On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
> Some pretty nice comments mixed in there. ;-) They also do a good job
> explaining why we need money.
>
> [Jay: interesting to look at, might be nice to use some like their
> comments in the future]
Some of it is just hopeless.
"Why can't th
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:42 PM, Dan Collins wrote:
> Wait. Is donating supposed to make the banner go away?
>
> Because it didn't...
No, there's a gadget and a "collapse" (only makes it smaller) button for that.
--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023
---
Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Chad wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:12 PM, geni wrote:
> >> 2008/12/23 Robert Rohde :
> >> > Looks like the new appeal is working well.
> >> >
> >> > We seem to be on pace to have the best single day of
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Chad wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:12 PM, geni wrote:
>> 2008/12/23 Robert Rohde :
>> > Looks like the new appeal is working well.
>> >
>> > We seem to be on pace to have the best single day of this fund drive.
>> >
>> > -Robert Rohde
>> >
>>
>> Not sure. Sti
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:12 PM, geni wrote:
> 2008/12/23 Robert Rohde :
> > Looks like the new appeal is working well.
> >
> > We seem to be on pace to have the best single day of this fund drive.
> >
> > -Robert Rohde
> >
>
> Not sure. Still getting complaints among others that donating doesn't
2008/12/23 Robert Rohde :
> Looks like the new appeal is working well.
>
> We seem to be on pace to have the best single day of this fund drive.
>
> -Robert Rohde
>
Not sure. Still getting complaints among others that donating doesn't
make the banner go away:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.ph
Looks like the new appeal is working well.
We seem to be on pace to have the best single day of this fund drive.
-Robert Rohde
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Delirium wrote:
> I assume most of you at least occasionally read one of the Wikimedia
> websites so probably saw this in a sitenotice,
David Goodman wrote:
> Upsell is the name of the leading market research company in
> publishing--probably they are the ones who designed it. I'm suprised,
> for they are generally known as competent.
No, that would be upsell as in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up-selling
I'd give you a Britanni
2008/12/23 Delirium :
> Worriers about the perennial suggestions to put advertising somewhere on
> the site(s) might also like what appears to be the closest to a no-ads
> pledge I've seen so far: "Like a national park or a school, we don't
> believe advertising should have a place in Wikipedia".
David Gerard wrote:
> (A tangential note: I consider NPOV to be our most important
> innovation - much more radical than merely letting anyone edit your
> encyclopedia. The concept of "neutrality" has existed in various
> guises, but not like Wikipedia does it, with the consequences it has
> as a s
I assume most of you at least occasionally read one of the Wikimedia
websites so probably saw this in a sitenotice, but I thought it was a
very well done appeal, concisely highlighting exactly what we do, why
it's different than what most people do, and why we're worth donating
to, so worth poi
I noticed that Britannica is using some creative commons images from
Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.
Example:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic-art/589288/113374/Courthouse-in-Denton-Texas
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Old_Courthouse_Denton_TX.jpg
-Aude
___
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Tim Starling wrote:
> I checked a larger biography, and it looked complete to me. Note that it
> uses ajax to load article sections as you scroll to them, so you have to
> scroll up and down the page to trigger all the ajax loads before you can
> copy the text out.
