Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-07-03 Thread Shlomi Fish
Hi Michael, On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:16:58 +0100 Michael Maggs mich...@maggs.name wrote: Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the notice boards on Commons, or who is subscribed to this mailing list, will be aware of a huge, wide-ranging and unfocused set of disputes and ill-natured

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-07-03 Thread Peter Southwood
Of Shlomi Fish Sent: 03 July 2014 01:02 PM To: Michael Maggs Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons Hi Michael, On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:16:58 +0100 Michael Maggs mich...@maggs.name wrote: Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the notice boards

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-07-03 Thread Peter Gervai
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Wonderful, I have high expectations of your ability and willingness to solve these problems, Please notify us of your success so we can celebrate. This was neither constructive nor civilised. It shows that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-28 Thread Erik Moeller
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: So what is your proposal for how to effectively curate the firehose of good and bad content that is uploaded to Commons day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute? Hi Pete, I would generally advocate for the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Yann Forget
Hi, 2014-06-27 5:57 GMT+05:30 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: than aggressively purging content in the fear that a single byte of potentially non-free content may infect the repository. You're attacking a straw

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread MZMcBride
Pete Forsyth wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: than aggressively purging content in the fear that a single byte of potentially non-free content may infect the repository. You're attacking a straw man. I hope you do not sincerely believe anybody acts

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Magnus Manske
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: than aggressively purging content in the fear that a single byte of potentially non-free content may infect the repository. You're

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Pipo Le Clown
Aren't you mixing things a little bit ? Nobody denies that there are problems with video support, Search engine and image display. But this is not (completely) the responsability of the Commons community. The software is provided by the foundation, and we deal with what they give us. If you want

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Jeevan Jose
Well, just yesterday I saw a (good but slightly amateurish-looking) image that is to be deleted because the metadata embedded in the /other/ images of the uploader indicates multiple cameras were used. Clearly, no one has more than one camera, so it must be a copyright violation. (would post

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Peter Southwood
] On Behalf Of Jeevan Jose Sent: 27 June 2014 10:46 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons Well, just yesterday I saw a (good but slightly amateurish-looking) image that is to be deleted because the metadata embedded in the /other/ images of the uploader

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Jeevan Jose
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Indeed, and as there is a notice on the Wikilegal article stating that it is not legal advice, it can and will be ignored by those who think they know better. Cheers, Peter That message on their every

[Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Michael Maggs
Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the notice boards on Commons, or who is subscribed to this mailing list, will be aware of a huge, wide-ranging and unfocused set of disputes and ill-natured arguments that have been raging for several months. The disputes are becoming more and more

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Nathan
The issue is *about* Commons but doesn't only affect Commons, particularly the discussion around alternative methods of making not-purely-free files available and searchable across Commons. As you can see from the growing discontent with Commons, this URAA issue is not the only problem. It's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Nathan
Correction - the first line should read available and searchable across WMF projects. Apologies for double posting. On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: The issue is *about* Commons but doesn't only affect Commons, particularly the discussion around alternative

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Pete Forsyth
Several people have replied to my latest message. I'd like to reiterate - I thought I was clear, but just to be certain: I have never claimed that all discussion on Commons is perfect, or that incivility or poor decisions never occur there. I did not intend to open this discussion as a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-27 Thread Jeevan Jose
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:09 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: What I *did* want, and am still waiting for, is some explanation from Erik Möller, the WMF's Deputy Director, about his inflammatory claim that the Wikimedia Commons community may be turning into a CLUB OF ZEALOTS

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-26 Thread Erik Moeller
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: The problem is the behavior of a certain core set of Commons admins; time and time and time again we have it reported here, we see it on Commons. While not lawyers, they attempt to be extraordinarily demanding when it comes to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-26 Thread Jeevan Jose
Hi Erik: Thanks for your comment. I noticed your comment at [[1]] so hope they are related. Yes; making proper attributions and satisfying all license requirements are a bit complicated and time consuming. See my proposal at [[2]]. I requested the help of CC team; but didn't get any response so

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-26 Thread billinghurst
Erik Moeller erik@... writes: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawrich at gmail.com wrote: The problem is the behavior of a certain core set of Commons admins; time and time and time again we have it reported here, we see it on Commons. While not lawyers, they attempt to be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-26 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:19 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: the project and world benefit from [Commons] existing as is. But we need an alternative to support the educational mission, reasonable

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-26 Thread David Gerard
On 26 June 2014 23:17, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: If people are excited about starting up a whole new project, that's fine by me. I think you'll find that donors attracted to the free knowledge aspect of our vision mission statements might be a little tough to persuade, but if

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-26 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 3:19 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 June 2014 23:17, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: If people are excited about starting up a whole new project, that's fine by me. I think you'll find that donors attracted to the free knowledge aspect

