Imo the lines were said by a member of a board of a chapter in her official
capacity as she was attending a board training paid fully by the global
community (unless she paid everything on her own and never got reimbursed
for anything)
If you keep up with this approach (which will for sure
Hoi,
Take one step back. What our aim is, is to share in the sum of all
knowledge. Arguably, this is the main and overriding objective of what we
do. There are many strategies to get to the point where we share
information. From where I stand, with Wikidata we have the opportunity to
do better
Gerard,
I think you mean There are organisations that want to share CC-0
information with us under a CC-0 license and there are those who want
to share CC-0 information under a CC-by
license. We are fine with organizations sharing CC-by information
under a CC-by license, no?
O and I agree
Ziko van Dijk wrote:
I think that a single quote by a unnamed female Wikimedian, said in
public or in private, is a very small basis for any substantiate
criticism...
I've said fuck the community a fair few times. And fuck the
foundation and fuck chapter [name]. Generally, all of them under
my
Hoi,
From where I stand ie Wikidata, the license we use is CC-0. When a GLAM
wants to share data it has to be CC-0. When it is CC-by or CC-by-sa, we
cannot use it. We do not retrieve it from their database we will find the
same data from elsewhere where there is no such burden.
When people use
Hoi,
One reason is that the license of Wikidata is questioned by members of the
Wikidata community.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 8 April 2014 11:27, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
From
Once the money an organization obtain from grants out matches anything
they get from anywhere else they become autonomous. Community support
just becomes a box to check.
Fred
This week's issue of the English Wikipedia Signpost delivers mildly
shocking news about the opinion of a prominent
Hello,
I think that a single quote by a unnamed female Wikimedian, said in
public or in private, is a very small basis for any substantiate
criticism...
Kind regards
Ziko
Am Montag, 7. April 2014 schrieb Fred Bauder :
Once the money an organization obtain from grants out matches anything
As one of the organisers of the workshop, I feel I ought to chime in here.
If I remember correctly, those remarks were made as a passing comment in a
very emotional session about the role of movement organisations. I don't
believe anyone present took them to heart.
Indeed, the vast majority of
2014-04-07 11:46 GMT+02:00 Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl:
Hello,
I think that a single quote by a unnamed female Wikimedian, said in
public or in private, is a very small basis for any substantiate
criticism...
Hear, hear.
The senitment would be extremely problematic if widespread,
Ziko van Dijk wrote
I think that a single quote by a unnamed female Wikimedian, said in
public or in private, is a very small basis for any substantiate
criticism...
Thanks to Chris e-mail's, we now know that the comment was made during a
public session (though I can't find the relevant
On 7 April 2014 11:16, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.net wrote:
I'm used to the secrecy, but I find it deeply disturbing that such a comment
could have been made during a public workshop in passing; however, it
would fit perfectly in the alleged divisions between some chapters and
David Gerard wrote:
That translates to OK, I have nothing; however, I'll assert I do anyway.
Which of the words from the sentence I wrote require translation for
you? The idea that there are divisions between chapters and communities
is not a new one; I personally have seen people mention
If that is indeed the case, the comment to fuck the community would fit
quite well in the divisions that /some/ people are alleging exist.
Tomasz
Could whoever is being quoted as saying this please come forward
publicly and explain what they meant?
If this was anything more
Hi Folks,
please do not pick out that single point and overestimate it.
I have not mentioned this to dupe anyone, but only to illustrate the
conflict of alignment or the objective of the chapters. The opposing
opinions are represented by several Wikimedians on both sides, please do
not harp on
Hoi,
What is it that you intend to do. Hang them and, hang them high??
You already know that it was in a very emotional moment ...
What is your objective? What do you expect as a result and how will that be
in everyone's benefit??
Thanks,
Gerard
On 7 April 2014 12:16, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
I don't believe Tomasz said anything about hanging them and hanging them
high.
But if there are movementarians who hold this point of view, they should be
able to speak up publicly and present that point of view.
I, for one, don't disagree with paid editing, so long as it is inline with
expected
I'd certainly hope not. One of the ground rules for the workshop was that
individual contributions were made on a confidential and non-attributable
basis.
This was exactly because we wanted people to speak freely and not worry
about a witch-hunt on an email list if a couple of trolls got hold of
I agree with Ziko's point entirely here. The two people who have taken
part in this discussion so far who were present at the time have not given
anything to indicate it was more than a flippant remark made in a stressful
situation. Not that I agree with the sentiment of course, but I'm glad
Chris, rather than again[1] using school-boy politics by defaming
people you don't like with personal attacks, please read Tomasz'
request: the idea that chapters can fuck the community is
absolutely unacceptable and should by rejected by all chapters
immediately.
Now, show some leadership and
Chris Keating wrote:
This was exactly because we wanted people to speak freely and not worry
about a witch-hunt on an email list if a couple of trolls got hold of some
out-of-context quotes.
I wish you answered the question instead of smearing me on a public
mailing list, Chris. I have no
Ok so the quote taken out of context is actually saying the opposite
of the original meaning.
The discussion was about what are the goals of the Wikimedia
Organizations?. Why do they exist?
