Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
"Kurt Maxwell Weber" wrote in message news:200901281218.09438@armory.com... > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 03:26, Jay Litwyn wrote: >> Not in the case of an adult banned user and a SEEMINGLY unresponsive ISP. >> If anything, since one guy seems to hav openned a channel to Verizon's >> abuse department, the problem might go away. I do not see any other way >> to >> do it, because police do not figure into the equation, as far as I hav >> seen >> in this guy's history. In short, "How would you do it?". >> > Yes, because a website is a WAY WAY WAY more important concern than the > privacy of a real person. The phone number through Fran Rogers was a more personal release, and even in the presence of an answering machine, it could be more effective. I am more concerned with how feasible it is to reduce the load on personnel. I am sure these volunteers would rather spend time writing signal than cancelling noise. ___ I FOUND JESUS! He was in my trunk when I got back from Tijuana. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
I think Brittanica's model *could* have worked if Wikipedia hadn't appeared on the scene. I, revealing that I am an old fart, ( as if you couldn't tell by my cantankerous moods), bought the complete Brittanica when I was just a pup (more or less) and paid about $900 for it them. (To you brits that's roughly in the neighborhood of 450 to 550 pounds). This was about twenty *cough* years ago. And I still have those. About 40 volumes with the Macropedia as well and a few annuals in case you know anyone looking for boat ballast. I used to consult them more than daily. Now I consult them about once a month if that, usually when I find something strikingly bizarre in-project. Google Books has essentially removed any need to consult hard print anymore at least in *my* field. At any rate, about ten years after I had purchased the set, they then came out with the full set on CD. But the catch, just in case people wanted to copy it and sell it or give it away free to their dearest friends, was that you had to also buy this hardware piece of woggle-mucky-mucky-junk whatever, that you plugged into one of your external plugs. Your computer saw that thingie bob, and said "Oh you have a legit copy". So they made sure there was no way to get it free. That version had popped down to a measly $250. Of course they didn't have to kill any trees or pay guys to lug 100 pounds of books door-to-door to sell it. After they had put their work up online, they realized that their ad revenue wasn't tip-top and to try to lure bloggers, they started giving away FREE subscriptions to online content creators. The details weren't clear, so I applied, and they gave me one. So I have been able to read the online content for free for a while, their intent being that I should cite, in my writings, to their articles, and thus get more people to click over into their content. Obviously to drive their ad revenue. But does this work? One of the rather interesting problems with that is, I don't mind citing the EB for main references, but in today's world, we frequently cite many inline citations to incidental things: "Yesterday in [[Arkansas]], a [[serial killer]] was apprehended declaring that she was driven by insanity and the prevalence of online [[pornography]]." When citing in-project we can easily use the double-brackets, but when writing off-project, we have to cite to the full URL. So what does Wikipedia allow for this? URLs like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/serial_killer What does EB use for this? URLs like http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/34888/Arkansas another dumb move on their part. I'm not going to *actually look up* the URL for every incidental article citation. Our project makes it easy to create incidental citations, because you don't have to actually *search* out each one. Will Johnson ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
You don't need to publish that unless you/we plan to use it as evidence for a report to his ISP. What I mean is the socks and IP ranges should be kept track of in some manner somewhere if it is intended to be reported to his ISP and of course the normal amount required for admins to act on the information. (what information is released needs to be kept somewhere easy to search (SSP)) Further tracking of his activity is probably better done on wikipedia (using a case named for him in WP:SSP). I don't think much more can be done or said about him on this thread. On 1/29/09, Sam Korn wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz > wrote: >> If you have *working* ideas feel free to tell us, we have already >> programmed bots that do nothing but look for his vandalism. We *have* >> done everything we possibly can on wiki that I can think of. The only >> on wiki action left to us is to block all of his ISP from editing. If >> you have alternative ideas speak out. >> >> To those on this thread, possibly move this to a page on wikipedia >> (the proxy project, or a case in his name on WP:SSP) Regardless some >> of his information needs to be published so we can deal with him. (on >> wikipedia or here makes no difference, both are public) > > Wikis have this advantage of being editable, of course... > > Name, location, IP address, everything, though? This is completely > pointless. I fail to see any fashion in which publishing such > information aids the effort to counter him. I am not blind to the > problems he has caused -- I have spent no little time in dealing with > him -- but I will not agree that this thread and the complete > disregard for private data that it has contained are useful or > justifiable. > > Sam > > -- > Sam > PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- Sent from my mobile device User:Nixeagle on all wikimedia foundation wikis. Administrator on English wikipedia and meta. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
