On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:25 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi community members,
I'm wondering how many people might be interested in having an IRC meeting
regarding the community's relationship to WMF and potentially developing
our own strategic plan that would be independent of
published some of the notifications, inducing a sort of Streisand effect.
Will the WMF publish or publicly track somewhere the receipt of these
notifications?
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
There are over four hundred list moderators?? I'm shocked there are even
that many people contributing to official mailing lists!
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Trillium,
Let's be clear about a few things. The only data that checkusers get is a
subset of the data that the WMF webservers (and all other webservers
throughout the Internet) collect on all visitors. This is data that is
voluntarily disclosed by readers (although they may not all be aware of
The issue is *about* Commons but doesn't only affect Commons, particularly
the discussion around alternative methods of making not-purely-free files
available and searchable across Commons. As you can see from the growing
discontent with Commons, this URAA issue is not the only problem. It's
Correction - the first line should read available and searchable across
WMF projects. Apologies for double posting.
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
The issue is *about* Commons but doesn't only affect Commons,
particularly the discussion around alternative
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
I have taken a moment to find a relevant reference to back up my
memory, see [1] which shows Salvio giuliano vigorously defending his
use of the word butthurt. Salvio giulano is a current English
Wikipedia Arbcom member. I have not
I don't think the concept of the project is the problem. I'm skeptical that
an Uncommons project built around fair use could be workable, considering
that the validity of a fair use claim is context-specific and no cross-wiki
project (like Commons) is going to have an easy time managing that
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is the behavior of a certain core set of Commons admins;
George, SJ, and Nathan:
In addition to Erik Moeller's initial proposal
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:29 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think the concept of the project is the problem. I'm skeptical
that
an Uncommons project built around fair use could be workable
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com
wrote:
All:
In other Wikimedia-related forums, recent discussions have focused on some
(alleged) comments at the Wiki Conference in New York. Apparently, some
people suggested that the WMF's Executive Director should dump
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
No, I have not recapped the whole situation. What I think is appropriate is
that we find a way to bring the situation to a calm conclusion of some
kind
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:11 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PRSTATEMENT
The statement is a nice read and it's hardly objectionable. I'd expect
nothing less from a group of public relations folks, all of whom have a
very vested interest
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Martin Rulsch martin.rul...@wikimedia.de
wrote:
And what's the purpose of your question(s)? How does it help you to know
what he said or not? Do you want to get an impression of his character?
Then better start over with fresh questions than the tendentious
substantial input of community
members.
As a result, the finished policy has rightly garnered a lot of support and
approval, and personally I'm happy to see it go live tomorrow.
~Nathan
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Trillium Corsage trillium2...@yandex.com
wrote:
I am writing to ask that the new
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com
wrote:
Nathan, 05/06/2014 18:46:
As a result, the finished policy has rightly garnered a lot of support and
approval,
{{citation needed}}
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/07/launching-a-privacy-policy-built
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:54 AM, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote:
A question to Yana et al.:
Is there any reason for the WMF to promote/sign Zero agreements instead of
the local chapters/user groups?
I mean, if that ability was subsidized to the chapters we could have a
different
or in part, if he proves that he is not responsible for
the event giving rise to the damage. Does this, perhaps in conjunction
with the Section 230 status of the WMF, provide some cover?
CC'd to the advocacy advisory list.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:23 PM, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
On 03/06/2014 12:53, Mark wrote:
On 6/2/14, 10:55 PM, ??? wrote:
There is no public interest in how many time celeb X got a detention
at school for not doing their homework at junior high.
Isn't that the kind of
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:54 PM, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote:
On 03/06/2014 22:35, Nathan wrote:
Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is
the
main feature of the article?
How about this 8 yo?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
to respond, but I don't think there
is a strong moral basis for not providing the round total number.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe
observers. I looked for one in the AffCom meta garden but
couldn't find anything quite like that.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk
wrote:
£2600 for everything. Got to get on! Don't want to get accused of hogging
the lists!
Thanks Jon! Sorry for my confusion, appreciate the response. (And its a new
month, and a new posting limit!).
it seriously should not be too difficult
to do this in a timely fashion.
Cheers
Russavia
The conference was in Berlin, not New York.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2014
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https
that the program to support such an organization had died, we put in to be
a user group.
Out of curiosity, what does the Borregos in the name mean?
