[Wikimedia-l] Re: Arabic Wikipedia day of action

[Dan Rosenthal]

An utterly shameful decision. I guess Israeli and Jewish lives aren't worth
standing up for, according to Arabic Wikipedia.

Dan Rosenthal


On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 8:18 PM Farah Jack Mustaklem 
wrote:

> Greetings to all,
>
> Arabic Wikipedia editors have agreed to hold a day of action to highlight
> the plight of the Palestinian people and to call for peace. At 00:00 UTC on
> the 23rd of December, the Arabic Wikipedia "went dark", meaning that
> Wikipedia will not be editable for 24 hours. Wikipedia remains accessible
> for reading, though.
>
> This action stems from the community's sense of moral duty to combat
> injustice. Wikipedia communities have previously stood up for human rights
> such as by protesting legal travesties like SOPA and PIPA or by showing
> solidarity with Ukrainians following Russia's invasion of their country.
>
> May everyone celebrating the holidays - and those who aren't - stay safe,
> and may peace and justice prevail throughout the World.
>
> All the best
>
> Farah
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OCPVKAGK3TAXJLLZPVFZVJKB3FVDZEUY/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4UNDOGTI6DSTDRF6BPEHFPOSO6AZLJVX/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Long Reddit post laying out inner workings of English Wikipedia

[Dan Rosenthal]

Man, that essay reads like someone spent a grand total of 5 days reading
Wikipedia policies, ventured into some politically fraught articles with a
right-wing agenda, got taken to AN/I for it, and subsequently blocked or
banned.

Dan


On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 6:41 AM Vi to  wrote:

> I don't know whether crossing the line "musk [...] fixing [...] Wikipedia"
> gives me more disgust or fear.
>
> Vito
>
> Il giorno lun 12 dic 2022 alle ore 05:12 reybueno1--- via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> ha scritto:
>
>> This just up in /r/trueunpopularopinion and YCombinator:
>>
>>
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/zieyyf/wikipedia_is_not_so_great_and_is_overrated/
>>
>>
>> Quoted below because it was explicitly released under public domain:
>>
>> You all have heard by now that Elon Musk said that Wikipedia has a "left
>> wing bias" when the article about Twitter Files had been suggested for
>> deletion. This has been received with mixed responses from liberals and
>> conservatives alike; the former dismissing it as "an attack on free
>> knowledge" and the latter cheering the move as "against censorship" and
>> vindication of their beliefs that Big Tech is biased against them.
>>
>> True, Wikipedia is supposedly editable by anyone around the world and I
>> had been an on and off editor there for years mostly doing small-ish edits
>> like fixing typos and reverting obvious vandalism. This is done while on IP
>> as opposed to using accounts because I would rather that some edits (i.e.
>> sensitive topics like religious and political areas) not tied to my name
>> and identity. However, reality is far from the preferred sugar-coated
>> description of Wikipedia, particularly its editing community.
>>
>> The editing community in overall is best described as a slightly
>> hierarchical and militaristic "do everything right" structure,
>> traditionally associated with Dell and recently Foxconn and now-defunct
>> Theranos. Exceptions apply in quieter and outlier areas such as local
>> geography and space, usually the top entry points for new users wanting to
>> try their first hand. There are higher tolerance of good-faith mistakes
>> such as point-of-view problems and using unreliable resources, which are
>> usually explained in detail on how to correct by them rather than a mere
>> warning template or even an abrupt block.
>>
>> Ultimately those sub-communities which can be said as populated by
>> exopedians, have relatively little to no power over the wider and core
>> communities, mostly dominated by metapedians. A third group called
>> mesopedians often alternates between these inner and outer workings.
>> Communities can have shared topical interest which are grouped by
>> WikiProject, an example being WikiProject Science
>>
>> I spend a lot of time casually browsing through edit wars (can be so lame
>> at times) like a fly on the wall, along with meta venues of Wikipedia such
>> as Articles for Deletion, Centralized discussion Neutral Point of View
>> Noticeboard, Biographical of Living Persons Noticeboard, Conflict of
>> Interest Noticeboard, Administrator's Noticeboard Incidents, Sockpuppet
>> investigations, Arbitration Committee noticeboard which is the "supreme
>> court" in Wikipedia community for serious behavioral and conduct disputes.
>> Therefore I can sum up how the editing community really functions, although
>> not really as extensive as you might expect because I am not a
>> "Wikipedioholic" with respect to inner workings.
>>
>> Deletionism and inclusionism
>> This has been very perennial and core reasons for just about any disputes
>> on Wikipedia ever D Deletionists treat Wikipedia as another "regular
>> encyclopedia" where information has to be limited once it become very much
>> to be covered; like cutting out junk, while inclusionists treats Wikipedia
>> as a comprehensive encyclopedia not bound by papers and thus can afford to
>> cover as much information as it can take; one man's junk could be another
>> man's treasure. Personally I support the latter and often the conflict
>> between two editing ideologies leads to factionalism, where attempts to
>> understand mutual feelings and perspectives are inadequate or even none at
>> all.
>>
>> There are no absolute standards of what defines "encyclopedic knowledge"
>> and "notability". Inclusionism posits that almost everything could become
>> valuable and encyclopedic in the future, even if they're aren't today. An
>> example I can think of is events, figures and stories from World War II.
>> Deletionism has been closely related to "academic standard kicks" and rely
>> on the premise that Wikipedia has to be of high standard and concise. There
>> are people who deem an addition of something as useful, and there are those
>> who think it's "trivia" or "crufty" something that is nominally discouraged
>> if not prohibited by Wikipedia's documentation (see this in particular,
>> although sometimes exceptions are applied 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcoming the new Wikimedia Foundation CEO

[Dan Rosenthal]

Congratulations and welcome Maryana.

Dan Rosenthal


On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:53 AM Nataliia Tymkiv 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I am pleased to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> has appointed Maryana Iskander as the new CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation
> [1] [2].
>
> Since 2013, Maryana has served as the CEO of Harambee Youth Employment
> Accelerator [3], a South African non-profit social enterprise focused on
> building African solutions for the global challenge of youth unemployment.
> Prior to this, she spent six years as Chief Operating Officer of Planned
> Parenthood Federation of America [4], a volunteer-led social movement
> focused on access to women’s healthcare. Maryana has also worked in
> academia as the Advisor to the President of Rice University [5], an
> international research university based in the United States.
>
> Her professional career has been motivated by breaking down systemic
> barriers, creating opportunities for collaborative solution-building, and
> community empowerment. She has a proven track record for leading complex
> organisations shaped by shared decision-making.
>
> In looking for the next CEO, we on the Board convened a Transition
> Committee [6], primarily to guide us in finding the right person for this
> critical role and secondly to oversee the executive Transition Team. The
> Transition Committee conducted a far-reaching and competitive global
> search, receiving around 400 recommendations and speaking to about 50
> potential candidates. Throughout this selection process, Maryana impressed
> us as someone who is deeply inspired by the Wikimedia vision and who
> embodies the values of equity and community that inform all Wikimedia work.
> She has extensive leadership experience working with volunteer-led
> initiatives and building partnerships across public, private and social
> sectors. Maryana also brings expertise in technology-led innovation to
> accelerate meaningful social change. She does this with a global
> perspective: Maryana was born in the Middle East, educated in the United
> States and the United Kingdom, and has spent the last decade living and
> working on the African continent.
>
> Maryana joins the Wikimedia Foundation at a crucial time. The movement is
> larger than ever, and it has never been more relevant or more trusted. This
> is an inflection point, as decisions need to be made to execute a shared
> vision for where the Movement wants to be in 2030. We believe that Maryana
> is the right person to help lead the Foundation at this moment.
>
> As Maryana begins, her priorities will include supporting movement efforts
> to implement the Wikimedia 2030 recommendations, such as the development of
> a Movement Charter and the finalization of a Universal Code of Conduct. She
> will continue the Foundation’s focus on knowledge equity and exploring ways
> to address the gaps in content and the diversity of contributors to
> Wikimedia projects. She will be supported by the Board in this journey.
>
> Maryana will officially start at the Wikimedia Foundation on January 5,
> 2022, as she transitions from her current job. Until then, the Foundation
> will continue to be led by the Transition Team, with guidance from the
> Board. In my conversations with her, I have seen that Maryana is a fan of
> direct communication and excited to learn from the movement. In the coming
> weeks, she will share ways to connect. Please join me in welcoming Maryana
> (CCed) to the Foundation!
>
> PS. For translations of this message, or to help translate it into more
> languages, please visit Meta-Wiki [7]
>
> *[1]
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2021/09/14/wikimedia-foundation-appoints-maryana-iskander-as-chief-executive-officer/
> <https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2021/09/14/wikimedia-foundation-appoints-maryana-iskander-as-chief-executive-officer/>*
>
> *[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryana_Iskander
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryana_Iskander> *
>
> *[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harambee_Youth_Employment_Accelerator
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harambee_Youth_Employment_Accelerator>*
>
> *[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood>*
>
> *[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_University
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_University> *
>
> *[6]
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Creating_a_CEO_Transition_Committee_and_Transition_Team,_2021
> <https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Creating_a_CEO_Transition_Committee_and_Transition_Team,_2021>
>  *
> *[7]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/14_September

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

[Dan Rosenthal]

I didn't put my words in your mouth -- I quoted your own words precisely,
and the implication you were trying to make is obvious; so respectfully,
please refrain from gaslighting here. I simply suggested dropping the
hyperbole of  "star chambers and kangaroo courts", "secret trials punishing
people who don't know they're being accused' and "very basic principle[s]
of Human Rights and dignity" over someone getting banned from a website
over bad conduct issues.  You need not reply -- I'm done with this portion
of the conversation.

