[Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread K. Peachey
Lets all welcome the new overlord Erik.

Add a new protection level called superprotect
Assigned to nobody by default. Requested by Erik Möller for the purposes
of protecting pages such that sysop permissions are not sufficient to


edit them.
Change-Id: Idfa211257dbacc7623d42393257de1525ff01e9e
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#q,Idfa211257dbacc7623d42393257de1525ff01e9e,n,z

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/153302/



Someone clearly can't take criticism of their projects well.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Erik Moeller
Hi folks,

Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
intent to remove this capability.

However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
This protection level provides an additional path to manage these
situations by preventing edits to the relevant pages (we're happy to
help apply any urgent edits) until a particular situation has calmed
down.

Thanks,
Erik
-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Maarten Dammers

Hi Erik,

I understand you reasoning, but you couldn't have communicated and timed 
this in a worse way. You might be doing the right thing, but because of 
this ill communication and timing, this will be completely overshadowed. 
That saddens me. Good luck with the shit storm :-(


Maarten

Erik Moeller schreef op 10-8-2014 14:27:

Hi folks,

Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
intent to remove this capability.

However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
This protection level provides an additional path to manage these
situations by preventing edits to the relevant pages (we're happy to
help apply any urgent edits) until a particular situation has calmed
down.

Thanks,
Erik



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread MZMcBride
Erik Moeller wrote:
Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
intent to remove this capability.

However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
This protection level provides an additional path to manage these
situations by preventing edits to the relevant pages (we're happy to
help apply any urgent edits) until a particular situation has calmed
down.

Let's be clear here. You unilaterally implemented super-protection and
then had a Community Advocate apply this new protection level to the
German Wikipedia's MediaWiki:Common.js?

You'd been threatening to implement super-protection for a long time. I
see you finally made good on this very bad idea. This is certainly bold,
but also incredibly reckless. Your response to being told we don't like
your software is to try shove it down a wiki community's throat?

The German Wikipedia can easily use MediaWiki:Vector.js or an
on-by-default JavaScript gadget to implement this change. The German
Wikipedia can also block Jan Eissfeldt's account for conduct unbecoming of
an administrator. In my opinion, it also wouldn't be unreasonable for the
stewards to remove Jan Eissfeldt's capability to protect this page.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 August 2014 15:51, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:

 You'd been threatening to implement super-protection for a long time. I
 see you finally made good on this very bad idea. This is certainly bold,
 but also incredibly reckless. Your response to being told we don't like
 your software is to try shove it down a wiki community's throat?


I thought this was a response to someone hamfistedly editing en:wp's
JS and *actually breaking it*. When Erik reverted this change and said
don't break the damn wiki, the response was but we can so we should
be able to! and an attempt to take the Foundation to en:wp
arbitration. The obvious response is to make it so that such
blithering stupidity can't be enacted again.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread MZMcBride
David Gerard wrote:
On 10 August 2014 15:51, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
 You'd been threatening to implement super-protection for a long time. I
 see you finally made good on this very bad idea. This is certainly bold,
 but also incredibly reckless. Your response to being told we don't like
 your software is to try shove it down a wiki community's throat?

I thought this was a response to someone hamfistedly editing en:wp's
JS and *actually breaking it*. When Erik reverted this change and said
don't break the damn wiki, the response was but we can so we should
be able to! and an attempt to take the Foundation to en:wp
arbitration. The obvious response is to make it so that such
blithering stupidity can't be enacted again.

Super-protection was implemented in response to the German, not English,
Wikipedia. It turns out that multiple communities don't like MediaViewer.

Erik is squarely responsible for the mess being made here and deserves the
full blame and consequences. He instigated the arbitration case on the
English Wikipedia and he's now instigating a war with the German Wikipedia.

