Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Tisza Gergő]

phoebe ayers  writes:
> 
> ** Despite the election's importance, turnout is so far pretty
> pathetic, esp. from smaller wikis.

Which begs the question: why was the central notice taken down when there is
still a day left?


___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Block update

[Mark Williamson]

Remind me, please, why we are still talking about this.

skype: node.ue



On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 4:13 PM, stevertigo wrote:
>> 2009/8/8 Stevertjgo :
>
>> I think those high level discussion can take place either on-wiki or
>> on existing mailing lists without a problem.
>
> I generally agree. But "existing mailing lists" generally means wikien-l -
> once highly purposed toward resolving on-wiki disputes - is now
> notoriously dismissive of dispute resolution issues and geared more toward
> discussing Wikipedia's media image.
>
>> Discussing specific disputes tends to annoy people on the existing
>> mailing lists and it doesn't make sense to discuss mailing list disputes
>> on-wiki, so the obvious answer seems to be a separate mailing list (or
>> several, divided up by language
>> I don't know if the non-English lists have a
>> problem needing this solution or not).
>
> OK, I agree, but would want to generalize it into either the dispute
> resolution or mailing list dimensions. A 'mailing list for discussing
> mailing lists and related issues? Hm.
>
>> I think it being a low traffic
>> list would be a good thing - the moderators would all have to be there
>> and a few mailing list regulars would sign up to keep an eye on things
>> and disputes could hopefully be resolved with a minimum of drama.
>
> Alright. I am not easily persuaded, but you make an interesting case. A
> lists-l list then.
>
> We can there discuss a new possible disputes-l list, as well as any ending
> any defunct lists, etc.
>
> -Steven
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Benjamin Lees]

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Brion Vibber  wrote:

> With the increase in administrative and organizational duties, I've been
> less and less able to devote time to the part of the job that's nearest
> and dearest to me: working with our volunteer developer community and
> end users -- Wikimedians and other MediaWiki users alike -- who have
> bugs, patches, features, ideas, complaints, hopes and dreams that need
> attention.
>
> The last thing I want to be is a bottleneck that prevents our users from
> getting what they need, or our open source developers from being able to
> participate effectively!
>
> Multicore brain upgrades aren't yet available, so to keep us running at
> top speed I've suggested, and gotten Sue & Erik's blessing on, splitting
> out the components of my current CTO role into two separate positions:


This is great news.  I look forward to upping my daily dose of vitamin B
(the supplements just didn't cut it).
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Brion Vibber]

On 8/7/09 5:43 PM, George Herbert wrote:
> I suspect you're going to have to be prepared to do a lot of internal
> discovery and discovery with potential hires to show them the web ops
> side - it's not well documented now (I keep meaning to find out more
> about the ops team and finding I have no time to join the IRC channel
> 24x7 ;-P ).  The team seems to function well - servers seem decently
> stable - but it's not clear to me if the process and documentation is
> up to industry standards for large website operations.  At some point
> tribal knowledge has to yield to documentation and process and
> organizational knowledge.

Oh yes, this is already very much an ongoing process as we've been 
increasing the ops staff this last year.

-- brion

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Block update

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/8/10 stevertigo :
>> 2009/8/8 Stevertjgo :
>
>> I think those high level discussion can take place either on-wiki or
>> on existing mailing lists without a problem.
>
> I generally agree. But "existing mailing lists" generally means wikien-l -
> once highly purposed toward resolving on-wiki disputes - is now
> notoriously dismissive of dispute resolution issues and geared more toward
> discussing Wikipedia's media image.

wikien-l is dismissive of specific disputes, I don't think people
would object to civil, non-sensational, good faith discussions about
the dispute resolution process.

> OK, I agree, but would want to generalize it into either the dispute
> resolution or mailing list dimensions. A 'mailing list for discussing
> mailing lists and related issues? Hm.

Yeah, that would work.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Block update

[stevertigo]

> 2009/8/8 Stevertjgo :

> I think those high level discussion can take place either on-wiki or
> on existing mailing lists without a problem.