On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have never said that this is a human rights violation, so please don't
> put your words on my mouth.
>
> I have said that the general principles of equality, right to fair trial,
> not having ones honor damaged by baseless accusations, etc. which are
> present at the UDHR are being forgotten here.
>
> Of course you may argue that since the WMF is a private organization, they
> are free to engage in this kind of secret trials, star chambers and
> kangaroo courts at will. As others already stated, the matter here is not
> if they can, but if they should be engaging on those schemes, as they are
> now.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
>
>
> A sábado, 15 de jun de 2019, 18:39, Dan Rosenthal 
> escreveu:
>
> > There is no "very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity" to be free
> > from the presumption of guilt by others.  You may be confusing Article 11
> > of the UHDR, but this applies explicitly only to "penal offenses."
> Unless
> > Fram is getting locked up in prison for his actions, let's drop the
> absurd
> > hyperbole that this is somehow a human rights violation.
> >
> >
> > Dan Rosenthal
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 11:35 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > People shouldn't be going with any random option, but rather presume
> the
> > > innocence of others unless guilt is proven by some legit process.
> > > It seems that this very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity is
> > > being forgotten.
> > > There is not the least appearance of due process happening there, but
> > that
> > > has not stopped people from finding themselves their guilty part of
> > > election, using their own bias to evaluate the case.
> > > Including some Wikipedia related social network accounts that should be
> > > acting more responsible and wiser than joining the rabble in the
> offwiki
> > > harassment of their guilty part of choice.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > geni  escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019 à(s)
> 17:15:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 00:04, David Gerard 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even
> plausible,
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > What you are calling Fram's framing appears to be a the WMF's version
> > > > of events as told to fram. The WMF does look slightly better if you
> > > > remember that T&S arw trying to improve behaviour through threat of
> > > > blocks not file a diff heavy arbcom case.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  >let alone the story
> > > >
> > > > Given that the other versions of "the story" are T&S's PR waffle or
> > > > conspiracy theories it understandable that people are going to go
> with
> > > > the option that at least gives them something to work from.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > geni
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wiki

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

[Dan Rosenthal]

There is no "very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity" to be free
from the presumption of guilt by others.  You may be confusing Article 11
of the UHDR, but this applies explicitly only to "penal offenses."  Unless
Fram is getting locked up in prison for his actions, let's drop the absurd
hyperbole that this is somehow a human rights violation.


Dan Rosenthal


On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 11:35 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:

> People shouldn't be going with any random option, but rather presume the
> innocence of others unless guilt is proven by some legit process.
> It seems that this very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity is
> being forgotten.
> There is not the least appearance of due process happening there, but that
> has not stopped people from finding themselves their guilty part of
> election, using their own bias to evaluate the case.
> Including some Wikipedia related social network accounts that should be
> acting more responsible and wiser than joining the rabble in the offwiki
> harassment of their guilty part of choice.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> geni  escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019 à(s) 17:15:
>
> > On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 00:04, David Gerard  wrote:
> > >
> > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> > >
> >
> > What you are calling Fram's framing appears to be a the WMF's version
> > of events as told to fram. The WMF does look slightly better if you
> > remember that T&S arw trying to improve behaviour through threat of
> > blocks not file a diff heavy arbcom case.
> >
> >
> >  >let alone the story
> >
> > Given that the other versions of "the story" are T&S's PR waffle or
> > conspiracy theories it understandable that people are going to go with
> > the option that at least gives them something to work from.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > geni
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

[Dan Rosenthal]

Wow, that logs page is something else. Pretty ironic that Bishonen would
accuse the Office account of "wheel warring", when the wheel warring policy
explicitly states that reversing an Office Action is indicative of wheel
warring. So I'm *sure* we'll see suitable discussions of sanctions for the
knowing, planned, intentional reversal of an office action against policy,
right?

Possible indications of an incipient wheel war:

   - An administrator getting too distressed to discuss calmly.
   - Deliberately ignoring an existing discussion in favor of a unilateral
   preferred action.
   - Abruptly undoing administrator actions without consultation.
   - *Reversal of a Wikimedia Foundation office action
   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Office_actions>.*


Dan Rosenthal


On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 5:06 PM effe iets anders 
wrote:

> Great, now we have a wheelwar going on (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=Fram ).
> I
> have a hard time seeing how this would help anyone.
>
> A massive discussion where everyone tries to say something and nobody
> really reads everything (because how could you) is not going to lead to any
> constructive outcome. I hope that someone picks up the challenge and brings
> together the WMF and community before this spins further out of control.
> (I'm naively assuming that the WMF would be willing to engage at least
> privately in conversation if it relies on private information, or publicly
> if it does not).
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:40 PM Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
> > Framing it as "competence over politeness" is convenient for the
> > people who do not want the latter and imagine they are the former.
> >
> > It also insults the editors who have managed to do both.  I know an
> > en.wp editor who has dozens of FAs and somehow managed the herculean
> > feat of not referring to anyone on Wikipedia using the c-word.
> >
> > Framing it as "the culture of the community" leaves out of the
> > community all of us who are sick of this behavior, including long-time
> > veterans of the community like myself (fifteen years), and community
> > victims of harassment asking T&S for help.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 1:58 PM Todd Allen  wrote:
> > >
> > > "Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an
> admin,
> > > all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask
> ourselves
> > > why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without intervening
> to
> > > stop it."
> > >
> > > First, if Fram were a well-known editor but not an admin, yes, there
> > > absolutely would be such a discussion. But as to why, the answer, very
> > > simply, is that the English Wikipedia community values competence over
> > > politeness, and probably always will. That is part of the culture of
> the
> > > community, and the WMF has no right to override that.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:46 AM camelia boban  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I quote David and Isaac.
> > > > Harassment is a serious thing and hounding another user is out of any
> > wiki
> > > > behavior.
> > > > Before asking why WMF has banned an admin (and if Fram was not an
> > admin,
> > > > all these discussions would not have been done), we need to ask
> > ourselves
> > > > why we (other users) have allowed such an attitude without
> intervening
> > to
> > > > stop it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Camelia
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Camelia Boban*
> > > >
> > > > *| Java EE Developer |*
> > > >
> > > > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
> > > > Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> > > > Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project
> ideator*
> > > >
> > > > *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
> > > > WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
> > > >
> > > > M. +39 3383385545
> > > > camelia.bo...@gmail.com
> > > > *Aissa Technologies* <http://aissatechnologies.eu/>* | *Twitter
> > > > <https://twitter.com/cameliaboban> *|* *LinkedIn
> > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122>*
> > > > *Wikipedia <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban> *

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

[Dan Rosenthal]

I think the broader point being that for any legal or criminal complaints,
the appropriate venue is the court system, not the Wikimedia-L mailing
list.

Dan Rosenthal

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 12:45 AM, James Salsman  wrote:

> > Legal threats are surely the universal language of bad faith
>
> That assumes that legal threats are never legitimate. If there are
> criminal allegations of which the Foundation has not yet been made
> aware, they should be emailed to the appropriate officials and role
> accounts. Abuse of process is the bad faith subset.
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 7:06 AM, Gabriel Thullen 
> wrote:
> > Thank you Katherine for your long and thoughtful message on this
> difficult
> > subject. I feel that the Foundation took the necessary steps to ensure
> that
> > all parties concerned were treated fairly. I also tend to trust the
> > Foundation board when they say that there was "no merit to the charges".
> >
> > This appears to be a classic case of "claims and counter claims" which
> the
> > Foundation has settled. Now that the smoke screen has been cleared, we
> now
> > need to address the other issues that are plaguing Wikimedia France.
> >
> > Once again, thank you for setting the record straight in such a calm and
> > measured fashion. I sincerely hope that we will now be able to answer our
> > member's grievances and get to the bottom of this mess, with the
> > Foundation's help, experience and guidance,
> >
> > Best regards
> > Gabriel
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 3:56 AM, Samuel Klein  wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 19, 2017 7:41 PM, "Richard Farmbrough"  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think it very clear that these allegations were the last gasp of an
> >> ancient regime,
> >>
> >>
> >> Legal threats are surely the universal language of bad faith.  And I
> have
> >> complete trust in Pierre-Selim and Caroline.
> >>
> >> Thanks Katherine, for sharing details of what has been happening.
> >>
> >> Sam.
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Dan Rosenthal]

"Since you are unable to imagine many actions more chilling than reporting
bullying and harassment to an appropriate authority, let me suggest
something that might be equally chilling -- calling for the banning from
the list of someone because you disagree with what they have to say."

That wasn't what Robert said, nor was there "bullying and harassment"
coming from anyone other than you, Rogol. This kind of passive-aggressive
straw-manning is an example of precisely why you have worn out your welcome
here.

