On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Tom Morris wrote:
>
> I was drawing an analogy: the point I was making is very simple - the
> general principle of "we shouldn't do X because someone else might
> reuse it for bad thing Y" is a pretty lousy argument, given that we do
> quite a lot of things in the
Chapters are ok with sharing the numbers. Please note, these are
preliminary numbers:
https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsYxO0Je1DGRdHZQMW53X2xSMm5JaWc4ZWNseU9uemc&hl=en_US#gid=0
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Brandon Harris wrote:
>
>
> On 11/30/11 6:11 PM, Sue Gar
On 11/30/11 6:11 PM, Sue Gardner wrote:
> There was a brief outage due to that page, Nathan, a few days ago.
> (Because of Brandon Harris's AMA on Reddit.)
Sorry about that.
--
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoun
On 1 December 2011 15:33, Juergen Fenn wrote:
> Sue, if you are currently not able to give live statistics for technical
> reasons, perhaps you could announce the current statistics on a static web
> page for the meanwhile?
Hi Juergen,
I think there's a backup Google spreadsheet. The spreadshe
Sue, if you are currently not able to give live statistics for technical
reasons, perhaps you could announce the current statistics on a static web page
for the meanwhile?
Best regards,
Juergen Fenn.
- Ursprüngliche Message -
> Von: Sue Gardner
> An: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Tom Morris wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 09:11, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
>> This is not a theoretical risk. This has happened. Most famously in
>> the case of Virgin using pictures of persons that were licenced under
>> a free licence, in their advertising
On incubator too.
On 11-12-01 6:30 PM, "Steven Walling" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to give anyone interested a heads up that we are holding an
> IRC office hours this Sunday, December 4th at 22:00 UTC. This is about the
> informal taskforce developing around the Special:FeedbackDashboard f
Hi,
I just wanted to give anyone interested a heads up that we are holding an
IRC office hours this Sunday, December 4th at 22:00 UTC. This is about the
informal taskforce developing around the Special:FeedbackDashboard feature
that the WMF features team has developed for collecting new editor fee
On 12/1/2011 11:15 AM, Dan Collins wrote:
> The sum total of human knowledge, and we can't find a decent spam filter.
No, that really is the sum total of human knowledge, expressed in
hexadecimal. I was pretty sure it would add up to more than 42.
--Michael Snow
_
The sum total of human knowledge, and we can't find a decent spam filter.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 09:11, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> This is not a theoretical risk. This has happened. Most famously in
> the case of Virgin using pictures of persons that were licenced under
> a free licence, in their advertising campaign. I hesitate to call this
> argument fatuous, but
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Tom Morris wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 03:34, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
>>
>> While I don't find that line of argument to be a fully fledged
>> straw-horse argument, it
>> does appear to me to be a cherry-picked argument to *attempt* to
>> refute. There ar
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:53:09PM +1100, John Vandenberg wrote:
> The latter can be solved by labelling but not filtering. If you are
> on the train and a link is annotated with a tag "nsfw", you can not
> click it, or be wary about the destination page.
Dude, no. That's prejudicial labelling.
2011/12/1 Carol Moore
> On 11/29/2011 5:19 PM, emijrp wrote:
> >
> >
> > So, the first step would be to try and figure out if women are
> > visiting the site and not editing or just not visiting at all, before
> > saying nonsense about sexism and Wikipedia community.
>
> Fundraising from women is
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Tom Morris wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 03:34, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
>>
>> While I don't find that line of argument to be a fully fledged
>> straw-horse argument, it
>> does appear to me to be a cherry-picked argument to *attempt* to
>> refute. There ar
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> ... The "downstream
> use" objection
> was *never* about downstream use of _content_ but downstream use of _labels_
> and
> the structuring of the semantic data. That is a real horse of a
> different colour, and not
> of straw.
Tom t
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Tom Morris wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 03:34, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
>>
>> While I don't find that line of argument to be a fully fledged
>> straw-horse argument, it
>> does appear to me to be a cherry-picked argument to *attempt* to
>> refute. There ar
18 matches
Mail list logo
