On 6 November 2010 17:43, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> I just checked it again. It is cc-by-sa.
I don't know what you checked, but that image is released under ND,
not SA. Check the link near the top of this page (that you link to):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hikingartist/4897593340/sizes/o
On 7 November 2010 00:34, Anthony wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Thomas Dalton
> wrote:
>> On 5 November 2010 17:02, David Gerard wrote:
>>> ... and compromise content, as TV Tropes found out:
>>>
>>> http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmw
On 7 November 2010 15:50, Fred Bauder wrote:
> We use a tab at the top of the article to link to the ad page. No one has
> to click on it; but if you're looking for buying, or investigating
> products, you will.
The click-through rate would be tiny and therefore so would the revenue.
___
On 7 November 2010 16:05, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Thomas Dalton
> wrote:
>> On 7 November 2010 15:50, Fred Bauder wrote:
>>> We use a tab at the top of the article to link to the ad page. No one has
>>> to click on it; but if
On 7 November 2010 16:21, Anthony wrote:
> 1) Why the huge assumption of bad faith? I don't think you're correct
> that people would sign up for ads who don't want ads. As you
> correctly point out, there would actually be no long-term benefit to
> anyone for doing so.
> 2) If the payment isn't
On 7 November 2010 16:40, Anthony wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Anthony wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Thomas Dalton
>> wrote:
>>> They won't be people that want ads, though. They'll be people that
>>> want ad revenue for us. I
On 7 November 2010 22:42, Fred Bauder wrote:
> Why have advertising anywhere when "you can just google for things you
> want to buy?"
Consumers don't put advertising anywhere and it is consumers that can
just google for things. Advertising is done by companies to attract
consumers they wouldn't o
On 8 November 2010 13:03, Arlen Beiler wrote:
> For one thing, we have always been proud of how Wikipedia and its sister
> sites have been ad-free. Why don't we get those half-breeds with their ads
> and everything to do the revenue making? I mean, of course, Wikia. Having
> ads on Wikipedia (or a
On 8 November 2010 13:34, Arlen Beiler wrote:
> I thought someone was saying that Wikia gets all kinds of special treatment,
> or something like that.
People say all kinds of things.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubs
The servers are in the US and owned by a US organisation which has
minimal overseas assets, which means US law is pretty much the only
one that applies. If you want people in Serbia to be able to re-use
the content, though, you need to make sure it satisfies Serbian law
too. That means you need to
It sounds like you are talking more about an inspection than an
ombudsman. The problem with your proposal is that disagreements
between the Foundation and community are usually due to it being very
unclear what the roles of each are. There isn't a rulebook that
someone can make sure the WMF is foll
On 4 December 2010 22:09, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
>> If WMF wanted to spend less money, the fundraiser would have much lower
>> profile, right? :)
>> I somehow want us to think about our users and service as primary objective,
>> not just organizational issues.
>
> When you budget 2 million for int
On 5 December 2010 05:24, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
> Yes, and only 4 times what the actual internet hosting of a top5 web site
> costs.
[Citation needed]
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.o
On 9 December 2010 10:00, Lodewijk wrote:
> ouch, this is painful. Like many chapters probably I have been trying
> to explain to people the difference between Wikimedia and Wikipedia,
> and that Wikipedia has no such thing as a board of editors or even a
> board of directors, but that the Wikimed
On 9 December 2010 18:54, Michael Snow wrote:
> While I understand the challenges in communicating effectively with a
> variety of audiences, I think the point that's been raised is that for a
> project that is all about trying to describe things as accurately as
> possible, much of the community
2010/12/9 Huib Laurens :
> Am I placed on moderation? all my previous emails seem to fail?
I've received this email...
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 9 December 2010 23:03, K. Peachey wrote:
> I'm not going to debate the whole wording thing, but I will point out,
> It is a crime to receive property/goods under false pretenses in
> Australia which is what advertising a person with the incorrect job
> title would be. Don't forget it isn't only
On 10 December 2010 00:20, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> Hi everyone -
>
> First, let me thank you all for your concern about the recent banners.
> Michael Snow is right - we tested some things, thinking that we could manage
> to raise the yield slightly by deliberately attempting to clarify (not
On 10 December 2010 12:33, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> With that said, the banners are being changed right now - they'll say
>> Wikimedia.