I generally agree. But "existing mailing lists" generally means wikien-l -
once highly purposed toward resolving on-wiki disputes - is now
notoriously dismissive of dispute resolution issues and geared more toward
discussing Wikipedia's media image.

> Discussing specific disputes tends to annoy people on the existing
> mailing lists and it doesn't make sense to discuss mailing list disputes
> on-wiki, so the obvious answer seems to be a separate mailing list (or
> several, divided up by language
> I don't know if the non-English lists have a
> problem needing this solution or not).

OK, I agree, but would want to generalize it into either the dispute
resolution or mailing list dimensions. A 'mailing list for discussing
mailing lists and related issues? Hm.

> I think it being a low traffic
> list would be a good thing - the moderators would all have to be there
> and a few mailing list regulars would sign up to keep an eye on things
> and disputes could hopefully be resolved with a minimum of drama.

Alright. I am not easily persuaded, but you make an interesting case. A
lists-l list then.

We can there discuss a new possible disputes-l list, as well as any ending
any defunct lists, etc.

-Steven




___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Five pillars and 'WP:Consensus' in WP:NOT

[wp99 -----]

PS.

at the bottom of the page of Wikipedia:Five pillars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars

Wikipedia's principles
Five pillars  as  ''Overview of our foundation''

--wp99

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] Five pillars and 'WP:Consensus' in WP:NOT

[wp99 -----]

Hi,

The last time, I asked a question how to share WP:NOT idea among WP
local projects.
I really appreciate lots of informative feed backs.

According to your replies, I confirmed that basically, officially,
only requirement is that they follow the founding principles
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Founding_principles.

   1. Neutral point of view as a guiding editorial principle,
   2. The ability of anyone to edit (most) articles without registration,
   3. The "wiki process" and discussion with other editors as the
final decision-making mechanism for all content.
   4. Free licensing of content; in practice defined by each project
as public domain, GFDL, CC-BY-SA or CC-BY.
   5. Maintaining room for fiat to help resolve particularly difficult
problems. By convention, Jimbo Wales and later Arbitration Committees
retain certain authority on the English Wikipedia (and other wikis set
up similar frameworks) — to make binding, final decisions such as
banning an editor.

At the same time, I see (in english WP)
Wikipedia:Five pillars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars

As you see, this looks very fundamental 'pillars' to define what wikipedia is...

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
Wikipedia has a neutral point of view
Wikipedia is free content
Wikipedia has a code of conduct
Wikipedia does not have firm rules

Clearly, NPV and free-content(free licensing of content) are shared
between the founding principles and the WP-5-five-pillars.
The first one is - an encyclopedia, which is an obvious definition of
the wikipedia project.

So, what I would like to watch closely here are the last 2 pillars,
Wikipedia has a code of conduct
Wikipedia does not have firm rules

To me, Wikipedia:Consensus that is a part of
Wikipedia has a code of conduct
tightly connects to

Wikipedia does not have firm rules = Wikipedia:Ignore all rules,
WP:NOTLAW,
WP:NOTDEMOCRACY.

and basically mentions the same concept, it looks like.

So, my questions are  as follows.

1. While Wikipedia:Five pillars includes Founding_principles and the
definition of WP(Wikipedia is an encyclopedia), is this still english
local WP pillars?
or
What do you think if we share the WP pillars among WP local projects?
What do you think if a local WP project refuses to share the WP pillars?

2. What do you think 'IF' a local project like ja-wp ,as a result,
determines discard the essence of the concept -WP:Consensus and prefer
treat WP:rules as a Law?


That's it, thanks.
Regards,

--wp99

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Philippe Beaudette]

On Aug 9, 2009, at 4:15 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:

> On a general note, I for one greatly appreciate the Election
> Committee's efforts to get wide community participation in the Board
> elections**, even if the mailing could have gone more smoothly.
>
> On an even more general note, the constructive part of this
> conversation -- i.e. planning for the next election, and pointing out
> things to do next time -- is great. Where's the best place for posting
> "next-time" suggestions from this thread? Elections talk?***

Thank you on behalf of the committee for your kind words.

