Sorry, I meant every audio recording of an article, not every sound file :)
Ryan Kaldari
On 9/9/10 10:23 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> So you're saying that the community is complicit in the agenda against
> itself? I guess we should just go back to the days when you had to
> record a half-hour recit
So you're saying that the community is complicit in the agenda against
itself? I guess we should just go back to the days when you had to
record a half-hour recitation of the GFDL license text in every sound
file hosted on Commons.
For the record, I was one of the community members on the Licen
OK, let me just ask you a few simple questions:
* You complain that the accreditation with the no (visible?) history tab is
not correct. Did you consult a lawyer or legal specialist (for example
Creative Commons in your country) for their opinion about this?
* The same question for the url when re
2010/9/9 Teofilo
> 2010/9/7, Teofilo :
> > 2010/9/7, Tim Starling :
> >
> >> Presumably this conspiracy would have to extend beyond the WMF to
> >> PediaPress and Purodha Blissenbach, the developers of Collection and
> >> mobile.wikipedia.org respectively.
> >
> > The absence of a history tab in
2010/9/7, Teofilo :
> 2010/9/7, Tim Starling :
>
>> Presumably this conspiracy would have to extend beyond the WMF to
>> PediaPress and Purodha Blissenbach, the developers of Collection and
>> mobile.wikipedia.org respectively.
>
> The absence of a history tab in the mobile format is in my view an
On 7 September 2010 11:01, Teofilo wrote:
> No and there won't be (at least from me). Because I don't know if it
> is a bug or a feature. Show me the specification of the pdf tool
> first. I will see if the specification says that pictures'
> photographers should be credited. If the specification
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Teofilo wrote:
> 2010/9/7, Tim Starling :
>
>> Presumably this conspiracy would have to extend beyond the WMF to
>> PediaPress and Purodha Blissenbach, the developers of Collection and
>> mobile.wikipedia.org respectively.
>
> The absence of a history tab in the mob
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Teofilo wrote:
> (1) [His] theory seeks to show that social agents develop strategies
> which are adapted to the needs of the social worlds that they inhabit.
Strikes me that having a strategy that is adapted to your world is
probably quite useful. For example, Wi
On 7 September 2010 13:03, Teofilo wrote:
> Let's not call this a conspiracy.
You already did:
"I think it is partly thoughtlessness, partly an agenda to remove
contributor's names from wherever is possible, so that the WMF can
dominate the contents and do whatever it wants with them without t
2010/9/7, Tim Starling :
> Presumably this conspiracy would have to extend beyond the WMF to
> PediaPress and Purodha Blissenbach, the developers of Collection and
> mobile.wikipedia.org respectively.
The absence of a history tab in the mobile format is in my view an
exact measurement of the temp
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Teofilo wrote:
> 2010/9/7, Kropotkine_113 :
>> There is absolutely nothing wrong with it on french Wikipedia.
>
> My interpretation : French admins are happy to see their powers
> increased, and to mimic oversighters with it.
You don't seem to understand how the fe
2010/9/7, Kropotkine_113 :
> There is absolutely nothing wrong with it on french Wikipedia.
My interpretation : French admins are happy to see their powers
increased, and to mimic oversighters with it. Non-admins, especially
newly-registered ones might be too shy or not aware that they are
allowed
On 07/09/10 20:01, Teofilo wrote:
> 2010/9/7, Tim Starling :
>>
>> If you don't like it, you can request that it be switched off, using
>> Bugzilla. You will need to demonstrate that the community is in favour
>> of such an action.
>
> This is not proactive. Giving more power to the admins is a
>
2010/9/7 K. Peachey
>
> RevDel replaced Oversight (a extension), and little changed overall
> between then, it features two deletion levels, one that hides it from
> standard users (admins and higher still have access to it) and one
> that hides it from everyone except oversight which leaves no vi
Le mardi 07 septembre 2010 à 20:18 +1000, K. Peachey a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Teofilo wrote:
> Is there something wrong with this on the french wikipedia? then you
> should submit a bug request so people actually know and can work on
> getting it set correctly
There is absolut
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Teofilo wrote:
> This is not proactive. Giving more power to the admins is a
> constitutional change. Usually a constitutional change requires a
> referendum beforehand (An amendment to the United States Constitution
> must be ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatur
2010/9/7, Tim Starling :
>
> If you don't like it, you can request that it be switched off, using
> Bugzilla. You will need to demonstrate that the community is in favour
> of such an action.
This is not proactive. Giving more power to the admins is a
constitutional change. Usually a constitutiona
Liam Wyatt wrote:
> In order to rid ourselves of all this harmful software I propose that we
> extend this moratorium and dispose with the need for software at all. Instead,
> we should build the world's first carrier pigeon-based encyclopedia.
I think this would be funnier if the Wikimedia Founda
On 06/09/10 20:33, Teofilo wrote:
> During the past few years, the new softwares of the Wikimedia
> Foundations have been developped in a too much anarchic way.
>
> * They are sometimes implemented as a whim of a few WMF big wheels,
> without consulting the user communities.
https://bugzilla.wik
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Teofilo wrote:
> Conclusion : Because more software means more harm, I call for a
> moratorium (1 year? 6 months ?) on all new software developpements.
> During that time the developpers should be allowed to repair only
> obvious and urgent bugs.
A brief examinatio
On 06/09/2010, at 11:23, Bod Notbod wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Teofilo wrote:
>
>> Conclusion : Because more software means more harm...
>
> Your premises don't seem to support quite such a sweeping conclusion.
>
In order to rid ourselves of all this harmful software I propose
On 6 September 2010 11:33, Teofilo wrote:
>
> * We are never shown specifications defining the goals of the planned
> softwares, which makes me doubt such specifications are ever written.
> With specifications being written and published, problems could be
> talked in a proactive way.
>
Also, I d
On 6 September 2010 11:33, Teofilo wrote:
> * The developpers have enabled for every Admin of the French
> Wikipedia, the possibility to mask (and exert acts of censorship)
> without needing to be an oversighter (1) Which means that the policy
> page at [[:fr:Wikipédia:Masqueur d'adresses IP]] (mo
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Teofilo wrote:
> Conclusion : Because more software means more harm...
Your premises don't seem to support quite such a sweeping conclusion.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: h
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Teofilo wrote:
> During the past few years, the new softwares of the Wikimedia
> Foundations have been developped in a too much anarchic way.
>
> * They are sometimes implemented as a whim of a few WMF big wheels,
> without consulting the user communities.
>
> * We
During the past few years, the new softwares of the Wikimedia
Foundations have been developped in a too much anarchic way.
* They are sometimes implemented as a whim of a few WMF big wheels,
without consulting the user communities.
* We are never shown specifications defining the goals of the pl
26 matches
Mail list logo
