In a message dated 11/29/2010 10:00:38 PM Pacific Standard Time,
pbeaude...@wikimedia.org writes:
> To suggest that the WMF (which means what, exactly, in this context?
> Staff? Mailing list participants?) does not feel accountable to anyone but
> donors is to make a careless generalization
On Nov 29, 2010, at 9:39 PM, James Alexander wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:13 AM, wrote:
>
>> So it is your belief, that the WMF is not accountable at all to it's
>> volunteers, such as editors? Just to its donors?
>>
>
>
> I prefer contributers or simply the community. Donors, edit
In a message dated 11/29/2010 9:34:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
russnel...@gmail.com writes:
> Huh?? Editors are donors as well, as are people who contribute to mailing
> lists, as are you.
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:13 AM, wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 11/29/2010 8:48:40 PM Pacific Sta
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:13 AM, wrote:
> So it is your belief, that the WMF is not accountable at all to it's
> volunteers, such as editors? Just to its donors?
>
I prefer contributers or simply the community. Donors, editors,
admins, volunteers whatever name you want to call them are all pa
Huh?? Editors are donors as well, as are people who contribute to mailing
lists, as are you.
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:13 AM, wrote:
> In a message dated 11/29/2010 8:48:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> russnel...@gmail.com writes:
>
>
> > Those with the passwords are accountable to the foundatio
FYI.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Erik Moeller
Date: 2010/11/29
Subject: [Backlog] April 2010 Wikimedia Foundation report
To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi,
earlier this year we fell behind on the monthly reports, and
April-June were never published. For historica
In a message dated 11/29/2010 8:48:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
russnel...@gmail.com writes:
> Those with the passwords are accountable to the foundation, which is
> accountable to the donors. The foundation needs to make sure that the
> money
> donated to it is spent wisely, and not frittered
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Anthony wrote:
> Those with the passwords do whatever they feel like
> and are accountable to no one?
>
Those with the passwords are accountable to the foundation, which is
accountable to the donors. The foundation needs to make sure that the money
donated to it
> Those with the passwords do whatever they feel like
> and are accountable to no one?
yup!
Domas
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Chad wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Anthony wrote:
>> Surely there are ways to publish policies which don't require a formal
>> board resolution every time something changes. Also, any emergency
>> exceptions could always be documented later, after the
Perhaps the definition of substance is different between you and me,
Gerard, but I don't expect you won't disagree it's important for us at
the community at large to confirm the Wikimedia accredited troll alive
and go well around.
/me ducks
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 5:29 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> O
On 29 November 2010 19:39, wrote:
I suspect you are the only person on this thread who considers that
you are asking for something substantive and important.
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://l
News and notes: Backlog drive; youth and confidence among Wikipedians,
brief news
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-11-29/News_and_notes
In the news: Fundraising banners continue to provoke; plagiarism
charges against congressional climate change report
http://en.wikip
Hi!
> It's isn't my policy, it's our policy.
Who is 'we', whom do you represent? :-)
> If you don't know to what I refer, then perhaps you can read up on it.
You didn't tell what you represent and what policy you talk about, I don't know
where to read about it.
> As far as citing the archiv
In a message dated 11/29/2010 11:33:05 AM Pacific Standard Time,
midom.li...@gmail.com writes:
> Hi!
>
> > Go on record, then I'll cite you.
> > An email list is not a citable source, per our policy.
>
> Why would I care about your policy? Which policy is 'our' policy? Why does
> it apply to
Hi!
> Go on record, then I'll cite you.
> An email list is not a citable source, per our policy.
Why would I care about your policy? Which policy is 'our' policy? Why does it
apply to anything here?
> However a page on the server is citable.
> So put your reputation up for view, then you'll be
If that's the case, I would suggest, if it does not do so already, that the
server also grab details about "How did you get here?" such as keywords
used, or page-come-from and so on.
Also I would want it to grab geographic location (where known), which would
help us to know, for example, if we'
On 29 November 2010 10:11, Domas Mituzas wrote:
>> The sampled 1/1000 squid logs can be used for statistical purposes, such as
>> page view stats. Someone more techy can answer that better than I can, if
>> the samples include IP addresses that could be used w/ geoip for geographic
>> analysis. (
In a message dated 11/29/2010 2:14:38 AM Pacific Standard Time,
midom.li...@gmail.com writes:
> This isn't Wikipedia, this is Wikimedia. You can cite me, if you want.
>
Go on record, then I'll cite you.
An email list is not a citable source, per our policy.
However a page on the server is cita
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Anthony wrote:
> Surely there are ways to publish policies which don't require a formal
> board resolution every time something changes. Also, any emergency
> exceptions could always be documented later, after the emergency has
> been resolved.
>
The policy shoul
Hi all;
I'm creating a census[1] with all the anti-vandalism bots in the Wikimedia
projects history. I want to research the features and techniques used in all
these past years. I need your help for compiling all the nicks of those
bots. You can help adding info to the page, but if you don't have
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Andre Engels wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 6:26 AM, wrote:
>> I know quite a lot about operational requirements, and I know that policies
>> should state clearly what IS being done, not what may be done.
>> It's quite practical to be more explicit. For exampl
On 27.11.2010 18:12, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 15:32, Henning Schlottmann
> wrote:
>> On 27.11.2010 01:41, Milos Rancic wrote:
>>
>>> In other words, our recruitment base are not well formed scientists,
>>> but high school students who are interested in Wikipedia (and other
>>>
> Humans are not citable sources, per our policy.
This isn't Wikipedia, this is Wikimedia. You can cite me, if you want.
Domas
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/f
> The sampled 1/1000 squid logs can be used for statistical purposes, such as
> page view stats. Someone more techy can answer that better than I can, if
> the samples include IP addresses that could be used w/ geoip for geographic
> analysis. (I think perhaps not)
we do aggregations on full samp
Hi!
> There aren't any raw logs?
Closest to raw log we may have is 1/1000 sample, that we keep sometimes for
noticing obvious things like DDoS or software feature gone mad.
Domas
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscr
Hi!
> Each web server, of which the WMF has a few, collects details on the
> behaviour of IPs, in logs. Those logs can be and probably have been
> requested by
> certain government officials, most likely for the purpose of tracking down
> who is behind a certain "Bad" posting to a BLP.
We lo
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 6:26 AM, wrote:
> In a message dated 11/28/2010 9:06:36 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> russnel...@gmail.com writes:
>
> Yes I agree, the policy is extremely vague.
> We may be struck by lightning, we may be abducted by aliens, we may be
> sentient beings.
> May doesn't say an
28 matches
Mail list logo