I've created a post-mortem topic at 
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Board_elections/2009#Post_mortem

Philippe

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Marc Riddell]

> Thomas,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> I have just received an email telling me I am eligible to vote in the
>> board elections when I have already voted. Please don't send
>> untargetted mass emails - they are spam.

on 8/9/09 5:15 PM, phoebe ayers at phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:

> 
> You think nothing of routinely filling up all of the list subscribers'
> inboxes with your opinions, as the top poster on Foundation-l.* But
> you are complaining here about one email, sent specifically to active
> and thus presumably interested members of Wikimedia projects reminding
> them about a single, important election? I find complaints about this
> being "spam" -- as if you can't handle one extra email about
> Wikimedia, when you clearly manage to get through hundreds of much
> less important missives on the mailing lists on a regular basis --
> pretty mindblowingly hypocritical.
> 
Yes!! Thank you Phoebe. This comment was long overdue!

Marc


___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Domas Mituzas]

> A high turnover rate would indicate a lot of people joining and  
> leaving,
> instead of long-term volunteers.

ah! that! no, site is operated by same people as five years ago (with  
brilliant exception of search), few people left during that time,  
because of various reasons.
some volunteers are not volunteers anymore though, being on foundation  
payroll.

unfortunately, being 'sysadmin' of such site is more about running  
around with debugger, profiler and compiler, rather than conventional  
systems administration, and it is somewhat difficult to get people to  
volunteer to do that (and certain things as full automatization of  
cluster management are quite big projects, that require years of  
experience and attention to detail).

Domas

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Philippe Beaudette]

On Aug 9, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Things started going wrong when the election committee didn't organize
> itself in time.


I should point out, though, that the committee does not "organize  
itself".  It responds to a call from the Board of Trustees.


___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Philippe Beaudette]

On Aug 9, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Al Tally wrote:
>> I don't want to seem rude, as I'm sure it's difficult and I  
>> understand the
>> election committee are volunteers, but why is it that things seem  
>> to be
>> going wrong this year?
>>
>>
> Things started going wrong when the election committee didn't organize
> itself in time.  It knew more than a year ago that one or more
> individuals would need to be elected this year.  It knew when  
> Wikimania
> would be held (the latest dates ever).  Because of the late Wikimania,
> following last year's timetable would have given them even more time  
> to
> get it together than last year.  It would not have needed to  
> foreshorten
> the voting period.  What it needs to do soon is to establish a firm
> timetable for future elections.  With no elections scheduled for two
> years this should not be difficult.  There is even plenty of time to  
> do
> this earlier to be able to deal with any vacancy that may arise.
>
> Ec


I agree.  I also suggest that the committee may be too small.  There  
are simply a huge number of details involved, and a larger committee  
may be a better system.

Philippe

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Ray Saintonge]

Al Tally wrote:
> I don't want to seem rude, as I'm sure it's difficult and I understand the
> election committee are volunteers, but why is it that things seem to be
> going wrong this year?
>
>   
Things started going wrong when the election committee didn't organize 
itself in time.  It knew more than a year ago that one or more 
individuals would need to be elected this year.  It knew when Wikimania 
would be held (the latest dates ever).  Because of the late Wikimania, 
following last year's timetable would have given them even more time to 
get it together than last year.  It would not have needed to foreshorten 
the voting period.  What it needs to do soon is to establish a firm 
timetable for future elections.  With no elections scheduled for two 
years this should not be difficult.  There is even plenty of time to do 
this earlier to be able to deal with any vacancy that may arise.

Ec

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Al Tally]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Domas Mituzas wrote:

> Hi!
>
> > I have a question on this for the tech team: as a rule, do you have a
> > high turnover of volunteers on the sysadmin ...
>
> turn-what?
> Jens is building a house or something, if that was your question.
>
> Domas
>

A high turnover rate would indicate a lot of people joining and leaving,
instead of long-term volunteers.

