I checked on it today and saw that this bug is marked resolved. Tisza, is it
working to hu.WP's satisfaction now?
Birgitte SB
--- On Fri, 8/28/09, Tisza Gergő wrote:
> From: Tisza Gergő
> Subject: [Foundation-l] FlaggedRevs on Hungarian Wikipedia still not working
> To
t on to the list. So he has been left blindly guess what
they might find appropriate enough to send
through. Whether it might be his tone (which I found so problematic), or the
subject, or perhaps even the position taken on a subject. Moderation can be
useful tool, when those who cross the lines are given adequate information on
what we find acceptable and how we expect them to change. It is an
inappropriate tool to use to suppress anyone's contributions without
explanation and requires better communication than has happened here.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
f this is not equally spread across cultures. So it hurts our outreach and it
hurts our general purpose because we end up hearing thoughts from a much less
diverse group than we might.
Two examples of the tone I find to be such a problem
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-
o Wikimedia will
be a hard act to follow. I hope I will still see you around here (foundation-l).
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
er in the past we found out it was standard to count these areas as
"admin" in such evaluations even though such things are an integral part of the
WMF program. I don't think the past discussion was specifically about Charity
Navigator. So do we know how they are categorizing these
luded more than just those participants similar to
yourselves, Wikimedia will be sorrier for it.
On a personal note, last week I have gone to having the responsibilities of
three people jobs, instead of only those two I have been handling for most of
ng
> silly). Bear in mind that only 0.55 % of the world
> population are
> sensitive about lyncing.
That post can only being seen as an example of "agressive disrespect of other
cultures" by people who think happening to be born in the USA is an agressive
disrespect of other
and developers (both staff and volunteer). Although I don't think I
would describe it as "the customer is always right"; technical vetos by
developers are common. The suggestion here is to eliminate the barriers between
two groups of developers. There will always be some kind of barrier between
the largely non-technical community and developers. There are a alot of rough
edges to that customer-vendor relationship, but the volunteer developers have
had alot of experience with the pitfalls there and can help staff developers
navigate them.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
art from scratch
with a file we can more easily put through the Proofread Page extention. Their
more rigid structure makes edition verification after release unnecessary for
them, but it is very important for us since our structure is so open. It is
difficult to see how we might help one another given s
your ability to work on content. I would
advise this group that as exciting as having their own Wikipedia must sound,
they might be more successful as a project within de.WP or de.WB And even if
they are dead-set on an independent w
trong labeling of the goals and make-up of this group wishing to work on
a Medical Encyclopedia for Children really needs to be supported by some
evidence. Especially as I don't believe they are participating in this
conversation and therefore unable to clarify. I am afraid I don'
10 at 8:59 PM,
> Milos Rancic
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Birgitte SB
> wrote:
> >> Such strong labeling of the goals and make-up of
> this group wishing to work on a Medical Encyclopedia for
> Children really needs to be supported by some evid
king only of what
the de.WP community wants. Self-governance is the only option for running the
wikis, but it will only serve the mission of WMF if they can each remember to
govern themselves as an individual collaborator in a larger project.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
, it
would be nice if they could highlight some other things that secure what has
already been accomplished. The endowment is not about just about funding, I
think it is probably also symbolic of endurance to many people. There is a
worry about the content remaining available in the long term. If th
is harmful to the WMF. If the
WMF is often an outside party to the volunteers for all practical purposes, at
least is an outside party well aligned with goals of the volunteers. And if
that ever fails to be true it is not the volunteers tha
tter than human. Given a large enough sample, people
will do what they do; what they have always done. It shouldn't be controversial
to ask for a system to be put in place to mitigate the harm from people
behaving in such a reliably predictable fashion as becoming corrupted by money
or power.
race, identification numbers, etc. is only
seen by the notary who puts a seal on the document to verify that the signature
was made by the person with that name.
