregious examples).  The rest is a cultural
problem that no enforcement body could fix; you don't make people nice
by beating them up.

-- Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
OP = original poster, Rui

 Sorry but I don't what/who OP is.

 And you still misunderstand. This is not a question about consensus over
 some article, it is about normal human behaviour, and that it sometimes
 is not there. If you haven't seen that happening I don't know where you
 have been looking. I think you paint an idealistic and rosy picture of
 the life in the Wikis that many users don't recognize.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
 An: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 18:05 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 On 09/05/2013 11:49 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 But if your child is mobbed at a Wiki when he/she tries to contribute,
 or your grandmother is being abused when she contributes to a Wiki, you
 want somewhere to turn. As said there is no such instance in the Wikis,
 there is noone responsible how people are treated and mistreated in the
 Wikis.

 You start from the presumption that those things usually or often happen
 for reasons other than trying to push something through against
 consensus.  I have rarely seen that happening (and no, the OP is not an
 example -- if anything he's an excellent counterexample).

 Mind you, there are often cases where the newbie is going against
 consensus but doesn't know it.  This is a case for user education.

 We /do/ have a problem with the way much of the community handles new
 editors, but the existing mechanism in place /do/ work for the most part
 (at least, for the more egregious examples).  The rest is a cultural
 problem that no enforcement body could fix; you don't make people nice
 by beating them up.

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
Well that is pretty easy: that Wiki-org will follow the example put up by many 
countries, companies and schools.

Create an independent instance (i.e. in this case independent of the Wikis) 
that you can turn to when you are offended, insulted, mobbed, harassed or in 
any way mistreated by people in the Wikis.

Since so many seems to misunderstand this question, it is not meant to handle 
questions about content or policies in the separate Wikis, but only about the 
normal human behaviour that we have agreed on shall be present in a society 
(today not including the Wikis).

It is also important that this independent instance shall be responsible for 
that the behaviour in the Wikis are within the boundaries of the outside 
society, and therefore also has the right to intervene in a Wiki, when members 
of that Wiki cross that boundary. 

Today there is an increasing problem with mobbing on the Internet. I don't want 
the Wikis to be an enclave where this is still allowed.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 16:04 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

Lars,

Please put your cards on the table. What are your suggested changes?

Fred

 I am also more interested in processes than discussing special cases. I
 think that was also the meaning of Rui Correia's letter starting this
 thread.

 To me there is obvious that there are flaws in the construction of the
 Wiki-organization when it comes to mistreatment and mobbing of users. I
 have discussed this question both with the stewards and the ombudsman,
 both tell me that they can't intervene in a Wiki, even if they themselves
 object to the behaviour of certain members of that Wiki.

 That means that there is no instance outside of the specific Wiki to
 which a harassed and mobbed user can turn. That is I think an structural
 error that I believe you don't usually find in any other big
 organization.

 I have also studied these pages where dispute resolution is handled.
 They do not impress me much. I agree with Rui Correia, it is the same
 people quarreling about the same things and the result is often nil.

 So I still think there need to be structural change to handle this type
 of problems.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 CC: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org;
 fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net
 Gesendet: 15:15 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself



 I've worked extensively with dispute resolution on English Wikipedia (I
 have conducted surveys and so on). If you have specific trends I would
 welcome seeing them (isolated cases where one side is unhappy with the
 result is not necessarily a sign the process is flawed, so I am more
 interested in overall trends but would welcome your opinion.)


 Steve ZhangSent from my iPad

 On 05/09/2013, at 10:59 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:


 Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work.
 Not in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius






 Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing
 List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work
 now. It could use improvement, but the same could be said about
 everything (and like most things, shortages of volunteers make things
 harder)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 6:18 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:

 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.

 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
 now.

 To imagine that groups of people will not try and manoeuvre out
 persons that they don't like is very naive.
 That has not happened before in the history of mankind and the
  Wikis are no exception.

 Today noone is accountable for what they do to other
 Wiki-contributors, they are not even identifiable since they hide
 behind nome de guerres. Stewards have no authority to protect users
 from abuses and the same goes for the Ombudsman. (see also Rui
 Correia's email)

 So if the Wikis want to be a safe place for children and old folks
 alike, and that everybody shall be able to contribute on equal
 conditions, a more realistic organization to protect the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Pavlo Shevelo
It seems to me, that Lars in wording
* **you take a step aside and are no longer actively involved in any Wiki*
means seasoned Wiki veterans, so *former* insiders.


On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

 Who is both independent, knowledgeable, and not involved in a wiki?

 All you have to do is read a newspaper or magazine article about
 Wikipedia to realize how hopelessly outsiders get everything wrong.

 Fred

  Well, it doesn't matter to me if it is re-invention or not.
  To me the important thing is to put such an instance in action.
  And I know for a fact that it doesn't function today since I discussed
  this question with numerous people in the Wiki-org (like the stewards,
  the ombudsman etc.)
 
  That you are independent doesn't mean that you are not accustomed to how
  the Wikis work, I would guess that it actually is a prerequisite that you
  are. It just means that you take a step aside and are no longer actively
  involved in any Wiki and that you understand your position as an
  independent arbitrator. This process is handled without difficulties by
  other organizations.
 
  I am involved in work to counteract mobbing on the Internet in general
  and there are the Wikis today absolutely a part of the problem.
 
 
  Regards,
  Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
  
   Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
  An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Gesendet: 19:14 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
  Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 
 
  That is just a re-invention of the Arbitration Committee. People from an
  external source nearly always have a fatal flaw; they don't understand
  how Wikipedia works. More informed people could man the arbitration
  committee, but that is a matter of documenting what the existing
  committee does and its effect and educating administrators, potential
  candidates and the existing committee members on the practical effect of
  their decisions.
 
  Fred
 
  Well that is pretty easy: that Wiki-org will follow the example put up
  by
  many countries, companies and schools.
 
  Create an independent instance (i.e. in this case independent of the
  Wikis) that you can turn to when you are offended, insulted, mobbed,
  harassed or in any way mistreated by people in the Wikis.
 
  Since so many seems to misunderstand this question, it is not meant to
  handle questions about content or policies in the separate Wikis, but
  only about the normal human behaviour that we have agreed on shall be
  present in a society (today not including the Wikis).
 
  It is also important that this independent instance shall be
  responsible
  for that the behaviour in the Wikis are within the boundaries of the
  outside society, and therefore also has the right to intervene in a
  Wiki,
  when members of that Wiki cross that boundary.
 
  Today there is an increasing problem with mobbing on the Internet. I
  don't want the Wikis to be an enclave where this is still allowed.
 
  Regards,
  Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 
  
   Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
  An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Gesendet: 16:04 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
  Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
  itself
 
 
  Lars,
 
  Please put your cards on the table. What are your suggested changes?
 
  Fred
 
  I am also more interested in processes than discussing special cases.
  I
  think that was also the meaning of Rui Correia's letter starting this
  thread.
 
  To me there is obvious that there are flaws in the construction of the
  Wiki-organization when it comes to mistreatment and mobbing of users.
  I
  have discussed this question both with the stewards and the ombudsman,
  both tell me that they can't intervene in a Wiki, even if they
  themselves
  object to the behaviour of certain members of that Wiki.
 
  That means that there is no instance outside of the specific Wiki to
  which a harassed and mobbed user can turn. That is I think an
  structural
  error that I believe you don't usually find in any other big
  organization.
 
  I have also studied these pages where dispute resolution is handled.
  They do not impress me much. I agree with Rui Correia, it is the same
  people quarreling about the same things and the result is often nil.
 