The German Wikipedia community has looked at and evaluated MediaViewer and
has decided that it doesn't want MediaViewer enabled on its wiki. Erik has
made it his mission to force MediaViewer on the German Wikipedians (and
the Commoners), using system administrators and community advocates and
anyone else he can coerce. This is unacceptable behavior on Erik's part.
MediaViewer is an entirely supplementary feature, not some fundamental or
critical piece of infrastructure in desperate need of protection.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 August 2014 16:08, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:

 He instigated the arbitration case on the
 English Wikipedia


That's *definitely* a claim needing actual evidence, considering he
didn't bring it. I assume you can produce something.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread John Mark Vandenberg
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 10:08 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
 David Gerard wrote:
On 10 August 2014 15:51, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
 You'd been threatening to implement super-protection for a long time. I
 see you finally made good on this very bad idea. This is certainly bold,
 but also incredibly reckless. Your response to being told we don't like
 your software is to try shove it down a wiki community's throat?

I thought this was a response to someone hamfistedly editing en:wp's
JS and *actually breaking it*. When Erik reverted this change and said
don't break the damn wiki, the response was but we can so we should
be able to! and an attempt to take the Foundation to en:wp
arbitration. The obvious response is to make it so that such
blithering stupidity can't be enacted again.

 Super-protection was implemented in response to the German, not English,
 Wikipedia. It turns out that multiple communities don't like MediaViewer.

 Erik is squarely responsible for the mess being made here and deserves the
 full blame and consequences. He instigated the arbitration case on the
 English Wikipedia and he's now instigating a war with the German Wikipedia.

 The German Wikipedia community has looked at and evaluated MediaViewer and
 has decided that it doesn't want MediaViewer enabled on its wiki. Erik has
 made it his mission to force MediaViewer on the German Wikipedians (and
 the Commoners), using system administrators and community advocates and
 anyone else he can coerce. This is unacceptable behavior on Erik's part.
 MediaViewer is an entirely supplementary feature, not some fundamental or
 critical piece of infrastructure in desperate need of protection.

As this has wide-ranging implications, I have started an RFC on meta

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Superprotect_rights

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread rupert THURNER
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 Hi folks,

 Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
 experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
 etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
 for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
 apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
 deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
 intent to remove this capability.

 However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
 MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
 a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
 This protection level provides an additional path to manage these
 situations by preventing edits to the relevant pages (we're happy to
 help apply any urgent edits) until a particular situation has calmed
 down.

erik, this was designed so, and worked well exactly like this.
administrators are voted, and there are hundreds which work together.
if it is wise process to review a change by another administrator
implement it like this. that has to be enough. it worked well 5 years
ago when we had most new editors joining. if you cannot convince the
admins about a change, there is strong evidence that something else is
wrong - not the user rights.

rupert

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Tomasz W . Kozłowski
This is, by far, the most disgusting and disrespectful action
undertaken by the Foundation that I have ever witnessed. The 2012 mass
desysopping of volunteer administrators on the WMF wiki and the past
threats of desysopping users re: VisualEditor and MediaViewer do not
even come close to this.

It is clear to me that the Foundation has agreed on this sneaky change
behind closed doors while some of the most outspoken Wikimedia
volunteers were (and still are) gathered in London. This is not the
first time that we're seeing this happpen, and it is clear to me that
the Foundation has lost all remaining moral authority to talk about
transparency and involving volunteers in the decision-making process.

Erik has forced his employees, including a so-called community
advocacy liaison, to use this opportunity to actively fight the
volunteer community of the German Wikipedia. He himself has engaged in
a wheel war over this, and continues to shove MediaViewer down the
German Wikipedia's community throat.

I'm not sure what was the purpose of this change, but if its aim was
to escalate the already tense situation between the WMF and its
volunteer communities regarding MediaViewer, protecting the
MediaWiki:Common.js page so that no one can edit it was the perfect
choice.

This action will cause a huge shitstorm, and Erik deserves every bit
of shit and mud that will be thrown his way.

You can force anything you like on your employees, but you cannot
force the volunteer community to do what you want, not in a manner
like this.