>
> That's progress, but it is still wrong. Sue is not the ED of
> Wikimedia. She is the ED of the Wikimedia Foundation. I am
On 13 December 2010 12:27, Tim Starling wrote:
> In principle, it would be possible to have a short error message with
> a
On 14 December 2010 09:41, Adam Cuerden wrote:
> Actually, why not just offer Citizendium space on Wikia? Could that be done?
That's not really a discussion for this mailing list. I'm not sure CZ
would accept such an offer even if it were made, though. Accepting
help from Wikipedia would be bad e
I expect a good lawyer can be found. The WMF might be able to help
with that, they have lots of useful contacts. If even the police
didn't think there is much of a case, they must stand a very good
chance of winning the case. While it will surely be a very stressful
and unpleasant experience for th
On 24 December 2010 23:20, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> Addressing the other half of this issue, "is creating a page = to editing",
> I'd argue that page creation is a subset of editing with a fundamental
> difference. Creating a page has different requirements (such as meeting
> mandatory inclusion
Congratulations to the board members that were re-appointed and good
luck for the next year/two years.
Was there any community consultation before this by-law change? If
there was, I missed it. While this change isn't likely to be
controversial, I think it would be a good idea to consult the
commu
On 1 January 2011 13:45, Stephen Bain wrote:
> This puts a ceiling on 'urgent' costs at $8.8 M, or 43% of the budget
> of $20.4 M. [3]
This is a worthwhile analysis, but you have neglected the numerous
expenses involved in supporting a large organisation. You can't have
an organisation with an $8
On 1 January 2011 23:50, Erik Moeller wrote:
> I don't see anything wrong at all with messages that signal increased
> urgency as the fundraiser draws to a close.
I do. When the fundraiser ends is a choice you make, not something
imposed upon you by external forces. Also, people can continue to
d
On 2 January 2011 00:15, David Gerard wrote:
> On 2 January 2011 00:09, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>
>> I agree with the rest of your email, though. The WMF's increased
>> budget is justified. That money is going on worthwhile things. That
>> doesn't, however, mean
On 2 January 2011 01:56, Erik Moeller wrote:
> 2011/1/1 Thomas Dalton :
>> That is the completely wrong attitude. If we cannot reach our target
>> with an honest campaign, we should accept that we cannot reach our
>> target and make do with less money. We should not lie
On 6 January 2011 00:59, MZMcBride wrote:
> Steven Walling wrote:
>> "The other Wikipedias weren't started on that date, so they have nothing to
>> celebrate or commemorate."
>>
>> The anniversary is not just about English Wikipedia. If this was just
>> English Wikipedia's celebration, there certa
2011/1/14 KIZU Naoko :
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Pharos wrote:
>> There's a high correlation between broadband and income levels that
>> probably has more to do with it.
>
> Not worldwide I assume, broadband availability seems to depend on
> geographic conditions.
>
> In some areas broadb
On 13 January 2011 21:19, Pharos wrote:
> There's a high correlation between broadband and income levels that
> probably has more to do with it.
There is a correlation between broadband and age, as well, I believe.
The elderly (when they have an internet connection at all) are more
likely to use
On 15 January 2011 21:55, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
> Before writing that proposal i reviewed many, many pages of "RFA is
> broken" discussions not just in the English Wikipedia, but in Hebrew,
> Russian and Catalan ones, too. Nowhere have i found a proposal to dump
> the concept of adminship complet
On 16 January 2011 07:45, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
> What they do in the Portuguese Wikipedia is not what i propose; it's
> only close to it. What's listed at [[en:Wikipedia:Perennial
> proposals]] is very different from what i propose. I don't propose
> limited adminship; i propose to retire the co
On 21 January 2011 06:36, whothis wrote:
>You can't be on an advisory board and tell a non-profit organization
> what to do as a pro-bono advisor to the board and then get paid by the said
> foundation as a fellow a few years into your tenure, serving both positions
> at the same time.
I think yo
On 21 January 2011 20:07, F.-F. Duron wrote:
> Yes, but maybe you can control the partnerships you're making! Wikipedia is
> one of the most visited websites in the world. Don't you think there is a
> problem here??
