Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[phoebe ayers]

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Robert S. Horning
 wrote:
> On 10/17/2010 11:01 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
>> Fred Bauder wrote:
>>
>>> This list is for people who support the project, not those who are
>>> actively opposing it or criticizing in public forums in exaggerated ways.
>>>
>> Please don't stupidly spout off about the purpose of this list. Or if you
>> insist on doing so, at least have the decency to be accurate. There is
>> absolutely no issue with dissent on this list (or on any Wikimedia mailing
>> list). Thoughtful critics and criticism should always be welcome. The view
>> you're putting forward is simply and unequivocally wrong.
>>
>> MZMcBride
>>
> While I think this reply could have been a bit more tactful, the
> sentient is well founded:  This list includes a fair bit of dissent and
> controversy over the role of the Foundation in regards to the operations
> of the various Wikimedia projects controversy that in some cases
> I've started in the past in various capacities.  *I* have offered
> dissenting viewpoints on several key things in the past, so if it is
> those who are actively criticizing the foundation or the actions of
> "project leaders", perhaps I ought to be the next one banned from this list?

I cannot speak for the list administrators. But criticism, especially
thoughtful criticism, is of course both welcome and healthy in general
in our projects, and personally I would love to see more nuanced and
thoughtful criticism as the basis of many more conversations about
where the Foundation and projects should go.

But I do note that Austin didn't specify the reasons that Kohs was
banned, so I don't think that it's particularly useful to raise
fearful scenarios. In the last few years that I have been actively
participating in Foundation-l, I've found it quite lenient not only
towards critics but also towards troublesome posters, even trolls. So
I doubt that Kohs' critical views towards the projects contributed to
his banning; there are plenty of other ways that someone can become
unwelcome in a community, including harassment of other members of
that community. I don't know what the specific situation in this case
was that triggered this action at this time, but I trust our list
administrators to make thoughtful decisions based on a long history.

regards,
Phoebe

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

Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Robert S. Horning]

On 10/17/2010 11:01 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
> Fred Bauder wrote:
>
>> This list is for people who support the project, not those who are
>> actively opposing it or criticizing in public forums in exaggerated ways.
>>  
> Please don't stupidly spout off about the purpose of this list. Or if you
> insist on doing so, at least have the decency to be accurate. There is
> absolutely no issue with dissent on this list (or on any Wikimedia mailing
> list). Thoughtful critics and criticism should always be welcome. The view
> you're putting forward is simply and unequivocally wrong.
>
> MZMcBride
>
While I think this reply could have been a bit more tactful, the 
sentient is well founded:  This list includes a fair bit of dissent and 
controversy over the role of the Foundation in regards to the operations 
of the various Wikimedia projects controversy that in some cases 
I've started in the past in various capacities.  *I* have offered 
dissenting viewpoints on several key things in the past, so if it is 
those who are actively criticizing the foundation or the actions of 
"project leaders", perhaps I ought to be the next one banned from this list?

This is a years (nearly a decade?) old mailing list with a rich and 
varied history and a whole lot of participants.  The degree of 
toleration for dissent can and ought to be a central aspect to the 
governance of these projects, and in fact is one of the reasons why I 
still participate in one degree or another on the various projects.  
Indeed it is when intolerance has happened is when I've seen various 
projects or sub-projects start to die.

On occasion there might be somebody engaging in actions that are simply 
so over the top that it is necessary to take some action.  Without 
supporting or being critical of the current action, to which I don't 
feel I have enough information to pass judgment, I certainly hope any 
such action to block or restrict another person is something done with a 
sober mind and well thought through before the action is taken.  I 
remember when this was completely unmoderated to a degree that would not 
be tolerated today simply because of spam and pure junk.  If it becomes 
merely a pruning exercise to make more like minded people, you can count 
me out.  Until then, at least know that there are a great many reasons 
why people read and contribute to this list.

-- Robert Horning

Globe Life Insurance
$1* Buys $50,000 Life Insurance. Adults or Children. No Medical Exam.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4cbbdc684885f337a37st05vuc

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

Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Birgitte SB]

- Original Message 
From: Austin Hair 
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List 
Sent: Sun, October 17, 2010 7:05:18 PM
Subject: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

Hi guys,

After extensive discussion among the list administrators, we've
enacted, for the first time, a permanent ban of a mailing list member.
Greg Kohs is no longer welcome to participate on Foundation-l.

