I'm not in accounting, but my guess is that this involves Paypal processing
fees for the fundraiser...
pb
___
Philippe Beaudette
Director, Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
415-839-6885, x 6643
phili...@wikimedia.org
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:38 PM, En Pine wrote:
I probably know what images we are talking about here. I believe the
closing admins' arguments also include that by uploading those images to
Flickr, those actress would have already given consent?
Best regards,
[[User:Bencmq]] / Benjamin Chen
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Techman224 wrote:
I notice that the financial report at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_February_2012 says
something about “higher bank fees ($42K)”. Has anyone taken a hard look at
these fees to see if WMF could organize its utilization of bank services in
such a way that it can lower thi
Would you mind posting this on wiki so that everyone there can comment about
this. Not many on wiki users subscribe to this list.
Thanks,
Techman224
On 2012-03-10, at 10:03 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board published the following
> Resolution:
>
>
> ---o0o-
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board published the following
Resolution:
---o0o---
The Wikimedia Foundation Board affirms the value of freely licensed
content, and we pay special attention to the provenance of this content. We
also value the right to privacy, for our editors and readers as
Sorry about the typo. That should have said foundation-l.
Pine
-Original Message-
From: En Pine
Sent: Saturday, 10 March, 2012 19:57
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: Strategy wiki logo, why are Strategy and Meta separate wikis?
Others have asked this question on the
Others have asked this question on the wiki strategy logo's talk page, but I
think that forum-l is a better place for this question. Why do we have
Strategy as a separate wiki from Meta? Would it be better to merge the two
wikis?
Pine
--
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 20
On 10 March 2012 22:15, Andrew Gray wrote:
> The image filter may not be a good solution, but too much of the
> response involves saying "we're fine, we're neutral, we don't need to
> do anything" and leaving it there; this isn't the case, and we do need
> to think seriously about these issues wi
Michael Peel wrote:
> I'd like to see more information here. What activities are MarkMonitor
> involved in with the 'anti-piracy fight'? Are they involved in filtering all
> peer-to-peer traffic, or just the traffic that contravenes copyright law? As a
> domain name supplier, what is their relation
On 9 March 2012 14:17, Thomas Morton wrote:
> We also work quite well as a filter of information. And it is improving
> this that we are currently discussing.
>
> Improving the filtering of information is a critical facet of making it
> accessible to as many people as possible. If a Muslim refuse
Michael Peel, 10/03/2012 21:54:
I'm all in favour of moving the Wikimedia domain names from GoDaddy to
MarkMonitor (and, tbh, I'm rather puzzled by why the WMF decided to use GoDaddy
in the first place), I'm just rather puzzled by your statements here.
The official blog post says that «the Fo
Hi Domas,
I'd like to see more information here. What activities are MarkMonitor involved
in with the 'anti-piracy fight'? Are they involved in filtering all
peer-to-peer traffic, or just the traffic that contravenes copyright law? As a
domain name supplier, what is their relation to ISPs, and
2012/3/10 Domas Mituzas
> Hi!
>
> I hereby congratulate Wikimedia Foundation switching domains from
> pro-SOPA Godaddy to MarkMonitor.
>
> Not that many people know, but MarkMonitor is ahead of the industry in
> anti-piracy fight:
>
> * They have systems to do real-time content filtering for ISPs
Hi!
I hereby congratulate Wikimedia Foundation switching domains from
pro-SOPA Godaddy to MarkMonitor.
Not that many people know, but MarkMonitor is ahead of the industry in
anti-piracy fight:
* They have systems to do real-time content filtering for ISPs, that
stop peer-to-peer piracy.
* They p
Hello all,
I feel the logo should be voted on as I am unsure if Meta logo is
appropriate for the wiki. I do not believe this was discussed before. I
have posted a vote for a new strategy wiki logo (including the current logo
if people want to keep things as is). All logos excluding the current
ver
Thomas Morton wrote:
>> Give as a clear message, that Wikipedia/Wikimedia will never assist in
>> hiding knowledge.
>
> The day that Wiki*edia changes its mission from providing access to free
> knowledge to "enforcing our view of knowledge on you", would be a saddening
> day.
You've excluded Wik
On 10 March 2012 14:58, David Gerard wrote:
> On 10 March 2012 14:54, geni wrote:
>> Not that I'm aware of but if you follow special:newpages for any
>> length of time you will notice a tendency for the problematical
>> articles to be orphans. After all a redlink generally means that at
>> least
On 10 March 2012 14:54, geni wrote:
> Not that I'm aware of but if you follow special:newpages for any
> length of time you will notice a tendency for the problematical
> articles to be orphans. After all a redlink generally means that at
> least one other person has thought that the article shou
On 10 March 2012 14:47, David Gerard wrote:
> On 10 March 2012 14:18, geni wrote:
>
>> People creating articles by clicking on redlinks are not as a general
>> rule a significant issue.
>
>
> That appears to be a numerical claim. Do we have numbers?
>
Not that I'm aware of but if you follow spec
On 10 March 2012 14:18, geni wrote:
> People creating articles by clicking on redlinks are not as a general
> rule a significant issue.
That appears to be a numerical claim. Do we have numbers?
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.
On Mar 9, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Neil Babbage wrote:
>
>
>> If you ran a charity store committed to providing educational products
>> free to all who needed them you wouldn't get many children as customers if
>> you put hardcore sex produc
On 10 March 2012 11:16, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> The first of the two Engineering is working on, partly because it lends
> itself to being broken out into smaller pieces of work, is the Landing
> System. Currently, when a registered newbie clicks on a redlink, they get
> automatically taken to an edi
I would like it the other way:
Why should some minorities force a worldwide project to obay their point of
view regarding images or other controversial content?
Why should the german speaking community collect funds for this filtering and
hiding project?
Every community is free to discuss whic
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Tilman Bayer wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> please find below the WMF report for February 2012, in plain text.
>
> As always, the editable and formatted version is on Meta:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_February_2012
>
> and the reports are po
Hey guys
So, as you know, we have issues with how new pages are treated on
Wikipedia. A lot of the pages created by new editors simply aren't very
good; this is bad for the new editors, because their pages get deleted, and
bad for the new page patrollers who then have to wade through a tide of
jun
I was using "useful" in its most basic sense - to mean "capable of being used
at all". That is, in the context of this discussion, avoids the current
situation where there is a risk that the whole encyclopedia (or any other
project) is off limits to certain groups or individuals because they ca
26 matches
Mail list logo