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-26 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: than aggressively purging content in the fear that a single byte of potentially non-free content may infect the repository. You're attacking a straw man. I hope you do not sincerely believe anybody acts out of such a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-20 Thread Yann Forget
Suite of the drama. A request for a topic ban against LGA, who made these deletion requests, was started by Hanay, a user from the Hebrew Wikipedia. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems#User:LGA Now she is blocked for one week for canvassing,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-20 Thread Jeevan Jose
All ended in a good way as Sven Manguard unblocked her. Hope the Hebrew Wikipedia will recover from the painful memories soon. Regards, Jee On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote: Suite of the drama. A request for a topic ban against LGA, who made these

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread Lodewijk
would that become Wikimedia Uncommons or Unwikimedia Commons? Or do we avoid this question by leaving it to an outside party? Lodewijk (who is btw not so much charmed of an uncommons at all) 2014-06-17 21:06 GMT+02:00 Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:19 PM, George

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread Peter Southwood
...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of George Herbert Sent: 17 June 2014 09:29 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think the concept of the project

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread Peter Southwood
] On Behalf Of Nathan Sent: 17 June 2014 09:52 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:29 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread geni
On 18 June 2014 08:43, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: This is a strong argument for locating Uncommons outside the USA. Somewhere where the copyright laws allow the widest range of images to be kept. Images can be tagged for where they are free and where they are not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread
On 18/06/2014, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: This is a strong argument for locating Uncommons outside the USA. Somewhere where the copyright laws allow the widest range of images to be kept. Images can be tagged for where they are free and where they are not free. I have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread Petr Kadlec
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 7:00 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: From the technical side, supporting one-click (i.e., easy to use) file moves between wikis would be enormously helpful here. This would allow transferring files to Commons or from Commons without much pain, which should

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Arguably when all repositories of media-files are Wikidatified, general availability could be as difficult as selecting the appropriate license. To do this no new project is needed as the Wikidata team has started work. All that is needed is to have one database to know about all media

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread
On 18/06/2014, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, Arguably when all repositories of media-files are Wikidatified, general availability could be as difficult as selecting the appropriate license. To do this no new project is needed as the Wikidata team has started work. All

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-18 Thread Yann Forget
2014-06-18 1:43 GMT+05:30 Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com: Yann, On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote: The rules of the project, free license, or in the public domain in USA and in the source country, are fine as long as they are not used to game the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Lodewijk
Hi Yann, While we can have a different discussion about methods used and tone applied, if I understand correctly the core argument/discussion point here is the question whether US law applies to Commons or not; more specifically: whether a picture that is (likely?) not in the Public Domain in the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Yann Forget
Hi, 2014-06-17 15:07 GMT+05:30 Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org: Hi Yann, While we can have a different discussion about methods used and tone applied, if I understand correctly the core argument/discussion point here is the question whether US law applies to Commons or not; more

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Tomasz Ganicz
The discussion about it was already performed: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Massive_restoration_of_deleted_images_by_the_URAA with final consensus that URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion. However this consensus (a rough one) was questioned by a small, but very

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread
On 17/06/2014, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: with final consensus that URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion... This is a selective quote, missing the explicit caveat that: Deleted files can be restored after a discussion in COM:UDR. If the process is being followed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George William Herbert
We need an Uncommons, where the strict open license / PD rules are abandoned and we accept images as long as their fair use can be established. And don't delete unless that fair use is credibly questioned. Conflating and comingling our educational role with open content advocacy was always

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread David Gerard
On 17 June 2014 16:26, George William Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: We need an Uncommons, where the strict open license / PD rules are abandoned and we accept images as long as their fair use can be established. And don't delete unless that fair use is credibly questioned. Grant

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Austin Hair
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 5:26 PM, George William Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: Conflating and comingling our educational role with open content advocacy was always risky and is proving impossible. Without devaluing open content, we need to separately support fair use for educational

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George William Herbert
On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:37 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: On 17.06.2014 17:26, George William Herbert wrote: We need an Uncommons, where the strict open license / PD rules are abandoned and we accept images as long as their fair use can be established. And don't delete

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Emmanuel Engelhart
On 17.06.2014 17:26, George William Herbert wrote: We need an Uncommons, where the strict open license / PD rules are abandoned and we accept images as long as their fair use can be established. And don't delete unless that fair use is credibly questioned. Conflating and comingling our

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
On 17.06.2014 16:47, Osmar Valdebenito wrote: If you take a look at the undeletion requests after the URAA discussion, most of the images restored were deleted afterwards anyway.[1][2] The only exception that I've seen are some German stamps that haven't been deleted (yet). The problem is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Jeevan Jose
Accidentally, I have one of these FFD nomination pages on my watchlist. Yesterday it was renominated for the THIRD time by the same user (the second one was keep as well). And I can not act on it anymore. Apparently, at some point the user will get an admin with a stricter interpretation of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread
On 17/06/2014, George William Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: We need an Uncommons, where the strict open license / PD rules are abandoned and we accept images as long as their fair use can be established. And don't delete unless that fair use is credibly questioned. There is no such