Peter Damian has also been moderated once again, and will remain on
moderation for the indefinite future.

Austin


You guys really need to get out of the echo chamber.  You don't even bother to 
try and articulate what you are trying to accomplish with moderation any more.  
Obviously everyone involved has written Greg Kohs off as inherently evil, so I 
won't waste my time with nuance on that subject.   But you might want to 
actually define your goalposts to prevent the predictable dramafest that will 
occur in the near future when someone who has not been labeled as evil begins 
grappling with them.  The foundation-l forum obviously has a broader population 
than wherever the adminstrators extensively discuss these things and none are 
mind readers.

Birgitte SB



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

Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[MZMcBride]

Fred Bauder wrote:
> This list is for people who support the project, not those who are
> actively opposing it or criticizing in public forums in exaggerated ways.

Please don't stupidly spout off about the purpose of this list. Or if you
insist on doing so, at least have the decency to be accurate. There is
absolutely no issue with dissent on this list (or on any Wikimedia mailing
list). Thoughtful critics and criticism should always be welcome. The view
you're putting forward is simply and unequivocally wrong.

MZMcBride



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

Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Fred Bauder]

This list is for people who support the project, not those who are
actively opposing it or criticizing in public forums in exaggerated ways.
Nothing constructive or helpful is likely to be added by thekohster, and
if Peter contributes something interesting and helpful it can be
approved.

Fred

> Hoi,
> I certainly welcome Mr Kohs absence from this list. His brinkmanship is
> well
> known, he is not welcome on two projects as well and he boasted recently
> that there are still projects open to him. Getting rid of a troll is imho
> beneficial to the atmosphere.
>
> Mr Damian uses hyperbole to the extend that you would believe there is
> nothing good to be found in Wikipedia. His posture as a superior mind has
> become increasingly boring. I hope he will consider his options and
> decide
> to tone down this rhetoric. This might make him relevant again I hope. If
> not tough.
>
> So I am one to welcome the move by the list administrators and I am happy
> to
> support their action.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On 18 October 2010 02:05, Austin Hair  wrote:
>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> After extensive discussion among the list administrators, we've
>> enacted, for the first time, a permanent ban of a mailing list member.
>>  Greg Kohs is no longer welcome to participate on Foundation-l.
>>
>> Peter Damian has also been moderated once again, and will remain on
>> moderation for the indefinite future.
>>
>> Austin
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I certainly welcome Mr Kohs absence from this list. His brinkmanship is well
known, he is not welcome on two projects as well and he boasted recently
that there are still projects open to him. Getting rid of a troll is imho
beneficial to the atmosphere.

Mr Damian uses hyperbole to the extend that you would believe there is
nothing good to be found in Wikipedia. His posture as a superior mind has
become increasingly boring. I hope he will consider his options and decide
to tone down this rhetoric. This might make him relevant again I hope. If
not tough.

So I am one to welcome the move by the list administrators and I am happy to
support their action.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 18 October 2010 02:05, Austin Hair  wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> After extensive discussion among the list administrators, we've
> enacted, for the first time, a permanent ban of a mailing list member.
>  Greg Kohs is no longer welcome to participate on Foundation-l.
>
> Peter Damian has also been moderated once again, and will remain on
> moderation for the indefinite future.
>
> Austin
>
> ___
> 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] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Andreas Kolbe]

--- On Mon, 18/10/10, Virgilio A. P. Machado  wrote:
> I strongly disagree with both
> decisions.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Virgilio A. P. Machado
> (Vapmachado)
 

While I appreciate the situation the moderators are in, I'm afraid I disagree 
too -- in particular in Peter's case, whose contributions generally seem 
intelligent and constructive. 

Greg's contributions may be provocative, but a culture that is able to tolerate 
provocation and dissent without losing its composure is healthier than one that 
cannot. That includes being able to deal with the occasional searching question 
from someone like Greg. 

