Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Marco Chiesa wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Robert Rohde wrote:
>>
>>> The licensing update poll has been tallied.
>>>
>>> "Yes, I am in favor of this change" : 13242 (75.8%)
>>> "No, I am opposed to this change" : 182
PM, while I respect your opinions, I must express my strong disagreement with
most of them.
Your first idea is restricting sexual content from userspace. This would
encroach on personal freedom, because why shouldn't people be able to post
whatever they want in their personal space?
The secon
Hi all,
I saw this news item today;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8061979.stm
and felt that it was tangentially related to the discussions on this list
concerning sexual content on wikimedia - it's prompted me to make this reply
anywhoo (both the story and the comments are worth reading, and I f
2009/5/22 Anthony :
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:43 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
>
>> Yes -- I think this is definitely the largest group of Wikimedians to
>> ever collectively express an opinion on anything! It'd be worth
>> figuring out why the vote was successful, if possible (long period of
>> votin
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:43 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> Yes -- I think this is definitely the largest group of Wikimedians to
> ever collectively express an opinion on anything! It'd be worth
> figuring out why the vote was successful, if possible (long period of
> voting? ubiquitous sitenotices?
2009/5/22 Michael Snow :
> Deliberately low threshold for eligibility.
Do we have any statistics for what the turnout was among different
demographics? In particular, do we know how many people voted that
wouldn't have been eligible under the board election suffrage rules?
If it isn't many then th
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Michael Snow wrote:
> phoebe ayers wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Robert Rohde
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Marco Chiesa
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Robert Rohde
> wrote:
> >>>
> The licensing up
phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Robert Rohde wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Marco Chiesa wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Robert Rohde wrote:
>>>
The licensing update poll has been tallied.
"Yes, I am in favor of t
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Marco Chiesa wrote:
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Robert Rohde wrote:
>>> The licensing update poll has been tallied.
>>>
>>> "Yes, I am in favor of this change" : 13242 (75.8%)
>>> "No, I am opposed
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:12 PM, effe iets anders
wrote:
> 2009/5/22 Anthony
>
> >
> >
> > Which way do neutral votes count on RfA?
> >
>
> 1) at which project (and please dont use enwiki abbreviations)
The important one (and why not).
> 2) does it matter? :)
Just wondering.
I see from
htt
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:19 PM, effe iets anders
wrote:
>
>
> 2009/5/22 Anthony
>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:12 PM, effe iets anders <
>> effeietsand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 2009/5/22 Anthony
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Which way do neutral votes count on RfA?
>>> >
>>>
>>> 1) at which project
2009/5/22 Anthony
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:12 PM, effe iets anders <
> effeietsand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2009/5/22 Anthony
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Which way do neutral votes count on RfA?
>> >
>>
>> 1) at which project (and please dont use enwiki abbreviations)
>
>
> The important one (and why
2009/5/22 Anthony
>
>
> Which way do neutral votes count on RfA?
>
1) at which project (and please dont use enwiki abbreviations)
2) does it matter? :)
eia
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikim
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> 2009/5/20 Robert Rohde :
> > The licensing update poll has been tallied.
> >
> > "Yes, I am in favor of this change" : 13242 (75.8%)
> > "No, I am opposed to this change" : 1829 (10.5%)
> > "I do not have an opinion on this change" : 2391
>> I don't know how many people were eligible to vote in the license
>> migration, but I believe there are currently about 150,000 active
>> editors, if active is defined as "a registered user who has made more
>> than five edits in the past month." Either Erik (Moeller or Zachte), or
>> Frank, mig
2009/5/20 Robert Rohde :
> The licensing update poll has been tallied.
>
> "Yes, I am in favor of this change" : 13242 (75.8%)
> "No, I am opposed to this change" : 1829 (10.5%)
> "I do not have an opinion on this change" : 2391 (13.7%)
I do want to state for the record that the only reason a "
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/5/21 Robert Rohde :
>> I believe there are around 600,000 qualified accounts (roughly half of
>> which from enwiki).
>
> What is your source for that?
>
>> PS. Incidentally enwiki has 9.7 M registered accounts, but 70% of
>> these have e
2009/5/21 Robert Rohde :
> I believe there are around 600,000 qualified accounts (roughly half of
> which from enwiki).
What is your source for that?
> PS. Incidentally enwiki has 9.7 M registered accounts, but 70% of
> these have exactly 0 edits and 90% have less than 5 edits.
90% with less tha
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Once again, a big *thank you* to the licensing committee for
> administering the voting process. All the volunteers on the committee
> have been hugely helpful. I want to especially mention Robert Rohde,
> without whom the result probably wouldn't have been ready last week.
>
2009/5/21 Michael Snow :
> In light of the vote results announced regarding the proposed licensing
> update, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has unanimously
> passed the following resolution:
>
> Resolved that:
>
> Whereas the Wikimedia community, in a project-wide vote, has expressed
>
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
> I don't know how many people were eligible to vote in the license migration,
> but I believe there are currently about 150,000 active editors, if active is
> defined as "a registered user who has made more than five edits in the past
> month
2009/5/21 Michael Snow :
> In light of the vote results announced regarding the proposed licensing
> update, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has unanimously
> passed the following resolution:
>
> Resolved that:
>
> Whereas the Wikimedia community, in a project-wide vote, has expressed
>
I don't know how many people were eligible to vote in the license migration,
but I believe there are currently about 150,000 active editors, if active is
defined as "a registered user who has made more than five edits in the past
month." Either Erik (Moeller or Zachte), or Frank, might be able t
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/5/21 Andrew Gray :
>> 2009/5/21 Robert Rohde :
>>
I think this is a very good result, in particular the turnout looks great
to me!
Congratulations to all who have worked hard to get to it, and I hope
there will be a
2009/5/21 Andrew Gray :
> 2009/5/21 Robert Rohde :
>
>>> I think this is a very good result, in particular the turnout looks great
>>> to me!
>>> Congratulations to all who have worked hard to get to it, and I hope
>>> there will be a board resolution soon.
>>
>> As was commented on elsewhere, the
2009/5/21 Robert Rohde :
>> I think this is a very good result, in particular the turnout looks great to
>> me!
>> Congratulations to all who have worked hard to get to it, and I hope
>> there will be a board resolution soon.
>
> As was commented on elsewhere, the 2008 Board Election only had 301
In light of the vote results announced regarding the proposed licensing
update, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has unanimously
passed the following resolution:
Resolved that:
Whereas the Wikimedia community, in a project-wide vote, has expressed
very strong support for changing the
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Marco Chiesa wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Robert Rohde wrote:
>> The licensing update poll has been tallied.
>>
>> "Yes, I am in favor of this change" : 13242 (75.8%)
>> "No, I am opposed to this change" : 1829 (10.5%)
>> "I do not have an opinion o
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Robert Rohde wrote:
> The licensing update poll has been tallied.
>
> "Yes, I am in favor of this change" : 13242 (75.8%)
> "No, I am opposed to this change" : 1829 (10.5%)
> "I do not have an opinion on this change" : 2391 (13.7%)
>
> Total ballots cast and cer
29 matches
Mail list logo
