from_name: Mirko Thiessen

body:
Martin wrote:

>
> 172 and Danny in particular. To a perhaps lesser extent, Baldhur,
> Meelar, Dissident,
> RickK, Secretlondon, Sam Spade.
>

I cannot speak for others, but I am anything but a Wik supporter. I just
said on that page that I mostly agree with him factually, but I really
hate his way of dealing with other people. I demanded a ban on Wik long
ago. Of course I would prefer if he changes his ways but that will never
happen. If he is able to chase away a brilliant editor like Tannin (and
many others) then he shall leave.

I don't know how it comes that I am called a Wik supporter now. Is it just
because Jor characterised me so on his user page (among his list of insane
users)?

Mirko (aka Baldhur)


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Tim Starling

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Wik and a not-quite-proposal for constitutional
	change

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> I certainly hope having a large watchlist isn't going to become something
> to be taken as prima facie evidence of ill intention.

I should hope not, since Patrick still has more watchlist entries than
Wik: 13,762 compared to 13,030. Here is the current hall of shame:

13763
Patrick
13030
Wik
8345
Stan Shebs
8250
Docu
6963
Morwen
5344
Mic
4414
Unyounyo
3801
Camembert
3743
Oliver Pereira
3491
The Anome
3420
TakuyaMurata
3302
Maveric149
3277
John Kenney
3068
Egil
3057
Radiojon
2734
Mintguy
2705
KF
2624
Zigger
2504
Menchi
2358
TUF-KAT
2318
Anthony DiPierro
2268
Infrogmation
2207
Texture
2083
Zanimum
2002
Fuzheado
2001
BRG

Ban them all!!!!! ;)

-- Tim Starling


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] html tidy integration

body:
Neil Harris wrote:
> This is great. Could it allow the Wiki front-end to be simplified
> further, by allowing a tradeoff where  "worse" HTML can be generated by
> a simplified version of the PHP script, only to be made completely
> regular and valid by the purpose-designed C-coded high-performance tidy
> engine?
>
> This might have the possbility of being both faster (purpose-designed
> single-function code for enforcing validity) and less buggy (fewer
> passes in PHP, and fewer lines of code that need maintenance)?

That would basically change one function in the parser, which has to run
for *security* anyway (stripping tags and attributes that aren't on the
known-good list). I don't think there's that much point.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] short domain name.

body:
Hunter Peress wrote:
> i think we should have a really short domain name. ideally 5 chars total, like:  wp.eu
>
> please try your respective countries.
>
> heres a page to document our efforts:  http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Domain_Name

Please don't. Eventually some portion of them will get forgotten on
renewal, and the links will be broken.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Switch query

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> I am interested in getting feedback on the issue of 10/100 versus
> gigabit.  The answer of which to get depends, of course, on the total
> price -- if the price difference is large, we can be happy with
> 10/100.  If the price difference is small, we might as well get the
> gigabit.

MySQL and other folks generally recommend gigabit if possible, not for
the bandwidth but because it reduces latency a smidge, since it takes
less time for a packet to be transmitted.

Not sure if it's worth it though if we're mostly I/O limited on some and
CPU-limited on others.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
Yes, well described.

Fred

> From: Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 10:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] On trolls, usenet and Wikipedia
>
> pulling
> people's chains on obscure process issues.


from_name: Mr Paul Vogel

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Sheer EVIL is SELFISHLY SUBJECTIVE and EGOTISTICAL
	EGOISM, ie. MOBY etc.

body:
A response to posts of a most conniving and pernicious
nature:

[[Psychological projection]]!-PV

To those who are not very interested in the matters
being debated, excuse my verbosity, but sometimes no
amount of words are adequate to convey the irritation
we can feel at some forms of behaviour, and yet we
must vent our outrage with some form of expression.
Sometimes a rant is well deserved response to some
forms of extreme arrogance, presumption, and forces at
work for sheer EVIL.

Sheer EVIL is SELFISHLY SUBJECTIVE and EGOTISTICAL
EGOISM, ie. MOBY etc, and "ilk".-PV

To anyone who is reasonable: I am intent on erasing
MUCH but not all of the asinine idiocy that a certain
individual has seen fit to post on my talk page,
perhaps thinking I might provide a place of safe haven
for posting MANY of his extremely warped views.

"What "extremely warped views" are you talking about,
MOBY, now that I have been again "falsely banned" for
this reason: "insane"?

It remains in the database record if you are
masochistic or deranged enough to want to try to read
through all of it. If a person is so paranoid,
unsocial, anti-social, pig-headed, obnoxious, rude and
just plain stupid that they don't even try to
establish and maintain their own user page among
decent human beings, or behave in a manner that even
attempts to acknowledge or accommodate the rights of
others beyond those that are imposed by their own
selfish and bigoted interests, I am certainly not
going to let them take over my talk page to post all
the extremely insulting and spiritually retarded
nonsense they are inclined to post that they can't get
away with posting elsewhere.

[[Psychological projection]]!-PV

I'm sure there are probably worse and more obnoxious
fools in existence, but thus far I have encountered no
one on the Wikipedia, or on the entire web for that
matter, who more exhibits the severe signs of the
narcissism that this person is so fond of accusing
others of exhibiting.

Moby and "ilk" see only what they want to "see", and
no more and no less.
[[Psychological projection]]!-PV

Some people seem to have their heads so far up their
own fundaments that it is a wonder that they can see
anything at all. It doesn't take a "Kangaroo Court" to
recognize a pile of manure.

Ad hominem personal attacks, after my being banned,
how sweet! How typical! How very "Malignantly
Narcissistic" of Moby! LOL! :D
[[Psychological projection]]!-PV

To PV, whose addiction to rants of Pathetic Vitriol
against others is truly alarming; to whom anyone who
does not agree with him is regarded as a "Marxist"or
"Zionist" agent or dupe, or else a "malignant
narcissist": "Narcissistic" does not even begin to
convey your absurd infatuation with yourself, and your
extremely deficient ability to respond to others in
civil and sincerely respectful ways.

More [[Psychological projection]]! LOL! :D-PV

There is a great deal of calm, restrained advice that
certain professionals might be able to give you, that
I doubt you would seek, but I will indulge in a little
venting of my own irritation with you, without
indulging in some of the profanity that can come very
easily to mind: GROW UP, YOU PALTRY MISERABLE WRETCHED
WASTER OF OTHER PEOPLE'S TIME AND LIFE AND ATTENTION.

More [[Psychological projection]]! LOL! :D-PV

Why don't you actually try reading something by some
of the great ethical and mystical philosophers of
history instead of trying to imply or claim they would
all eagerly embrace the grandiose pettiness and absurd
enshrinement of paltry bigotry that you seem to think
is a path to eternal grandeur and "Godhood".

More [[Psychological projection]]! LOL! :D
I have actually done so, and "arete'" or "excellence"
or "quality" is the actual path towards "Godhood" as
is "Personal Integrity", or "intellectual honesty and
moral courage" and of which both you and which your
"Pathetic Vitriol" of own "ilk" have clearly and often
here demonstrated actually have none-PV

I will now quote an article on your "hero", "Dr."
Pierce:

"All of the homosexuals, racemixers, and hard-case
collaborators in the country who are too far gone to
be re-educated can be rounded up, packed into 10,000
or so railroad cattle cars, and eventually
double-timed into an abandoned coal mine in a few
days' time," he wrote in a 1994 newsletter. "All of
these people simply don't count, except as a mass of
voters. . . . Those who speak against us now should be
looked at as dead men, as men marching in lockstep
toward their own graves." Like others on the far
right, he held Jews, not blacks or gays, to be the
main target. He had a special thing for race-mixing
women, whom he pictured in The Turner Diaries hanging
by the neck from telephone poles with their eyes
bugged out. - Village Voice article

The wages of such "sin", ie. "race treason", are
death.-HOLY BIBLE, and there are actually many many
more "genocidal" and "murderous" so-called "Jewish
Heros" to be found therein.-PV

I suspect the source will imply to PV that I am
definitely a "Pinko" of some sorts (but just speaking
against his views usually suffices there) but it just
happens to be the top hit I got when I entered
"Pierce", "Hitler", and "nazi" into a google search.

Not so much any "Pinko" as just being "brain-washed"
and quite "ignorant" of the WHOLE TRUTHS of REALITY.
-PV

I will quote a certain individual that Pierce, and you
and your "ilk" seem to have a great deal of admiration
for, and then a few people who were executed during
his brief but bloody reign.

Yawn. Get out the world's smallest violin.-PV

We have to put a stop to the idea that is a part of
everybody's civil rights to say whatever he pleases. -

Indeed. Freedom of Speech is for only your own "ilk",
right?-PV

 Adolf Hitler, from a conversation transcribed on
Februatry 22, 1942 Luckily for you, most people who
disagree with you don't go so far as these "great
heroes" of the "National Alliance" in seeking to
silence you, though you certainly can sometimes make
the idea seem appealing.