I realise the moderators' aim is to prevent disruption. And I am aware that 
back-and-forth discussions about putting a member in an online discussion group 
on moderation are one of the most tedious and unproductive types of discussions 
to have. It's something that can make moderating an online discussion group a 
truly invidious task, making the most well-meaning moderator feel their job is 
not appreciated.

That is not so.

But I feel compelled to point out that falling prey to groupthink* is often a 
more hazardous fate for a group than suffering disruption.

Andreas

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

 
> At 01:05 18-10-2010, you wrote:
> >Hi guys,
> >
> >After extensive discussion among the list
> administrators, we've
> >enacted, for the first time, a permanent ban of a
> mailing list member.
> >  Greg Kohs is no longer welcome to participate on
> Foundation-l.
> >
> >Peter Damian has also been moderated once again, and
> will remain on
> >moderation for the indefinite future.
> >
> >Austin
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Marc Riddell]

on 10/17/10 8:05 PM, Austin Hair at adh...@gmail.com wrote:

> Hi guys,
> 
> After extensive discussion among the list administrators, we've
> enacted, for the first time, a permanent ban of a mailing list member.
> Greg Kohs is no longer welcome to participate on Foundation-l.
> 
> Peter Damian has also been moderated once again, and will remain on
> moderation for the indefinite future.
> 
Why? Would you like to share your reasoning with the rest of us? When
someone else decides that what another person has written isn't suitable for
someone else's eyes - what else do you call it but censorship. The only
reason words are ever banned is out of fear of the consequence of their use.
Has either of these persons threatened anyone with harm? As I understand
this Forum, it is for discussing all issues related to the Foundation that
controls the Project we are all working on. The Community should be able to
openly discuss all of the laundry that belongs to it - both clean and dirty.
This way, we may not always like what we hear, but we can always trust that
we are hearing it all.

Marc Riddell


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

Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Virgilio A. P. Machado]

I strongly disagree with both decisions.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado
(Vapmachado)


At 01:05 18-10-2010, you wrote:
>Hi guys,
>
>After extensive discussion among the list administrators, we've
>enacted, for the first time, a permanent ban of a mailing list member.
>  Greg Kohs is no longer welcome to participate on Foundation-l.
>
>Peter Damian has also been moderated once again, and will remain on
>moderation for the indefinite future.
>
>Austin


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

[Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

[Austin Hair]

Hi guys,

After extensive discussion among the list administrators, we've
enacted, for the first time, a permanent ban of a mailing list member.
 Greg Kohs is no longer welcome to participate on Foundation-l.

Peter Damian has also been moderated once again, and will remain on
moderation for the indefinite future.

Austin

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

[Foundation-l] Four new language editions of Wikimedia projects

[Jesse (Pathoschild)]

Hello,

Four new language editions of Wikimedia projects have been approved
and created: the Banjar Wikipedia at , the
Hill Mari/Мары йӹлмӹ Wikipedia at , the
Komi-Permyak/Перем Коми Wikipedia at , and
the Persian/فارسی Wikinews at . The
Gagauz/gagauzça Wikipedia has also been approved and is only awaiting
final details (logo, namespace translation, etc) before creation.

(As usual, this is a personal message and not an official language
committee announcement.)

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse (Pathoschild)

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

[Foundation-l] Page views

[Erik Zachte]

I also think the seemingly extraordinary increase in page views in October
is most likely a glitch.

 

Compare this chart which shows long term trends in page (and image) requests
per second.

 
http://www.nedworks.org/~mark/reqstats/reqstats-yearly.png

No sudden peak in October here.

 

There are several steps involved in producing page view stats.

What we can say so far is the anomaly happens before or during data
aggregation on our squid log post-processing server.

 

Erik Zachte

 

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

Re: [Foundation-l] Page views

[Robert Rohde]

Given that there doesn't appear to be any jump in page views or reach
as measured by Alexa [1], I would be inclined to assume it is some
sort of a glitch with our counting infrastructure.  It is hard to
imagine any simple external process creating a real 50% jump in
traffic.  If I recall correctly, Google is the largest single referrer
and they only account for 30% of traffic or something, so they would
have to more than double their referrals to raise our views +50% in a
month.  More likely than not, this is some sort of an error in
counting for the current month.