Being bold here and expounding a little. If any of you have read the history of encyclopedias *Britannica* put out in its "Macropedia" from a few years ago, it's been clear their management has been living in a dream world. They go on at length about quaint little experiments from the 1980s, while neglecting to mention the existence of Wikipedia as it swam into their river and chomped on *Britannica's* market share like a swarm of piranhas. Meanwhile they portrayed themselves as a 'portal to the Internet', reflecting a top-down information management mentality that's obsolete to anyone who's ever heard of Google. Bottom line for that organization: they may be cream of the crop as encyclopedias go, but in terms of general reliability hierarchies that's kind of like being the best in cuisine at microwave dinners. If the competition is nearly as good and free, why should the public pay to get their service? Their business plan never accounted for that possibility. After the *Nature* study it looked very curious that, five months later, * Britannica* management revived interest in dead news by publishing a bitter rebuttal. That was lousy PR. And the head-to-head with Jimbo in the Wall Street Journal shortly afterward made it clear--with minimal reading between the lines--that ol' *B* must have been hurting financially. A venerable institution doesn't act that counterintuitively unless it's hemmorhaging readership and money. Privately, I've been telling people for years that I doubt their business plan could survive another decade. They may have embraced wiki-ish modifications, but it's too little too late. They should have anticipated the Internet's real potential twelve years ago. Headlines may say 'Watch out Wikipedia', but Alexa says differently. How many of you are shelling out hard cash to read *Britannica* online? Raise your hands. Yeah, just about none. Sayonara, Durova On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:20 PM, wrote: > <<-Original Message- > From: Ray Saintonge > To: English Wikipedia > Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:52 pm > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0 > > wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > > < >> I had sent him a scathing email denigrating him for not allowing > direct user edits. > >> > >> For some time, they allowed you to *email* them additions and > corrections, > >> > >> and I pointed out how ridiculously last decade that was. And how > if they > >> don't shape up ...like now dude they would be history. Buried > by Wikipedia. > >> > >> I notice they didn't mention my name in that article however. > Shameless! > >> > > It's hard to see what will be accomplished by taunting them in this > way. > > Rubbing dirt in the faces of the losers is not particularly > dignified. > > If we really are the winners we need to be more gracious about it.>> > > > > Then you're not understanding what occurred. > > What was accomplished is that they *now* allow contributors to make > direct > > edits to the articles. > > They didn't before. > > > Sorry, but I hadn't realised that they had done all this just because > of > your letter. :-[ > > Ec>> > - > > Of course! > Everything revolves around me and my needs and desires. > The rest of creation in fact is just part of a dream I keep having. > > W.J. "formerly the Artist" > > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- http://durova.blogspot.com/ ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Why infoboxes are good
Hehe good one -- Alvaro On 29-01-2009, at 22:51, Mark Wagner wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:02, Luna wrote: >> Any band article with an infobox tends to attract >> small-time battles over the specific list of genres to include, >> too, I've >> noticed > > I've always thought the proper solution to this is to hardcode the > "genre" line to read "music" -- although I suppose this would lead to > edit wars over the use of such infoboxes in articles on rappers. > > -- > Mark > [[User:Carnildo]] > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Why infoboxes are good
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:02, Luna wrote: > Any band article with an infobox tends to attract > small-time battles over the specific list of genres to include, too, I've > noticed I've always thought the proper solution to this is to hardcode the "genre" line to read "music" -- although I suppose this would lead to edit wars over the use of such infoboxes in articles on rappers. -- Mark [[User:Carnildo]] ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
Something that would definitely help is to have more CUs around when he attacks. That way we can dig up more sleepers and block the proxies that he's been using. According to Luna he was using one proxy for at least a month before it was blocked. - Chris On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Sam Korn wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz > wrote: > > If you have *working* ideas feel free to tell us, we have already > > programmed bots that do nothing but look for his vandalism. We *have* > > done everything we possibly can on wiki that I can think of. The only > > on wiki action left to us is to block all of his ISP from editing. If > > you have alternative ideas speak out. > > > > To those on this thread, possibly move this to a page on wikipedia > > (the proxy project, or a case in his name on WP:SSP) Regardless some > > of his information needs to be published so we can deal with him. (on > > wikipedia or here makes no difference, both are public) > > Wikis have this advantage of being editable, of course... > > Name, location, IP address, everything, though? This is completely > pointless. I fail to see any fashion in which publishing such > information aids the effort to counter him. I am not blind to the > problems he has caused -- I have spent no little time in dealing with > him -- but I will not agree that this thread and the complete > disregard for private data that it has contained are useful or > justifiable. > > Sam > > -- > Sam > PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: > If you have *working* ideas feel free to tell us, we have already > programmed bots that do nothing but look for his vandalism. We *have* > done everything we possibly can on wiki that I can think of. The only > on wiki action left to us is to block all of his ISP from editing. If > you have alternative ideas speak out. > > To those on this thread, possibly move this to a page on wikipedia > (the proxy project, or a case in his name on WP:SSP) Regardless some > of his information needs to be published so we can deal with him. (on > wikipedia or here makes no difference, both are public) Wikis have this advantage of being editable, of course... Name, location, IP address, everything, though? This is completely pointless. I fail to see any fashion in which publishing such information aids the effort to counter him. I am not blind to the problems he has caused -- I have spent no little time in dealing with him -- but I will not agree that this thread and the complete disregard for private data that it has contained are useful or justifiable. Sam -- Sam PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
If you have *working* ideas feel free to tell us, we have already programmed bots that do nothing but look for his vandalism. We *have* done everything we possibly can on wiki that I can think of. The only on wiki action left to us is to block all of his ISP from editing. If you have alternative ideas speak out. To those on this thread, possibly move this to a page on wikipedia (the proxy project, or a case in his name on WP:SSP) Regardless some of his information needs to be published so we can deal with him. (on wikipedia or here makes no difference, both are public) On 1/29/09, Sam Korn wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Chris Down > wrote: >>> >>> It is the policy of Wikimedia that personally identifiable data collected >>> in the server logs, or through records in the database via the CheckUser >>> feature, or through other non-publicly-available methods, may be released >>> by >>> Wikimedia volunteers or staff, in any of the following situations: >>> >>>1. In response to a valid subpoena or other compulsory request from >>> law >>>enforcement, >>>2. With permission of the affected user, >>>3. When necessary for investigation of abuse complaints, >>>4. Where the information pertains to page views generated by a spider >>>or bot and its dissemination is necessary to illustrate or resolve >>> technical >>>issues, >>>5. *Where the user has been vandalizing articles or persistently >>>behaving in a disruptive way, data may be released to a service >>> provider, >>>carrier, or other third-party entity to assist in the targeting of IP >>>blocks, or to assist in the formulation of a complaint to relevant >>> Internet >>>Service Providers,* >>>6. Where it is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or >>>safety of the Wikimedia Foundation, its users or the public. >>> >> Am I missing something? > > No. But it is common sense that we should do the least amount > possible to sort the problem out. The publication of private data in > a thread like this is completely unnecessary. Repeat: it is quite > within the privacy policy to reveal this info to Verizon (and even > publicly on-wiki, if an IP block is helpful). This thread is > completely gratuitous and unnecessary. > > I very strongly believe we should not be vindictive in our dealing > with problematic users. We should seek to sort out our problems, not > to cause problems for others, no matter how many problems they've > caused us. > > Sam > > -- > Sam > PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- Sent from my mobile device User:Nixeagle on all wikimedia foundation wikis. Administrator on English wikipedia and meta. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
<<-Original Message- From: Ray Saintonge To: English Wikipedia Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:52 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0 wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > <> I had sent him a scathing email denigrating him for not allowing direct user edits. >> >> For some time, they allowed you to *email* them additions and corrections, >> >> and I pointed out how ridiculously last decade that was. And how if they >> don't shape up ...like now dude they would be history. Buried by Wikipedia. >> >> I notice they didn't mention my name in that article however. Shameless! >> > It's hard to see what will be accomplished by taunting them in this way. > Rubbing dirt in the faces of the losers is not particularly dignified. > If we really are the winners we need to be more gracious about it.>> > > Then you're not understanding what occurred. > What was accomplished is that they *now* allow contributors to make direct > edits to the articles. > They didn't before. > Sorry, but I hadn't realised that they had done all this just because of your letter. :-[ Ec>> - Of course! Everything revolves around me and my needs and desires. The rest of creation in fact is just part of a dream I keep having. W.J. "formerly the Artist" ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
-Original Message- From: Ray Saintonge To: English Wikipedia Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:45 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0 Keith Old wrote: > New features enabling the inclusion of this user-generated content will be > rolled out on the encyclopedia's website over the next 24 hours, * > Britannica's* president, Jorge Cauz, said in an interview today." (More in > story) > > That this is not a dead-tree encyclopedia is exactly the point. This is on their website. They do not plan to incorporate this material into their print version. Will ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