Do we have a partnership with them? The French Wikipedia apparently
links to thei
On 24 January 2011 18:02, geni wrote:
> On 24 January 2011 16:09, Magnus Manske wrote:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12265173
>>
>> Anything worth salvaging?
>>
>
> Probably but I can't see it falling within our remit. Apart from
> anything else it's not under a free license.
I
On 25 January 2011 07:11, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> It is a question however if per
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/help/entry_faqs#copyright and
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/terms/#4 "In certain circumstance the BBC may also
> share your contribution with trusted third parties*." would allow for
> such a r
On 25 January 2011 11:26, Alison M. Wheeler wrote:
>
> - "Thomas Dalton" wrote:
>> Very doubtful indeed. Wikipedia might, conceivably, be considered a
>> trusted third party, but there is no way the rest of world would and
>> we can't accept content th
On 26 January 2011 23:41, David Gerard wrote:
> On 26 January 2011 22:54, MZMcBride wrote:
>
>> Jimmy has previously made way too many off-the-cuff remarks that have gotten
>> him into hot water to repeat that mistake again, surely.
>
>
> *cough*Sarah Palin*cough*
Comparing Jimmy to Sarah Palin
On 28 January 2011 08:25, Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Tonight, Egypt has ordered all operators to shut down their BGP
> adjacencies with out of countries providers. This mean Egypt is
> disconnected from the rest of the internet.
>
> I am wondering, should we just close our site in support
On 30 January 2011 18:02, Noein wrote:
> On 30/01/2011 13:10, koteche mcintosh wrote:
>> People choose to donate just like before. But on a regular basis. everyone
>> can see the fund. Everyone is part of the story. this GALVANIZES
>> support. Shoes governments the POWER of public opinion. Cre
On 28 January 2011 20:33, phoebe ayers wrote:
> Such a solution would make it easier to fold separate wikis
> (such as a conference wiki) back into Meta when we were done with
> them, too.
Why fold them into meta afterwards rather than just use Meta from the
beginning? Isn't the whole point of th
On 4 March 2011 19:50, church.of.emacs.ml
wrote:
> Previously, we limited our efforts to text
> banners. Only if our fundraising goal wasn't going to be met, we used
> our Joker card "Personal appeal by Jimmy Wales".
I agree with your sentiments, but I don't think that point is true. It
was alway
On 5 March 2011 14:05, WereSpielChequers wrote:
> Picking up on the comment by Tobias about less intrusive fundraising,
> I would make sure we are pursuing the following:
>
> 1 Build up a past donors database, communicate with them effectively
> and then as long as they donate annually make sure t
On 5 March 2011 16:12, WereSpielChequers wrote:
> I appreciate that we may only be able to exclude donors who are logged
> in readers from banner ads. But it is better in my view to say "Yes we
> can do that, but you would have to tell us your username and be
> logged in to avoid ads" than to tel
On 6 March 2011 10:40, wrote:
> So how cool is this?
>
> http://copyright.co.tv/
>
> Refresh the page, click a few links, ... anyone see any attribution?
>
> Teofilo check your moral rights, I think they have been mislaid.
Using Wikipedia articles to get a domain squatting page that appears
On 6 March 2011 09:48, geni wrote:
> On 6 March 2011 09:12, David Gerard wrote:
>> Indeed. That claim's a definite "citation needed".
>
> I know you follow the media with regards to wikipedia to at least some
> extent. You must have noticed the "WMF is a tiny little organisation
> running a great
On 6 March 2011 10:14, Pavel Richter wrote:
> But who says that the sole purpose of the WMF is to keep Wikimedia wikis
> running?
I don't think many people would say that's the sole purpose of the
WMF, but I think most would agree that it is the primary purpose. The
amount of other work the WMF d
On 6 March 2011 23:54, MZMcBride wrote:
> So... that's a no? There's no record of who wrote what? I think people in
> the community are interested to know how much of the strategic plan came
> from various stakeholders, both the ideas and the actual pieces of the
> report. If you feel that it's un
On 7 March 2011 11:44, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> On 6 March 2011 10:14, Pavel Richter wrote:
>>> But who says that the sole purpose of the WMF is to keep Wikimedia wikis
>>> running?
>>
>> I don't
This really is fantastic news - welcome back Brion!
On 7 March 2011 23:27, Jay Walsh wrote:
> Sending on behalf of Danese...
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Yes, the rumors are true! Today I am pleased to announce that after more
>> than a year away, Brion Vibber will be returning as a full-time employee of
On 8 March 2011 00:03, MZMcBride wrote:
> Andrew Garrett wrote:
>> We might be growing, but I don't think anybody in the industry would
>> hesitate to say that we're still "small" and "running on a shoestring
>> budget". The websites that we compete with run budgets in the hundreds
>> of millions
On 8 March 2011 13:24, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> On 3/5/11 7:48 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
>> While most donations come from people outside the Wikimedia (editing)
>> community, the people within the community often feel that the very small
>> staff of the past was more productive, more agile, less bloated,
On 9 March 2011 16:26, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
>
>> (Just to throw in a crazy idea: Informal monthly reports on what's going
>> on in the communities and what's bothering them? And on the other hand a
>> summary of what's being discussed on foundation-l?)
>>
>
> Sounds actually as a good idea -
On 9 March 2011 17:22, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
>
>> Or send them to the relevant mailing lists. ie. send a monthly report
>> in English about what's been discussed on wikide-l to foundation-l and
>> a monthly report in German about what's been discussed on foundation-l
>> to wikide-l. (And simi
On 9 March 2011 23:02, David Goodman wrote:
> Until recently, the foundation has been increasing its staff by hiring
> the best person immediately available, rather than a person good
> enough to do the necessary job.
I don't think that's true, at least not for the past couple of years.
The WMF o
2011/3/9 phoebe ayers :
> I know not everyone uses Gmail, but for those that do: the labs
> "message translation" extension rocks my world.
Thanks for the recommendation. I've just turned it on and this thread
now makes far more sense!
That said, it still doesn't make much sense. Automatic transl
On 12 March 2011 14:53, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> A really (and not only formally) multilingual list is the new iberocoop
> list, started after the last Wikimania
> (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Iberocoop ).
I didn't know about that list. That's very interesting - thanks for
the heads up! I
On 13 March 2011 12:06, Marcus Buck wrote:
> The upside is, that we won't get sued by copyright holders, I guess.
Actually, the upside is that our reusers won't get sued by copyright
holders. We can claim fair use when using images like that on
Wikipedia, but images on Commons are supposed to be
On 13 March 2011 18:25, Hans A. Rosbach wrote:
>> The English Wikipedia has a fair use policy, I know of no other Wikipedia
> that has one. The statement "We can claim fair use when using images like
> that on
> Wikipedia" is correct for English Wikipedia, but not for the other
> Wikipedias.
When
On 13 March 2011 20:02, Klaus Graf wrote:
> German Wikipedia is accepting Freedom of Panorama for all countries,
> and this is the right way to handle the problem.
>
> WMF board should decide not to oppose the results of a desirable
> Commons poll that all pictures of buildings (which are free in
On 21 March 2011 09:49, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Even in US elections the turnout is much lower for the mid-terms. It's
> relatively easy to decide on a presidential candidate, but the degree of
> being informed drops significantly for offices further down the
> political food chain.
I would have
On 21 March 2011 15:26, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> I could not disagree more.
Can you elaborate? There isn't much point saying you disagree if you
don't say what you think the truth actually is.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.
On 21 March 2011 19:27, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> The statements I reply to are balderdash. The board is relevant and the
> influence board members wield is real. Some of our best are of have been
> member of the board and it hass certainly not been a waste of their time.
The statements you
I doubt there is any way the court in question can enforce its ruling,
which is probably why the WMF didn't bother responding.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/founda
On 25 March 2011 17:55, Fred Bauder wrote:
>> I doubt there is any way the court in question can enforce its ruling,
>> which is probably why the WMF didn't bother responding.
>
> For all we know we have servers in Hong Kong.
I think we know where we have servers...
_
On 31 March 2011 22:35, Lodewijk wrote:
> I did a preliminary measure, and it actually showed a decline, starting the
> exact week it was implemented on nlwiki :( However, this preliminary measure
> was unscientific, not precise and would need better testing/measuring.
