Details on how to measure it are relatively complex. We can make a guess
because of data collected from sources available for Catalan. My mail was
just to explain the phenomena.
Figures results from: a) Surveys. Last one answered by 400 Catalan Wikipedia
readers. We use results from answer to qu
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Andrew Garrett wrote:
> (hint: a 16-year-old masturbating is
> not "real" child pornography, and is in fact legal, though explicit,
> in New South Wales, Australia).
>
Last I checked the WMF falls under US law, so you might want to read
http://www.law.cornell.edu/
Mike Godwin wrote:
> Nathan writes:
>
> With respect, legal issues are debated on many projects practically
>
>> every day. This particular issue is no different. In some
>> jurisdictions, just accessing such files can expose one to legal risk.
>> While Mike is a good lawyer, he doesn't represen
**
____ _ __ _
/ / /\ \ (_) | _(_)___(_)_ __ ___
\ \/ \/ / | |/ / |_ / | '_ \ / _ \
\ /\ /| | <| |/ /| | | | | __/
\/ \/ |_|_|\_\_/___|_|_| |_|\___|
.org
Anno Domini MMX Week III Numb
2010/1/17 private musings :
> Here's another concerning aspect of management of explicit media on WMF;
> It's been asserted that images of a 16 year old girl masturbating have been
> uploaded to commons;
Whats that got to do with management? Any service that allows user
uploads of images is going
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:31 PM, private musings wrote:
>
> I just had a good chat with someone pointing out that my posts probably
> conflate a few different areas, so perhaps while I may have your ear, Mike,
> I could ask you if you'd see any problem with expanding the role of OTRS to
> include
heh! indeed - I don't think anyone would expect you to disclose everything
on this list! That would be rather silly ;-)
I'm also certain of both your expertise and connections in regard to law
enforcement, DOJs and whatnot - I certainly haven't meant to imply that your
expertise in this regard is a
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:41 PM, private musings wrote:
>
> Finally, your last bit, Mike, seemed to indicate that you feel the DOJ
> (department of justice, I think) would be wanting to talk to you if anything
> bad was going on does that really prohibit us from chatting about stuff
> here? Ha
( ah c'mon d - who loves ya' baby ;-)
It's good to see you (Mike) here too - I'm glad you're clearly aware of the
concerns I've consistently raised, and I appreciate that I may not have been
completely clear about what I would hope the foundation, as oppose to the
communities, might be able to do -
2010/1/19 Mike Godwin :
> Keep in mind, though, that PM is constantly asking for Foundation
> intervention with regard to the images that he is so consistently reviewing
> and concerned about. Why PM wants Foundation intervention rather than
> community consensus is unclear to me --
It's because
Nathan writes:
With respect, legal issues are debated on many projects practically
> every day. This particular issue is no different. In some
> jurisdictions, just accessing such files can expose one to legal risk.
> While Mike is a good lawyer, he doesn't represent individual editors -
> and the
> It's possible for system administrators to delete files entirely from
> the servers for legal reasons, but because it is quite
> labour-intensive, I for one have only ever performed such a deletion
> when it is real child pornography (hint: a 16-year-old masturbating is
> not "real" child pornogr
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 2:23 AM, K. Peachey wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:39 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
>> iirc, there is already a mediawiki capability for images to be
>> completely removed from the servers.
>>
>> I can't see this capability in the sysop tools, so maybe I only imagined it
On 01/18/2010 09:29 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
> There are 3 phenomena acting simultaneously against the number of visits to
> small projects: The bilingual effect, the size effect, and the Google
> effect. For Catalan case we estimate a penalization factor of 8.3 (that
> means that visits are 8.3 times
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>> somewhat taken aback by a few of the pics in that video... are we ever
>> going to have an article called "gay facial"?
>
> Are you saying that you will be surprised if you find out that we have one?
Heh, after I pressed 'send' I though
Dear all,
We've had SUL ([1]) for almost two years now. At the moment projects all
have different policies for usurpation. On some projects conflicts can
easily be solved, while on others they can't.
Are there any plans for having a Foundation wide policy on that? Will
unattached accounts ever be
Joan Goma hett schreven:
> There are 3 phenomena acting simultaneously against the number of visits to
> small projects: The bilingual effect, the size effect, and the Google
> effect. For Catalan case we estimate a penalization factor of 8.3 (that
> means that visits are 8.3 times less that what t
There are 3 phenomena acting simultaneously against the number of visits to
small projects: The bilingual effect, the size effect, and the Google
effect. For Catalan case we estimate a penalization factor of 8.3 (that
means that visits are 8.3 times less that what they should be). It comes
from: 1.
On Jan 18, 2010, at 10:25 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>
> Are you saying that you will be surprised if you find out that we
> have one?
I'm mostly surprised that we DON'T.
Philippe Beaudette
Facilitator, Strategy Project
Wikimedia Foundation
phili...@wikimedia.o
Дана Monday 18 January 2010 16:33:00 Bod Notbod написа:
> somewhat taken aback by a few of the pics in that video... are we ever
> going to have an article called "gay facial"?
Are you saying that you will be surprised if you find out that we have one?
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:19 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>> As for the link, showing these in greatly enlarged versions, without
>> the context of the articles in which they are used, is setting up a
>> strong bias. We've never engaged in that use of the material, nor
>> would we. If people want to
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:00, private musings wrote:
> I'm more raising the issue that what could be child pornography remains
> available to wmf volunteers with 'oversight' op.s on commons - I don't think
you wanna get the only fun from poor oversights, naughty
naughty
22 matches
Mail list logo
