Resources...who has
just resigned, too, and has yet to be replaced.
Risker/Anne
On 12 March 2016 at 21:09, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> On March 1, Jimmy Wales wrote:[1]
>
> things like standard boilerplate language to be signed by
> > all employees doesn't strike me as something
n resources issue (in respect of
NDAs). It's pretty obvious from what has bubbled to the surface over the
last few months that transparency was NOT just an issue from the community
perspective. Perhaps a transparency officer in Legal might make sense.
Risker/Anne
___
pending on the nature of the disclosure.
There have been transparency problems, no question about it. But they had
nothing to do with NDAs. Let's leave NDAs out of it at this point.
They're absolutely not within Community Engagement's purview.
Risker/Anne
On 12 March 2016 at 22
"Requests for transparency" is highly inaccurate; what you are requesting
is information. The two are not synonymous. I have moved the page to the
more correct name.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_information
On 12 March 2016 at 22:18, SarahSV wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at
I think it is probably best that human resources issues (including the
reasons for people leaving the organization) are not included in this list,
unless expressly disclosed by the individuals.
Risker
On 14 March 2016 at 12:14, Pine W wrote:
> Um. Luis, if you were offered a severa
that
could result in a large settlement, either individually or as a group
(think high-tech employees lawsuit). This is an area where "transparency"
very definitely intersects with the privacy rights of those individuals who
are directly affected. Privacy should win.
Risker/Anne
On
a serious impact on
their future earnings and ability to secure future employment.
Risker/Anne
On 14 March 2016 at 13:37, Nathan wrote:
> We need to distinguish between the personal and private details of
> individuals and the policies of the WMF around management of employees. It
>
Well, Pete, I certainly interpreted Nathan's question as being specific
enough to require that a number be given.
On 14 March 2016 at 14:28, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> > There's a difference between "does the WM
oversight role.
Risker/Anne
On 4 April 2016 at 16:54, Greg Varnum wrote:
> Forward on behalf of Kelly Battles.
>
>
>
> Hello All -
>
> My name is Kelly Bodnar Battles and I am honored to have joined the
> Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees in January of this year.
&g
be published. It would
probably violate quite a few labour and human rights laws, not to mention
the separation agreement that no doubt exists. That's not transparency,
it's prurience.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
Just noting that 1700-1800 PDT on Wednesday May 11 is -0100 UTC on
Thursday May 12. Based on the link given, this seems to be when the meeting
will be held. Please verify.
Risker/Anne
On 4 May 2016 at 21:28, Pine W wrote:
> Forwarding.
>
> Pine
> -- Forwa
ts may be useful in other
contexts as well.
Risker/Anne
On 1 June 2016 at 09:18, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
> hi James,
>
> thanks for your input. One of the reasons for the survey is asking the
> community what they think about the key qualities. I think it is quite
> likely a more eff
f issues addressed by checkusers on different projects is
very different.
Risker/Anne
On 7 June 2016 at 15:01, Sydney Poore wrote:
> My suggestion is to come up with a general type training that can work for
> all administrators and functionaries since all have the freedom and
> permission
Pine, have you read Patricio's email in the new thread?
Risker
On 7 June 2016 at 20:28, Pine W wrote:
> I consider the systematic omission of proactive disclosure of this
> expenditure of at least $300,000 in donor funds to be financial misconduct
> and a breach of trust. I
greed to the posting of her own direct salary for the 2015-16
fiscal year, despite the fact that it would not come close to the Form 990
reporting threshold.
Risker
On 7 June 2016 at 20:42, Pine W wrote:
> Thank you for pointing that out, Risker. The emails indeed cross paths and
> I did
as Chair. Thank you as
well to Alice for her service as Vice Chair.
Risker/Anne
On 24 June 2016 at 09:49, Jan-Bart de Vreede
wrote:
> Congratulations go to Christophe, and also thank you for making yourself a
> candidate. Your years of experience in the movement and personality are are
&
f the languages of
the Indian subcontinent, and that somehow it is the WMF's fault.
