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

It would be good to conclusively and definitively close the RFC, but I'm not sure I agree with the notion that less posts is a *bad* thing. In some months we've had quite a lot of traffic on this list, a lot of which has been very low quality and only of interest to a small number of people. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Publicpolicy] Update on FISA 702 reauthorization

I think, as Geni says, that even that isn't going to provide any effective barrier. If the NSA or other US Government spooks want to get into the servers, they will, regardless of what hardware it's running on, what software it uses, or what jurisdiction it is located in. Anything that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

Can I suggest to all parties that, as was the case last time this came up here, raking this conflict over the coals here on a mailing list where very few of us have direct knowledge of the situation, or the power to do anything about it in any case, is probably not helpful for anyone? I am

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

Joining the pile-on here. The focus on nitpicking semantics rather than substantive issues, passive-aggressive grandstanding ("May I suggest that you withdraw your original posting"), and the threat to tattletale on someone to their boss for expressing a perfectly reasonable perspective are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Wikimédia France - informations sur la situation actuelle

I am not closely familiar with the issuse at WMFR right now, and I would suggest that those here that speak French probably already have a strong view on this, and those who do not probably do not know enough to have an educated view on what is happening. With that being said, if WMFR staff are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What to do when the WMF is stingy with the community?

I'm afraid I don't really see the logic in this. Even if we assume for a moment that the WMF is sitting on top of an enormous, inexhaustible pile of cash, it doesn't make sense that it should just splash that money around on community initiatives without carefully assessing whether it is the best

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-WMF funding sources for community work

Well, before we talk about funding the Signpost through the WMF or through a non-WMF source, lets ask if that is what the folks who actually work on the Signpost would like? There's a pretty big assumption here that the writers there would like to be paid in the manner of a college newspaper,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A proposed project, Wikifiction

It looks like discussion on this died out years ago; a user has recently removed the rejected tag citing "discussion" (I'm not sure where), but it looks like this particular idea ran out of steam long ago. Cheers, Craig On 10 May 2017 at 15:28, George Ho wrote: > The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hi Kirill, On 26 April 2017 at 02:31, Kirill Lokshin wrote: > > Having said that, there are certain issues that can prevent a smooth > transition from a chapter to a user group. In particular, any individuals > considered to have personal responsibility for an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing the Hardware donation program

This is a fantastic idea. Well done to everyone involved. Cheers, Craig On 17 March 2017 at 15:06, Asaf Bartov wrote: > Dear Wikimedians, > > The Wikimedia Foundation is pleased to announce a small new program called > the Hardware Donation Program. In a word, it is a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] AMD petition

Hi James, Again, could you clarify how this is related to Wikimedia? If there's a direct connection I am not seeing it. Cheers, Craig On 14 March 2017 at 09:49, James Salsman wrote: > Recent leaks suggest almost all commercial x86 processors have been > compromised by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

On 4 March 2017 at 18:38, Pine W wrote: > It seems to me that Anna is interested in improving the situation rather > than having a battle with the community. I'd like to let the improvement > process happen. Please have some patience, and let's be grateful that WMF > is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

hope to see more of this rather than less in the future. Cheers, Craig On 2 March 2017 at 19:09, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> wrote: > Hi Anna, > > Thanks for offering your thoughts on this (and I mean that sincerely). > Lord knows that sometimes the temper

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

Hi Anna, Thanks for offering your thoughts on this (and I mean that sincerely). Lord knows that sometimes the temperature on this list and in other venues rises to a point where no communication of substance can occur, and all that is achieved is that everyone walks away with bruised egos and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

by Wikimedians, they have gotten it wrong, because they've highlighted the causes rather than the individuals. I suspect that it is too late to change the 2016 report, but I hope that they are a little more mindful for the 2017 report. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 2 March 2017 at 10:31, Michael Peel

[Wikimedia-l] WMF Global Bans

This is a good point Pete. I only know the full circumstances of a couple of the global bans, but in each case it is based on non-public information that we would not want going public. Just because each discussion is not subject to a yes/no decision on Meta, does not mean there is no community

