Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Thomas Townsend
Am I right in thinking that this email, containing a long account of the alleged poor treatment of the Treasurer of WMBE, referred to throughout in the third person, was in fact written by that person? The Turnip On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 10:00, Romaine Wiki wrote: > > Hello all, > > On Saturday

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation management of volunteers

2019-06-17 Thread Mister Thrapostibongles
Vito This rather tends to support my point. One (and not the most important) pieces of evidence for Wikipedia being in a failed state is precisely that it does not , by the community's own admission, constitute a reliable source:whereas "Reputable tertiary sources

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation management of volunteers

2019-06-17 Thread Dennis During
"One (and not the most important) pieces of evidence for Wikipedia being in a failed state is precisely that it does not, by the community's own admission, constitute a reliable source " You have made this argument more than once. That might be a piece of evidence seems both wrong and not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright workflows - research (Was: Re: Foundation management of volunteers)

2019-06-17 Thread Yann Forget
Hi, It has been suggested many times to ask Google for an access to their API for searching images, so that we could have a bot tagging copyright violations (no free access for automated search). That would the single best improvement in Wikimedia Commons workflow for years. And it would benefit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Isaac Olatunde
Considering that it was sent by that person, one may reasonably conclude that it was written by them. That being said, I do not want to believe that it was not reviewed and approved by the governing board (assuming it was written by that person). BUT if it was written by another person, reviewed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I'm comparing it to a case where spreading of rumors led to the condemnation of presumably innocent people without due process, in a kind of "precautionary principle". The punishment in question is immaterial to this case. Or will you argue that an episode is only worth of attention if people are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" I'm referring to message from Caroline" - How have you jumped from Caroline wanting to further clarify something, to the conclusion that the OP was "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward"? Yes, she claims to have been "forced to step up", but were you able to find any

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello, It seems to me the best that a (different) member of the WMBE board contacts a suitable person at WMF. A public list is not the best place for sorting these things out. Kind regards Ziko Am Mo., 17. Juni 2019 um 16:48 Uhr schrieb Dariusz Jemielniak : > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:26 PM

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Thank you WMBE for your long report. I was at Wikimania 2018 and I was deeply troubled by the actions taken by the Trust & Safety team. I now have a much clearer understanding of what went on, and I feel that there really needs to be some introspection done by the Trust & Safety team. I am also

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
Hi Paulo, On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:54 PM Paulo Santos Perneta wrote: " I'm referring to message from Caroline" - How have you jumped from Caroline wanting to further clarify something, to the conclusion that the OP was "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward"? I'm

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Amir Sarabadani
Are you comparing banning someone to participate at conference(s) with hanging innocent people? On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:34 PM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote: > " In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a > rumour about them" - that's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:26 PM Michel Vuijlsteke mailto:wikipe...@zog.org>> wrote: In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a rumour about them? My understanding is that noone was banned from an event. On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:28 PM Paulo Santos Perneta

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Dariusz, I understand Caroline wanted to add that she was finding difficult that Romain was not aware of her stress or unease on a specific situation vaguely described there (without any mention to her at all). And that later they have talked about it, and she accepted his apologies for that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright workflows - research (Was: Re: Foundation management of volunteers)

2019-06-17 Thread James Forrester
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 06:28, Yann Forget wrote: > It has been suggested many times to ask Google for an access to their API > for searching images, > so that we could have a bot tagging copyright violations (no free access > for automated search). > That would the single best improvement in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Chris Keating
> > Here's a fundamental source of disagreement. It gets at something I'm not > sure the strategy process is properly addressing. Does the WMF lead and > direct the Wikimedia movement? Personally, I don't think the WMF knows the answer to this, either in practice, or what they want. We are in a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright workflows - research (Was: Re: Foundation management of volunteers)

2019-06-17 Thread Mister Thrapostibongles
Leila Since I raised this particular issue,, I'll take the liberty of giving an answer to this question, even though you addressed it to Benjamin. The failure that I was pointing to was not the failure to identify copyright violations, but the failure to address the huge backlog of probable

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a rumour about them" - that's Wikimedia version of the Salem witch trials. Unbelievable that this sort of thing is coming from one of the WMF trustees, even as a personal opinion. Paulo Michel Vuijlsteke escreveu no dia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Dariusz, I've read and reread the WMBE message, and have not found anything near "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward". I also do not understand why you're addressing WMBE as "Romaine" (begging the question?). Can you please clarify? Paulo Dariusz Jemielniak

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Caroline Becker
Hi all, I have no opinion whatsoever about all the things going on in this mail, except for this part : Three additional anonymous complaints were: * speaking to loud * standing to close * having touched someone's hand/arm It must be noted that *none* of the people that complained to the Trust

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
whoa! pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward is not ok at all. I do not honestly understand why the story from nearly a year ago has emerged, with personal details. It is not unusual for people who caused distress to not have done it intentionally, and to genuinely

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 16:12, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: >If there are rumors about physical violence, unbelievable as they may seem, >the bottom line common sense is to approach the alleged would-be attacker and >request politely that they stay away, to deescalate even just a potentially tense

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Isaac Olatunde
The "sender is Romaine" is not the same as "Romaine is WMBE". This sort of confusion should have been prevented by allowing another person to send this email on behalf of WMBE. Regards, Isaac On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 3:48 PM Dariusz Jemielniak > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:26 PM Michel

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright workflows - research (Was: Re: Foundation management of volunteers)

2019-06-17 Thread James Salsman
Google has been offering reverse image search as part of their vision API: https://cloud.google.com/vision/docs/internet-detection The pricing is $3.50 per 1,000 queries for up to 5,000,000 queries per month: https://cloud.google.com/vision/pricing Above that quantity "Contact Google for more

[Wikimedia-l] EDUWiki Open Meeting next Monday!