Risker/Anne
On 28 June 2016 at 11:51, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Anders Wennersten
> wrote:
> > I have been active in FDC and followed closely all applicants. It wor
On 28 June 2016 at 12:24, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Risker wrote:
> > Milos, I read the points you are making in your initial post, and I
> cannot
> > tell what actions you are seeking. I am not even really clear on what
> the
> > problem
icles on a near-constant basis, as well, but they don't scan
everything in real time. I have seen very good results using this process,
often within the hour.
Risker
On 7 August 2016 at 20:24, Pine W wrote:
> Hi Pax,
>
> I believe that WMF Discovery is the team that is best suited t
committee itself.
I wish you all the very best - you have an opportunity to have a
significant impact in the governance of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Risker/Anne
On 20 July 2016 at 21:00, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
> Dear members of the Wikimedia community,
>
> As you know the boa
Hello Amy -
This mailing list doesn't permit attachments for security reasons. Could
you please link to the job description on a publicly accessible page?
Thanks.
Risker/Anne
On 20 September 2016 at 19:48, Amy Elder wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Over the past few weeks, we have been wo
. The
Ombudsperson will publicly document the complaint, and investigate as
needed.
On behalf of the FDC,
Anne Clin / Risker
FDC Chair
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_recommendations/2016-2017_round_1
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grant
Congratulations!
Risker/Anne
On 1 January 2017 at 20:28, Biplab Anand wrote:
> No not at all.
> On 1 Jan 2017 22:49, "MF-Warburg" wrote:
>
> > Congratulations.
> > Was this supported by bots?
> >
> > 2017-01-01 8:16 GMT+01:00 Biplab Anand :
> &
Well done!
Risker/Anne
On 1 January 2017 at 10:46, Orsolya Virág Gyenes
wrote:
> Congratulations on the milestone! Mazel Tov!
>
> Orsolya
>
> 2016. dec. 29. 16:11 ezt írta ("Itzik - Wikimedia Israel" <
> it...@wikimedia.org.il>):
>
> Hi,
>
> I&#
unity to have to raise more money for the purpose
of hiring the staff and paying the bills to address undisclosed paid
editing to the point that there is a genuine effect.
Risker/Anne
On 5 January 2017 at 13:53, David Gerard wrote:
> I should add: I spent a few months following the various
Thank you to all of you - those who have served AffCom so admirably, those
who are stepping up to take on these responsibilities, and those who are
continuing their dedicated service.
Risker/Anne
On 17 January 2017 at 23:15, Nabin K. Sapkota
wrote:
> Congratulations!!
>
> On Jan 17,
at have come as a result of the publishing of biographical
information of notable-only-on-Wikipedia people. Please stop doing this.
Risker/Anne
On 13 February 2017 at 19:43, Vi to wrote:
> I find all of these to be deeply non relevant. Though they might be
> relevant according to standard
being addressed within the
relevant community, or (as in this case) are not being discussed in the
relevant community at all, is not really appropriate, and I for one would
appreciate if you'd stop doing that.
Risker/Anne
On 26 July 2015 at 17:45, Pine W wrote:
> Pinging WMF Legal to ask a
significantly elevated levels of protection above
'all administrators on Project ABC', although they may call for another
level of protection that can be customizable to allowing a much smaller
group or specific individuals to be the only editors.
Risker/Anne
On 11 August 2015 at 16:43, Romaine W
o that from the back door, and Superprotect is probably the prettied-up
interface so others can do it), and if there's a problem that serious it is
going to ahve to remain in a broader range of hands.
Risker/Anne
On 11 August 2015 at 17:27, Pine W wrote:
> Most of the time, admins beha
Who said the problem was on enwiki?
On 11 August 2015 at 17:58, Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Risker wrote:
>
>
> > There are situations where not even the administrators of a particular
> > community should be allowed to edit a page. A good
On 11 August 2015 at 18:05, Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> > Who said the problem was on enwiki?
>
>
> If you think this issue is only a problem in some specific place or class
> of wikis, then say so. Otherwise, I would have t
eral-hundred of us we might be able to
come up with a solution that works to accommodate both groups.
Risker/Anne
On 20 August 2015 at 01:19, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> Yes, Andrew is right. Navigation is a very important focus point of
> organising every Wiki Loves Monuments.