Birgitte SB
- Original Message
> From: Lodewijk
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Cc: r...@slmr.com
> Sent: Mon, J
GLAM organizations
that want to affiliate with the movement. Some is needed more along the lines
of "Dedicated to Emancipating Culture - we are committed the licensing all
internally owned copyrights under [favorite free license] and to forthrightly
advertising the most accurat
- Original Message
> From: Nathan
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Sent: Fri, July 15, 2011 2:07:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] roadmap for WM affiliation ; a name for
>self-identified affiliation
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 2:27 PM
- Original Message -
> From: Yaroslav M. Blanter
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2011 10:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
>
>> It is true however that many chapters do important work for the local
>> projects, and serve their lo
>
>From: Jimmy Wales
>To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
>Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 7:49 AM
>Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
>
>On 8/10/11 7:22 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> As for the rest I encourage you to exercise your
>> moral duty by
>
>rom: phoebe ayers
>To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
>Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 8:13 AM
>Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
>
>On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Michael Snow wrote:
>
>> On 8/11/2011 7:08 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
>> > Anyway, thanks
as an article on Freemasonary, the
"lodges" within that are should very similar to use of chapters of a greek
letter society as that was all modeled on freemasonary.
I don't if there is a general concept in German for the way "lodge" is used in
Freemasaonary, but
ow consistently higher standards,
then I think that extreme cases will improve also. That sort of approach
should be more successful than making blocks stick for the extreme cases.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ave a banner on that page saying "If you
have a problem with information about yourself that is on Wikipedia report it
here." And send it to a specific email address.
Birgitte SB
--- On Mon, 3/2/09, Robert Rohde wrote:
> From: Robert Rohde
> Subject: [Foundation-l] Re
t be
any different because it was requested. It will only lead to false hopes and
greater disappointment if we have a special rule for "per request". Personally
I support defaulting to delete on all BLPs
3) I disagree with the notion that other Wikipedias should shift t
r not a thread has been resolved. I frankly don't
do much work in this area, but I occasionally stumble across something and
report it there. The lack of feedback about whether the issue I reported was
significant is discouraging. I imagine casual reporters who do not see the
issue
ce if they have a chance being deleted. And if they are obvious
cases where they will be kept, simply tell the person we don't delete on
request. Putting these articles at AfD with a note that the subject requested
deletion is going to make things worse most of the time. It will attract people
to the discussion who are interested in putting on a show for the announced
audience and who would not show up at a basic AfD. I don't think listing an AfD
as a subject request will change the overall result of the discussion, but just
make the path to that result more difficult for the subject.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
a RFC on Meta for anything remotely like
this situation. And I would say that if were regarding any wiki (I am sure I
have said that for similar situations on other wikis in the past). The wikis
are autonomous on these issues. If someone has reason why en.WS adminship
rules are incompatible
--- On Thu, 3/12/09, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> From: Ray Saintonge
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Pissed off at en:Wikisource
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 3:03 AM
> Birgitte SB wrote:
> > Sorry but there is no r
ys been reasonable
attribution as Erik's arguments describe. But from the license migration
forward, we are offering greater flexibility in attribution options in order to
be to be more compatible with free content developed externally.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
this as pro-transition vs anti-transition is misleading.
It really is more a matter of the transition forcing to light all sorts of
issues we did not spend time thinking on before even though they existed. The
arguments that are anti-transition
nting a
> proposal for quite significant change on the English
> Wikipedia based on a
> poll with only 320 participants.
>
I am afraid this one is serious.
Asking Foundation staff to overrule a community decision is not going find
support
e to spare the rest of us on Dec 28. Follow David's example and ignore
those who actually choose to waste your time and spare the rest of us your
stereotyped rant.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--- On Wed, 4/1/09, Marcus Buck wrote:
> From: Marcus Buck
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Non-free content on Commons
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 10:16 AM
> Birgitte SB hett schreven:
> > Right, it obviousl
hose wanting the rest of the story:
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/court-congress-cant-put-public-domain-back-into-copyright.ars
>
While this is definitely encouraging news, we might want to hold off on
changing our evaluation of URAA restoration
hose wanting the rest of the story:
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/04/court-congress-cant-put-public-domain-back-into-copyright.ars
>
While this is definitely encouraging news, we might want to hold off on
changing our evaluation of URAA restoration
--- On Mon, 4/6/09, Andrew Gray wrote:
> From: Andrew Gray
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Court: Congress can't put public domain back into
> copyright
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Monday, April 6, 2009, 12:39 PM
> 2009/4/6 Birg
> local
> community. I don't think this is a common thing, but maybe
> it worth
> thinking about this now rather when we face this problem.