-Dan





Dan Rosenthal

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Robert
>
> If someone posts to an email discussion list owned and run by their
> employer, using an email account provided by their employer, with a
> signature block giving the name of their employer and their name and
> position with that employer, and if their line manager is not only a
> regular reader but a participant in discussions on the list, as recently as
> yesterday, then it may reasonably be presumed that they expect their
> employer to be aware of their posting.
>
> Since you are unable to imagine many actions more chilling than reporting
> bullying and harassment to an appropriate authority, let me suggest
> something that might be equally chilling -- calling for the banning from
> the list of someone because you disagree with what they have to say.
>
> Roibéard
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
> > Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned from
> the
> > list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators regarding
> > why they will not do so.
> >
> > I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect on
> > participation here than one of this list's most frequent posters
> contacting
> > your employer because he disagrees with what you have to say.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm that
> > my
> > > choice of words were very carefully chosen.
> > >
> > > And I stand by them.
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Joseph
> > > >
> > > > I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that you do so too.
> I
> > > said
> > > > that the proposal "involves", not "is equal to" real-life identity
> To
> > > the
> > > > extent that real-life identities are involved, it is reasonable to
> ask
> > > how
> > > > that personal information is going to be handled.  For some reason,
> you
> > > > seem keen to derail that part of the discussion by elevating a
> quibble
> > > over
> > > > your hasty misunderstanding of my wording into an accusation, which I
> > > > reject, of generalised misconduct.  If you have some comment to make
> > > about
> > > > the handling of personal information, please do so.
> > > >
> > > > May I suggest that you withdraw your original posting, apologise to
> the
> > > > membership of this list for the unconstructive nature of your
> posting,
> > > and
> > > > to me for its aggressive, insulting and incorrect content.
> > > Alternatively,
> > > > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is
> > the
> > > > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum.
> > > >
> > > > Reginald
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Joseph Seddon <
> jsed...@wikimedia.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Real identity does not equal real-life identity. You can mask your
> > > > > pseudonymous identity and pose as a third party similarly
> > pseudonymous
> > > > > individual.
> > > > >
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
> > > > >
> > > > > Seddon
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.or

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

[Dan Rosenthal]

Hey Rogol:

"Alternatively,
perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is the
sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum."

This is the kind of "unconstructive" behavior the list is talking about. I
fail to see how threatening to tattle to someone's manager, because they
disagreed with you about the wording of your posts in public, is either
constructive or the "sort of behavior" one would "expect you to exhibit in
a public forum." But then again, I'd venture to guess you knew that already.

Cheers.

Dan Rosenthal

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Thoughtful, practical, good. Thank you.
>
> On Aug 22, 2017 9:03 PM, "John Mark Vandenberg"  wrote:
>
> Hi list members,
>
> The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I, your
> humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent
> posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant atmosphere some
> posters (some of them frequent) create.
>
> It is natural that frequent posters will say specific things that more
> frequently annoy other list members, but often the complaints are due
> to the volume of messages rather than the content of the messages.
>
> We are floating some suggestions aimed specifically at reducing the
> volume, hopefully motivating frequent posters to self-moderate more,
> but these proposed limits are actually intending to increasing the
> quality of the discourse without heavy subjective moderation.
>
> The first proposal impacts all posters to this list, and the last
> three proposals are aimed at providing a more clear framework within
> which criticism and whistle-blowing are permitted, but that critics
> are prevented from drowning out other discussions. The bandwidth that
> will be given to critics should be established in advance, reducing
> need to use subjective moderation of the content when a limit to the
> volume will often achieve the same result.
> --
>
> Proposal #1: Monthly 'soft quota' reduced from 30 to 15
>
> The existing soft quota of 30 posts per person has practically never
> been exceeded in the past year, and yet many list subscribers still
> clearly feel that a few individuals overwhelm the list. This suggests
> the current quota is too high.
>
> A review of the stats at
> https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html show very few
> people go over 15 in a month, and quite often the reason for people
> exceeding 15 per month is because they are replying to other list
> members who have already exceeded 15 per month, and sometimes they are
> repeatedly directly or indirectly asking the person to stop repeating
> themselves to allow some space for other list members also have their
> opinion heard.
> --
>
> Proposal #2: Posts by globally banned people not permitted
>
> As WMF-banned people are already banned from mailing lists, this
> proposal is to apply the same ‘global’ approach to any people who have
> been globally banned by the community according to the
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans policy.
>
> This proposal does not prevent proxying, or canvassing, or “meat
> puppetry” as defined by English Wikipedia policy.  The list admins
> would prefer that globally banned people communicate their grievances
> via established members of our community who can guide them, rather
> than the list admins initially guiding these globally banned people on
> how to revise their posts so they are suitable for this audience, and
> then required to block them when they do not follow advice.  The role
> of list moderators is clearer and simpler if we are only patrolling
> the boundaries and not repeatedly personally engaged with helping
> globally banned users.
> --
>
> Proposal #3: Identity of an account locked / blocked / banned by two
> Wikimedia communities limited to five (5) posts per month
>
> This proposal is intended to strike a balance between openness and
> quality of discourse.
>
> Banned people occasionally use the wikimedia-l mailing list as a
> substitute of the meta Request for comment system, and banned people
> also occasionally provide constructive criticisms and thought
> provoking views.  This proposal hopes to allow that to continue.
>
> However people who have been banned on a few projects also use this
> list as their “last stand”, having already exhausted the community
> patience on the wikis.  Sometimes the last stand is brief, but
> occasionally a banned person is able to maintain sufficient decorum
> that they are not moderated or banned from the list, and mailing list
> readers need to suffer month after month of the banned person
> dominating the m

Re: [Wikimedia-l] General Counsel: Welcome Eileen Hershenov

[Dan Rosenthal]

Michelle is beyond amazing, end of story. Best of luck to the new incoming
GC, and hope she can fill the very big shoes.

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Philippe Beaudette 
wrote:

> For nearly a decade, I worked (sometimes closely, sometimes not as closely)
> with Michelle Paulson.  She dazzled me with her brilliance and her care for
> Wikimedia and Wikimedians around the globe.  Anytime that I needed someone
> to fight with me because a Wikimedian was in some way threatened, I never
> had to check - because I knew that Michelle was either there ahead of me,
> or right besides me.
>
> She is unwavering in her care for Wikimedians - she feels that calling very
> deeply.  Wikimedia owes much to her.
>
> But speaking personally, I've seen the toll that it took on her, and I've
> felt a touch of it myself.  Michelle - go take a good long break.  You've
> earned it.  Well done, my friend.  Well done.
>
> philippe
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Tomasz Ganicz 
> wrote:
>
> > 2017-04-26 15:33 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher :
> >
> > > Michelle
> >
> >
> > Michelle was one of my personally favourite employees of WMF with which I
> > had occasion to meet face to face - so I wish her great continuation of
> her
> > carrier somewhere else and be missing her.
> >
> > Hopefully, our new General Counsel will be even better.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Philippe Beaudette
>
> phili...@beaudette.me
> 415-716-1795
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Dan Rosenthal]

Florence -- Trump's executive orders also involved the revocation of
non-immigrant visas. I don't think the choice of picture is inappropriate
at all.  In fact, I think it highlights just how poorly planned and
executed the executive order was in the first place.

Whether the sitenotice is a good idea in the first place, separate
question.


Dan Rosenthal

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Nathan  wrote:

> It's an unambiguously political statement. Not political in the sense of
> "everything we do is political" - but in the sense of opposing the policies
> of a single national government as promulgated by a head of state and
> supported by one political party in a deeply polarized and contentious
> political environment. I expect that any WMF official responsible for this
> report will acknowledge this is true, as there appears to be no way to
> honestly claim otherwise. In that case I hope they can provide a well
> reasoned and passionate defense of this decision and why the WMF should
> continue in this vein.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] What's cool?

[Dan Rosenthal]

"What's a cool thing you just discovered or are involved in that is
happening in the Wikimedia world?"

That the WMF is one of the charities in this week's Humble Bundle (along
with MSF and charity:water) -- and it's actually a pretty good bundle.

https://www.humblebundle.com/

Dan Rosenthal

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Luis Villa  wrote:

> FWIW, Community Engagement will be doing something similar (mix of
> positive-serious with positive-fun)  in metrics meeting every month. You
> can see the first iteration during last month's metrics meeting:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Metrics_and_activities_meetings/2015-05
>
> Luis
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:44 PM, phoebe ayers 
> wrote:
>
> > Ps Fabrice sent the blog roundup while I was writing this! Those are all
> > cool things. Would love to learn about more as well.
> >
> > Phoebe
> > On Jun 4, 2015 2:41 PM, "phoebe ayers"  wrote:
> >
> > > I need a break from thinking about things going wrong. And so per
> Milos'
> > > observation that discussion here is falling off, I thought I'd start an
> > > open discussion thread about things going right.
> > >
> > > What's a cool thing you just discovered or are involved in that is
> > > happening in the Wikimedia world?
> > >
> > > My contribution: the SF Wikimedia list just had an announcement about
> an
> > > edit-a-thon (organized by Jake Orlowitz at the wmf office) that is
> > > happening during the American Libraries Conference, which is in SF this
> > > year. 30,000 librarians attend ALA! I'm super pleased we are
> infiltrating
> > > library conferences :)
> > >
> > > What's happening over in your part of the project?
> > >
> > > Phoebe
> > >
> > ___
> > 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>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Luis Villa
> Sr. Director of Community Engagement
> Wikimedia Foundation
> *Working towards a world in which every single human being can freely share
> in the sum of all knowledge.*
> ___
> 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] Moderation of messages sent to this list

[Dan Rosenthal]

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 Morton has a very good point though -- so if I may make a request:

 Whether the topic is Wikidata, or Wil, or Wikipediocracy, or pedophilia,
or whatever the drama was with Russavia, or Commons admins, or whatever it
is that raises hackles; can we all just be real for a second, and stop
feigning innocence/ignorance when we're trolling, being snarky, or posting
"innocent questions" that just so happen to cover a controversial topic, or
using misleading/distorted data to ask a pointed question? Seriously, this
list is becoming less like foundation-l and more like foxnews-l.