>
> The com
lessen the impact of the scheduling conflict.
Risker/Anne
On 21 August 2015 at 16:22, Michael Peel wrote:
> From my perspective, this strikes me as part of the reason why national
> organisations are well suited to running the Wikimedia fundraising
> campaigns rather than a global organis
Thank you to the members whose terms are complete, and congratulations to
Wikimedia Espana on their new board. Best wishes to the new members!
Risker/Anne
On 4 October 2015 at 19:38, Tito Dutta wrote:
> Best wishes and congrats.
>
> On 5 October 2015 at 04:09, Dennis Tob
subscriber
behaves inappropriately (e.g., does the person get unsubscribed, is there
an appeal mechanism, what's the complaints mechanism, do affiliates who
have a member "unsubscribed" get to replace that person with someone else,
etc.)
Risker/Anne
___
to Wikidata. Wikidatians are working hard to add referencing and
improve what is there already, but it's a huge labour and we shouldn't be
adding to their mountain of work unnecessarily.
Risker/Anne
On 29 October 2015 at 14:37, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think it is time for
ot a reasonable filter. A preference to receive a reminder that Wikidata
is missing would work. But it should not automatically pop up whenever
someone creates an article, which is just as likely to annoy editors.
Risker/Anne
On 29 October 2015 at 16:08, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> That is compa
ve said nothing.
Copying Joseph in case he wants to respond to some of the discussions here.
Risker/Anne
On 15 November 2015 at 10:36, Pharos wrote:
> The figure quoted is quite interesting, but do we have a comparable metric
> for the Wikimedia projects? :
>
> "... inci
On 23 November 2015 at 21:04, Pine W wrote:
> Thank you FDC.
>
> Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this round. That
> is nice to see.
>
> I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more problems
> the FDC seemed to find with the org's budget and performanc
Hello Gerard -
The recommended grant for Wikimedia Deutschland is larger than ever, and
represents a 42% increase from last year's grant. This is a massive
increase. Please don't confuse the fact that WMDE did not get everything
it wanted with whether or not Wikidata is underfunded. Remember, t
r Wikimedia
movement entity except WMDE has received in the past three rounds.
User:Risker - FDC member
On 24 November 2015 at 10:13, Nicola Zeuner
wrote:
> Dear Risker, Gerard et al.,
>
> Just a quick correction:
>
> WMDE did indeed provide a detailed cost breakdown for Wikidat
to
proceed.
Risker/Anne
On 1 December 2015 at 18:09, Mardetanha wrote:
> do we have any definite number that if reach then we would not any
> fundraiser again in the future (I really would like to to see WMF in the
> position in which, it would not need yearly fundraiser to stand up
I confess. I have used many adjectives to describe Wikimedians over the
years, but "boring" has never been one of them.
Risker/Anne
On 8 December 2015 at 14:20, Carlos Colina (Maor_X)
wrote:
> WellIberocoopians always have fun ;-)
>
> Sent from my HTC
>
> - R
oking forward to the viability assessments.
Risker/Anne
On 16 December 2015 at 15:22, Toby Negrin wrote:
> No one asked for 10 more wishes? :)
>
> Thanks Danny and the Community Tech team. This is a great model for working
> with our Communities.
>
> -Toby
>
> On Wed,
Excellent news, Christophe and everyone else at WMFR!
Risker/Anne
On 17 December 2015 at 11:41, Christophe Henner <
christophe.hen...@wikimedia.fr> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> A quick email to share with you a good news on our side.
>
> A few month ago, Wikimedia France start
to grow these projects within the
founding principles is not just important, it's necessary.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.
t without being
able to provide provenance, its data doesn't even meet the minimal criteria
for verifiability.
Risker/Anne
On 28 December 2015 at 13:00, Jane Darnell wrote:
> All I said is that the wiki way works, that's all. You can't hide it when
> someone tries to take o
committee
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Committee
> >
> to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
> steps.
>
> Patricio Lorente
>
> Chair, Board of Trustees
>
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
While you are at it,
o weren't board members
this time last year. By the end of their Wikimania board meeting, we could
have as many as eight trustees with less than 18 months of experience under
their belt. Of all the problems the board has, insufficient turnover is
NOT one of them.
