Re: [WikiEN-l] Rank hath its privileges
Joe Szilagyi wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Sam Korn wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: To ray, you have a point, if it is a 3rd parties copyright, it is their fight. Generally though I don't like the thought of that ability being used to undelete stuff that is not helpful to this project and creates these sorts of distractions, but it is now his fight. I agree mostly with these sentiments. If there was a case to be made, I would argue that it should be presented as using the admin tools in a way likely to bring the project into disrepute. There has been no breach of our copyright policy, as the content was not posted on Wikipedia. I do not recall ever taking on-wiki actions against a user for breaching the GFDL on another website. As far as I am concerned, this is a minor, if rather stupid, abuse of the tools. Trout-slapping, rather than arbitration, seems in order. Sam, how is it minor? Anything that is not major is minor. QED A comparable case is User:Everyking, where he was emergency desysopped for even suggesting that he might disclose deleted information on Wikipedia review--and that pales in comparison to this. This admin did disclose information that was apparently deleted for copyright purposes, posted it onto one of the busiest non-WMF websites in existence, and then had it splashed over one of the major media sources on the planet Earth that he did it with his WMF admin tools. This is minor how? I am not familiar with the Everyking case, and it's not worth wasting a lot of my time finding out about it, and whether that case was major or minor. Though if I remember correctly the big issue relating to most Wikipedia Review cases had to do with revealing private personal information of Wikipedians. That's very different from a make-believe problem about copyright, and a make-believe emergency over something done two years ago. Any admin can freely recover content deleted for copyright purposes and then repost it wherever and however they want? Absolutely. Why not? We have understandably stricter copyright rules about what is included in Wikipedia. One should not jump to the absurd conclusion that violating those rules means violating copyright rules as defined by law. 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] Rank hath its privileges
Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Bah forgive me, I was trying to be sarcastic. Did not work so well :S People here can sometimes be victims of their own literalism. One thing about lynch mob members is that they believe they are ridding the world of scum. Such true believers do not understand sarcasm. ;-) To ray, you have a point, if it is a 3rd parties copyright, it is their fight. Generally though I don't like the thought of that ability being used to undelete stuff that is not helpful to this project and creates these sorts of distractions, but it is now his fight. There's still a difference between undeleting material and taking deleted material for use on an external site. The Wall Street Journal report is certainly a distractions, but volunteers who are driven by their ideals to participate in the wikis tend to be more sensitive to these distractions than is warranted. Large organizations are frequently subject to these critical reports, and soon learn that making a fuss of them is a waste of everybody's time. Ec On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote Feel free to start one or someone else is likely to do it. After all lynching gets good drama ;). ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
There may very well be a difference, but any way you look at it that admin did violate copyright. One thing I did notice is this happened over a year ago, as such I'm not totally convinced now that revoking the bit will do much good. Regardless I doubt there is much more to be said here, as there is a thread on this at WP:ANI or AN. I am not taking a part in the onwiki discussion as I think most of the valid views have been covered and it is time to move on. On 1/9/09, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Bah forgive me, I was trying to be sarcastic. Did not work so well :S People here can sometimes be victims of their own literalism. One thing about lynch mob members is that they believe they are ridding the world of scum. Such true believers do not understand sarcasm. ;-) To ray, you have a point, if it is a 3rd parties copyright, it is their fight. Generally though I don't like the thought of that ability being used to undelete stuff that is not helpful to this project and creates these sorts of distractions, but it is now his fight. There's still a difference between undeleting material and taking deleted material for use on an external site. The Wall Street Journal report is certainly a distractions, but volunteers who are driven by their ideals to participate in the wikis tend to be more sensitive to these distractions than is warranted. Large organizations are frequently subject to these critical reports, and soon learn that making a fuss of them is a waste of everybody's time. Ec On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote Feel free to start one or someone else is likely to do it. After all lynching gets good drama ;). ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
