Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[Philippe Beaudette]

Perhaps that's the answer, James. But maybe there are others as well,
especially since, by their own admission, that tech is not ready for prime
time (meaning fully editable encyclopedia) yet.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 5:17 PM James Salsman  wrote:

> Why not just officially support Wikipedia on IPFS, which has been
> hosting the Turkish Wikipedia in Turkey, unlike the Foundation, for
> almost two years now?
>
> https://blog.ipfs.io/24-uncensorable-wikipedia/
>
> https://github.com/ipfs/distributed-wikipedia-mirror
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:10 PM Philippe Beaudette 
> wrote:
> >
> > Nathan, when you write "the very nature of Wikipedia is
> > maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> > unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of
> Wikipedia",
> > it's very easy for me to fully and totally agree -- as I would have,
> three
> > years ago.  But in those three years, I've seen things in the US that I
> had
> > never thought I would see.  I've seen the rights that I considered
> > inviolable... violated.  I've seen the resurgence of a brand of
> > conservatism that I find alarming.
> >
> > I find myself, reluctantly, agreeing with Fae that there should be a
> backup
> > plan.  However I choose to believe this is also an opportunity.  What
> > about a fully distributed version that's hosted everywhere, and nowhere?
> > What other options, besides the traditional, can the WMF's bright staff
> and
> > creative volunteers come up with? Surely there's something 
> >
> > Failing that, there's always Iceland. :-)
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:05 PM Nathan  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Fae,
> > >
> > > I'm curious what nation you have in mind for your stable Plan B. Is it
> > > Brexit Britain? France of the Yellow Vests and Front National? Perhaps
> > > Orban's Hungary, Putin's Russia, or Germany with its recent right-wing
> > > resurgence?
> > >
> > > Maybe you'd prefer Jair Bolsonaro's Brazil? I suppose in Italy we'd
> worry
> > > about Beppe and criminal libel statutes, while BJP would hardly seem
> > > welcoming in India and I can't imagine you'd suggest a home on the
> other
> > > side of the Great Firewall.
> > >
> > > Maybe you're hinting at Canada, but otherwise, I'd love to understand
> what
> > > island of liberal stability and legal safeguards you think is safe
> from the
> > > vagaries of electoral politics or rigid authoritarianism.
> > >
> > > The countries I list above have their own flaws (although in each
> case, I
> > > believe, many desirable traits as well) as does any other alternative.
> > > Anyone could reasonably argue it's unfair to stigmatize any of them by
> > > glaringly public flaws.
> > >
> > > To my mind Steve Walling has it right - the very nature of Wikipedia is
> > > maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> > > unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of
> Wikipedia.
> > >
> > > Nathan
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:17 PM Fæ  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> > > > following,
> > > >
> > > > For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely
> alarming
> > > > to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> > > > reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> > > > whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> > > > voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> > > > politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> > > > inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is
> not
> > > > inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> > > > decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> > > > virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
> > > >
> > > > The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> > > > switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> > > > continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
> > > > has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
> > > > and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
> > > > and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.
> > > >
> > > > However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a
> Plan
> > > > B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
> > > > hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
> > > > government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
> > > > our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
> > > > political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
> > > > started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that
> published
> > > > plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
> > > > simply power off our servers in the USA, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[James Salsman]

Why not just officially support Wikipedia on IPFS, which has been
hosting the Turkish Wikipedia in Turkey, unlike the Foundation, for
almost two years now?