(To clarify this is not directed at Tomasz -- I'm just taking advantage of
his post to GerardM as being tangentially related.)

Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Thomas Morton <
morton.tho...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> At a guess; unpleasant snark.
>
> Tom
> On 21 Jun 2014 16:49, "Tomasz W. Kozłowski"  wrote:
>
> > Earlier today, I used the Gmane.org gateway to send a message to this
> > mailing list in response to the "Iraqi 2014 elections thread" started
> > by GerardM.
> >
> > Here is the content of my message (typed from memory):
> >
> > Have you tried Google yet? It is a search engine that lets
> > you search for information easily and accurately (most of
> > the time).
> >
> > The Wikidata entry for Google is at
> > <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q9366>.
> >
> > Hope this helps!
> >
> > Tomasz
> >
> > I was surprised to receive a notification saying that my e-mail was
> > rejected by an unnamed moderator (as all e-mails sent to the list
> > through Gmane have to be accepted before being sent on), with the
> > following reason: "Your message was deemed inappropriate by the
> > moderator."
> >
> > I would like the unknown moderator to — please — explain to me what
> > was so inappropriate in my message that they had to reject it.
> >
> > Thank you!
> > --
> > 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>
>
___
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] Stop the New Privacy Policy until Lila is Thoroughly Briefed on It, Countdown 14 Hours

[Dan Rosenthal]

Echoing Luis's shout-out to Michelle for such a colossal achievement.


Dan Rosenthal


"P.S. Let me take this opportunity to again thank Michelle Paulson for her
work leading this process; all told, it has been something like 18 months
of work for her. And that is only the start for her - now that the policy
is in place, she'll be working extensively with ops, analytics, the
ombudsmen, and many others to ensure compliance and look for other ways to
improve privacy. She deserves a big round of applause from every
privacy-concerned Wikimedian for her tireless work on this issue, sometimes
under literally thankless conditions. :)"
___
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] Dells are backdored

[Dan Rosenthal]

*"And as much as I personally appreciate Wikimedia staff, I am inclined*



*to agree with the sentiment that perhaps we should hire more staff until
we get some who believe that it wouldn't cost $100,000 totransition to less
expensive hardware. And maybe some people who know how to order chassis?"*

What makes you think they don't?

Dan Rosenthal


On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:55 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> When this came up last time, it turned out that there was some kind of
> a deal in place, and certainly many if not most published pictures of
> the Wikimedia data center feature rows of shiny Dell logos.  But Dell
> does support Microsoft and the NSA, obviously, and also supports some
> very creative accounting methods to avoid paying taxes with tax
> havens. Dell's corporate structure adventures are not the sort of
> corporate behavior concordant with a mission to empower anyone other
> than Dell stockholders.
>
> If you don't like Cubietrucks, then how about RADXA? At least with
> http://dl.radxa.com/rock/docs/hw/RADXA_ROCK_schematic_20130903.pdf
> you know exactly what you're getting and it doesn't cost a huge power
> bill. We still failover when machines go out of service, and sure the
> caches would have different RAM configurations, but the fact is it
> doesn't cost more money to switch to ARM, and you jettison a bunch of
> legacy x86 crap that nobody uses but take millions of transistors
> which need to be powered. Why ask our donors to keep all those useless
> transistors warm?
>
> And as much as I personally appreciate Wikimedia staff, I am inclined
> to agree with the sentiment that perhaps we should hire more staff
> until we get some who believe that it wouldn't cost $100,000 to
> transition to less expensive hardware. And maybe some people who know
> how to order chassis?
>
> Best regards,
> James
>
> ___
> 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] Block evasion might be a federal offense

[Dan Rosenthal]

An additional issue, if we're still talking CFAA's private right of action,
is where would the minimum damage requirements come from?

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Nathan  wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
>  wrote:
> > Discussed several times with no clear outcome.
> >
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123678.html
> >
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terms_of_use/Archives/2011-10-06#WSJ_Op-Ed_.22Should_Faking_a_Name_on_Facebook_Be_a_Felony.3F.22
> >
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terms_of_use/Archives/2011-11-08#Is_this_enforceable.3F
> >
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terms_of_use/Archives/2011-12-13#Criminal_liability_for_breaching_the_TOU
> >
> >
> > Nemo
> >
> >
>
> That is, frankly, a very different issue (in fact, other than
> implicating the CFAA, could hardly be more different).
>
> ___
> 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 Announcements] Changes at the Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Team

[Dan Rosenthal]

Congratulations about the new site Zack, and congratulations to Megan,
Lisa, and Sara!

Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:38 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> I know I've been critical of Zack Exley for technical reasons over the
> past year, but I think very highly of him as a person. If I was
> recruiting colonists for an interstellar colonization mission, he
> would likely be in the top 100 based on his accomplishments,
> orientation, drive, and social skills alone.
>
> But even if he weren't, his new project is outstandingly spectacular
> on its own merits, and I want to urge everyone reading this in or from
> the U.S. to sign up and join it:
>
> http://www.fivethirtysix.org/
>
> I predict that anyone with even a passing interest in U.S. politics
> who doesn't follow FiveThirtySix will first regret it, and then end up
> following it afterwards to prevent further such regret.
>
> Also, congratulations to Megan and Lisa!
>
> Sincerely,
> James Salsman
>
> ___
> 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] Staff Images

[Dan Rosenthal]

You realize we have a page on Tattoos that shows just how prevalent they
are throughout the world, yes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tattoo


Also, I think you missed my sarcasm about Rory and the invisibility cloak.
They're non-issues, just as Brandon's photo is a non-issue.

-Dan


Dan Rosenthal


On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Eddy Paine  wrote:

> Dan,
> A placeholder for people without pictures shouldn't be a problem. Thats
> common use. And they are all the same so thats a OK thing.
> The picture of Rory is a picture of Rory. It even says its a mascot and I
> agree with Erik we need Tux for Engineering.
> And no, we are not in the 1950's but as a international organisation we
> should still keep in mind that tattoos aren't accepted world wide. Placing
> your tattoo on a staff page and your face faded away is provocating the
> fact that he has tattoo's and not proffesional.
> Secondly all staff pictures are made by a professional photographer? Or
> kind of in the same setting. That will keep the page uniform also.
> Ed
> > From: swatjes...@gmail.com
> > Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 04:02:56 -0400
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Staff Images
> >
> > I don't see any problem with it. I'm not sure how it is somehow more
> > unprofessional than "absentee" (for lack of a better term) pictures being
> > labeled "Cloak of invisibility?" Or the picture of Rory as "mascot"?
> >
> > Further, what does "all but neutral" mean?
> >
> > Really, aren't there better things to do than play morality police
> because
> > someone "might" be upset about some ink? This isn't the 1950's. Who is
> > upset, and why?
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> >
> > Dan Rosenthal
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:16 AM, Eddy Paine 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > While its maybe not something for the whole community. Since only Staff
> > > can edit Wikimedia Foundation website I believe this will be the
> correct
> > > place to post this.
> > > I feel that the staff images on the Foundation site should show the
> staff
> > > in a good way where nobody can have a problem with it. The images being
> > > made by professionals for that.
> > > I believe the image Brandon Harris is using since this night is not
> > > suitable for a staff picture. The ink he is showing can discourage
> people
> > > and the picture is all but neutral. Secondly he isn't even really on
> the
> > > picture his is faded out.
> > > I would strongly advice to keep the images there proffesional.
> > > Ed
> > > ___
> > > 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] Staff Images

[Dan Rosenthal]

I don't see any problem with it. I'm not sure how it is somehow more
unprofessional than "absentee" (for lack of a better term) pictures being
labeled "Cloak of invisibility?" Or the picture of Rory as "mascot"?

Further, what does "all but neutral" mean?

Really, aren't there better things to do than play morality police because
someone "might" be upset about some ink? This isn't the 1950's. Who is
upset, and why?

-Dan


Dan Rosenthal


On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:16 AM, Eddy Paine  wrote:

> Hi,
> While its maybe not something for the whole community. Since only Staff
> can edit Wikimedia Foundation website I believe this will be the correct
> place to post this.
> I feel that the staff images on the Foundation site should show the staff
> in a good way where nobody can have a problem with it. The images being
> made by professionals for that.
> I believe the image Brandon Harris is using since this night is not
> suitable for a staff picture. The ink he is showing can discourage people
> and the picture is all but neutral. Secondly he isn't even really on the
> picture his is faded out.
> I would strongly advice to keep the images there proffesional.
> Ed
> ___
> 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] PRISM

[Dan Rosenthal]

Anthony and John beat me to it -- I was going to second the suggestion that
the sentence spend a bit of time being wordcrafted on Meta for extra eyes,
to clarify things like the National Security Letters, NSL gag orders, etc.