Remember that in the end, the community can exist without the WMF, but
there is no WMF without the community.

-- 
Tomasz

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Chris Keating

 It is clear to me that the Foundation has agreed on this sneaky change
 behind closed doors while some of the most outspoken Wikimedia
 volunteers were (and still are) gathered in London.


It's interesting you mention Wikimania, because one of the things I took
away from the conference was the idea that if Wikimedia sites keep on
looking and acting like they did in 2004, we'll get left behind by the rest
of the internet

Chris
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Austin Hair
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 6:29 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
 As this has wide-ranging implications, I have started an RFC on meta

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Superprotect_rights

With that done, I'd like to ask that discussion on this topic be
continued there. Not that this isn't an appropriate forum for the
issue to be raised, because it obviously is, but a public,
transparent, and permanently documented RfC seems like a better place
for it than the inboxes of this select few.

Austin

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Tomasz W . Kozłowski
The show must go on.

To ensure that no German Wikipedia administrator deletes
MediaWiki:Common.js to cancel the super-protection, the WMF has just
merged https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/153345/ and deployed it to
Wikimedia wikis as a matter of emergency after a personal request from
Erik Moller.

Someone is definitely forgetting that Wikimedia wikis are not the
Foundation's personal playground.

You should be ashamed of yourself, Erik, and you should resign or be fired.

And all volunteers should make sure to remember who was involved in
deploying those shameful patches to Wikimedia wikis without consulting
anything with the people who actually matter -- the community.

Tomasz

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread John Lewis
The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish
administrators. The community. couldn't take no for an answer and what has
happened?

* Wheel/edit wars
* A new user right to prevent disruption
* A priviledge has been revoked on dewiki
* A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki

And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to get
it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of being
too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.

To be honest - until we as a community learn we are not the overlords, the
masters, god of
Wikimedia, we can work to building a real encyclopedia with awesome feature
where are all work in a good environment and get on as a community and
Foundation.

I am not saying the WMF is perfect and is not in the wrong; they certainly
have some blame to take and I will come onto that shortly, but we can not
blame the Foundation for revoking something we clearly do not deserve.


Erik, While I will say you have not been communicating stuff the best you
can and this new user right was proxy deployed by Tim and an advocate and
not your self - you mean well and I see this. I agree with everything you
have done so far as a matter of fact.

Fabrice, Have you attempted to start any discussions with communities in
exactly why they don't want Media Viewer and how exactly it causes so much
dispute that it requires Erik to proxy intervene? It not, please do so.

In a short conclusion - I feel both parties have acted inappropriately and
our bitching at each other does far than solve it. The WMF had to implement
a new right and revoke dewiki's access to their site wide js page because
of their refusal to accept what the WMF said and want to create a
performance killer hack to 'fix it' at the cost of performance. Why did
dewiki have to do this? The WMF refusing to disable Media Viewer. From what
I see, the WMF have backed up by they refused to do this for Wikipedias and
their compromise for Commons is acceptable. I have yet to see a valid
reason why Media Viewer exactly makes Wikipedia go into a 'OMG UNUSABLE
DISABLE IT FUCKING NOW OR I WILL' state. Media Viewer allows you to view
and images without leaving the page - reducing load time for both users and
the WMF. It is hardly the beginning if the end for images.

If we take a quick look at the statistics - 64 voted against Media Viewer
on the English Wikipedia while 6kish users enabled it, this shows 1.1%
consensus for disabling the extension in a whole.

I will not ramble on any more. I just ask the community to stop bitching at
the WMF and accept their decision. Until then - I fully support Erik super
protecting every single js and CSS page on every wiki as most Sysop I feel
are technically incompetent.

John Lewis



-- 
John Lewis
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Austin Hair
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Tomasz W. Kozłowski
twkozlow...@gmail.com wrote:
 Someone is definitely forgetting that Wikimedia wikis are not the
 Foundation's personal playground.

 You should be ashamed of yourself, Erik, and you should resign or be fired.

