Hello, I am an independent Lebanese journalist. I am very interested to be your
company representative in Lebanon, with whom I may communicate concerning this
matter? Also I have a project proposal doing internet interaction site for
intellectuals, with whom should I communicate? Thank you. Joum
1: "pedophiles are being blocked even if they are not advocating, if I
remember correctly"
2: "they are blocked because their behaviour on the site is agains our
principles"
Either they are advocating, or they are not. Either they are inappropriately
trying to contact minors, or they are not.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Andre Engels wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
>
>> Am I being dense, or are you being silly? Blocking advocacy from a site with
>> a NPOV policy is a bajillion miles from being censorship.
>
> It may be a bajillion miles, I st
HI folks - on-passing this important note from Garfield!
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Garfield Byrd wrote:
> The audit of the Wikimedia Foundation and frequently asked questions about
> the audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 are available at
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/F
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Am I being dense, or are you being silly? Blocking advocacy from a site with
> a NPOV policy is a bajillion miles from being censorship.
It may be a bajillion miles, I still think it's closer to it than
giving the possibility to peop
Hey guys; the AFT office hours session will be starting at 11:00 (or
whenever Geoff finishes) :). Hope to see you all there!
--
Oliver Keyes
Community Liason, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wiki
Thanks, I figured out the problem, or rather a workaround.
Dan Rosenthal
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Kim Bruning wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 09:23:14PM +0300, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> > Trying to connect -- anyone else having trouble or is it just me?
> It's you. :-)
>
> --
>
>
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 09:23:14PM +0300, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> Trying to connect -- anyone else having trouble or is it just me?
It's you. :-)
--
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Steven Walling wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> This is a reminder that in about 20 minutes Geoff Brigham, our General
> Counsel, will be in #wikimedia-office to answer your questions.
>
> This is Geoff's first office hours, so please take a moment before we start
> to rea
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:36 PM, WereSpielChequers
wrote:
>
> We already have a no censorship policy that makes various exceptions. For
> Example Paedophilia advocates get blocked on site on EN wikipedia. There
> may in the past have been a consensus against any change to that policy,
> but there
Hi everyone,
This is a reminder that in about 20 minutes Geoff Brigham, our General
Counsel, will be in #wikimedia-office to answer your questions.
This is Geoff's first office hours, so please take a moment before we start
to read the introduction that he wrote:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Us
On 2 December 2011 14:50, David Gerard wrote:
> On 2 December 2011 14:36, WereSpielChequers
> wrote:
>
>> My reading of that is that the board has agreed to drop the idea of a
>> filter based on our category system, but unfortunately they haven't yet
>> agreed to drop the idea that someone contr
On 2 December 2011 14:36, WereSpielChequers wrote:
> My reading of that is that the board has agreed to drop the idea of a
> filter based on our category system, but unfortunately they haven't yet
> agreed to drop the idea that someone controlling an IP could censor what
> other viewers using tha
Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:55:29 +0200
> From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Image filter brainstorming: Personal
>filter lists
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
>
> Message-ID:
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> O
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:00 PM, WereSpielChequers
wrote:
> I'm pretty sure that the community is against a filter system based on our
> commons categories.
.
> Thankfully the Foundation seems to have taken that message on board and
> though we can expect to continue to have pro-filter people join
On 2 December 2011 11:00, WereSpielChequers wrote:
> A fourth area of contention is money and specifically whether this is a
> legitimate use of the money donated to the movement. We've already had one
> UK board member ask awkward question re this.
Wikimedia Deutschland has passed a motion aga
It's not spam; it's the mailing list "confirmation" string.
Obviously didn't quite go right :)
Tom
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I'm pretty sure that the community is against a filter system based on our
commons categories. Those who oppose that type of scheme range from the
idealists who are opposed to censorship in principle to the pragmatists who
are aware of our categorisation backlog and don't want to set us up to fail
Am 01.12.2011 20:06, schrieb Tom Morris:
> 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.
Am 01.12.2011 10:53, schrieb John Vandenberg:
> 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 h
20 matches
Mail list logo