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF advanced permissions for employees

I agree completely with both Robert and Marc. James, it is my understanding that every global ban must be signed off by the Legal department. Is this correct? If so, not only would this provide a check against the hypothetical situation of someone being globally banned in a fit of pique, but it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation duties

Hi Richard, I know that at times keeping on top of a mailing list as "spicy" of this one must have been a tough job. It's one that you've done well, in this subscriber's opinion. Thanks for your service. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 6 February 2017 at 07:18, Richard Ames <rich.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: stranded travelers offered asylum in Canada

Agreed. Most of us are very concerned about the current state of affairs in the United States, but if you want to discuss that there are plenty of other venues where such discussion is not grossly off topic. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 30 January 2017 at 09:26, Thyge <ltl.pri...@gmail.com>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Concerns in general

io and how they'd react to it. Now might be a good time for them to dust off that document and review it, just in case. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 28 January 2017 at 18:52, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have created a Phabricator task here: > https://phabricator.wikimedi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Additional information on community health initiative and next steps

This is excellent news! I am particularly excited by the idea of a better suite of blocking tools, which will hopefully save admins from playing a game of whack-a-mole with particularly tenacious vandals and harassers. Cheers, Craig On 27 January 2017 at 06:37, Danny Horn

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Delegation of policy-making authority" resolution

As frustrating as the drama was at the beginning of the year for us, I'd prefer to get one well considered story from someone like Dariusz, rather than a mishmash of uncoordinated replies that have some inconsequential contradictions in them for people to obsess over. Sometimes too much

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How should security of Wikimedia accounts be better?

I know it's been said many times, but two-factor authentication, mandatory for accounts with advanced privileges and optionally available for everyone else, would seem to be a logical step. It's not foolproof, but it would go a long way to making us less of a soft target. Cheers, Craig On 12

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A new Wikipedia fork: InfoGalactic

So what you're saying is, Vox Day has created a "safe space" where his circle of friends can reinforce each other's biases without interference from the outside world? Great. Also, "Starlords". Good grief. Cheers, Craig On 11 October 2016 at 04:13, David Gerard wrote: >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FW: My final email

Hi Caitlin, I know you've already answered Peter's original question, but are you able to answer John's question as well? Cheers, Craig Franklin On 17 August 2016 at 19:31, John Mark Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com> wrote: > What is https://www.pages04.net/ ? > > WMF has gi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FW: My final email

Well, he *did* say it was his final email! I'd imagine the unsubscribe link would get you off the "former donors we can spam" list without removing you from this august list. Cheers, Craig On 17 August 2016 at 18:52, Peter Southwood wrote: > Is there any way to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2014-2015 now on-wiki

Hi Greg, Just to expand a little on what John is saying here, I find it a little odd that the information to separate out the cost of actually making trademark applications, and the cost of legal consultants, has not been separated out. I confess I'm not that familiar with the rules of Form 990,

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

I imagine that this is the email that Trillium is referring to, for those who are just joining us: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082566.html Whether he means that he supported her "dismissal" or supported her "resignation" is left to the reader. Cheers, Craig

Re: [Wikimedia-l] User interaction on Wikipedia --call for submissions

Hi Moushira, The problem when you use jargon like "ideation" in this context is that you're essentially excluding anyone who isn't familiar with the particular terminology used in the field. Especially so when there are plenty of plain-English alternatives that can be used in its place. Note

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Arbital, another Wikipedia competitor/complement

They have correctly identified that a lot of our articles on scientific concepts are jargon-filled babble that is unintelligible to anyone who isn't already an expert in the field (and if they're an expert, why are they consulting an encyclopaedia?), but I'm not that confident that Yudkowsky of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: A conversation?