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote:
Wil,
Just for the record, hands-off is the best way to describe our
approach to wikimedia-l moderation. We (the administrators) sometimes
step in when a thread or a poster gets way out of control, but for
this list, that
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Sam,
If all the steps could happen at the same time, and decisions were made by
a single person, then the process could indeed be done in 30 minutes under
ideal circumstances (a person being 24/7 online, and all
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:48 PM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi Lila,
My read of the *new* Privacy Policy is that nonpublic emails sent
to WMF should remain nonpublic unless the user gives consent to the
contrary. The policy states that We may share your information for a
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Markus Glaser
markus.gla...@wikimedia.de javascript:;wrote:
As we have more than 1 members now
I did not realize WMDE
Welcome Rachel!
Erik (or someone else), is there a succinct description of the mission of
the Community Engagement and Community Advocacy departments, and/or
especially a summary of the difference between their roles? Your e-mail
from December included some of this information, I'm just curious
appreciate that you have made
it clear you've seen the threads of the last few weeks and understand the
concerns that posters have described.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l
Perfect. Thanks as always Philippe for being awesome.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Nathan, I was responding to Lila's note to clarify that I had made the
decision to not discuss anything privately with any WMF employee. The
IRC discussion was referenced by Fae, so I sent a link to the
discussion so everyone
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Markus Glaser
markus.gla...@wikimedia.dewrote:
Am 27.05.2014 15:18, schrieb Andy Mabbett:
On 26 May 2014 13:38, Tim Moritz Hector tim-moritz.hec...@wikimedia.de
wrote:
The wording regarding the quorum to hold an exceptional general assembly
has
been
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Martijn Hoekstra
martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
wrote:
On 05/27/2014 09:44 AM, Stevie Benton wrote:
American Osteopathic Association
I'm not an expert on the latest woo-woo, but
FYI - Here is the previous thread on this list about this study / topic:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/460005?do=post_view_threaded
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Markus Glaser
markus.gla...@wikimedia.dewrote:
Hi Nathan,
I put my answers inline.
Am 27.05.2014 16:18, schrieb Nathan:
The fees are the same for either type of member, 24 euros per year?
Yes.
Double the term length of the supervisory board,
A term
That's a weird content architecture, right there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_medicine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_medicine_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_medicine_in_Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_physician
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: And
this conversation is
getting pretty repetitive, isn't it?
Yep!
Remember that some of the harsher reactions here have more to do with WR/WO
than you.
Hope the long string of uniformly negative reactions on the list haven't
comment or a bit of strong language.
Lastly, standard Internet comment on free speech: Your legal right to free
speech is not a protection against criticism or a limit in any other way on
what others can say to or about you.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 May 2014 13:19, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk
wrote:
...
2. Probably not. See
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Edward Galvez egal...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Hi Pine,
Thank you for your bringing this page to our attention and for raising
these interesting questions. I would have to agree that the “Program
evaluation basics” page is not well-designed and should be
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:12 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 20 May 2014 00:14, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
I did give serious consideration to going and properly categorizing the
image, but given the underlying threat from Russavia, and my
disinclination
to be
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:16 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
I'll be leaving Commons categorisation until it's tags rather than
ridiculously specific subcategories.
Commons has tags right now: they're called categories. Or is there a
distinction you're making?
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:44 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Nathan wrote:
Sure - ease of use for tagging and the sometimes complex hierarchical
nature of categories.
For ease of use (adding and removing), I think most wikis have HotCat
(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/HotCat
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 6:19 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 May 2014 23:14, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
For what it's worth, there was a recent external study of Wikipedia's
medical content that came to unflattering results:
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I'd like the Foundation to invest in such research, which is why I
brought it up here.
I cant think of several instances of donors' money being spent on things
that to me seemed less supportive of the
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
I'm a total newb here, and I know the grant system between WMF and the
different chapters has been debated in the past. But I have a simple
question: if WMF is funding these efforts through grants and the grant
money is used to
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
I looked at WMF's grant page here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants. I don't see any mention of
grants for academic research. Does the WMF give such grants? If not,
why not?
,Wil
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
I imagine this isn't the first time someone has thrown something like
this in to the Wikipedosphere. If so, what did people think? If not,
what do you guys think? :)
,Wil
I think it sounds a little bit like wikidata.org,
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to point out something that stands out to me. This is not an
outright contradiction, but it's a puzzling contrast. In an unrelated
thread on this email list, Executive Director Sue Gardner recently said:
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 8:46 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
Regarding
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-01-31#Strategy_discussion
The Board discussed how they will develop the process for the next
strategic plan. The Board would like the strategic planning process
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
Hi Risker,
On 27 Apr 2014, at 16:01, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
However, having accepted the validity of the proposal, the FDC does not
have the authority to delegate its role.