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Anthony  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:13 PM, John Vandenberg  wrote:
>
> > e.g. "we have never received or honored an NSA or FISA subpoena or
> > order" is good (and far better than I've seen from Google or
> > Facebook), but ...
> >
> > does that exclude all possible orders under the Patriot Act?
> > does that exclude orders from any U.S. Government agency?  e.g. FBI?
> >
>
> Apparently "if it's your communications records the government is after,
> they're more likely to use a National Security Letter" (
> https://ssd.eff.org/foreign/fisa)
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Spanish Wikipedia first million

[Dan Rosenthal]

Felicitaciones!

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Victor Grigas wrote:

> Great job on the video And congratulations for 1m articles!
>
> On May 27, 2013, at 9:50 PM, Ivan Martínez  wrote:
>
> > In Puebla city, too :D
> >
> >
> > 2013/5/27 Osmar Valdebenito 
> >
> >> Thanks for the announcement, Salvador.
> >> It was a really hard work to coordinate the recordings in Buenos Aires,
> >> Puebla, Jerusalem and La Paz, but I think we did a good job :)
> >>
> >> *Osmar Valdebenito G.*
> >> Director Ejecutivo
> >> A. C. Wikimedia Argentina
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/5/26 Salvador A 
> >>
> >>> Also, it's in Commons:
> >>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Un_mill%C3%B3n_de_gracias,_de_Wikipedia_en_espa%C3%B1ol.webm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2013/5/26 Salvador A 
> >>>
> >>>> To celebrate this milestone, Iberocoop chapters have made this video
> >> that
> >>>> we share with you:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLw_Z8w604
> >>>>
> >>>> Enjoy it!
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2013/5/17 ENWP Pine 
> >>>>
> >>>>>   Felicitaciones a la española Wikipedia!
> >>>>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fogos_artificiais.jpg
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pine
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ___
> >>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> >>>>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >>>>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> *Salvador Alcántar*
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> *Salvador Alcántar*
> >>> ___
> >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> >>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Atentamente:
> >
> > Iván Martínez
> > Presidente
> > Wikimedia México A.C.
> > wikimedia.mx
> >
> > Imagina un mundo en donde cada persona del planeta pueda tener acceso
> libre
> > a la suma total del conocimiento humano.
> > Eso es lo que estamos haciendo <http://es.wikipedia.org>. *
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Wikimedia-l administrator/moderator

[Dan Rosenthal]

Congratulations Richard (for taking up the task) and also thank you to Alex
for your work on the list as well.

Best,
Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:10 PM, J Alexandr Ledbury-Romanov <
alexandrdmitriroma...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Please join me in welcoming our new Wikimedia-l list
> administrator/moderator, Richard Ames. Richard is a retired electronics
> technician and computer scientist living in Sydney, Australia. He started
> using the 'Internet' in 1981 to read USENET FAQs and communicate by email.
> He has been a Wikipedia editor since 2004 as User:Ariconte. He is a member
> of the FDC advisory group.
>
> I will remain on as administrator/moderator for a short transition period.
>
> Alex
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exit Interview - Sue

[Dan Rosenthal]

Huh, I did not know that (I use Reddit maybe once a year at best). Perhaps
that wouldn't be a bad thing though, if that means you are speaking
directly to a relevant audience (men in an all male environment, about
gender gaps).

Dan Rosenthal


On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

> Dan Rosenthal, 17/05/2013 07:32:
>
>  Is there any thought or discussion as to whether Sue could (or would want
>> to) additionally do an actual Reddit IAmA, as Jorm did? Don't get me
>> wrong,
>> I understand why it is on Meta and I think the Meta interview is a great
>> idea, but there is also something to be said for presenting to an audience
>> of people beyond our immediate community of users who even know about
>> meta,
>> which Reddit's IAmA subreddit is. Especially since Sue has done some very
>> important work on things like gender issues and her departing thoughts on
>> broader internet governance issues that would benefit from a wider
>> audience.
>>
>
> Note however that Reddit is an all-male environment, as noted on some
> other list linking this: <https://infobeautiful3.s3.**
> amazonaws.com/2013/01/1276_**chicks_rule.png<https://infobeautiful3.s3.amazonaws.com/2013/01/1276_chicks_rule.png>
> >.
> (Still not as bad as Wikimedia!)
>
> Nemo
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exit Interview - Sue

[Dan Rosenthal]

Is there any thought or discussion as to whether Sue could (or would want
to) additionally do an actual Reddit IAmA, as Jorm did? Don't get me wrong,
I understand why it is on Meta and I think the Meta interview is a great
idea, but there is also something to be said for presenting to an audience
of people beyond our immediate community of users who even know about meta,
which Reddit's IAmA subreddit is. Especially since Sue has done some very
important work on things like gender issues and her departing thoughts on
broader internet governance issues that would benefit from a wider audience.

-Dan



Dan Rosenthal


On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> This was a wonderful idea.  Thank you both for organizing it.  SJ
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Theo10011  wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > A few weeks ago MZMcBride proposed an exit interview for Sue on Meta. I
> > believe his intention was something similar to Reddit's IAmA. I thought
> > that this was a good idea and supported it. Sue has been at the helm for
> a
> > long while, it would be interesting to get her reflection on all the
> > changes, and give everyone who missed the last IRC office hour session, a
> > chance to ask any lingering questions.
> >
> > Sue graciously accepted to do an exit interview a couple of weeks ago.
> The
> > page is already set up on Meta[1] for this, and we have a few questions
> > already. So far, things are organizing themselves pretty well with
> everyone
> > voting on what questions are finally picked. Please understand that we
> want
> > this to be a slow process, so everyone has time to see the questions and
> it
> > can take weeks to get your answer.
> >
> > I would like to invite everyone reading this to have a look at the page.
> > Please feel free to post your questions or vote for the ones already
> > listed. Signpost, Wikinews or any other project/group that wants to use
> the
> > exit interview is welcomed to follow that page and add to it. Thanks to
> MZ
> > for getting things rolling on Meta and Sue, for accepting to do this.
> >
> > Regards
> > Theo
> >
> >
> > [1]http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_exit_interview/Sue_Gardner
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
>
>
> --
> Samuel Klein  @metasj   w:user:sj  +1 617 529 4266
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patience

[Dan Rosenthal]

Florence,

I agree with you almost completely, but I would also note that it is also
partially about the user's thought processes and business norms that
determine how "fast" it is. My employer, for instance, has a wiki that's
meant to be a collaborative resource where disparate elements from across
the (several thousands of persons with access) organization can quickly
iterate on a document the same way we make revisions to our wikis. In
practice, however, we are so accustomed to a high level "waterfall style"
process as you describe, with a primary author and several interested
parties "clearing" the copy, it completely loses any benefit of the process
and becomes no different to me than a Sharepoint site with slightly better
UI.

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Florence Devouard wrote:

> Just yesterday during a meeting, a working partner of mine said that he
> really could not understand why on earth we were insisting so much that
> "wiki" meant "quick". Whilst the edit itself maybe done very quickly, it
> actually lead people installing wikis to believe this will accelerate the
> production process (=increase productivity).
>
> It is actually incorrect; In most cases, collaborative editing using a
> wiki does actually take MORE time than the traditional back and fro of a
> document written on a desktop editor and forwarded to others by email (or
> dropbox or whatever). Traditional way of doing things is actually so boring
> than most multi-authored documents end up being essentially written by one
> and lightly copyedited by others, a process which is often much quicker
> than the slow and laborious co-writing process on a wiki.
>
> Of course, the second is likely to result in a better document, so that
> the argument to use a wiki should be "better documents" rather than
> "quicker process".
>
> (No reference to conflict here. It is just a side thought emerging from my
> mind as I read this post about patience)
>
> Flo
>
>
>
>
> On 5/15/13 9:31 AM, Chris Keating wrote:
>
>> Thank you Michael for the thoughtful post!
>>
>> I very much agree. I read somewhere (don't ask me for a citation!) that
>> the
>> physiological effects of anger - increased levels of adrenalin and
>> cortisol, high heart rate, and the like - take about 30 minutes to return
>> to normal after something happens that makes you angry.
>>
>> Back in the day if you received a letter that made you angry, you would
>> have several hours to write an immediate response, which would then
>> probably take several more hours to reach its recipient, who would
>> probably
>> respond the next day... plenty of time for the physical reaction of anger
>> to subside.
>>
>> Email, usenet, PhPBB, wikis and the like means there is a technological
>> method of ensuring that responses can be written and shared instantly (and
>> angrily) and, indeed, in heated threads you can quite happily exchange
>> messages which provoke an emotional response quickly enough that your
>> flight-or-fight reflex is being triggered repeatedly over a period of
>> hours
>> with every ping of your inbox.
>>
>> So basically; yes, I agree.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Michael Snow > >wrote:
>>
>>  I originally wrote this message last year on a nonpublic list. It seemed
>>> to be well received, and some people asked me to share it publicly, but I
>>> didn't get around to it then. I think this would be a good time to share
>>> it
>>> here now. It is not specifically directed at recent issues here, but I
>>> think it does have some relevance. (I have some thoughts more directly
>>> related to those matters as well, which I hope to share when I have time
>>> to
>>> write them down. That might not happen until late Friday, which is
>>> probably
>>> not the best time for it, but based on recent history perhaps I can still
>>> hope some people will be reading then.)
>>>
>>> Internet technology is known for letting things happen much faster than
>>> they did before we were all so connected. This speed now seems normal to
>>> us
>>> and, being immersed in that culture, we have come to expect it. Wikis, as
>>> one aspect of that culture, have the feature of making that speed a
>>> personal tool - you can make something happen right away. How many of us
>>> got involved because we saw a mistake and figuratively couldn't wait to
>>> fix
>>> it? And when w

[Wikimedia-l] movement blog, not WMF blog, was: Go away, community (from WMF wiki at least)

[Dan Rosenthal]

While we are waiting, if Matthew could also check whether I still have my
access rights to the blog, if I do I would appreciate them being removed as
I do not need them.