Right.
Anyone can take a text or conversation "out of
context" for "lying and slanderous propaganda"
purposes or reasons and twist it, as happened
to me and by your own "ilk" during arbitration.-PV

A few others from Mein Kampf that I do think go a long
way to explaining your own behaviour, and apparent
ideas:

No amount of genius spent on the creation of
propaganda will lead to success if a fundamental
principle is not forever kept in mind. Propaganda must
confine itself to very few points, and repeat them
endlessly. Here, as with so many things in this world,
persistence is the first and foremost condition of
success.

Indeed, like the clearly "false" proposition and
assertion that "ALL men are created equal", etc. ad
nauseum and ad infinitum, and all of the rest of the
other "Marxist-PC lying and hypocritical propaganda".
-PV

The application of force alone, without moral support
based on a spiritual concept, can never bring about
the destruction of an idea or arrest the propagation
of it, unless one is ready and able ruthlessly to
exterminate the last upholders of that idea even to a
man, and also wipe out any tradition which it may tend
to leave behind.

Exactly. You are trying to exterminate an "idea", ie.
COSMOTHEISM, or "White separatism" by destroying the
race first via miscegenation and lying propaganda.-PV

Any violence which does not spring from a spiritual
base, will be wavering and uncertain. It lacks the
stability which can only rest in a fanatical outlook.

"Fanatical" to and for "upholding" the moral and
"spiritual truths" that support it, yes.-PV

In the big lie there is always a certain force of
credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are
always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of
their emotional nature than consciously or
voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of
their minds they more readily fall victims to the big
lie than the small lie.

True. Put in the correct context, Hitler was actually
talking about the current Jewish-Marxist propaganda
techniques of his time, which hasn't changed much at
all. "The official party-line story of the 6 Million
Jews exterminated in the Nazi Holocaust" being a very
clear example of this "Big lie" technique that has
worked.-PV

And finally another quote of Hitler's:

I have not come into this world to make men better,
but to make use of their weaknesses.

Do cite this in the correct "context", please, and
provide the page number and show where this is to be
found?-PV

It is appalling that there remains so many weak-souled
and weak-minded individuals as can still consider this
depraved abomination a hero, and I will now quote from
some leaflets of a few who died opposing him , who
belonged to the German group known as The White Rose:
[6]

Actually, the truely "weak-minded" and "weak-souls"
rabble are mostly to be found on the
Social-Marxist-Left!-PV

It is impossible to engage in intellectual discourse
with National Socialist Philosophy, for if there were
such an entity, one would have to try by means of
analysis and discussion either to prove its validity
or to combat it.

On the contrary, the "irrationality" is not so much on
the part of any "National Socialist Philosophy" as it
is in the almost complete lack of any actual personal
integrity, intellectual honesty, nor moral courage, on
the part of its so-called detractors.-PV

In actuality, however, we face a totally different
situation. At it's very inception this movement
depended on the deception and betrayal of one's fellow
man; even at that time it was inwardly corrupt and
could support itself only by constant lies.

That really sounds much more like the lying Mass Media
controlled and so-called Democratic "political
systems" of today than anything else.-PV

In the next passage I will concede that they go a bit
too far in their own rhetoric, for I do not accept
that every word out of his mouth was a lie? but I do
not doubt that most were spoken by a man deranged, and
very much inclined to lie to others, and even to
himself about the nature of reality, historical
circumstances and his own personal fate.

Nonsense.
It is clear just who or whom are the real "Masters"
and "People of the Lie", actually are and have been
for thousands of years.
Obviously, you do not know factual history very well
do you?-PV

Every word that comes from Hitler's mouth is a lie.
When he says peace, he means war, and when he
blasphemously uses the name of the Almighty, he means
the power of evil, the fallen angel, Satan. His mouth
is the foul-smelling maw of Hell, and his might is at
bottom accursed. True, we must conduct a struggle
against the National Socialist terrorist state with
rational means; but whoever today still doublts the
reality, the existence of demonic powers, has failed
by a wide margin to understand the metaphysical
background of this war.

More patent nonsense.
It is clear just who or whom are the real "Masters"
and "People of the Lie", actually are and have been
for thousands of years.
Obviously, you do not know factual history very well
do you?-PV

I am posting this on my talk page, and might post it
in a few other spots where I and others have attempted
dialog with you, only to have our statements butchered
up into convenient little bits that your plainly small
mind can attempt to digest and respond to, and do not
expect that it will be spared from the same treatment.

On the contrary, your elephant of disinformation and
lying and hypocritical propaganda is so very huge,
that the only way to properly address it is just one
small bite at a time.-PV

Except that on my talk page I can certainly insist on
maintaining it intact.

Who cares if it is "intact" or not, what actually
matters is if it is "true" or not, which it isn't.-PV

Despite the loathsomeness of your attitudes and
behaviour, I don't wish any ill fate befalls you,
indeed I hope that lucidity can eventually arrive into
your mixed up mind, and I truly hope you evolve to the
decent human being level sometime soon: I assure you,
with great confidence: YOU ARE CERTAINLY A VERY LONG
WAY FROM GODHOOD. - Moby 17:09, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

LOL! :D

That was really a most amusing example of typical
[[psychological projection]].

My mind is actually quite clear, thank you, and I do
recognize that HUMANITY as a WHOLE has a extremely
long way to go to achieve GODHOOD or the OMEGA POINT
of TdC. That is ONLY if such "muddled" and "Social
Marxist-PC thinking" and any such clearly false
delusions and "false identities" of our own people are
not finally cleaned-up and once and for all.-PV

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


from_name: Christopher Mahan

subject: [WikiEN-l] Sheer EVIL and other such nefariousities

body:
The delete button is your friend :)

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Wikimedia PR

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia and Wiktionary

body:
I have been talking about this since quite a while (although without any concrete proposal)... using Wikipedia's popularity to benefit Wiktionary.
Jimbo Wales showed up in IRC and I took the opportunity to talk with him about it. I had already discussed it on the IRC channel.
Here's a transcript of the chat
<pre>
<Hemanshu> hello
<jwales> Hello!
<Hemanshu> I was wondering if Wikipedia should incorporate links to Wiktionary in articles?
<Hemanshu> Wiktionary is really lacking interest
<jwales> It sounds like a reasonable concept to me.
<Hemanshu> we need to use Wikipedia's popularity to make Wiktionary more popular
<jwales> I agree with that.
<Hemanshu> good
<jwales> I can think of two ways...
<jwales> First, encourage more interwiki linking with wiktionary, somehow.
<jwales> Possibly even go so far as to have a bit of new markup.
<Hemanshu> yes
<Hemanshu> maybe we can have a small icon link next to words
<jwales> Second, we could put a link on every page of wikipedia, "Look for a definition of 'Article Title' in Wiktionary".
<Hemanshu> yeah
<jwales> That second one might generate resistance, though, because many many times the article title is not really a word that needs defining, per se.
<jwales> Take a look at this:
<jwales> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_Japan
<jwales> just an example for us to brainstorm about.
<jwales> Now, that article has interlanguage links for 'fr' and 'ja' versions of the same topic.
<jwales> Perhaps a simple extension of the interlanguage syntax, but for definitions, would be sensible.
<Hemanshu> yeah I see
<Hemanshu> yes
<jwales> Here's a better brainstorm:
<Hemanshu> that would make it possible to link to definitions of article titles
<jwales> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cladistics
<Hemanshu> and that could be implemented really easily
<jwales> There are 4 interlanguage links there.
<jwales> We could have a new one, like:
<Hemanshu> being able to provide quicklinks to definitions of word used in the article could be more difficult
<jwales> [[definiton:paraphyletic]] could be the simple new markup.
<Hemanshu> yeah
<jwales> And that magically makes a a link, in the text at that point, to wiktionary.
<jwales> I would support something along those lines.
<jwales> Will you run this by wikipedia-l and wikitech-l?
<jwales> I'll make noises of joy.
<Hemanshu> :)
<jwales> Maybe it will excite someone and then it might happen.
<Hemanshu> I haven't joined the mailing list
<Hemanshu> I just have to send an email to?
<Hemanshu> wikipedia-1@?
<Hemanshu> can I post this conversation on the wiki?
<jwales> Yeah
<Hemanshu> ok
<jwales> Anyhow, talk to you later I'm going to have to go.
<Hemanshu> ok
<Hemanshu> nice talking
</pre>

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040506/c78d8ed4/attachment.htm


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: short domain name.

body:
David Friedland wrote:
> Brion Vibber wrote:
>> Please don't. Eventually some portion of them will get forgotten on
>> renewal, and the links will be broken.
>
> Not if they all get their ownership transferred to the foundation and
> get kept track of in a centralized location. We keep track of all kinds
> of stuff on a daily basis. Why wouldn't we be able to keep track of
> domain names?

Then the foundation will be paying for them in perpetuity. IMHO that's a
waste of donors' money.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


body:
This is Paul Vogel who is a hairbreath short of a 1 year ban. He has only
hours, perhaps minutes to go. See [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Paul
Vogel]].