-- 
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Domas Mituzas]

Hi!

> I have a question on this for the tech team: as a rule, do you have a
> high turnover of volunteers on the sysadmin ...

turn-what?
Jens is building a house or something, if that was your question.

Domas

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[phoebe ayers]

Thomas,

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> I have just received an email telling me I am eligible to vote in the
> board elections when I have already voted. Please don't send
> untargetted mass emails - they are spam.

You think nothing of routinely filling up all of the list subscribers'
inboxes with your opinions, as the top poster on Foundation-l.* But
you are complaining here about one email, sent specifically to active
and thus presumably interested members of Wikimedia projects reminding
them about a single, important election? I find complaints about this
being "spam" -- as if you can't handle one extra email about
Wikimedia, when you clearly manage to get through hundreds of much
less important missives on the mailing lists on a regular basis --
pretty mindblowingly hypocritical.

On a general note, I for one greatly appreciate the Election
Committee's efforts to get wide community participation in the Board
elections**, even if the mailing could have gone more smoothly.

On an even more general note, the constructive part of this
conversation -- i.e. planning for the next election, and pointing out
things to do next time -- is great. Where's the best place for posting
"next-time" suggestions from this thread? Elections talk?***

-- phoebe

* http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-February/050149.html
** Despite the election's importance, turnout is so far pretty
pathetic, esp. from smaller wikis.
*** http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Board_elections

-- 
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
 gmail.com *

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
The things that go wrong are not necessarily the same things that go wrong.
Yes things go wrong.. There are more things that could and should have gone
differently... Nobody heard the Wikivoices interviews with many of the
candidates for instance. Sadly it did not materialise but it could have made
a difference for many voters. I participated because of the potential of it.


Yes, the mails went out late and extra work will be needed to weed out the
bots BUT when more people voted as a result, when everyone was approached
who was eligible to vote it has been a good thing.

To the people who considered the invitation to vote SPAM, I have one
message, you can opt out and if that is not good enough, tough.
Thanks,
  GerardM

2009/8/9 Al Tally 

> Maybe this is related?
>
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Unable_to_vote_in_trustees_election
>
> I don't want to seem rude, as I'm sure it's difficult and I understand the
> election committee are volunteers, but why is it that things seem to be
> going wrong this year?
>
> --
> Alex
> (User:Majorly)
> ___
> 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

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Magnus Manske]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
> High Priest of Mediawiki?

I propose robes as his official outfit, similar to this:
http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Stallman/index.shtml


Magnus

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Sean Whitton]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 01:43, George Herbert wrote:
> I suspect you're going to have to be prepared to do a lot of internal
> discovery and discovery with potential hires to show them the web ops
> side - it's not well documented now (I keep meaning to find out more
> about the ops team and finding I have no time to join the IRC channel
> 24x7 ;-P ).  The team seems to function well - servers seem decently
> stable - but it's not clear to me if the process and documentation is
> up to industry standards for large website operations.  At some point
> tribal knowledge has to yield to documentation and process and
> organizational knowledge.

I have a question on this for the tech team: as a rule, do you have a
high turnover of volunteers on the sysadmin rather than the dev side,
or has it remained mainly constant over the past few years?
Considering the future, better documentation (assuming you don't
already have such things privately) would be no bad thing.

The rest of Wikimedia and our projects have extensive procedural
documentation because while there are old-timers around, there are
also people who have less time to give and move around between
activities, which has both advantages and disadvantages within a
largely volunteer organisation such as ours.