Risker
___
were
solicited, and further follow-up emails about this time's process.
Risker
On 10 January 2016 at 21:18, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:37 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak
> wrote:
> > I can, however, generally add that we have not collected any nominations
> > fr
rmation, then it gives
an excuse for the community's comments to be ignored "because they don't
know the facts". So let's lay out all the facts on the table, please.
Risker/Anne
On 16 January 2016 at 15:06, Vituzzu wrote:
> Thank you for sharing this but, above all,
ting VisualEditor is then immediately dumped to the bottom of
the drawer when it comes to Wikidata. First we'll make it easy for them to
edit. Then we'll include a whole pile of data that they can't edit -or at
least can't edit on the website they logged into. They're pretty opp
nds great. If en.WP do this as part of The Signpost, it would have
> a high level of reach, immediately. Same with Wikidata's weekly
> update.
>
>
Heh. I think back to when I first started editing. I would have been
completely freaked out at th
o reframe things in "oh, evil WMF did all wrong
> against
> > the poor, innocent community" terms serves no purpose other than create a
> > windmill to tilt at.
>
> It is comments like this from WMF staff which make m
Thanks to MADe, M0tty and Dimi z - and congratulations and best wishes to
the new members and the entire board.
Risker/Anne
On 23 January 2016 at 20:11, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> We as Wikimedia Belgium now have a new board installed with the General
> Assembly of
Thanks to Wikimedia Argentina for this work - and to the Wikimedians of
Argentina for sharing their experiences.
Risker/Anne
On 22 January 2016 at 08:56, Anthony Cole wrote:
> Anyway, it's gorgeous. Well done all.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:15 PM,
Indeed. I was rather shocked to find that I was winding up on the
Wikimedia Foundation site every time I clicked on to Meta...
Risker/Anne
On 26 January 2016 at 13:45, Michael Peel wrote:
> Also Commons, and anything else at *.wikimedia.org. Apparently, "Bad
> deployment, bei
...And Mediawikiwiki, where I tried to log into Phabricator...
Risker/Anne
On 26 January 2016 at 13:46, Lane Rasberry wrote:
> And Commons.
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Pharos
> wrote:
>
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>
Congratulations and thanks to the new Bangladeshi board.
Risker/Anne
On 27 January 2016 at 12:46, Subhashish Panigrahi
wrote:
> Wow, three friends already! :)
>
> Congratulations everyone. Looking forward to hear more on the new EC's
> work soon.
>
> Best,
> Subh
Well done, all! It is really impressive to see such excellent
collaboration between free knowledge open source communities. Everyone
should take a bow.
Risker/Anne
On 28 January 2016 at 23:16, Tito Dutta wrote:
> Congratulations. :)
>
> On 29 January 2016 at 09:12, Katy Lo
I am sure the agenda was prepared well in advance and before the events of
the last 48 hours; however, it should be noted that there are now *two*
open board seats (one community-selected, one Board-appointed).
Risker/Anne
On 29 January 2016 at 09:01, Pete Forsyth wrote:
>
>
tiple winners, (b) is simple and intuitive for voters
and (c) has some sort of process for voters to identify clearly the
candidates they feel are very inappropriate for the role.
While we're at it...diversity remains a very serious problem for the
Board. Does the community voting process want to
appropriate to a limited number
of articles but would be inappropriate or even offensive in other
presentations.
Risker/Anne
On 30 January 2016 at 13:37, Haitham Shammaa wrote:
> Hi Tobias,
>
> In addition to Maggie's attempt to explain why the numbers might seem high,
> the report
hem in a more permanent way, such as the "learnings"
that many groups have created and shared with the assistance of Community
Engagement. I'm sure we can think of more ways to share information that
doesn't involve people having to fly half-way around the world and spend
thousands o
ll be brilliant wherever you wind up - and I'm glad to hear you
plan to stick around as a volunteer. All the best!