  So I still think there need to be structural change to handle this
  type
  of problems.
 
  Regards,
  Lars Gardenius
 
 
 
 
  
   Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
  An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
  CC: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org;
  fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net
  Gesendet: 15:15 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
  Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
  itself
 
 
 
  I've worked extensively with dispute resolution on English Wikipedia
  

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
The problem is that howls of outraged anguish seems to come from the admins 
not from the newbies.

But that was not the question here. The question was that the Wikis lack an 
instance that people can turn to when they are harassed and mobbed in the 
wikis, be that newbies or admins, children or old folks, women or men.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 18:03 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

Yes, that is pretty much the situation. The howls of outraged anguish
from those who were not able to dictate (really bad) content or practices
form the core of our organized opposition. That does not mean systemic
deficiencies don't exist; just that we must look and think in a noisy
environment.

Fred

 On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
 now.

 Where doesn't work is mostly defined as didn't give the result I
 demanded.

 I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
 came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
 majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of losing
 to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.

 When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
 getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
 exactly what it's been designed for.

 Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
 convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
 side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
 concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
 ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
 and personality conflicts.

 There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
 occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from the system didn't
 let me get my way to the system is broken/dying is all to easy to
 make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.

 This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront might
 prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
 established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
 conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects of
 human nature...

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
On the contrary, the Arbitration Committee has the responsibility and the
power. That they do not discharge the full remit is another matter.
People have ran for and been elected to the committee on a platform of
not discharging the responsibility it was given.

Fred

 No, I just responded to a problem that I recognized well.

 If you call him/her this or that is not important.

 The important thing is that the person (or group of persons) has the
 responsibility and the power to fulfil its task, i.e. to protect
 Wiki-users from abuses and mobbing. Today nobody has neither that
 responsibility nor that power.

 regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 18:44 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 And your solution is an ombudsman, or what? I know there is a solution
 that you have in mind. In fact, it looks very much like a solution in
 search of a problem. Out with it!

 Fred

 The problem is that howls of outraged anguish seems to come from the
 admins not from the newbies.

 But that was not the question here. The question was that the Wikis
 lack
 an instance that people can turn to when they are harassed and mobbed
 in
 the wikis, be that newbies or admins, children or old folks, women or
 men.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 18:03 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 Yes, that is pretty much the situation. The howls of outraged anguish
 from those who were not able to dictate (really bad) content or
 practices
 form the core of our organized opposition. That does not mean systemic
 deficiencies don't exist; just that we must look and think in a noisy
 environment.

 Fred

 On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in
 a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't
 work
 now.

 Where doesn't work is mostly defined as didn't give the result I
 demanded.

 I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
 came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
 majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of losing
 to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.

 When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
 getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
 exactly what it's been designed for.

 Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
 convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
 side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
 concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
 ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
 and personality conflicts.

 There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
 occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from the system didn't
 let me get my way to the system is broken/dying is all to easy to
 make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.

 This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront
 might
 prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
 established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
 conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects
 of
 human nature...

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
Indeed, a community a few hundred seems optimal.

Fred

 This is certainly not a question only for the English Wikipedia. I
 somewhat doubt that it even foremost has to do with the English
 Wikipedia. I have seen this problem primarily in smaller Wikis dominated
 by few people.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius



 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 CC: wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 13:28 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 At wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org ? Perhaps, but hard to start over from
 the beginning.

 Fred

 Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English
 wikipedia?

 There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
 recognize from my home wp

 Anders



 Fred Bauder skrev 2013-09-05 13:18:
 That was the purpose of the original arbitration committee. Finding a
 mentor is kind of hard nowdays as there are so many users who might
 help
 but probably will not. On the other hand, many requests I have
 received
 and looked into are from people who are making trouble themselves;
 sometimes very serious trouble. Giving a second chance to someone who
 has
 been banned by the community after extended discussion seldom works
 out
 well. But that's not a newbie who has run into serious trouble just
 for
 making jokes about Windoze...

 Fred

 It is very laudable if you, Peter, tries and help newbies and others
 that
 are harassed by other users.

 I however don't think it is enough in a worldwide organization that
 you
 have to rely on volunteers and that these will intervene.

 As I see it, if you start such an organization you must also take on
 the
 responsibilities that follows.
 You can't just duck and pretend that you can hand over all problems
 to
 the users.

 I still think that an international organization like the Wikis
 demands
 an instance to which mistreated and mobbed users can turn. An
 instance
 with the responsibility that normal rules in a society are upheld and
 with the authority to uphold them.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
   Von: Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 10:50 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius
 lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
 You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

 At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
 (honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
 debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
 oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
 good solution seem to exist.

 In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
 cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
 who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but
 they
 would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
 regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
 Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request
 (if
 the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
 outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but
 a
 large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

 I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
 a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
 enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean,
 one
 in a week or month or so.

 The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
 the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
 community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
 them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
 debates.)

 g

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
Perhaps you should think again Anders. It certainly also has to do with the 
Swedish wikis.

You just repeated what you wrote earlier.


Regards,
Lars Gardenius



 Von: Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se
An: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 13:23 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English wikipedia?

There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can 
recognize from my home wp

Anders



Fred Bauder skrev 2013-09-05 13:18:
 That was the purpose of the original arbitration committee. Finding a
 mentor is kind of hard nowdays as there are so many users who might help
 but probably will not. On the other hand, many requests I have received
 and looked into are from people who are making trouble themselves;
 sometimes very serious trouble. Giving a second chance to someone who has
 been banned by the community after extended discussion seldom works out
 well. But that's not a newbie who has run into serious trouble just for
 making jokes about Windoze...

 Fred

 It is very laudable if you, Peter, tries and help newbies and others that
 are harassed by other users.

 I however don't think it is enough in a worldwide organization that you
 have to rely on volunteers and that these will intervene.

 As I see it, if you start such an organization you must also take on the
 responsibilities that follows.
 You can't just duck and pretend that you can hand over all problems to
 the users.

 I still think that an international organization like the Wikis demands
 an instance to which mistreated and mobbed users can turn. An instance
 with the responsibility that normal rules in a society are upheld and
 with the authority to uphold them.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
   Von: Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 10:50 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
 You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

 At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
 (honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
 debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
 oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
 good solution seem to exist.

 In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
 cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
 who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but they
 would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
 regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
 Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request (if
 the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
 outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but a
 large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

 I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
 a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
 enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean, one
 in a week or month or so.

 The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
 the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
 community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
 them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
 debates.)

 g

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Chad Horohoe
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

 It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who bump
 up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
 that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.


Removing the mediation committee from that process might
streamline things a bit. I notice the mediation cabal has closed
its doors since the last time I looked.

-Chad
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
No thank you, I do not have a dispute; you do; please follow the dispute
resolution procedure.

Fred

 Hi  Tom

 Thanks for your contribution. However, you seem to have missed the point.

 So Lisa violates the 3RR principle and you lecture me. And I lodge a
 complaint over the 3RR and that gets closed without due process.

 Would you care to touch on those tho aspects and advance your opinion on
 the 3RR violation being swept under the carpet? And reporting of a 3RR
 violation being swept under the same carpet?

 I must presume that you condone the action of the other editor?

 And for your information, everytime I have come across people that
 monitor
 even the talkpage of their favourite articles you can be sure that it is
 about the content of what is posted, but about whether or not the comment
 casts the subject of the article in a bad light.

 Perhaps you might care to look into this and look into the edit history
 of
 these editors?

