from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Then I'm thoroughly confused.   What page are we talking about?  The only page I've been discussing, and the only one I've known about, was the arbcom decision page.

RickK

Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
Rick wrote:

> Still unacceptable. The Arbcom is still making policy which has not
> been agreed to by the wikipedia as a whole.

Incorrect. Fred was editing that page as a Wikipedian. Other
Wikipedians may also edit it; the blocking policy page is not an
arbitration committee page, but a Wikipedia community page, edited by
the community at large. If you disagree with its wording, I suggest you
comment on its talk page. That's how policy is made here, after all.

-Mark

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/079abc9a/attachment.htm


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Except if a user holds strictly to written policy they really can't do a lot
of stuff that results in disruption, damage and hell. Community consensus
would result in changed written policy to replace such parts of written
policy that are "ill-thought-out and often unenforced legalistic jargon".
Other than that you seem to have summed it up pretty well.

In other words, heroism is not necessary on your part to "save" Wikipedia.
Just steady pressure on those who as you put it, "cause as much disruption,
damage and hell as possible".

Fred

From: John Robinson <john at freeq.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 12:20:36 -0500
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

So let me see if I have this straight.

As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause as much
disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community consensus on a matter
is secondary to ill-thought-out and often unenforced legalistic jargon.

Does that pretty much sum it up?

-Hephaestos

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/eaf5d34c/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Yep.  The vandals have won.  Guanaco is repeatedly unblocking a vandal who used an offensive term because I didn't give him a warning.  To me, entering the term "faggot" into an article would be sufficient grounds for blocking, but to Guanaco, we're supposed to allow it because it was the first time.  Well, great, how many articles do we need to have the word "faggot" in because it was just the first time?  How many pages do we need to have vandalized because a sysop isn't allowed to do his or her job?

Sorry, but I will continue to do what needs to be done, and I hope, Heph, that you will, too.

RickK

John Robinson <john at freeq.com> wrote:
So let me see if I have this straight.

As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause as much disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community consensus on a matter is secondary to ill-thought-out and often unenforced legalistic jargon.

Does that pretty much sum it up?

-Hephaestos

A Wikipedia administrator needs to be thoroughly familiar with those parts of Wikipedia policy they chose to deploy.  Many of us never block anybody. Those who do need to know what is permitted and what is not. That is laid out on the page [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]]. What the arbitration committee is trying to do is to craft a remedy for those instances where administrators are making up their own policy, perhaps to some extent in reliance on community consensus but nevertheless expanding their actions beyond those set forth in blocking policy.  Certain parts of that policy are somewhat ambiguous but it is a limited policy which permits blocks only in certain cases. Not in every case where it "feels right" or in every case where "something has to be done".

Fred

From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

This "rule" requires sysops to have to have all of the policy pages available at hand.  Fine.  Then give me a table of contents.
RickK

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/a94eb710/attachment.htm


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocked IP list is inaccurate

body:
Harry Smith wrote:
> The blocked IP list in wikipedia is inaccurate.
> The dates listed for blocks to expire are incorrect.
> Meaning that they are not tied to the block mechanism.
>
> An admin can block an IP address for a period of time
> beyond the expiry date listed on the blocked IP page.
>
> I am not familiar with the mechanism.  Does the block
> page allow one to enter periods of time beyond a
> single day (seems to be the default)?

Yes.

> Can one block for a period of time different then the
> comment indicates?

If a block is entered into the block log, then it will expire when it
says it does.

> Can one extend blocks without updating the comment.

Blocks can be extended by unblocking and then reblocking with a
different expiry time. This operation is logged. Autoblock entries are
automatically extended whenever the associated user accesses the site.
Autoblock entries are the ones claiming to block "#2345" or something
similar, they correspond to blocks of the IP addresses used by blocked
users. They are not entered into the block log.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: John Robinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
So let me see if I have this straight.

As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause
as much disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community
consensus on a matter is secondary to ill-thought-out and often
unenforced legalistic jargon.

Does that pretty much sum it up?

-Hephaestos

>A Wikipedia administrator needs to be thoroughly familiar with those
>parts of Wikipedia policy they chose to deploy.  Many of us never
>block anybody. Those who do need to know what is permitted and what
>is not. That is laid out on the page [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]].
>What the arbitration committee is trying to do is to craft a remedy
>for those instances where administrators are making up their own
>policy, perhaps to some extent in reliance on community consensus
>but nevertheless expanding their actions beyond those set forth in
>blocking policy.  Certain parts of that policy are somewhat
>ambiguous but it is a limited policy which permits blocks only in
>certain cases. Not in every case where it "feels right" or in every
>case where "something has to be done".
>
>Fred
>
>
>From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy
>
>This "rule" requires sysops to have to have all of the policy pages
>available at hand.  Fine.  Then give me a table of contents.
>
>RickK
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/854bf21e/attachment.htm


from_name: Arno M

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fw: TRUST, or, an old e-mail scam.

body:
Did anyone else get this??

If so, then beware, this is a scam. See http://www.stlouis.bbb.org/news052004a.html
for details.

Arno

----- Original Message -----
From: "jan tinubu" <janproject200 at galmail.co.za>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 04:05:51 +0200
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: TRUST

> DEAR SIR,
>
>
> I AM MISS JAN TINUBU 25YRS,THE DAUGHTER OF THE
> PRESENT EXECUTIVE GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE, NIGERIA,
> SENATOR AHMED BOLA TINUBU. I HAVE IN MY
> POSSESSION THE SUM OF TWELVE MILLION UNITED STATE
> DOLLARS{$12,000,000.00},AND THE TOP LIST OF MY
> PRIORITY
> IS WHERE TO INVEST THIS MONEY OUTSIDE MY COUNTRY.
> "REASON BEST KNOWN TO ME" . I URGENTLY NEED YOUR
> ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING A RELIABLE GENUINE TRADE OR
> COMPANY WHERE I CAN INVEST THE FUND AND IMMEDIATELY
> MEET YOU IN YOUR COUNTRY FOR SETTLEMENT.
> PLEASE I WILL KINDLY WELCOME YOUR ADVICE TOO.
>
> I AM EXPECTING YOUR URGENT MAIL REPONSE. I NEED YOUR
> SUPPORT AND URGENT REPONSE. I HAVE RESIGNED MY
> APPOINTMENT IN THE STATE MINISTRY BECAUSE OF THE
> INVESTMENT.
>
>
> MISS JAN TINUBU
>
>
> THE $12M IS OUT OF NIGERIA AND PRESENTLY DEPOSITED IN
> A SECURITY VAULT. DETAILS WILL BE GIVEN TO YOU AS SOON
> AS YOU REPLY THIS MAIL. PLEASE YOUR REPLY TO MY
> CONFIDENTIAL BOX:janinvest2004 at indiatimes.com
>
>
>

--
_______________________________________________
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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Surely you don't object to your objections being taken seriously?

Fred

From: John Robinson <john at freeq.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:50:12 -0500
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

the objections of those who would be sanctioned under those proposals are
given as much weight as those of [other] users.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/5a8d779e/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Aren't unblocks also shown in the Block log?  Not the Specialpages list of blocked addresses, but the log itself.  ~~~~

Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:Point of information. I can see the block log but not where this guy is unblocked. Where do you look for that?

Fred

From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

Yep.  The vandals have won.  Guanaco is repeatedly unblocking a vandal who used an offensive term because I didn't give him a warning.  To me, entering the term "faggot" into an article would be sufficient grounds for blocking, but to Guanaco, we're supposed to allow it because it was the first time.  Well, great, how many articles do we need to have the word "faggot" in because it was just the first time?  How many pages do we need to have vandalized because a sysop isn't allowed to do his or her job?

Sorry, but I will continue to do what needs to be done, and I hope, Heph, that you will, too.

RickK

John Robinson <john at freeq.com> wrote:
So let me see if I have this straight.

As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause as much disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community consensus on a matter is secondary to ill-thought-out and often unenforced legalistic jargon.

Does that pretty much sum it up?

-Hephaestos

A Wikipedia administrator needs to be thoroughly familiar with those parts of Wikipedia policy they chose to deploy.  Many of us never block anybody. Those who do need to know what is permitted and what is not. That is laid out on the page [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]]. What the arbitration committee is trying to do is to craft a remedy for those instances where administrators are making up their own policy, perhaps to some extent in reliance on community consensus but nevertheless expanding their actions beyond those set forth in blocking policy.  Certain parts of that policy are somewhat ambiguous but it is a limited policy which permits blocks only in certain cases. Not in every case where it "feels right" or in every case where "something has to be done".

Fred

From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

This "rule" requires sysops to have to have all of the policy pages available at hand.  Fine.  Then give me a table of contents.
RickK

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

---------------------------------

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/10/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail/static/efficiency.html>  - Send 10MB messages!
_______________________________________________
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!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/eb6eb7ef/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Database error

body:
I keep encountering a database error when attempting to edit Wikipedia pages (though not all pages -- I can edit the village pump just fine.  But when I try to edit [[Current Events]] and [[George W. Bush]] I get:

"Database error From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
A database query syntax error has occurred. This could be because of an illegal search query (see Searching Wikipedia), or it may indicate a bug in the software."