On Monday, May 13, 2013, Thehelpfulone wrote:

> On 13 May 2013 13:02, Thehelpfulone  wrote:
>
> > Thanks for clarifying why Huib had his blog access revoked Tilman. Please
> > could you clarify why Casey and Alex (who haven't been socking, at least
> > not to my knowledge!) had their access revoked without notification?
>
>
> Ah I sent this just before your response, so I'm happy to wait for Matthew
> to reply to this question.
>
>
> --
> Thehelpfulone
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Fundraising 2013] Wikimedia France stepping back from payment processing

[Dan Rosenthal]

Christophe,

About this "reconnaissance d'utilite publique" or "supercharity" concept;
is there a link to an analysis (preferable) or even just the text of the
law/provision/regulation? Even one in French only would be OK, I'm just
curious to know more about how it works in practice.

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Fae  wrote:

> On 29 April 2013 21:28, Christophe Henner
>  wrote:
> ...
> > In face of that situation, Wikimedia France board has asked WMF to
> > stop being a payment processor in 2013
>
> Hi Christophe, thank you for giving this difficult decision some
> suitable context, and for doing so openly and promptly.
>
> Could someone advise me, is there an official table on meta showing
> the current list of Chapters with payment processing agreements in
> place for the 2013 fund raiser?
>
> Independently of any hat I happen to be wearing, I am planning on
> putting aside some volunteer time to examine the
> "admin:fundraising:program" ratio for our organizations over the next
> few months, so it makes sense to ensure this is achieved for the
> current payment processors, rather than just those organizations that
> are "easy" to find the figures for or come forward spontaneously. I
> would support other sensible top level performance indicators should
> they be identified and become available soon, FDC members may have
> a view on what might work well as the "top 5" indicators. Hopefully at
> least the admin ratio can be publicly shared before October this year to
> help foster a pragmatic discussion on simple dashboards and governance.
>
> I'm hoping that the WMF can set a lead by publishing a calculation of
> admin ratio for themselves. ;-)
>
> PS staff salaries are not all automatically 'admin', I hope we can
> agree that some
> program activities are entirely justifiably supported by paid staff
> and contractors.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm
> Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Single User Login finalisation: some accounts will be renamed

[Dan Rosenthal]

Global renames will be done by Stewards then, yes?

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:17 PM, K. Peachey  wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Benjamin Chen 
> wrote:
> > ...
> > One thing to note is the technical limitation on # of edits. If account
> has too many edits, he may not be able to get it renamed further.
> > ...
>
> It just needs to be done server side, The same way it already is.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] CFAAA+CALEA vs. SOPA+PIPA: the amortization

[Dan Rosenthal]

Mathieu: CFAA is the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which
criminalizes among other things unauthorized access or exceeding authorized
access of a protected system, and is found at 18 U.S.C. 1030.

CALEA is the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which is a
federal wiretapping law making it easier for law enforcement to wiretap
certain digital communications; I believe the latest provisions under
discussion involve VoIP.  EFF discusses here:
https://www.eff.org/issues/calea

Hope that helps,

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Mathieu Stumpf <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote:

> Le 2013-04-15 09:39, FastLizard4 a écrit :
>
>  {{cn}} 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/**wiki/Template:Cn<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cn>>
>> is the template on
>> the English Wikipedia that inserts the little "[citation needed]" text.
>>  So, in other words, Marc is asking for James to provide sources to back
>> up his (James') claim.
>> - --
>>
>
> Ok, thank you Andrew.
>
>
>
> __**_
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org 
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia (Foundation) endowment

[Dan Rosenthal]

Nathan hit on something that I was thinking about, while reading Darius and
Nemo's comments.  (some snipping below)

"We should also consider how having an endowment might affect the
democratic nature of the WMF  This is the flipside of making the
organization dependent on the annual fundraiser. If at some point the
WMF loses the confidence,
interest or support of the greater community of readers, then the
organization will suffer as a result. But as an endowment becomes
larger, the influence of the community decreases and the independence
of management increases."

This is definitely a risk, and one that needs to be addressed. In our
current state I think if we had an endowment magically appear today,  the
combination of board, staff, and community could be counted on to provide
enough oversight that while there may be policy disputes, the vision and
fundamental shape of the WMF are generally similar to what they are now. We
could reasonably count on that to stay the same in the near future. But as
that timeline grows further into the future, that assumption becomes more
shaky, especially when you reach the point in time where the majority of
staff/board/users have turned over from the present generation to the next;
losing that institutional memory.  We've seen how contentious questions
involving the community's relationship with the WMF can be.  If the
endowment can be structured in such a way that it guarantees perpetual
community oversight of the WMF's implementation of the movement's vision,
this is a good thing. But if not, it risks the organization slowly drifting
into something different, without the leverage of the fundraiser to bring
it back.


Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 4:52 PM, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 18 March 2013 13:39, Thomas Morton 
> wrote:
>
> > Just having a backup is only 1/10th of the problem though, if that.
> > If Wikimedia Commons, for example, where to disappear in a cloud of smoke
> > overnight what would it take to turn one of those backups into a properly
> > functioning replacement?
> > Open knowledge data is only useful when it's accessible :)
>
>
> Yes, that's the precise thing I'm saying needs proper testing :-)
>
> My threat model here is if WMF vanishes one day, say it's hit by a
> meteor (including legal meteors).
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia (Foundation) endowment

[Dan Rosenthal]

And many of those universities, libraries, etc. have designed endowments in
such a way that they have the flexibility to adapt to emergent
technologies.  There's no reason why the WMF can't do the same -- in fact,
shouldn't we be better at it (than any random library/church), by virtue of
being staffed by people who understand technology, who understand the
digital space in which the WMF operates, and who can at least keep up with
change and innovation?



Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:

> Dariusz Jemielniak, 18/03/2013 10:03:
>
>> [...]The
>>
>> only business I know of that relies on something close to 100 years of
>> time
>> horizon for strategy is forestry.  [...]
>>
>
> Seriously? What about dams, railways... or nuclear plants? (Just to use
> extreme examples.) But the point is that we're not a business; good
> comparisons for endowments are things like universities, libraries,
> churches, red cross etc. etc.
>
> Nemo
>
>
>
>
> __**_
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org 
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia (Foundation) endowment

[Dan Rosenthal]

A couple of counterarguments for Ting:

1) (WMF does not need an endowment).  The crux of this argument is that the
WMF is not dependent on large grants, but from a widely spread grassroots
campaign of small donations. While it is true that this has worked for us
in the past, the WMF budget grows and gets bigger, and it is dangerous to
rely solely on donations. A year of underperforming donations, poor
fundraising, bad economy affecting users willingness to donate, etc., could
be disastrous for the WMF. An endowment is a long-term security blanket to
cover the WMF in situations when fundraising fails. Additionally, our
fundraising model is not perfect. Zack can correct me if I'm wrong on this,
but the annual fundraising drive is disruptive to people's experiences and
expectations. It serves as a reminder, but probably also serves to turn
some people off to further engagement in Wikimedia.  We've evolved from
staring at Jimmy-face year after year, and our campaigns keep getting
better, (thanks in no small part to work by Megan, Zack, Ryan, and the rest
of that team) but it would be best if we didn't have to run them at all. So
no, I dispute the premise that the WMF does not need an endowment.  It's
been well established that we can benefit from an endowment, and while
there are certainly drawbacks, sticking the status quo is not really
acceptable for this kind of innovative organization.

2) (Endowment poses extra risks and problems for WMF).  Yes, endowments
require money management. So does fundraising. Is it really so different
for us to have a team dedicated to overseeing and growing an endowment,
than for us to have a team that exists mostly to run tests on banners for
fundraising every year?   The comparison to banks is irrelevant. An
endowment is not a bank, it is not regulated as a bank, and it answers to a
different set of stakeholders than a bank does. The 2008 financial meltdown
was a catastrophic failure of management, oversight, ethics, on many sides.
Despite the AAA ratings from Moodys and other institutions, plenty of
people saw it coming and gave the dire warnings.  Actually, an endowment
acts as a hedge against this sort of thing. Careful wealth management can
limit the risk to the endowment from market shocks that fundraising cannot
avoid. For instance, high unemployment will, broadly speaking, hurt
fundraising which depends on disposable income.  Endowments don't rely
nearly as directly on end-consumers, their confidence, and their
job/financial security.

