I tend to agree with this. I'm one of the first to criticize WMF when they
deserve it (I wish they didn't as often!), but I see nothing wrong with
consumers of huge amounts of data being asked to chip in to cover the costs
of providing it. That is, of course, provided that there is never any fee
And, how might one view it?
Todd
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 11:29 AM Zack McCune wrote:
> Hello all -
>
> A quick update on timing: this Board briefing has been rescheduled for July
> 28th.
>
> thanks,
>
> - Zack
>
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 6:24 AM João Alexandre Peschanski <
> joa...@gmail.com>
Really, there shouldn't be any "selection". All of the community questions
should be put over, and the candidates then may choose to answer any or all
of them. If a candidate does not answer a question, people can then take
from that what they will.
This is a community selection process. There is
te you a blank check.
What EXACTLY are you proposing to do, step by step and detail by detail?
Regards,
Todd Allen
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 2:34 PM Kaarel Vaidla wrote:
> Dear Todd,
>
> Thank you for the feedback!
>
> While working on the consolidation of the recommendatio
. Is there a buzzword-to-English translation of
it available?
Regards,
Todd Allen
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 4:02 AM Kaarel Vaidla wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Voting for the election for the members for the Movement Charter drafting
> committee is now open. In total, 70 Wikimedians
still be irritated about that. But use our funds to
actively stomp on our volunteer community, and ignore what they say?
Well that's not just disgust. That's anger, and that's what you're seeing.
Regards,
Todd Allen
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 2:51 PM Guillaume Paumier
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
4:39 AM Vi to wrote:
> UCOC must surely be ruled out of this list. The reasons behind its
> creations are indisputable.
>
> Anyway donations are collected because of volunteers' work, but should be
> mainly bound to readers' (donors') will.
>
> Vito
>
> Il giorno mar 28 set
Certainly, any "database rights" should already be considered waived by the
CC license, so I fail to see the problem here.
Todd
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 9:12 AM Strainu wrote:
> Thank you Andreas, that was exactly what I was looking for. Everybody
> seems to agree there is more and more CC4
You put in a URL that links to one. And there, you're done.
Having a "howto" gadget like that is not the purpose of an article. The
purpose of an article is to describe, not have a "simulator". A URL to one
on some other site in the external links section might be quite in
order, but that is out
So, what is this actually intended to do?
Regards,
Todd Allen
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022, 07:42 Kannika Thaimai
wrote:
> Dear Movement members,
>
> The innovation program UNLOCK will soon enter its third edition. At UNLOCK
> [1], we support people and communities who are working
Excellent work. Thanks to all who worked on this project and made it happen.
Todd
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:10 AM Sam Walton wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We've just published a blog post summarising the new features and
> functionality available to active Wikipedia editors in The Wikipedia
> Library:
Actually, you're technically even breaching it saying it here, since the
mailing list is "outside the Wikimedia projects".
I would agree that this needs substantial clarification, especially
regarding both spammers and already-public information.
Regards,
Todd Allen
On Fri, Apr 15,
Well, nothing is stopping you from discussing it anywhere else you like.
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023, 6:39 AM Ndahiro Derrick Alter
wrote:
> How amazing it would be , if discussions like these were hosted somewhere
> else other than this mailing list
>
> derrick
>
>
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 at 13:01
Could you provide a copy of the email, or at least its text? When
discussing something like this, it's helpful to see exactly what we're
talking about.
Todd
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 11:07 AM Romaine Wiki
wrote:
> This was the title of a message on the Help Desk of the Dutch Wikipedia
> earlier
a "short list" of affiliate-approved candidates.
Affiliate seats are NOT community seats.
Regards,
Todd Allen
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 4:32 PM Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> Chris,
>
> There is no longer any distinction between community and affiliate
> trustees. For reference,
No. I would prefer them to be selected in open, at-large elections, as they
should have been in previous years.
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022, 04:25 Chris Keating
wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 1:13 AM Todd Allen wrote:
>
>> Yes, and let me say it in stronger terms: Th
It is hard to determine what is being complained about, when the letter
does not actually link to any of the threads it complains about. If it did
that, it would be much more easily possible for someone to look into the
substance of it. It states that it has been linked to "continual bad-faith
Or, maybe just require an open disclosure of where the bot pulled from and
how much, instead of having it be a black box? "Text in this response
derived from: 17% Wikipedia article 'Example', 12% Wikipedia article
'SomeOtherThing', 10%...".
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 10:17 PM Steven Walling
wrote:
Hello Brian,
It doesn't seem like there are any updates to the reports at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety/Case_Review_Committee/Monthly_reports#2022.
Also, who are these three new members and the seven existing ones?
Regards,
Todd Allen
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 1:32 PM Brian
I'm not so sure Getty's got a case, though. If the images are on the Web,
is using them to train an AI something copyright would cover? That to me
seems more equivalent to just looking at the images, and there's no
copyright problem in going to Getty's site and just looking at a bunch of
their
Though, this does run the risk of encouraging people to take the
"backwards" approach to writing an article--writing some stuff, and then
(hopefully at least) trying to come up with sources for it.
The much superior approach is to locate the available sources first, and
then to develop the
Ultimately, this seems a case of "Fix it or get out of the way".
There was already a suggestion of restoring graphs with the ability to
modify them restricted to interface admins. People with IA permissions
could, quite frankly, do far more harmful things to user security if they
"went rogue"
201 - 222 of 222 matches
Mail list logo