RickK

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/1089d44c/attachment.htm


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Joining SQL Dump Files

body:
Claudio V wrote:
> I used to have a lot of problems trying to concatenate
> the data files from the SQL dumps using Windows XP as
> an OS but thanks to Brion Vibber and other I figure it
> out.
>
> What I did to solve it is use Cygwin:
>
> Download and install Cygwin.
>
> Open Cygwin by clicking on the icon from your desktop
> and go to the location of your hard drive where the
> split files are situated.
>
> To concatenate multiple files into a single file you
> could do:
> $ cat xaa xab xac xad xae > old_table.sql.bz2
> or
> $ cat xa? > old_table.sql.bz2
>

Note that UnxUtils also has cat and bunzip2, which may be more
convenient than Cygwin for some people:

http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/

-- Tim Starling


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Point of information. I can see the block log but not where this guy is
unblocked. Where do you look for that?

Fred

From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

Yep.  The vandals have won.  Guanaco is repeatedly unblocking a vandal who
used an offensive term because I didn't give him a warning.  To me, entering
the term "faggot" into an article would be sufficient grounds for blocking,
but to Guanaco, we're supposed to allow it because it was the first time.
Well, great, how many articles do we need to have the word "faggot" in
because it was just the first time?  How many pages do we need to have
vandalized because a sysop isn't allowed to do his or her job?

Sorry, but I will continue to do what needs to be done, and I hope, Heph,
that you will, too.

RickK

John Robinson <john at freeq.com> wrote:
So let me see if I have this straight.

As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause as much
disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community consensus on a matter
is secondary to ill-thought-out and often unenforced legalistic jargon.

Does that pretty much sum it up?

-Hephaestos

A Wikipedia administrator needs to be thoroughly familiar with those parts
of Wikipedia policy they chose to deploy.  Many of us never block anybody.
Those who do need to know what is permitted and what is not. That is laid
out on the page [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]]. What the arbitration
committee is trying to do is to craft a remedy for those instances where
administrators are making up their own policy, perhaps to some extent in
reliance on community consensus but nevertheless expanding their actions
beyond those set forth in blocking policy.  Certain parts of that policy are
somewhat ambiguous but it is a limited policy which permits blocks only in
certain cases. Not in every case where it "feels right" or in every case
where "something has to be done".

Fred

From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

This "rule" requires sysops to have to have all of the policy pages
available at hand.  Fine.  Then give me a table of contents.
RickK

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

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/10/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/new
_mail/static/efficiency.html>  - Send 10MB messages!
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/fc705c07/attachment.htm


from_name: Mike Halterman

subject: [WikiEN-l] Database error

body:
A server error, I would imagine. I tried editing [[Peyton Place (soap opera)]] with a gigantic edit and I got that. Then all the stuff I typed was lost. I'm not bothering on that article for a while.

-Mike H

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/7cd0c802/attachment.htm


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikiverse spamming

body:
I have gotten 2 complaints so far today from people who were spammed
by wikiverse.org.  Wikiverse is a relatively nice and non-evil looking
Wikipedia mirror.  But they are apparently sending emails to
webmasters who are in the "external links" section saying things
like:

==================
Dear webmaster at firesigntheatre.com,

My name is Kate Weaver (though most people just call me Katz) and I'm
the Content Manager of Wikiverse.org - A World of Knowledge, a
community of sites dedicated to providing high-quality informative web
+content.

We placed a link to your site http://www.firesigntheatre.com in the
External Link section of the Homepage of:

http://the-firesign-theatre.wikiverse.org/ (Check it out!)

I would appreciate it if you returned the favor and linked back to
http://the-firesign-theatre.wikiverse.org/.  Linking back to us will
also help maintain your link with us in the future.

===================

This is evil.  There is not much we can do about it, I think, but I
just wanted to publicly shame them into stopping it.

--Jimbo


subject:
[WikiEN-l] [fwd: Wikipedia,
	the free encyclopedia in-accurate history of Goa]

body:
I have no opinion about this, I just forward it in case someone feels
like looking at our articles.

I informed the author that they could edit the site.

----- Forwarded message from . at .-----

From: . at .
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 06:30:29 -0700 (PDT)
To: jwales at bomis.com
Subject: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in-accurate history of Goa

Jimmy Wales,

The following is an in-accurate account of my peoples history. We
Goans till today are waiting for our true freedom. Please do some more
research to display the truth on your web site.

When India became independent in 1947, Goa remained Portuguese. The
Indian government of Jawaharlal Nehru insisted that it, along with a
few other minor Portuguese holdings, be turned over to
India. Portugal, however, refused. France, which had also had small
enclaves in India (most notably Pondicherry), gave them up. Portugal,
however, amended its constitution to have Goa made a Portuguese
province and refused to surrender it.

Opinions within Goa were mixed. The port was profiting immensely from
being a conduit of smuggled goods into India, the strong Roman
Catholic faith of the inhabitants also led to some affinity for
Portugal. Many of the people were pro-India, however, and a pro-Indian
resistance group began operating in the territory. In 1955 an unarmed
invasion was launched by a mass of Indians following the teachings of
Gandhi. The Portuguese met them with force and 21 were reported
killed.

In the 1960s the World Court and the United Nations General Assembly
both ruled in India's favour in the dispute. World public opinion was
also turning against Portugal due to their brutal actions in
Angola. The United States, however, remained supportive of its NATO
ally and would not allow the UN Security Council to rule against
Portugal.

The Indians offered continued special treatment for the Portuguese in
Goa and protection of the area's distinct culture, but still the
Portuguese refused to negotiate. This was mostly out of concern for
the situation in Angola, where any concessions in Goa would weaken
Portugal's colonial hold.

In December 1961 India, under pressure from public opinion, and
foreign pressure from the rest of the third world to oppose
colonialism, moved into Goa. Twenty Indians and 17 Portuguese were
killed in the fighting, which lasted twenty-six hours.

After annexation the area was under military rule for five months, but
the previous civil service was soon restored and the area became a
federally administered territory.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
----- End forwarded message -----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
>Except if a user holds strictly to written policy they really can't do a lot
>of stuff that results in disruption, damage and hell. Community consensus
>would result in changed written policy to replace such parts of written
>policy that are "ill-thought-out and often unenforced legalistic jargon".
>Other than that you seem to have summed it up pretty well.

In practice, community consensus results in "proposals" which remain
forever in limbo because the objections of those who would be
sanctioned under those proposals are given as much weight as those of
honest users.

>In other words, heroism is not necessary on your part to "save" Wikipedia.
>Just steady pressure on those who as you put it, "cause as much disruption,
>damage and hell as possible".

I'd hardly classify doing what the Arbitration Committee has
neglected for months to do as "heroism" but whatever.

-Hephaestos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/5deabe40/attachment.htm


from_name: Mark Richards

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
I think that it would be fair to say that people
acting outside the community established guidelines is
not wanted, whatever the motivations.
Mark

--- John Robinson <john at freeq.com> wrote:

> >Surely you don't object to your objections being
> taken seriously?
>
> In light of the fact that the Arbitration Committee
> is quite willing
> to censure me and others for having the audacity to
> do the job they
> refuse to do, over any objections we may have, I
> don't think they are
> being taken seriously.
>
> On the other hand, if I were to change my handle to
> GreezyTroll and
> start spewing nonsense about "cabal" and "GFDL
> corpus", and inserting
> "faggot" into every other article, I think my
> objections would be
> taken quite seriously. In the name of "fairness" or
> somesuch.
>
> >Sorry, but I will continue to do what needs to be
> done, and I hope, Heph,
> >that you will, too.
>
> Why should we, when our help is so clearly not
> wanted?
>
> - Hephaestos>
_______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia mentioned in Washington Times

body:
See http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20040731-101359-2982r.htm

...Do a "Google" search on political correctness and for the most part
you will find a definition, such as that in the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia:
    "Political correctness is the alteration of language said to redress
real or alleged unjust discrimination or to avoid offense. The term most
often appears in the predicate adjective form politically correct, often
abbreviated PC, and is usually used mockingly or disparagingly. One
purpose behind 'politically correct' language is to prevent the
exclusion or the offending of people based upon differences or
handicaps. The idea behind using 'politically correct' terminology is to
bring peoples' unconscious biases into awareness, allowing them to make
a more informed choice about their language and making them aware of
things different people might find offensive."


body:
How odd. What an incoherent ramble.

--- "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:

> See
>
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20040731-101359-2982r.htm
>
> ...Do a "Google" search on political correctness and
> for the most part
> you will find a definition, such as that in the free
> encyclopedia
> Wikipedia:
>     "Political correctness is the alteration of
> language said to redress
> real or alleged unjust discrimination or to avoid
> offense. The term most
> often appears in the predicate adjective form
> politically correct, often
> abbreviated PC, and is usually used mockingly or
> disparagingly. One
> purpose behind 'politically correct' language is to
> prevent the
> exclusion or the offending of people based upon
> differences or
> handicaps. The idea behind using 'politically
> correct' terminology is to
> bring peoples' unconscious biases into awareness,
> allowing them to make
> a more informed choice about their language and
> making them aware of
> things different people might find offensive."
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Timwi

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Jeopardy question

body:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:

> Answer:
>
>>You keep using that word...
>>I do not think it means what you think it means.
>
> Question:
>
> "What is 'inconceivable'?"