3) (Endowment counterproductive to vision). I disagree with this point as
well. The Wikimedia vision and culture is about getting information to
people, about sharing, about freedom of knowledge.  I wholly disagree that
the fundraising campaign is an effective way to propogate this culture. In
fact, it is antithetical to this culture. It is essentially an annual
hostage-taking of the WMF projects until we get our money. It means that
projects are not truly free -- they are not gratis because if enough people
don't donate, they will disappear, and they are arguably not libre because
they are under a constant existential threat.  If we want more people to
have access to Wikimedia projects which makes more sense -- removing the
risk of shutdown by employing an endowment that will ensure the freedom of
the projects in perpetuity; or to beg for money year after year, simply
because it reminds people that we exist?

Finally, it's a false dichotomy that we can't have both an endowment and do
fundraising. The endowment itself can do its own fundraising as needed,
which can serve the purpose of reminding people we exist, and continuing to
grow from a personal, grassroots level (rather than by large grants).

Frankly, without senior WMF staff buy-in, an endowment is dead in the
water. Even if the community designed and implemented one on their own,
it'd need support from all sorts of other entities (WMF legal, probably
WCA, etc.).

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Ting Chen  wrote:

> Hello dear all,
>
> at first thank you very much MZ for put this together. This is a quite hot
> topic both for the board election, which is coming soon again, and also on
> the board.
>
> The following is my personal opinion why WMF should not build an
> endowment. The rationale from me are the following three:
> 1. WMF doesn't need an endowment
> 2. An endowment poses extra risks and problems for the WMF
> 3. From some aspect an endowment is contraproductive for the WMF even if
> we ignore the risks.
>
> Let me explain in more detail:
>
> 1. WMF does not need an endowment.
>
> For most NGO and non-profit organizations, an endowment is a method to
> mitigate the risk of unconstant income and unsecure funding. With the
> endowment the organization is indepenmdant on the ever changing fundraising
> result or on its depe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's non-disclosure agreement

[Dan Rosenthal]

I can't find a copy of mine (probably in storage somewhere) but I would
assume mine was identical to Keegan's since we came in at the same time and
did the same job.

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Keegan Peterzell wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Katie Chan  wrote:
>
> > On 06/03/2013 23:00, MZMcBride wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Out of curiosity, if you sign an NDA as a volunteer, what is the
> >> "disclosure period", then? Is it indefinite?
> >>
> >
> > "Disclosure period"? If you mean how long the party is bound by the
> > agreement, then it'll depends on the exact agreement. For things like
> > personally identifiable information, it will be forever which is kinda
> the
> > point of having the NDA in the first place.
> >
> > KTC
>
>
> My NDA, signed 7 November 2011, is for three years.  I found the copy.
>
> James Salsman:
>
> There are no terms about "disparaging information" or anything like that.
>  Save it for another thread, please.
>
> --
> ~Keegan
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

[Dan Rosenthal]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the WMF has used Oppenheim before for senior
level hiring (appointed board members and maybe C-suite level staff? I'm
not sure about that last one, but I'm almost certain I recall the WMF has
used Oppenheim for executive searches before.) My understanding is that the
value in the prospect is simply because Oppenheim simply has a wider reach
and base of contacts than the WMF does. If memory serves, they were the
ones who found Geoff Brigham, and I believe they also found the replacement
for Veronique as CFOO. I'm not really sure why this is suddenly a concern
now, and not before, especially given the quality of success they've had in
the past.

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal


On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:21 PM, rupert THURNER wrote:

> my first thought when i read this was "should i use my free time to
> edit wikipedia so that somebody donates money to wmf, and they use it
> to pay oppenheim?"
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Itzik Edri  wrote:
> > I don't understand. The board hired and pays to a company to find a board
> > member? Have we tried before via our networks, chapters, and via our
> > advisory board to find such a person (as been done until now?).
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Alice Wiegand  >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> as you know, we have one vacant appointed seat on the Board of
> Trustees. We
> >> have asked m/Oppenheim Associates to assist us in finding a new board
> >> member and and we are reaching out to the community for suggestions and
> >> nominations.
> >>
> >> The Board functions as a governance body that is ultimately responsible
> for
> >> the Wikimedia Foundation and its activities, supervises the disposition
> and
> >> solicitation of donations, and evaluates the organization’s Executive
> >> Director who leads all Foundation staff. As arguably the most
> influential
> >> and respected organization in the free knowledge movement, the Wikimedia
> >> Foundation and its Board have a great responsibility for setting policy
> >> deliberately and with due consideration for the diverse interests of a
> >> truly global community. To find out more about the responsibilities and
> >> workings of the board you can have a look at the Board
> >> manual<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual>
> >> .
> >>
> >> As with any search process we will be communicating with a lot of
> potential
> >> candidates to see if we are a good match. The Board’s objective is to
> use
> >> this search to strengthen its competence with regards to board
> governance,
> >> grantmaking, strategy, and expertise with regions where Wikimedia is
> trying
> >> to make rapid strides in the growth of our projects.
> >>
> >> Board terms are for a two year period. Compared to other boards the time
> >> commitment is very significant. The Board of Trustees meets four times a
> >> year, twice in San Francisco and twice in changing locations around the
> >> globe. Meetings take two days and travel can add another two days to
> each
> >> meeting. In addition, the Board communicates frequently by email and
> >> Internet Relay Chat (IRC) as it navigates policy issues. This can absorb
> >> 4-10 hours weekly. Board members also regularly engage with the
> Community
> >> through wiki pages.
> >>
> >> We think that the WMF would benefit from a Board member who has
> experience
> >> with organizations that have grown and evolved rapidly, and who
> understands
> >> how boards can evolve to provide appropriate governance support in these
> >> changing circumstances. Experience with international, community-driven,
> >> consensus organizations is also important as the Foundation would not
> exist
> >> without the community.
> >>
> >> We would like to call upon you to help us out with finding the right
> >> individual. A complete position description can be found
> >> here<
> >>
> http://moppenheim.com/searches/links/Wikimedia%20Foundation%20-%20Board%20Member%20position%20description%20-%20final.pdf
> >> >and
> >> additional information can be found at
> >> www.moppenheim.com and www.wikimediafoundation.org. Your suggestions
> and
> >> nominations are very welcome. Please feel free to reach out to your
> >> networks and distribute this note as you deem appropriate.
> >>
> >> Interested individuals should contact Lisa Grossman
> li...@moppenheim.com
> >>
> &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: IRC Office Hours

[Dan Rosenthal]

Not really excessive during a holiday season where people may not see the
message for several days. And a month is a good amount of lead time for
something like this. I don't get what the problem is...

Dan Rosenthal


On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:

> Hi Jayle,
>
> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:18:00 -0800
> Gayle Karen Young  wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > I'll be doing an open office hours on IRC at #wikimedia-office on January
> > 28th. I'll talk about my first full year at WMF, and answer any questions
> > to the degree that I'm able to about current HR practices and where I see
> > the trajectory of needs for the coming year. I'm looking forward to
> meeting
> > and chatting with people!
> >
> > Date: Monday, January 28
> > Time: 1000 PT/1800UTC
> >
> > In the meantime, I wish you all a very happy holiday season and a great
> > start to 2013. :)  Live long and prosper.
>
> Is it going to be 28 January 2013 (over a month from now) or 28 December
> 2012
> (tomorrow according to Israeli time). Announcing IRC open office hours a
> month in advance seems somewhat excessive.
>
> Regards,
>
> Shlomi Fish
>
> --
> -
> Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
> Optimising Code for Speed - http://shlom.in/optimise
>
>  I’m trying to achieve world peace and this regex is the last
> thing
> standing in my way! ;)
>
> Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraiser launch update

[Dan Rosenthal]

What would be nice to have would be a not-overly-detailed summary of how
payment processing/fundraising was done 5 years ago, and how it is being
done this year (and in the future) with new payment processing, FDC, etc.
Because frankly, I don't have a clue anymore.

Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Philippe Beaudette  wrote:

> I'd actually like to clarify something about the way fundraisers work,
> because it may not be readily apparent to everyone remember that the
> date that the goal is "hit" is always fuzzy, because we actually don't know
> it until it's viewed in retrospect.  There's money that comes in on a date
> that isn't actually posted until later (for instance, check transactions,
> which aren't posted the day they're received or transactions from payment
> processors that may report on a 24 hour delay - I don't know if there are
> any of these right now, but there used to be - or something similar).
>
> So you actually don't know what date you "hit" the mark until you're quite
> a bit farther down the line.  Systems are markedly better this year than
> ever before, but I remember the year that I worked the fundraiser, we were
> a week or more behind on posting checks.  That's just a manpower issue.
>
> So while it's easy to talk about the "date" as though there's a magic total
> board, there's not.  It's mostly good guesswork by Zack, his team, and the
> payment processing chapters in approximating when it happens.
>
> pb
>
> ___
> Philippe Beaudette
> Director, Community Advocacy
> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
>
> 415-839-6885, x 6643
>
> phili...@wikimedia.org
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:21 AM, K. Peachey  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Zack Exley 
> wrote:
> > > Thanks for the encouragement!  We're really sorry that this decision
> came
> > > so close to the fundraiser. But I think it's necessary and is going to
> > make
> > > things so much better. I'm hoping that we can get the fundraiser down
> to
> > > something like 30 days this year (from 46 last year)
> >
> > Is that 46 day figure when the goal was reached and exceeded or when
> > they were turned off, Since last year (and a few others if i'm not
> > mistaken) those were two different dates.
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Question for Board

[Dan Rosenthal]

Agree with Keegan.Not to mention a) the legal ramifications, and b) the PR
ramifications -- how on earth do we maintain a straight face having a
policy on paid editing if we begin paying administrators directly?