 And all volunteers should make sure to remember who was involved in
 deploying those shameful patches to Wikimedia wikis without consulting
 anything with the people who actually matter -- the community.

Tomasz,

While I appreciate your indignation, this is absolutely not the tone
appropriate for the list, nor is it one likely to effect your desired
outcome. Please be civil, and consider commenting on the RfC rather
than making personal attacks and veiled threats on this mailing list.

Austin

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread MF-Warburg
Your mail is embarrassing.
If you think the foundation is like the parent of the community, you don't
understand anything about the foundation nor the community.
Am 11.08.2014 00:05 schrieb John Lewis johnflewi...@gmail.com:

 The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
 acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish
 administrators. The community. couldn't take no for an answer and what has
 happened?

 * Wheel/edit wars
 * A new user right to prevent disruption
 * A priviledge has been revoked on dewiki
 * A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki

 And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
 children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to get
 it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of being
 too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.

 To be honest - until we as a community learn we are not the overlords, the
 masters, god of
 Wikimedia, we can work to building a real encyclopedia with awesome feature
 where are all work in a good environment and get on as a community and
 Foundation.

 I am not saying the WMF is perfect and is not in the wrong; they certainly
 have some blame to take and I will come onto that shortly, but we can not
 blame the Foundation for revoking something we clearly do not deserve.

 
 Erik, While I will say you have not been communicating stuff the best you
 can and this new user right was proxy deployed by Tim and an advocate and
 not your self - you mean well and I see this. I agree with everything you
 have done so far as a matter of fact.

 Fabrice, Have you attempted to start any discussions with communities in
 exactly why they don't want Media Viewer and how exactly it causes so much
 dispute that it requires Erik to proxy intervene? It not, please do so.

 In a short conclusion - I feel both parties have acted inappropriately and
 our bitching at each other does far than solve it. The WMF had to implement
 a new right and revoke dewiki's access to their site wide js page because
 of their refusal to accept what the WMF said and want to create a
 performance killer hack to 'fix it' at the cost of performance. Why did
 dewiki have to do this? The WMF refusing to disable Media Viewer. From what
 I see, the WMF have backed up by they refused to do this for Wikipedias and
 their compromise for Commons is acceptable. I have yet to see a valid
 reason why Media Viewer exactly makes Wikipedia go into a 'OMG UNUSABLE
 DISABLE IT FUCKING NOW OR I WILL' state. Media Viewer allows you to view
 and images without leaving the page - reducing load time for both users and
 the WMF. It is hardly the beginning if the end for images.

 If we take a quick look at the statistics - 64 voted against Media Viewer
 on the English Wikipedia while 6kish users enabled it, this shows 1.1%
 consensus for disabling the extension in a whole.

 I will not ramble on any more. I just ask the community to stop bitching at
 the WMF and accept their decision. Until then - I fully support Erik super
 protecting every single js and CSS page on every wiki as most Sysop I feel
 are technically incompetent.

 John Lewis



 --
 John Lewis
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 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, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] [Translators-l] Thank you for Tech News see you soon

2014-08-10 Thread svetlana
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, at 04:07, Tomasz W. Kozłowski wrote:
 Philippe,
 the patch is not for the MediaWiki software but for the configuration
 of Wikimedia wikis (it's in the operations/mediawiki-config repository
 on Gerrit).
 
 It has been merged and deployed on the production cluster. The user
 right has been added to the global staff user group, and it has
 already been used to protect the MediaWiki:Common.js page on the
 German Wikipedia so that no one can edit it except Wikimedia
 Foundation employees.
 
 Wikimedia Foundation is using this user right to actively fight its
 community of volunteers.
 
 This is something I cannot and will not support.
 