An immeadiate decline isn't
2011/4/19 Dana Lutenegger :
> Actually, I'm pretty sure that on paper, Chinese law forbids this kind of
> copying without attribution. The issue is whether or not it can be enforced
> in practice. If it was strictly enforced, a lot of Baidu Baike and Hudong
> Wiki would have to be seriously retoole
I'm sorry, where was the decision made to write a press release? I'm
really not sure that's the best approach. What attempts at direct
communication have been attempted so far?
On 24 April 2011 09:45, WereSpielChequers wrote:
> 16,000,000 out of 3,000,000 articles sounds high to me, it would mean
On 25 April 2011 08:13, Andre Engels wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
>> As Ray saids legal prosecution to claim for formal accomplishing of the
>> copyright terms is expensive and difficult. But the same happens the other
>> way around.
>>
>> I would like to have a clea
On 26 April 2011 03:06, wrote:
> I always thought that translations were considered "wholely derivative",
> that is that a new copyright is *not* created, by translating.
I would expect that to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. For
example, jurisdictions that includes some kind of "sweat o
The idea is that any discussion about announcements happens on
Foundation-l, so the reply-to is correct. You can subscribe to
foundation-l and select not to receive any emails, which would still
let you send emails. You wouldn't receive any of the responses to your
emails, though. If you want to ta
On 22 May 2011 17:22, geni wrote:
> On 22 May 2011 11:58, Chris Keating wrote:
>> Also rather interestingly, it appears that a Scottish newspaper has revealed
>> the identity of the footballer in question, on the grounds that English
>> superinjunctions don't apply in Scotland.
>
> I rather doubt
On 22 May 2011 20:39, Sarah wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 13:33, wrote:
>> On 22/05/2011 19:32, Sarah wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:00, wrote:
On 22/05/2011 11:58, Chris Keating wrote:
> Also rather interestingly, it appears that a Scottish newspaper has
> reve
On 23 May 2011 00:03, FT2 wrote:
> Out of interest, when a BLP is created and not speedy deleted, could we not
> write a standard email to the subject stating that a biographical article
> has been created on them on the online encyclopedia "Wikipedia", inviting
> them to review it, explaining wha
On 1 June 2011 21:35, Nathan wrote:
> Forgive me if I find these resolutions rather toothless; this is
> another in a string of board resolutions that simply "urge the
> projects." I'd love to understand what the Board thinks such
> resolutions will accomplish. I understand there are legal constra
On 1 June 2011 22:05, Michael Snow wrote:
> On 6/1/2011 2:03 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>> "Wikimedia projects are curated and edited collections, according to
>> certain principles: namely, we host only content that is both free and
>> educational in nature."
>>
>> So Board said that Wikinews is out
On 2 June 2011 00:00, phoebe ayers wrote:
> I will say that the Board drafted these resolutions with good faith
> and a great deal of care, and the one thing I would ask as you debate
> them is to consider them as a whole. We think all of the principles we
> articulate are important, and have impl
On 2 June 2011 14:21, Fae wrote:
> Briefly responding to a couple of points raised so far:
>
> Yes, there is a need for a policy as otherwise the WMF would have no
> long term operational archive plan.
Why would we have an archive plan? Archives are for things that aren't
expected to needed on a
I'm sorry to hear that, Danese. While we haven't really worked
together, I've heard nothing but good things from those that have
worked with you. The WMF is significantly poorer for losing you.
Could you elaborate on your reason for leaving? Has a decision been
made to change the direction and pur
On 2 June 2011 18:48, Fae wrote:
> Sure Tom, here's a SciFi user story:
>
> In 2016 San Francisco has a major earthquake and the servers and
> operational facilities for the WMF are damaged beyond repair. The
> emergency hot switchover to Hong Kong is delayed due to an ongoing DoS
> attack from Ea
Try these guys:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission
On 2 June 2011 20:40, Huib Laurens wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> I'm wondering, is there a policy for OTRS agents saying that they can't make
> info send to OTRS public?
>
> --
> Kind regards,
>
> Huib Laurens
> WickedWay.nl
>
> Webhost
On 7 June 2011 11:17, Huib Laurens wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Almost a week later there has been no responds bij the Foundation nor a
> responds from the OTRS admins to this mailing nor in private.