 Regards,

 Rui




 On 5 September 2013 14:18, Thomas Morton
 morton.tho...@googlemail.comwrote:

 Lets just be clear here, the contributuion Rui is talking about was as
 follows:

 Must be a joke - how can moving from W8 to W XP be called a downgrade?
 W8
 is crap! I want a computer, not a basket of apps for retarded
 morons!
 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Windows_XPoldid=571533769
 

 His response to its removal is to suggest those removing it are paid
 Pro-Microsoft editors.

 Rui, what I'm going to suggest here is that you've not really
 understood
 the processes that go into collaborating on an article. You may well be
 right that the content needs changing, but your presentation of a
 personal
 opinion in such a ranting form makes it very hard to collaborate.

 Look at it from another side. If you'd put a lot of effort into writing
 and
 article and then someone turned up on the talk page to post what looked
 like a personal rant about the content, citing no sources and putting
 very
 little in the way of suggested changes would you be peeved? Would
 you
 wonder if perhaps that editor was a paid editor sent to disrupt the
 article
 by a competitor?

 Would you be offended if Lisa held that view about you (that you were a
 paid advocate?).

 So, yes, Wikipedia has a big problem. But it's not just abusive admins
 (we
 have a few) and grumpy editors, or paid advocates. It is a broad
 spectrum
 of problems - and in this case you were the one with the
 less-than-perfect
 contribution.

 Broadly speaking this is an education problem; we need to bring more
 focus
 on the concept of the talk page as a collaboration portal *not* as a
 place
 to discuss the topic (i.e. NOTFORUM) and we also need to emphasise the
 importance of making comments in the right tone, and with supporting
 sources.

 Regards,
 Tom


 On 4 September 2013 22:08, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote:

  Greetings to All
 
  Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not
 compared
 to
  people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a
 long
 list
  of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.
 
  In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave
 the
  project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore
 having
 to
  fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.
 
  In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis
 is
  fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
  process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of
 people
  previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
  resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the
 'outsider'
  that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets
 'good
  advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to
 temper
  his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is
 round
 at
  a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is
 making
 the
  WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.
 
  And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.
 
  I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
  encounters when you include something negative about certain big
  corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and
 everbody
  else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we
 know
  there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear
 you!.
 
  Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly
 -
 was
  anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are
 legions
  out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know
 that
  they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here,
 
 
 http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles
 
  I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word
  downgrade 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Tyler Romeo
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is a very good point - we must try to protect logs of visitors to
 the WMF blog from the inevitably prying eyes of the National Security
 Agency! And only by self-hosting it will this be effectively
 accomplished!


This doesn't make any sense. If we're assuming the NSA is monitoring all
Internet traffic, which is the problem everybody has been complaining
about, then they don't need access to our servers to tell who is visiting
the blog.

*-- *
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2016
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | tylerro...@gmail.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
This is certainly not a question only for the English Wikipedia. I somewhat 
doubt that it even foremost has to do with the English Wikipedia. I have seen 
this problem primarily in smaller Wikis dominated by few people.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius




 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
CC: wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 13:28 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

At wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org ? Perhaps, but hard to start over from
the beginning.

Fred

 Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English wikipedia?

 There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
 recognize from my home wp

 Anders



 Fred Bauder skrev 2013-09-05 13:18:
 That was the purpose of the original arbitration committee. Finding a
 mentor is kind of hard nowdays as there are so many users who might
 help
 but probably will not. On the other hand, many requests I have received
 and looked into are from people who are making trouble themselves;
 sometimes very serious trouble. Giving a second chance to someone who
 has
 been banned by the community after extended discussion seldom works out
 well. But that's not a newbie who has run into serious trouble just for
 making jokes about Windoze...

 Fred

 It is very laudable if you, Peter, tries and help newbies and others
 that
 are harassed by other users.

 I however don't think it is enough in a worldwide organization that
 you
 have to rely on volunteers and that these will intervene.

 As I see it, if you start such an organization you must also take on
 the
 responsibilities that follows.
 You can't just duck and pretend that you can hand over all problems to
 the users.

 I still think that an international organization like the Wikis
 demands
 an instance to which mistreated and mobbed users can turn. An instance
 with the responsibility that normal rules in a society are upheld and
 with the authority to uphold them.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
   Von: Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 10:50 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius
 lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
 You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

 At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
 (honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
 debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
 oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
 good solution seem to exist.

 In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
 cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
 who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but they
 would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
 regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
 Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request (if
 the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
 outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but a
 large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

 I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
 a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
 enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean, one
 in a week or month or so.

 The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
 the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
 community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
 them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
 debates.)

 g

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:51 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
 Personally i think this is a bad idea, especially with respect to all the
 nsa discussions. If wmf is not able to host it might be hosted by one of
 the chapters, or wikinews might accept a new article type blog, what you
 think?

 Rupert


This is a very good point - we must try to protect logs of visitors to
the WMF blog from the inevitably prying eyes of the National Security
Agency! And only by self-hosting it will this be effectively
accomplished!

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Leslie Carr
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote:

 As I understand  the blog is currently a self-hosted instance of Wordpress
 and the idea is to move the hosting to somewhere else.
 (So this is not MediaWiki vs. Wordpress, but self-hosting vs. not
 self-hosting)


Exactly!


 Best regards,
 Bence


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:

  On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org
  wrote:
 
   This was definitely mentioned at Wikimania. What I understood is that
 it
   will be hosted externally for performance and reliability reasons, but
  that
   the rest should remain the same.
  
 
  So, A blog for one of the top 10 websites in the world is being hosted
  externally for performance and reliability? - That doesn't sound right.
  Maybe Mr. Roth  friends can clarify a bit here.
 


I can chime in as a tech operations person (in my official capacity).
 Currently the blog is in a partially maintained by Operations state.  In
ops, we have a few concerns - #1 is security (exemplified by our recent
security incident) of having a wordpress instance in our production
environment.  #2 is support of the blog from a technical standpoint.  We
are currently all oversubscribed with trying to keep the production sites
up and speedy.  The blog is low priority for us compared to the wiki's, and
therefore is often neglected.  When we hire about 5 more ops people, it may
be more sustainable, but right now, it's not - so it would actually be a
net positive for the Operations team to move the blog onto a dedicated
third party, and will also hopefully prevent any future security incidents.

Leslie


  Blogs generally don't require a lot of resources, aside from some comment
  oversight. But it's not like there is a deluge of comments or moderation
  required in the current blog - they average about 1, maybe 2 comments and
  from my impression, don't particularly have a high number of regular
  followers.
 
  This seems like something trivial, perhaps because of familiarity with
  Wordpress, it is being preferred in this case. But then, why are we
  willingly and so easily handing the visitors to a third party? especially
  with so much paranoia about monitoring and privacy issues. Even for the
  sake of our own impression and opinions - Is there a particular role
 there
  that Mediawiki can't fill in? (I recall Erik once argued that wiki is the
  most versatile platform, does he believe that Wordpress is a better
  alternative? )
 
  Regards
  Theo
 
 
  
   Anyway, I'm not an expert here, just what I understood from Matthew
 Roth
  
   friends
  
   Lodewijk
  
  
   2013/9/5 Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk
  
This is being discussed on-wiki too, at
   
   
  
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Privacy_policy#Blog_not_hosted_by_WordPress.3F
.
   
Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
   
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England
  and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
  Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London
 EC2A
   4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation
  (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
   
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal
  control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
   
   
On 5 September 2013 14:00, Neil Harris n...@tonal.clara.co.uk
 wrote:
   
 On 05/09/13 13:37, MZMcBride wrote:

 Hi.

 The recent draft privacy policy mentions that the Wikimedia blog
 (https://blog.wikimedia.org) will soon be hosted by
  WordPress.com.

 Was this discussed anywhere? If so, where?

 What is the proposed URL structure of a blog hosted by
  WordPress.com?
   I
 think there's a reasonable expectation that when a user visits
 *.wikimedia.org, we don't simply send his or her browser info to
 a
third
 party without his or her consent. This has come up previously with
Jobvite
 and iframes. It's also come up with the use of tracking tools such
  as
 Google Analytics, which not only affect one-time visitors, but aim
  to
 persist client-side.

 How will the blog be backed up? Relying on an external service
 means
   not
 being in control of the data. Will there be regular backups made
 to
ensure
 that if WordPress.com goes away, we won't lose all of our posts?

 MZMcBride




 I agree: this does seem to be a curious decision, at odds with the
   WMF's
 general policy of self-hosting as much as possible in order to
  maintain
 maximum independence from outside entities, particularly in the
  context
of
 the recent concerns about privacy. I would have thought that
   maintaining
a
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and the politics of encryption

2013-09-05 Thread Seb35

I don’t see precisely how mandatory HTTPS could help spread the knowledge;
accordingly if users feel themselves spied and it prevent them to
contribute, yes, HTTPS helps; but if others feel cluttered by HTTPS (time
load, unfriendly firewalls, various problems), it could also lower the
number of editors.

On another side HTTPS is quite useless if users click-through any warning
(You are spied.: Ok/close me that ad → privacy education); anyway
encryption and code breaking is always a cat-and-mouse play, and we sould
have to carefully monitor state of the art if we really want to protect
the users; but imho it’s not our vision.

For HTTPS, I would like to see the users opt-in to the security they want:
e.g. if they write about intelligence, they probably know the dangers
about being spied and want minimize it as part of other means; if they
write about butterflies, perhaps they don’t matter about being spied. For
specific-rights editors security could be enforced, but possibly with
other means than encryption; e.g. if an oversight has to hide an article,
it is primarly needed to be sure the user has oversight rights
(authorisation), and it is not really useful to hide what article it is
(it was public). Accordingly for checkusers, we want the IPs stay private
(encrypted during the transport). This point is: HTTPS is not the solution
to all problems.

For HTTPS I see some security levels chosed by the users: no HTTPS at all
(Chinese users), equal HTTP/HTTPS (butterflies editor), prefered HTTPS
(privacy-conscious editor, but travelling to China regularly), always
HTTPS or nothing (intelligence editor). And this could be also implemented
for readers during their session. This option is politically neutral, it
just let the user choose.

Sébastien


Le Tue, 03 Sep 2013 21:38:36 +0200, Terry Chay tc...@wikimedia.org a
écrit:
This part of the discussion has strayed a bit far from the politics of  
encryption. ;-)


Not that it doesn't have value, but if I can bring it back on-topic for  
a moment…


The gist of the HTTPS issues is that it's simply not an engineering  
discussion, it's a political one. The abuses recently revealed in the  
United States is either orthogonal to the issue of the politics of  
encryption (in that HTTPS encryption in China, Iran, and the future is  
in discussion), or is the direct salient (in that it is a prime  
motivator for accelerating HTTPS rollout which has triggered this issue).


I, for one, would like to see the discussion of what to do. I'm of the  
believe that there is no simple engineering decision without introducing  
practical, political, legal, and moral complications. I suspect that  
even the more clever or complex ones also introduce these issues. It's  
important to outline what our choices are and the consequences of those  
choices, and derive consensus on what the right choice is going forward,  
as it is clear what we have now[1] is a temporary band-aid.[2]


I'm less sanguine about Erik's suggestion that creating a deadline to  
HTTP-canonical will actually get us to an adequate resolution. The  
reason is simply—whatever I think of Google personally—I feel Google has  
a highly-capable, highly-motivated, engineering-driven staff, and they  
were unable to come up with a workable solution. Unlike Google, we have  
a clear sense about what motivates us[3], so we need to figure out how  
best to get there/interpret it.


[1]:  
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/08/28/https-default-logged-in-users-wikimedia-sites/
[2]: Maybe start an RfC or other wiki page on Meta with a summary of the  
discussion so far?

[3]: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vision

Take care,

terry

On Sep 3, 2013, at 11:50 AM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com  
wrote:


The thing is, it's kind of a crapshoot anyways.  You might see  
something that you think might be classified and report it; but, unless  
you actually have the corresponding clearance yourself, you have no way  
of knowing for certain whether the material is in fact classified in  
the first place.  Conversely, anyone who does have that information is  
unlikely to confirm it one way or the other, for obvious reasons.


To make things even more convoluted, reporting certain kinds of  
material to the WMF could itself potentially be considered illegal in  
some circumstances, since not everyone at the WMF is considered a US  
person for ITAR purposes.


Kirill

On Sep 3, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net  
wrote:



To be fair, none of the people receiving requests through legal@ or
emergency@ have security clearances either.

Kirill


True, but there are not so many of them. I'm not sure if a request  
about
a major matter has ever been made through any channel. In a way, that  
is

kind of a dumb move.

Fred





___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,  

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Laura Hale
On Thursday, September 5, 2013, rupert THURNER wrote:

 Personally i think this is a bad idea, especially with respect to all the
 nsa discussions. If wmf is not able to host it might be hosted by one of
 the chapters, or wikinews might accept a new article type blog, what you
 think?


Cool idea, but maybe Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikiversity, meta or outreach
would be a better fit mission wise?  Blog hosting would violate fundamental
Wikinews project guidelines regarding neutrality, style guidelines and
verifiability.  Thus, not a good fit for Wikinews, though I am sure if you
contact the local communities, they would appreciate the suggestion. :)
 (Maybe Spanish Wikinews would appreciate it.) If it was a serious option,
Wikinewsie.org is getting Icelandic hosting for our reporting journalism
workspace to protect our reporters...  I believe we already have a
Wordpress install, so as a potential thematic organization, The Wikinewsie
Group could be placed to assist.  We chose Icelandic hosting for a variety
of reasons that have been mentioned in previous security related
discussions.

Sincerely,
Laura Hale


-- 
mobile:   635209416
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Andrew Gray
Mediawiki is indeed the most versatile platform, but that just means
it's okay at most things. It doesn't mean it's better than other
platforms explicitly designed for a particular job ;-)

I'd prefer self-hosting on general principle, but if our operations
people say it's better and more stable hosted elsewhere - and
presumably they have - then fair enough.

Andrew.

On 5 September 2013 18:29, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:

 This was definitely mentioned at Wikimania. What I understood is that it
 will be hosted externally for performance and reliability reasons, but that
 the rest should remain the same.


 So, A blog for one of the top 10 websites in the world is being hosted
 externally for performance and reliability? - That doesn't sound right.
 Maybe Mr. Roth  friends can clarify a bit here.

 Blogs generally don't require a lot of resources, aside from some comment
 oversight. But it's not like there is a deluge of comments or moderation
 required in the current blog - they average about 1, maybe 2 comments and
 from my impression, don't particularly have a high number of regular
 followers.