 Tomasz
 

completely agree with 100% of the above
cc'ing 2 more lists

ftr, the change discussed is: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/153302/

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Richard Symonds
MF-Warburg, that came across as a bit rude...
On 11 Aug 2014 00:29, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Your mail is embarrassing.
 If you think the foundation is like the parent of the community, you don't
 understand anything about the foundation nor the community.
 Am 11.08.2014 00:05 schrieb John Lewis johnflewi...@gmail.com:

  The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
  acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish
  administrators. The community. couldn't take no for an answer and what
 has
  happened?
 
  * Wheel/edit wars
  * A new user right to prevent disruption
  * A priviledge has been revoked on dewiki
  * A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki
 
  And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
  children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to
 get
  it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of being
  too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.
 
  To be honest - until we as a community learn we are not the overlords,
 the
  masters, god of
  Wikimedia, we can work to building a real encyclopedia with awesome
 feature
  where are all work in a good environment and get on as a community and
  Foundation.
 
  I am not saying the WMF is perfect and is not in the wrong; they
 certainly
  have some blame to take and I will come onto that shortly, but we can not
  blame the Foundation for revoking something we clearly do not deserve.
 
  
  Erik, While I will say you have not been communicating stuff the best you
  can and this new user right was proxy deployed by Tim and an advocate and
  not your self - you mean well and I see this. I agree with everything you
  have done so far as a matter of fact.
 
  Fabrice, Have you attempted to start any discussions with communities in
  exactly why they don't want Media Viewer and how exactly it causes so
 much
  dispute that it requires Erik to proxy intervene? It not, please do so.
 
  In a short conclusion - I feel both parties have acted inappropriately
 and
  our bitching at each other does far than solve it. The WMF had to
 implement
  a new right and revoke dewiki's access to their site wide js page because
  of their refusal to accept what the WMF said and want to create a
  performance killer hack to 'fix it' at the cost of performance. Why did
  dewiki have to do this? The WMF refusing to disable Media Viewer. From
 what
  I see, the WMF have backed up by they refused to do this for Wikipedias
 and
  their compromise for Commons is acceptable. I have yet to see a valid
  reason why Media Viewer exactly makes Wikipedia go into a 'OMG UNUSABLE
  DISABLE IT FUCKING NOW OR I WILL' state. Media Viewer allows you to view
  and images without leaving the page - reducing load time for both users
 and
  the WMF. It is hardly the beginning if the end for images.
 
  If we take a quick look at the statistics - 64 voted against Media Viewer
  on the English Wikipedia while 6kish users enabled it, this shows 1.1%
  consensus for disabling the extension in a whole.
 
  I will not ramble on any more. I just ask the community to stop bitching
 at
  the WMF and accept their decision. Until then - I fully support Erik
 super
  protecting every single js and CSS page on every wiki as most Sysop I
 feel
  are technically incompetent.
 
  John Lewis
 
 
 
  --
  John Lewis
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  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, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 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, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread MF-Warburg
Oh sorry, that was totally not the intention. It must be the strange beer
here at the Thistle Barbecue hotel.
Am 11.08.2014 00:54 schrieb Richard Symonds 
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk:

 MF-Warburg, that came across as a bit rude...
 On 11 Aug 2014 00:29, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com wrote:

  Your mail is embarrassing.
  If you think the foundation is like the parent of the community, you
 don't
  understand anything about the foundation nor the community.
  Am 11.08.2014 00:05 schrieb John Lewis johnflewi...@gmail.com:
 
   The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
   acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish
   administrators. The community. couldn't take no for an answer and what
  has
   happened?
  
   * Wheel/edit wars
   * A new user right to prevent disruption
   * A priviledge has been revoked on dewiki
   * A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki
  
   And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
   children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to
  get
   it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of
 being
   too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.
  
   To be honest - until we as a community learn we are not the overlords,
  the
   masters, god of
   Wikimedia, we can work to building a real encyclopedia with awesome
  feature
   where are all work in a good environment and get on as a community and
   Foundation.
  
   I am not saying the WMF is perfect and is not in the wrong; they
  certainly
   have some blame to take and I will come onto that shortly, but we can
 not
   blame the Foundation for revoking something we clearly do not deserve.
  