2009/1/29 Ray Saintonge : > Speed of updates may be a factor for current events, but I see nothing > to convince me that EB wants to enter that field. Nor do I see them as > competitors to upload the latest plot line of "Desperate Housewives" as > soon as it has aired. > > Has there been a survey of non-editing readers about the speed of > updates, and what that means to them? I suspect that their demands > would involve a significantly longer yardstick than the minute. It's > not as though we were a newspaper trying to get the latest scoop on its > competitor. Compared to Wikinews, Wikipedia should not need to feel that > pressure. Failing to keep up with deaths is something EB has taken flack for in the past. > I don't share your passion for instant gratification, a concept with > problems that extend far beyond the wikis. What you have a passion for doesn't really matter. What our driveby content adders have a passion for does. > With flagged revisions our > content writers would continue to see the results of their labours > immediately. False. Only logged in users will see them. > If they are any good at what they do they can also feel > confident that the general public will also soon see their changes. See the backlog of unpatrolled new pages. -- geni ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
geni wrote: > 2009/1/29 Ray Saintonge: > >> So what if it takes 3 weeks? So what if there are backlogs? Even >> accepting the premise that EB can maintain such a breakneck speed, >> whoever defined this as a race to do things more quickly? >> > Our readers and our content writers. Speed of updates is a feature > much liked by readers (and back when people where doing WPvsEB was > often used as a point in wikipedia's favor). > > For our content writers the instant results are a significant part of > their reward for contributing. > Speed of updates may be a factor for current events, but I see nothing to convince me that EB wants to enter that field. Nor do I see them as competitors to upload the latest plot line of "Desperate Housewives" as soon as it has aired. Has there been a survey of non-editing readers about the speed of updates, and what that means to them? I suspect that their demands would involve a significantly longer yardstick than the minute. It's not as though we were a newspaper trying to get the latest scoop on its competitor. Compared to Wikinews, Wikipedia should not need to feel that pressure. I don't share your passion for instant gratification, a concept with problems that extend far beyond the wikis. With flagged revisions our content writers would continue to see the results of their labours immediately. If they are any good at what they do they can also feel confident that the general public will also soon see their changes. Ian Woollard wrote: > Well, they have less users than us. They have less scope than us, and > they're probably growing more slowly than us, and they're not much > more reliable than us, and they require people paying them money to be > able to edit the articles as well as to read the articles. > In other words we're already far ahead of them. Having people pay for the right to edit can't be a winning strategy; that would justify a claim from our side that they are a vanity press. :-) > I'd say that there's a defacto race there, even if nobody has defined > it as such; they're trying to compete with a free, larger competitor > before going broke. > > > If EB is in a race to the bottom their gravity is the only help they need. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > <> I had sent him a scathing email denigrating him for not allowing direct >> user edits. >> >> For some time, they allowed you to *email* them additions and corrections, >> >> and I pointed out how ridiculously last decade that was. And how if they >> don't shape up ...like now dude they would be history. Buried by >> Wikipedia. >> >> I notice they didn't mention my name in that article however. Shameless! >> > It's hard to see what will be accomplished by taunting them in this way. > Rubbing dirt in the faces of the losers is not particularly dignified. > If we really are the winners we need to be more gracious about it.>> > > Then you're not understanding what occurred. > What was accomplished is that they *now* allow contributors to make direct > edits to the articles. > They didn't before. > Sorry, but I hadn't realised that they had done all this just because of your letter. :-[ Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
Keith Old wrote: > "In a move to take on Wikipedia, the *Encyclopedia Britannica* is inviting > the hoi polloi to edit, enhance and contribute to its online version. > > New features enabling the inclusion of this user-generated content will be > rolled out on the encyclopedia's website over the next 24 hours, * > Britannica's* president, Jorge Cauz, said in an interview today." (More in > story) > What's their business plan? Vetting the information to the standards they profess is going to take a considerable staff to keep up with the work that could in theory come their way. What will be their revenue source to sustain all this? There's a limited market for multi-volume dead-tree encyclopædias, and depending on advertising revenues in the middle of a global financial is not very secure. Maybe a sugar-daddy with bottomless pockets and insatiable vanity? Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Chris Down wrote: >> >> It is the policy of Wikimedia that personally identifiable data collected >> in the server logs, or through records in the database via the CheckUser >> feature, or through other non-publicly-available methods, may be released by >> Wikimedia volunteers or staff, in any of the following situations: >> >>1. In response to a valid subpoena or other compulsory request from law >>enforcement, >>2. With permission of the affected user, >>3. When necessary for investigation of abuse complaints, >>4. Where the information pertains to page views generated by a spider >>or bot and its dissemination is necessary to illustrate or resolve >> technical >>issues, >>5. *Where the user has been vandalizing articles or persistently >>behaving in a disruptive way, data may be released to a service provider, >>carrier, or other third-party entity to assist in the targeting of IP >>blocks, or to assist in the formulation of a complaint to relevant >> Internet >>Service Providers,* >>6. Where it is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or >>safety of the Wikimedia Foundation, its users or the public. >> > Am I missing something? No. But it is common sense that we should do the least amount possible to sort the problem out. The publication of private data in a thread like this is completely unnecessary. Repeat: it is quite within the privacy policy to reveal this info to Verizon (and even publicly on-wiki, if an IP block is helpful). This thread is completely gratuitous and unnecessary. I very strongly believe we should not be vindictive in our dealing with problematic users. We should seek to sort out our problems, not to cause problems for others, no matter how many problems they've caused us. Sam -- Sam PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