A few days ago I asked what it was that we as the community could do to enhance transparency within the Foundation. This was not what I had in mind. Why would Jimmy or anyone else in a position of authority at the WMF seek to engage with those making criticisms when they'll be subject to acts

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

ngle is a a > distraction from that, as this has nothing to do with WMF staff per se. > > Yes we should also urge the board to develop more rigorous procedures and > to follow them more closely to make it harder for individuals to make bad > choices, but there is still resolving what

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

To be honest, I consider it unlikely that Patricio or anyone else is going to discuss HR matters at length in public, even when they concern Lila, and especially when they could potentially be interpreted as negative towards a particular identifiable individual. For legal reasons, it might be the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Executive transition planning

As much as I agree Geoff would probably do a wonderful job, I'm not sure that as a movement we want him away from the excellent job he's doing in the Legal team for too long. Call me cynical, but I expect that the term of the interim ED will turn out to be lengthy. Any number of people would

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

This sounds like an excellent strategy if you're looking to have the board meetings turn into a rubber stamp for issues that have been discussed and decided elsewhere. Rather than solving the transparency problem through gimmicks like wheeling a video camera into the board room, we should look at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Armenia candidate for the board

Andreas, Unless you have specific evidence that Susanna has been specifically involved with anything untoward, you are smearing with guilt by association and creating your own chilling effect, and you would owe Susanna a retraction and apology. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 3 March 2016 at 09:15

Re: [Wikimedia-l] I am going to San Francisco

My understanding is that the Foundation purchases certain technical and apps services (cloud email, for instance) from Google. Cheers, Craig On 1 March 2016 at 12:15, Risker wrote: > > I cannot for the life of me imagine what Google sells that the WMF would be > interested

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The reinstatement of James Heilman

seats, but that doesn't change the reality that we must deal with here and now. Cheers, Craig On 27 February 2016 at 21:47, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 February 2016 at 11:33, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> > wrote: > > While it's nice to think tha

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The reinstatement of James Heilman

While it's nice to think that everyone might be able to kiss and make up, the trustees (particularly Jimmy) and James have been mauling each other politely in public for the best part of two months. I don't think it's realistic to expect that everything can just go back to the way it was, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership - Board Reform

One could argue that any action that would injure the movement would also injure the Foundation by definition. Denny is quite correct that trustees have a legal obligation to put the Foundation before anything else, however there's usually a fair bit of latitude in how that obligation is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Post mortems

People will have discussions at a location that is personally convenient for them. Unless you're going to reprogram human nature, I don't see that there's anything to be done about the resulting balkanisation of the discussion. Cheers, Craig On 22 February 2016 at 09:54, Thyge

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Facebook marketing inside pt.wikipedia

While I appreciate these concerns, I think that the most suitable people to determine whether this is appropriate for the Portuguese Wikipedia are the users of the Portuguese Wikipedia. Perhaps with a veto by the WMF Legal Team if there's some terms of service related reason this can't happen.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Yaroslav, You're correct in that most volunteers don't care directly. The problem is that a lot of the BoT's recent difficulties have crossed the line from "angry encyclopedia people venting on a mailing list" to "serious and negative attention from the mainstream press". If there is too much

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking this Michael. Reading the documents I've seen, it seemed like (1) to me, but a lot of the assumptions seem to lean towards (3). If it is (1), then that is an entirely reasonable thing for the Foundation to be putting development effort into. The problem is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

Thankyou Arnnon. I imagine it can't have been a pleasant decision for you to make when you obviously feel that you have a lot to contribute, but I think your decision is in the best interests of the Foundation and of the movement generally, and for that I am appreciative. Cheers, Craig Franklin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Monetizing Wikimedia APIs

On 16 January 2016 at 22:09, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > Do we want to charge for knowledge? Of course not. But do we want to be > able to introduce cool new tools for everyone faster, because e.g. Google > is willing to pay for their development if they can use it for some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google

ious explaining. Assume > good faith, but we're starting from some pretty *startling* > circumstances and evidence here. > > > - d. > > On 9 January 2016 at 09:19, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> > wrote: > > Chris, > > > > Thanks for saying that.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing new Wikimedia Foundation Trustees

Congratulations from me as well to both Kelly and Arnnon. I wonder if they'll take the plunge and subscribe here? =) But without in any way questioning their good faith, dedication and fitness for the job (and it is good to see another female appointed), I have to say that I also feel this is a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