I think you're
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Richard Symonds
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
No, Aya, I don't think there will be a public report - I don't think it's
happened in previous years.
I for one would not be happy with making my marking grid public because the
bidders didn't know that
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Peter Southwood
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote:
Preferable for the affiliation to be a variable linked to the username. It
can then be changed if/when applicable. Is should be possible to link a
string of affiliations to a username. User should be able to
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
On 04/21/2014 12:07 PM, Nathan wrote:
Of the 120 staffers that don't have a staff account, how many have
accounts with (WMF) in the username - or accounts at all?
I honestly do not know the numbers, though I'd wager
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 2:16 PM, James Alexander
jalexan...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
wrote:
On 04/21/2014 12:07 PM, Nathan wrote:
Of the 120 staffers
activities. Of course all this serves
to support part of Pete's point in his blog post; transparency is tough to
successfully mandate, and hardly solves all of the inherent issues
surrounding for-profit engagement with Wikimedia content.
~Nathan
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
In February 2010, either shortly before or during his application for a top
level executive position as Chief Community Officer, Zack created[1] a user
page with the following content:
Mainly, I just fix typos
Many of the chapters are still in startup mode - a challenge that the WMF
should avoid when targeting organizations for sponsorship or donation.
Perhaps more saliently, OSM, MariaDB, Internet Archive etc. are not
representing the Wikimedia movement, aren't using Wikimedia trademarks,
and
I agree with Mike Peel on 'maybe' - I think donations from the WMF to
non-profit organizations could be great and very useful, but that the WMF
should
1) ensure that the donations have a substantial impact (i.e. not $500 to
ICRC, where WMF funds would get lost in a sea of other contributors),
2)
Which part do you think is a joke? The same notice is posted on all the
proposal forms.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:19 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.comwrote:
IMO if Nathan felt that a peaceful and private resolution couldnt or
shouldnt be achieved via one-on-one email exchange, I think the
appropriate response is to forward it privately to the list admins.
Rupert should
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 1:35 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote:
as i overrun my monthly limit of mails allowed on this list already,
and i do not want an unrelated discussion on a public mailing list,
this in private:
nathan, would you be so kind to invest a little bit more
or interrogatory
tone towards WMF employees is probably not helpful, as it rarely is in
professional communication.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote:
sarcasm
Wow, we've made an entire 1.6k out of bitcoin? This totally seems like the
highest-value way to spend our time! Thanks, Bitcoin! I'm sure that the
value of these items won't wildly vary in short spaces of time
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.comwrote:
We've tried this before and so far it hasn't worked very well. See results
from 2012-13 at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Donor_engagement/Thank_You_campaign
Generally speaking, we're moving away from
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Stryn@Wikimedia strynw...@gmail.com wrote:
The corrected report seems to be
http://www.finlandtimes.fi/national/2014/03/02/5152/Report-submitted-to-police-duly,-says-Wikimedia
Regards,
*Stryn*
Wow, that's one hell of a correction. Good on Finland Times.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 5:56 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 February 2014 22:03, Galileo Vidoni gali...@gmail.com wrote:
We remain convinced that something is fundamentally wrong when its
practical result is self-inflicting the highest possible loss of
contents.
And we
So the lesson here is that list archives should not be messed with. I don't
think that is news, I seem to remember hearing about the havoc potentially
caused by selectively editing list archives many years ago and once in
awhile ever since.
___
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.comwrote:
The archives were rebuilt (and then restored up to January) under request
of a user who shared private information in February. Old links are not
broken and you can normally access the specific volumes:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Craig Franklin
cfrank...@halonetwork.netwrote:
Hear that sound?
That's the sound of a million data miners working to figure out what juicy
bit of info has been redacted.
Cheers,
Craig
Found it: http://bit.ly/1fsZjVI
, that is not the policy of this list.