Risker/Anne
On 11 February 2016 at 20:24, Siko Bouterse wrote:
> Dear friends and colleagues,
>
> I’ve had the amazing privilege of serving this movement in a staff capacity
they should
be consulted and possibly should actively approve any grant applications
where the dollar value sought is higher than that amount. I don't believe
the current policies require advance approval or even advance notification,
though.
Risker/Anne
On 12 February 2016 at 03:54, Gerard Meijs
that we don't know
how much was actually requested in this case, only what was granted.)
Risker/Anne
On 12 February 2016 at 21:23, Anthony Cole wrote:
> Anne, regarding:
>
> "Since the Board must approve acceptance of any donations over $100,000
> USD, it seems to be obviou
to obtain visas and
we generally have far more disposable income to attend these events.
Risker/Anne
On 18 February 2016 at 19:04, Gnangarra wrote:
> The first thing that happens when you split up something like Wikimania in
> multiple events is you multiple the cost of WMF attendance bec
ters
after all, and some of them see things from a very different perspective
than others.
Risker/Anne
On 18 February 2016 at 21:04, Lane Rasberry wrote:
> SJ,
>
> Can you please contact any Wikimedia chapter and ask them to request
> nominations?
>
> There are two criteri
r the chapter group, either through the
coordination group or through some other means, to be more specific in what
kinds of talents and characteristics they'd like to see in candidates.
Risker/Anne
On 18 February 2016 at 22:18, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> Risker, I think Lane understood SJ&#x
assume good faith", don't worry. I'm going to
say "don't beat up on people who have different levels of information".
Risker/Anne
On 20 February 2016 at 20:31, Brandon Harris wrote:
>
> Danny, don't kid yourself! The folks at Wikipediocracy kn
Wikimedians are not just ordinary morons.
> >
>
> Right. So can't we fix this? Lila is part of the movement too, and
> everyone is clearly in a lot of pain here.
>
> What can be done to help? Can an outside broker be brought in to hold a
> meeting wi
As has already been explained on this list, many people do not have access
to Facebook. If this is something germane and useful to a lot of people on
this list, perhaps it would be appropriate to ask Jonathan to post it here.
Risker/Anne
On 21 February 2016 at 18:34, Anthony Cole wrote:
>
interested parties cannot even read, let alone participate in, unless
they're willing to give up some fairly significant privacy. I am
disappointed, but I do not hold it against anyone for preferring to discuss
issues in a venue not associated with Wikimedia.
Risker/Anne
On 21 February 2016
ely happy
to be on Facebook would agree there's a bit of an irony on talking about
the respect for Wikimedia community values on a site that explicitly
doesn't share them.
That, and it's a bit unfair to tease people.
Risker/Anne
On 21 February 2016 at 22:01, Gergő Tisza wrote:
>
fications which, despite some rather minor
grumblings and need for a few tweaks at the beginning, has been fully
embraced by the community. It's not entirely perfect for all use cases,
but it is so much better than anything we had before. It's become so
natural to ping someone with {{u|use
This is really cool, Yuri! Thank you for sharing this.
Risker
On 22 February 2016 at 22:15, Yuri Astrakhan
wrote:
> First complex interactive graph in Wikipedia explores the most expensive
> paintings in history. Move the mouse around to view images, click the
> period or artist to
onsible for some of the unfortunate
situations we have seen in the last several months. But those who are
seeking a new board...well, you already have one.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailin
Well, Sarah, after all of these years I didn't think you'd come up with
anything that would surprise me. I was wrong, And I'll say that if I was
going to favour paying anyone, it would be paying qualified translators to
support smaller projects, and Wikisourcers, and people who may have the
intere
On 24 February 2016 at 21:16, Risker wrote:
> Well, Sarah, after all of these years I didn't think you'd come up with
> anything that would surprise me. I was wrong, And I'll say that if I was
> going to favour paying anyone, it would be paying qualified translat
ntage of the
editing group over all other stakeholders. I'd like to see some
suggestions that are more balanced.
Risker
On 24 February 2016 at 22:27, George Herbert
wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 24, 2016, at 7:01 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> >
> > George, the WMF, particular
Congratulations, Katy! It's been a pleasure working with you on the FDC
for the last two years, and I will look forward to continuing to work with
you in your new role.