   
   Erik, While I will say you have not been communicating stuff the best
 you
   can and this new user right was proxy deployed by Tim and an advocate
 and
   not your self - you mean well and I see this. I agree with everything
 you
   have done so far as a matter of fact.
  
   Fabrice, Have you attempted to start any discussions with communities
 in
   exactly why they don't want Media Viewer and how exactly it causes so
  much
   dispute that it requires Erik to proxy intervene? It not, please do so.
  
   In a short conclusion - I feel both parties have acted inappropriately
  and
   our bitching at each other does far than solve it. The WMF had to
  implement
   a new right and revoke dewiki's access to their site wide js page
 because
   of their refusal to accept what the WMF said and want to create a
   performance killer hack to 'fix it' at the cost of performance. Why did
   dewiki have to do this? The WMF refusing to disable Media Viewer. From
  what
   I see, the WMF have backed up by they refused to do this for Wikipedias
  and
   their compromise for Commons is acceptable. I have yet to see a valid
   reason why Media Viewer exactly makes Wikipedia go into a 'OMG UNUSABLE
   DISABLE IT FUCKING NOW OR I WILL' state. Media Viewer allows you to
 view
   and images without leaving the page - reducing load time for both users
  and
   the WMF. It is hardly the beginning if the end for images.
  
   If we take a quick look at the statistics - 64 voted against Media
 Viewer
   on the English Wikipedia while 6kish users enabled it, this shows 1.1%
   consensus for disabling the extension in a whole.
  
   I will not ramble on any more. I just ask the community to stop
 bitching
  at
   the WMF and accept their decision. Until then - I fully support Erik
  super
   protecting every single js and CSS page on every wiki as most Sysop I
  feel
   are technically incompetent.
  
   John Lewis
  
  
  
   --
   John Lewis
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   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, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  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, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 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, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Richard Symonds
As long as we all stay friends!
On 11 Aug 2014 00:57, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Oh sorry, that was totally not the intention. It must be the strange beer
 here at the Thistle Barbecue hotel.
 Am 11.08.2014 00:54 schrieb Richard Symonds 
 richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk:

  MF-Warburg, that came across as a bit rude...
  On 11 Aug 2014 00:29, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com wrote:
 
   Your mail is embarrassing.
   If you think the foundation is like the parent of the community, you
  don't
   understand anything about the foundation nor the community.
   Am 11.08.2014 00:05 schrieb John Lewis johnflewi...@gmail.com:
  
The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not
 punish
administrators. The community. couldn't take no for an answer and
 what
   has
happened?
   
* Wheel/edit wars
* A new user right to prevent disruption
* A priviledge has been revoked on dewiki
* A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki
   
And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming
 to
   get
it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of
  being
too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.
   
To be honest - until we as a community learn we are not the
 overlords,
   the
masters, god of
Wikimedia, we can work to building a real encyclopedia with awesome
   feature
where are all work in a good environment and get on as a community
 and
Foundation.
   
I am not saying the WMF is perfect and is not in the wrong; they
   certainly
have some blame to take and I will come onto that shortly, but we can
  not
blame the Foundation for revoking something we clearly do not
 deserve.
   

Erik, While I will say you have not been communicating stuff the best
  you
can and this new user right was proxy deployed by Tim and an advocate
  and
not your self - you mean well and I see this. I agree with everything
  you
have done so far as a matter of fact.
   
Fabrice, Have you attempted to start any discussions with communities
  in
exactly why they don't want Media Viewer and how exactly it causes so
   much
dispute that it requires Erik to proxy intervene? It not, please do
 so.
   