Lynching and drama don't interest me in the slightest; please don't suggest those terms. The integrity of the project is paramount. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote: If I were not on a cell phone and had time, I would join the angry mob and start an RFAR :) I don't think he has any excuse for his actions which knowingly violated our copyright rules. Feel free to start one or someone else is likely to do it. After all lynching gets good drama ;). On 1/7/09, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote: It's come up on ANI. I await his reply before concluding how to proceed. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org wrote: And I imagine no way to get it unless views of deleted revisions is logged somewhere that I don't know of I suspect this is rather unlikely unless wmf has them privately. On 1/7/09, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin. X! On Jan 7, 2009, at 10:04 PM [Jan 7, 2009 ], Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 ___ 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 -- 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 ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: The reason why it is not ok in this case is because the admin in question posted text that he does not own the copyright to. Provided the text is not a copyright violation on its own, this admin has violated the GFDL by not giving credit to the original author. This is the kind of comment characteristic of those who aren't happy unless they are persecuting somebody. If this is indeed a copyright issue, then it should be up to the owners of the material to take action against this individual. It is not the business of third parties to enforce copyright on behalf of Kronos. While there may be enough uncertainty about the copyright to prevent it being shown on a publicly visible Wikipedia page, if someone who sees this differently wants to post such deleted material on some other site he should be free to do so with the understanding that he personally accepts whatever legal risks may come with his actions. I think that a strong argument can be made against the copyright of this material on the basis that copyright does not apply to information but to forms of expression, and an answer key may be only information. This person is free to make that argument if this ever gets to court. Our policies regarding copyright tend to be risk-averse to the extreme, and as a site we are free to take such a position. We have no business trying to broadly impose our rules on people acting on unrelated sites. When we delete something the most that we can infer from that act is that it doesn't belong in Wikipedia. It may still belong somewhere else. Soong should be commended for his campaign, as long as he does not insist on pursuing it on Wikipedia, and, by all appearances, he hasn't done that. 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] Rank hath its privileges
Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Hence why I put provided the text is not a copyright violation in my prior post. Regardless posting text that he does not have the copyright permission for, regardless if it is from the GFDL or from a third source... This admin has crossed a certain ethical line. Nonsense! 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] Rank hath its privileges
Bah forgive me, I was trying to be sarcastic. Did not work so well :S To ray, you have a point, if it is a 3rd parties copyright, it is their fight. Generally though I don't like the thought of that ability being used to undelete stuff that is not helpful to this project and creates these sorts of distractions, but it is now his fight. On 1/7/09, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote: Lynching and drama don't interest me in the slightest; please don't suggest those terms. The integrity of the project is paramount. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote: If I were not on a cell phone and had time, I would join the angry mob and start an RFAR :) I don't think he has any excuse for his actions which knowingly violated our copyright rules. Feel free to start one or someone else is likely to do it. After all lynching gets good drama ;). On 1/7/09, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote: It's come up on ANI. I await his reply before concluding how to proceed. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org wrote: And I imagine no way to get it unless views of deleted revisions is logged somewhere that I don't know of I suspect this is rather unlikely unless wmf has them privately. On 1/7/09, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin. X! On Jan 7, 2009, at 10:04 PM [Jan 7, 2009 ], Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 ___ 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 -- 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 ___ 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 ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org wrote: To ray, you have a point, if it is a 3rd parties copyright, it is their fight. Generally though I don't like the thought of that ability being used to undelete stuff that is not helpful to this project and creates these sorts of distractions, but it is now his fight. I agree mostly with these sentiments. If there was a case to be made, I would argue that it should be presented as using the admin tools in a way likely to bring the project into disrepute. There has been no breach of our copyright policy, as the content was not posted on Wikipedia. I do not recall ever taking on-wiki actions against a user for breaching the GFDL on another website. As far as I am concerned, this is a minor, if rather stupid, abuse of the tools. Trout-slapping, rather than arbitration, seems in order. -- 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] Rank hath its privileges
As far as I am concerned, this is a minor, if rather stupid, abuse of the tools. Trout-slapping, rather than arbitration, seems in order. I agree. Admins un-delete things all the time because they think it might be useful to someone elsewhere (usually they undelete it to someone's user space, but it makes little difference), the only problem here was that the admin in question carelessly neglected to follow the GFDL when doing so (and/or get permission from the copyright owner). ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Sam Blacketer sam.blacke...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Sam Korn smo...@gmail.com wrote: As far as I am concerned, this is a minor, if rather stupid, abuse of the tools. Trout-slapping, rather than arbitration, seems in order. I agree; also the fact that it seems to have taken place nearly two years ago has some weight in persuading me that a heavy-handed response is not appropriate. The biggest part that concerns me is the dubious judgment in admitting doing it to a journalist from a major newspaper. The initial posting of the information in question to Wikipedia (by an IP) and the deletion of two revisions of the article in question, were both done in February 2007. It is not clear when the use of tools to view those deleted revisions, and the Facebook posting, took place (the WSJ article doesn't say). There was also an OTRS ticket associated with the deletions - though that was not stated in the deletion log (it should have been). Like Sam Blacketer and Sam Korn, it is the disrepute aspect and the judgment aspect that concerns me here. I don't really want to say more, though, as an on-wiki ArbCom venue would be more appropriate than here. And waiting for the user in question to respond is also important. There should, though, really be a place on Wikipedia itself for open public discussion like this that doesn't require the formality of RFAR or the non-transparency of the ArbCom mailing list, and is less chaotic than ANI. At the moment, WT:RFAR is all there is for this is there a problem here pre-RFAR query - see a post made there by Masem on another issue that has garnered little response. 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] Rank hath its privileges
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Sam Korn smo...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org wrote: To ray, you have a point, if it is a 3rd parties copyright, it is their fight. Generally though I don't like the thought of that ability being used to undelete stuff that is not helpful to this project and creates these sorts of distractions, but it is now his fight. I agree mostly with these sentiments. If there was a case to be made, I would argue that it should be presented as using the admin tools in a way likely to bring the project into disrepute. There has been no breach of our copyright policy, as the content was not posted on Wikipedia. I do not recall ever taking on-wiki actions against a user for breaching the GFDL on another website. As far as I am concerned, this is a minor, if rather stupid, abuse of the tools. Trout-slapping, rather than arbitration, seems in order. As said on ANI... Sam, how is it minor? A comparable case is User:Everyking, where he was emergency desysopped for even suggesting that he might disclose deleted information on Wikipedia review--and that pales in comparison to this. This admin did disclose information that was apparently deleted for copyright purposes, posted it onto one of the busiest non-WMF websites in existence, and then had it splashed over one of the major media sources on the planet Earth that he did it with his WMF admin tools. This is minor how? Any admin can freely recover content deleted for copyright purposes and then repost it wherever and however they want? There is a better place than this mailing list to debate whether there has been a serious case of abuse of administrator tools. I know I've posted in this thread myself, but please, let's not have the discussions spread over several different venues. At the very least, the sitting arbitrators should withdraw from this discussion (as they may be required to arbitrate) and the former arbitrators who are privy to the ArbCom mailing list discussions should probably also stay out of the discussion here. As a sitting arbitrator, I'm going to do exactly that and stop posting in this thread until the matter has been resolved. 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] Rank hath its privileges
Sam Blacketer wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Sam Korn smo...@gmail.com wrote: As far as I am concerned, this is a minor, if rather stupid, abuse of the tools. Trout-slapping, rather than arbitration, seems in order. I agree; also the fact that it seems to have taken place nearly two years ago has some weight in persuading me that a heavy-handed response is not appropriate. The biggest part that concerns me is the dubious judgment in admitting doing it to a journalist from a major newspaper. That last point could qualify him for some version of an e-Darwin Award. :-) 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
[WikiEN-l] Rank hath its privileges
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
If the username of this individual is discovered, I would gladly bring the individual to RFAR and request desysopping. This is the opposite of what we entrust administrators to do. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote: Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 -- 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] Rank hath its privileges
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Soxred93 wrote: Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin. X! I didn't exactly intend to start an RfAr on this admin, but I'd point out that there are not that many current admins on en and the article provides multiple starting points for a search (his Facebook account and True Name, for starters). If you don't have it, I think it's because you haven't looked very hard. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllgO0ACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oLbFgCfRjhPg3taKpWZIOcJwwZEILKS clAAmwa0JIykKrXdDL8Xt+Sj/g81Sbt6 =oT72 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
Agreed. This is an absolute travesty. bibliomaniac15 --- On Wed, 1/7/09, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote: From: Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Rank hath its privileges To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 8:17 PM If the username of this individual is discovered, I would gladly bring the individual to RFAR and request desysopping. This is the opposite of what we entrust administrators to do. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote: Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 -- 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 ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
And I imagine no way to get it unless views of deleted revisions is logged somewhere that I don't know of I suspect this is rather unlikely unless wmf has them privately. On 1/7/09, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin. X! On Jan 7, 2009, at 10:04 PM [Jan 7, 2009 ], Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
It's come up on ANI. I await his reply before concluding how to proceed. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote: And I imagine no way to get it unless views of deleted revisions is logged somewhere that I don't know of I suspect this is rather unlikely unless wmf has them privately. On 1/7/09, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin. X! On Jan 7, 2009, at 10:04 PM [Jan 7, 2009 ], Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 ___ 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 -- 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] Rank hath its privileges
If I were not on a cell phone and had time, I would join the angry mob and start an RFAR :) I don't think he has any excuse for his actions which knowingly violated our copyright rules. Feel free to start one or someone else is likely to do it. After all lynching gets good drama ;). On 1/7/09, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote: It's come up on ANI. I await his reply before concluding how to proceed. -Durova On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote: And I imagine no way to get it unless views of deleted revisions is logged somewhere that I don't know of I suspect this is rather unlikely unless wmf has them privately. On 1/7/09, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin. X! On Jan 7, 2009, at 10:04 PM [Jan 7, 2009 ], Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit (that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to post that). For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit. On 1/7/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key, driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In a discussion section of a Wikipedia entry, he saw a mention of a set of Unicru statements and answers that had been posted there but removed. Using privileges as a volunteer Wikipedia administrator, which gave him access to deleted page histories, Mr. Soong, a University of Virginia student, was able to recover the answer key and re-post it on Facebook. - -- gwern -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREKAAYFAkllIJsACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIQ9wCgkhjvk65QkqLHVfRlsNr6R9qE 3CIAnjNSNtb2bBBoEYMQMCCJtKHZor+S =hFKM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 ___ 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 -- 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 ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
2009/1/8 Scientia Potentia est bibliomaniac...@yahoo.com: Agreed. This is an absolute travesty. Questionable. What deleted content wikipedia admins can hand over has always been something of a grey area. Deleted stuff that the author wants is fairly widely accepted to be okey but other areas left clear. Admins using the ability to see deleted material out of curiosity certianly happens a fair bit and not unknown for admins to comment in a manner informed by the information. Dirrect copy any paste however is unusual however it does happen. Saw it happen today in fact (okey so that was a completely harmless issue related to so interface stuff). While I would oppose it that is mostly because it doesn't look right rather than my being able to find an armored plated policy reason as to why that is the case. -- 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] Rank hath its privileges
The reason why it is not ok in this case is because the admin in question posted text that he does not own the copyright to. Provided the text is not a copyright violation on its own, this admin has violated the GFDL by not giving credit to the original author. On 1/7/09, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/1/8 Scientia Potentia est bibliomaniac...@yahoo.com: Agreed. This is an absolute travesty. Questionable. What deleted content wikipedia admins can hand over has always been something of a grey area. Deleted stuff that the author wants is fairly widely accepted to be okey but other areas left clear. Admins using the ability to see deleted material out of curiosity certianly happens a fair bit and not unknown for admins to comment in a manner informed by the information. Dirrect copy any paste however is unusual however it does happen. Saw it happen today in fact (okey so that was a completely harmless issue related to so interface stuff). While I would oppose it that is mostly because it doesn't look right rather than my being able to find an armored plated policy reason as to why that is the case. -- 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 ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
2009/1/8 Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org: If I were not on a cell phone and had time, I would join the angry mob and start an RFAR :) I don't think he has any excuse for his actions which knowingly violated our copyright rules. He probably hasn't. The release under the GFDL is unlikely to be legit so the issue is entirely between him and the company. Our copyright rules do not apply. -- 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] Rank hath its privileges
Hence why I put provided the text is not a copyright violation in my prior post. Regardless posting text that he does not have the copyright permission for, regardless if it is from the GFDL or from a third source... This admin has crossed a certain ethical line. On 1/7/09, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/1/8 Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org: If I were not on a cell phone and had time, I would join the angry mob and start an RFAR :) I don't think he has any excuse for his actions which knowingly violated our copyright rules. He probably hasn't. The release under the GFDL is unlikely to be legit so the issue is entirely between him and the company. Our copyright rules do not apply. -- 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 ___ 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] Rank hath its privileges
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Admin_misusing_viewdeleted The admin account has apparently been identified. - Joe ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