I don't think anyone here knows what you're talking about, what you're
referring to, what you're getting at or what your point is.

Timwi


from_name: moink

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Jeopardy question

body:
> Hmm.  I do watch "Jeopardy" frequently, and I'm usually good at "getting
> it"  What's so inconceivable about a big-eared African fox?

There are obviously not enough "Princess Bride" fans in Wikipedia. :)

moink


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
>Surely you don't object to your objections being taken seriously?

In light of the fact that the Arbitration Committee is quite willing
to censure me and others for having the audacity to do the job they
refuse to do, over any objections we may have, I don't think they are
being taken seriously.

On the other hand, if I were to change my handle to GreezyTroll and
start spewing nonsense about "cabal" and "GFDL corpus", and inserting
"faggot" into every other article, I think my objections would be
taken quite seriously. In the name of "fairness" or somesuch.

>Sorry, but I will continue to do what needs to be done, and I hope, Heph,
>that you will, too.

Why should we, when our help is so clearly not wanted?

- Hephaestos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/9ddcb453/attachment.htm


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Patent nonsense proposal

body:
Pete/Pcb21 wrote:
> Note: we bend over backwards to support all major browsers (minimizing
> JavaScript etc) because most people cannot change their browser. Yet
> when we come to sound, we are changing tack.

To my knowledge, we don't offer any content which would be impossible
for people to view using free software for reasons related to software
patents.  Free browsers can and do display javascript, java, etc.

Notice that the situation with mp3's is much worse than it was with
gif's when the gif patents were still existing.  With gif, free
software could view them no problem.  But free software could not
_create_ them.

With mp3, free software can't view them or play them.

Therefore, when we encourage people to use the mp3 format, we are
encouraging them not to use free software, and we continue the
illusion that proprietary software is better somehow.

--Jimbo


body:
Pete/Pcb21 wrote:
> I must protest a little bit. You selectively edit my post in order to
> suggest something that I am not, then attack me for it. I was talking
> solely in the context of Windows - raising some points that Jimbo may
> not have been aware and then saying "the question is are those points
> important?" This is plainly different from suggesting that Windows users
> are the only people we care about.

Yes, in defense of Pete, I did understand him to be saying this.

And let me say this: if it were determined that the vast majority of
Windows users could not view (or listen to, in this case) our content
unless we used some proprietary format, we would have a tough decision
to make indeed.

As a thought experiment, imagine a nightmare scenario where someone is
granted a patent on html, and for a period of time that patent is
vigourously enforced against free software, rendering it virtually
impossible to use the web at all without using non-free or semi-free
software.  Would we just shut down?  No, we would make the pragmatic
decision to move forward with reluctance.

So Pete's questions and comments are very much on-point.  There is a
judgment call to be made here: how much inconvenience for end users is
tolerable in order to encourage them to switch to an unencumbered
format?

My sense of it is that the inconvenience is minor.  The point about
libraryies and schools is well-taken, but I don't know (none of us do)
how many people would actually be frustrated by that.  The question
about what is required of end users is also a valid one, but it seems
like nothing to me to download a plug-in... most people do that sort
of thing all the time.

> It appears you can _play_ MP3s libreally and gratisly. The difficulty is
> creating them. Thus as long as the uploader "signs" to say they have
> done so legally, then the migration path that allows dual formats (even
> of the same piece) might be an option.

I think the situation is worse than that.  I think it is not possible
for legal free software to even play mp3s.  Am I wrong about that?

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Russian constitutional crisis of 1993 (some responses)

body:
Stan Shebs wrote:
> When Jimbo posted his message, from the way he described his reaction,
> I knew right away where the content must have come from.

I hope that this was in part because I described the article as a
"delightful read".  It's worth repeating, since I was critical of what
I perceived as a slant in the article, that Abe is a wonderful writer
and the article was informative, etc.

--Jimbo


from_name: Matt Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
The 'legitimate' reason for the complaint, I gather, is that the
images are marked copyrighted and explicitly deny the right to
redistribute outside Wikipedia.  However, VfD is not the place to take
this.  That issue is with the copyright status of the images, not the
appropriateness of the page.  The page itself is about Wikipedia and
is in a User: namespace, so there are no problems there whatsoever.

However, I suspect the above is only the ostensible, not the actual,
reason for the listing.  Given Anthony's history, he's trolling,
possibly to "make a point".

-Morven

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:31:59 -0600, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> This page is a bit of information and photos from the Boston meeting of
> Wikipedians. It is obviously in violation of nothing. What were you
> thinking?
>
> Fred
>
> > From: "Anthony DiPierro" <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com>
> > Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:41:53 -0400
> > To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1
>
>
> >
> > I find this amazing.
> >
> > Raul creates a page, [[User:Raul654/Boston]], in blatant violation of
> > [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] (see #15).  The page consists of a bit
> > of text and a number of images all of which violate [[Wikipedia:Copyright]]
> > ("If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you thereby license it to the
> > public under the GFDL").  I list the page on [[wp:VfD]], stating that it
> > violates "Wikipedia is not a file repository", and I get blocked.
> >
> > Yes, perhaps it was technically not against the rules for me to be blocked
> > (at least not provably so).  But give me a break, this is just ridiculous.
> >
> > Anthony
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Moving pages between Wikimedia projects

body:
Manuel G R wrote:
> es.wikibooks.orgs has recently been launched. Some users are moving the
> articles from their former location on www.wikibooks.org
>
> For better compliance of the GNU FDL, some of us are wondering whether
> there is a way to move the page along with its history to the new site.
>
> I know the Special:Export feature, but is there an import feature to be
> used in the target site?

Special:Import is not yet complete. If someone wants to have a go,
please feel free. Otherwise I'll try to get to at some point, but can
make no guarantees about when that will be.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040802/0dfc3e0a/attachment.pgp>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
Forgive me for not getting this, but why not just let
it languish on VfD? It's clearly not going to get
deleted.
Mark

--- Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:

> The 'legitimate' reason for the complaint, I gather,
> is that the
> images are marked copyrighted and explicitly deny
> the right to
> redistribute outside Wikipedia.  However, VfD is not
> the place to take
> this.  That issue is with the copyright status of
> the images, not the
> appropriateness of the page.  The page itself is
> about Wikipedia and
> is in a User: namespace, so there are no problems
> there whatsoever.
>
> However, I suspect the above is only the ostensible,
> not the actual,
> reason for the listing.  Given Anthony's history,
> he's trolling,
> possibly to "make a point".
>
> -Morven
>
> On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:31:59 -0600, Fred Bauder
> <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> > This page is a bit of information and photos from
> the Boston meeting of
> > Wikipedians. It is obviously in violation of
> nothing. What were you
> > thinking?
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > > From: "Anthony DiPierro"
> <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com>
> > > Reply-To: English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > > Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:41:53 -0400
> > > To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I find this amazing.
> > >
> > > Raul creates a page, [[User:Raul654/Boston]], in
> blatant violation of
> > > [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] (see #15).
> The page consists of a bit
> > > of text and a number of images all of which
> violate [[Wikipedia:Copyright]]
> > > ("If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you
> thereby license it to the
> > > public under the GFDL").  I list the page on
> [[wp:VfD]], stating that it
> > > violates "Wikipedia is not a file repository",
> and I get blocked.
> > >
> > > Yes, perhaps it was technically not against the
> rules for me to be blocked
> > > (at least not provably so).  But give me a
> break, this is just ridiculous.
> > >
> > > Anthony
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 18:59:00 -0400, Anthony DiPierro
<anthonydipierro at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I referenced the violations right in my email.  [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia
> is not]] #15, and
> [[Wikipedia:Copyrights]]  ("If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you
> thereby license it
> to the public under the GFDL").  The appropriate place to bring up a
> violation of what Wikipedia is not is on VfD.  As for the violation of
> Wikipedia:Copyrights, there really isn't an appropriate place to bring it
> up.  It's not a copyright violation, so the copyright problems page isn't
> appropriate.  And the image is still used on a page, so images for deletion
> isn't appropriate either.

The user-space article in question is definitely on-topic for an
article in that space; it's about en.wikipedia (in specific, pictures
of a real-world meet of wikipedians).  Do you seriously believe that
articles, photo galleries etc. of Wikipedian meets are not (or should
not be) allowed on the english wikipedia in the user space?

Copyright problems OTHER than violations are also on-topic for
[[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]] - that's exactly why the name got
moved, IIRC.  So that's where you bring up issues with image
licensing.

I am absolutely sure, Anthony, that you listed this on VfD knowing
everyone would disagree.  Thus, I believe you did it for the purpose
of "making a point"; ie. trolling.

The proper course of action would have been to take it up with the
user directly.  I do agree that if Raul654 wants to put up
redistribution-prohibited pictures and cares deeply about that
restriction, he might want to consider placing his images elsewhere
(if nothing else, because technically by submitting his own work to
Wikipedia, he explicitly DID license those images under the GFDL ...)