S

-- 
Sean Whitton / 
OpenPGP KeyID: 0x25F4EAB7

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Ombudsman commission

[Christophe Henner]

2009/8/9 Peter Jacobi :
> The issue is still unresolved.
>
> de:User:Mautpreller, who filed the original complaint, just affirmed
> that there is still no answer.
>
> See 
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Checkuser/Anfragen#Ombudskommission
>
> So, just doing nothing may be a way of telling de:User:Mautpreller
> that his complaint is considered pointless, but this method of
> (non-)communication seems out of place for complaints regarding such a
> central topic as the privacy policy.
>
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
> *:User:Pjacobi
>
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

I am taking care of it but, i'm sorry, I took the case up only two
weeks ago. I have a job wich takes me a lot of time and german is not
my native language. So any answers won't just pop up.

I'll do as quick as I can to issue an answer.

All the best,

-- 
Christophe

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Al Tally]

Maybe this is related?

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Unable_to_vote_in_trustees_election

I don't want to seem rude, as I'm sure it's difficult and I understand the
election committee are volunteers, but why is it that things seem to be
going wrong this year?

-- 
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Ombudsman commission

[Peter Jacobi]

The issue is still unresolved.

de:User:Mautpreller, who filed the original complaint, just affirmed
that there is still no answer.

See 
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Checkuser/Anfragen#Ombudskommission

So, just doing nothing may be a way of telling de:User:Mautpreller
that his complaint is considered pointless, but this method of
(non-)communication seems out of place for complaints regarding such a
central topic as the privacy policy.


Regards,
Peter

*:User:Pjacobi

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

[Geoffrey Plourde]

High Priest of Mediawiki?





From: Dan Rosenthal 
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2009 5:59:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

Somehow I'm not disappointed that we're having a problem trying to  
find a title to describe how incredibly awesome Brion is.

Congrats.
-Dan
On Aug 8, 2009, at 8:45 PM, Jim Redmond wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 19:32, Kat Walsh   
> wrote:
>
>> Or you could have two sets of business cards. :-)
>>
>
> And here I was going to suggest a slashed title: "Senior Software
> Architect/Lead Hacker".  (Maybe "Senior Software Architect/ 
> Sourceror" if
> he's the eighth son of an eighth son.)
>
> Congratulations on doing the job of two, Brion.  I hope we find a  
> good CTO
> to handle the management side for you.
>
> -- 
> Jim Redmond
> [[User:Jredmond]]
> ___
> 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



  
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/8/9 Ray Saintonge :
> Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>> Although I had already voted, I was not bothered by one tiny email reminding 
>> me that I was eligible to vote. Thanks guys, hopefully this will get people 
>> to the polls.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> It didn't bother me either even though it came after I voted.  As far as
> spam goes this was softball, and it's impossible to screen out to the
> extent that some people want.
>
> I only received the message once, but considerably more messages
> complaining about it.

And even more messages like the one you just sent that add absolutely
nothing to the conversation and just say "me too".

It is not impossible to remove people who have already voted from the
list of people to be reminded, it has been done in previous years.

Why wasn't all this planned in advance? There should have been a
timetable with a specific date on which an email would be sent out and
there should have been a specific earlier date at which the mailing
list would be completed by. (People that voted inbetween those dates
may get a redundant email, a line should be added to the end
apologising for that.) These elections have been run several times
before, basic stuff like sending out emails shouldn't be cobbled
together at the last minute.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Ray Saintonge]

Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
> Although I had already voted, I was not bothered by one tiny email reminding 
> me that I was eligible to vote. Thanks guys, hopefully this will get people 
> to the polls. 
>
>
>
>   
It didn't bother me either even though it came after I voted.  As far as 
spam goes this was softball, and it's impossible to screen out to the 
extent that some people want. 

I only received the message once, but considerably more messages 
complaining about it.

Ec

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] Fwd: Translatewiki newsletter - A new translation rally has begun

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Siebrand send this e-mail to the contributors to translatewiki.net. As
localisation is an integral part to our success, I forward this to you.
Those who already contribute to our localisation I thank and those who are
capable of supporting MediaWiki by helping in the localisation effort I urge
to lend a hand.

In the end this is a rally intended to help us provide a better service to
our readers and editors.
Thanks,
   GerardM

-- Forwarded message --
From: Translatewiki.net staff 
Date: 2009/8/9
Subject: Translatewiki newsletter - A new translation rally has begun
To: gerard.meijssen


 Hello, dear translatewiki.net user.