Fred

> From: David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 20:39:45 +0000
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] three revert rule and quickpolls
>
> On 05/06/04 13:40, KNOTT, T wrote:
>
>> The general consensus appears to be the quickpolls do not appear to work in
>> the case of violations of the three revert rule. Fair enough. So what do we
>> do now? I would like admins to have the power to 24hour block someone who
>> violates this rule, once they have received a warning. I personally can't see
>> any situation where someone would have a legitimate reason to revert more
>> than three times in a day.
>> Vandalism - protect the page.
>> Um what else? I can't think of anything. What does everyone else think?
>
>
> That's a sweet thought, but 24.45.99.191 has been going hogwild
> with (a) spamming large slabs of text across the place (b) altering
> archives of talk pages yesterday and today. I put it on the
> Vandalism page, but it doesn't seem to warrant any action. Just
> what does it take for an anon IP vandal to get blocked?
>
>
> - d.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] A lengthy defense of Wik

body:
daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 5/6/2004 1:04:49 AM Eastern Standard Time,
charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com writes:

>>would find it easier to believe that Wik and I are on the same side, if I
could edit down the bloated [[1920 in Germany]] page without reverts from
him and 172,

>So teh problem with Wik is that he is long winded?

No, this is source material, I am told.  I queried the source on the Talk
page, and got no answer (I was told about this indirectly, by someone else).

So, Point One, no answer from Wik about the reasonable request about the
source of 49 K pasted with little format into WP.

I added the headings on the page.  Dammit, I'm interested in the content.  I
made some editorial cuts, and Wik reverted them on the 'grounds' that "We
have enough space''.

So, Point Two, 32K pages are an ideal maximum for some browsers.

Point Three - 'We?'.  Is that the editorial we, the royal we, or what?  I
think this is just to impose.

Point Four, no reply to my comments on the talk page about this.

And then when I edited some more, 172 says the cuts were excessive.  Hardly.
And he's an academic historian.  The stuff shows huge POV, and the length is
such that concision work should be welcomed.  Not all this 'you propose, we
dispose by revert' stuff; with nil engagement on the talk page.

That page is turgid to a fault, and should be edited without this sort of
arrogance.

Charles


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: short domain name.

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Then the foundation will be paying for them in perpetuity. IMHO that's a
> waste of donors' money.

Well, it depends, I think.  If they are particularly good, then it's
not a bad idea.  Of course I'd appreciate if people run them by me
first before assuming that we'd like to keep them in perpetuity.

One way to (mostly) avoid the issue of having links to alternative
urls would be to redirect.  That is, if someone were to type:

http://www.sd.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson
(where 'sd' means 'short domain')
then they would be redirected automatically to
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson

That would (mostly) prevent people from making links to the shorter
domain.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] PAUL VOGEL INSANE? HARDLY! LOL! :D

body:
Mr Paul Vogel wrote:
> Obviously, there is a Social-Marxist and
> Jewish-Zionist "political bias" within Wikipedia
> and not the least of which is shared by Jimbo and
> this "censorship" and "banning" and "blocking" of
> me by this ilk or cabal was solid proof of it for
> any doubters.

<deadpan>
Ah, yes, Jimbo, the notorious Social-Marxist Jewish-Zionist.
</deadpan>

Anyone even passingly familiar with my personal politics and
philosophy must be amused by that.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] three revert rule and quickpolls

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> That's a sweet thought, but 24.45.99.191 has been going hogwild
> with (a) spamming large slabs of text across the place (b) altering
> archives of talk pages yesterday and today. I put it on the
> Vandalism page, but it doesn't seem to warrant any action. Just
> what does it take for an anon IP vandal to get blocked?

Whether or not it is Paul Vogel, posting from an anon IP relieves him
of most due-process protections generally afforded to logged-in users.
"Sysops may, at their judgment, block IP addresses that vandalise Wikipedia."

--Jimbo


subject: [Wikitech-l] Switch query

body:
My research reveals that 24 port gigabit switches are available for under
$600.  Managed switches a bit more, but still under $800.

That seems worthwhile to me.

Brion Vibber wrote:

> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> >I am interested in getting feedback on the issue of 10/100 versus
> >gigabit.  The answer of which to get depends, of course, on the total
> >price -- if the price difference is large, we can be happy with
> >10/100.  If the price difference is small, we might as well get the
> >gigabit.
>
> MySQL and other folks generally recommend gigabit if possible, not for
> the bandwidth but because it reduces latency a smidge, since it takes
> less time for a packet to be transmitted.
>
> Not sure if it's worth it though if we're mostly I/O limited on some and
> CPU-limited on others.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: KNOTT, T

body:
The general consensus appears to be the quickpolls do not appear to work in the case of violations of the three revert rule. Fair enough. So what do we do now? I would like admins to have the power to 24hour block someone who violates this rule, once they have received a warning. I personally can't see any situation where someone would have a legitimate reason to revert more than three times in a day.

 Vandalism - protect the page.

Um what else? I can't think of anything. What does everyone else think?

Theresa


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikitech-l] html tidy integration

body:
Gabriel Wicke wrote:

>To make sure the markup MediaWiki parser produces is valid xhtml/xml
>i've added a tidy (http://tidy.sf.net) function to Parser.php that pipes
>the generated body html through the tidy tool as a last step. The
>function is disabled by default, set $wgUseTidy = true in LocalSettings
>to enable it. You can test the output at http://test.wikipedia.org.
>
>I've done some benchmarks using ab with tidy enabled vs. disabled- the
>performance impact seems to be neglible.
>PHP5 has tidy built in as a module (see
>http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.tidy.php). It might be possible to
>improve the overall parser performance with the php5 version as it seems
>to be possible to teach it which tags to allow (currently done in php).
>
>
>
This is great. Could it allow the Wiki front-end to be simplified
further, by allowing a tradeoff where  "worse" HTML can be generated by
a simplified version of the PHP script, only to be made completely
regular and valid by the purpose-designed C-coded high-performance tidy
engine?

This might have the possbility of being both faster (purpose-designed
single-function code for enforcing validity) and less buggy (fewer
passes in PHP, and fewer lines of code that need maintenance)?

-- Neil


body:
Most of the time he was just an insulting POV poster. Now that he is in
trouble he's striking out more.

Fred

> From: David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 21:34:13 +0000
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] three revert rule and quickpolls
>
> On 05/06/04 19:49, Fred Bauder wrote:
>> From: David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>
>>> On 05/06/04 13:40, KNOTT, T wrote:
>
>>>> The general consensus appears to be the quickpolls do not appear to work in
>>>> the case of violations of the three revert rule. Fair enough. So what do we
>>>> do now? I would like admins to have the power to 24hour block someone who
>>>> violates this rule, once they have received a warning. I personally can't
>>>> see
>>>> any situation where someone would have a legitimate reason to revert more
>>>> than three times in a day.
>>>> Vandalism - protect the page.
>>>> Um what else? I can't think of anything. What does everyone else think?
>
>>> That's a sweet thought, but 24.45.99.191 has been going hogwild
>>> with (a) spamming large slabs of text across the place (b) altering
>>> archives of talk pages yesterday and today. I put it on the
>>> Vandalism page, but it doesn't seem to warrant any action. Just
>>> what does it take for an anon IP vandal to get blocked?
>
>
>> This is Paul Vogel who is a hairbreath short of a 1 year ban. He has only
>> hours, perhaps minutes to go. See [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Paul
>> Vogel]].
>
>
> Yes, I know it is. So you're saying it takes four months for an anon IP
> vandal to get blocked?
>
>
> - d.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Gabriel Wicke

subject: [Wikitech-l] html tidy integration

body:
To make sure the markup MediaWiki parser produces is valid xhtml/xml
i've added a tidy (http://tidy.sf.net) function to Parser.php that pipes
the generated body html through the tidy tool as a last step. The
function is disabled by default, set $wgUseTidy = true in LocalSettings
to enable it. You can test the output at http://test.wikipedia.org.

I've done some benchmarks using ab with tidy enabled vs. disabled- the
performance impact seems to be neglible.
PHP5 has tidy built in as a module (see
http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.tidy.php). It might be possible to
improve the overall parser performance with the php5 version as it seems
to be possible to teach it which tags to allow (currently done in php).

--
Gabriel Wicke


subject: [WikiEN-l] Translation articles: stemming the flood

body:
For the second day running, mid-morning GMT, there have been numerous
articles posted by what appears to be a group of students at a Spanish
university, acting in concert in a project to boost WP's pages on machine
translation and allied topics.

I mention this not because there is an actual crisis - various alerts have
been raised, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:VfD-Translation_articles - but
because of the somewhat alarming feeling while it's on, of a whole group of
newbies loose and working in collaboration, and not communicating in
English.  Much of the work is wasted, because there are existing articles
under almost identical titles.  Much of the text is copied from somewhere,
posing a problem of scale looking at possible copyvio.  Some even seems to
be WP material being copied back here from another site using it.

