Re: [Foundation-l] Jay Walsh's statement

On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Adam Cuerden wrote: > With respect, the work on the Sexual Content proposal as pretty much > thrown out all of Jimbo's work, and is proceeding from a direction [snip] You're linking to something from May 17th. It would be much more productive to focus on matters w

[Foundation-l] Jay Walsh's statement

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2010/clarifying-recent-coverage-of-wikipedia/ With respect, the work on the Sexual Content proposal as pretty much thrown out all of Jimbo's work, and is proceeding from a direction more consistent with the values of Commons. To say that " Jimmy is actively engaged in di

[Foundation-l] Strategic Planning Office Hours

Hi Everyone - Our next strategic planning office hours will be: 20:00-21:00 UTC, Tuesday, 1 May. Local timezones can be checked athttp://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?year=2010&month=6&day=1&hour=20&min=0&sec=0&p1=0 As always, you can access the chat by going to https://webchat.fr

[Foundation-l] Fwd: [Air-L] Open Video Conference proposals deadline: June 7th

This is relevant to Wikivideoistas ... wasn't last year's conf the origin of the "video on Wikipedia" campaign? Watch out, who knows what they'll come up with this year. -- Forwarded message -- From: Ben Moskowitz Date: Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:58 AM Subject: [Air-L] Open Video Con

Re: [Foundation-l] Participation of intellectual professions

> I see a number of issues holding professionals back from contributing: > > 1) Some do not realize that it is possible to edit Wikipedia ( I hear > this > at work when people ask me how I became an editor ). Maybe we should > advertise the fact that yes you too can edit Wikipedia. This, I think,

[Foundation-l] Participation of intellectual professions

I see a number of issues holding professionals back from contributing: 1) Some do not realize that it is possible to edit Wikipedia ( I hear this at work when people ask me how I became an editor ). Maybe we should advertise the fact that yes you too can edit Wikipedia. 2) Many are just not inte

[Foundation-l] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2010/clarifying-recent-coverage-of-wikipedia/

With respect, the work on the Sexual Content proposal as pretty much thrown out all of Jimbo's work, and is proceeding from a direction more consistent with the values of Commons. To say that " Jimmy is actively engaged in discussions with other Wikimedia editors about sexually-explicit materials o