2019-06-17 Thread Shani Evenstein
(Sorry for x-posting!) Dear all, Next Monday, June 24, between 1530-1700 UTC, the Wikipedia & Education User Group will be hosing its bi-monthly Open Meeting and you're all invited! The full meeting agenda is listed at the end, but it includes 2 featured speakers this month: LiAnna Davis, from

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation management of volunteers

2019-06-17 Thread Dennis During
It might be a good thread were it based on a better line of argument. You are making too much of an artifact of the drafting of a Wikipedia policy. The intent was clearly to prevent 1., bootstrapping, ie, writing an article and using it as a 'reliable source' for another article, and 2.,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright issues

2019-06-17 Thread James Heilman
Clarifying one small bit, the "copypatrol" tool was initially developed by Eran (a Wikimedia volunteer from Israel). It was than further developed by the Wikimedia Foundation. Agree that it is a great success, not only with respect to the final result but with respect to it being a successful

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright workflows - research (Was: Re: Foundation management of volunteers)

2019-06-17 Thread effe iets anders
The landscape has changed quite a bit since 2012, and there are a number of players that could offer a service like this by now. It may be worthwhile exploring them briefly (including but not limited to Google), if we believe this is important enough to invest time in (and I agree that there is a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation management of volunteers

2019-06-17 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
Wikipedia itself can never be more reliable than the sources it cites. If it's allowed to cite itself, then there is no "bottom" to lean on, and its quality would quickly drop. That you conclude from that that wikipedia is unreliable and therefore failed is IMO such a silly proposition, that I

[Wikimedia-l] Trust & Safety (was: New board for...)

2019-06-17 Thread effe iets anders
(forking the discussion to allow a focus on more general line, rather than the specifics of who wrote what, why and when) My main takeaway from this discussion would be that it's good if there is a neutral review option for actions by the T team (or the WMF in general), such as an ombudsperson. A

[Wikimedia-l] Copyright workflows - research (Was: Re: Foundation management of volunteers)

2019-06-17 Thread Leila Zia
Hi Benjamin, My name is Leila and I'm in the Research team in Wikimedia Foundation. Please see below. On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 12:59 AM Benjamin Lees wrote: > > The community has been working on copyright violation issues for a long > time.[2] There are probably ways the WMF could support

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Caroline Becker
I was forced to step up *today* on this mailing list because the description of the WIkimania 2018 incident in the first mail was false: the claim that "none of us expressed there was a problem" is simply not what happened. And by the way this is exactly why the details of stuff like that are NOT

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright issues

2019-06-17 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
Actually, I am afraid, for CCI at some point we will have to remove all added text by bot. I do not see any other scalable solution. Cheers Yaroslav On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 5:36 PM Stephen Philbrick < stephen.w.philbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have seen a couple comments on copyright issues in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation management of volunteers

2019-06-17 Thread Mister Thrapostibongles
Dennis, I started this thread to discuss both conduct and content policies on Wikipedia, and indeed how the two interact. Wikipedia is a project to build an encyclopaedia. By its own criteria, encyclopaedias are reliable sources and Wikipedia is not a reliable source; hence by its own criteria,

[Wikimedia-l] Copyright issues

2019-06-17 Thread Stephen Philbrick
I have seen a couple comments on copyright issues in the last couple days so I thought I'd share some information that I think may be not well-known by everyone. Very roughly, copyright issues (text) can be viewed in three categories: 1. Addition of copyrighted material to articles in years past,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Ciell Wikipedia
Hello Caroline, I'm very sorry for what happened back in Capetown and that today you are reminded of this again through a public mailing list, where the story is starting to lead it's own life. I can only imagine that you felt the need to correct this misinterpretation of what happened to you. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
I went ahead and offered my time to participate in the strategy process. My offer was rejected.. I do not think I will ever do it again. I an afraid WMF is up to some surprises when they publish the 2030 Strategy which was not in any way coordinated with the communities, and then see that the

[Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Romaine Wiki
Hello all, On Saturday 15 June 2019 Wikimedia Belgium had its annual General Assembly in Brussels. *New board* Two board members have indicated to step down: * Afernand74 * SPQRobin We thank them for their work and valuable input in the past years! They remain available for advice to the board.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
What is that "strategic direction", and where was it agreed? Paulo Peter Southwood escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019 à(s) 08:20: > " Previously a strategic direction has been agreed." > Not by that many. It is so vague that it can be interpreted to mean > whatever the WMF want it to mean and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Peter Southwood
" Previously a strategic direction has been agreed." Not by that many. It is so vague that it can be interpreted to mean whatever the WMF want it to mean and used as a justification for a wide range of policies and actions that were not obviously specifically discussed. This was mentioned at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation management of volunteers

2019-06-17 Thread Benjamin Lees
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 8:18 AM Mister Thrapostibongles < thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote: > Let's look at the content first. Even on Wikipedia's own terms, it has > failed. It is a principle that Wikipedia is founded on reliable sources, > and by its own admission, Wikipedia itself is not