> > It is the policy of Wikimedia that personally identifiable data collected > in the server logs, or through records in the database via the CheckUser > feature, or through other non-publicly-available methods, may be released by > Wikimedia volunteers or staff, in any of the following situations: > >1. In response to a valid subpoena or other compulsory request from law >enforcement, >2. With permission of the affected user, >3. When necessary for investigation of abuse complaints, >4. Where the information pertains to page views generated by a spider >or bot and its dissemination is necessary to illustrate or resolve > technical >issues, >5. *Where the user has been vandalizing articles or persistently >behaving in a disruptive way, data may be released to a service provider, >carrier, or other third-party entity to assist in the targeting of IP >blocks, or to assist in the formulation of a complaint to relevant Internet >Service Providers,* >6. Where it is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or >safety of the Wikimedia Foundation, its users or the public. > > Am I missing something? - Chris On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Sam Korn wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Chris Down > wrote: > > Divulging his IP to his provider seems standard, advisable, and perfectly > > ethical. We aren't just talking about minor vandalism, he has inspired > > numerous copycats and has harassed (or his copycats have) many editors. > > > > I've not looked, but if our privacy policy disallows this even in such > > circumstances as this, we need to look at revising it. > > It does, very explicitly. Discussing it on an open, publicly archived > mailing list is a different matter and really seems quite unnecessary. > > -- > Sam > PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Chris Down wrote: > Divulging his IP to his provider seems standard, advisable, and perfectly > ethical. We aren't just talking about minor vandalism, he has inspired > numerous copycats and has harassed (or his copycats have) many editors. > > I've not looked, but if our privacy policy disallows this even in such > circumstances as this, we need to look at revising it. It does, very explicitly. Discussing it on an open, publicly archived mailing list is a different matter and really seems quite unnecessary. -- Sam PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Why infoboxes are good
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Mark Gallagher wrote: > As a reader, it's cool to quickly find the national motto of Burundi or the > height of Centrepoint Tower without having to read through paragraphs of > text. I love infoboxes! But also as a reader, it's distracting to have a > professional wrestler's "coach" or actress's bust size floating in the > corner of the screen. I hate infoboxes! I guess you can break that down to > say: it's nice when there is a consensus view of what a given infobox should > say; it's less nice when the people who populate the infoboxes have > different interests and values from you. > A point well taken. :) Any band article with an infobox tends to attract small-time battles over the specific list of genres to include, too, I've noticed -- these people never seem to bother with the prose, I suppose because they might then have to cite references from time to time. Thinking specifically of articles about nations, some of our larger infoboxes manage to get a bit overwhelming. Purely in the interest of brainstorming and discussion, is this good or bad? If it is bad, is there something we could do about it? Break the main infobox down a bit, put smaller infoboxes in major sections of the article? Put some information into split articles (say, all but basic economic info to an infobox on the [[Economy of Foo]] article)? Before we break out the torches and pitchforks, I wouldn't call these serious proposals, just looking for ideas. -Luna ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
2009/1/29 Ray Saintonge : > So what if it takes 3 weeks? So what if there are backlogs? Even > accepting the premise that EB can maintain such a breakneck speed, > whoever defined this as a race to do things more quickly? Our readers and our content writers. Speed of updates is a feature much liked by readers (and back when people where doing WPvsEB was often used as a point in wikipedia's favor). For our content writers the instant results are a significant part of their reward for contributing. -- geni ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