 This seems like something trivial, perhaps because of familiarity with
 Wordpress, it is being preferred in this case. But then, why are we
 willingly and so easily handing the visitors to a third party? especially
 with so much paranoia about monitoring and privacy issues. Even for the
 sake of our own impression and opinions - Is there a particular role there
 that Mediawiki can't fill in? (I recall Erik once argued that wiki is the
 most versatile platform, does he believe that Wordpress is a better
 alternative? )

 Regards
 Theo



 Anyway, I'm not an expert here, just what I understood from Matthew Roth 
 friends

 Lodewijk


 2013/9/5 Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk

  This is being discussed on-wiki too, at
 
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Privacy_policy#Blog_not_hosted_by_WordPress.3F
  .
 
  Richard Symonds
  Wikimedia UK
  0207 065 0992
 
  Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
  Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
  Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
 4LT.
  United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
  movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
  operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
 
  *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
  over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
 
 
  On 5 September 2013 14:00, Neil Harris n...@tonal.clara.co.uk wrote:
 
   On 05/09/13 13:37, MZMcBride wrote:
  
   Hi.
  
   The recent draft privacy policy mentions that the Wikimedia blog
   (https://blog.wikimedia.org) will soon be hosted by WordPress.com.
  
   Was this discussed anywhere? If so, where?
  
   What is the proposed URL structure of a blog hosted by WordPress.com?
 I
   think there's a reasonable expectation that when a user visits
   *.wikimedia.org, we don't simply send his or her browser info to a
  third
   party without his or her consent. This has come up previously with
  Jobvite
   and iframes. It's also come up with the use of tracking tools such as
   Google Analytics, which not only affect one-time visitors, but aim to
   persist client-side.
  
   How will the blog be backed up? Relying on an external service means
 not
   being in control of the data. Will there be regular backups made to
  ensure
   that if WordPress.com goes away, we won't lose all of our posts?
  
   MZMcBride
  
  
  
  
   I agree: this does seem to be a curious decision, at odds with the
 WMF's
   general policy of self-hosting as much as possible in order to maintain
   maximum independence from outside entities, particularly in the context
  of
   the recent concerns about privacy. I would have thought that
 maintaining
  a
   WordPress installation would be well within the WMF's capabilities.
  
   Neil
  
  
  
  
   __**_
   Wikimedia-l mailing list
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-request@**lists.wikimedia.org
  wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
   ?subject=**unsubscribe
  
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Lodewijk
This was definitely mentioned at Wikimania. What I understood is that it
will be hosted externally for performance and reliability reasons, but that
the rest should remain the same.

Anyway, I'm not an expert here, just what I understood from Matthew Roth 
friends

Lodewijk


2013/9/5 Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk

 This is being discussed on-wiki too, at

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Privacy_policy#Blog_not_hosted_by_WordPress.3F
 .

 Richard Symonds
 Wikimedia UK
 0207 065 0992

 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
 Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
 Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
 United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
 movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
 operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

 *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
 over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*


 On 5 September 2013 14:00, Neil Harris n...@tonal.clara.co.uk wrote:

  On 05/09/13 13:37, MZMcBride wrote:
 
  Hi.
 
  The recent draft privacy policy mentions that the Wikimedia blog
  (https://blog.wikimedia.org) will soon be hosted by WordPress.com.
 
  Was this discussed anywhere? If so, where?
 
  What is the proposed URL structure of a blog hosted by WordPress.com? I
  think there's a reasonable expectation that when a user visits
  *.wikimedia.org, we don't simply send his or her browser info to a
 third
  party without his or her consent. This has come up previously with
 Jobvite
  and iframes. It's also come up with the use of tracking tools such as
  Google Analytics, which not only affect one-time visitors, but aim to
  persist client-side.
 
  How will the blog be backed up? Relying on an external service means not
  being in control of the data. Will there be regular backups made to
 ensure
  that if WordPress.com goes away, we won't lose all of our posts?
 
  MZMcBride
 
 
 
 
  I agree: this does seem to be a curious decision, at odds with the WMF's
  general policy of self-hosting as much as possible in order to maintain
  maximum independence from outside entities, particularly in the context
 of
  the recent concerns about privacy. I would have thought that maintaining
 a
  WordPress installation would be well within the WMF's capabilities.
 
  Neil
 
 
 
 
  __**_
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-request@**lists.wikimedia.org
 wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
  ?subject=**unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread rupert THURNER
Personally i think this is a bad idea, especially with respect to all the
nsa discussions. If wmf is not able to host it might be hosted by one of
the chapters, or wikinews might accept a new article type blog, what you
think?

Rupert

Am 05.09.2013 19:34 schrieb Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com:

 As I understand  the blog is currently a self-hosted instance of Wordpress
 and the idea is to move the hosting to somewhere else.
 (So this is not MediaWiki vs. Wordpress, but self-hosting vs. not
 self-hosting)

 Best regards,
 Bence


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:

  On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org
  wrote:
 
   This was definitely mentioned at Wikimania. What I understood is that
it
   will be hosted externally for performance and reliability reasons, but
  that
   the rest should remain the same.
  
 
  So, A blog for one of the top 10 websites in the world is being hosted
  externally for performance and reliability? - That doesn't sound
right.
  Maybe Mr. Roth  friends can clarify a bit here.
 
  Blogs generally don't require a lot of resources, aside from some
comment
  oversight. But it's not like there is a deluge of comments or moderation
  required in the current blog - they average about 1, maybe 2 comments
and
  from my impression, don't particularly have a high number of regular
  followers.
 
  This seems like something trivial, perhaps because of familiarity with
  Wordpress, it is being preferred in this case. But then, why are we
  willingly and so easily handing the visitors to a third party?
especially
  with so much paranoia about monitoring and privacy issues. Even for the
  sake of our own impression and opinions - Is there a particular role
there
  that Mediawiki can't fill in? (I recall Erik once argued that wiki is
the
  most versatile platform, does he believe that Wordpress is a better
  alternative? )
 
  Regards
  Theo
 
 
  
   Anyway, I'm not an expert here, just what I understood from Matthew
Roth
  
   friends
  
   Lodewijk
  
  
   2013/9/5 Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk
  
This is being discussed on-wiki too, at
   
   
  
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Privacy_policy#Blog_not_hosted_by_WordPress.3F
.
   
Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
   
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England
  and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
  Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London
EC2A
   4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation
  (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
   
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal
  control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
   
   
On 5 September 2013 14:00, Neil Harris n...@tonal.clara.co.uk
wrote:
   
 On 05/09/13 13:37, MZMcBride wrote:

 Hi.

 The recent draft privacy policy mentions that the Wikimedia blog
 (https://blog.wikimedia.org) will soon be hosted by
  WordPress.com.

 Was this discussed anywhere? If so, where?

 What is the proposed URL structure of a blog hosted by
  WordPress.com?
   I
 think there's a reasonable expectation that when a user visits
 *.wikimedia.org, we don't simply send his or her browser info to
a
third
 party without his or her consent. This has come up previously
with
Jobvite
 and iframes. It's also come up with the use of tracking tools
such
  as
 Google Analytics, which not only affect one-time visitors, but
aim
  to
 persist client-side.

 How will the blog be backed up? Relying on an external service
means
   not
 being in control of the data. Will there be regular backups made
to
ensure
 that if WordPress.com goes away, we won't lose all of our posts?

 MZMcBride




 I agree: this does seem to be a curious decision, at odds with the
   WMF's
 general policy of self-hosting as much as possible in order to
  maintain
 maximum independence from outside entities, particularly in the
  context
of
 the recent concerns about privacy. I would have thought that
   maintaining
a
 WordPress installation would be well within the WMF's
capabilities.