On the whole I think the Wikipedians involved have handled this rather
professionally - taking a pro-active line in looking at what is going on,
rather than a reactive assumption that this is malicious in some way.  There
is going to be quite a job tidying it all up, later, if every such
contribution is treated (as it should be) on a case-by-case basis.

Charles

http://www.speakingasaparent.com/


from_name: David Friedland

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: short domain name.

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Hunter Peress wrote:
>
>> i think we should have a really short domain name. ideally 5 chars
>> total, like:  wp.eu
>>
>> please try your respective countries.
>>
>> heres a page to document our efforts:
>> http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Domain_Name
>
>
> Please don't. Eventually some portion of them will get forgotten on
> renewal, and the links will be broken.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Not if they all get their ownership transferred to the foundation and
get kept track of in a centralized location. We keep track of all kinds
of stuff on a daily basis. Why wouldn't we be able to keep track of
domain names?

- David


from_name: Viajero

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Wik has removed the lists (short)

body:
On 05/06/04  at 06:57 AM, Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com> said:

> What I would really like is for him to come here and join in the policy
> discussions.

He seems to read the mailing list (Hi Wik!) but for some reason refuses to participate in the discussions.

V.


subject: [Wikitech-l] html tidy integration

body:
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 15:07 +0100, Neil Harris wrote:

> This is great. Could it allow the Wiki front-end to be simplified
> further, by allowing a tradeoff where  "worse" HTML can be generated by
> a simplified version of the PHP script, only to be made completely
> regular and valid by the purpose-designed C-coded high-performance tidy
> engine?

I haven't tried it yet, but it looks like it. An alternative possibility
would be to extend the tidy source itself (looks not very hard after a
quick look at the code), but the php-integrated version would be cleaner
and much less hassle of course.
--
Gabriel Wicke


from_name: Ivan Krstic

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: short domain name.

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Then the foundation will be paying for them in perpetuity. IMHO that's a
> waste of donors' money.

Agreed. It'd make some sense if we could get a com/net/org; something
else is simply too obscure. Imagine telling a friend "yeah, just go to
ee-enn dot dubya-pee dot ee-you". It would make no sense (or be
memorable) to a non-technical person. The current domain names do and are.

Cheers,
Ivan


body:
It's a bit of an oversimplification. If I wanted to troll, I'd make a
controversial edit. When it was reverted I'd troll on the talk page. Get
no bites - make another  controversial edit and troll on the talk page
again. Get no bites again? Troll quickpolls, village pump, review of
admin actions etc, complaining that I was being reverted without
discussion.

How do you deal with users like a troll version of me?

Theresa

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Richards [mailto:marich712000 at yahoo.com]
Sent: 06 May 2004 16:25
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] On trolls, usenet and Wikipedia

Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to deal
with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The problem is
users who have not vandalised anything, but seek to
engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with anyone
who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you have
lost already.
If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If not,
don't feed him.
Mark

--- Christopher Mahan <chris_mahan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls can
> be ignored (not
> fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia, they
> escalate their
> vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of damaging
> articles that
> people have spend countless hours of their precious
> time crafting.
>
> Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst thing you
> could possibly
> do, since it will bite you in the proverbial bum.
>
> =====
> Christopher Mahan
> chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> 818.943.1850 cell
> http://www.christophermahan.com/
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Luciana Salete Buriol

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia database - how to concatenate files

body:
How can I concatenate the data split in files?

For example, The old table of de.wikipedia.org was split in
files xaa (part one) and xab (part two).
I've concatenated the files with cat:
cat xaa xab > 20040501_old_table.sql.bz2

bunzip2 doesn't uncompress the generated file. I checked the md5 number
and:
md5sum 20040501_old_table.sql.bz2 => 7669369a13df1b48ff4cad5c02a5c0fd
wikipidia md5 number is e96a44216a3fa546d2299647f6f6eb45

The same happens to the English data (en.wikipedia.org)

Does somebody knows how to concatenate the files?

Thanks!
Luciana


subject: [WikiEN-l] On trolls, usenet and Wikipedia

body:
>How do you deal with users like a troll version of me?

Theresa

Oh dear - and I thought female trolls were in the entwives/hen's teeth class
for rarity.

I think wikis make it very easy for attention-seeking vandals/trolls to get
attention.  After all, vandalise a page, after 30 seconds on RecentChanges
it's reverted; you have your attention.  And rightly given.  An
argumentative person on a Talk page really should be given calm, firm
attention.

Strip out those categories ... well, but the soft security point is not to
argue that this always works, but to point out that it is a good-enough
buffer for all but hard cases.

Charles


from_name: Rick

body:
Unfortunately, there are far too many people on Wikipedia (most of whom do little actual editing of articles) who are more concerned about giving the trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will attack and try to get banned those of us actually out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a trollopedia.

RickK

Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to deal
with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The problem is
users who have not vandalised anything, but seek to
engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with anyone
who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you have
lost already.
If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If not,
don't feed him.
Mark

--- Christopher Mahan wrote:
> On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls can
> be ignored (not
> fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia, they
> escalate their
> vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of damaging
> articles that
> people have spend countless hours of their precious
> time crafting.
>
> Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst thing you
> could possibly
> do, since it will bite you in the proverbial bum.
>
> =====
> Christopher Mahan
> chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> 818.943.1850 cell
> http://www.christophermahan.com/
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040506/8e9f6197/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] The JewWatch googlebomb attempt

body:
JewWatch is back at the top of the Google listings:

http://www.webpronews.com/news/ebusinessnews/wpn-45-20040506TheyreBaaaackORHowTheGoogleJewWatchControversyJustWontDie.html

RickK

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040506/94820274/attachment.htm


from_name: Mark Richards

body:
Well, I'm not advocating for the rights to troll (I
don't think vandalism has anything to do with this,
since its already covered) - I'm just saying that the
current way of dealing with trolling isn't very
effective.

Ignoring things that are not vandalism or malicious
article edits might be better than providing fertile
ground for more trolling. The username issue is the
biggest one of concern to me, I think that we're
setting ourselves up for a whole new round of trolling
over 'if admins can ban users with 'troll' in their
name, what other names can I get away with'. By just
ignoring these usernames (unless they are attacks on
users, genuinely offensive etc) this game would not
start.

Mark

--- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Unfortunately, there are far too many people on
> Wikipedia (most of whom do little actual editing of
> articles) who are more concerned about giving the
> trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will
> attack and try to get banned those of us actually
> out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
> trollopedia.
>
> RickK
>
> Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to
> deal
> with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The problem is
> users who have not vandalised anything, but seek to
> engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with anyone
> who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you have
> lost already.
> If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If
> not,
> don't feed him.
> Mark
>
> --- Christopher Mahan wrote:
> > On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls can
> > be ignored (not
> > fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia, they
> > escalate their
> > vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of damaging
> > articles that
> > people have spend countless hours of their
> precious
> > time crafting.
> >
> > Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst thing
> you
> > could possibly
> > do, since it will bite you in the proverbial bum.
> >
> > =====
> > Christopher Mahan
> > chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> > 818.943.1850 cell
> > http://www.christophermahan.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> >
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs >
_______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


from_name: David Gerard

body:
On 05/06/04 13:40, KNOTT, T wrote:

> The general consensus appears to be the quickpolls do not appear to work in the case of violations of the three revert rule. Fair enough. So what do we do now? I would like admins to have the power to 24hour block someone who violates this rule, once they have received a warning. I personally can't see any situation where someone would have a legitimate reason to revert more than three times in a day.
>  Vandalism - protect the page.
> Um what else? I can't think of anything. What does everyone else think?

That's a sweet thought, but 24.45.99.191 has been going hogwild
with (a) spamming large slabs of text across the place (b) altering
archives of talk pages yesterday and today. I put it on the
Vandalism page, but it doesn't seem to warrant any action. Just
what does it take for an anon IP vandal to get blocked?

- d.


body:
To my knowledge, admins are not banning people merely for having
the name 'troll'.  J. R. R. Trollkien, despite being a pain in the
neck, has been around for a few weeks now, right?