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Delirium
On 6/17/14, 5:52 PM, George William Herbert wrote: On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:37 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: On 17.06.2014 17:26, George William Herbert wrote: We need an Uncommons, where the strict open license / PD rules are abandoned and we accept images as long as their

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
On 17.06.2014 18:13, Jeevan Jose wrote: Accidentally, I have one of these FFD nomination pages on my watchlist. Yesterday it was renominated for the THIRD time by the same user (the second one was keep as well). And I can not act on it anymore. Apparently, at some point the user will get an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:26 AM, George William Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: Conflating and comingling our educational role with open content advocacy was always risky and is proving impossible. Insightful point. (We have a similar situation with our competing values of privacy

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George Herbert
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: Can you clarify -- who do you intend by we? If your answer is English Wikipedia, I think we already have a somewhat workable solution to this complex problem: fair use is permitted in certain cases.[2] Of course, you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George Herbert
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: If we don't maintain the focus on free media, we may as well direct people to a web image search, all of which is use at your own risk anyway, just like our proposed new repository. Being free content is the Commons value

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Sarah
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 5:26 PM, George William Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: Conflating and comingling our educational role with open content advocacy was always risky and is proving impossible. Without

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:12 AM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: Can you clarify -- who do you intend by we? If your answer is English Wikipedia, I think we already have a somewhat workable

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George Herbert
Pete - An apologia for Commons, and the obvious implication that use on projects will have to (if people actually care to enforce local standards) require checking license status for every Project use, do not in any way lessen the need for Uncommons. On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Pete

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Samuel Klein
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:19 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: the project and world benefit from [Commons] existing as is. But we need an alternative to support the educational mission, reasonable inter-project reuse, and end the endless deletion wars. Yes, this. With

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Nathan
I don't think the concept of the project is the problem. I'm skeptical that an Uncommons project built around fair use could be workable, considering that the validity of a fair use claim is context-specific and no cross-wiki project (like Commons) is going to have an easy time managing that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: The problem is the behavior of a certain core set of Commons admins; George, SJ, and Nathan: In addition to Erik Moeller's initial proposal that Commons be used as a repository for *free* media files (linked previously), there

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George Herbert
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think the concept of the project is the problem. I'm skeptical that an Uncommons project built around fair use could be workable, considering that the validity of a fair use claim is context-specific and no cross-wiki

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: The problem is the behavior of a certain core set of Commons admins; George, SJ, and Nathan: In addition to Erik Moeller's initial proposal that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George Herbert
And yet we have a global, and in many cases (and specifically, en.wp) local Fair Use policy, which is quite actively and productively used, and has been since around day one of the first Wikipedia. Uncommons is not a change in policy. It is ultimately a technical matter; a software and project

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:29 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think the concept of the project is the problem. I'm skeptical that an Uncommons project built around fair use could be workable,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:37 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: Unless you intend to try to roll that back on en.wikipedia and the Foundation policy, Absolutely not. I don't have any real problem with the way fair use is handled on English Wikipedia, and have uploaded some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Yann Forget
Hi, 2014-06-18 0:37 GMT+05:30 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com: I don't think the concept of the project is the problem. I'm skeptical that an Uncommons project built around fair use could be workable, considering that the validity of a fair use claim is context-specific and no cross-wiki project

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Andrew Gray
On 17 June 2014 17:53, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote: educational and other uses, by Wikimedians and third parties. If it's not an open-content encyclopedia, for example if Wikipedia articles make use of provincial American copyright loopholes that render them illegal to redistribute

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Yann Forget
2014-06-18 0:55 GMT+05:30 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: The problem is the behavior of a certain core set of Commons admins; Yes. George, SJ, and Nathan: In addition to Erik Moeller's initial proposal that Commons be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Tim Davenport
Per GerardM: Many people no longer trust Commons to store their media files. People are more certain that their files will remain available when they upload media files to their own project. I for one won't use Commons for image uploads. I feel that my uploads have been treated

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Pete Forsyth
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-06-18 0:55 GMT+05:30 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com: The people you, Nathan, are accusing of behaving badly, are the ones who are doing the hard, day-do-day work of enforcing the expressed consensus of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread George Herbert
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:29 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think the concept of the project is the problem. I'm skeptical

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread Russavia
Yann, On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote: The rules of the project, free license, or in the public domain in USA and in the source country, are fine as long as they are not used to game the system. Yann I totally agree with this. The problem is, that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-17 Thread MZMcBride
The subject line is cute, but perhaps a bit trite. I think with a bit of effort we can do better. :-) George Herbert wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: If we don't maintain the focus on free media, we may as well direct people to a web image search,

[Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

2014-06-16 Thread Yann Forget
Hi, Some Commons contributors like to ask impossible requirements, and threaten to delete files if these are not met. We have now a case of famous pictures from the government of Israel and Israel Defense Forces.