 Neil




 __**_
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

 Unsubscribe:
   https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-request@**lists.wikimedia.org
wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
 ?subject=**unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Steven Zhang
The dispute resolution page is a little bit of a mess, but we're working on 
streamlining things. Informal mediation was closed as it had been made largely 
redundant by the dispute resolution noticeboard. The same could perhaps be said 
about the mediation committee, but it's a long-standing process and I don't see 
it being closed anytime soon, regardless of how effective it is, due to its 
longevity, and due to the fact there'd be nowhere to take a dispute after DRN.

I did have a chat to a few folk at Wikimania and am coming up with an 
alternative DR process to try and take the pain out of things - DRN would have 
a go at resolving the dispute, and if that failed, a moderated discussion would 
take place where the question(s) or matters under dispute would be clearly 
defined, and then put to the wider community for a discussion. I believe there 
was recently a discussion like this on Jerusalem.

But I think the main thing that holds our processes back is a lack of involved 
volunteers. It causes burnout. You can't scream aah, this process sucks 
and it's broken! and expect things to magically fix itself. Getting involved 
will go a long way to fixing things.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

On 6 Sep 2013, at 5:33 am, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

 On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 wrote:
 
 It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who
 bump
 up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
 that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.
 Removing the mediation committee from that process might
 streamline things a bit. I notice the mediation cabal has closed
 its doors since the last time I looked.
 
 -Chad
 
 I confess I'm not up to date; hardly anyone ever tries to seriously argue
 with me; and, often, if they do, I find something more productive than
 arguing with an idiot. (See, I am a very bad citizen). The Dispute
 resolution pages should be up to date and reflect current practices,
 whatever they are; in many cases matters that once would have been
 considered for arbitration are now handled by administrators.
 
 Fred
 
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Gregory Varnum
I think this makes 100% sense from an operations perspective.  Anytime you can 
outsource a lower priority web service - fantastic.

However, from a community advocacy perspective - I am less convinced.  I would 
be curious if anyone from that team could chime in as well.

The security argument makes a great deal of sense to me - making the primary 
production sites vulnerable should always be avoided if at all humanly possible 
to do so.

Here are some lingering questions I would have for Advocacy and Ops:
1. How closely are we working with WordPress.com staff on this setup?
2. Will we be paying for the service? (I know it is minimal - more curious than 
anything)
3. Is the Automattic (company behind WordPress) privacy policy compatible with 
WMF's current and proposed (as it exists now) privacy policy?
4. Will people be required to register with WordPress.com to participate in the 
blog?
5. I recognize we utilize a lot of corporations - but most do not handle our 
content (I suppose data centers and bandwidth - but I digress) - generally that 
has been our own or a nonprofit like Freenode (if you count IRC as content 
service). Additionally, they use ads - which has been a hot topic on project 
sites.  Recognizing the blog is not really a project site that is covered as 
tightly under our principles - can someone speak to the compatibility of 
Automattic's policies and values with WM and WMF? How are we getting around the 
ads?
6. Are there other services on WMF servers that could be potential security 
threats? Are OTRS, Mailman, and Etherpad subject to these concerns as well? Is 
there a likely possibility that other services will be moved in the future?
7. Should all of these services be moved to a separate server?  Is that 
feasible?

I appreciate that WMF is having this dialogue before the switch actually 
happens.  I agree it is a compelling idea.

- greg aka varnent


On 5 Sep, 2013, at 5:16 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 5 September 2013 22:07, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 That is a argument for changing the blogging tool/platform, Not changing to
 non self-hosted environment.
 
 
 tl;dr Wordpress is the only blog that isn't shit. And Wordpress.com is
 a fine place to host a blog if you don't want ever to have to think
 about the nuts and bolts of securing the thing.
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
I don't believe you are rightly informed there. You are of course right that 
there are many arenas where mobbing is frequent, like blogs and Facebook etc.

But to believe that the Wikis are a rosy exception in that context is to be 
very naive or very ill informed.

I don't exactly understand what you mean by Wikipedia's extreme size. First 
of all I don't only mean Wikipedia but all Wikis handled by Wikimedia. In this 
context Wikis can be very small, dominated and controlled by a very small 
number of people, or it can be huge like some of the big Wikipedias, which I 
guess are much harder to control by a small group.

I have primarily seen this problem in various small Wikis, but I suppose that 
it exist to a higher or smaller degree across the whole spectrum.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: geni geni...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List 
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 20:37 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 







On 5 September 2013 18:50, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de wrote:


I am involved in work to counteract mobbing on the Internet in general and 
there are the Wikis today absolutely a part of the problem.


Not remotely. Wikipedia's extreme size and heterogeneous nature make it an 
extremely poor place for ah mobs to form and sustain themselves. Places the 
reddit, free republic, DU and facebook are fair better environments for mobs 
and if you were actualy working on the  counteract mobbing on the Internet you 
would know this. 
 


-- 
geni 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
No, I just responded to a problem that I recognized well.

If you call him/her this or that is not important.

The important thing is that the person (or group of persons) has the 
responsibility and the power to fulfil its task, i.e. to protect Wiki-users 
from abuses and mobbing. Today nobody has neither that responsibility nor that 
power.

regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 18:44 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

And your solution is an ombudsman, or what? I know there is a solution
that you have in mind. In fact, it looks very much like a solution in
search of a problem. Out with it!

Fred

 The problem is that howls of outraged anguish seems to come from the
 admins not from the newbies.

 But that was not the question here. The question was that the Wikis lack
 an instance that people can turn to when they are harassed and mobbed in
 the wikis, be that newbies or admins, children or old folks, women or
 men.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 18:03 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 Yes, that is pretty much the situation. The howls of outraged anguish
 from those who were not able to dictate (really bad) content or practices
 form the core of our organized opposition. That does not mean systemic
 deficiencies don't exist; just that we must look and think in a noisy
 environment.

 Fred

 On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
 now.

 Where doesn't work is mostly defined as didn't give the result I
 demanded.

 I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
 came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
 majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of losing
 to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.

 When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
 getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
 exactly what it's been designed for.

 Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
 convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
 side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
 concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
 ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
 and personality conflicts.

 There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
 occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from the system didn't
 let me get my way to the system is broken/dying is all to easy to
 make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.

 This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront
 might
 prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
 established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
 conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects of
 human nature...

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Lars Gardenius
As said that are easily solved in the society as a whole. So it is probably 
also possible in Wikis.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius





 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Gesendet: 20:30 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

Who is both independent, knowledgeable, and not involved in a wiki?

All you have to do is read a newspaper or magazine article about
Wikipedia to realize how hopelessly outsiders get everything wrong.

Fred

 Well, it doesn't matter to me if it is re-invention or not.
 To me the important thing is to put such an instance in action.
 And I know for a fact that it doesn't function today since I discussed
 this question with numerous people in the Wiki-org (like the stewards,
 the ombudsman etc.)

 That you are independent doesn't mean that you are not accustomed to how
 the Wikis work, I would guess that it actually is a prerequisite that you
 are. It just means that you take a step aside and are no longer actively
 involved in any Wiki and that you understand your position as an
 independent arbitrator. This process is handled without difficulties by
 other organizations.

 I am involved in work to counteract mobbing on the Internet in general
 and there are the Wikis today absolutely a part of the problem.


 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius



 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 19:14 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 That is just a re-invention of the Arbitration Committee. People from an
 external source nearly always have a fatal flaw; they don't understand
 how Wikipedia works. More informed people could man the arbitration
 committee, but that is a matter of documenting what the existing
 committee does and its effect and educating administrators, potential
 candidates and the existing committee members on the practical effect of
 their decisions.