--Jimbo

Mark Richards wrote:

> Well, I'm not advocating for the rights to troll (I
> don't think vandalism has anything to do with this,
> since its already covered) - I'm just saying that the
> current way of dealing with trolling isn't very
> effective.
>
> Ignoring things that are not vandalism or malicious
> article edits might be better than providing fertile
> ground for more trolling. The username issue is the
> biggest one of concern to me, I think that we're
> setting ourselves up for a whole new round of trolling
> over 'if admins can ban users with 'troll' in their
> name, what other names can I get away with'. By just
> ignoring these usernames (unless they are attacks on
> users, genuinely offensive etc) this game would not
> start.
>
> Mark
>
> --- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Unfortunately, there are far too many people on
> > Wikipedia (most of whom do little actual editing of
> > articles) who are more concerned about giving the
> > trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will
> > attack and try to get banned those of us actually
> > out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
> > trollopedia.
> >
> > RickK
> >
> > Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to
> > deal
> > with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The problem is
> > users who have not vandalised anything, but seek to
> > engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with anyone
> > who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you have
> > lost already.
> > If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If
> > not,
> > don't feed him.
> > Mark
> >
> > --- Christopher Mahan wrote:
> > > On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls can
> > > be ignored (not
> > > fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia, they
> > > escalate their
> > > vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of damaging
> > > articles that
> > > people have spend countless hours of their
> > precious
> > > time crafting.
> > >
> > > Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst thing
> > you
> > > could possibly
> > > do, since it will bite you in the proverbial bum.
> > >
> > > =====
> > > Christopher Mahan
> > > chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> > > 818.943.1850 cell
> > > http://www.christophermahan.com/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> > >
> > http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > >
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> > http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs >
> _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
On 05/06/04 19:49, Fred Bauder wrote:
>From: David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>
>>On 05/06/04 13:40, KNOTT, T wrote:

>>>The general consensus appears to be the quickpolls do not appear to work in
>>>the case of violations of the three revert rule. Fair enough. So what do we
>>>do now? I would like admins to have the power to 24hour block someone who
>>>violates this rule, once they have received a warning. I personally can't see
>>>any situation where someone would have a legitimate reason to revert more
>>>than three times in a day.
>>>Vandalism - protect the page.
>>>Um what else? I can't think of anything. What does everyone else think?

>>That's a sweet thought, but 24.45.99.191 has been going hogwild
>>with (a) spamming large slabs of text across the place (b) altering
>>archives of talk pages yesterday and today. I put it on the
>>Vandalism page, but it doesn't seem to warrant any action. Just
>>what does it take for an anon IP vandal to get blocked?

 > This is Paul Vogel who is a hairbreath short of a 1 year ban. He has only
 > hours, perhaps minutes to go. See [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Paul
 > Vogel]].

Yes, I know it is. So you're saying it takes four months for an anon IP
vandal to get blocked?

- d.


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikitech-l] about the real names

body:
In the case the real name field is really something that wikipedians
want, so that will be activated in mediawiki 1.3, could it be moved more
  at the bottom of the page, instead of being the first thing asked in
the preferences ?

Also, could we indicate that this is optional ?

Anthere


subject: [Wikitech-l] linkscc trouble on test.wp.org

body:
In the last 20 minutes or so, this error pops up everywhere on test:

A database query syntax error has occurred. This could be because of an
illegal search query (see Searching TestWikipedia), or it may indicate a
bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:
        REPLACE INTO linkscc(lcc_pageid,lcc_cacheobj) VALUES(14312,
        'x^??M?@????G??=eP?????C.?.?K??7?`?????~?#??kJ]?
        ???O?=X???{P?Py?D????\"?? \'?y? ?{???u ??\0?? ????o2?A?F??
        ??
q?[??y$???k?Gc-W?? -l??+Lc?????FVi')
from within function "". MySQL returned error "1205: Lock wait timeout
exceeded; Try restarting transaction".

Any ideas?
--
Gabriel Wicke


body:
Well, I don't know, I havn't been following the
details, my frustration is just over the level of time
and energy that is put into this.
I thought that there were moves afoot to ban people
simply for having 'troll' in their username, but
honestly couldn't care less one way or another, the
whole discussion (on the talk etc pages) just seems to
me to be troll food.
Sorry to go on about this, I'm just kind of fed up of
the whole thing, but then, I guess we all are.
Mark

--- Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com> wrote:
> To my knowledge, admins are not banning people
> merely for having
> the name 'troll'.  J. R. R. Trollkien, despite being
> a pain in the
> neck, has been around for a few weeks now, right?
>
> --Jimbo
>
> Mark Richards wrote:
>
> > Well, I'm not advocating for the rights to troll
> (I
> > don't think vandalism has anything to do with
> this,
> > since its already covered) - I'm just saying that
> the
> > current way of dealing with trolling isn't very
> > effective.
> >
> > Ignoring things that are not vandalism or
> malicious
> > article edits might be better than providing
> fertile
> > ground for more trolling. The username issue is
> the
> > biggest one of concern to me, I think that we're
> > setting ourselves up for a whole new round of
> trolling
> > over 'if admins can ban users with 'troll' in
> their
> > name, what other names can I get away with'. By
> just
> > ignoring these usernames (unless they are attacks
> on
> > users, genuinely offensive etc) this game would
> not
> > start.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > --- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, there are far too many people on
> > > Wikipedia (most of whom do little actual editing
> of
> > > articles) who are more concerned about giving
> the
> > > trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and
> will
> > > attack and try to get banned those of us
> actually
> > > out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
> > > trollopedia.
> > >
> > > RickK
> > >
> > > Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to
> > > deal
> > > with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The
> problem is
> > > users who have not vandalised anything, but seek
> to
> > > engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with
> anyone
> > > who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you
> have
> > > lost already.
> > > If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If
> > > not,
> > > don't feed him.
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > --- Christopher Mahan wrote:
> > > > On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls
> can
> > > > be ignored (not
> > > > fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia,
> they
> > > > escalate their
> > > > vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of
> damaging
> > > > articles that
> > > > people have spend countless hours of their
> > > precious
> > > > time crafting.
> > > >
> > > > Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst
> thing
> > > you
> > > > could possibly
> > > > do, since it will bite you in the proverbial
> bum.
> > > >
> > > > =====
> > > > Christopher Mahan
> > > > chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> > > > 818.943.1850 cell
> > > > http://www.christophermahan.com/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________
> > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo!
> HotJobs
> > > >
> > >
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> > > >
> _______________________________________________
> > > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > >
> > >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> > >
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> >
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


body:
I think i tracked it down. There was a long-running query from bart.
Restarting apache on bart seems to have solved the problem.
--
Gabriel Wicke


from_name: Carson, David

body:
Paul Vogel wrote:
> <snip 323 lines of ranting>

After reading that, I, for one, find it not in the slightest bit odd
that you were banned for being "insane". Have a nice day!

Cheers!
David...


from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Switch query

body:
On Thu, 6 May 2004 09:59:03 -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Currently we are using a 16 port 10/100 switch on loan from (and
> shared with) Bomis.  It is full.  I have here another 8 port 10/100
> switch that I can use for when the new servers arrive, but sooner or
> later I will want to buy a wikipedia-only switch.
>
> We currently have 9 servers live, and we will soon have 5 more.  At
> some point, Jason will send me pliny and larousse, and we will
> probably use them for something as well.  (I think Wikipedia owns
> three "old" machines?  I would have to review email to see which ones
> of those I said that we gave to the foundation versus loaned.)

Maybe one of the old machine could be used as a ssh box for developers with
stats / internal wiki / configurations backup / packages / logs ? ;)

> So that's maybe 17 ports plus the port for the remote power
> controller.  Anyway, a 16 port will not be enough.
>
> A 24 port would be enough for now, but at our current rate of growth,
> it seems very likely to me that a 32 port would be needed as well.

Why not two 16 ports switch ? This way if one switch goes down, half of the
servers are still accessible.

> I am interested in getting feedback on the issue of 10/100 versus
> gigabit.  The answer of which to get depends, of course, on the total
> price -- if the price difference is large, we can be happy with
> 10/100.  If the price difference is small, we might as well get the
> gigabit.
>
> --Jimbo

Not sure it's really needed unless the wikipedia really need low latency
and huge datas transfers between servers. According to #mediawiki chats,
most of the troubles come from cpus and hard disk usage, not network.

my 2c?

--
Ashar Voultoiz
http://fr.wikipedia.org/Utilisateur:Hashar
My french blog: http://twenkill.dyndns.org/plog/


body:
On 05/06/04 21:29, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Mr Paul Vogel wrote:

>>Obviously, there is a Social-Marxist and
>>Jewish-Zionist "political bias" within Wikipedia
>>and not the least of which is shared by Jimbo and
>>this "censorship" and "banning" and "blocking" of
>>me by this ilk or cabal was solid proof of it for
>>any doubters.

> Ah, yes, Jimbo, the notorious Social-Marxist Jewish-Zionist.

The BBC said you were encouraging old-school socialism,
and they're well known for their complete lack of bias.

- d.


from_name: Alex Regh

body:
Hi!

On Thu, 6 May 2004 11:36:51 -0700 (PDT), Christopher Mahan wrote:

>The delete button is your friend :)

Nah! We've got to conserve these masterpieces of - errr - any minors around?
Masterpieces of - oh, let's stick with "rant". After all, who'd believe this
should he ever been gone?

Alex
--
If you don't go over the top,
you can't see what's on the other side.
        --- Jim Steinman ---

Alex' Assorted Homepages: www.alexsite.de


list: foundation-l

from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Foundation-l] Registering Wikimedia trademarks

body:
Michael Snow wrote:
>The filing fee for a trademark application is US $335 (I'm
>assuming we would start by registering in the US). We should
>at least consider registering trademarks for Wikimedia, Wikipedia,
>Wiktionary, Wikiquote,  Wikisource, and Wikibooks. Granted, with
>our current financial resources  it may not be practical to try and
>register all of our trademarks in  every country we reach. But US
>registration is an important start, and would facilitate international
>registrations later.