>
Those are not situations which would be covered by any Compulsory policy across
projects. Community governance does depend only on
to use something like:
http://markmail.org/search/?q=cc-by-sa#query:cc-by-sa%20list%3Aorg.wikimedia.lists.foundation-l+page:1+state:facets
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
cases and always
following the law is easier for the entire community to accept without
fracturing.
But those are my personal thoughts. You probably won't get an actual straight
answer here.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l
al to me. I cannot agree that vote for a change in licensing can be
interpreted as support for the current attribution model. It only means you
believe the change in licensing is a net benefit over no change.
Birgitte SB
___
foundat
I second this. Does anyone really believe it is even possible to set one
standard of what it means to be 'collegial' and 'collaborative' for all
cultures? These things are not absolute values and each community needs to work
out what standards are most pragmatic
w NPOV is defined; it simply
doesn't hold up for other projects. The real value behind this issue if the
"sum of all human knowledge". Bias in the form that excludes other information
or interpretations is taboo, yet bias itself is not excluded.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Are all your emails showing up at
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-April/author.html
Birgitte SB
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, Gregory Kohs wrote:
> From: Gregory Kohs
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board statement regarding biographies of living
> people
> To:
ould be better focused making all of our content better
suited for re-usability by different tastes and then letting third-party work
out exactly which tastes need to be targeted. Rather than creating a mirror
ourselves for "No Nudity" and leaving the whatever existing stumbling blocks
are in place for general re-purposing of the content.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
rious different things
unacceptable?
Birgitte SB
--- On Thu, 5/14/09, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> From: Aryeh Gregor
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia is not the Karma Sutra, was Re: commons
> and freely licensed sexual imagery
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
>
sults. In fact the next thread that PM starts about a
particular image that is *an example of a problem* rather than a thread about a
proposal to address a problem is going to put him on my personal ignore list.
Because I am finding the unproductive sensationalist approach very annoying.
List traffic is not predictive of results. It might even be inversely related,
after a certain level.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:33 AM,
> Birgitte SB
> wrote:
> > Your really didn't address my question. Why do you
> think WMF resources are best used to create and support a
> mirror for people who are disgusted by sexuality rather than
> making easier for third-parties to c
ay, May 15, 2009, 1:46 PM
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:44 PM,
> Birgitte SB
> wrote:
> > I think this email really shows a misunderstanding of
> "Wikipedia is not censored" is about; so I am starting a new
> thread to discuss the issue.
>
> Well, for my p
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:40 PM,
> Birgitte SB
> wrote:
> > Well you now snipped it all, but someone suggested
> creating mirror under a different domain name for schools.
> I replied to that saying how I thought resources were best
> spent. Then you replied to me.
> >
&
--- On Fri, 5/15/09, Birgitte SB wrote:
> From: Birgitte SB
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia is not censored (was Wikipedia is not
> the Karma Sutra, was Re: commons and freely licensed sexual imagery
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Frid
tstantly
changed. If we advertise that we have such a feature and people sign-up for it
and it is only 80% effective, we may suffer more loss of goodwill then if we
don't offer a "safe" option at all. Passively not meeting people's expectations
7;t talk
about them publicly. That is your best chance to actually move forward on
anything. It still takes months, but you really don't have a hope of getting
people to help you until focus on one thing of a manageable size.
Birgitte SB
__
he language you're talking about :)
>
en.WS is like commons. I imagine most WS are. The editors are not the
copyright holders 95% of the time there, so the license is not up to them. The
background stuff on the site and any notes written by editors to introduce the
texts, will be re
ey beat out the no message option by 10 to 1. Why can't we test
messages that are actually clear and honest? Wikipedia will still be free for
everyone if not a single further donation is ever made.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l maili
d
what issues belong on this list. Why I have two . . . or now I should say
three people on ignore for that reason alone. It saves a great deal of
argument.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
in here they are often properly informed that it is
a local matter and that the each wiki is self-governing. Frankly the autonomy
of the wikis is hardly a choice, if you honestly consider the logistics of it.
