On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Gayle Karen Young wrote:
> This definitely feels like a bit of trial by fire.
True dat. Now that you have received your initiation, there's nothing
left to say but WELCOME TO WIKIPEDIA :)
Cheers,
th cash, this is
simply not on. I'll leave other issues which have been raised to
others. Odder's latest blog at
http://twkozlowski.net/saving-by-spending-according-to-affcom/ might
be of interest.
Cheers,
Russavia
___
Wikimedia-l mail
than the $200 per
night being budgeted for at the Regent.
Russavia
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
, many are still clueless as to what exactly this Bright
Line is (it's not very bright), and how it should be applied in practice,
so Jimmy, if you are out there, your comment is requested on that.
Cheers,
Russavia
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
W
aid
editing and explain why it's not all that bad. I hope she takes the latter
route :)
Cheers,
Russavia
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Craig Franklin wrote:
> There seems to be some pretty heavy assumptions in Odder's article - it all
> just seems to be speculation based
n for some time now.
Anyway, I look forward to hearing from Sarah on this issue, and again, she
has my support in regards to this issue.
Cheers,
Russavia
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia
s. And
then we can get those within the movement who have so publicly taken a
stance on paid editing, namely Sue and Jimmy, to clarify where they truly
stand on these issues for once and for all.
Cheers,
Russavia
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Nathan wrote:
> Let's be clear,
rovided, it's couldn't be clearer.
What isn't so clear is how Sue and Jimmy will respond..
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Steven Walling wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Russavia wrote:
>
>> Odder has published a fantastic blog piece at
>> http:/
ly correct anything that you should have done to begin with, and
publicly commit yourself to doing such editing the ethical way. Then
all talk of "Bright Line Policy", etc can be put to rest, and not just
in your case, and then discussion on solid policies, etc as Dariusz
also mentions can oc
No Geni, that would be the Wikimedia community, which from Sue's press
release
(http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/10/21/sue-gardner-response-paid-advocacy-editing/)
it is pretty clear that the terms of use she has invoked apply to. It
applies to you on English Wikipedia, Dariusz on Polish Wikipedia a
If anyone is interested, since this issue was raised, there has been a
change to Sarah's profile on odesk.
The entry for "Wikipedia Page for Individual" is now rated 5 stars,
and has the comment "Thanks, Sarah! I really appreciate you!".
Sarah has also been active on Wikipedia. I can understand
Tomasz,
As has been said elsewhere, ""No registration required," "we respect your
privacy," and "no paid editing" are fundamentally incompatible."
The only way that it would be possible for a system as you describe to
exist, the following would need to be true :
1) No more IP editing -- most COI
Fae,
You raise very good points in your email, and I have posted this for
consideration by the WMF Board of Trustees
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard#Undeclared_conflicts_of_interest
If anyone wishes to support this please feel free to do so on the noticeboa
101 - 113 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
