Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships

2015-04-05 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Josh Lim wrote: In the absence of any meaningful alternative, what should we do then? Close down Wikipedia Zero and let the developing world languish in the dark? Technically it would be entirely possible for service providers to offer access to Wikipedia for free even if the Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-09 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Sydney Poore wrote: It appears to me that you are entirely missing the actual nature of the problem and the reason for having a campaign targeted at the gender gap. The *problem* is that there have been a suboptimal number of grant requests for funds to address the gender gap even though it a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-08 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Sydney Poore wrote: It has become pretty obvious that funding the interests/values of existing community members through regular channels is not creating content free of systemic bias in general nor closing the human gender gap. (I say this as someone who has read all types of WMF funding

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-08 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Liam Wyatt wrote: I understand from the explanations that the reason for not accepting any non-gender-gap focused grants for several months is because of the expected workload on the staff in reviewing applications and supporting the projects that do get funded. However, what I don't understand

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WaPo Wikipedia's 'complicated; relationship with net neutrality

2015-01-08 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Kim Bruning wrote: Found another article calling out Wikipedia. Are there also articles praising us? :-) Quoting, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp and Wikipedia become “the Internet” for the users of mobile data supported by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-05 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Siko Bouterse wrote: Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Our final email

2014-12-19 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Peter Southwood wrote: OK, I was just wondering if acceptance of this form of marketing was an American thing or more generally an English language thing. Obviously not universally acceptable to English speakers, even in USA and England, but possibly more offensive to people with other

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Spam] Re: Fwd: Our final email

2014-12-19 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Andrew Gray wrote: (In all seriousness: I generally agree with Liam's concerns, but I'd also like to note that the banners running on mobile are much more discreet, though are just as eye-catching. Well done to whoever thought of those.) When I encountered one of those I had to scroll four

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Google Groups: You've been added to Gender Gap

2014-12-05 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Russavia wrote: I mentioned on the Gender Gap mailing list the other day that this was not me, but now it would appear that email addresses on this mailing list are being scraped. Whoever controls that list added the address in my From and my signature which pretty clearly suggests use of some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banners (again)

2014-12-03 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Martijn Hoekstra wrote: Dear fundraising team. Thank you for your efforts to make the fundraiser as quick as possible. I understand that effective banners allow us to keep the yearly donation drive as short as possible. Considering the rate at which the Foundation and its Chapters increase and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banners (again)

2014-12-02 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* geni wrote: On 2 December 2014 at 06:53, Lila Tretikov wrote: All -- we will not have a pop-up banner. And how exactly would you describe this then? I got something like that on my mobile phone

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Tim Starling wrote: On 17/01/14 01:14, Todd Allen wrote: This proposal asks to move to a free as in beer model, where content will be free to view, but not necessarily to reuse (and with the opaque license, it may not even be possible to tell). I don't really understand this argument. It's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-17 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Andrew Lih wrote: BTW, Luis from WMF has put a very lengthy and detailed analysis of the legal issues that does help quite a bit, at the end of the RFC: I note that the Wikimedia Foundation does

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

2014-01-16 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Fabrice Florin wrote: The Wikimedia Foundation's multimedia team (1) seeks your guidance on a proposal to support the MP4 video format. As you know, this digital video standard is used widely around the world to record, edit and watch videos on mobile phones, desktop computers and home video

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch

2014-01-09 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Frank Schulenburg wrote: And so I ask you to respect Sarah's privacy at what is surely a difficult time for her, ... An extremely visible public announcement that the Wikimedia Foundation has fired her within two days of an allegation of misconduct -- that is how you are making it sound -- is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

2014-01-08 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Nathan wrote: We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the fundraiser. I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing drives, even though editing is really the core way for people to donate to Wikimedia. That would make many editors very annoyed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Public Domain Day

2014-01-03 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Romaine Wiki wrote: January 1st was Public Domain Day [1] and after xx years of copyright, it expires on the first of January of the year after. As result hundreds of images were restored on Commons on the 1-1-2014, but many of them did not get a place in articles on Wikipedia and her sister

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Public Domain Day

2014-01-03 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Michael Maggs wrote: On 3 Jan 2014, at 14:22, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: I find it a bit worrying that Commons makes little effort to distinguish between copyright on this sculpture and copyright on this photograph of a sculpture. It would seem preferable if there was suitable

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dells are backdored

2013-12-31 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* James Salsman wrote: Can we please stop paying the Microsoft and NSA taxes and start buying datacenter equipment which costs a lot less? Cubieboard/Cubietrucks for instance? Related: -- Björn Höhrmann · ·

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hours for VisualEditor

2013-10-30 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Risker wrote: Just to clarify, since UTC is a confusing time for most of that the minute after 2359 UTC on November 2 (i.e., 7 hours after the first session), or is it the minute after 2359 UTC on November 3? I've seen it used both ways so I just want to be clear. Could you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Use of YouTube videos in fundraising banners

2013-07-17 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote: it came to my attention very recently that a link to a YouTube video has been included in our fundraising banners[1] last year, enabling people by default to watch a video about Wikipedia loaded through a YouTube iframe / element. I am told that there are technical

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] PRISM, government surveillance, and Wikimedia: Request for community feedback

2013-06-15 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Geoff Brigham wrote: You are not making a good case there as to what to do and why and how this community is affected and needs to act. An immediate question seems to be whether the Wikimedia Foundation should become signatory

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The case for supporting open source machine translation

2013-04-26 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Andrea Zanni wrote: At the moment, Wikisource could be a interesting corpora and laboratory for improving and enhancing OCR, as the OCR generated text is always proofread and corrected by humans. As part of our project (, Micru was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage launch: why no blog post or pressrelease?

2013-01-16 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Jay Walsh wrote: I'm amused that this thread commenced with a reflection about the need to distribute press releases at the appropriate global time window and has rolled into this. I've been at this for five years and this is the first time I've seen so much attention paid to the manner we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TVTropes deletes all pages with Rape in title under advertising pressure.

2012-06-26 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Nathan wrote: It's simple. The WMF didn't do anything. The English Wikipedia did. That project effectively changed the content of the entire encyclopedia for political reasons. That is the condicio sine qua non for abandoning neutrality. You might say it was done for great reasons, and that it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-16 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Tobias Oelgarte wrote: Am 17.06.2012 01:21, schrieb Anthony: I have never seen a censorware that works flawlessly (not even china can do this right). Either it allows to much (incomplete blacklist) or it is unnecessary limited (incomplete whitelist producing angry mob). Additionally it has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-13 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* Michael Peel wrote: My understanding of this line of argument was that images would be displayed where you would expect them to be displayed (e.g. the article on penis or vagina would naturally include a picture of a penis or vagina), but wouldn't be immediately displayed where you wouldn't

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Study: Nobody cares about your copyright

2012-05-21 Thread Bjoern Hoehrmann
* David Gerard wrote: So, is the time ripe yet for us to start pushing for a 14-year term, or do we wait a bit? I suggest we start contemplating it, however. You don't say who we are, but in case some people think the Wikimedia Foundation should position itself on copyright matters much beyond