-Morven


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
This page is a bit of information and photos from the Boston meeting of
Wikipedians. It is obviously in violation of nothing. What were you
thinking?

Fred

> From: "Anthony DiPierro" <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:41:53 -0400
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1
>
> I find this amazing.
>
> Raul creates a page, [[User:Raul654/Boston]], in blatant violation of
> [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] (see #15).  The page consists of a bit
> of text and a number of images all of which violate [[Wikipedia:Copyright]]
> ("If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you thereby license it to the
> public under the GFDL").  I list the page on [[wp:VfD]], stating that it
> violates "Wikipedia is not a file repository", and I get blocked.
>
> Yes, perhaps it was technically not against the rules for me to be blocked
> (at least not provably so).  But give me a break, this is just ridiculous.
>
> Anthony
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
I think this is probably a good idea for everyone, not just for you. Working
on a page and then having to mess around defending it on VfD is no fun for
anyone, newbie or old hand.

Fred

> From: "Anthony DiPierro" <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 18:59:00 -0400
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1
>
> Don't list pages created by admins on VfD.  Maybe I'll even extend
> it to not listing pages created by longstanding Wikipedians on VfD, at least
> not without discussing it with them first.


from_name: Robert Dodier

subject: [WikiEN-l] followup re: blocking policy

body:
Hephaestos wrote:

> In light of the fact that the Arbitration Committee is
> quite willing to censure me and others for having the
> audacity to do the job they refuse to do, over any objections
> we may have, I don't think they are being taken seriously.
>
> On the other hand, if I were to change my handle to
> GreezyTroll and start spewing nonsense about "cabal" and
> "GFDL corpus", and inserting "faggot" into every other article,
> I think my objections would be taken quite seriously. In the
> name of "fairness" or somesuch.

Wikipedia is suffering from a classic case of looking for
the house keys under the street light. There is an inability,
or perhaps refusal, to recognize trolling. On the other hand,
it,s very easy to spot admins who are breaking rules.

RickK wrote:

> Sorry, but I will continue to do what needs to be done,
> and I hope, Heph, that you will, too.

Hephaestos wrote:

> Why should we, when our help is so clearly not wanted?

For the record: -I- want your help. I consider WP a serious
project -- that means the current troll-pandering has to stop.

Hephaestos, you rock, and RickK, so do you.
Keep up the good work.

For what it,s worth --
Robert Dodier
(Wile E. Heresiarch)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
I find this amazing.

Raul creates a page, [[User:Raul654/Boston]], in blatant violation of
[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] (see #15).  The page consists of a bit
of text and a number of images all of which violate [[Wikipedia:Copyright]]
("If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you thereby license it to the
public under the GFDL").  I list the page on [[wp:VfD]], stating that it
violates "Wikipedia is not a file repository", and I get blocked.

Yes, perhaps it was technically not against the rules for me to be blocked
(at least not provably so).  But give me a break, this is just ridiculous.

Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 19:51:13 -0400, Anthony DiPierro
<anthonydipierro at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Do you seriously believe that rticles, photo galleries etc. of
> > Wikipedian meets are not (or should not be) allowed on the
> > english wikipedia in the user space?
>
> Yes.

Then we disagree; but this is no major matter personally.

> > Copyright problems OTHER than violations are also on-topic for
> > [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]] - that's exactly why the name got
> > moved, IIRC.  So that's where you bring up issues with image
> > licensing.
>
> That's news to me.  I remember having a listing deleted because it was a
> licensing issue other than a copyright violation, although I believe that
> was before the name change.

I believe that this was the purpose of the rename (as well as to be a
less 'contentious' name).  I may be wrong, but I do recall seeing
questions recently where it is the license, not the permission, that
has been questioned.

Thanks,

-Morven


from_name: rose.parks at att.net

subject:
[Wikitech-l] German Validation System (was CVS HEAD on German
	wikipedia?)

body:
Hi,

     I have looked at the validation parameters on the article validation page on test.
I am wondering what happened to "CopyEdit." Is this going to be done by the German users? If so, where is the rating system for "Copyedit?"

                       As Ever,

                           Ruth Ifcher--

-------------- Original message from Magnus Manske : --------------

> Hello all,
>
> as some of you know, a company will release a snapshot of the German
> wikipedia on CD. They will use a dump from September 1, less than one
> month from now.
>
> We (de.wikipedia) would very much like to get the validation feature up
> and running ASAP, even though it is only in the early stages (but
> functional), so we can harvest WikiPower (tm) to sort out the junk, er,
> the "articles" that should rather not go on CD.
>
> Now for the scary part: Can we soon go live with what is CVS HEAD, or is
> there something utterly unstable in it?
>
> Also, any help with the validation feature will be greatly appreciated.
> The current state of affairs can be seen at http://test.wikipedia.org
>
> Magnus
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1

body:
I guess what I said is ambiguous. I suggest talking with the creator of
pages first rather than simply listing them is a good idea.

Fred

> From: Timwi <timwi at gmx.net>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 01:13:11 +0100
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1
>
> Fred Bauder wrote:
>
>>> Don't list pages created by admins on VfD.  Maybe I'll even extend
>>> it to not listing pages created by longstanding Wikipedians on VfD, at least
>>> not without discussing it with them first.
>>
>> I think this is probably a good idea for everyone, not just for you. Working
>> on a page and then having to mess around defending it on VfD is no fun for
>> anyone, newbie or old hand.
>
> You're seriously suggesting that pages created by admins should be
> unVfDable? I object.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Where are all the trolls?

body:
Perhaps the inability or refusal to deal with this
'problem' is that there really isn't much of a
problem?
Mark

--- Robert Dodier <robert_dodier at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hephaestos wrote:
>
> > In light of the fact that the Arbitration
> Committee is
> > quite willing to censure me and others for having
> the
> > audacity to do the job they refuse to do, over any
> objections
> > we may have, I don't think they are being taken
> seriously.
> >
> > On the other hand, if I were to change my handle
> to
> > GreezyTroll and start spewing nonsense about
> "cabal" and
> > "GFDL corpus", and inserting "faggot" into every
> other article,
> > I think my objections would be taken quite
> seriously. In the
> > name of "fairness" or somesuch.
>
> Wikipedia is suffering from a classic case of
> looking for
> the house keys under the street light. There is an
> inability,
> or perhaps refusal, to recognize trolling. On the
> other hand,
> it,s very easy to spot admins who are breaking
> rules.
>
> RickK wrote:
>
> > Sorry, but I will continue to do what needs to be
> done,
> > and I hope, Heph, that you will, too.
>
> Hephaestos wrote:
>
> > Why should we, when our help is so clearly not
> wanted?
>
> For the record: -I- want your help. I consider WP a
> serious
> project -- that means the current troll-pandering
> has to stop.
>
> Hephaestos, you rock, and RickK, so do you.
> Keep up the good work.
>
> For what it,s worth --
> Robert Dodier
> (Wile E. Heresiarch)
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We
> finish.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Is it possible to change the signiture text using
	javascript?

body:
Is it possible to change the text that is written to the edit form
when one presses the /sig/ button, currently it writes "--~~~~" but i
would like it to write "?~~~~". Thanks.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
> This page is a bit of information and photos from the Boston meeting of
> Wikipedians. It is obviously in violation of nothing. What were you
> thinking?

> Fred

> The 'legitimate' reason for the complaint, I gather, is that the
> images are marked copyrighted and explicitly deny the right to
> redistribute outside Wikipedia.  However, VfD is not the place to take
> this.  That issue is with the copyright status of the images, not the
> appropriateness of the page.  The page itself is about Wikipedia and
> is in a User: namespace, so there are no problems there whatsoever.

> -Morven

 I referenced the violations right in my email.  [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia
is not]] #15, and
[[Wikipedia:Copyrights]]  ("If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you
thereby license it
to the public under the GFDL").  The appropriate place to bring up a
violation of what Wikipedia is not is on VfD.  As for the violation of
Wikipedia:Copyrights, there really isn't an appropriate place to bring it
up.  It's not a copyright violation, so the copyright problems page isn't
appropriate.  And the image is still used on a page, so images for deletion
isn't appropriate either.

> Similarly, I once received a message on my talk page saying, "Do you
> mind not going and vfding other peoples articles." What are these people
> thinking? That you're supposed to list only your own articles?

>  Timwi

Perhaps the problem is that the page was created by an admin (and that's
what "other people" was supposed to mean).  I'm going to take that as my
lesson.  Don't list pages created by admins on VfD.  Maybe I'll even extend
it to not listing pages created by longstanding Wikipedians on VfD, at least
not without discussing it with them first.

In hindsight I guess I could have started by asking Raul to license the
images under the GFDL and to move the page to meta or his personal homepage
or somewhere more appropriate than en.  I highly doubt this would have
worked, but at that point I guess I could have brought the issue up here.  I
can't get blocked from en.Wikpedia for bringing up issues on this mailing
list, can I?

Again, I'm not saying the block was against the rules.  I don't really care
about the block.  My issues are with the page being on Wikipedia, with the
images not being licensed to anyone other than Wikipedia, and with the
rudeness of the admin who blocked me without discussing things with me
first.