In a short conclusion - I feel both parties have acted
 inappropriately
   and
our bitching at each other does far than solve it. The WMF had to
   implement
a new right and revoke dewiki's access to their site wide js page
  because
of their refusal to accept what the WMF said and want to create a
performance killer hack to 'fix it' at the cost of performance. Why
 did
dewiki have to do this? The WMF refusing to disable Media Viewer.
 From
   what
I see, the WMF have backed up by they refused to do this for
 Wikipedias
   and
their compromise for Commons is acceptable. I have yet to see a valid
reason why Media Viewer exactly makes Wikipedia go into a 'OMG
 UNUSABLE
DISABLE IT FUCKING NOW OR I WILL' state. Media Viewer allows you to
  view
and images without leaving the page - reducing load time for both
 users
   and
the WMF. It is hardly the beginning if the end for images.
   
If we take a quick look at the statistics - 64 voted against Media
  Viewer
on the English Wikipedia while 6kish users enabled it, this shows
 1.1%
consensus for disabling the extension in a whole.
   
I will not ramble on any more. I just ask the community to stop
  bitching
   at
the WMF and accept their decision. Until then - I fully support Erik
   super
protecting every single js and CSS page on every wiki as most Sysop I
   feel
are technically incompetent.
   
John Lewis
   
   
   
--
John Lewis
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   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, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  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] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Tomasz W . Kozłowski
On 11 August 2014 01:05, John Lewis wrote:

 The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
 acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish
 administrators.

Erik was acting in a manner that is totally disgraceful. He should
have never used his force to revert DaB.  The way that DaB.
implemented the results of that RfC were incorrect, and the
community of the German Wikipedia were perfectly able to revert his
edits themselves once they realized what the effects were — without
the need to involve the WMF at any point.

 * A new user right to prevent disruption

Implemented without any community consultation whatsoever, on a global
scale even though the problem was occurring only on the German
Wikipedia.

 * A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki

Nothing of the sort has happened yet.

 And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
 children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to get
 it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of being
 too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.

The only person that should be blamed by what happened is Erik. He is
a WMF employee, he is an experienced Wikimedian, and he should have
realized what would be the result of his actions.

Instead, he went ahead with his show of force, and escalated a
situation that would have fixed itself in a matter of hours.

Even if MMV was disabled for a day, nothing would have happened. Now
shit's happened, and it will be damn hard to regain the trust that was
lost over this absurd stretching of muscles.

PS For what it's worth: I like MultimediaViewer. I use it, and I
opposed the idea that a small community of volunteers can decide to
disable it for anonymous editors. But what Erik has done is totally
unacceptable, and contrary to the supposed cooperation between the WMF
and the volunteer communities.

-- 
Tomasz

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Options for the German Wikipedia

2014-08-10 Thread MZMcBride
Hi.

The German Wikipedia has evaluated and decided against the default use of
MediaViewer on its project (preferring opt-in, rather than opt-out). Erik
has made it his mission to impose MediaViewer on the German Wikipedia
using Wikimedia Foundation staff coercion (cf.
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/153302 and
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/153345). Both changes have been pushed
through hastily and have had negative repercussions as a result (missing
translations, disrupted workflows, etc.). From a recent Bugzilla comment
about the latter change, it's clear this change was a kneejerk reaction
without a lot of thought as to the effects.

The security of the entire MediaWiki infrastructure, which in turn is the
security of a large portion of Wikimedia wikis, heavily relies on the idea
that local administrators can be trusted. With his provocative actions,
Erik has declared war on the German Wikipedia.

Given this, there are options for the German Wikipedians. This is a
non-exhaustive list and may not reflect the latest waste of developer and
system administrator resources coerced by Erik.

* Local disruptive accounts (such as User:Eloquence and User:JEissfeldt
(WMF)) can be locally blocked by German Wikipedia administrators for
conduct unbecoming.

* Global accounts can have their privileges removed by stewards, who are
intended to serve as the root users of Wikimedia wikis.

* While the German Wikipedia's MediaWiki:Common.js has been
super-protected, there are other pages such as MediaWiki:Vector.js,
MediaWiki:Monobook.js, and MediaWiki:Group-user.js that can probably
be used to achieve the same effect.

