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 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 merely the best recent example. The discussion you > propose on Commons appears to focus purely on URAA; that's fine, a > discussion like that should exist (though I object to your presumption (and > odders) that the URAA RfC is discredited or nullified either by the way it > was closed or by a follow-up RfC with drastically fewer participants). But > the content of the various "tragedy of Commons" threads on this list and > others is broader and attempts to identify and solve deeply embedded > problems in the Commons culture. > > So while a discussion on Commons might be easier for Commons > administrators to shape and control, there is no good reason why discussion > on this list (or commons-l) should be dropped in favor of a section on the > Commons admin noticeboard. > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>