I agree with this completely - this should be something that the trustees take
care of soon after the election.

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


list: wikimedia-l


subject: [Wikitech-l] Wiktionary image on wikimedia.org portal broken

body:
It is pointing to http://wiktionary.org/upload/wiki.png when it should point to
http://wiktionary.org/images/wiktionary-en.png .

Could somebody fix this?

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> It is pointing to http://wiktionary.org/upload/wiki.png when it should point to
> http://wiktionary.org/images/wiktionary-en.png .
>
> Could somebody fix this?

Done.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Switch query

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> My research reveals that 24 port gigabit switches are available for under
> $600.  Managed switches a bit more, but still under $800.
>
> That seems worthwhile to me.

I don't think you want to make this decision without at least getting
some rudimentary numbers to work with. I'd be surprised if you're maxing
out regular 100 Mbit/s ethernet, but two quick ways to check are MRTG on
routers, or ntop (in webserver mode) on the actual machines. My
knee-jerk response is that the types of things that wikipedia servers do
are CPU/IO bound, not network.

If you're well below 100 Mbit/s, why throw away the money if you can,
say, buy extra RAM?

Cheers,
Ivan


from_name: Cimon Avaro

subject: [Wikitech-l] GNU Mailman upgraded to 2.1.5rc2

body:
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 15:58, Brion Vibber wrote:
> On account of various troubles, most particularly rejection of all mail
> to wikipl-l for the last couple weeks, I've upgraded mailman from 2.1.2
> to 2.1.5rc2. It seems to work so far, but give a holler if it does
> something unexpected.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Funny you should ask,...

The Finnish mailing list just barfed all messages from the end of time
that I had sent to it with the gripe that I don't have permission to
post to that forum. Which is a just a bit odd, since I am that lists
administrator...

Not really troublesome, but it does fit the description "unexpected".


from_name: Bod NotBod

body:
"Yes, I know it is. So you're saying it takes four months for an anon IP
vandal to get blocked?"

Hello,

New list member and only joined Wikipedia a week ago.

I've got the details of a user who, amidst making useful edits, has
committed 15 acts of vandlism over a period of two weeks.  I have every
reason to believe that if the user knows I am thinking of going public with
that info he will attack my articles.

Obviously I'm not keen for that to happen.  On the other hand I realise that
things need to be open.

The user does not have a page, so I assume they have no warnings?  I am
reluctant to *start* a user page for them as I feel I will be victimised
should I do so.  And I feel without previous warnings, from what I've picked
up over the last week, they won't be blocked, and I'll be in the sh**.

All the acts (save one) involve the insertion of 'joke' material into
articles.  So, there is no question of newbie accidents or oversights.

Would appreciate advice.

I have links directly to the pages where the vandalism has happened with
comparison to the previous version, so it's all extremely easy to follow.

Apologies if this doesn't belong on this mailing list - but I noticed you
were discussing trolls, so figured I'd jump in.

Bodnotbod

_________________________________________________________________
Find a cheaper internet access deal - choose one to suit you.
http://www.msn.co.uk/internetaccess


from_name: Angela

body:
> I've got the details of a user who, amidst making
> useful edits, has
> committed 15 acts of vandlism over a period of two
> weeks.  I have every
> reason to believe that if the user knows I am
> thinking of going public with
> that info he will attack my articles.

The best thing to do is list the person on the
"vandalism in progress" page at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress.

If you would rather remain anonymous, you could try
emailing another user that you trust to make the
report for you. There is a list of administrators at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_administrators,
many of whom you can email using the "email this user"
feature on their user page. I'm sure that any of them
would be happy to look into the situation for you
without revealing your name to the vandal.

Angela.

____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Paul Vogel banned for a year

body:
The proceedings are still technically open I believe, but there's
majority votes on enough issues---particularly the issue of
banning---for something to be implemented.  The findings of fact were a
bit more controversial, so basically everyone agrees Paul Vogel needs to
be banned, but we don't completely agree on why.  But given that we
agree on the action part, sitting on our hands arguing about the
legalistic justifications doesn't seem all that useful.

The gory details are all on [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Paul
Vogel]] (where they've been for a while, actually), including links to
examples and evidence and whatnot.  The summary version follows.

All votes reported as (Yes-No-Abstain).  There are 10 arbitrators, so 6
'yes' votes are needed to pass any issue.

Findings of fact
---
Passed (7-0-0): Paul Vogel has engaged in a few instances of vandalism.
Examples include: [...]. ... The arbitration committee notes that many
accusations of "vandalism" levelled against Paul Vogel would more
accurately be described as "NPOV violations".

Passed (6-0-0): [Read the page for the text... Summary is that the
committee found Paul Vogel's counter-accusations to be unpersuasive, and
generally found rather the opposite was true for most of them.]

Almost but not yet passed (5-0-1): Paul Vogel has engaged in a number of
personal attacks in violation of the widely accepted no personal attacks
policy. ... The arbitration committee notes a handful of personal
attacks made against Paul Vogel. ... However, the committee was unable
to uncover any evidence (and none was provided) supporting the
accusations of slander or repeated attacks alleged by Paul. ...

Nothing decided (2-2-1): [Read the page for the text... Summary is that
there's disagreement over whether he was blocked inappropriately by
individual sysops and therefore whether he should be held liable for
circumventing some of those bans.]

Remedies (both passed 7-0-0)
---
1. Paul Vogel's editing priviledges on Wikipedia are revoked for a
period of one year.

2. Wikipedia contributors are encouraged to edit Wikipedia's talk pages
to deal with personal attacks, excessive repetition, misleading
indentation or signatures, unnecessarily offensive comments, etc,
contributed by Paul Vogel. They should delete them, edit them,
quarantine them on an appropriate user talk: page, or otherwise deal
with them as they judge appropriate.

Comments by me (not the committee)
---
A year is a rather long time for a ban, but I don't think anybody really
sees how Mr. Vogel can become a productive contributor in the forseeable
future, so there was no need to waste everyone's time with a succession
of shorter bans that would be the inevitable result.  If he surprises us
and does indeed have an interest in working more amicably with us, he
can request reinstatement, and either Jimbo or the committee can
reconsider the matter in light of any new evidence.

As far as enforcement goes: In light of the decision, I've blocked
24.45.99.191, his most common IP address.  Even though he's used it
consistently for some weeks, it has 'dyn' in the hostname, so I only
blocked it for a month, lest it turn out to be dynamic.  Reblocking it
for an additional month after that expires is a trivial matter if he
returns anyway.  He's used a number of other addresses, most of them
dynamic IPs, and relatively infrequently (and not in the past few days),
so I have not blocked those.  Since he is now officially banned, any
sysop may feel free to ban any reincarnations that pop up, although I'd
recommend 24-to-48-hour bans unless you're sure it's a static IP of his.

-Mark


subject: [WikiEN-l] Troll Silent, Troll Deep

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

>The current policy on blocking provides that users with names that are
>objectionable to at least "some" users can be blocked after refusal to
>select another name. I have been treatening to block [[Troll Silent, Troll
>Deep]] under that policy but am awaiting a decision in JRR Trollkien. See
>TSTD's talk page. JRR Trollkien was unblocked so he could participate in
>arbitration. By the way, it is only the name not the user who would be
>blocked.
>
>
I had thought it was more along the lines of names that are
objectionable to at least "some" users can be blocked after refusal to
select another name if a majority of Wikipedians think blocking is
appropriate.  That is, to block [x], there have to be at least some
users who are offended by the name [x], and then a majority of people
have to think "well, even if I'm not offended by [x], I can see why it
would be offensive."  In the past this has sometimes been done by voting
on talk pages.

My main problem with a looser criterion is that people can be offended
about almost _anything_.  There has to be some threshold for what is
reasonable, and if all it is is something like "at least 5 users have to
consider it offensive", given enough time for Wikipedia to get big, I
bet you'll be able to find 5 users offended at almost anything
ridiculous you can come up with.  There's a lot of crazy people out there!

-Mark


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] A despised underclass

body:
While user names with troll in them provide a handy guide as to which users
to ignore or deprecate, they consitute an underclass of despised users with
kick me written all over them. However like all users they are entitled to
respect. A schizophrenic situation.

Viewed in their most favorable light trolls as a group consititute a faction
with only the most nebulous viewpoint. A division promising conflict but not
resolution of issues.