Risker/Anne
On 25 February 2016 at 18:04, Philippe Beaudette
wrote:
> Congrats to Katy. She will be an excellent pe
as far as I can see), who has not provided any evidence that his
statement is based on some known information. It may come as a surprise to
a lot of people, but Wikia's software has been increasingly diverging from
the MediaWiki we all use on Wikimedia projects, and they already have
better inter-wi
may or may not even exist.
Let's work more on problem identification first.
Risker/Anne
On 26 February 2016 at 19:44, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> To Oliver and Keegan -- I hear you guys loud and clear, and I am very aware
> that the trauma of the last few months has taken this kind of
ss, and the lack of documentation or clarity of the
process, were much closer to root causes here.
That's just one example.
Risker/Anne
On 26 February 2016 at 21:04, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> Risker and Brion:
>
> I very much agree with the principles you're stating, and am c
A gmail address?
I am sure if you ask nicely the committee can be granted a wikimedia.org
email address through Mailman that will allow more than one person to
handle applications. It could probably be done pretty quickly.
Risker/Anne
On 4 September 2014 14:35, Carlos M. Colina wrote:
> D
30. Indeed, I'm not entirely clear why this isn't happening
onwiki, but I suppose there may be a reason for that which doesn't come
through in the original email.
Risker/Anne
On 4 September 2014 15:34, Bence Damokos wrote:
> Thank you for the suggestion, Anne!
>
> As so
y that it may not be possible to come up with a product
that is actually useful on the projects we have to replace the discussion
system we have. It seems that the Flow team has assembled the ingredients
to make a chocolate cake with the hope that it will be a suitable
replacement for vegetable stew.
rface (that would be VisualEditor), and to recognize that wikitext
editing needs to remain in existence as well. Adding a third one whose
primary purpose will be to talk about the content being created using the
other two is counterintuitive at best.
Risker/Anne
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Flow
ch about the frills
(no matter how well they are executed) and focusing instead on what the
new "system" doesn't do. This is the real parallel between Flow and Visual
Editor - focusing on the "difference" between the new product and that it
was intended to replace, instea
cial interaction has
changed significantly, or that those with a low level of contribution to
discussion space are doing so because they find the *technology*
unappealing.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.
On 8 September 2014 00:46, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> . e.g. once it is
> beta quality, I am sure Jimmy Wales will want it enabled on his user
> talk page, which would increase exposure to, and acceptance of, Flow.
>
>
...or possibly far less complaining on his page. :
newbies to participate on many of the
larger Wikimedia projects. There are lots of ways that we can make it
easier. The most obvious one is automatic signing of comments, and it is
something that we have technically been able to impose for years; sinebot
didn't come into existence in a vacuum.
Risk
ticle
histories contain their username or IP (a form of automatic signature), so
I'm not convinced that there's an expectation on the part of new users that
anything they write anywhere will automatically be signed.
Risker/Anne
On 8 September 2014 10:24, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
e majority of people in this thread have signed their posts.
Indeed, Jon Davies' "+1" in response to this post had a 588-character
signature line, presumably added to his mail client preferences.
Risker/Anne
On 8 September 2014 11:43, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> Hello,
>
&g
#x27;s going to be just as
much an issue for Flow as it would be if we just turned on those email
messages today. Looks brilliant on paper, but reality is a different
thing.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://me
s,
but it's not that. "Wikimedia Affiliates Conference" will do fine.
Risker/Anne
On 11 September 2014 15:12, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> On 11.09.2014 20:48, Isarra Yos wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm part of the Wikimedia movement, but there are no chapters nearby, nor
d get a lot out of it?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
This is the same problem. It's usurping the Wikimedia name, and this
proposal also usurps the Meta (all communities communication forum) name.
It is neither for Wikimedia (as a whole) nor for Meta. It's for designa
We do have a community centre. It's called Meta. It may not be a very
elegant one, and there are definitely parts that can be improved, but it's
our virtual community centre.
Risker/Anne
On 11 September 2014 19:54, Richard Symonds <
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
>
101 - 200 of 468 matches
Mail list logo