2008/12/22 Gregory Maxwell :
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 5:38 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>> (A tangential note: I consider NPOV to be our most important
>> innovation - much more radical than merely letting anyone edit your
>> encyclopedia. The concept of "neutrality" has existed in various
>> guises,
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 5:38 PM, David Gerard wrote:
[snip]
> (A tangential note: I consider NPOV to be our most important
> innovation - much more radical than merely letting anyone edit your
> encyclopedia. The concept of "neutrality" has existed in various
> guises, but not like Wikipedia does
2008/12/22 Tomasz Ganicz :
> I don't like guys from Wikmedia projects speaking in some sort of
> "supremacy" language. Our goal is to create: "a world in which every
> single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge." so
> if the Britannica or PWN or any other commercial provider o
2008/12/22 David Gerard :
> 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
>
>> Then, I wanted to see what is the value of Britannica; without
>> success. It is a "private company" (in US sense of that meaning;
>> "public companies" in European sense are just companies owned by some
>> local or state government; and in
2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
> Then, I wanted to see what is the value of Britannica; without
> success. It is a "private company" (in US sense of that meaning;
> "public companies" in European sense are just companies owned by some
> local or state government; and in some specific circumstances). It
Sorry, wrong company name--I was thinking of another one --a truly
competent one, Outsell, that has undoubtedly nothing to do with this
nonsensical method of protection.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:20 PM, David Goodman wrote:
> Upsell is the name of the leading market research company in
> publishi
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:17 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Tim Starling
>> wrote:
>
>>> The following Firefox bookmarklet may be useful:
>>> javascript:(function(){Darwin.Upsell.deactivate();})()
>
>> Thanks! It works well :)
>
>
> They c
Upsell is the name of the leading market research company in
publishing--probably they are the ones who designed it. I'm suprised,
for they are generally known as competent.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:17 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Tim St
2008/12/22 David Gerard :
> They called the function "upsell"? *facepalm* Wikipedia doesn't need
> to do anything to compete with Britannica, just leave them to collapse
> under the weight of their own ineptitude.
>
> We should probably run a large public "Save Britannica!" campaign -
> how to save
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
> 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
>> If I understood well, the content of the online edition of Britannica
>> became free (as in "free beer", of course). They are putting some
>> irritating screen with recommendation to buy access to their edition
Dnia 22 grudnia 2008 20:42 "Tomasz Ganicz" napisał(a):
> 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
> > Many times we raised the issue that many (maybe majority of) users of
> > Wikimedia content don't realize that it is possible to edit pages on
> > Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Last time I was talk
2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Tim Starling wrote:
>> The following Firefox bookmarklet may be useful:
>> javascript:(function(){Darwin.Upsell.deactivate();})()
> Thanks! It works well :)
They called the function "upsell"? *facepalm* Wikipedia doesn't need
to do a
2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
> Many times we raised the issue that many (maybe majority of) users of
> Wikimedia content don't realize that it is possible to edit pages on
> Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Last time I was talking about
> it a couple of days ago, during the conference in Belgra
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Tim Starling wrote:
> The following Firefox bookmarklet may be useful:
>
> javascript:(function(){Darwin.Upsell.deactivate();})()
>
> Put it in a bookmark in your toolbar and click it to get rid of the
> annoying box. It doesn't come back until you go to another pa
Many times we raised the issue that many (maybe majority of) users of
Wikimedia content don't realize that it is possible to edit pages on
Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Last time I was talking about
it a couple of days ago, during the conference in Belgrade, with a
Polish Wikimedian, Marc
teun spaans wrote:
> "but possibly illegal" you can omit the word "possibly". I dont see a copy
> left license at their site.
You can copy it for your personal use :°♫
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
> wrote:
>> 2008/12/22 Amir E. Aharoni :
>>> 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
>>> An
2008/12/22 teun spaans :
> "but possibly illegal" you can omit the word "possibly". I dont see a copy
> left license at their site.
It may be possible to copy from EB under fair use terms. On Wikipedia
i don't even need to think about that (except some images...).
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni
heb: ht
"but possibly illegal" you can omit the word "possibly". I dont see a copy
left license at their site.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
> 2008/12/22 Amir E. Aharoni :
> > 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
> > And Britannica has this totally weird feature - the article loads
> > its
2008/12/22 Amir E. Aharoni :
> 2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
> And Britannica has this totally weird feature - the article loads
> itself as soon as the scrollbar progresses through it. So even if it
> is free as in beer, it is obnoxiously inconvenient to copy text from
> it, 'cuz Ctrl-A doesn't work a
2008/12/22 Milos Rancic :
> If I understood well, the content of the online edition of Britannica
> became free (as in "free beer", of course). They are putting some
> irritating screen with recommendation to buy access to their edition
> every 10 seconds (or so), but, in fact, it is possible to co
33 matches
Mail list logo