While it's not hard to find a WMF employee who will privately (or increasingly, not-so-privately) complain of poor morale, I'd be wary of reading too much into submissions to sites like Glassdoor. Employees that are content rarely take the time to report this, so you end up with a skewed sample

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I'd like to second this. Getting to the point of dismissing a trustee, whether they're community elected or not, is serious business. There should be an investigation conducted by an impartial external organisation, not to lay blame or point the finger, but to recommend changes to make sure it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Jimbo has stated on Jimbo-talk that this was a removal for cause: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales=prev=697407200 He also mentions on that page that he and others tried to talk Heilman into resigning quietly, but he chose to make the BoT push him:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

t; "false" answer ..it takes seconds to speak the truth, but days to > > connive a lie..so i doubt we will get the 'truth' or atleast the full > > truth.. > > > > On 12/30/15, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> wrote: > > > Thanks Brad for spo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Thanks Brad for spotting this and bringing it here, and also to Jimbo for filling in a few more details. Just as an aside, my thinking is that this must have needed to be an emergency action. Because if the BoT has been mulling this over for awhile, it would be very poor governance to not have a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

Such issues are always going to crop up when you're attempting to describe the world using Aristotelian propositions. In a source like Wikipedia, we can provide some nuance, explain both sides of the issue, the history of both claims, and let the reader decide. In a database, we are limited to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

On 2 December 2015 at 16:37, MZMcBride wrote: > Sadly, other sites can be more obnoxious. Some sites have interstitial > advertisements that include auto-playing video. The Wikimedia Foundation > has not yet sunk to that yet. > [[WP:BEANS]] comes to mind, don't say that too

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3 Dec 2015 10:25 am, "Craig Franklin" <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> > wrote: > > > > On 2 December 2015 at 16:37, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote: > > > > > Sadly, other sites can be more

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

t; forward. You can add you comments here to help guide the conversation: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)#Annual_Plan > > Lila > > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net > > wrote: > >> I likew

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

I likewise appreciate the strong language on the situation with the WMF; the general opacity and vagueness of public budget plans (especially considering the requirements for affiliate organisations in this area) is something that has been widely noted on this list and elsewhere, and to my mind

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wiki-research-l] Quality issues

Indeed, the things that make a Wikipedia article high quality (such as well written and engaging prose) are not necessarily the same things that are useful for a data-driven product like Wikidata. When Wikidata offers assistance to another project, and that assistance is not received

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect is gone

Good riddance to a bad mistake. Hopefully the underlying causes of the MediaViewer conflict can be addressed before any other incidents of this nature occur. Cheers, Craig On 06/11/2015 3:36 AM, "Quim Gil" wrote: > Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Number of new User Groups

Hi, My suggestion is to take care with using the term "limited liability", because it sounds like this might mean a different thing in my jurisdiction and in my jurisdiction. As has been pointed out, volunteers in a user group may be exposing themselves to significant risk of something goes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing the Wikimedia Affiliates mailing list

Hi All, One thing I think that is missing from this discussion is that if people want to collaborate internally, they will collaborate internally. If there isn't a mailing list available to do that, it will simply be done through other means, be that private email, instant messaging, etcetera.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] help needed - Arkansas

This is not an especially helpful response. Regards,, Craig On 14 October 2015 at 20:37, Jane Darnell wrote: > Arkansas is considered one of the "fly-over" states. Good luck locating a > Wikipedian somewhere around there, not to mention a Wikimedian. > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost

You could excuse the Perth and Manila bid teams for being very angry at having wasted a lot of time and energy when the decision was apparently made behind closed doors weeks ago. Even if you think the idea of getting rid of the expensive bid process is a good idea (and I do), the way that this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost

here. > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> > wrote: > > > You could excuse the Perth and Manila bid teams for being very angry at > > having wasted a lot of time and energy when the decision was apparently > > made b

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Departure

is a significant loss for the Foundation and for our movement, but that's offset by the fact that it's going to be a great boon for the cause of public education in California. Best wishes for the future! Cheers, Craig Franklin On 11 September 2015 at 07:53, Garfield Byrd <gb...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy largely blocked by WMF fundraising