Birgitte SB
___
f
There are always extreme situations that merit exceptional treatment. ja.WP,
however, has a great deal more than 3 active users.
Birgitte SB
--- On Thu, 8/6/09, Mark Williamson wrote:
> From: Mark Williamson
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Policy Interlingual Coordin
know, etc. It is
very touchy situation that leans towards misunderstandings even when everyone
speaks the same language.
Birgitte SB
--- On Fri, 8/7/09, Mark Williamson wrote:
> From: Mark Williamson
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Policy Interlingual Coordinationn -
&g
--- On Sat, 8/8/09, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> From: Ray Saintonge
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Policy Interlingual Coordinationn -
> WP:NOT
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009, 1:31 AM
> Birgitte SB wrote:
> >
have been able to share is experience
with WMF throughout this year instead of just this short interm. This of
course did not happen, but it should not seen a fault of Matt's that it was not
the case.
Birgitte SB
--- On Wed, 8/26/09, Ting Chen wrote:
> From: Ting Chen
ould be to share informations before the official
> report and
> to work closely with local chapters ; but this is a more
> wide problem
> and slightly out-of-the-scope of this thread.
>
I don't completely understand what you are talking about here. What is the
"american way" ? And what do you mean by "pedagogic"?
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
WP
projects must be in WMF projects. Then hu.WP will find real answers and
solutions. Or at least, they will find answers and solutions as well as anyone
does.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--- On Sat, 8/29/09, Marcus Buck wrote:
> From: Marcus Buck
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] FlaggedRevs on Hungarian Wikipedia still not
> working
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 4:36 AM
> Birgitte SB hett schreven:
&
for a month how much he
will continue to post. I understand why people want moderation, but I don't
think it is practical. However, filters solve a majority of the problem. The
biggest help would be people resisting the urge to reply when someone is
obviously looking for a de
ncies between your
experiences.
Birgitte SB
--- On Thu, 9/3/09, David Goodman wrote:
> From: David Goodman
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Universal Library
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Thursday, September 3, 2009, 2:19 PM
> I have been re-reading t
over the executions of LBGT
Egytians - People suggested Wikimania never be held in a country where LBGT
folks are persecuted
These issues are not really good arguments for never having Wikimania in
certain countries. They are good arguments for rotating Wikimania amoung a
large variety of diffe
Obviously the original e-mail belonged on wiki-en-l and was off-topic for
foundation-l. But I can't understand why so many different people think it is
a good idea to respond to off-topic posts in kind. Please stop participating
in the off-topic contests.
Birgitte SB
--- On Tue, 9/
Especially as it isn't really
necessary for them to be involved in achieving a negative result.
Birgitte SB
--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Erik Moeller wrote:
> From: Erik Moeller
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Pending Changes development update: September 27
> To: "Wikimedia Founda
--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Risker wrote:
> From: Risker
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Pending Changes development update: September 27
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 5:22 PM
> On 28 September 2010 18:10, Birgitte
> SB
&g
Not cutting off other forums.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
afest that will
occur in the near future when someone who has not been labeled as evil begins
grappling with them. The foundation-l forum obviously has a broader population
than wherever the adminstrators extensively discuss these things and none are
mind reader
of gut-shot that
hasn't been thought through. Moderate more people based on real criteria,
rather than how you feel about them.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
be banned, but it
is clear that trolling and personal attacks do not bring about moderation.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
r
him.
Your recent postings have definitely been foolish. You seem to be going out of
the way to misinterpret everyone's words in the worst possible light. Why
should
you assume the phrase donor is meant to be restricted to monetary donations?
Why
must you approach responses that are
It would be really nice if the percentage of
provocative messages could be lowered and I intend to try do my part in that.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
- Original Message
> From: "wjhon...@aol.com"
> To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Sent: Fri, December 10, 2010 10:35:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wiki[p/m]edia
>
> In a message dated 12/10/2010 6:52:05 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> zvand...@googlemail.com writes:
>
>
> >
hows
above this practice began as a reaction to the failure to protect Living
Persons
from defamation which happens to be one of the few types of failures which
cannot be tolerated. If it does in fact turn out to be overreaction, I imagine
it will be adjusted sooner or later. There are
What project are you speaking of? At en.WS the entire navigation structure of
how to move between Chapters within a book is encoded in templates. I can't
imagine how they could be scapped.