Divulging his IP to his provider seems standard, advisable, and perfectly ethical. We aren't just talking about minor vandalism, he has inspired numerous copycats and has harassed (or his copycats have) many editors. I've not looked, but if our privacy policy disallows this even in such circumstances as this, we need to look at revising it. - Chris On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: > If he wanted his privacy he should have heeded the warnings to cease > the excessive and rather annoying vandalism he does. I don't think > giving Verizon this information is a violation of our privacy policy > as we are doing so to stop persistant vandalism and abuse. He has had > plenty of chances to stop. > > On 1/28/09, Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote: > > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 03:26, Jay Litwyn wrote: > >> Not in the case of an adult banned user and a SEEMINGLY unresponsive > ISP. > >> If anything, since one guy seems to hav openned a channel to Verizon's > >> abuse department, the problem might go away. I do not see any other way > to > >> do it, because police do not figure into the equation, as far as I hav > >> seen > >> in this guy's history. In short, "How would you do it?". > >> > > Yes, because a website is a WAY WAY WAY more important concern than the > > privacy of a real person. > > -- > > Kurt Weber > > > > > > ___ > > WikiEN-l mailing list > > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > User:Nixeagle on all wikimedia foundation wikis. > Administrator on English wikipedia and meta. > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
On 29/01/2009, Ray Saintonge wrote: > So what if it takes 3 weeks? So what if there are backlogs? Even > accepting the premise that EB can maintain such a breakneck speed, > whoever defined this as a race to do things more quickly? Well, they have less users than us. They have less scope than us, and they're probably growing more slowly than us, and they're not much more reliable than us, and they require people paying them money to be able to edit the articles as well as to read the articles. I'd say that there's a defacto race there, even if nobody has defined it as such; they're trying to compete with a free, larger competitor before going broke. > Ec -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly imperfect world would be much better. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
the wub wrote: > Also fom the article: > "He said the encyclopedia had set a benchmark of a 20-minute > turnaround to update the site with user-submitted edits to existing > articles" > > That'll probably be faster than us once flagged revisions is switched > on (compare with the German expeiment, where backlogs are up to 3 > weeks) which should make for an interesting role reversal. > So what if it takes 3 weeks? So what if there are backlogs? Even accepting the premise that EB can maintain such a breakneck speed, whoever defined this as a race to do things more quickly? Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia
< wrote: > On another note... > Oh... my.. god becky! > > Thomas you look just like that one guy from Ferris Bueller's day off, > his sidekick who I don't know what the guy's name was. Cameron?>> That's it. Thomas Larsen looks like that guy. In a way of course. Will **From Wall Street to Main Street and everywhere in between, stay up-to-date with the latest news. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom0023) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
< I had sent him a scathing email denigrating him for not allowing direct user > edits. > > For some time, they allowed you to *email* them additions and corrections, > and I pointed out how ridiculously last decade that was. And how if they > don't shape up ...like now dude they would be history. Buried by Wikipedia. > > I notice they didn't mention my name in that article however. Shameless! > It's hard to see what will be accomplished by taunting them in this way. Rubbing dirt in the faces of the losers is not particularly dignified. If we really are the winners we need to be more gracious about it.>> Then you're not understanding what occurred. What was accomplished is that they *now* allow contributors to make direct edits to the articles. They didn't before. Will **From Wall Street to Main Street and everywhere in between, stay up-to-date with the latest news. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom0023) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 1/21/2009 keith...@gmail.com writes: > > New features enabling the inclusion of this user-generated content will be > rolled out on the encyclopedia's website over the next 24 hours, * > Britannica's* president, Jorge Cauz, said in an interview today." (More in > story)>> > - > I had sent him a scathing email denigrating him for not allowing direct user > edits. > > For some time, they allowed you to *email* them additions and corrections, > and I pointed out how ridiculously last decade that was. And how if they > don't shape up ...like now dude they would be history. Buried by > Wikipedia. > > I notice they didn't mention my name in that article however. Shameless! > It's hard to see what will be accomplished by taunting them in this way. Rubbing dirt in the faces of the losers is not particularly dignified. If we really are the winners we need to be more gracious about it. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
David Goodman wrote: > The combination of user generated content, user-based editorial > control, and free content is our characteristic. That doesn't mean > it's the best way for all purposes, or even that it will always be us > that implements it best. > > It is perfectly possible that if there were an equally free > encyclopedia that was equally comprehensive, but did have editorial > control in a more authoritarian conventional manner, that people might > prefer it for many or most purposes. Even so, we will have the > distinction for being not just the first large project of our sort, > but the one that stimulated change elsewhere. It's an acknowledgment > of our importance that we are influencing conventional publication > also. > > It's important that we learn from Britannica's history. Its current crisis is not the first time it's been on its deathbed. Its revival often depended on the injection of new management with new ideas. We have yet to figure out how to make our own rule-making processes dynamic. There's a natural tendency for majorities to be comfortably protectionist about their vicarious accomplishments. The status quo can have a warm and fuzzy feeling of the kind that makes babies reluctant to leave the womb. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