Fred

> From: Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 20:29:09 -0700 (PDT)
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] On trolls, usenet and Wikipedia
>
> Well, I'm not advocating for the rights to troll (I
> don't think vandalism has anything to do with this,
> since its already covered) - I'm just saying that the
> current way of dealing with trolling isn't very
> effective.
>
> Ignoring things that are not vandalism or malicious
> article edits might be better than providing fertile
> ground for more trolling. The username issue is the
> biggest one of concern to me, I think that we're
> setting ourselves up for a whole new round of trolling
> over 'if admins can ban users with 'troll' in their
> name, what other names can I get away with'. By just
> ignoring these usernames (unless they are attacks on
> users, genuinely offensive etc) this game would not
> start.
>
> Mark
>
> --- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Unfortunately, there are far too many people on
>> Wikipedia (most of whom do little actual editing of
>> articles) who are more concerned about giving the
>> trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will
>> attack and try to get banned those of us actually
>> out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
>> trollopedia.
>>
>> RickK
>>
>> Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to
>> deal
>> with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The problem is
>> users who have not vandalised anything, but seek to
>> engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with anyone
>> who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you have
>> lost already.
>> If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If
>> not,
>> don't feed him.
>> Mark
>>
>> --- Christopher Mahan wrote:
>>> On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls can
>>> be ignored (not
>>> fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia, they
>>> escalate their
>>> vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of damaging
>>> articles that
>>> people have spend countless hours of their
>> precious
>>> time crafting.
>>>
>>> Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst thing
>> you
>>> could possibly
>>> do, since it will bite you in the proverbial bum.
>>>
>>> =====
>>> Christopher Mahan
>>> chris_mahan at yahoo.com
>>> 818.943.1850 cell
>>> http://www.christophermahan.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________
>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
>>>
>> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
>> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs >
> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Troll Silent, Troll Deep

body:
The current policy on blocking provides that users with names that are
objectionable to at least "some" users can be blocked after refusal to
select another name. I have been treatening to block [[Troll Silent, Troll
Deep]] under that policy but am awaiting a decision in JRR Trollkien. See
TSTD's talk page. JRR Trollkien was unblocked so he could participate in
arbitration. By the way, it is only the name not the user who would be
blocked.

Jimbo, do you feel that policy should be changed? Or that it doesn't exist?

Fred

> From: Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 20:43:08 -0700
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] On trolls, usenet and Wikipedia
>
> To my knowledge, admins are not banning people merely for having
> the name 'troll'.  J. R. R. Trollkien, despite being a pain in the
> neck, has been around for a few weeks now, right?
>
> --Jimbo
>
> Mark Richards wrote:
>
>> Well, I'm not advocating for the rights to troll (I
>> don't think vandalism has anything to do with this,
>> since its already covered) - I'm just saying that the
>> current way of dealing with trolling isn't very
>> effective.
>>
>> Ignoring things that are not vandalism or malicious
>> article edits might be better than providing fertile
>> ground for more trolling. The username issue is the
>> biggest one of concern to me, I think that we're
>> setting ourselves up for a whole new round of trolling
>> over 'if admins can ban users with 'troll' in their
>> name, what other names can I get away with'. By just
>> ignoring these usernames (unless they are attacks on
>> users, genuinely offensive etc) this game would not
>> start.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> --- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Unfortunately, there are far too many people on
>>> Wikipedia (most of whom do little actual editing of
>>> articles) who are more concerned about giving the
>>> trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will
>>> attack and try to get banned those of us actually
>>> out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
>>> trollopedia.
>>>
>>> RickK
>>>
>>> Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to
>>> deal
>>> with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The problem is
>>> users who have not vandalised anything, but seek to
>>> engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with anyone
>>> who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you have
>>> lost already.
>>> If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If
>>> not,
>>> don't feed him.
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> --- Christopher Mahan wrote:
>>>> On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls can
>>>> be ignored (not
>>>> fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia, they
>>>> escalate their
>>>> vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of damaging
>>>> articles that
>>>> people have spend countless hours of their
>>> precious
>>>> time crafting.
>>>>
>>>> Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst thing
>>> you
>>>> could possibly
>>>> do, since it will bite you in the proverbial bum.
>>>>
>>>> =====
>>>> Christopher Mahan
>>>> chris_mahan at yahoo.com
>>>> 818.943.1850 cell
>>>> http://www.christophermahan.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________
>>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
>>>>
>>> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>>
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________
>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
>>> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs >
>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
>> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


body:
Complementary to this, in the case of bans which seem to be improvidently
granted, a quickvote of 4 arbitrators to rescend the ban and not hear the
case could be part of this.

Fred

> From: Tim Starling <ts4294967296 at hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 13:58:52 +1000
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Suggested implementation of Jimbo's quickpoll proposal
>
> Jimbo has suggested expanding the power of quickpolls to allow banning
> until such time as the arbitration committee makes a decision. Hence the
> arbitration committee becomes like a court of appeal.
>
> To date, there have been lots of criticisms of quickpolls, on the talk
> page and elsewhere. Most of them have been centred around the issue of
> frivolous use. Jimbo suggested allowing only sysops to start quickpolls.
>
> After some pondering, I've decided I like this proposal. It's reasonably
> democratic, since someone with a real complaint is very likely to find
> at least one sympathetic sysop. The sysop body is heterogeneous. And it
> gives the community a way to take decisive action.
>
> This could be implemented just by posting a policy statement at the top
> of [[Wikipedia:Quickpolls]], saying that only sysops may start polls.
> However, I'm of the opinion that simple technical barriers can be used
> to great effect in enforcing policies. Perhaps we could put each
> quickpoll in an unprotected MediaWiki: message, then have a list of
> {{msg:}} tags in [[Wikipedia:Quickpolls]] itself. The list would then be
> protected, preventing anyone except for sysops from adding items.
>
> Theoretically a user could add a new quickpoll to the bottom of one of
> the included messages. But if they do that, it is clear to all that they
> have understood the policy and attempted to evade it. Others may remove
> the quickpoll not only on the basis of policy, but also because the
> listing is in the wrong place, and is incorrectly formatted.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Constans, Camille (C.C.)

subject: [Wikitech-l] Switch query

body:
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : wikitech-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
>[mailto:wikitech-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org]De la part de Jimmy Wales
>Envoy? : jeudi 6 mai 2004 23:37
>? : Wikimedia developers
>Objet : Re: [Wikitech-l] Switch query
>
>
>My research reveals that 24 port gigabit switches are
>available for under
>$600.  Managed switches a bit more, but still under $800.
>
>That seems worthwhile to me.

Go for it then :) I thought it was more expensive.

Shaihulud


from_name: Charles Matthews

body:
>Unfortunately, there are far too many people on Wikipedia (most of whom do
little actual editing of articles) who are more concerned about giving the
trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will attack and try to get
banned those of us actually out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
trollopedia.

RickK

I don't like posts that use the existence of trolls on Wikipedia to attack
others.  How can this help?

Charles


from_name: Arno M

subject: [WikiEN-l] Hate lists

body:
"As a gesture of goodwill, Wik has removed the lists from his page that people found offensive."

It's good to see it go.

On a similar token, I would like to see the 'hate list'
on netesq's user page removed. It's been there for 1.5
years, and netesq himself seems to have moved on.

Hopefully one certain sysop now has some idea of what
I've been through after having his name put on wiki's page. He declined to have it removed on a previous occasion.

If the practice of using user pages to attack other
users could be banned, that would be VERY good indeed. Plenty of people have had a taste of it now thanks to
wik and I'm sure that they found it unpleasant.

____________________________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10


from_name: Rick

body:
Because I'm tired of being criticised for doing the right thing?

RickK

Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>Unfortunately, there are far too many people on Wikipedia (most of whom do
little actual editing of articles) who are more concerned about giving the
trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will attack and try to get
banned those of us actually out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
trollopedia.

RickK

I don't like posts that use the existence of trolls on Wikipedia to attack
others. How can this help?

Charles

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040507/db05bfa9/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Bodnotbod

body:
Any worry belongs to the list :-)

It is not entirely clear to me, whether the user in question is editing under IP, or is registered under a name.

If he is editing under ip, you can't be sure the same person has done the good edits and the bad edits. Perhaps is it an ip used by several different persons. In the this case, we can't really block the ip number, so I would recommand that you just revert the vandalism, perhaps put a comment on the user ip page (if you are on the site at the same time of him), and put a comment on the talk page if he is vandalising the same page over and over. If he is only vandalising the same page, just ask a sysop to temporarily protect it (some people do have a liking in one page sometimes, and focus on adding stupid things only to this one), or possibly to block the ip temporarily so that the user knows he is not going unnoticed.

Now, if the person is a user (with a user page, even an empty one), be bold. Edit his user page, or his talk page, and tell him firmly what you think about what he is doing. Think about using humour as well. Suggest that he participates to the same articles than you. Leave him a message everyday or so. Show him you pay attention to him. But gently. Encourage good edits and firmly revert the bad ones (without agressivity).

Consider this.
Either the guy is just a vandal, trying to hide his vandalism under a couple of good edits. Then, if you stay polite, perhaps even friendly to him, he may either go full vandalism entirely (and he will be banned quite easily) or just give up when he sees his vandalism is firmly removed each time. He may even leave quietly Wikipedia if no one goes into agressing him badly, because he will see that his vandalism is not really funny and not making people strongly react.