If we look at what Wikimedia Organizations do, mostly, is investing in
free knowledge. If that's their
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
tom...@twkozlowski.netwrote:
Chris Keating wrote:
This was exactly because we wanted people to speak freely and not worry
about a witch-hunt on an email list if a couple of trolls got hold of some
out-of-context quotes.
I wish you
Hi All,
I was not present at this meeting, but gather that it was a weekend that was
valued by all that attended. As Chris has already indicated, he does not agree
with the remark and I think that all of us disagree with the remar (and that is
discounting the fact that the whole statement is
Chris
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.comwrote:
I'd certainly hope not. One of the ground rules for the workshop was that
individual contributions were made on a confidential and non-attributable
basis.
Sounds to me like the Wikimedian version of the
I am really saddened by the incessant demands that the community needs public
investigations, heads to roll, public apologies and so on. I am also saddened
by repeated demands that specific community members state publicly whether they
do or do not agree with something allegedly said by a
Michael,
Wikimedia UK is in the fortunate position that due to my original work
with Peter on governance, you and all trustees on your board have
signed a trustee code committing them to the Nolan principles. This
makes it obvious that if any of the UK Trustees that made public
statements of this
I am not sure it would qualify as a public statement rather than a sentence
taken and quoted out of context from a closed meeting - in other words, it
was not made at a public, accessible location, rather at a closed meeting
(with limited places, an entrance fee, etc.). While there are published
Hey all!
As I have been helping out with wikipedias from time to time, here my
5 cent:
@Fae: I do not think that it is within the spirit of the Nolan
Principles to break a promise given to participants... there is no
trade-offpossiblebetween the principles for the
*@Fae: I do not think that it is within the spirit of the Nolan
Principles to break a promise given to participants...*
I'm sorry but quote someone on a on-line journal does not break the promise
of secrecy? If they speak believing they would never be quoted, put their
words on
Dear all,
I beg your pardon, that I have quoted this statement in my blog.
As mentioned before, I had never intended to condemn anyone or even expose.
It served me merely to illustrate the various points of view. The fact that
this statement was highly exaggerated and was expressed in a moment
No. You may want to look at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Standards_in_Public_Life
this does not include keeping things secret just because someone said
let's keep this secret. The exact opposite is true, if you are in a
trusted public position then you must show leadership for
On the other other hand, having any sort of Chatham House Rule in an
organisation which prides itself as having openness and transparency as one
of its core tenets..think about it people..
Hell, we once had Oliver Keyes spouting on IRC how lowly he thinks of Jimmy
Wales (in addition
Way to completely miss the point.
Sometimes, the rule of nonattribution is necessary to foster open exchange of
views. Nothing anyone has said disputes that.
If you disagree, disagree before the meeting, not after.
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com
Sent from Kangphone
On Apr
I think this topic has been overblown. It's not as if anyone on this
mailing list has any right or opportunity to pressure a chapter to remove a
member of their Board - unless those individuals are members of the
specific chapter. And really, if you're an active member of that chapter,
you
Just to clarify that I don't believe Tomasz, the original poster, was
trolling.
You, Ashley, have been doing so spectacularly :)
On 7 Apr 2014 16:50, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
No. You may want to look at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Standards_in_Public_Life
this does not
I don't find it deeply disturbing. What, now everybody must love
absolutely all wiki[mp]edians?
Let her air her thoughts. Or has that also become forbidden?
M.
El 07/04/2014 12:16 p.m., Tomasz W. Kozlowski escribió:
Ziko van Dijk wrote
I think that a single quote by a unnamed female
Carlos M. Colina wrote:
I don't find it deeply disturbing. What, now everybody must love
absolutely all wiki[mp]edians?
Yes, what's wrong with fucking the community? Let's go do it, we don't
need that useless bunch of moaning robots!
Tomasz
Look, there is too much drama in telenovelas to add another one. You
guys are overreacting over it.
M.
El 07/04/2014 11:36 p.m., Tomasz W. Kozlowski escribió:
Carlos M. Colina wrote:
I don't find it deeply disturbing. What, now everybody must love
absolutely all wiki[mp]edians?
Yes,
I'm not sure I want to be subscribed to this mailing list any more. :-( What
happened to the intelligent conversation that used to take place here?
Thanks,
Mike
On 7 Apr 2014, at 22:38, Carlos M. Colina ma...@wikimedia.org.ve wrote:
Look, there is too much drama in telenovelas to add another
On 7 April 2014 22:40, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
I'm not sure I want to be subscribed to this mailing list any more. :-( What
happened to the intelligent conversation that used to take place here?
This year, Fae and Russavia.
- d.
On Tuesday, 8 April 2014, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
What happened to the intelligent conversation that used to take place here?
There used to be intelligent conversation on wikimedia-l? As I remember
it foundation-l was always famous for a seemingly endless supply
of controversy
With all due respect, Gerard, not the bearer ofthe message, Tomas, is
the problem, the problem arises where there are people who can make
decisions with far-reaching consequences - and be selected for it - but
then assume one for me unacceptable position against that group whose
services are
43 matches
Mail list logo