> Forgive me for not getting this, but why not just let
> it languish on VfD? It's clearly not going to get
> deleted.
>Mark

Last time I checked it still is on VfD.  And yes, it's clearly not going to
get deleted, so I'd remove the nomination except for the fact that I'm
blocked.

Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbcom neglect

body:
As I recall, back in January, the Arbitration Committee was in its
second or third month of trying to find its ass with both hands.

-Hephaestos

>
>As I understand it, Heph is criticising us for not banning Lir
>already. Heph decided that
>we'd been negligent in failing to ban Lir in late January, and
>decided again on 3 July, in
>both cases blocking Lir.
>
>Meanwhile, the first time that Lir has been the subject of a request
>for arbitration was on
>5 July. I was never good at arithmetic, but I do understand that
>five is greater than
>three, and in the conventional calendar July is after January. I
>must express my regret
>to Hephaestos that the arbitration committee is unable as yet to
>make decisions in
>negative time.
>
>Thank you for your feedback.
>-Martin


from_name: Mark Pellegrini

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking of Anthony

body:
Anthony and I discussed this on IRC (along with Danny to help).

Anthony agreed that the VFD listing should be removed (he says that
looking back on it, he should have done something less disruptive),
and I have unblocked him. The blocking itself was totally inline with
policy - I saw it, and asked on IRC if an impartial admin would look
at it to see if it was provacative (which, according to the agreement,
is grounds to block him) Fennec did, thought it was provacative,
and blocked him.

About the copyright status of the images on the page - I informed
Anthony that I own the copyright on the pictures, and I have no problem
releasing them under the GFDL. However, I didn't think it prudent to do
this without getting permission from the people in those pictures, and I
didn't feel like hunting down the 20-odd people in order to do so.
So I split the difference, and made them Wikipedia-only.

--Mark


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
> The user-space article in question is definitely on-topic for an
> article in that space; it's about en.wikipedia (in specific, pictures
> of a real-world meet of wikipedians).  Do you seriously believe that
> articles, photo galleries etc. of Wikipedian meets are not (or should
> not be) allowed on the english wikipedia in the user space?

Yes.

> Copyright problems OTHER than violations are also on-topic for
> [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]] - that's exactly why the name got
> moved, IIRC.  So that's where you bring up issues with image
> licensing.

That's news to me.  I remember having a listing deleted because it was a
licensing issue other than a copyright violation, although I believe that
was before the name change.

> I am absolutely sure, Anthony, that you listed this on VfD knowing
> everyone would disagree.  Thus, I believe you did it for the purpose
> of "making a point"; ie. trolling.

Well, you're simply wrong.

> -Morven

> I for one congratulate the mediation committee in their success in
reaching an
> agreement on this case, that has allowed Raul654 to rapidly and robustly
deal with the
> issue, pending further discussion. I hope that mediation will continue to
resolve many
> similar issues without resorting to arbitration.

> -Martin

The mediation committee had nothing to do with the agreement.  Raul and I
came to the agreement ourselves on IRC.  (And as was pointed out, Raul
didn't make the block.)

Danny, who is a member of the mediation committee, did facilitate an
agreement in this particular case (of the most recent block).  I agreed (on
IRC) that in hindsight I should have handled the issue in a way other than
listing the page on VfD.  I also agreed that Danny could remove the
nomination.  Raul agreed to unblock me in light of this and upon Danny
removing the nomination.

Raul and I then spoke about the issue of the copyright of the images.  His
concern was that it might not be legal for him to release the images under
the GFDL, as there are people depicted in the images who have a right to
privacy.  While I disagree with him on this legal issue, I understand this
concern, so I'm not going to press the issue any further.

As for whether or not this page of images violates what Wikipedia is not, I
still feel that it does, but as there is a concensus against me I won't
press that issue any further either.  In addition, as I've already said, I'm
not going to be listing pages created by admins on VfD, or pages created by
any longstanding user without speaking with them first.

Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] Block #1

body:
> The blocking itself was totally inline with policy - I saw it, and
> asked on IRC if an impartial admin would look at it to see if it
> was provacative (which, according to the agreement, is grounds
> to block him)

>  --Mark

I don't dispute that I cannot prove that my purpose for making that edit was
not to troll, so yes, the block itself didn't violate policy.  However, just
as I could have done something other than list the page on VfD (such as
speak to Mark first), Fennec could have done something other than block me
(such as speak to me first).  Just because you *can* block me doesn't mean
you should.

Anyway, hopefully this thread is nearing a close.

Anthony


from_name: Magnus Manske

body:
rose.parks at att.net wrote:

>Hi,
>
>     I have looked at the validation parameters on the article validation page on test.
>I am wondering what happened to "CopyEdit." Is this going to be done by the German users? If so, where is the rating system for "Copyedit?"
>
>                       As Ever,
>
>                           Ruth Ifcher--
>
>
The parameters on test are just for - well, testing :-)

We are currently discussing parameters suitable for the sitoation -
probably a "put it on CD - yes/no" will be the first and only option, as
this has a deadline attached. Other parameters can easily be added over
time.

Magnus


subject: [WikiEN-l] followup re: blocking policy

body:
Robert Dodier wrote: "Hephaestos, you rock, and RickK, so do
you. Keep up the good work"

Amen to that. Rickk and Heph do a wonderful keeping the worst
users at bay.

--Mark


from_name: Daniel P.B.Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 13, Issue 5

body:
> From: "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com>
>
> "What is 'inconceivable'?"

"What did the lady mean to say when she said 'That's impossible, I'm
impregnable?'"

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 279 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040802/90c37900/attachment.bin


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: [fwd: Wikipedia,
 the free encyclopedia in-accurate history of Goa]

body:
Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:

> I have no opinion about this, I just forward it in case someone feels
> like looking at our articles.

How do these people find your e-mail address, and why do they think that
you're the right person to contact?

Maybe should try to track down whatever page seems to imply that, and
change it to say that they shouldn't contact you about the content of
articles.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

> Yes, perhaps it was technically not against the rules for me to be blocked
> (at least not provably so).

I find it highly dubious that listing anything on VfD should be
bannable, or even remotely condemnable.

I don't understand why people take offense at something being listed on
VfD. If a majority thinks that the page should stay, then listing it on
VfD makes no difference. If a majority thinks that the page should be
deleted, then other people are going to list it too, so why get offended
at the first lister?

Similarly, I once received a message on my talk page saying, "Do you
mind not going and vfding other peoples articles." What are these people
thinking? That you're supposed to list only your own articles?

Timwi


from_name: Finlay McWalter

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

> I find this amazing.
>
> Raul creates a page, [[User:Raul654/Boston]], in blatant violation of
> [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] (see #15).  The page consists of a bit
> of text and a number of images all of which violate [[Wikipedia:Copyright]]
> ("If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you thereby license it to the
> public under the GFDL").  I list the page on [[wp:VfD]], stating that it
> violates "Wikipedia is not a file repository", and I get blocked.
>
> Yes, perhaps it was technically not against the rules for me to be blocked
> (at least not provably so).  But give me a break, this is just ridiculous.
>
> Anthony

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Anthony_DiPierro

reads

   "Decrees:

      1. The arbitration committee instructs Anthony to refrain
         from playing around and making provocative edits on VfD and
         associated pages"

QED.
FIn

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
W.Finlay McWalter   [[User:Finlay McWalter]]   http://www.mcwalter.org
"With the thoughts you'd be thinkin', You could be another Lincoln..."


subject: [Wikitech-l] Bughunt!

body:
At this moment the bug tracker lists 214 open bugs out of 1098 total
reports; that's an average of about one bug report closed per day since
we started using it in mid-2002.

A lot of the remaining bug reports are duplicates, or refer to problems
that have since been fixed. A handful are really feature requests. A
bunch more are relatively minor problems that just haven't been gotten to...

I'd like to see us cut the open bug reports *in half* to 107 over the
next week. It may sound like a lot (three months' worth of closings!)
but I'm confident we can do it; in just the last day JeLuF and I have
cleared out about 15 bug reports. If we can keep up that rate, we'll
make the goal easily.

To encourage people to pay more attention to the nasty bugses, I've set
up a quickie bot that reports updates to bug tracker into the #mediawiki
IRC channel.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040802/ce508c5c/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Martin Harper

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbcom neglect

body:
> I'd hardly classify doing what the Arbitration Committee has
> neglected for months to do as "heroism" but whatever.

As I understand it, Heph is criticising us for not banning Lir already. Heph decided that
we'd been negligent in failing to ban Lir in late January, and decided again on 3 July, in
both cases blocking Lir.

Meanwhile, the first time that Lir has been the subject of a request for arbitration was on
5 July. I was never good at arithmetic, but I do understand that five is greater than
three, and in the conventional calendar July is after January. I must express my regret
to Hephaestos that the arbitration committee is unable as yet to make decisions in
negative time.