Or the guy is rather a good guy, perhaps a kid, testing the system, having a bit of fun, or trying to ask for a bit of attention. Chances is then, that if you pay attention to him, if you try to direct him on providing good contributions, if you praise him, he will feel better than when just testing the system. And he will stop doing the little vandalism. And you will have gain a new contributor :-)

The second situation sounds nicer. I would rather try that first. Don't show you are irritated. And don't show you are scared by him. There is no reason you would be victimised for talking firmly to him. If he reacts by attacking your contributions, then seek for help from other people, but try first giving him a chance. And try to do it yourself. If that works, you will feel great, that is worth it :-)

And if you unfortunately find yourself in the sh** as you say, well, come over to mediation committee page, and I'll offer you a cup of tea :-)

Anthere

-----Original Message-----
From: Bod NotBod [mailto:bodnotbod at hotmail.com]
Sent: 07 May 2004 02:50
To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] three revert rule and quickpolls

"Yes, I know it is. So you're saying it takes four months for an anon IP
vandal to get blocked?"

Hello,

New list member and only joined Wikipedia a week ago.

I've got the details of a user who, amidst making useful edits, has
committed 15 acts of vandlism over a period of two weeks. I have every
reason to believe that if the user knows I am thinking of going public with
that info he will attack my articles.

Obviously I'm not keen for that to happen. On the other hand I realise that
things need to be open.

The user does not have a page, so I assume they have no warnings? I am
reluctant to *start* a user page for them as I feel I will be victimised
should I do so. And I feel without previous warnings, from what I've picked
up over the last week, they won't be blocked, and I'll be in the sh**.

All the acts (save one) involve the insertion of 'joke' material into
articles. So, there is no question of newbie accidents or oversights.

Would appreciate advice.

I have links directly to the pages where the vandalism has happened with
comparison to the previous version, so it's all extremely easy to follow.

Apologies if this doesn't belong on this mailing list - but I noticed you
were discussing trolls, so figured I'd jump in.

Bodnotbod

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040507/2dc4a70f/attachment.htm


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Mr Paul Vogel wrote:

>Now I am both a "troll" and "insame"?
>because I have posted NPOV articles
>for my own religion of Cosmotheism
>and NPOV articles on the "unfashionable"
>politics of "White Separatism"?
>
He has a point here.  The two concepts are mutually exclusive, depending
on whether he believes what he is saying. :-)

Ec


from_name: KNOTT, T

body:
There is no need to be scared. If they vandalise your articles, they will bhe reverted. If necessary the pages will be protected. But if you are still worried, send the details to me and I'll take the necessary action. I aint scared of nobody.

Theresa

-----Original Message-----
From: Bod NotBod [mailto:bodnotbod at hotmail.com]
Sent: 07 May 2004 02:50
To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] three revert rule and quickpolls

"Yes, I know it is. So you're saying it takes four months for an anon IP
vandal to get blocked?"

Hello,

New list member and only joined Wikipedia a week ago.

I've got the details of a user who, amidst making useful edits, has
committed 15 acts of vandlism over a period of two weeks.  I have every
reason to believe that if the user knows I am thinking of going public with
that info he will attack my articles.

Obviously I'm not keen for that to happen.  On the other hand I realise that
things need to be open.

The user does not have a page, so I assume they have no warnings?  I am
reluctant to *start* a user page for them as I feel I will be victimised
should I do so.  And I feel without previous warnings, from what I've picked
up over the last week, they won't be blocked, and I'll be in the sh**.

All the acts (save one) involve the insertion of 'joke' material into
articles.  So, there is no question of newbie accidents or oversights.

Would appreciate advice.

I have links directly to the pages where the vandalism has happened with
comparison to the previous version, so it's all extremely easy to follow.

Apologies if this doesn't belong on this mailing list - but I noticed you
were discussing trolls, so figured I'd jump in.

Bodnotbod

_________________________________________________________________
Find a cheaper internet access deal - choose one to suit you.
http://www.msn.co.uk/internetaccess

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Mark Richards

subject: [WikiEN-l] A despised underclass

body:
You should write a sociology of trolling Fred! I guess
I agree that 'troll' usernames are probably a flag
indicating disatisfaction with something, but there
has to be a way to funnel that into an opportunity to
express that, otherwise you just drive it into more
and more nefarious trolling.
I don't think I really approve of removing comments
(however inflamatory) from the request for review of
admin actions - let them stay there, let people have
their say, and archive it later. Its kind of a troll
ju-jitsu - let them post on discussion pages (as long
as it's not offensive etc), but ignore it, if there's
enough, shift it to a sub-page and ignore it.
Responding to it (even by reverting it) is playing
along, which is feeding the trolls.
I understand I hold a somewhat extreme view on this,
so feel free to ignore me, but I would love to get
agreement from everyone to try it for a week or so,
just to see...
Mark

--- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> While user names with troll in them provide a handy
> guide as to which users
> to ignore or deprecate, they consitute an underclass
> of despised users with
> kick me written all over them. However like all
> users they are entitled to
> respect. A schizophrenic situation.
>
> Viewed in their most favorable light trolls as a
> group consititute a faction
> with only the most nebulous viewpoint. A division
> promising conflict but not
> resolution of issues.
>
> Fred
>
> > From: Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com>
> > Reply-To: English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 20:29:09 -0700 (PDT)
> > To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] On trolls, usenet and
> Wikipedia
> >
> > Well, I'm not advocating for the rights to troll
> (I
> > don't think vandalism has anything to do with
> this,
> > since its already covered) - I'm just saying that
> the
> > current way of dealing with trolling isn't very
> > effective.
> >
> > Ignoring things that are not vandalism or
> malicious
> > article edits might be better than providing
> fertile
> > ground for more trolling. The username issue is
> the
> > biggest one of concern to me, I think that we're
> > setting ourselves up for a whole new round of
> trolling
> > over 'if admins can ban users with 'troll' in
> their
> > name, what other names can I get away with'. By
> just
> > ignoring these usernames (unless they are attacks
> on
> > users, genuinely offensive etc) this game would
> not
> > start.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > --- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, there are far too many people on
> >> Wikipedia (most of whom do little actual editing
> of
> >> articles) who are more concerned about giving the
> >> trolls the right to troll and vandalize, and will
> >> attack and try to get banned those of us actually
> >> out to make an Encyclopedia instead of a
> >> trollopedia.
> >>
> >> RickK
> >>
> >> Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Hang on a second, I thought vandals were easy to
> >> deal
> >> with? Revert, ban if necessary, done. The problem
> is
> >> users who have not vandalised anything, but seek
> to
> >> engage in endlessly convoluted arguments with
> anyone
> >> who will play. Unfortunately, if you play, you
> have
> >> lost already.
> >> If the troll vandalises, ban him immediately. If
> >> not,
> >> don't feed him.
> >> Mark
> >>
> >> --- Christopher Mahan wrote:
> >>> On Usenet or any of many online forums, trolls
> can
> >>> be ignored (not
> >>> fed) and they mostly disappear. On wikipedia,
> they
> >>> escalate their
> >>> vandalism, learning ever-sneakier ways of
> damaging
> >>> articles that
> >>> people have spend countless hours of their
> >> precious
> >>> time crafting.
> >>>
> >>> Ignoring a troll on wikipedia is the worst thing
> >> you
> >>> could possibly
> >>> do, since it will bite you in the proverbial
> bum.
> >>>
> >>> =====
> >>> Christopher Mahan
> >>> chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> >>> 818.943.1850 cell
> >>> http://www.christophermahan.com/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> __________________________________
> >>> Do you Yahoo!?
> >>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> >>>
> >>
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>>
> >>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> __________________________________
> >> Do you Yahoo!?
> >> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> >>
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------
> >> Do you Yahoo!?
> >> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs >
> > _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> >
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: On trolls, usenet and Wikipedia

body:
Folks know what you mean - the great thing about the
mailing list that I'm discovering, is that there is
still a general assumption of good faith!
Mark

> I thought, after I sent my message, somebody would
> pick my up on the phrase
> 'my articles'.  Thanks, everybody, for not leaping
> on me for the use of such
> heretic terminology.
> Bodnotbod
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for a FREE BT Broadband connection today!
> http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover


body:
Mark Richards wrote:

>Well, I don't know, I havn't been following the
>details, my frustration is just over the level of time
>and energy that is put into this.
>I thought that there were moves afoot to ban people
>simply for having 'troll' in their username, but
>honestly couldn't care less one way or another, the
>whole discussion (on the talk etc pages) just seems to
>me to be troll food.
>Sorry to go on about this, I'm just kind of fed up of
>the whole thing, but then, I guess we all are.
>Mark
>
There's no need to apologize.  I find the perpetual whining about trolls
and their ilk far more irritating that what the "trolls" do.  It often
seems that in their zeal to solve a problem the anti-troll lobby creates
bigger ones.

Ec