No idea since I have no idea what most of those things are. You could try 
making it more clear, for starts by using the full expressions rather than the 

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [] On Behalf Of 
James Salsman
Sent: Sunday, 03 January 2016 11:12 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Database administration support (was Re: IRC office 
hours: Shared hosting)

If anyone is opposed to any of these things, please say so:

(1) adding database administration staff;

(2) not buying premium name-brand equipment or any equipment with e.g.
BIOS-to-JTAG back doors;

(3) opposing the TPP portions deleterious to movement interests;

(4) opposing the recently omnibus-enacted CISA and its Chinese counterpart;

(5) caching cited references at Foundation expense under volunteer review;

(6) re-evaluating the FTE cost of supporting the different varieties of 
JavaScript on the different varieties of browsers on the different varieties of 
platforms including O(N^2) structures like cross-browser copy/paste. I think 
Visual Editor is sucking up the oxygen in Foundation engineering at the moment, 
leaving the lengthy community backlog mostly in the lurch; and

(7) funding the Foundation Engineering Community backlog, and lengthening it 
from 10 items to 20.

I am also fascinated by the discussion about whether a Florida law selection 
trumps an advertised election, but more interested in why Kevin wrote that I 
don't understand the Foundation mission. I proposed years ago that all Board 
meetings' open sessions should be live-streamed and recorded. The Foundation 
does that for monthly meetings, why not the Board too?


On Tuesday, December 22, 2015, James Salsman <> wrote:

> On Sunday, December 20, 2015, Brian Wolff < 
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','');>> wrote:
>> If you want to get Dispenser his hard disk space, you should take it 
>> up with the labs people, or at the very least some thread where it 
>> would be on-topic.
> The labs people are so understaffed that two extremely important 
> anti-spam bots recently had to be taken offline for much longer than in 
> recent years.
> I propose Foundation management allocate the necessary resources and 
> recommend the hiring of sufficient personnel and purchasing of 
> sufficient, non NSA-compatible (i.e., discount and homebrew style) 
> equipment to properly support both existing infrastructural bots and 
> similar projects such as Dispenser's reflinks cache.
> I would also like to propose that the Foundation oppose the TPP 
> provisions deleterious to our interests, and that this position be 
> endorsed on the Public Policy list.
>> Then by definition it wouldn't be a third-party spam framework if WMF 
>> was running it.
> I am not proposing that the WMF take the bots over, just meet their 
> necessary service level requirements.
> Sincerely,
> Jim
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG -
Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11319 - Release Date: 01/04/16

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to