Firstly, I'm delighted to see that a mutually acceptable compromise has been reached here. Well done everyone in coming together with the best interests of the entire movement in mind. If I can make a suggestion though, I'd suggest that the fundraising team and the community, particularly the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New WMF initiative: Community Capacity Development

As someone who has been telling anyone at the WMF who will listen that this sort of capacity development is *essential* if community groups are going to meet the governance requirements of the Foundation and actually achieve measurable outcomes, I'm enormously pleased that something has finally

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy largely blocked by WMF fundraising

It has been my experience that site banners are the best way to reach casual readers who are not already integrated into the projects and existing communication channels. This is why the Fundraising team run banners, rather than begging for money through Facebook and targeted talk page messages,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

On 12 August 2015 at 14:41, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote: ... It has a trail of bad usage it is connected with. ... I'm not sure I agree with that. There are two known uses. The first one, where a software tool was locked in over the consensus of the community was a bad usage I'll

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation quarterly reviews for April-June 2015

Indeed, as Kirill says, the grants process is owned by the WMF (albeit one hosted on Meta), not by the community, so I'm not sure why the Meta community needs to get involved. It actually seems to me that the foundation wiki would be a better home for processes like this so that community

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cebuano and Waray-waray Wikipedias among Top 10

There is already a consensus on enwiki (please, hold your rotten tomatoes) that projects like this which have inflated article counts due to extensive botting rather than through having a lively community not be included on the main page. I think a lot of the comments here about a huge article

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

I think this is dancing around the perceived problem. You can either have open, democratic, and fair elections with a result that represents the will of the electorate, or you can have a group of people who are diverse in terms of nationality, gender, ethnicity, etcetera. Not both. And I don't

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wiki Towns

Indeed. Unfortunately I'm just heading out so i can't waffle at length, but there are two active projects in Australia in Fremantle and Toodyay. Cheers, Craig On 01/05/2015 7:45 AM, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote: I believe Wikimedia AU did some work with this type of stuff… On

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF office location and remodel

this particular egg, as relocating now would probably end up costing more than would be saved by moving to a lower cost centre, which is unfortunate. Regards, Craig Franklin On 10 April 2015 at 01:47, Garfield Byrd gb...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi Fae, We have 215 staff in total, with a hub of activity

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships

Hello, Might I suggest that if folks want to continue talking about this, they rename this thread, as it is no longer about Kourosh Karimkhany, and it is just creating background noise for those of us who have no desire to discuss the whole Wikipedia Zero freedom thing yet again? Cheers, Craig

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Join the Wikimedia strategy consultation

On 24 February 2015 at 09:40, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Philippe Beaudette wrote: Five years ago, I was part of the work on a strategic plan for the Wikimedia movement. Much has changed since then. Now, I’m back...and we’re working on strategic direction again. :-) Hi. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [treasurers] Accounting software for thematic orgs

Hi Pine, That's great to hear, I was really pleased with how Xero worked for our organisation and I hope it's just as good for you. If you (or any other user group) need a hand with it, please feel free to drop me a line as I've a few years experience with it now. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 16

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contents based on original research?

rules for the content, and make your own rules about what is and is not allowed. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 5 January 2015 at 23:42, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: This sounds like a Wikisource idea - do we have any wikisourcerers who can give their thoughts? Richard

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Our final email

very much, but needed more to build cool new tools, improve the quality of the project content, and implement more innovative projects to meet our movement's goals. Regards, Craig Franklin ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism

Am I the only one that sees the irony in asking folks not to pick on the Commons community, then immediately asserting that enwp is the source of all drama? Cheers, Craig Franklin On 12/12/2014 4:56 PM, Pipo Le Clown plecl...@gmail.com wrote: As you said, the first issue of Commons

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia France] WikiCheese crowdfunding - Let's photograph 'em all

