I don't understand how a Wikimedia trustee using Wikimedia websites,
Wikimedia branding, and this Wikimedia supported email list to promote a
funding event for their own commercial project, i.e. "WT:Social", fits with
the bylaws which include:
"The property of this Foundation is irrevocably
It would have been nice to see a list without many long term "names" who
will by default be entrenched in current systems and group think.
It's great that old timers, and those who have careers within the WMF or
Affiliates are involved and help with reviews, but it is worth considering
the
Nice to hear about the excitement.
It looks like reading the policy and checking links in the supplied
document would take around 45 minutes to do thoroughly, plus joining the
meeting with the two WMF teams would take another hour. It is unfortunate
that the invitation is with less than 1 days
Apart from mindless news sources that regurgitated the Christies PR, more
recent journalism has in the headlines "triggers controversy", "editors
very mad", "some Wikipedians are pissed".
Of these, the presentation by Slate seems even-handed good quality
journalism, presenting the facts, the
Hi Leila,
What are the requirements for evidence of peer review and the quality of
editorial oversight for the published research, or are you accepting
nominations of unreviewed research so long as it's printed in a "scholarly
publication", for example, a letter or report rather than a paper?
On
Dariusz, Chair of the BGC: "Cryptocurrency and blockchains were not a
factor here – the Governance Committee, and then the Board, were
considering other things..."
This is so wrong it's painful to read. The fundamental job of the
Governance Committee is to ensure that appointed trustees do not
If you live in China or the USA, no payment system is guaranteed invisible
from state agents. There is no reason to believe that cryptocurrency
transactions going in or out of countries with sophisticated security
agencies could be any more anonymous or trustworthy than, say, an anonymous
payment
Several organizations, including pension companies, have been
withdrawing their investments that may indirectly support Russia's war
in Ukraine. Similarly there have been several news reports of
directors stepping down from companies where their personal interests
and or past history is now seen
o borrow a page out of the playbook that is escalation. We
> should not because of what we stand for.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2022 at 11:27, Lane Chance wrote:
>>
>> Several organizations, including pension companies, have been
>> withdrawing their inves
for the WMF to spend effort on a hypothetical.
>
> As to taking offence, you apparently expect that you and your intentions are
> self evident and you do not need to reciprocate those sentiments. Wonderful,
> thank you for your interaction.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> On Mon
It's worth highlighting the stipend (presumably intended for otherwise
unpaid volunteers who are not full-time employees of the WMF). It's
$200 for "each 2 months" and covers costs of "childcare, internet,
transportation and other costs that make volunteering possible".
The commitment is to give
varied between countries because it'd
> encourage and entrench bias, and inequity across the movement.
>
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 19:44, Lane Chance wrote:
>>
>> It's worth highlighting the stipend (presumably intended for otherwise
>> unpaid volunteers who are not
Xeno,
Question 1 - ratification failure
Could you explain more clearly what happens if the ratification
process fails to get 50% support?
"If the majority of voters oppose the adoption of the guidelines as
written, they will be asked which elements need to be changed and
why"[1] gives no clue
It would make the UCoC easier to understand if there was a glossary on
the same page. A chosen definition of "race" or "ethnicity" being used
in the context of this policy document may not be the same as exists
in the reader's head, how they describe their own identity, or as
might be used on
A 'liberalization' of IPBE can easily be enabled by allowing WMF
funded projects to add this group to any participants that request it,
or even all participants in some editathons given the benefits of
editing from shared wifi or through a proxy in some countries where
editing Wikipedia may have
yone
care? It is not the job of checkusers to be secret police and see all new
joiners in bad faith, that is neither useful, nor a good use of volunteer
time.
> Regards,
> Rae
>
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 04:48 Lane Chance wrote:
>
>> "Granting IPBE by default to [...extendedconfir
here have been?
Lane
> Vito
>
> Il giorno sab 23 apr 2022 alle ore 19:58 Lane Chance
> ha scritto:
>
>>
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 at 15:17, Rae Adimer via Wikimedia-l <
>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lane,
>>>
&g
"Granting IPBE by default to [...extendedconfirmed]/etc. users is not
feasible."
Granting IPBE to large groups of good faith editors is feasible, such as
entire classes of people during editathons, all registered accounts joining
a virtual conference, or everyone with more than 1,000 edits on
Hi, from the statements so far, there seems no planned date for
implementation. By this I mean a date from which an affected volunteer can
raise a complaint.
Given the extended redrafting, "conversations" and having another vote, is
it fair to estimate that the earliest for UCoC cases would be
Responding to LGBTQ minority communities raising legitimate, evidence
based, concerns of systemic bias with "stay in your lane"?
I don't think I've read anything more tone deaf.
The give away is "Without having looked into the actual substance". Do
the research before rushing to punch down the
re are the links?
>
> Todd
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 5:17 AM Lane Chance wrote:
>>
>> Responding to LGBTQ minority communities raising legitimate, evidence
>> based, concerns of systemic bias with "stay in your lane"?
>>
>> I don't thi
ements-1235279115
2.
https://futurism.com/the-byte/celebrities-bored-apes-are-hilariously-worthless-now
3.
https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/02/06/bored-ape-yacht-club-and-neo-nazis-so-much-reaching-for-just-four-bananas/
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 at 16:02, Lane Chance wrote:
> Dariusz, C
Fascinating, the WMF are saying they have answered the question on
Meta, yet a simple fact check, by reading the page, shows they have
not answered the obvious simple yes/no needed.
A vague reply of "We are in the process" must set off red flags for
any logical reader. The huge amount of money
...
> It's not causing any form of disruption to make these changes in a deliberate
> and thoughtful manner. Everyone can take a deep breath.
> Risker/Anne
The WMF has never claimed that setting out a fixed timetable that
their CEO and the Endowment "agents" can be held accountable to is
either
Thank you for making a statement.
Could the WMF please publish the take down order (on-wiki)?
I understand that take down orders are not normally considered
confidential or private, though there may be reasons for you to
publish a redacted version. There are obvious benefits to volunteers
taking
WMAU is a registered charity in Victoria state and a registered NFP
and so complies with guidelines from the Charities and Not-for-profits
Commission. WMAU is therefore required to comply with the Privacy Act
1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles.[1] This includes how an
individual can access
Keep in mind how fast these tools change. ChatGPT, Bard and
competitors understand well the issues with lack of sources, and Bard
does sometimes put a suitable source in a footnote, even if it
(somewhat disappointingly) just links to wikipedia. There's likely to
be a variation soon that does a
27 matches
Mail list logo