>
> At this moment I'm starting to believe the Foundation and the OTRS admin's
> doens't care at all about
2008/11/13 Nikola Smolenski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thursday 13 November 2008 20:06:06 Cetateanu Moldovanu wrote:
>> All I want is to NOT name the CYRILLIC garbage with OUR NAME !
>
> Ај обџект то јур колинг сирилик "гарбиџ", анд ај вуд лајк ан аполоџи.
While this is an international mailing lis
2008/11/14 geni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2008/11/14 Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Why not just rename it ro-cyrl.wikipedia.org *right now* and be done
>> with it?
>
> Because the people who actually use it would not consider it Romanian.
But the ISO standard that we use for these decisions
2008/11/16 Milos Rancic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I am making now one site (about pseudoscience) which I want to
> double-license, so materials may be used in the future at Wikipedia.
> As it is my site, I may make whichever, partial licensing, but I
> realized that there is one very stupid problem fo
> BTW, I am not the only person who is working on the site, but it is a
> very small group of people and editing is not open to the world.
In that case, you can just get explicit permission from each of them
to do whatever it is you need to do, so there shouldn't be a problem.
___
> 26 thousand Euro in the last 40 hours. Normal figures appear to be
> 3000 EUR per day. That's quite impressive. I wonder whether there is
> an actual net gain.
Do we have statistics on how many people actually access the German
Wikipedia via the wikipedia.de domain? If it's not many, then there'
> So we should send the guy flowers and thank him publicly with a banner
> for suing us! O:-)
> Or is that to humiliating for him :)
I think publicly thanking the donors for supporting us against him
would be sufficiently humiliating without being petty.
__
Thank you very much. It looks like the foundation's finances are in
excellent order. A few things that jump out at me - despite the size
of the foundation in pretty much every respect increasing dramatically
over the last year, the money spent on travel (which is something I
remember some people th
> But SignWriting is not sign-language: Many people who are deaf and use
> ASL (and, I presume, other forms of sign language) are unaware of and
> have no interest in SignWriting as being deaf does not result in an
> inherit inability to communicate using more common written languages.
>
> As far a
> - Many people claim that all deaf are literate in dominate languages
> of their area, but while this is partially true (almost all deaf in,
> say, the US are functionally literate), it's also true that many
> people are much more proficient and understand their signed language
> better than the w
> Here we must be using some other
> meaning since the overwhelming majority of deaf children are born to
> hearing parents who do not speak sign language.
Really? Do you have some statistics to back that up? Deafness is very
often inherited. It may be a majority, but I doubt it is overwhelming.
> Your problem (mine and of the boys) is NOT that have non wikimedians in
> brazilian chapter. Is because that non wikimedians hostilize every
> wikimedian and don't permite anyone discussion... every is taboo.
What kind of organisation is Wikimedia Brazil? Do members not have
legal rights? The wa
2008/11/24 Michael Bimmler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Yeah and, what Nathan probably meant: If a chapter ignores a
> termination message and keeps using the trademark, we would need to
> obtain an injunction in *their* country. Now, I think the Wikipedia
> trademark is not even registered international
> 5. So far, no legal entity has been created and there is no such a group
> of Wikimedia representatives.
That's an interesting point that we seemed to be missing. This is all
just at the planning stage so far? I don't see that we have any
serious problem then, this dispute simply means that
2008/11/24 Casey Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Florence Devouard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think it is not appropriate that Wikimedia Brasil is listed (and
>> described) as a non-profit organization if it is not yet incorporated:
>> http://wikimediafoundation.o
2008/11/24 Casey Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Thomas Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But there is no chapter, just a proposal. The idea of a Brazilian
>> chapter has been approved, but that idea still needs to be
>> impl
2008/11/24 Casey Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:41 PM, Thomas Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I know what the resolution says, it doesn't mean it makes sense. There
>> is no "Wikimedia Brasil", so the resolution is pretty meani
2008/11/24 Florence Devouard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Casey Brown wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Bence Damokos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I guess the issue is that usually organisations need to "earn" the title of
>>> non-profit (by being accepted as such by the courts/authorities), s
901 - 1000 of 1059 matches
Mail list logo