Dan Rosenthal


On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> On Oct 24, 2012 9:46 PM, "Keegan Peterzell"  wrote:
> >
> > When you subsidize volunteers they a) are no longer volunteers and b) the
> > same problem with paid editors: losing the power to walk away.
> >
> > Give me money to administrate Wikipedia and I give up my bit.  The
> freedom
> > to pick and choose what we do on the website is one of our greatest
> > strengths.
>
> Well said.
>
> Sj
> ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The new narrowed focus by WMF

[Dan Rosenthal]

On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 19:19:59 +0300, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
>
>> I too have to say that while I agree with a narrowing focus, I disagree
>> with the tabling of Fellowships. Not only have they brought a lot of great
>> talent into the foundation (as I saw when I worked there, as well as
>> after), but more than anything the WMF is an agent of disruptive
>> innovation, and I feel strongly that encouraging Fellows to explore things
>> that might not be viable for the rest of the staff (whether due to
>> resources or interest) serves that innovation, and thus the foundation
>> itself. I believe at one point there was a Fellow working on studying ways
>> to improve en.wp's internal governance. After witnessing the utter debacle
>> that is going on in the clarifications on Malleus' ban, I'm more convinced
>> than ever that such a review is critical and that the WMF should actually
>> be devoting MORE resources to this. Editor engagement comes not just
>> through things like Visual Editor (which is awesome), but also creating a
>> conducive environment for new editors from a policy standpoint. I'm afraid
>> we're going to lose that in a narrowing focus.
>>
>> Dan Rosenthal
>> __**_
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org 
>> Unsubscribe: 
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
>
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> whereas I can agree or disagree with you on your points, I fail to see the
> connection to the Malleus's ban debate. Could you please elaborate? I am
> not sure I would like to see WMF involved there, if this is your point
> (probably not).
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
>
>
>

The connection is that it is an example of the significantly more
negative/hostile environment and failure of en.wp's governance structure
that harms editor retention; this is something that could have been studied
and reported on by the Fellowship program. Basically, it's a specific
example of a broader problem that would be perfect for Fellows to look at,
were the program to continue. I was not advocating that the WMF be involved
in Malleus's specific debate.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The new narrowed focus by WMF

[Dan Rosenthal]

I too have to say that while I agree with a narrowing focus, I disagree
with the tabling of Fellowships. Not only have they brought a lot of great
talent into the foundation (as I saw when I worked there, as well as
after), but more than anything the WMF is an agent of disruptive
innovation, and I feel strongly that encouraging Fellows to explore things
that might not be viable for the rest of the staff (whether due to
resources or interest) serves that innovation, and thus the foundation
itself. I believe at one point there was a Fellow working on studying ways
to improve en.wp's internal governance. After witnessing the utter debacle
that is going on in the clarifications on Malleus' ban, I'm more convinced
than ever that such a review is critical and that the WMF should actually
be devoting MORE resources to this. Editor engagement comes not just
through things like Visual Editor (which is awesome), but also creating a
conducive environment for new editors from a policy standpoint. I'm afraid
we're going to lose that in a narrowing focus.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright on Xrays

[Dan Rosenthal]

As I'm running out the door, two things to point out factually:

1) people who work in U.S. hospitals are very often independent
contractors, especially physicians.
2) much medical diagnostic imaging is done on an outpatient basis at an
independent imager. Even if the imager has copyright, there's no way to
know whether there is a standing assignment agreement or not.

Additionally to confuse things, HIPAA mandates access to (but not
necessarily copyright in, though I haven't really looked at it) medical
records, as well as disclosure and protection requirements.

Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Anthony  wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Max Harmony 
> wrote:
> > 2012/8/20 Anthony :
> >> Under US law (I know very little about the law of other countries):
> >>
> >> Unless the patient somehow contributed creatively to the image (broke
> >> his bones in a certain creative pattern), it's certainly not the HMO
> >> or patient.  If the X-ray tech is an employee, then it's certainly not
> >> the X-ray tech.
> > But the copyright of a work for hire goes to the employer. The X-ray
> > tech would get the copyright, but they're employed by the hospital.
> > The hospital, in turn, is employed by the patient. As such, I would
> > think the patient does own the copyright.
>
> If the X-ray tech is an employee (and the work is created within the
> scope of his employment, which I am assuming), then, under US law, the
> tech never "gets the copyright".  The employer is the author.  The
> tech is completely out of the loop.
>
> As for the hospital being "employed by the patient", not in the sense
> of work for hire law.
>
> For the patient to get the copyright, they would need to enter into a
> work for hire agreement, the details of which are long and which you
> can easily find online.
>
> > Is a similar logic not
> > applied to, say, wedding photos, in which an photographer is employed
> > by a company which is in turn employed by the couple?
>
> Wedding photos are more complicated.  I could see an argument, under
> some factual circumstances, that the couple  (and/or the decorator,
> etc) might own copyright as a joint author.  Or they may have employed
> the photographer directly.  Or they may have commissioned the work
> under a work for hire agreement.  Or they might have purchased the
> copyright in a copyright transfer.  Or they might just not own the
> copyright in the work at all.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright on X rays

[Dan Rosenthal]

I've asked on my state bar's listserv to see if anyone has any thoughts or
has any caselaw available they can refer to.  I have some speculation, but
I'm running out the door so I'll post it when I return.


Dan Rosenthal


On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 3:21 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> @ Klaus So if they are copyrightable in Germany who owns the copyright?
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FAQ - Board Resolution on Personal Image Hiding Feature

[Dan Rosenthal]

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

> Dan Rosenthal, 16/07/2012 20:01:
>
>  It's like you read the first 14 words, ignored everything else, and
>> twisted
>> it around until it doesn't even resemble what he actually said
>>
>
> Oh really? <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/**index.php?title=User_talk:**
> Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=**481889811<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=481889811>
> >
> What does it mean in your opinion then?
>
>
It means exactly what Jimmy said.

"Commons would be a lot better off placed under the jurisdiction of our
ArbCom, but that isn't going to happen. What would be best would be for
Commons to get their house in order themselves. I hope people are willing
to help them with that. There are good people at commons who are trying.-"

Jimmy is saying that Commons should fix their own problems, and that it
ISN'T going to be placed under ArbCom's jurisdiction. The words "en.wiki
community should rule Commons" are not anywhere to be found, either in
letter or in spirit. What you suggested that he said rises to the Fox News
level of misleading.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FAQ - Board Resolution on Personal Image Hiding Feature

[Dan Rosenthal]

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

> Bishakha Datta, 16/07/2012 18:53:
>
>  At our in-person board meeting of 11 July 2012, the vote on this was
>> provisionally recorded at 9-1, with Jimmy voting against. Jimmy has since
>> changed his vote to a yes, on reviewing an FAQ accompanying this
>> resolution
>> which notes that the board is willing to approve a plan broadly backed by
>> the community.
>>
>
> What community? Jimbo often declares that en.wiki community should rule
> Commons, for instance;[1] will an en.wiki community plan be considered
> enough to impose something on everyone?
>
> Nemo
>
> [1] Most recently:  index.php?title=User_talk:**Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=**501492599>
> (although ArbCom is technically controlled by himself, not by en.wiki
> community).
>
>
>
It's like you read the first 14 words, ignored everything else, and twisted
it around until it doesn't even resemble what he actually said

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans policy

[Dan Rosenthal]

The way I read it, Steven correct me if I am wrong, he is writing in a
staff role, but not necessarily within his Engineering responsibilities.

Dan Rosenthal


On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Theo10011  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Steven Walling  >wrote:
>
> > P.S. On a personal note, I wanted to say that though I'm writing this
> > with my staff accout during working hours, this is not really a part
> > of my core job description now that I've joined Engineering and
> > Product Development. I've spent my time authoring this policy and
> > proposing it because I think it's really important, not merely because
> > I was assigned to do so.
>
>
> Steven, just a note, I'd be a bit more comfortable if you could clearly
> demarcate whether you are doing this in your staff role or as a
> volunteer. You are debating a few people who are opposing that policy using
> your "Steven Walling (WMF)" staff account. And, not everyone new on Meta
> might be aware of that postscript you just added here. It also doesn't help
> that 4 of the 12 supporters for implementing the policy in its current form
> are WMF staff.
>
>
> Regards
> Theo
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

[Dan Rosenthal]

OSM is great. Here in Addis Ababa, street names are not used except in a
handful of major thoroughfares; people navigate by landmark. OSM has far
more navigable map of the city than googlemaps does.  In some areas it
labels the street name in the local fashion (e.g. "Road to Gerji Giorgis).
Yet it fails in other aspects -- the U.S. embassy is the most recognizable
landmark on Intoto street, and is not listed; neither are the French,
German, or British embassies. The EU Commission is not listed on Cape Verde
st. even though that street is commonly known as "EU Road". Yet, the
Brazilian Ambassador's residence, not a particularly well known landmark,
is known.


Dan Rosenthal


On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Cristian Consonni
wrote:

> 2012/6/7 Richard Symonds :
> > the house because it's not
> > on their navigation systems...
>
> May I thank evebody participating in this discussion for the
> throughout update on navigation system?
> I am finding it very interesting, above all the comparising among
> different countries. =)
>
> Cristian
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l