* Importing edits on top of an existing page should replace the content
and bypass any protection, though this theory needs additional testing.

* Certain pages in the MediaWiki namespace such as MediaWiki:Copyright
still allow raw HTML, which can be used for a direct script insertion.

* JavaScript gadgets can be enabled by default across a wiki.

* CentralNotice from Meta-Wiki can be used to deploy JavaScript to the
German Wikipedia.

There are also more extreme options available.

* Using per-user CSS or JavaScript to forcibly hijack Erik's or another
staff member's account. This can be done locally on any wiki, including
sites such as Meta-Wiki.

* Disabling editing and/or reading of the German Wikipedia, using a
variety of tools. Erik's declaration of war makes this option viable, but
it should likely be used only as a measure of last resort. If Erik is
truly hell-bent on damaging or destroying the wiki model, perhaps the wiki
should simply cease to be. Using the title blacklist, the AbuseFilter
extension, site-wide JavaScript and CSS, and other techniques, it's
possible to fully disable reading and/or editing of the German Wikipedia
until an amicable solution can be found.

* A Wikimedia-wide vote of no confidence for Erik. Again, this is an
extreme option, but given Erik's behavior over the past few weeks
(including his actions on the English Wikipedia, which resulted in an
arbitration case involving him), beginning a vote of no confidence is an
idea worthy of consideration.

There are also alternate options.

* Disabling the MediaViewer extension by default on the German Wikipedia,
as requested by the German Wikipedia community.

* Accepting Erik's authority over the technical infrastructure of
Wikimedia wikis and allowing him to rule as a technical autocrat.

I'm interested to read others' views about options and ways forward here.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

2014-08-10 Thread Pine W
Lila,

I hope you are aware of the issues being described in this thread. Would
you please state your views on this situation?

Pine
On Aug 10, 2014 6:09 PM, Tomasz W. Kozłowski twkozlow...@gmail.com
wrote:

 On 11 August 2014 01:05, John Lewis wrote:

  The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
  acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish
  administrators.

 Erik was acting in a manner that is totally disgraceful. He should
 have never used his force to revert DaB.  The way that DaB.
 implemented the results of that RfC were incorrect, and the
 community of the German Wikipedia were perfectly able to revert his
 edits themselves once they realized what the effects were — without
 the need to involve the WMF at any point.

  * A new user right to prevent disruption

 Implemented without any community consultation whatsoever, on a global
 scale even though the problem was occurring only on the German
 Wikipedia.

  * A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki

 Nothing of the sort has happened yet.

  And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
  children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to
 get
  it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of being
  too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.

 The only person that should be blamed by what happened is Erik. He is
 a WMF employee, he is an experienced Wikimedian, and he should have
 realized what would be the result of his actions.

 Instead, he went ahead with his show of force, and escalated a
 situation that would have fixed itself in a matter of hours.

 Even if MMV was disabled for a day, nothing would have happened. Now
 shit's happened, and it will be damn hard to regain the trust that was
 lost over this absurd stretching of muscles.

 PS For what it's worth: I like MultimediaViewer. I use it, and I
 opposed the idea that a small community of volunteers can decide to
 disable it for anonymous editors. But what Erik has done is totally
 unacceptable, and contrary to the supposed cooperation between the WMF
 and the volunteer communities.

 --
 Tomasz

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 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, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Options for the German Wikipedia

2014-08-10 Thread Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
*Note these are entirely my own personal opinions as a community member and
in no way at all represent anything official.*

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:12 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:


 I'm interested to read others' views about options and ways forward here.


People could realize that demagoguery and warring is going to make
everything much harder that it needs to be, and decide to block the people
trying to escalate the issue so that more rational people can work out a
rational solution.

On the enwiki VPT thread about this, User:Fluffernutter suggested that we
could eliminate 90% of the drama over software deployments by topic-banning
a small number of people from the discussions. That'd probably be a much
more productive topic than trying to brainstorm ways to make the situation
worse.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe