On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:46:45AM -0700, phoebe ayers wrote:
> Thanks Kim; I agree there's a lot of room to figure out the best way to do
> this, and problems with possible interpretations or implementations. That's
> part of the thought behind putting this up for another round of discussion
> (al
(It seems that mail server is not functioning properly. I've got
"local delivery failed". Trying again or tomorrow.)
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 04:14, Andrew Garrett wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>> While it is not a big deal for me to get six emails (including one i
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> While it is not a big deal for me to get six emails (including one in
> Polish) instead of once, I want to say that I already added pattern
> for my bot accounts at the Wikimedia nomail list and it existed at
> Friday morning there, at least [
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 09:33:07PM +0100, David Gerard wrote:
> On 19 August 2011 20:50, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>
> > I was oh so very pleased to learn that I get to give my opinion on
> > insignificant implementation details of a "feature" that stands in
> > opposition to everything Wikipedia
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 14:29, Andrew Garrett wrote:
> I've just started sending out over 750,000 emails to folks who are
> eligible to vote in our Wikimedia Referendum. I've learned from past
> mailouts in trying to exclude more bots, multiple accounts and folks
> who've already voted. However, i
Hi Fred,
I didn't intend to say that these journals are "bad in some way",
though some details like the "non-commercial" clause at Scientific
Reports could well qualify for that label.
PLoS ONE addresses three major problems:
*Access to the research literature it publishes
*Scope limitations
*Imp
On 19 August 2011 20:50, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> I was oh so very pleased to learn that I get to give my opinion on
> insignificant implementation details of a "feature" that stands in
> opposition to everything Wikipedia stands for which is going to be
> committed against us whether we like i
On 19/08/2011 2:46 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> I think one thing that will come out of this, which I'm really happy
> about, is that we will learn a lot more about a broadly consultative
> vote and how to do it well.
I think that the first thing that should be learned -- and indeed that
should ha
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Kim Bruning wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 01:17:15PM -0700, phoebe ayers wrote:
> > This week, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees unanimously
> > passed a resolution addressing the issue of controversial content on
> > the projects. The Board also unani
Every time we've run an election of any kind with emails, to the best of my
knowledge, the email has caused a huge jump in participation. This time,
sending the email led to an additional 5000 votes overnight, which more than
doubled the total vote count. I don't have the numbers to hand, but we s
New RfC [1] has been opened on Meta. Here is the description and one suggestion.
* * *
Stewards had short discussion at their list and came to the conclusion
to start the discussion how stewards could help to make life of
Wikimedians easier. It is mostly about small wikis and rules around
them. T
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:00:57AM -0700, Alec Conroy wrote:
> > One *big* problem we have now is: Wikipedia has won. Wikipedia is the
> > encyclopedia anyone actually consults, ever. Wikipedia now defines
> > what an "encyclopedia" is in popular conception.
> >
> > So we don't have any tail-lights
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 01:17:15PM -0700, phoebe ayers wrote:
> This week, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees unanimously
> passed a resolution addressing the issue of controversial content on
> the projects. The Board also unanimously passed a resolution
> addressing images of identifiable
Hi,
Maybe we shouldn't e-mail every user every time there is a vote.
There has never been a run that didn't cause any problems and like
Andrew was saying elsewhere they know the system doesn't check for
global blocks and multible blocks.
So there will be a lot of false positives. And a lot of pe
Hi all,
I've just started sending out over 750,000 emails to folks who are
eligible to vote in our Wikimedia Referendum. I've learned from past
mailouts in trying to exclude more bots, multiple accounts and folks
who've already voted. However, if you receive an email which doesn't
apply to you (fo
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Huib Laurens wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just recieved this e-mail while I'm not enigble to vote and not able to
> remove myself from the list.
There isn't currently any handling for removing people who are blocked
on more than two projects nor for people who are global
Yep, I just got a second for a very old account
Beste SterkeBak,
U bent stemgerechtigd in het referendum over de afbeeldingsfilter. In dit
referendum wordt getracht meer input te krijgen voor de ontwikkeling en het
gebruik van een optionele functie die gebruikers in staat stelt om bepaalde
soorte
Hello,
I just recieved this e-mail while I'm not enigble to vote and not able to
remove myself from the list.
I guess if I recieve it more people that aren't engible will recieve it.
Best.
Huib
-- Forwarded message --
From: Wikimedia Referendum, 2011
Date: 2011/8/19
Subject: Im
@itwikiquote is an experiment by WMI,
it's a bot that writes the Quote of the day via Twitter.
It work fairly well.
Aubrey
2011/8/19 Lodewijk :
> Of course there's the infamous @wikipedia_mk and @itwikiquote :)
>
> 2011/8/18 Andrew Gray
>
>> On 18 August 2011 17:39, Tom Morris wrote:
>> > More
Of course there's the infamous @wikipedia_mk and @itwikiquote :)
2011/8/18 Andrew Gray
> On 18 August 2011 17:39, Tom Morris wrote:
> > More useful for smaller wikis. Tweeting new pages or recent changes
> > for enwiki would probably destroy Twitter very quickly.
> >
> > When I was more involve
Please, let me forward this conversation also to our brand new libraries list.
Aubrey
2011/8/19 Fred Bauder :
>> SAGE Open is one of those "PLoS ONE clones". Others include
>> BMJ Open: http://blogs.bmj.com/bmjopen/
>> Scientific Reports: http://www.nature.com/srep
>> AIP Advances: http://aipadva
21 matches
Mail list logo