[1] http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikipedia.org

-Robert Rohde


On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Joan Goma  wrote:
> Is there any explanation for the extraordinary jump in page views this
> month?
>
> http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthly.htm
> ___
> 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] Page views

[Milos Rancic]

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 22:49, Przykuta  wrote:
>> Is there any explanation for the extraordinary jump in page views this
>> month?
>>
>> http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthly.htm
>>
>
> If it is not a bug[1], I think it is newsworthy
>
> http://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/W_pa%C5%BAdzierniku_skokowo_wzros%C5%82a_liczba_wej%C5%9B%C4%87_na_Wikipedi%C4%99
>
> + 50% jump.
>
> przykuta
>
> [1] number of edits: 
> http://www.wikistatistics.net/?family=wikipedias&project=en&subject=edits&scanback=200
>
> ___
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

If I remember well, data for the previous year or so were partial.
But, someone from tech staff should know it better.

Alexa doesn't say anything special for Wikipedia.

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

Re: [Foundation-l] Page views

[Przykuta]

> Is there any explanation for the extraordinary jump in page views this
> month?
> 
> http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthly.htm
> 

If it is not a bug[1], I think it is newsworthy

http://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/W_pa%C5%BAdzierniku_skokowo_wzros%C5%82a_liczba_wej%C5%9B%C4%87_na_Wikipedi%C4%99

+ 50% jump.

przykuta

[1] number of edits: 
http://www.wikistatistics.net/?family=wikipedias&project=en&subject=edits&scanback=200

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

[Foundation-l] Conservative collaboration and the Wikipedia model

[Fred Bauder]

A serious analysis of Conservapedia:

http://www.yalelawtech.org/wikipedia/conservative-collaboration-and-the-wikipedia-model/

Fred


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

[Foundation-l] Page views

[Joan Goma]

Is there any explanation for the extraordinary jump in page views this
month?

http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthly.htm
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Expertise and Wikipedia redux

[Peter Damian]

- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Damian" 
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" 
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Expertise and Wikipedia redux


> I haven't checked the related article on William Smith
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Smith_(lexicographer) (he was the
> editor of Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology) but I bet
> the sentence "In 1867, he became editor of the Quarterly Review, which he
> directed with marked success until his death; his remarkable memory and
> accuracy, as well as his tact and courtesy, specially fitting him for such 
> a
> post." was lifted directly without any attempt at integration with the
> project.

I did check it and I was right.  The entire article, with the exception of 
two words, is lifted *verbatim* from Britannica 1911 
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Sir_William_Smith.  The 'specially fitting 
him for such a post' is a giveaway and an obvious POV.

Oddly, Smith's most lasting legacy, the Latin-English dictionary, is not 
mentioned as such.  That is because they did not know this in 1911.  It was 
revised and re-published many times afterwards. I have the 1965 edition, 
somewhat dog-eared.

Peter



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

Re: [Foundation-l] Expertise and Wikipedia redux

[Peter Damian]

- Original Message - 
From: "David Goodman" 
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" 
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 5:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Expertise and Wikipedia redux


> (I leave aside the question of whether the synthesis or even the basic
> information can actually be relied on--I know of no branch of
> humanities or social science that has remained static over the past
> century. )

Thank you for addressing my main point, if only briefly.  I don't have a 
difficulty with wholesale copying in itself.  It is the *indiscriminate* 
wholesale copying without

1.  elementary fact-checking
2.  checking for agreement with more recent scholarship
3.  checking for style.  Many of the older sources are written in an 
outdated style that is not suited to a modern mass-market encyclopedia.  I 
haven't checked the related article on William Smith 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Smith_(lexicographer) (he was the 
editor of Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology) but I bet 
the sentence "In 1867, he became editor of the Quarterly Review, which he 
directed with marked success until his death; his remarkable memory and 
accuracy, as well as his tact and courtesy, specially fitting him for such a 
post." was lifted directly without any attempt at integration with the 
project.

And my point remains about Wikipedia in 100 years time.  If Wikipedia relies 
on 100-year old sources, in 100 years time it will rely on sources produced 
today.  But today we only have Wikipedia. 


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