Wishing a safe and healthy life to all Ukrainians during their time of
turmoil.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Is there a way to incorporate the local policy by reference into the TOU,
something like The Wikimedia Foundation requires that all users being paid
to contribute follow the disclosure, conflict or related applicable policy
on each project where said users contribute.? Might that be a solution to
of money. Since the list archives form a public record and not all
list subscribers know everyone else, it would be very helpful if posters
considered including this kind of a disclosure in posts where it may be
meaningful.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.comwrote:
Le 12 févr. 2014 00:10, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com a écrit :
Well, it's actually pretty straightforward. For members of the Board of
Trustees, FDC and AffCom, as well as Board members of all Chapters. All of
us
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps you misunderstood what I was wondering about, which is probably my
fault as I was trying to avoid giving any specific examples. But without at
all attempting to disparage her or suggest that her intentions are anything
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote:
Hi Nathan,
Allow me to correct - WMIL is not withdrawing from international
activities. For example, WMIL will probably going to be one of the leading
chapters supporting WLE, and many others international projects
There's an article about the debate up from yesterday on Ars:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/01/wikimedia-considers-supporting-h-264-to-boost-accessibility-content/
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of
Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem. YouTube
enables cc-by uploading and has 4 million videos with a free license, and
6.5 million videos that are explicitly educational. Are we sure focusing on
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of
Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem. YouTube
enables cc-by uploading and has 4 million videos with a free license, and
6.5
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure what debate you're referring to. If it's about whether video
belongs in Wikipedia, I don't think it's even in question.
Wikipedia started in 2001 as all text.
It didn't have photos then, we now have photos.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
Ah. Well if you're not even buying into the legitimacy of photos on
Commons, I'm not sure there's a way to have a productive discussion about
video.
-Andrew
No, I think the vast repository of images, properly curated,
Thanks to WMDE for the thoughtful and very interesting feedback to the FDC.
As an observer but not a participant, I found it very helpful in organizing
and restating the criticism we've all read about the FDC process. The
statement is highly constructive, and I understand why it doesn't get into
I think we should just thank everyone, on at least a yearly basis, with a
thank you drive similar to what we do for fundraising. It doesn't need to
be for a specific edit or tied to any one IP. After the fundraiser hits the
goal we usually run it a little with a thank you banner, and if we did
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Seb35 seb35wikipe...@gmail.com wrote:
If a basic income is implemented somewhere in the world, people will have
more time for themselves in mean (probably more partial-time work), so they
will have more time to edit the Wikimedia projects, among other possible
We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the fundraiser.
I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
drives, even though editing is really the core way for people to donate to
Wikimedia.
___
Wikimedia-l
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
* Nathan wrote:
We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the
fundraiser.
I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
drives, even though editing is really the core way
You know what, I think this outcome is not just disappointing, it's
positively astounding. I have a lot that I could say about it, but I can't
imagine what the point of saying it could possibly be. Chalk one up for the
trolls.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.comwrote:
Yes, Nathan, please let us cut the bullshit, for I have a pretty low
tolerance for it, and I am happy to call you out on it.
You are right, I don't see anywhere in Odder's blog or in my posts on this
list that Sarah
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
Nathan,
I am unable to find a mention of sockpuppetry in the Terms of Use, whether
in Section 4 or elsewhere.
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use
I don't think there could be such a mention, really, given
Let's be clear, Russavia - the terms of use bar sockpuppetry, and the cease
and desist refers to concealing the identity of the author to deceive the
editing community. I don't see that you've accused Sarah of sockpuppetry,
so why not cut the bullshit? Thanks for notifying Wiki-PR, by the way, I'm
it should be elsewhere, it is probably unnecessary to remind us
again.
~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ
agreements between WMF
and other Wikimedia entities and Cultural Outreach Ltd?
Thanks,
Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan
srik.r...@wikimedia.in wrote:
I would like to note that this is highly irregular, biased, and unfair.
Last year, Wikimedia India had formally requested for similar concessions
during FDC Round 2 of 2012-13 and were denied the same and we
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:10 AM, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote:
In my opinon this whole bitcoin debate is framed incorrectly. The question
is not if it should be accepted or not, but which parameters make any
currency or payment method acceptable.
If I had to name a few, I would say:
I'm a little skeptical about the charitable nature of Bitpay's offer to
hold funds for the WMF. It doesn't help that they refer to Wikipedia's
bank accounts, but in the absence of other evidence I suspect that Bitpay
is taking advantage of the volatility of Bitcoin exchange rates to profit
from
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Matthew Walker mwal...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
That assumes that [Bitpay] are, in fact, forwarding donations at all.
We have received some funds from them.
~Matt Walker
Wikimedia Foundation
Fundraising Technology Team
Thanks Matt. I'm still concerned that they
If the number of donations and the total amount donated stayed the same,
how did the amount of the average donation spike by a factor of 10? Looks
like a data glitch, not some special strategy.
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 8:39 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm still very interested in
Hi Megan, quick question - when the campaign goal is hit, will the
fundraising campaign return to the low profile version you now run
year-round? Or will the banners stay up until a specific ending date?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
201 - 300 of 426 matches
Mail list logo
