On Mar 9, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Neil Babbage wrote:
>
>
>> If you ran a charity store committed to providing educational products
>> free to all who needed them you wouldn't get many children as customers if
>> you put hardcore sex produc
On Mar 21, 2012, at 8:53 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> Sue Gardner wrote:
>> Everybody knows that reversing stagnating/declining participation
>> in Wikimedia's projects is our top priority.
>
> Thank you for sharing this.
>
> How much discussion has there been internally about this being the wron
On Mar 21, 2012, at 10:07 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
> birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Mar 21, 2012, at 8:53 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
>>> Sue Gardner wrote:
Everybody knows that reversing stagnating/declining participation
in Wikimedia's projects is our top priority.
>>>
>>> Thank you fo
>
> Hi Birgitte
>
> I greatly respect your opinion, and rarely found myself disagreeing with
> you. I didn't want to reply in-line because I believe majority of your
> opinions stem from the wisdom of the crowd model, which might best describe
> the wiki model and the assumption that, it will con
It seems to me that there has been a quite a variety of results to booster
activities, and that the poorest results have come from random educators who
decide to make a "Wikipedia class project" without consulting any veteran
editors rather than from people more thoroughly exposed to the sausage
Please don't assume I disagree with all objections that could possibly be made,
just because I disagree that the one's which had been presented so far are very
significant. I sincerely hope this program is more decentralized then any other
program being run right now. It seems to be in rather ea
Yes I eventually found that app. And it is much superior to editing from the
browser. But it doesn't support ProofreadPage extension. Still between the app
and browser it is definitely workable with two edits. My concern is much more
that the reading/navigation experience seems to be driving pe
You are third person to respond as if my email was about me personally looking
for help editing. And the second to snip my writing out of all context. Steven
seemed to actually get what my concern was. You can hate whatever you like, or
dislike as the case may be. It is not going to help WMF
I forgot to say there are not website bugs, so much as browser bugs. Or just
an extremely different interface. Perhaps a great mobile browser could be
built to effectively kill apps. But is not something website changes could
address. IMHO
BirgitteSB
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2011, at 6:
On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:20 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
> Michael Snow writes:
>
> And for people who were worrying about the implications, I think setting
>
> things up in stages is just as likely to make it look worse as to make it
>> look
>> better.
>>
>
> I think Michael's point here can't be
On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:54 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On 06/24/2011 01:58 AM, Kat Walsh wrote:
>> It also wasn't an easy decision to make. The question came down to
>> this one: do we necessarily refuse someone as a candidate solely
>> because they were proposed by a funder?
>
> As a Nominating
To clarify my position, I found the procedure as designed for handling
appointed seats to be inherently unworkable. I don't think the procedures could
have been followed during my service on the committee given the resources and
time available. I imagine idealists will disagree with that assessm
On Jul 7, 2011, at 2:50 AM, Andrea Zanni wrote:
> 2011/7/7 Ting Chen
>
>> On de.wikisource.org they scan every page of the original text, upload
>> the scan on Commons and show the scan on the right part of every page as
>> an image. It is even obligatory to have the original scan of the te
On Jul 9, 2011, at 4:06 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote:
> 2011/7/9
>
>> Snip
>
>> Having a corpus with some depth on Wikisource will open up a much different
>> reading experience than an index of PDFs, even though the words all match.
>> Just look at what is being done with the SCOTUS documents,
Do they have notaries in the Netherlands? Why not simply ask them to mail a
notarized statement that "I am Foo at such an address and request an ublock so
I may edit as Bar"? I still am not sure if this is something I would completely
endorse, but at least it would be meaningful and not so easi
On Aug 5, 2011, at 6:45 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
.
>
> People bring up the forum because this (foundation-l) is the central list
> for the Wikimedia Foundation. Anyone who thinks that this particular issue
> is outside of this list's scope is insane. Using internal-l as a substitute
> for an open
Sorry if this a duplicate but I didn't receive it even though my later email
came through
Begin forwarded message:
> From: birgitte...@yahoo.com
> Date: August 5, 2011 7:07:02 PM CDT
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board letter about fundraising and chapt
On Aug 5, 2011, at 3:32 AM, phoebe ayers wrote:
>
> ==Design principles==*
>
> Our design principles for improving the fundraising model are:
>
> * We are deeply committed to decentralized pursuit of our mission and to
> supporting the long-term sustainability of chapters and other movemen
On Aug 6, 2011, at 2:41 AM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> Hello Birgitte,
>
> Thank you for these comments and edits/suggestions. [all: please also
> post suggestions on Meta. most people are not subscribed to this
> list.]
>
> This Board letter was published on short notice. Once it was clear
>
On Aug 6, 2011, at 3:14 AM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> Hello MZM, thanks for taking a start at new pages to illustrate the
> discussion on Meta.
>
> MZMcBride writes:
> .
>
>
>> Anyone who thinks that this particular issue
>> is outside of this list's scope is insane. Using internal-l as a sub
I have realized that WMF seems to seriously misunderstand the role of chapters.
I say this as someone who has always had a somewhat conservative view of
chapters to begin with. But underneath the current rift is a serious
disconnect between WMF professionals and how this whole program actually
On Aug 8, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:39 PM, wrote:
>
>> Decentralization isn't some random choice that somehow was attached to this
>> movement; it is the only way the program functions at all. WMF professionals
>> can't begin to account for the pro
On Aug 9, 2011, at 12:51 AM, "Yaroslav M. Blanter" wrote:
>> Nor does off-wiki collaboration require that a formal entity be in
>> existence. Off-wiki activities -- whether social meetups or more formal
>> outreach efforts to GLAM institutions and elsewhere -- are no less
>> effective
>> for
On Aug 9, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
>
>> Writing about ethical concerns while at same time being blind to anything
>> that does not maximize donations is laughable. The obvious solution to the
>> stated concern that is being raised is returning to the split screen
>> fundrais
On Aug 10, 2011, at 3:20 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> On 8/9/11 3:47 PM, Birgitte SB wrote:
>> It seems to me that these changes are about making chapters more into
>> franchises. Which I find to be exactly backwards.
>
> It would be, if that's what it were about. But I can say with
> confide
On Aug 10, 2011, at 3:32 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
>> Redefining the chapters
>> who participated in a joint fundraiser with WMF as WMF's "payment
>> processors" is straight-up insulting.
>
> Whoa, please slow down!
>
> No one has said anything like that, and it isn't how the term is being
>
On Aug 10, 2011, at 6:42 PM, Nathan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:22 PM, wrote:
>
>> I don't care what people spoke of, nor of what they desire, nor what their
>> agenda is. I never supposed that people were conspiring to fail. I care
>> what effect the actions people are proposing
On Aug 10, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:51 PM, wrote:
>
>> I don't think chapters are being cut off I think they are being
>> centralized. Centralization, not lack of funding, is what I believe will
>> make chapters ineffective. Frankly, I think cutti
--- On Mon, 4/20/09, Samuel Klein wrote:
> From: Samuel Klein
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Principle and pragmatism with nudity and sexual
> content
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Monday, April 20, 2009, 6:26 PM
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:18 AM,
> David Gerard
> wrote:
I am getting ready do to a little traveling. It works out that traveling light
is going to be my best bet for various reasons. As I don't want to carry around
the weight of a laptop; I have purchased a little closer to the cutting edge
than I generally do. In setting up my iPad this is what shoc
On Jun 9, 2011, at 8:23 PM, "K. Peachey" wrote:
> Why couldn't you edit it with the normal web browser in the ipad?
>
> ___
>
I could edit from a browser, but it was rather difficult. That difficulty
wasn't really important, but just what motivat
31 matches
Mail list logo