 Fred

 Well that is pretty easy: that Wiki-org will follow the example put up
 by
 many countries, companies and schools.

 Create an independent instance (i.e. in this case independent of the
 Wikis) that you can turn to when you are offended, insulted, mobbed,
 harassed or in any way mistreated by people in the Wikis.

 Since so many seems to misunderstand this question, it is not meant to
 handle questions about content or policies in the separate Wikis, but
 only about the normal human behaviour that we have agreed on shall be
 present in a society (today not including the Wikis).

 It is also important that this independent instance shall be
 responsible
 for that the behaviour in the Wikis are within the boundaries of the
 outside society, and therefore also has the right to intervene in a
 Wiki,
 when members of that Wiki cross that boundary.

 Today there is an increasing problem with mobbing on the Internet. I
 don't want the Wikis to be an enclave where this is still allowed.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 16:04 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 Lars,

 Please put your cards on the table. What are your suggested changes?

 Fred

 I am also more interested in processes than discussing special cases.
 I
 think that was also the meaning of Rui Correia's letter starting this
 thread.

 To me there is obvious that there are flaws in the construction of the
 Wiki-organization when it comes to mistreatment and mobbing of users.
 I
 have discussed this question both with the stewards and the ombudsman,
 both tell me that they can't intervene in a Wiki, even if they
 themselves
 object to the behaviour of certain members of that Wiki.

 That means that there is no instance outside of the specific Wiki to
 which a harassed and mobbed user can turn. That is I think an
 structural
 error that I believe you don't usually find in any other big
 organization.

 I have also studied these pages where dispute resolution is handled.
 They do not impress me much. I agree with Rui Correia, it is the same
 people quarreling about the same things and the result is often nil.

 So I still think there need to be structural change to handle this
 type
 of problems.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 CC: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org;
 fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net
 Gesendet: 15:15 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself



 I've worked extensively with dispute resolution on English 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread David Gerard
On 5 September 2013 20:03, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:

 Mediawiki is indeed the most versatile platform, but that just means
 it's okay at most things. It doesn't mean it's better than other
 platforms explicitly designed for a particular job ;-)


Wordpress is a ridiculously better blog platform than MediaWiki will ever be.


 I'd prefer self-hosting on general principle, but if our operations
 people say it's better and more stable hosted elsewhere - and
 presumably they have - then fair enough.


I would worry only about our privacy policies for users - will we use
our own database of users? Will people need to log in with a
Wordpress.com accoun to comment? Can we say precisely what data
Wordpress will get?


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Dan Collins en.wp.s...@gmail.com wrote:
 At least OTRS and mailman belong inside our security bubble of control,
 where the only people with access are ops and they can be properly secured.
 The security risk of those applications potentially introducing and
 attacker to all our data is minimal compared to the much greater risk of
 placing our user names, passwords, email addresses, and highly private OTRS
 queues in the hands of a third party including all their technicians, not
 to mention their security practices that we have no control over.

 As for the other question. If the nsa sends a letter to WordPress then they
 can get the email address and IP of someone who posted a post or comment to
 our blog. Probably the password too. If we host it over SSL then there's no
 way for them to know even that a given user commented, and if we did SSL
 right (maybe in another ten years) no one would know whether an IP was anon
 browsing, a checkuser or oversight, or reading our highly sensitive OTRS
 queues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/nsa-foils-much-internet-encryption.html?hp

In which it is disclosed that, unsurprisingly, SSL poses no real
challenge for the NSA. In any case, I find it hard to imagine a
plausible scenario in which the NSA would be interested in a commenter
on the WMF blog. (My previous post in this thread was sarcastic, in
case that was unclear).

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Dennis Pierri
I've had the same issues in Spanish Wikipedia, the project is missing 
neutrality and is in danger because of serious editors and admins which put 
their opinions before the Wikipedia values

Sent from my iPhone

On 04/09/2013, at 16:38, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote:

 Greetings to All
 
 Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not compared to
 people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long list
 of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.
 
 In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the
 project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore having to
 fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.
 
 In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis is
 fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
 process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of people
 previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
 resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the 'outsider'
 that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets 'good
 advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to temper
 his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is round at
 a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is making the
 WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.
 
 And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.
 
 I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
 encounters when you include something negative about certain big
 corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and everbody
 else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we know
 there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear you!.
 
 Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly - was
 anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are legions
 out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know that
 they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here,
 http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles
 
 I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word
 downgrade to refer to people using Windows 8 who wanted to go back to XP.
 For a failed product, by Microsoft's own admission, going back to XP is an
 upgrade, going back to sanity, not a downgrade.
 
 I was first accused of trolling, then something else, then of offending the
 entire community of users of Windows 8. The editor who is adamant - not the
 first time - to purge ant-MS from the talkpage violated the 3RR, but
 nothing gets done about it. I reported the 3RR, and it was immediately
 closed, labelled as being relatiatory. There is a backlog of issues on that
 page, but my entry was closed within minutes.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Codename_Lisa_reported_by_User:Rui_Gabriel_Correia_.28Result:_Closed.29
 
 It was closed, claiming that it was already being addressed elsewhere.
 
 So, I too will consider my stay here. Like I said right at the top, I don't
 do much here, so I am certain I will not even be missed. I edit in eight
 languages, small little bits here and there. I participated in a number of
 initiaves on the development of Chapters in Africa and am happy to see that
 things are moving. I had the honour and privilege to meet Jimmy Wales in
 South Africa and to discuss a few things relating to WP in Africa.
 
 So, it is time to wind down anr retire into a corner. I am busy with a
 novel, I am sure that is where I should invest my time and energy.
 
 Sincere regards to all, happy editing
 
 Rui Correia
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 _
 Rui Correia
 Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Work Consultant
 Bridge to Angola - Angola Liaison Consultant
 
 Mobile Number in South Africa +27 74 425 4186
 Número de Telemóvel na África do Sul +27 74 425 4186
 ___
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and the politics of encryption

2013-09-05 Thread George Herbert
Theo:

 They even have a Key
 recovery service and it's been going on for a long while apparently, to
 the point that the NSA has been steering the release of encryption
 standards and tools. I suppose that should make the politics of
 encryption a bit less relevant?



No; with Perfect Forward Security it is still entirely relevant, and PFS
has been discussed in the game plan for WMF (I don't recall the status of
the long term security roadmap, but it's been widely discussed on technical
lists here).

It's also entirely relevant with or without PFS for any
less-than-NSA-capable agency or third party attempting to watch WMF project
users.  UK and China may be somewhere up there in capability, for example,
but most countries won't be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_forward_secrecy




On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:

 So, does this have any bearing on the discussion? -

 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/nsa-foils-much-internet-encryption.html

 Or are we just partial to the US surveillance over PRC.

 The article does mention SSL, VPNs and 4G security. They even have a Key
 recovery service and it's been going on for a long while apparently, to
 the point that the NSA has been steering the release of encryption
 standards and tools. I suppose that should make the politics of
 encryption a bit less relevant?

 -Theo


 On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:

  On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Brion Vibber bvib...@wikimedia.org
  wrote:
 
   I would love to see Wikipedia content made available in China on
 Chinese
   infrastructure operated by a Chinese organization, with total ability
 to
   determine their own security and censorship policies.
  
   But that's what Baidu did and we hate them! you say?
  
   We could work *with* such an organization to coordinate, share content,
   etc, without compromising basic web security for our sites or giving up
  our
   liberal content policies on Wikipedia proper.
 