If he wanted his privacy he should have heeded the warnings to cease the excessive and rather annoying vandalism he does. I don't think giving Verizon this information is a violation of our privacy policy as we are doing so to stop persistant vandalism and abuse. He has had plenty of chances to stop. On 1/28/09, Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote: > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 03:26, Jay Litwyn wrote: >> Not in the case of an adult banned user and a SEEMINGLY unresponsive ISP. >> If anything, since one guy seems to hav openned a channel to Verizon's >> abuse department, the problem might go away. I do not see any other way to >> do it, because police do not figure into the equation, as far as I hav >> seen >> in this guy's history. In short, "How would you do it?". >> > Yes, because a website is a WAY WAY WAY more important concern than the > privacy of a real person. > -- > Kurt Weber > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- Sent from my mobile device User:Nixeagle on all wikimedia foundation wikis. Administrator on English wikipedia and meta. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > For instance that simian society has always had ways > of restricting access to intellectual property, not > limited to intentional obfuscation, initiatory methods > of knowledge access, and going all the way to the level > of intentionally making the information transmitted > faulty, just so you would have to make the leap of > intellectual discovery as to what precise way the > mechanism in question worked. Copyright *did* in fact > enable people to spell out in full detail what they had > discovered, because they had a reasonable expectation > that even if they didn't only pass on their knowledge to > their apprentices, somebody would protect their ability > to milk it for all it was worth... > What you are describing here is really about patents rather than copyrights. Patents protect ideas on behalf of the exploiters; copyrights only protect the way they are expressed. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Why infoboxes are good
On Jan 29, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Mark Gallagher wrote: > I tend to find the infoboxes alternately annoying and silly or > practical and awesome, depending on my frame of mind and purpose. One solution to the love/hate problem with infoboxes would be to add a hide/show preference... similar to NO_TOC. --Noah-- ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Subject: New technology, new errors
On 29 Jan 2009 at 10:45:32 +, Carcharoth wrote: > New technology, new ways to make errors, and hilarious edit summary: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=267165064 > > "Sorry my error in that reversion (actually killing a bug on my HP > touchscreen)." Looks like computer bugs have come full circle since this famous one from 1947: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:H96566k.jpg -- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/ ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:20 AM, wrote: > On another note... > Oh... my.. god becky! > > Thomas you look just like that one guy from Ferris Bueller's day off, > his sidekick who I don't know what the guy's name was. Cameron? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia
On another note... Oh... my.. god becky! Thomas you look just like that one guy from Ferris Bueller's day off, his sidekick who I don't know what the guy's name was. but you look like him. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia
Your Help or Community Portal page should describe your project. Your Welcome page isn't very informative about exactly how you are different from Wikipedia, or any other wiki for that matter. Almost all (or many) Wikis are free and global. Maybe you could describe somewhere on your site why you are more reliable or something. Also your About page is blank. By the way, just to humour me, why do you disallow account names with numbers, punctuation or domain names? I'm sure you must have a good reason, but I can't fathom it. Will -Original Message- From: Thomas Larsen To: English Wikipedia Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:39 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia Hi all, We now have over 100 articles and 25 contributors on the English-language main project. I'd like to stress that this project is open to participation, so feel free to check it out and contribute an article. :-) Have a good day, —Thomas Larsen ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Why infoboxes are good
G'day Luna, > I do think it's worth pointing out that literally every time I've > mentioned > dislike of infoboxes to non-WPians, the reply has been along the > lines of > "Why not? They're AWESOME!" I try to explain the objections, but > usually the > person is so set on the accessibility front that they can't see why > anyone > would want to avoid the boxes. > It's not just bots that want information in an easily parsed format. I think my perspective as (let's face it) an ex-Wikipedian is pretty similar to that of the common or garden-variety non-WP reader these days. (This may be why I've become significantly more of an inclusionist since I stopped creating --- and deleting --- articles). I tend to find the infoboxes alternately annoying and silly or practical and awesome, depending on my frame of mind and purpose. If I'm after specific information --- e.g. a recent case where a colleague and I were arguing over the population breakdown of the UK --- the infoboxes save me time and prevent confusion. If I'm just reading for the heck of it (cf. xkcd's "hours of fascinated clicking") they tend to be distracting. This is especially jarring in the case of subjects whose details don't break down easily into infoboxes, like real people. As a reader, it's cool to quickly find the national motto of Burundi or the height of Centrepoint Tower without having to read through paragraphs of text. I love infoboxes! But also as a reader, it's distracting to have a professional wrestler's "coach" or actress's bust size floating in the corner of the screen. I hate infoboxes! I guess you can break that down to say: it's nice when there is a consensus view of what a given infobox should say; it's less nice when the people who populate the infoboxes have different interests and values from you. Cheers, -- Mark Gallagher 0439 704 975 http://formonelane.net/ "Even potatoes have their bad days, Igor." --- Count Duckula ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Why infoboxes are good
