Hoi,
The lack of options to vote for makes it a biased attempt at strong arming
into a specific directions. In my opinion as it is flawed it is hardly
relevant.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 14 March 2011 07:21, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote:
> Liam Wyatt wrote:
> > I presume you are raising this point now in because of the recent global
> > banner referring people to the "March 11 Update" on Strategy Wiki signed
> by
> > Sue - http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/March_2011_Update
> > Unless I'm mistaken that banner was only displayed to logged-in editors
> > however this RfC does not differentiate between banners that are only
> shown to
> > either logged-in or anonymous users. As a result I do not think that this
> RfC
> > which you started last August is an adequate representation of the
> consensus
> > of Wikimedians towards this particular banner (if that is indeed the
> reason
> > why you to raise this issue now).
>
> That banner is what reminded me of the RFC (and the general issue). It's a
> bit late to pull that one back, though. Instead, I'd like to try to make
> sure that future banners undergo some sort of sanity check before being
> translated/deployed.
>
> > Certainly, as time goes on there is an increasing need for guidelines
> about
> > who is allowed to use what kind of banners, for what purpose, when and
> > displayed to whom. This discussion could also include elements of:
> banners on
> > watchlists; frequency (e.g. "only 1 in every 1,000 hits");
> > logged-in/anon/everyone; which projects/languages; Chapters/WMF
> originated;
> > geolocation (and to what level of precision); what category of thing it's
> > promoting (fundraising, IRL event, election); etc.
>
> Yes, CentralNotice's feature set has grown, which is great for a lot of
> reasons, but it increases the complexity of any attempt to regulate and
> control global banners.
>
> I'm not really sure what the best solution is to make sure that global
> banners are appropriate (and appropriately targeted). I think it'd be
> reasonable to not run any new banners until a better process is defined,
> but
> I imagine some people would object to that. :-)
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
