Re: [Foundation-l] chapter board seats (was: Greg Kohs and Peter Damian)
Message: 3 Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:52:11 +0200 From: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 79, Issue 65 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: aanlktiksvkmvg302trra8hqx6=6pevxcfwrgytfk1...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hoi, The fact that nobody informed the losers that they had lost wins definitely not the price for best practices. I know for a fact that the person involved in the election process has been suggested to do so. People do appreciate a word of thanks for being a candidate and a good loser. We can improve and we have a good example to copy from. I was a candidate for Chapters committee and Lodewijk sent me a mail telling I had failed that made me feel very comfortable. (Thanks again Lodewijk). Then I sent personal mails to each one of the winners congratulating them. As far as I know only winners have been announced. It is not clear even to participants in the election how many votes they got. A thick veil of secrecy hung over this election. I was warned that by posting my candidacy I might no longer be eligible ... So yes, there is room for improvement in the procedure. In the end good people were elected. People with a long track record in our movement. As far as I am concerned all is well that ends well. grin it could have been better /grin Thanks, GerardM I only can agree with you partially. I think we are not in the end. We are still on time to publish the candidates and the related information not only for the board candidates but also for the Chapters Committee candidates. You, me, and many people can believe that the outcome has been good. But there is no need to ask anybody to believe if they can see. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] privacy and usability of user talk pages (inc. LiquidThreads)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Peter Coombe thewub.w...@googlemail.com wrote: Perhaps a better solution (if this is a common enough problem) would be to edit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Editnotices/Namespace/User_talk to inform/remind people that messages they leave there are public. I just checked and it seems it would stack ok with individuals' custom editnotices for their talk page. Please no. We have more than enough annoying boxes on Wikipedia as it is. -- Andrew Garrett http://werdn.us/ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
If you are counting votes, please count mine for moderation. Cheers Yaroslav On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 02:23:16 +0100, Virgilio A. P. Machado v...@fct.unl.pt wrote: Three days after the announcement made by Austin Hair on behalf of this list administrators, which also includes Ral315 and AlexandrDmitri, that Greg Kohs was banned and Peter Damian moderated, this much has been accomplished by about 41 posts on that subject: 1) Austin Hair, Ral315, and AlexandrDmitri continue to be the list administrators; subscribe: 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] Proposal for new project
On 10/21/10 6:14 PM, Robert S. Horning wrote: On 10/21/2010 08:21 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: I wouldn't say that a how-to is necessarily NPOV, although there are more ways to do something. But such a project can be realised already within Wikibooks. How-to books are on Wikibooks mainly due to the long-ago viewpoint that Wikibooks ought to be an incubator project for all kinds of ideas that didn't quite fit on Wikipedia... and the Wikibooks community was generally willing to try them out for a time. While I would still feel that Wikibooks would be an appropriate place for this kind of projects, I also think that Wikihow has taken hold in this area of knowledge. As a separate project it is valuable competition to Wikimedia projects. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
On 21 October 2010 20:18, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: I would also like to add my gratitude to Mike for his years of useful service. It is hard to imagine who could be a suitable replacement. Having been privileged to see some of the breathtaking thngs Mike pulled off for Wikimedia that cannot as yet be spoken of, I can only hope that he has a memoir stored up for release in thirty years ... - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
On 22 October 2010 08:19, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote: If you are counting votes, please count mine for moderation. +1 Seriously, this list is commonly referred to as troll-l and lots of chapter people refuse to even look at it. Pulling it out of the mire might make it even slightly useful again. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Proposal for new project
Hoi, I would like to qualify Wikihow not as a competition to WMF projects but as a welcome addition.. Remember we are all one Wiki movement :) Thanks, GerardM On 22 October 2010 10:15, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: On 10/21/10 6:14 PM, Robert S. Horning wrote: On 10/21/2010 08:21 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: I wouldn't say that a how-to is necessarily NPOV, although there are more ways to do something. But such a project can be realised already within Wikibooks. How-to books are on Wikibooks mainly due to the long-ago viewpoint that Wikibooks ought to be an incubator project for all kinds of ideas that didn't quite fit on Wikipedia... and the Wikibooks community was generally willing to try them out for a time. While I would still feel that Wikibooks would be an appropriate place for this kind of projects, I also think that Wikihow has taken hold in this area of knowledge. As a separate project it is valuable competition to Wikimedia projects. Ray ___ 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] Russian police probe Wikipedia for extremism
Hello, 2010/10/19 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: For those who have forgotten it, we had a similar issue with http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Les_Protocoles_des_Sages_de_Sion (I've never understood how it's concluded: it's so complicated!). Nemo There was never any formal request for deletion by any French authority, so we still have it. Regards, Yann ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:54 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Seriously, this list is commonly referred to as troll-l and lots of chapter people refuse to even look at it. Pulling it out of the mire might make it even slightly useful again. Who want's a list that's slightly useful? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
Hoi, People who appreciate an upgrade from totally useless... obviously... Thanks, GerardM On 22 October 2010 14:27, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:54 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Seriously, this list is commonly referred to as troll-l and lots of chapter people refuse to even look at it. Pulling it out of the mire might make it even slightly useful again. Who want's a list that's slightly useful? ___ 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] Ban and moderate
on 10/22/10 8:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen at gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, People who appreciate an upgrade from totally useless... obviously... Thanks, GerardM To what use are you talking about, Gerard; groupthink-l? Marc Riddell On 22 October 2010 14:27, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:54 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Seriously, this list is commonly referred to as troll-l and lots of chapter people refuse to even look at it. Pulling it out of the mire might make it even slightly useful again. Who want's a list that's slightly useful? ___ 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] Ban and moderate
On 22 October 2010 14:14, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net wrote: on 10/22/10 8:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen at gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: People who appreciate an upgrade from totally useless... obviously... To what use are you talking about, Gerard; groupthink-l? Your answer appears to have fallen prey to the fallacy of the excluded middle. The problem is how to arrest the evaporative cooling effect: http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/social-software-sundays-2-the-evaporative-cooling-effect/ - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
To what use are you talking about, Gerard; groupthink-l? Marc Riddell This is a public list for discussion of matters which concern and affect the Wikimedia Foundation. It is open to supporters and critics of our projects; to novices and old hands. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
Very sad to hear of Mike leaving; he's a charismatic lawyer. I used to get a kick out of telling people that we have *the* Godwin on board. I am going to take it for granted that do you have an internet meme and law named after you? will be one of the key questions when recruiting the next legal counsel. - bnb ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
Encyc. Dramatica seems too take pride in creating attack pages regarding Wikipedians. Of course they are exposing themselves to libel suits but looking at some of the rest of their site this seems to be the least of their worries with a great deal of racist content as well as underage pornography. Wondering if we have any measures available to deal with these attacks against Wikipedia? Or have others who have considered this issue feel that attempting anything would 1) be futile 2) just promote the creation / promotion of more such content. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, B.Sc. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
On 22/10/2010 08:54, David Gerard wrote: On 22 October 2010 08:19, Yaroslav M. Blanterpute...@mccme.ru wrote: If you are counting votes, please count mine for moderation. +1 Are you both asking to be put on moderation or to be banned Seriously, this list is commonly referred to as troll-l and lots of chapter people refuse to even look at it. Pulling it out of the mire might make it even slightly useful again. Has troll become the new Nazi? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
Whatever happened to freedom of speech? Encyclopedia Dramatica is a parody site. Plenty of people have tried to shut them down before, it's unlikely to ever happen (and in my opinion, should never happen). If they have an offensive article about you, trying to get rid of it will probably make it worse. 2010/10/22 James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com: Encyc. Dramatica seems too take pride in creating attack pages regarding Wikipedians. Of course they are exposing themselves to libel suits but looking at some of the rest of their site this seems to be the least of their worries with a great deal of racist content as well as underage pornography. Wondering if we have any measures available to deal with these attacks against Wikipedia? Or have others who have considered this issue feel that attempting anything would 1) be futile 2) just promote the creation / promotion of more such content. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, B.Sc. ___ 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] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:00 AM, M. Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote: Whatever happened to freedom of speech? Encyclopedia Dramatica is a parody site. Plenty of people have tried to shut them down before, it's unlikely to ever happen (and in my opinion, should never happen). If they have an offensive article about you, trying to get rid of it will probably make it worse. In almost any jurisdiction, freedom of speech has exceptions that include obscenity, defamation, certain types of hate speech, threats, etc. You can generally find all of those at ED; such speech isn't protected, nor should it be. Nathan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 4:44 PM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: Encyc. Dramatica seems too take pride in creating attack pages regarding Wikipedians. Of course they are exposing themselves to libel suits but looking at some of the rest of their site this seems to be the least of their worries with a great deal of racist content as well as underage pornography. Wondering if we have any measures available to deal with these attacks against Wikipedia? Or have others who have considered this issue feel that attempting anything would 1) be futile 2) just promote the creation / promotion of more such content. Well, Encyclopedia Dramatica is a special sort of case that seasoned veterans of the Internet recognize, and is probably best described as satire taken to (or even beyond) an extreme (a la 4chan). It may not always be appreciated, but ED editors generally aren't writing with malice, and if they are it's so absurd that nobody really gets hurt over it. Hell, I'm on ED, and I'm not filing a libel suit. If they violate local laws, that's up to those government agencies to enforce, but if Wikimedians were go go on a crusade against them I think you'd wind up with #2. Austin ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
Whatever happened to freedom of speech? Encyclopedia Dramatica is a parody site. Plenty of people have tried to shut them down before, it's unlikely to ever happen (and in my opinion, should never happen). If they have an offensive article about you, trying to get rid of it will probably make it worse. I don't think anyone has actually tried to shut them down, as anyone who could is familiar with parody. They are not immune to libel suits and there is reason to believe the queen bee lives in the UK. However, that said, it's a waste of time. They may, however, be more responsive to complaints than is generally believed. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
on 10/22/10 10:11 AM, Fred Bauder at fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: This is a public list for discussion of matters which concern and affect the Wikimedia Foundation. It is open to supporters and critics of our projects; to novices and old hands. I am listening, and do hear what you are saying, Fred. But banishment from something, whether it be from a working project or a country, means that person is being openly, or even surreptitiously, destructive of the body, the substance, of the project or country, not merely being critical of it. Has either of these persons, Greg or Peter, been destructive of the substance of the Project: the body of the Encyclopedia? And could we please stop the disingenuousness of calling what is clearly censorship, moderation? And, when someone's constant (and seemingly only) answer to anyone who doesn't agree with them is to call them a name - like troll, the accusation should bounce right back to the accuser. In psychology it's called projection. Marc ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net wrote: I am listening, and do hear what you are saying, Fred. But banishment from something, whether it be from a working project or a country, means that person is being openly, or even surreptitiously, destructive of the body, the substance, of the project or country, not merely being critical of it. Has either of these persons, Greg or Peter, been destructive of the substance of the Project: the body of the Encyclopedia? That is, in fact, exactly what we, the list administrators, finally concluded. A minor correction, however: it was his contribution to the mailing list we were assessing, not to Wikipedia or any other project. (Though, given that he's been banned from at least two of them, that would have been a much easier case to make.) Greg Kohs went beyond being merely critical (which is welcome, and even encouraged) to the point of being antisocial and counterproductive. He did so to such an extent that it was actively preventing civil discourse. And could we please stop the disingenuousness of calling what is clearly censorship, moderation? Moderation is the technical term for it, and and you can call it censorship if you like, but your term carries an obvious bias. I've been taking time out of my day to regularly log into the list administration interface to make sure nobody's posts were unnecessarily delayed, and I personally haven't rejected a single one from Peter Damian so far. I expect that we'll probably take him off moderation soon, if only to relieve the burden on the administrators. And, when someone's constant (and seemingly only) answer to anyone who doesn't agree with them is to call them a name - like troll, the accusation should bounce right back to the accuser. In psychology it's called projection. The funny thing about projection, of course, is that it's so easy to call it out as recursive. Austin ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
People on ED are exactly the same as 4chan: they are in it for the lulz.[1] They will probably always write these attack pages/satire/whatever term you prefer. We're mostly pretty odd folk, so it's easy to make fun. But giving them attention of any kind is what they want most, since it gives them an opportunity for more mischief (and thus more lulz). In other words, don't feed. Steven Walling 1. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=lulz On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: Whatever happened to freedom of speech? Encyclopedia Dramatica is a parody site. Plenty of people have tried to shut them down before, it's unlikely to ever happen (and in my opinion, should never happen). If they have an offensive article about you, trying to get rid of it will probably make it worse. I don't think anyone has actually tried to shut them down, as anyone who could is familiar with parody. They are not immune to libel suits and there is reason to believe the queen bee lives in the UK. However, that said, it's a waste of time. They may, however, be more responsive to complaints than is generally believed. Fred ___ 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] Ban and moderate
I support the list admins in making this assessment. I dont think it is very productive to then discuss every assessment on this list. So if we agree that moderation might be necessary under certain circumstances, if we agree what circumstances those are and who should be the list admins (or at least there are no major objections of 33% of the members of this list), then I suggest we leave it with that. These circumstances have been discussed several times on this list, but if you need to discuss something, please stick to those abstract circumstances, and dont go into specific cases. I think that might actually carry some value for the future. Best, Lodewijk 2010/10/22 Muhammad Yahia shipmas...@gmail.com On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:54 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 October 2010 08:19, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote: If you are counting votes, please count mine for moderation. +1 Seriously, this list is commonly referred to as troll-l and lots of chapter people refuse to even look at it. Pulling it out of the mire might make it even slightly useful again. +1 from me too. I would also like to add that labeling someone a troll doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't provide good criticism, it's just that he presents it in the most time consuming and destructive way possible. I am personally interested in some of the criticism Kohs put forward, but I am against his tactics. We had a troll on ar.wp who was pretty similar in tactics, it took months of debate about freedom and censorship etc. and a few good editors actually quitting before we banned him. And it took a few more months of sock-puppeting for him to actually give up, and looking back at this humongous waste of the time for all parties involved, I wonder if the couple of points he was making were even worth it, we do have people who are capable of presenting criticism in a civil manner, so it's not about 'opinion'. I believe WP:POINT and WP:GAME should apply to any medium we are trying to constructively work together. -- Best Regards, Muhammad Yahia ___ 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] Ban and moderate
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote: If you are counting votes, please count mine for moderation. +1. Although I am not privy to all of Mr. Koh's engagements with the community, he has certainly made himself notorious for polemical disruption over various Wikimedia projects and forums. Allegations of censorship are misplaced. He will, without a doubt, continue to blog about Wikimedia and interested members can relay anything worthy of being read without the kerfuffle. Anirudh Bhati 00 91 9328712208 Skype: anirudhsbh ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 4:44 PM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: Encyc. Dramatica seems too take pride in creating attack pages regarding Wikipedians. Of course they are exposing themselves to libel suits but wow, now I have an excuse to finally look at this page! I did not look at the p0nr pages that were posted last time on this list, but this ED might be worth reading. Up till now, only 15 year old hyperactive kids talked about ED, but now it is serious business, it is on the WMFL! thanks, mike ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: People on ED are exactly the same as 4chan: they are in it for the lulz.[1] They will probably always write these attack pages/satire/whatever term you prefer. We're mostly pretty odd folk, so it's easy to make fun. But giving them attention of any kind is what they want most, since it gives them an opportunity for more mischief (and thus more lulz). In other words, don't feed. Unless they are exposing sensitive and private information (facts) about you or someone you know. Anirudh Bhati 00 91 9328712208 Skype: anirudhsbh ___ 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] Attack pages at Encyc. Dramatica
Like Steven said ED is in it for the lulz. So please don't feed the trolls (I know a few editors from en:wp that are on ED). In terms of legal standing, US has much less plaintiff-friendly Defamation laws than most European Countries, and most differ widely from state to state. I don't think you would have an easy case in any jurisdiction. Think of it along the lines Celebrity blogs, Probably congratulate those who have their own page on ED. LULZ abound. Regards Theo On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: People on ED are exactly the same as 4chan: they are in it for the lulz.[1] They will probably always write these attack pages/satire/whatever term you prefer. We're mostly pretty odd folk, so it's easy to make fun. But giving them attention of any kind is what they want most, since it gives them an opportunity for more mischief (and thus more lulz). In other words, don't feed. Unless they are exposing sensitive and private information (facts) about you or someone you know. Anirudh Bhati 00 91 9328712208 Skype: anirudhsbh ___ 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
Mike Godwin will be missed by the WMF. It's a fact that he never lost a case in this position with the WMF. H.N. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
Austin Hair, you have very recently publicly stated: Greg Kohs went beyond being merely critical (which is welcome, and even encouraged) to the point of being antisocial and counterproductive. This is in follow-up to calling him completely unable to keep contributions civil. In the past, David Gerard has insinuated that he is a dick on the list you moderate. Phoebe Ayers has hinted that harassment may be a problem of his. Neither member of the list has been publicly rebuked by any on your moderating team, though their insinuations are offensive to us. However, you were asked privately, and Samuel Klein as well, to please point out what has been uncivil (and now antisocial) about any of the last five of Kohs' posts to the Foundation-l mailing list. You have failed to respond to that question. Samuel has failed to respond to that question. So, I ask here, what has been uncivil or antisocial about any of the most recent five of Kohs' posts to Foundation-l? http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061602.html http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061461.html http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061456.html http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060702.html http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060441.html This should take no more than 3 or 4 minutes of your time. You refuse to take that time, yet you find the time to label Kohs antisocial (which is really quite comical, considering his expansive list of friends on Facebook). How many hours have already been wasted on Foundation-l, thanks to your recent judgment? How many more hours will be wasted as we move forward with the next steps? (You don't really think this is over, do you? Kohs will likely return with sockpuppets on the mailing list. He is relentless when prodded.) Or, you could just admit that you've made a mistake, apologize, and then we all move on. He's already gotten bored with Wikisource, Wikibooks, and Wikiversity, where he's been unblocked -- and yet given excellent free content before he faded off. H.N. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
Sad news. I remember an office hour with Mike Godwin, competent and sympathetic. Best wishes Ziko 2010/10/22 Houston Navarro houstonnava...@gmail.com: Mike Godwin will be missed by the WMF. It's a fact that he never lost a case in this position with the WMF. H.N. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- Ziko van Dijk Niederlande ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net wrote: Has either of these persons, Greg or Peter, been destructive of the substance of the Project: the body of the Encyclopedia? Yes, in my opinion. Both were banned from English language Wikipedia and (I believe) other projects, for content and behavioral reasons. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
hah, can we pre-order? I would also like to add my voice to those offering appreciation for all your good works, Mike. - Original Message - From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:22 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation On 21 October 2010 20:18, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: I would also like to add my gratitude to Mike for his years of useful service. It is hard to imagine who could be a suitable replacement. Having been privileged to see some of the breathtaking thngs Mike pulled off for Wikimedia that cannot as yet be spoken of, I can only hope that he has a memoir stored up for release in thirty years ... - d. ___ 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] Paid editing, was Re: Ban and moderate
Kohs will likely return with sockpuppets on the mailing list. He is relentless when prodded.) H.N. Yes, but he is relentless when not prodded. Unless we chose to open up Wikipedia to paid editing of the sort he does he will probably continue to be relentless. When I was checking out thekohser on freelancer.com I found a couple of other Wikipedia editors who were bidding on contracts to edit Wikipedia for money. One, who had completed two contracts and had accepted a third, seems to have given up. The other seems to be an excellent editor, but at this point I have not identified a particular contract of theirs. The question remains: what do we expect of someone who edits Wikipedia, or any other foundation project, for money. And frankly, why would we make trouble for someone living in Bangladesh that is earning what is a month's salary there, $30, in return for adding an article about some marginally notable business to Wikipedia? Our policies remain somewhat unclear, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28policy%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28guideline%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28guideline%29/Noticeboard And the Reward Board: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reward_board#Money These examples are from the English Wikipedia, but potentially apply to any foundation project. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Paid editing, was Re: Ban and moderate
Since the can of worms has been opened... In my opinion, which ironically is probably similar to Greg Kohs', having any stance on paid editing of Wikipedia is pointless. Most large companies and organizations are already paying people to edit Wikipedia (albeit quietly). The ones we know about and complain about are the companies that are too small to do it in-house and try to outsource it. Any policy we enact is going to be ignored by the people doing it quietly and will only affect the people doing it publicly (like Kohs). The only way we can be effective in this regard is to strengthen our COI, NPOV, OR, and V policies to minimize misuse of Wikipedia (paid or not). That said, I still believe that Kohs has gone far beyond being a useful critic. Yes, he has points that are worth discussion, but that doesn't mean we have to overlook his disruptive behavior. He clearly has an axe to grind and intends to grind it. We don't have to facilitate that. Ryan Kaldari On 10/22/10 2:04 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: Yes, but he is relentless when not prodded. Unless we chose to open up Wikipedia to paid editing of the sort he does he will probably continue to be relentless. When I was checking out thekohser on freelancer.com I found a couple of other Wikipedia editors who were bidding on contracts to edit Wikipedia for money. One, who had completed two contracts and had accepted a third, seems to have given up. The other seems to be an excellent editor, but at this point I have not identified a particular contract of theirs. The question remains: what do we expect of someone who edits Wikipedia, or any other foundation project, for money. And frankly, why would we make trouble for someone living in Bangladesh that is earning what is a month's salary there, $30, in return for adding an article about some marginally notable business to Wikipedia? Our policies remain somewhat unclear, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28policy%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28guideline%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28guideline%29/Noticeboard And the Reward Board: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reward_board#Money These examples are from the English Wikipedia, but potentially apply to any foundation project. Fred ___ 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] Paid editing, was Re: Ban and moderate
Obviously, the ones who do better at it are the ones we cannot detect. My experience is that some in-house PR people do a very poor and easily detectable job. An expert specialist who knows what is actually wanted will do far better than a PR generalist who approaches it like any other PR. I have, however, seen some PR people from institutions learn the merits of entering a purely factual description and of doing only articles on the notable people there, not the borderline ones. On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: Since the can of worms has been opened... In my opinion, which ironically is probably similar to Greg Kohs', having any stance on paid editing of Wikipedia is pointless. Most large companies and organizations are already paying people to edit Wikipedia (albeit quietly). The ones we know about and complain about are the companies that are too small to do it in-house and try to outsource it. Any policy we enact is going to be ignored by the people doing it quietly and will only affect the people doing it publicly (like Kohs). The only way we can be effective in this regard is to strengthen our COI, NPOV, OR, and V policies to minimize misuse of Wikipedia (paid or not). That said, I still believe that Kohs has gone far beyond being a useful critic. Yes, he has points that are worth discussion, but that doesn't mean we have to overlook his disruptive behavior. He clearly has an axe to grind and intends to grind it. We don't have to facilitate that. Ryan Kaldari On 10/22/10 2:04 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: Yes, but he is relentless when not prodded. Unless we chose to open up Wikipedia to paid editing of the sort he does he will probably continue to be relentless. When I was checking out thekohser on freelancer.com I found a couple of other Wikipedia editors who were bidding on contracts to edit Wikipedia for money. One, who had completed two contracts and had accepted a third, seems to have given up. The other seems to be an excellent editor, but at this point I have not identified a particular contract of theirs. The question remains: what do we expect of someone who edits Wikipedia, or any other foundation project, for money. And frankly, why would we make trouble for someone living in Bangladesh that is earning what is a month's salary there, $30, in return for adding an article about some marginally notable business to Wikipedia? Our policies remain somewhat unclear, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28policy%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28guideline%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid_editing_%28guideline%29/Noticeboard And the Reward Board: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reward_board#Money These examples are from the English Wikipedia, but potentially apply to any foundation project. Fred ___ 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 -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Paid editing, was Re: Ban and moderate
Obviously, the ones who do better at it are the ones we cannot detect. It is not so much that they cannot be detected, after all their editing has purpose and they are usually both aggressive and persistent. However, adequate demonstration of such patterns of activity to other administrators, or ultimately, to a committee is not trivial. The essential clue is that they have a strong point of view about something that no ordinary person would be exercised about, some company or product with public relations deficits. Ultimately, pursuit of any but the most clumsy is hard thankless work. Beating on the clumsy, is, of course, a necessary task if only to correct bad editing. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Page views
On 22 Oct 2010, at 02:02, Erik Zachte wrote: A quick update on our inflated page view stats: Ryan's hypothesis that deployment of the new CentralNotice banner loader had something to do with it has been confirmed. So those extra page views were actually internally generated requests, which accessed just two new special pages in huge amounts. Special:BannerController and Special:BannerListLoader http://stats.grok.se/en/201010/Special%3ABannerListLoader http://stats.grok.se/en/201010/Special%3ABannerController I'm a little surprised that those numbers are so low. ~70 million page views a day is only about 10-15 times the number of page views that the en.wp main page gets, and is way less than the number of page views that Wikipedia gets each day. It's also surprising that the two pages get different numbers of page views a day. Is there caching going on here, or are these pages not loaded upon every access to the site via other means (are they only called by the occasional centralnotice perhaps)? Mike Peel ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:45 AM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks, I want to let you know that as of this Friday, October 22, 2010, Mike Godwin will be leaving his role as General Counsel for the Wikimedia Foundation. ...snip... The search for his successor will begin immediately. It's being conducted by the recruiting firm m|Oppenheim. ...snip... -- Sue Gardner Just a matter of inquiry, why didn't the search start when Mike handed in his notice, compared to now when he has left? With a role like this wouldn't it make sense to have it refilled as soon as possible to give the best chance of a change over period? -Peachey ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Page views
The CentralNotice pages/js use client-side caching, so not ever page view will actually spawn a new request to the squid servers. Ryan Kaldari On 10/22/10 4:00 PM, Michael Peel wrote: On 22 Oct 2010, at 02:02, Erik Zachte wrote: A quick update on our inflated page view stats: Ryan's hypothesis that deployment of the new CentralNotice banner loader had something to do with it has been confirmed. So those extra page views were actually internally generated requests, which accessed just two new special pages in huge amounts. Special:BannerController and Special:BannerListLoader http://stats.grok.se/en/201010/Special%3ABannerListLoader http://stats.grok.se/en/201010/Special%3ABannerController I'm a little surprised that those numbers are so low. ~70 million page views a day is only about 10-15 times the number of page views that the en.wp main page gets, and is way less than the number of page views that Wikipedia gets each day. It's also surprising that the two pages get different numbers of page views a day. Is there caching going on here, or are these pages not loaded upon every access to the site via other means (are they only called by the occasional centralnotice perhaps)? Mike Peel ___ 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
K. Peachey wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:45 AM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks, I want to let you know that as of this Friday, October 22, 2010, Mike Godwin will be leaving his role as General Counsel for the Wikimedia Foundation. ...snip... The search for his successor will begin immediately. It's being conducted by the recruiting firm m|Oppenheim. ...snip... -- Sue Gardner Just a matter of inquiry, why didn't the search start when Mike handed in his notice, compared to now when he has left? With a role like this wouldn't it make sense to have it refilled as soon as possible to give the best chance of a change over period? -Peachey I think it's clear in the original announcement that this isn't a clean break, but will be phased pending appointment of a replacement for Mike. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Paid editing, was Re: Ban and moderate
No. You underestimate their subtlety and professionalism.. See Durova, at http://searchengineland.com/seo-tips-tactics-from-a-wikipedia-insider-11715 . I am aware of editing by paid editing that is neither aggressive nor inappropriate. Really good PR people can learn to be careful not to express a POV when they know they are not supposed to. On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: Obviously, the ones who do better at it are the ones we cannot detect. It is not so much that they cannot be detected, after all their editing has purpose and they are usually both aggressive and persistent. However, adequate demonstration of such patterns of activity to other administrators, or ultimately, to a committee is not trivial. The essential clue is that they have a strong point of view about something that no ordinary person would be exercised about, some company or product with public relations deficits. Ultimately, pursuit of any but the most clumsy is hard thankless work. Beating on the clumsy, is, of course, a necessary task if only to correct bad editing. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
I would think the people who think this list is useless have already unsubscribed. Can't please everyone. On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, People who appreciate an upgrade from totally useless... obviously... Thanks, GerardM On 22 October 2010 14:27, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:54 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Seriously, this list is commonly referred to as troll-l and lots of chapter people refuse to even look at it. Pulling it out of the mire might make it even slightly useful again. Who want's a list that's slightly useful? ___ 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] Ban and moderate
On 10/22/2010 09:27 AM, Muhammad Yahia wrote: I wonder if the couple of points he was making were even worth it, we do have people who are capable of presenting criticism in a civil manner, so it's not about 'opinion'. I believe WP:POINT and WP:GAME should apply to any medium we are trying to constructively work together. Muhammad, I found this part of your email especially compelling. There is no lack of people on our public email lists with a variety of opinions, and have no hesitation in sharing them, who don't otherwise engage in abusive or disruptive behavior. Cary ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Paid editing, was Re: Ban and moderate
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 23:57, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: Obviously, the ones who do better at it are the ones we cannot detect. My experience is that some in-house PR people do a very poor and easily detectable job. An expert specialist who knows what is actually wanted will do far better than a PR generalist who approaches it like any other PR. I have, however, seen some PR people from institutions learn the merits of entering a purely factual description and of doing only articles on the notable people there, not the borderline ones. I had, actually, good experiences with PR agencies. Last two years I had contact with a couple of them. I was explaining to them how to write articles which would stay on Wikipedia. For free, while there were soft pressure to take money. They are usually much more reasonable than ordinary POV-pushers. They want to do their job and nothing more. It is our interest to have them as editors and to know that they are editing. They are doing useful job. At last, they are contributing their knowledge to the free knowledge pool. As Ryan said, many companies are doing that already. Some of them are doing that in-house, some of them are doing that via PR companies. Just the smallest ones are doing that at market. And it is not just about companies, but about politicians and various state structures. So, the question is not do we want that, as it will be no matter do we want, but how to incorporate them in the best interest of our projects. Explaining to them what the rules are,. what is acceptable and what is not -- should be our first priority in this area. If we stay where we are, at the top of informational sources on Internet, I think that we would have more and more PR departments and agencies as our editors. And the best way is to build an efficient framework for such environment. I don't know how it should look exactly, but I think that we are already doing a good job, as we are not making witch hunts against them. The most of our editors are not core ones and the most of them have some interest to edit Wikimedia projects. Interest could be a passion, showing the truth, self-promotion, but it could be money, too. And we don't want to push away our editors. I think that the field for professional Wikipedians are exactly PR departments and agencies. And I prefer much more to see two or more professionals who are arguing by using facts, than two or more amateur POV-pushers whose best argument are personal attacks. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ban and moderate
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Cary Bass c...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 10/22/2010 09:27 AM, Muhammad Yahia wrote: I wonder if the couple of points he was making were even worth it, we do have people who are capable of presenting criticism in a civil manner, so it's not about 'opinion'. I believe WP:POINT and WP:GAME should apply to any medium we are trying to constructively work together. Muhammad, I found this part of your email especially compelling. There is no lack of people on our public email lists with a variety of opinions, and have no hesitation in sharing them, who don't otherwise engage in abusive or disruptive behavior. Cary I didn't mean to imply otherwise Cary, I was just alluding to the fact that those people exist, on wiki or on mailing list, as opposed to what he is doing. -- Best Regards, Muhammad Yahia ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