G'day Luna, > I do think it's worth pointing out that literally every time I've > mentioned > dislike of infoboxes to non-WPians, the reply has been along the > lines of > "Why not? They're AWESOME!" I try to explain the objections, but > usually the > person is so set on the accessibility front that they can't see why > anyone > would want to avoid the boxes. > It's not just bots that want information in an easily parsed format. I think my perspective as (let's face it) an ex-Wikipedian is pretty similar to that of the common or garden-variety non-WP reader these days. (This may be why I've become significantly more of an inclusionist since I stopped creating --- and deleting --- articles). I tend to find the infoboxes alternately annoying and silly or practical and awesome, depending on my frame of mind and purpose. If I'm after specific information --- e.g. a recent case where a colleague and I were arguing over the population breakdown of the UK --- the infoboxes save me time and prevent confusion. If I'm just reading for the heck of it (cf. xkcd's "hours of fascinated clicking") they tend to be distracting. This is especially jarring in the case of subjects whose details don't break down easily into infoboxes, like real people. As a reader, it's cool to quickly find the national motto of Burundi or the height of Centrepoint Tower without having to read through paragraphs of text. I love infoboxes! But also as a reader, it's distracting to have a professional wrestler's "coach" or actress's bust size floating in the corner of the screen. I hate infoboxes! I guess you can break that down to say: it's nice when there is a consensus view of what a given infobox should say; it's less nice when the people who populate the infoboxes have different interests and values from you. Cheers, -- Mark Gallagher 0439 704 975 http://formonelane.net/ "Even potatoes have their bad days, Igor." --- Count Duckula ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] New technology, new errors
New technology, new ways to make errors, and hilarious edit summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=267165064 "Sorry my error in that reversion (actually killing a bug on my HP touchscreen)." I wonder if that's bad karma? Killing the bug, not the reversion. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Why infoboxes are good
I do think it's worth pointing out that literally every time I've mentioned dislike of infoboxes to non-WPians, the reply has been along the lines of "Why not? They're AWESOME!" I try to explain the objections, but usually the person is so set on the accessibility front that they can't see why anyone would want to avoid the boxes. It's not just bots that want information in an easily parsed format. -Luna On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Carcharoth wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 2:52 PM, David Gerard wrote: > > > http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2009/01/27/extracting-wikipedia-infoboxes-values-from-text/ > > Some infoboxes are designed for that sort of thing, some aren't. Some > have footnotes for example, and lots of flexibility, which makes it > harder, but not impossible, to parse the data. And some projects (for > good reason) still virulently reject infoboxes, mainly because people > who don't understand a particular subject try to force simplified > statements (i.e. sentences, not words or numbers) inside an infobox, > and lose nuance and context in the process, devaluing the article as a > whole (reading the full text is ultimately more educational). > > And not all such data is in infoboxes: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Metadata > > Something I tried to improve, which still needs expansion and TLC. > > Some areas of data are in separate templates (not infobox templates) > and some are in categories. > > I'd like to add some of the data-heavy infoboxes to that list, like > the ones in maths, physics, astronomy, geography, geology and > chemistry, and the other 'hard' sciences. Are any of those infoboxes > organised for the extraction of data the way the geographical co-ords > templates are? > > Carcharoth > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
Gwern Branwen wrote: >> In a message dated 1/21/2009 larsen.thoma...@gmail.com writes: >> >> >> What evidence do you have that an encyclopedia must be free? >> >> Society has existed for a few thousand years without a free encyclopedia. >> > A statement trivially true. Society has also existed for a few > thousand years without copyright, period. > > And for most of those few thousand years there were no printing presses. Copyright without printing presses was meaningless. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Announcing "Epistemia", a new wiki encyclopedia
Hi all, We now have over 100 articles and 25 contributors on the English-language main project. I'd like to stress that this project is open to participation, so feel free to check it out and contribute an article. :-) Have a good day, —Thomas Larsen ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Reporting Grawp to Verizon
On Wednesday 28 January 2009 03:26, Jay Litwyn wrote: > Not in the case of an adult banned user and a SEEMINGLY unresponsive ISP. > If anything, since one guy seems to hav openned a channel to Verizon's > abuse department, the problem might go away. I do not see any other way to > do it, because police do not figure into the equation, as far as I hav seen > in this guy's history. In short, "How would you do it?". > Yes, because a website is a WAY WAY WAY more important concern than the privacy of a real person. -- Kurt Weber ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