This is our e-mail newsletter for August 2009. It intends to keep you
updated on translatewiki.net's developments, and is also aimed at reminding
you to visit http://translatewiki.net at least once every month to update
the language(s) you have been contributing to in the past, so that the
localisations will stay up to date. Because our shortage of staff time, it
has been 6 months since we have sent out our last newsletter. We hope to
make it worth your while :)
Translation Rally: Contribute 500 MediaWiki translations and share in 1,000
Euro!

In the last week of 2008 we had our first translation
rally.
All translators that would contribute more than 500 translations to
MediaWiki would share the 1,000 Euro bounty. To our astonishment 35 users
managed to reach this milestone.

Sponsored by Stichting Open Progress , with a grant
from Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland 's
"International Projects" fund, we are able to have another translation
rallywith about the same
conditions. The Translation Rally has already started
and will run until 18 August 2009 24:00 UTC. See the project page for
details.
Other News

Niklas Laxström  (aka Nikerabbit), founder of
translatewiki.net, has entered into the Google Summer of Code
2009program and has already been making
many
improvements  to the
MediaWiki Translate extension. We are very much looking forward to no longer
having to open new tabs to edit messages, for example. Translatewiki.net
staff remains being most committed to the site's translators.

We welcome feedback about this newsletter. Please let us know by sending a
reply to this mail. We will try to accommodate your wishes.

Siebrand Mazeland
Translatewiki.net staff
--

You are one of over 1,500 people receiving this e-mail because you have
registered with http://translatewiki.net, the wiki localisation platform for
translation communities, language communities, and open source projects.
This newsletter will be sent at most once every month.

You can opt-out by visiting translatewiki.net, logging in, and checking the
box 'Do not send me e-mail newsletters' at the bottom of the tab 'User
Profile' in your preferences - although we hope you will not. If you have
multiple accounts with the same e-mail address, you have to opt-out for all
of them.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Luna]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Bod Notbod  wrote:

> OK, *ideally* an email wouldn't be sent to those who have already
> voted. But it's really not as if Wikimedia is a persistent spammer.
> I'd let it slide.


Yeah, that's about where I sit on it. :) I wouldn't have said anything, if
it weren't already under discussion -- I didn't mind it one bit.

While I am tabulating suggestions, looks like one decent idea got lost in
another thread, forked from this one:

   - Consider excluding blocked accounts from the email list.

-Luna
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Bod Notbod]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Luna wrote:

> Indeed. I had already voted, and got an email, but I'm not going to do any
> complaining. It's one email, for Pete's sake.

The irony is that those who dislike having received an email about the
election have now received about 30 more due to reporting this issue.

OK, *ideally* an email wouldn't be sent to those who have already
voted. But it's really not as if Wikimedia is a persistent spammer.
I'd let it slide.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Luna]

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Steven Walling wrote:

> I already voted when I got my email, and I didn't think it was spam. I
> smiled at the fact that Wikimedia is making sure everyone who can vote has
> the opportunity.
>

Indeed. I had already voted, and got an email, but I'm not going to do any
complaining. It's one email, for Pete's sake.

That said, I have seen some good suggestions in this thread, that might be
helpful for next year:

   - Consider excluding accounts that have already voted, or sending them a
   different email.
   - Consider excluding bot accounts
   - If possible, try to get these out a bit sooner. I know it's hard.

Either way, thanks are due to those who handled this. So, thank you.

-Luna
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Kwan Ting Chan]

Milos Rancic wrote:

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Kwan Ting Chan wrote:

Just out of interest, how many such email did you get last year because I'm
sure I only (try to) send one email to each email address (that hadn't voted
already).


* One email to myself (mill...@gmail.com). I voted first day and a
couple of days ago once more [with the same account, of course :] ].
* One email to my main bot account Millbot to another/old email
address (mill...@users.sourceforge.net). This bot has global account
and bot flag on at least a couple of Wikinews editions (it maintains
[[Template:Statistics]] there).
* One email to my Wikinews bot Millbot-Beta, which email is
mill...@gmail.com, too. It doesn't have bot flag.