  I don't buy the argument. Last time I checked, Hudong (now just
  Baike) and Baidu Baike were the main wiki-like encyclopedias
  operating out of and serving mainland China. Both use non-free
  licensing terms, and both are subject to local censorship policies and
  practices. That may include turning over contributors if they post
  content that's deemed to be problematic by local authorities.
 
  At least on the surface, the projects are successful, with millions of
  articles and lots of traffic. I have no idea what the quality of the
  content is, but looking at an article like DNA, I'm guessing it
  provides useful value to its readers:
 
  http://www.baike.com/wiki/DNAprd=button_doc_jinru
 
  Where they are failing to do so, they can improve, if necessary by
  copying Wikipedia content. But the one thing that they _cannot_
  provide, and that a neutral encyclopedia _must_ provide, is precisely
  information of the kind that the Chinese government would censor.
  Neutral information about people, politics and history, irrespective
  of whether that information afflicts a comfortable bureaucrat
  somewhere.
 
  I would posit a different argument. The problem of providing basic
  information about any subject _is_ being solved for by local
  information providers. China isn't some backwater waiting for us to
  educate them about physics and disease control. The problem of
  providing a neutral, uncensored encyclopedia in the Chinese language,
  on the other hand, isn't being solved for by anyone but us. The answer
  is not to water down our security or partner with local information
  providers that allow censorship and are willing to turn over user
  data. It's to find ways to get that information to people, including
  the bits they'd rather have people not see.
 
  Erik
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread shi zhao
*.Wordpress.com blocked in China.
Chinese wikipedia: http://zh.wikipedia.org/
My blog: http://shizhao.org
twitter: https://twitter.com/shizhao

[[zh:User:Shizhao]]


2013/9/6 Matthew Roth mr...@wikimedia.org:
 Hi all,

 I was going to socialize some of the transitions for the Wikimedia blog in
 the next few weeks on the Wikimedia blog
 spacehttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Blogon Meta and on
 the blog itself with a blog post, but this conversation has
 sped up the discussion. I plan to have something on Meta by the beginning
 of next week and hope that we can continue the discussion there when the
 content is posted.

 As a general concept, we’re redesigning the blog to be less focused on the
 Wikimedia Foundation and more on the Wikimedia movement. For the past year,
 we have been sharing more narratives from the movement, making this
 important communications tool more about movement partners and not
 exclusively about the Wikimedia Foundation. We believe the public has
 little understanding of the people behind the projects and we want to share
 their stories (i.e. why the contribute, why they edit, why they develop).
 We still need the tool to communicate important updates from the WMF, but
 that can be accomplished in a larger ecosystem with more diversity of
 voices. We’ve had a significant increase in publication from authors who
 don’t work for the WMF, as well as increased multi-lingual posts, and we
 will continue to increase the amount and diversity of participation.

 Specifically, let me address a couple of points raised in this thread.


-

We are redesigning the blog. For those at Wikimania who saw my talk, we
shared the working site for the new Wikimedia blog and explained the basics
of our thinking. Here is the link for the site under construction. Please
understand this is still under construction and there will be some changes,
but this is the basic design of the new Wikimedia blog. It’s also populated
with data from a db dump that is now 2 months old, so you will see
significant content difference from the current Wikimedia blog. The draft
version of the blog is hosted on an outside platform, WP Engine, but this
is not necessarily the hosting company we may use in future:
http://wikimedia.wpengine.com/
-

We’re exploring the possibility of 3rd-party hosting of the blog. We had
extensive discussions with members of the WMF Operations and Engineering
teams about whether to continue to host the blog on our servers or move to
a 3rd-party host. Ultimately we determined that 3rd party hosts made sense
for the blog for a number of important reasons. I would refer you to the
email in this
 threadhttp://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/387838#387838from
 Leslie Carr in our Ops team, but essentially they feel that a move to
a 3rd party host would address important security and support concerns, and
would therefore be preferable to continuing to host the blog ourselves.
-

A 3rd-party host will give us redundancy and strong backups. The blog
has become the Foundation’s primary public communications tool (alongside,
naturally, the host of wikis we use to converse with the community). We
want to be sure this platform is hosted on a 3rd-party site in case we
encounter a significant outage or cluster-wide downtime. Obviously we can’t
rely on the projects to get that information out if the cluster is down,
and although we will continue to use identi.ca, twitter, and facebook,
we’d like to have a stable place to point traffic.
-

The blog needs to be able to handle a lot of traffic, quickly. We know
that Wikimedia’s servers are up to this kind of task, but we’re experts at
hosting wikis - not necessarily experts at hosting blogs. Specifically
blogs that may need to handle very large volumes of traffic, spam, and
comments in a short period of time. We had one such situation back in 2012
during the Wikipedia blackout. We sent tens of millions of readers to the
Wikimedia blog and dealt with around 18K comments in a matter of hours. We
could handle it, but we’d like to have capacity to handle that in an
emergency situation. Not all blog hosting companies can do this, but a few
that we’re looking at are expressly built to handle immediate and massive
increases in traffic, and they’ve got amazing back up services.
-

We have not yet selected a 3rd-party host. We have screened a couple of
3rd-party hosts. While Wordpress.com is one of our top choices (not the
standard consumer version, rather their ‘managed’ or white glove hosting
services for high volume customers), we have not yet selected them. Right
now the WMF legal team is in discussions with Wordpress.com and others. We
appreciate that if we host on a 3rd party site, we need to navigate the
important issue of ensuring our privacies 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Greg Grossmeier
quote name=Tyler Romeo date=2013-09-05 time=23:17:46 -0400
 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:57 PM, shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  *.Wordpress.com blocked in China.
 
 Welp, there goes that plan.

Being pedantic: that doesn't mean that all wordpress.com hosted blogs
through different domains (eg: blog.wikimedia.org can point to a
wordpress.com IP, which the blog really lives) are blocked.

I can't think of one off the top of my head that is in that category
(they don't usually advertise that they're wordpress.com-hosted) to
test/suggest.

Greg


-- 
| Greg GrossmeierGPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
| identi.ca: @gregA18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Matthew Roth
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org wrote:


 I can't think of one off the top of my head that is in that category
 (they don't usually advertise that they're wordpress.com-hosted) to
 test/suggest.


Here are a few: http://wordpress.org/showcase



 Greg


 --
 | Greg GrossmeierGPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
 | identi.ca: @gregA18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 

Matthew Roth
Global Communications Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
+1.415.839.6885 ext 6635
www.wikimediafoundation.org
*http://blog.wikimedia.org/*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia blog moving to WordPress.com

2013-09-05 Thread Tyler Romeo
Also, it'd be a bit difficult to set up, because I doubt the China firewall
is stupid enough to allow simple CNAME redirects, so we'd have to
dynamically interact with whatever Wordpress.com's DNS environment is.

-- 
Tyler Romeo
On Sep 6, 2013 1:11 AM, Matthew Roth mr...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:

 
  I can't think of one off the top of my head that is in that category
  (they don't usually advertise that they're wordpress.com-hosted) to
  test/suggest.
 

 Here are a few: http://wordpress.org/showcase


 
  Greg
 
 
  --
  | Greg GrossmeierGPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
  | identi.ca: @gregA18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 



 --

 Matthew Roth
 Global Communications Manager
 Wikimedia Foundation
 +1.415.839.6885 ext 6635
 www.wikimediafoundation.org
 *http://blog.wikimedia.org/*
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe