Couldn't the stats job you want run on toolserver? Peter Gervai wrote: > Hello, > > I wasn't subscribed to this list, since I usually try to avoid the > politics around. > > I was notified, however, that some interesting claims were made and > some steps taken (again) without any discussion whatsoever. > > First, let me tell it here again - as I have told it on a different > list - that I am extremely disappointed by the lack of discussion > before someone from outside seriously interfere with other project > based on, as it turns out, incorrect informations. In the past people > with privileges (if we ever considered them that way instead of people > with work to be done) were more cautious. I would like you all > fast-handed guys to slow down and talk first, get informed, and act > later. > > I already commented elsewhere on vls, in summary I miss the discussion > and I do not believe the case actually breached any privacy, but this > isn't my concern now (as I'm in a bit of hurry). > > Regarding huwp, it would have been pretty easy to find out who to ask. > Apart from the obvious choice of "anyone with any flags on huwp", it > could've been easy to identify who made the changes, and ask them. > Like, for example me. > > As far as I see, lots of wasted energies go around, like people > planning how to block javascript, how to block counters, etc. It is > the wrong way. The good way is, and I'm repeating myself again, is > FIRST to get to know WHY these scripts are there in the first hand, > what solution they have to solve. This is a crucial step, fellows, > which you neglected to take. (And we all know that the reason is to > create usage stats.) > > Next step should be examining whether there is anything this violates, > like, Privacy Policy. In the case of Google this is debateable, since > I don't know what is the scope of the data retention. > > However I completely do know about the Hungarian stats. Let me share > the real information here, briefly, since I have to go soon, but I do > not want to let you destroy something you're not aware of. > > The stats (which have, by surprise, a dedicated domain under th hu > wikipedia domain) runs on a dedicated server, with nothing else on it. > Its sole purpose to gather and publish the stats. Basically nobody > have permission to log in the servers but me, and I since I happen to > be checkuser as well it wouldn't even be ntertaining to read it, even > if it wasn't big enough making this useless. I happen to be the one > who have created the Hungarian checkuser policy, which is, as far as I > know, the strictest one in WMF projects, and it's no joke, and I > intend to follow it. (And those who are unfamiliar with me, I happen > to be the founder of huwp as well, apart from my job in computer > security.) > > If you would have gathered this knowledge (which means that the server > is closed and run by an identified user to WMF), then you could have > started the discussion. > > As it is obvious, don't make any interfering moves while discussing it > for days, or even weeks, wouldn't change anything. > > What have you achieved with removing the code? You killed our stats, > which provides us with the statistics originally WMF provided (same > data content), but later killed off. > > We'll propose (huwp) some solutions on the problem, but I'll really > have to go now. Tgr can help discussing it, and I'll thank him for his > help in advance. :-) > > So, think about these in the weekend, I'm back on monday. I hop there > can be an _useful_ discussion, with thinking people and not people > acting on impulses. > > Peter Gervai > Hungary > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l