; that then please bring that up in a *separate* thead.
> you're going more and more off topic. I suggest that we return to the
> at hand: the two stage loading problem.
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:41 AM, David Emrany <david.emr...@gmail.com
> Hi David,
> I would refer to my answer I gave on the forked thread relating to this
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 3:4
> Hi David,
> Would you mind elaborating on the first point? I vaguely recall test
> banners being shown to logged in users, but don't recall seeing one myself
> while logged in for a while.
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:16 PM,
a) This is incorrect
b) how many years would "for several years" encompass?
On 9/5/17, Joseph Seddon wrote:
> WMF hasn't shown fundraising banners to logged in users for several years.
Thanks Lodewikj for your excellent catches.
1. The form-990 covers the period from 01-July 2014 to 30-June 2015.
During which the payments of US$ 300,000 to Sue Gardner
(SpecialAdvisor) was comparable to Lila Tretikov's (E.D.)
2. The largest contractor was "Jones Day" US$ 1,742,916 (almost 2
You are aware that copyright law of India has specific procedures to
be followed for relinquishment or assignment of copyright and which
involves Registrar of copyrights or public notice (as defined in
Indian law) ?
On 5/5/16, sailesh patnaik wrote:
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
McAfee Site advisor tags it as a dangerous phishing site trying to
Ploughing through the link leads instead to "a" Wikipedia web book on
"health care" which is edited mainly by you.
> it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
> What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it but
> throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !!
> On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emr..
Since the "Mediawiki" trademark was lost to WMF the day you and
Anthere placed the logo into public domain , how can the WMF now
spin-off this new organization ?.
Am I correct in assuming the Mediawiki software can be forked by
anybody interested along with attribution ?
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship
with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story 
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has
been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after
I believe you better understand how the robbery happened by studying
the way the composition of the Board and WMF's senior functionaries
rotated between 2005 to 2010. You can access these online from the
government websites where WMF filed them
On 3/9/16, Adam Wight
I have also been in the movement for over a decade, and I am sick of
people on all sides distorting facts, gaming the system / manipulating
IMO, this came to a boil in Dec 2006 when WMF altered its structure
and purpose and relocated followed by the "COO scandal"  and
There is no public evidence of your misleading statements re years of
careful planning.and execution.
What there is public evidence of is that the WMF has systematically
To cite 1 specific instance, Sue Gardner was
with "absolute certainty".
On 3/1/16, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote:
> On 16-03-01 03:57 AM, David Emrany wrote:
>> What nobody is prepared to acknowledge is that only under Lila's term
>> some of the most blatant and egregious instances
I respectfully disagree. My point is that the "community" you refer to
is not a representative community at all. for eg. voices from Asia and
Africa are not properly represented here.
The community is incapable of policing itself because (to quote a
prominent WP criticism site) "the
be the simplest thing for WMF to insist on verification of WMF
user accounts, to ensure that minors cannot edit, or else to ensure
that anonymous editors must take responsibility for defamatory/biased
On 3/1/16, Erik Moeller <eloque...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2016-02-29 23:19 GMT-08
Wikimovement veterans recall your invaluable assistance in arranging
the 3 million grant from the Sloan Foundation to WMF, so reading your
email, we also recall these quotes from the time of the Stanton
Foundation fiasco ? 
"The Executive Director and Chief Revenue Officer agree
Free as in beer ..or paid as in PR !!!
This is exactly the sort of PR paid editing for which Wikimedia-UK
(and the UK centric paid editing cabals) are notorious for.,,
Do you seriously expect the community to believe that promoting a
web-page which starts off with an
As a community member *I* am interested in knowing if WMF (or Jimmy)
is selling to Google - or to anybody else ... like the Chinese.
On 3/1/16, Risker wrote:
> On 29 February 2016 at 20:43, Andreas Kolbe
It would be even nicer if we have more editors editing voluntarily
instead of driving them away.
In the present scenario a University of Minnesota report by Aaron Halfaker says
"The declining number of editors is not due to the site's inability to
keep longtime editors contributing.
When you refer to patches with other movements / affiliates, are you
proposing that WMF sponsors more Gibraltrapedias ?
Have we forgotten so soon the adverse media publicity about these
stealth PR campaigns
"Once Wikipedia becomes a
I am appalled that anybody is seriously suggesting "paid editing" be
The real issue to be addressed are the large number of trustees,
staff, Arbcom members, and
administrators who are undisclosed paid editors and who ensure that
uninterested editors are driven away.
Mail list logo