Thank you for your feedback.
-Martin


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: IRC

body:
Julian Ostrow a ?crit:
> Anthere,
>
> I can't attest to how good it is because I've never used it, but I hear
> IRCle being mentioned from time to time.  It works on all kinds of
> MacOS versions (their site says): http://www.ircle.com/download.shtml
>
> Good luck!
>
> - Julian Ostrow (X13)

I thank you. Yes, I heard it was probably the best one, but... it is not
free :-(
Well, I'll manage with shadow irc for the next few days, then will try
to find another solution, perhaps rely on 30 days trials....


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: IRC

body:
Fennec Foxen a ?crit:
> On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 08:35:35 +0200, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi
>>
>>Would someone have an idea for me (how to fix the bug) or a new IRC
>>client to recommand me (I am on macintosh OS9, netscape 7.02 and no, I
>>cant upgrade to a newer system) ?
>
>
> One thing you could try (if the bug fixing does not work out) is to
> get someone to give you a shell account somewhere with access to
> irssi, and use IRC from there. You'd need to do a little bit of a song
> and dance manuver to get it to do UTF-8, but as long as you have a SSH
> client to get to it, it would work on any kind of computer.

...
Euh... Fennec, did I already mentionned I was not a developer ?

Anthere, totally confused here... :-(((


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Fwd: Security hole in "What_we_use_the_money_for"
 on meta.wikimedia.org -- ???

body:
Daniel Mayer a ?crit:
> I just got this email from a reader (I've already explained that we are a wiki
> and he did not do any harm):
>
> |I noticed an "edit" tab.  I clicked on this at got an edit form that
> |seems to have allowed me to edit this text, for real, right on your site!
> |I've taken a look in a couple different browsers and even a different CPU
> |and it seems to be there consistently -- despite clearing cache and
> |cookies.   (my "here's MM's edit") at the end of the body text.
> |
> |Is this for real?  Did I make a permanent modification on your public page?
> |If so, isn't that a big security hole?  If not, it's very confusing to me
> |what I did and why I was able to do it.

I love it :-)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1

body:
Martin Harper wrote:

> I for one congratulate the mediation committee in their success in reaching an
> agreement on this case, that has allowed Raul654 to rapidly and robustly deal with the
> issue, pending further discussion. I hope that mediation will continue to resolve many
> similar issues without resorting to arbitration.

For the record, it was Fennec and not Raul654 who blocked Anthony:

20:03, 2 Aug 2004 Fennec blocked "Anthony DiPierro" with an expiry time
of 24 hours (Per [[Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration/Standing
orders/Anthony]] as applies to the listing of Boston meetup pictures on VFD)

FIn

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
W.Finlay McWalter   [[User:Finlay McWalter]]   http://www.mcwalter.org
"With the thoughts you'd be thinkin', You could be another Lincoln..."


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1

body:
>       1. The arbitration committee instructs Anthony to refrain
>          from playing around and making provocative edits on VfD
>          and associated pages"

Which is pretty clear. That Anthony has apparently ignored a direct instruction is a
matter of regret, and would have reflected badly on him had the case proceeded to
arbitration. This is perhaps why, during mediation, he agreed to accept the following
standing order:

[[Wikipedia:Requests_for_Arbitration/Standing_orders/Anthony]]

> If Anthony should, for any reason, make a provocative edit (that
> is, an edit which is "trolling", "disruptive", and/or "antisocial" as
> interpreted by an admin) or engage in an edit war, an admin, may
> at his discretion, block Anthony for a period of 24 hours, not
> subject to the normal warnings and protections afforded other
> users.

I for one congratulate the mediation committee in their success in reaching an
agreement on this case, that has allowed Raul654 to rapidly and robustly deal with the
issue, pending further discussion. I hope that mediation will continue to resolve many
similar issues without resorting to arbitration.

-Martin


from_name: Manuel G R

body:
es.wikibooks.orgs has recently been launched. Some users are moving the
articles from their former location on www.wikibooks.org

For better compliance of the GNU FDL, some of us are wondering whether
there is a way to move the page along with its history to the new site.

I know the Special:Export feature, but is there an import feature to be
used in the target site?

Regards.


from_name: Jens Ropers

subject: [WikiEN-l] can I send attachments to this list?

body:
Hi all,

I've got a newbie question:
Can I send attachments to this list?

I have a BIG issue I would like to raise.
It's best presented in a table with weblinks (it gets very confusing otherwise),
to I created a (small!) HTML file with the respective links, etc.

Can I send that little index.html to this list?
Would it come across to actual list recipients?

If not, would it be ok if I temporarily posted it at my web site and sent a link
to this mailing list (I'd prefer not to do that if I can avoid that)?

Thanks and regards,

Jens Ropers
(User:Ropers)

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


body:
Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:

> As a thought experiment, imagine a nightmare scenario where someone is
> granted a patent on html, and for a period of time that patent is
> vigourously enforced against free software, rendering it virtually
> impossible to use the web at all without using non-free or semi-free
> software.  Would we just shut down?  No, we would make the pragmatic
> decision to move forward with reluctance.

In that case, I suppose one could still realistically offer two
alternatives (HTML for the Windows users and a new alternative that
would no doubt emerge in the free-software community for the
free-software users). In the case of media files, it would be wasteful
to offer all of them in several or even two formats.

> My sense of it is that the inconvenience is minor.  The point about
> libraryies and schools is well-taken, but I don't know (none of us do)
> how many people would actually be frustrated by that.  The question
> about what is required of end users is also a valid one, but it seems
> like nothing to me to download a plug-in... most people do that sort
> of thing all the time.

I completely agree with all of that. For the longest time I was opposed
to OGG, thinking "We already have MP3, and I can play it with my Winamp,
I don't wanna switch!" but then I found out that all I needed was a
little plug-in, and it was trivial to install too.

> I think the situation is worse than that.  I think it is not possible
> for legal free software to even play mp3s.  Am I wrong about that?

According to http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/openletter.html, it was
legal up until recently, because the owners of the MP3 patent officially
allowed royalty-free use of the decoding technology. They have now
revoked this permission and are collecting royalties.

I have Audacity (http://audacity.sourceforge.net/) installed on my
computer, and it can read but not save MP3 files. I downloaded this at a
time when royalty-free implementation of MP3 decoders was still allowed.
Maybe someone should check if the newest version can still do that or if
the functionality has been removed; I don't want to risk losing this
functionality by installing the newest version myself.

Timwi


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
> So let me see if I have this straight.
>
> As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause
> as much disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community
> consensus on a matter is secondary to ill-thought-out and often
> unenforced legalistic jargon.
>
> Does that pretty much sum it up?

No, I'd say that's exactly backwards of what's going on.  I don't
really understand why you're saying those things.

I think there's a misunderstanding here, and an ironic one at that.

It has always been true that sysops could reverse blocks done by other
sysops.  You could always do that, and you can do it now.  What this
ruling proposes is that if a sysop blocks *and gives a proper reason*,
then the burden of proof would be on another sysop to say why they
reverted it.

This enhances the ability to block and have the blocks stick.

--Jimbo


from_name: Timwi

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1

body:
Mark Richards wrote:

> Forgive me for not getting this, but why not just let
> it languish on VfD? It's clearly not going to get
> deleted.

My point exactly.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Block #1

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

>>Don't list pages created by admins on VfD.  Maybe I'll even extend
>>it to not listing pages created by longstanding Wikipedians on VfD, at least
>>not without discussing it with them first.
>
> I think this is probably a good idea for everyone, not just for you. Working
> on a page and then having to mess around defending it on VfD is no fun for
> anyone, newbie or old hand.

You're seriously suggesting that pages created by admins should be
unVfDable? I object.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: can I send attachments to this list?

body:
Jens Ropers wrote:

> Can I send attachments to this list?

Yes.

> Can I send that little index.html to this list?

Yes.

> Would it come across to actual list recipients?

Yes.

> If not, would it be ok if I temporarily posted it at my web site and sent a link
> to this mailing list (I'd prefer not to do that if I can avoid that)?

This would certainly be preferable, because then only people actually
interested in your file can look at it. If you attach it, everyone will
have to download it. Especially because you said that it was big, I
would strongly suggest you use the web-site method. That's common
practice on mailing lists, anyway.

Timwi


list: foundation-l

from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Foundation-l] More on GNOME bounties

body:
FYI-

From:    Nat Friedman <nat at novell dot com>
To:      Jonathan Blandford <jrb at redhat dot com>
Copy:    Erik Moeller <moeller at scireview dot de>
Subject: Re: GNOME bounty system success
Date:    Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:12:28 -0400

Jonathan's summary is good.  One quick point on numbers: only 11
bounties have been paid, but we've had patch submissions on >50% of the
total bounties; release engineering timelines have made it hard for
bounty submitters to get some of their patches accepted by module
maintainers, and therefore paid, so that contributes to the small number
of paid bounties you see.

One thing that's surprising is that pretty much all of our bounty
submissions came from first-world economies.  Despite efforts to promote
the bounties heavily in e.g. India.

I think there's a need for a bounty administration infrastructure; some
piece of software that can run these programs automatically, instead of
the mostly hand-generated web pages I wrote.