Forget that, I'd like WMUK to fly me to Scotland so that I can, uh, research and write about various types of whisky. Cheers, Craig On 25 November 2014 at 18:59, Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: And next the wine project? Count me in. On 24 November 2014 at 18:22, Christophe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banners (again)

in Megan Hernandez, the Director of Online Fundraising in the hope of getting a comment, just in case she's not aware of this discussion. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 27 November 2014 at 21:44, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: This notwithstanding, I think the issue *yet again*, is a lack

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC funds allocation recommendation is up

of a factor. Cheers, Craig Franklin ___ 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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Fundraiser] fundraising blocked in Russia

and the community, and it would be a shame if that was undone through more moments of carelessness like this one. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 14 November 2014 11:16, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Geoff Brigham wrote: In that context, we feel that laws in Russia offer a number of possible

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Fundraiser] fundraising blocked in Russia

of chapter and user group press contacts being the last people to find out about potentially controversial issues like this. Regards, Craig Franklin (personal view only) On 13 November 2014 10:07, Joseph Seddon josephsed...@gmail.com wrote: I would hate to preclude any answer from

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call to Action

eyes will assist the engineering team in pushing through the present difficulties with software deployments. Regards, Craig Franklin On 7 October 2014 11:02, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Hello and welcome, Damon. One thing I've long appreciated about the Wikimedia movement

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

, Craig Franklin On 5 October 2014 18:04, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Itzik, If I understand you correctly, you are asking about whether WMF and thematic organization bylaws should allow employees to vote in trustee elections for their own orgs. I can see how this could create

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps regarding WMF-community disputes about deployments

be intelligently reasoned with, they only harden feelings on both sides and make a suitable arrangement being found less likely. No employee should be made to receive that sort of harassment in the course of their job, no matter how much you disagree with them. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 1

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

I agree with this wholeheartedly. When I think back to when I was new on Wikipedia, pretty early on I got an honest-to-god personal message from someone to thank me for correcting a typo ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lankiveildiff=5647166oldid=5629943 ). It made me feel

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

like what happened on de.wp? Thanks, Craig Franklin On 10 August 2014 23:27, 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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Research Committee

I've spent a half hour or so going through this, and it looks like Nathan is on the money here. If RCOM is as inactive as it seems (except where it concerns the research of RCOM members) then it is no great surprise that external parties eventually try to do an end-run around it. Unless an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lets delete everything from commons (was The tragedy of Commons)

Pardon me if this has already been covered, but as I understand it the problem is not the legal status of the files in Israel, the problem is with the legal status of the files in the United States, where the Israeli Government may still have some copyright protections. So while the contents of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lets delete everything from commons (was The tragedy of Commons)

russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Craig, et al On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote: Pardon me if this has already been covered, but as I understand it the problem is not the legal status of the files in Israel, the problem is with the legal

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation of messages sent to this list

On 22 June 2014 09:53, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote: I might point out that I've perhaps needled GerardM more than most people on this list (and even been moderated for it once years ago), but I find his posts about WikiData interesting and I read them when I can. I think Thomas

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

I must agree with the frustration over the quality of discussion on this mailing list lately, but I did want to make clear my appreciation to the list admins, who have decided to avoid playing semantic word games over what is and is not appropriate, and started moderating people who want to use

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms

Indeed. The thing that I like about this is that it shows these PR firms are aware of our rules and the controversy around paid editing. If they now get busted, they can hardly say that they didn't know. Regards, Craig Franklin On 13 June 2014 00:17, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA in the media

As someone who usually wears a suit and tie to Wikimedia events when I go (Hong Kong last year was the exception to that for the most part, way too humid), my advice to people would be to wear whatever the hell you feel comfortable in, subject to the normal standards of decency and the local

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results

it started to become more responsive to community expectations, more transparent, and all around effective as a governance group. I am sure that this is not a coincidence. Cheers, Craig Franklin On 4 June 2014 02:17, Alice Wiegand me.ly...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to the organizers and facilitators

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

Hi Wil, I think the advice in this thread from John and Dariusz is excellent, and well worth taking on board. Energy is good, and disruption to shake us out of our status quo is good. But at the moment, your communication style is swamping this list and that's getting people's backs up. The

  1   2   >