Birgitte SB
- Original Message
> From: "wjhon...@aol.com"
of
> > how to move between Chapters within a book is encoded in templates. I
> > can't
> > imagine how they could be scapped.
> >
> > Birgitte SB
> >
>
> [[Moby Dick, chapter 2]] might work.
>
> Fred Bauder
No it wouldn't. You migh
that
is
not even started instead of making the project actually work with templates?
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
n the past? Are you
concerned that the work being done as part of the fellowship is not useful? Or
do do you think the fellowship itself turned out decently, but are concerned
that your input was not solicited when it was in the proposal stage? After
reading all your questions which seem to
of the Wikimedia community and it's ability to integrate
newcomers as to prefer ignorance.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
But people can personally try
to become gossip black-holes and/or work to shift the substance of the gossip
to
the appropriate channel. And WMF staff can certainly encourage the advertising
of issues through more valid (i.e. any other) channels. At the very least, they
should refrain from op
ommunities when the communities finally
learn to stop operating in the manner they have always operated in.
Comments like earlier ones that "staff may just stopping posting on
foundation-l
if you guys aren't nicer" miss the point. That would be WMF's loss much
in through the process can
refused by WMF. If that process is that everyone has three weeks to privately
email Sue Gardner their thoughts on five different proposals and then she sits
down on Friday morning with her notes and picks and announces whichever
proposal she j
ng your name so carelessly (and obviously incorrectly). As they say
"competence will excuse almost anything", but even if it had been accurate I
would still have been wrong to be so careless. Sorry
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
en by people with
narrow interests and sometimes based on ancient traditions that translate
poorly
into our modern world. It is not in any way universal. Not internationally
speaking. Not over time. Not across mediums.
Birgitte SB
- Original Message
> From: Lodewijk
> To: Wikimedia
well as we can
realistically hope for.
Birgitte SB
- Original Message
> From: Lodewijk
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Sent: Wed, February 23, 2011 7:10:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Licenses' biodiversity : my big disagreement with
>the Wikime
WMF will require
them
to become a subject of the Identification Resolution? As new tools are
developed, who will be responsible for keeping track of their existence and
seeing that it is determined whether or not those who will be given access to
them will need to become a subject of the Identification
From: Lodewijk
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Cc: Birgitte SB
Sent: Fri, February 25, 2011 3:51:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Genisis of WMF Identification policy?
It should be clear and transparant why the WMF is collecting this
information
From: THURNER rupert
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Sent: Sat, February 26, 2011 7:48:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Genisis of WMF Identification policy?
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 23:58, Birgitte SB wrote:
>
>
From: David Gerard
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Sent: Sat, February 26, 2011 9:55:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Genisis of WMF Identification policy?
On 26 February 2011 22:58, Birgitte SB wrote:
I think we really need the actual threat and
personally vigilant
regarding those who might try to restrict the descendants of our collected
content from others. What is it that you want to do?
Birgitte SB
From: Teofilo
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Sun, February 27, 2011 11:02:15 AM
Subject
ly
for vague jobs, and everyone wins because good hiring is all about fit. Narrow
and well-settled duties = detailed description of opening. Wide-ranging and
uncertain duties = ambiguous description of opening.
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
From: Birgitte SB
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Sent: Tue, March 1, 2011 4:46:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia "Storyteller" job opening
From: MZMcBride
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing
- Original Message
> From: Teofilo
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 5:05:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
>
> 2011/2/27 Birgitte SB :
> > No one wants to attack French moral rights, or the attack the
gt; ensure accuracy, or is there a more insidious reasoning.
ND also rules out translations
Birgitte SB
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ant improvement in the process. The recent effort was neither poor,
nor
was it ideal. It was a very nice step forward, which is right about where I
believe we all should set our expectations. I find the whole "it was
practically perfect" vs. "it was in opposition to ou
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