Regards,

Nat


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] More on GNOME bounties


subject: [Wikitech-l] More on GNOME bounties


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: followup re: blocking policy

body:
Mark Pellegrini wrote:

> Robert Dodier wrote: "Hephaestos, you rock, and RickK, so do
> you. Keep up the good work"
>
> Amen to that. Rickk and Heph do a wonderful keeping the worst
> users at bay.
>
> --Mark

Ditto. Both are much abused and greatly under appreciated.
FIn

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
W.Finlay McWalter   [[User:Finlay McWalter]]   http://www.mcwalter.org
"With the thoughts you'd be thinkin', You could be another Lincoln..."


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:
> The language now reads, "When a Wikipedia administrator discovers an
> instance where a block was made without appropriate reference to the
> Wikipedia:Blocking policy, they may reverse the block but should post a note
> on the offending Wikipedia administrators talk page explaining why the block
> was reversed."

This has always been true, of course.  I think this wording is leading
people to think that this is some new advocacy for reversing blocks.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
> Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> The language now reads, "When a Wikipedia administrator discovers an
> instance where a block was made without appropriate reference to the
> Wikipedia:Blocking policy, they may reverse the block but should post a note
> on the offending Wikipedia administrators talk page explaining why the block
> was reversed."

Rick wrote:
> Still unacceptable.  The Arbcom is still making policy which has not been agreed to by the wikipedia as a whole.
>
> RickK

What do you see as being a policy change in this?

Administrators have always been able to reverse a block which was made
without appropriate reference to the Blocking policy, because admins
have always been able to reverse blocks for any reason at all.

If anything, Rick, I should think you would strongly support this
language, because it *hints* (but doesn't say) that if a proper reason
*is* given, then admins *may not* reverse a block.  That is a policy
that I suspect you would support, but it would be policy-making by the
committee if they literally said it.

--Jimbo


from_name: TJ69662094 at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Block

body:
Hi! I was blocked severely and unfairly by user RickK. I need to be
unblocked. He also blocked my father, because there was some name changing war between
them.

I dont think of RickK as an administrator, rather he thinks he is a DICtator,
which is a shame because I share a lot of respect for all wikipedians, and
wonderful friendships with some of them. RickK , as far as I know, didnt even
bring the subject of blocking us to Village Pump or other discussion fields
before blocking us. Administrative abuse of powers, maybe?

I need to be unblocked so that I can return to be a good wikipedia
contributor, as does my dad, user Marine 69-71.

Thank you and Godbless!

Sincerely yours,
User:AntonioMartin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040803/8ba9a2f5/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

body:
Hi Jimbo:
How areyou doing my man?

Me and my father, userMarine 69-71 have been blocked inexplicablyby user
RickK. The whole thing only because my dad saw a red line under Joaquin Phoenix at
the List of Puerto Ricans and he decided in good faith to write an
article.RickK already had one under Joaquin Raphael Phoenix, but dad didnt know this.
In turn this led to a name changing war and RickK as far as I understad,
failed to compromise by requensting for a merger beforehe went for the KO blow and
blocked us permanently!!!

Can you please unblock us? We aredesperate to going back to return
immediately to be the good hearted contributor we are. And Idlike to asj you if RickK
violated any adm, rules with this behaviour.

Jimmy you know how much I love this site, and my dad does too.I think you are
a genius and this is not kidding because I see wikipedia in the I love the
2000s MTV show by 2010. I have big ies and I was aboutto talk to Angela about
how we can make people more aware with wikipedia collectibles and advertising.

I hope you can help us and maybe have a talk with RickK. I dont know but
maybe he might ave to coll his engines a little bit. He probably,I acknowledge
does it thinkingof the best for oursite, for that I acknowledge him,butn he might
ant to have his blood presure checked the way heacts sometimes.

Thank you for your help and God bless you!

Sincerelyours,
Uer AntonioMartin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040803/d2f73424/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] unfair blocking

body:
Hi:I believe my father and I have been unfairly and severely blocked by user
RickK, can someone pleaseunblock us?

Thanks and God bless!
Sincerely yours,
AntonioMartin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040803/f8015687/attachment.htm


subject: [Wikitech-l] Reminder...please participate

body:
THE POLL IS BELOW

------------------

Hello all

I'd like to remind you of the current ongoing poll. About a dozen people have participated in the past 3 days. Which is great ! It was truely very informative to me. However, I am still missing some opinions, in particular from a couple of very active developers (or so is my feeling they are active :-))

PS : Eloquence, I tried to send you an email yesterday, but your mailing box is full, so the mail was rejected :-(

I would like to insist that this is not only about payment, but also meant to perhaps discuss some improvement in the organisation of development.
I also would like to remind that we are in a situation where participants voted to elect their representatives (Angela and I) to act as proxies, representing your will. We agreed to free you from the responsibilities of the daily business of the foundation management,  without stripping you entirely of political power.

Polling is necessary to us to accurately measure your views. We can not be in your shoes (they are probably too large for us). I preferred a sampling poll over a regular vote with fixed rules, as it gives more flexibility and richness (you may participate or not; you may answer only to part of the questions rather than all; you may comment at will...).

And from the sample I got, your views are very diverse indeed. So more feedback would be great.

The board can very well decide whether to hire people, or whether to set financial rewards or not. Technically we do not need your opinion. However, in reality, we do. The one thing I would find really dramatic is that we take a decision for which 3 people will agree, 3 will be neutral and 20 strongly oppose, resulting in huge drop of motivation and perhaps even people leaving.

I have seen mostly discussion here, about whether that might be a technical benefit, eg a way to orient development toward certain tasks rather than others, a way to speed up development, a way to motivate people.
I doubt not these might be beneficial.
However, I do think benefits should not only be measured in terms of technical benefits, but from the social perspective as well.

So thank you for helping us representing your views better :-)

-------------------------

Hello, we are writing to all active developers to survey views on
development and how these might interact with a rewards system that
has been proposed. There has been a discussion about this at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Developer_payment. It would be really
helpful if you could find time to answer the questions at the end of
this email.

Some people believe that Wikimedia could benefit from having certain
MediaWiki features developed or developed more quickly that they
currently are.

However, some of these features might not be coded because we do not
have internal resources to take care of them ourselves. Others do not
exist because no one is doing them, possibly due to low motivation,
being overworked by other tasks, or because no one is aware the
features are requested.

For these reasons, it has been suggested that we create a system which
would influence development activity in certain directions. In short,
that the Wikimedia Foundation offers bounties for certain development
tasks.

In order to take such a decision, we need to determine whether the
solution is potentially a good one, or not (both *technically* and
*socially*). We also wish to explore alternative solutions to increasing
performance and individual satisfaction.

Whilst recognizing that there is nothing wrong or amoral to wish to be
paid or rewarded for volunteer activity, we do not wish to alienate
people who are strongly opposed to the idea, nor donors who gave money
with another dream in mind. As with any system relying on voluntary
activity, use of money as an item of exchange for work is
controversial. What we would like to understand better is how
controversial it is, both for editors and for developers. This poll is
meant to help us understand better what developers' opinions are on
the topic.

A number of questions are included below, but please feel free to not
answer any that you not wish to respond to, particularly if you feel
they are too personal or not relevant to you. Add comments if you
wish, but try to keep them short and clear :-). Any complex proposals
should be added to Meta or sent to wikitech-l.

Please send your answers to anthere9ATyahoo.com.

Note : The reason we are distributing this questionnaire privately rather
than publicly is for the simple reason that some people are
uncomfortable talking about money issues in public. Also, some might
prefer not to enter into public controversies.

All replies will be kept confidential. If any statistics are released,
they will only be aggregate ones, and no comments will be quoted if
the author of them could be identified.

--------------------------------
--------------------------------

Are you, or have you been in the past, involved in development of
MediaWiki or maintenance of the Wikimedia servers?

If so, can you briefly indicate which specific activities you have
done (maintenance of servers, performance improvement, development of
features, debug, interface, "hotline" etc)

Which tasks, if any, really ought to be done, but currently are not?

Are there any tasks that you would like to get involved with but have
not yet done so?

If so, what is preventing becoming more involved with those tasks?

Is there anyone that you would like to be more involved with certain
tasks? If so, which tasks?

Did you find it easy to join the development team? Did you receive
appropriate guidance to allow you to start helping? Do you feel it is
easy now for newcomers to get involved?

If not, what do you think would help new developers to "get in"?

Was there anything in particular that you found helped you to join in?

Are you proud of what you are currently doing?

Do you feel your work is undervalued or under-recognized?

If you are now less involved with the development team than you were
previously, what made you decrease your contribution there?

What is the best reward for your good work, or what way would you prefer to be
rewarded?

Do you think any of the following could help? Thinking only of
technical considerations, please rate the following on this five point
scale from A to B.

A. Yes, I am convinced that could help a lot. I strongly support
B. Yes, it might help eventually. I slightly support this
C. I don't know if this will help. I neither support nor oppose this
D. No, I think it will not be helpful. I am slightly opposed to this
E. I am strongly opposed to this option, whether helpful or not

1. Having paid staff (permanent, full or part time, for example a
sysadmin). (Ie, paying someone for rather loosely defined activity)

2. A system of bounties or similar. For example, a one off contract
for a specific task, such as the development of a feature.