*Point to "last year" from original message* ;-)

I wasn't responsible for this year email, but was last year.

KTC

--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine


PGP.sig
Description: PGP signature
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Milos Rancic]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Kwan Ting Chan wrote:
> Just out of interest, how many such email did you get last year because I'm
> sure I only (try to) send one email to each email address (that hadn't voted
> already).

* One email to myself (mill...@gmail.com). I voted first day and a
couple of days ago once more [with the same account, of course :] ].
* One email to my main bot account Millbot to another/old email
address (mill...@users.sourceforge.net). This bot has global account
and bot flag on at least a couple of Wikinews editions (it maintains
[[Template:Statistics]] there).
* One email to my Wikinews bot Millbot-Beta, which email is
mill...@gmail.com, too. It doesn't have bot flag.

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

[Kwan Ting Chan]

Milos Rancic wrote:

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 5:00 AM, Casey Brown wrote:

Bot accounts will probably be excluded in the future, since they are
explicitly not allowed to vote.


I think that it shouldn't be so complicated to do one "sort -u" over
emails. As I said, some of my bots don't have bot flags and because of
that they can't be treated as bots automatically. However, I am using
just one email address for all of them. Probably, there is number of
similar cases with well intentioned sock-puppet owners.


Just out of interest, how many such email did you get last year because 
I'm sure I only (try to) send one email to each email address (that 
hadn't voted already).


KTC

--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine


PGP.sig
Description: PGP signature
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Waerth]

Chen Minqi wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Waerth  wrote:
>
>   
>> According to the wikimedia foundations rules someone whom is blocked is
>> not allowed to vote.
>>
>> 
>
> You are not eligible to vote on nlwp, but on other wikis you may be
> eligible, so that is why you received the email I guess?
>   
Nope because I wouldn't qualify according to other subrules 

W

___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Chen Minqi]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Waerth  wrote:

> According to the wikimedia foundations rules someone whom is blocked is
> not allowed to vote.
>

You are not eligible to vote on nlwp, but on other wikis you may be
eligible, so that is why you received the email I guess?

[[User:Bencmq]]

--
Without friends
   no one would choose to live,
   though he had all other goods.
  ~ Aristotle
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Foundation-l] Board elections email adding insult to injury

[Waerth]

I have just received an email that I am elligable to vote in the board 
elections.

While I am inelligeble as I am blocked on the nl.wikipedia since 3 
months already.

This ads insult to injury.

As I was blocked on request of a sockpupeteer whom is now blocked 
himself together with multiple other accounts.
As 3 months ago the arbcom said it accepted the case regarding my block.
The blocking mod did it without community consensus and is a part of the 
arbcom himself (which explains why it is taking them 3 months already)
In every case the Dutch arbcom emails the person and asks them for their 
side of the story. In 3 months NO member of the Dutch arbcom has even 
bothered to mail me. They have only asked their blocking fellow arbcom 
member for a statement!! How do you mean this is rigging things?
My block was doubled because when checking another account it was 
claimed it was me while it wasn't  obviously 500.000 Thai 
internetters behind the same IP range will give problems and any Thai IP 
seems to be me in the logic of the mods.


According to the wikimedia foundations rules someone whom is blocked is 
not allowed to vote. So why I was send this mail  it bothers me. It 
is insulting me on top of this block about nothing as I never performed 
vandalism or endangered the encyclopedia. I merely pointed out that one 
of the anonymous moderators in reality is not whom he claims he is and 
is writing articles about himself and familymembers. This while he is 
blocking other people who do the same and have the honesty to admit it. 
And is also aggressively pursuing this stance on the deletion lists. 
Thus this mod is a hypocrite, doing what he haunts others for. But me 
telling this to the community was a blockable offence it seems.

Waerth


___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l