On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:58 PM Robert Fernandez
wrote:
> Because they'd be immediately accused of libeling him and it would
> turn into a he said/they said.
>
> Also, while I do think the WMF should be in the business of blocking
> problem-causing users, it shouldn't be in the business of speaki
Because they'd be immediately accused of libeling him and it would
turn into a he said/they said.
Also, while I do think the WMF should be in the business of blocking
problem-causing users, it shouldn't be in the business of speaking out
against them publicly.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:39 PM Benj
Do you at least believe him when he says he hasn't contacted anyone offwiki,
and everything he was warned about was onwiki?
And if he really is lying, why can't they even say so?
On Jun 28, 2019, at 12:14 PM, Robert Fernandez wrote:
> I do.
>
> It just doesn’t make any sense. His acco
I do.
It just doesn’t make any sense. His account is either wrong or leaving out
much of the truth.
I have some idea (from unfortunate experience) how long office bans take,
how much work goes into them, and how many people have to sign off on them.
So we’re either saying one person with a chec
Indeed... there is no wikiversity phd. Nor is one planned in the near
future in any language, as far as I know.
Getting WV courses onto accredited platforms seems like a step towards
alignment (or perhaps first: working w/ an existing set of accredited
courses and getting their materials onto WV a
The files were mainly kept because most of them were considered to be
utilitarian objects, but IMO the rationale was correct, as all of them are
modern props from the Lord of the Rings movie series.
Personally, I think it could be interpreted or construed as some kind of
petty revenge from Fram on
I think many Commons users would be flatly insulted by the idea that they
wouldn't take action against something done on Commons because an English
Wikipedia admin did it. Commons is as fiercely protective of its
independence as EN-WP is.
And this elides a crucial question: Were the deletion nomin
Not really demonizing WMF, but healthily not trusting at face value what
they say, specially given WMF quite messy record at that.
The WMF interference in that Wikipedia community was completely out of
process, and to the moment lacking any justification worth of that name.
IMO it is OK for that c
Many of us take the opposing view that we do not have enough reason to think
the ban was justifiable, and that the ban itself is a small part of the issue,
which is seen as lack of due process, compounded by poor communication and bad
crisis management.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
Nobody seems to be insinuating that Fram is lying. It's just plain
stupidity to demonize the WMF's action solely on their part of the story
alone. Fram has penchant for irritating people he disagrees with and
it's possible they have crossed the line.
Recently there was an AbCom case against Ram
Yes, like Samuel I'm excited to see some experimentation with alternative
(and hopefully better) mediums for community engagement.
Adrian Raddatz
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 7:05 PM Samuel Klein wrote:
> I love the idea of experimenting like this.
> More like this please. The simpler and lighter
Dear all,
I would like to announce that the call for submissions for the Wikimedia
CEE Meeting 2019, which will take place in Belgrade from 11-13 October, has
been extended until 10 August. If you have some learning in mind that you
think should be shared with the CEE communities, this is a very g
An update on this thread:
* We have launched the survey on 2019-06-26 in 15 languages and we
intend to stop the surveys 7 days after launch time. The current flow
of responses is as expected.
* The participating languages are: ar, de, en (sampling from all
countries), en (sampling from countries
Why do you doubt Fram? What do you think happened? And why can't the WMF say
even so much as a, "That's not accurate."?
You really think he's just outright lying?
On Jun 14, 2019, at 4:03 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> le
14 matches
Mail list logo