3. An award system : nomination of a "developer of the month" (for a special thank you
time) with an explanation of why. This could be advertised on IRC with
a paypal link on the fundraising page.

4. Another award system. For example, once a year, between one and three
developers could receive an award of the "best developer of the year",
possibly with a price  of hardware or of money, and thank you notes
splashed everywhere.

5. A "get to know me more" system : A special "know more about our developers" page, where each developer may explain how he contributed to the project, add a paypal
link, webpage link etc. This could be prominently linked to from the fundraising page.

6. Professional training to some of the developers if the Wikimedia Foundation could secure free or reduced price training.

7. Make our third global press releases oriented toward development issues, in order to attract new contributors for software and hardware issues. Focus on tech news site for promotion.

8. A meet-up for developers to work together occasionally (in Germany perhaps, with round of beers paid by the foundation :-))

9. A big clean up of the development pages on Meta, and clearer paths
to help new developers to "jump in".

10. Nomination of "organiser(s)" whose role would be to clean up the
list of tasks to do, clarify priorities, go around asking who could do
that, attract volunteers etc...

11. Please add your own ideas below.

Would you be interested to make a living directly or undirectly from Wikip?dia ?

If the Board were to hire staff, what type of staff do you think would be most helpful?

Do you think staff should be hired internally or externally? (ie, someone already volunteering, or someone who is not a participant)

If the Foundation were hiring, would you consider applying for a
development position?

How would you summarize your view on the proposed bounty system?
Strongly support / support/ neutral/ opposed/ strongly opposed/ undecided.

If opposed, please briefly indicate why.

If the Board decided to use a bounty system, would you try to get involved to get some of the bounties?

Do you feel your motivation level would be increased or decreased through the use of a bounty system?

If you are opposed to a bounty system, would its implementation cause you to decrease your level of contribution?

Please cite three tasks that you feel would be well suited to a bounty  system.

Given that we would roughly evaluate the number of hours for a task, how much do you think should be given for a bounty (ie, amount of money per hour)? Alternatively, how much would you suggest the Foundation should offer for the tasks you mentioned just above?

What do you think would be the largest benefit of implementing a bounty system?

What do you think would be the largest harm caused by a bounty system?

Do you have your own pay pal account?

Would you be interested in having a little bio about you and your achievement on WMF site ?

Would you be interested in having a link on the site whereby users could donate money to you via this account?

Would you be interested in receiving professional training?

If developers were to be awarded special prizes by the Board, would you prefer to receive money or hardware?

Are there any ways of improving organization that you feel you can commit yourself to right now? For example, cleaning up pages, writing documentation, coaching newbies, writing technical press releases, improving the bug tracking system, setting up a "tech news" reporting page, playing the pom pom girl?

Please send your answers to anthere9ATyahoo.com.

-------------------------
-------------------------

We thank you for your time and attention, and hope you will agree to participate to this survey. As board members and representants of all wikipedians, it is important to Angela and I that we take decisions which will be at the same time beneficial to the project, beneficial for WMF, consistent with our shared values and agreeable to the community.

Anthere

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040803/4c2ccfd9/attachment.html>


from_name: John Robinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Then I'm still confused, because according to Fred Bauder's reply to
that post I "summed it up pretty well."

Although I admit I like your version better; I've never had a block
reversed when the person doing the reversing actually told me on my
talk page that they had done so.

- Hephaestos

>  > So let me see if I have this straight.
>>
>>  As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause
>>  as much disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community
>>  consensus on a matter is secondary to ill-thought-out and often
>>  unenforced legalistic jargon.
>>
>>  Does that pretty much sum it up?
>
>No, I'd say that's exactly backwards of what's going on.  I don't
>really understand why you're saying those things.
>
>I think there's a misunderstanding here, and an ironic one at that.
>
>It has always been true that sysops could reverse blocks done by other
>sysops.  You could always do that, and you can do it now.  What this
>ruling proposes is that if a sysop blocks *and gives a proper reason*,
>then the burden of proof would be on another sysop to say why they
>reverted it.
>
>This enhances the ability to block and have the blocks stick.
>
>--Jimbo


from_name: Fennec Foxen

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: IRC

body:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:23:24 +0200, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > One thing you could try (if the bug fixing does not work out) is to
> > get someone to give you a shell account somewhere with access to
> > irssi, and use IRC from there. You'd need to do a little bit of a song
> > and dance manuver to get it to do UTF-8, but as long as you have a SSH
> > client to get to it, it would work on any kind of computer.
> ....
> Euh... Fennec, did I already mentionned I was not a developer ?
> Anthere, totally confused here... :-(((

You don't need to be a developer in order to set up a shell with
irssi. It might be a little confusing to set up, however, and you
would need assistance as well as someone with server space available.
It would not necessarily be on a Wikimedia server.


body:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:21:49 +0100, Finlay McWalter
<finlay_wikipedia_94ac at mcwalter.net> wrote:
> Mark Pellegrini wrote:
> > Robert Dodier wrote: "Hephaestos, you rock, and RickK, so do
> > you. Keep up the good work"
> > Amen to that. Rickk and Heph do a wonderful keeping the worst
> > users at bay.
> Ditto. Both are much abused and greatly under appreciated.

Well, you certainly can't call their enthusiasm in such endeavours
into question.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Where are all the trolls?

body:
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 18:40:57 -0700 (PDT), Mark Richards
<marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Perhaps the inability or refusal to deal with this
> 'problem' is that there really isn't much of a
> problem?
> Mark

It's not that there are a lot of trolls everywhere. It's that there
are a few trolls everywhere. The same few, even...


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy

body:
Jimbo has added a great deal to this discussion. As he points out the
proposed formulation provides what in securities law is called a "safe
harbor". That is, if certain, pro forma rules are followed, namely citing
some provision of blocking policy, which in your good faith opinion applies,
you stand blameless, absent a complaint from the person blocked or some
other administrator that the representation you made was not proper, not
supported by the facts or in bad faith.

That would have to go through the whole laborious dispute resolution process
before it would come home to roost.

Fred

> From: John Robinson <john at freeq.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 08:30:55 -0500
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking policy
>
> Then I'm still confused, because according to Fred Bauder's reply to
> that post I "summed it up pretty well."
>
> Although I admit I like your version better; I've never had a block
> reversed when the person doing the reversing actually told me on my
> talk page that they had done so.
>
> - Hephaestos
>
>>> So let me see if I have this straight.
>>>
>>> As long as a user holds strictly to written policy, he/she may cause
>>> as much disruption, damage and hell as possible, and community
>>> consensus on a matter is secondary to ill-thought-out and often
>>> unenforced legalistic jargon.
>>>
>>> Does that pretty much sum it up?
>>
>> No, I'd say that's exactly backwards of what's going on.  I don't
>> really understand why you're saying those things.
>>
>> I think there's a misunderstanding here, and an ironic one at that.
>>
>> It has always been true that sysops could reverse blocks done by other
>> sysops.  You could always do that, and you can do it now.  What this
>> ruling proposes is that if a sysop blocks *and gives a proper reason*,
>> then the burden of proof would be on another sysop to say why they
>> reverted it.
>>
>> This enhances the ability to block and have the blocks stick.
>>
>> --Jimbo
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Emmanuel Engelhart

subject: [Wikitech-l] Bughunt!

body:
Selon Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com>:

> At this moment the bug tracker lists 214 open bugs out of 1098 total
> reports; that's an average of about one bug report closed per day since
> we started using it in mid-2002.
>
> A lot of the remaining bug reports are duplicates, or refer to problems
> that have since been fixed. A handful are really feature requests. A
> bunch more are relatively minor problems that just haven't been gotten to...
>
> I'd like to see us cut the open bug reports *in half* to 107 over the
> next week. It may sound like a lot (three months' worth of closings!)
> but I'm confident we can do it; in just the last day JeLuF and I have
> cleared out about 15 bug reports. If we can keep up that rate, we'll
> make the goal easily.
>
> To encourage people to pay more attention to the nasty bugses, I've set
> up a quickie bot that reports updates to bug tracker into the #mediawiki
> IRC channel.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>

Hi

I guess that this one "[ 983680 ] username starting with" could be close.

Emmanuel Engelhart


subject: [Wikitech-l] Bughunt!

body:
Selon Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com>:

> At this moment the bug tracker lists 214 open bugs out of 1098 total
> reports; that's an average of about one bug report closed per day since
> we started using it in mid-2002.
>
> A lot of the remaining bug reports are duplicates, or refer to problems
> that have since been fixed. A handful are really feature requests. A
> bunch more are relatively minor problems that just haven't been gotten to...
>
> I'd like to see us cut the open bug reports *in half* to 107 over the
> next week. It may sound like a lot (three months' worth of closings!)
> but I'm confident we can do it; in just the last day JeLuF and I have
> cleared out about 15 bug reports. If we can keep up that rate, we'll
> make the goal easily.
>
> To encourage people to pay more attention to the nasty bugses, I've set
> up a quickie bot that reports updates to bug tracker into the #mediawiki
> IRC channel.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>

[ 967833 ] Only first five template inclusions work

Patched by Jeluf

Emmanuel


from_name: Bill Clark

subject: [Wikitech-l] Mozilla to offer bounties