https://blog.ipfs.io/24-uncensorable-wikipedia/

https://github.com/ipfs/distributed-wikipedia-mirror


On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:10 PM Philippe Beaudette  wrote:
>
> Nathan, when you write "the very nature of Wikipedia is
> maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia",
> it's very easy for me to fully and totally agree -- as I would have, three
> years ago.  But in those three years, I've seen things in the US that I had
> never thought I would see.  I've seen the rights that I considered
> inviolable... violated.  I've seen the resurgence of a brand of
> conservatism that I find alarming.
>
> I find myself, reluctantly, agreeing with Fae that there should be a backup
> plan.  However I choose to believe this is also an opportunity.  What
> about a fully distributed version that's hosted everywhere, and nowhere?
> What other options, besides the traditional, can the WMF's bright staff and
> creative volunteers come up with? Surely there's something 
>
> Failing that, there's always Iceland. :-)
>
> Philippe
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:05 PM Nathan  wrote:
>
> > Hi Fae,
> >
> > I'm curious what nation you have in mind for your stable Plan B. Is it
> > Brexit Britain? France of the Yellow Vests and Front National? Perhaps
> > Orban's Hungary, Putin's Russia, or Germany with its recent right-wing
> > resurgence?
> >
> > Maybe you'd prefer Jair Bolsonaro's Brazil? I suppose in Italy we'd worry
> > about Beppe and criminal libel statutes, while BJP would hardly seem
> > welcoming in India and I can't imagine you'd suggest a home on the other
> > side of the Great Firewall.
> >
> > Maybe you're hinting at Canada, but otherwise, I'd love to understand what
> > island of liberal stability and legal safeguards you think is safe from the
> > vagaries of electoral politics or rigid authoritarianism.
> >
> > The countries I list above have their own flaws (although in each case, I
> > believe, many desirable traits as well) as does any other alternative.
> > Anyone could reasonably argue it's unfair to stigmatize any of them by
> > glaringly public flaws.
> >
> > To my mind Steve Walling has it right - the very nature of Wikipedia is
> > maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> > unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia.
> >
> > Nathan
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:17 PM Fæ  wrote:
> >
> > > Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> > > following,
> > >
> > > For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
> > > to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> > > reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> > > whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> > > voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> > > politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> > > inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
> > > inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> > > decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> > > virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
> > >
> > > The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> > > switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> > > continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
> > > has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
> > > and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
> > > and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.
> > >
> > > However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a Plan
> > > B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
> > > hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
> > > government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
> > > our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
> > > political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
> > > started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that published
> > > plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
> > > simply power off our servers in the USA, rather than compromise our
> > > content.
> > >
> > > If anyone knows of committed investment in a practical WMF Plan B, it
> > > would be reassuring to share it more widely at this time. If not, more
> > > of us should be asking about it, politely, persistently but perhaps
> > > less patiently than indefinitely. :-)
> > >
> > > Links:
> > > 1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46739180
> > > 2. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[Philippe Beaudette]

Nathan, when you write "the very nature of Wikipedia is
maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia",
it's very easy for me to fully and totally agree -- as I would have, three
years ago.  But in those three years, I've seen things in the US that I had
never thought I would see.  I've seen the rights that I considered
inviolable... violated.  I've seen the resurgence of a brand of
conservatism that I find alarming.

I find myself, reluctantly, agreeing with Fae that there should be a backup
plan.  However I choose to believe this is also an opportunity.  What
about a fully distributed version that's hosted everywhere, and nowhere?
What other options, besides the traditional, can the WMF's bright staff and
creative volunteers come up with? Surely there's something 

Failing that, there's always Iceland. :-)

Philippe

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:05 PM Nathan  wrote:

> Hi Fae,
>
> I'm curious what nation you have in mind for your stable Plan B. Is it
> Brexit Britain? France of the Yellow Vests and Front National? Perhaps
> Orban's Hungary, Putin's Russia, or Germany with its recent right-wing
> resurgence?
>
> Maybe you'd prefer Jair Bolsonaro's Brazil? I suppose in Italy we'd worry
> about Beppe and criminal libel statutes, while BJP would hardly seem
> welcoming in India and I can't imagine you'd suggest a home on the other
> side of the Great Firewall.
>
> Maybe you're hinting at Canada, but otherwise, I'd love to understand what
> island of liberal stability and legal safeguards you think is safe from the
> vagaries of electoral politics or rigid authoritarianism.
>
> The countries I list above have their own flaws (although in each case, I
> believe, many desirable traits as well) as does any other alternative.
> Anyone could reasonably argue it's unfair to stigmatize any of them by
> glaringly public flaws.
>
> To my mind Steve Walling has it right - the very nature of Wikipedia is
> maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia.
>
> Nathan
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:17 PM Fæ  wrote:
>
> > Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> > following,
> >
> > For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
> > to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> > reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> > whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> > voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> > politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> > inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
> > inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> > decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> > virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
> >
> > The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> > switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> > continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
> > has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
> > and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
> > and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.
> >
> > However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a Plan
> > B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
> > hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
> > government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
> > our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
> > political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
> > started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that published
> > plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
> > simply power off our servers in the USA, rather than compromise our
> > content.
> >
> > If anyone knows of committed investment in a practical WMF Plan B, it
> > would be reassuring to share it more widely at this time. If not, more
> > of us should be asking about it, politely, persistently but perhaps
> > less patiently than indefinitely. :-)
> >
> > Links:
> > 1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46739180
> > 2. http://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/research/updates/populism
> > 3.
> >
> https://www.cnet.com/news/obama-signs-order-outlining-emergency-internet-control
> > "... this order was designed to empower certain governmental agencies
> > with control over telecommunications and the Web during natural
> > disasters and security emergencies."
> > 4.
> >
> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418
> > "The president could seize control of U.S. internet traffic, impeding
> > access to certain websites and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[Nathan]

Hi Fae,

I'm curious what nation you have in mind for your stable Plan B. Is it
Brexit Britain? France of the Yellow Vests and Front National? Perhaps
Orban's Hungary, Putin's Russia, or Germany with its recent right-wing
resurgence?

Maybe you'd prefer Jair Bolsonaro's Brazil? I suppose in Italy we'd worry
about Beppe and criminal libel statutes, while BJP would hardly seem
welcoming in India and I can't imagine you'd suggest a home on the other
side of the Great Firewall.

Maybe you're hinting at Canada, but otherwise, I'd love to understand what
island of liberal stability and legal safeguards you think is safe from the
vagaries of electoral politics or rigid authoritarianism.

The countries I list above have their own flaws (although in each case, I
believe, many desirable traits as well) as does any other alternative.
Anyone could reasonably argue it's unfair to stigmatize any of them by
glaringly public flaws.

To my mind Steve Walling has it right - the very nature of Wikipedia is
maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia.

Nathan

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:17 PM Fæ  wrote:

> Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> following,
>
> For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
> to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
> inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
>
> The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
> has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
> and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
> and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.
>
> However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a Plan
> B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
> hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
> government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
> our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
> political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
> started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that published
> plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
> simply power off our servers in the USA, rather than compromise our
> content.
>
> If anyone knows of committed investment in a practical WMF Plan B, it
> would be reassuring to share it more widely at this time. If not, more
> of us should be asking about it, politely, persistently but perhaps
> less patiently than indefinitely. :-)
>
> Links:
> 1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46739180
> 2. http://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/research/updates/populism
> 3.
> https://www.cnet.com/news/obama-signs-order-outlining-emergency-internet-control
> "... this order was designed to empower certain governmental agencies
> with control over telecommunications and the Web during natural
> disasters and security emergencies."
> 4.
> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418
> "The president could seize control of U.S. internet traffic, impeding
> access to certain websites and ensuring that internet searches return
> pro-Trump content as the top results."
> 5. Bizarro, as used in the title of this email:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to a "Wikimedia Café" casual online meetup

[Pine W]

Hi, the Wikimedia Café for January will be on Wednesday the 23rd at 11 AM
Pacific / 7 PM UTC. The Zoom link is below. Because of the monthly limit
for emails from any one person to Wikimedia-l and my wish to conserve my
remaining emails to that list for other topics, I likely will not send a
reminder about this event, so please mark your calendars now if you want to
attend. Thanks!

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )


On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 3:07 PM Pine W  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The next "Wikimedia Café" meetup will be on Wednesday the 23rd of January,
> on a time to be chosen via Doodle poll:
> https://doodle.com/poll/5mf5cfkuxpprk727. The plan is that for January's
> meetup we will focus on Wikidata. Bluerasberry
> , who works extensively
> with Wikidata at the University of Virginia's Data Science Institute, plans
> to participate.
>
> The Zoom online meeting link will be the same link that we have used for
> previous Wikimedia Café meetups; see below.
>
> The Café meetups are usually small, so they are a good place to ask
> questions or to discuss ideas, regarding Wikidata or other Wikimedia topics.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:15 PM Pine W  wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Based on comments that I received on Wikimedia-l, I would like to invite
>> people to a casual online meetup one hour before the monthly WMF Metrics
>> and Activities Meeting.
>>
>> There will be no set agenda. You can come with questions or ideas that
>> you would like to discuss. Please be willing to listen to questions and
>> ideas from other Wikimedians.
>>
>> I will host the meeting with the Zoom software. You can join with
>> software or by using your phone. If you join by phone then your phone
>> number will be visible to other participants.
>>
>> The primary language of the meeting will be English, but if people would
>> like to communicate in diverse languages then that is okay too. We can
>> facilitate translation by text chat. Many Wikimedians, myself included, are
>> multilingual in varying degrees, so we might try to have live
>> interpretation also.
>>
>> Here is information about how to connect:
>>
>> Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/136978210
>>
>> Or iPhone one-tap :
>> Argentina: +543415122188,,136978210#
>> Or Telephone:
>> Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current
>> location):
>> Argentina: +54 341 512 2188
>> Australia: +61 (0) 2 8015 2088  or +61 (0) 8 7150 1149
>> Canada: +1 647 558 0588
>> Hong Kong, China: +852 5808 6088
>> France: +33 (0) 1 8288 0188  or +33 (0) 7 5678 4048
>> Germany: +49 (0) 30 3080 6188  or +49 (0) 30 5679 5800
>> Israel: +972 (0) 3 978 6688
>> Italy: +39 069 480 6488
>> Japan: +81 (0) 3 4578 1488  or +81 524 564 439
>> Mexico: +52 229 910 0061  or +52 554 161 4288
>> Spain: +34 84 368 5025  or +34 91 198 0188
>> Sweden: +46 (0) 7 6692 0434  or +46 (0) 8 4468 2488
>> Russia: +7 495 283 9788
>> United Kingdom: +44 (0) 20 3051 2874  or +44 (0) 20 3695 0088
>> US: +1 408 638 0986  or +1 646 558 8665
>> Meeting ID: 136 978 210
>> International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/ekaPibJIy
>>
>> The first "Wikimedia Café" meetup will be on 30 August 2018, at 17:00 UTC
>> / 10:00 Pacific.
>>
>> Let me emphasize that the environment won't be like this
>> ,
>> so please don't feel intimated if you are nervous about public speaking.
>> (If a conversation feels to me like it is becoming uncivil or intimidating,
>> then I will ask the debaters to quiet themselves or to move to somewhere
>> else.) The meeting will generally have an environment that is more like
>> this
>>  or
>> this
>> .
>> I anticipate that few people will come, which is okay. I hope that if you
>> come then you will enjoy the environment and conversation.
>>
>> Until next time,
>> Pine
>> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[David Gerard]

So ... when did someone last test putting up a copy of the sites from
the backups?

(just a complete copy with history, not even at publicly-accessible scale)



On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 19:31, Steven Walling  wrote:
>
> Great question to think about for our long term sustainability. I think we
> already have a universal "plan B" however? It's providing all content under
> free licenses and regularly distributing complete dumps of our content.
>
> Many larger and more well-funded technology organizations (Google,
> Facebook, etc.) regularly do disaster recovery scenarios that account for
> not just governmental disruption or civil unrest but events such as a major
> earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Area. The movement doesn't really have
> the resources to do this effectively in the same manner.
>
> It seems like decentralizing our ability to recover from a disruption is
> the most effective defense we have, *especially *in the scenario involving
> government intervention because the Foundation's infrastructural and legal
> presence in the United States is actually one of the more brittle pieces
> within our movement.
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 9:18 AM Fæ  wrote:
>
> > Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> > following,
> >
> > For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
> > to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> > reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> > whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> > voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> > politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> > inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
> > inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> > decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> > virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
> >
> > The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> > switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> > continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
> > has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
> > and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
> > and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.
> >
> > However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a Plan
> > B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
> > hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
> > government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
> > our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
> > political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
> > started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that published
> > plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
> > simply power off our servers in the USA, rather than compromise our
> > content.
> >
> > If anyone knows of committed investment in a practical WMF Plan B, it
> > would be reassuring to share it more widely at this time. If not, more
> > of us should be asking about it, politely, persistently but perhaps
> > less patiently than indefinitely. :-)
> >
> > Links:
> > 1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46739180
> > 2. http://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/research/updates/populism
> > 3.
> > https://www.cnet.com/news/obama-signs-order-outlining-emergency-internet-control
> > "... this order was designed to empower certain governmental agencies
> > with control over telecommunications and the Web during natural
> > disasters and security emergencies."
> > 4.
> > https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418
> > "The president could seize control of U.S. internet traffic, impeding
> > access to certain websites and ensuring that internet searches return
> > pro-Trump content as the top results."
> > 5. Bizarro, as used in the title of this email:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Fae
> > --
> > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[Steven Walling]

Great question to think about for our long term sustainability. I think we
already have a universal "plan B" however? It's providing all content under
free licenses and regularly distributing complete dumps of our content.

Many larger and more well-funded technology organizations (Google,
Facebook, etc.) regularly do disaster recovery scenarios that account for
not just governmental disruption or civil unrest but events such as a major
earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Area. The movement doesn't really have
the resources to do this effectively in the same manner.

It seems like decentralizing our ability to recover from a disruption is
the most effective defense we have, *especially *in the scenario involving
government intervention because the Foundation's infrastructural and legal
presence in the United States is actually one of the more brittle pieces
within our movement.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 9:18 AM Fæ  wrote:

> Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> following,
>
> For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
> to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
> inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
>
> The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
> has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
> and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
> and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.
>
> However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a Plan
> B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
> hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
> government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
> our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
> political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
> started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that published
> plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
> simply power off our servers in the USA, rather than compromise our
> content.
>
> If anyone knows of committed investment in a practical WMF Plan B, it
> would be reassuring to share it more widely at this time. If not, more
> of us should be asking about it, politely, persistently but perhaps
> less patiently than indefinitely. :-)
>
> Links:
> 1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46739180
> 2. http://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/research/updates/populism
> 3.
> https://www.cnet.com/news/obama-signs-order-outlining-emergency-internet-control
> "... this order was designed to empower certain governmental agencies
> with control over telecommunications and the Web during natural
> disasters and security emergencies."
> 4.
> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418
> "The president could seize control of U.S. internet traffic, impeding
> access to certain websites and ensuring that internet searches return
> pro-Trump content as the top results."
> 5. Bizarro, as used in the title of this email:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[Fæ]

Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the following,

For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]

The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.

However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a Plan
B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that published
plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
simply power off our servers in the USA, rather than compromise our
content.

If anyone knows of committed investment in a practical WMF Plan B, it
would be reassuring to share it more widely at this time. If not, more
of us should be asking about it, politely, persistently but perhaps
less patiently than indefinitely. :-)

Links:
1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46739180
2. http://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/research/updates/populism
3. 
https://www.cnet.com/news/obama-signs-order-outlining-emergency-internet-control
"... this order was designed to empower certain governmental agencies
with control over telecommunications and the Web during natural
disasters and security emergencies."
4. 
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418
"The president could seize control of U.S. internet traffic, impeding
access to certain websites and ensuring that internet searches return
pro-Trump content as the top results."
5. Bizarro, as used in the title of this email:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World

Thanks,
Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ABUSE OF THE SYSTEM

[Lucas Teles]

Hello.

Contacting stewards by email seem like the proper venue. Please, wait for
an answer.

Posting it on this list won’t help you and it is out this list’s purpose.

I hope you understand. Regards.

Teles

Em ter, 8 de jan de 2019 às 12:33, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> escreveu:

>
> I have just been IP globally blocked as an ip;
>
> based on a series of misunderstanding.
>
> coming from page stalking on talk pages and watching list edit tools.
>
> and the fact that anybody can go to the  Steward
> requests/Global
>
> page and ask for a block with out any text
> what so ever
>
> and no notice to the ip user, and that one stewards can
> come
>
> by without any evidence  and
> grant all postings at once.
>
> and yes i have filled out the form and sent the stewards
> e-mail.
>
> also with this abuse going on on individual wiki’s I
> have tried
>
> to contact trust and safety with no reply ever, on
> e-mail or
>
> there talk pages.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

-- 
Steward for Wikimedia projects. Administrator at Portuguese Wikipedia and
Wikimedia Commons.
Sent from mobile. Please, excuse my brevity.

+55 (71) 99707 6409
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] ABUSE OF THE SYSTEM

[80hnhtv4agou--- via Wikimedia-l]

I have just been IP globally blocked as an ip;
 
based on a series of misunderstanding. 
 
coming from page stalking on talk pages and watching list edit tools.  
 
and the fact that anybody can go to the  Steward 
requests/Global
 
page and ask for a block with out any text 
what so ever
 
and no notice to the ip user, and that one stewards can 
come
 
by without any evidence  and 
grant all postings at once.
 
and yes i have filled out the form and sent the stewards 
e-mail.
 
also with this abuse going on on individual wiki’s I 
have tried
 
to contact trust and safety with no reply ever, on 
e-mail or
 
there talk pages.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,