Hello,
I found this link *http://destour.org *on the Wikipedia-ar mailing list,
and thought it might interest people who don't speak Arabic as well.
This is a Wiki inviting Tunisian citizens to write the country's new
constitution the Wiki way. The site is entirely in Arabic and it
includes a constitution draft, which the Tunisian public is supposed to
change and amend collaboratively. According to their "about", this is an
initiative of the Tunisian Internet Association (/Jam'iyat Tunis
lil-Internet/), which is a non-official non-profit Tunisian
organization. According to them, the project is run by volunteers.
To be honest, I don't give much chance to this initiative, but it is an
interesting development nonetheless. As far as I remember, Florence told
me about similar initiative in France by the French government, but it
seems to be the first of its kind in the Arab world. Perhaps the close
cultural ties between Tunisia and France played a role here, but this is
nothing more than a speculation.
Dror K
The Vector skin, the main product of the Usability Initiative, was
deployed on Wikimedia projects in April 2010.
Quoting usability.wikimedia.org: "The goal of this initiative is to
measurably increase the usability of Wikipedia for new contributors by
improving the underlying software on the basis of user behavioral
studies, thereby reducing barriers to public participation."
In the year that passed since then, did anyone measure whether the
usability of Wikipedia for new contributors increased?
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
Machado initiated this matter by posting a sarcastic message directed at
me to the effect that I was ignorant.
I'm sorry if someone has overdone it in responding to him, but the
ugliness started with him.
Fred Bauder
> After a cool off period of about 48 hours and considerable
> reflection, it is my conviction that the posts of two above mentioned
> editors should be moderated from now on.
>
> Andrew Garrett wrote, Sun Apr 3 10:13:26 UTC 2011, "Your messages are
> deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to boot." it is
> unclear what messages he is referring to, but these are not
> acceptable terms to classify anybody's messages, unless it is
> acceptable that others classify Andrew Garrett's or anybody else's
> messages as "deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to
> boot." and therefore asks him or them to "Cut it out, please." "What
> is good for the goose is good for the gander."
>
> After engaging in a "friendly and polite exchange" with Dan
> Rosenthal, he saw fit to send me an e-mail, Sun, 3 Apr 2011 05:26,
> concerning "[Foundation-l] Wiki-revolution," using language
> unbecoming to a gentleman, that I'll not repeat. This kind of
> behavior cannot and should not be tolerated from members of this
> list. Should everybody start sending unspeakable messages to other
> members of the list? I do have experience of exchanging off list
> messages with other members, but those were used for clarification,
> to reach a mutual understanding and establish new bridges and avenues
> of communication. They were used to improve relations with other
> members and, as a result, improve the peaceful and cordial exchanges
> that should take place on this list, despite any disagreements and
> differences of opinion. There can never be any disagreements or
> differences of opinion as far as the level of education and manners
> used on this list, and towards members of this list both on and off
> list. This is no army barracks, farm stables, or brawl among
> drunkards on the town fairgrounds.
>
> As Dan Rosenthal might wish to present evidence that no harm was
> intended or done, by making public his message, I authorize that he
> so does. I have no trouble in reproducing Dan Rosenthal's message on
> this list, provided he grants me, here, in public, on this list,
> authorization to do it.
>
> I believe that Dan Rosenthal's action called for more severe
> sanctions, but I have many reservations concerning all sorts of so
> called severe sanctions on this list and Wikimedia projects in
> general. We all know how easily they can be circunvented by the less
> scrupulous. Therefore, as in the case of Andrew Garrett, my request
> is that their posts to be moderated from now on. That should be
> sufficient to prevent Dan Rosenthal from coughing again on this list
> and hopefully at least make him hesitate before sending unworthy
> messages off list.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado (Vapmachado)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:32 AM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <vam(a)fct.unl.pt> wrote:
> After a cool off period of about 48 hours and considerable
> reflection, it is my conviction that the posts of two above mentioned
> editors should be moderated from now on.
As administrators, it's our policy not to take punitive action. We
only use moderation to prevent likely repeat offenders from further
disrupting the list.
Andrew Garrett (who, as others have noted, was actually defending
you—I understand that this isn't something you're used to, after all
these years) is not a troll and, while blunt, is generally not
disruptive.
Dan Rosenthal is not always the friendliest in his interactions with
the list, and has been moderated before, but I see no reason to do so
again at this time.
And that's all I intend to say in reply. You don't even get my
traditional folksy "guys, be nice" line for this one.
Austin
Hi, folks,
When I browsed Wikipedia this morning, I found all wikimedia sites were
blocked again in China.
And several others reported blocking by their ISP also.
Recently Ai WeiWei, a famous artist and activist, were detained by the
government,
it seems that the government seized their control on the society.
And the block of Wikimedia add another sign for this trend.
Personally, I think this block is possible for taking another long period of
time.
But we would observe for a short time to judge the situation.
Regards,
Mingli
Andrew was clearly referring to me, lets leave him out of this please.
-Dan
On Apr 4, 2011, at 8:32 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> After a cool off period of about 48 hours and considerable
> reflection, it is my conviction that the posts of two above mentioned
> editors should be moderated from now on.
>
> Andrew Garrett wrote, Sun Apr 3 10:13:26 UTC 2011, "Your messages are
> deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to boot." it is
> unclear what messages he is referring to, but these are not
> acceptable terms to classify anybody's messages, unless it is
> acceptable that others classify Andrew Garrett's or anybody else's
> messages as "deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to
> boot." and therefore asks him or them to "Cut it out, please." "What
> is good for the goose is good for the gander."
>
> After engaging in a "friendly and polite exchange" with Dan
> Rosenthal, he saw fit to send me an e-mail, Sun, 3 Apr 2011 05:26,
> concerning "[Foundation-l] Wiki-revolution," using language
> unbecoming to a gentleman, that I'll not repeat. This kind of
> behavior cannot and should not be tolerated from members of this
> list. Should everybody start sending unspeakable messages to other
> members of the list? I do have experience of exchanging off list
> messages with other members, but those were used for clarification,
> to reach a mutual understanding and establish new bridges and avenues
> of communication. They were used to improve relations with other
> members and, as a result, improve the peaceful and cordial exchanges
> that should take place on this list, despite any disagreements and
> differences of opinion. There can never be any disagreements or
> differences of opinion as far as the level of education and manners
> used on this list, and towards members of this list both on and off
> list. This is no army barracks, farm stables, or brawl among
> drunkards on the town fairgrounds.
>
> As Dan Rosenthal might wish to present evidence that no harm was
> intended or done, by making public his message, I authorize that he
> so does. I have no trouble in reproducing Dan Rosenthal's message on
> this list, provided he grants me, here, in public, on this list,
> authorization to do it.
>
> I believe that Dan Rosenthal's action called for more severe
> sanctions, but I have many reservations concerning all sorts of so
> called severe sanctions on this list and Wikimedia projects in
> general. We all know how easily they can be circunvented by the less
> scrupulous. Therefore, as in the case of Andrew Garrett, my request
> is that their posts to be moderated from now on. That should be
> sufficient to prevent Dan Rosenthal from coughing again on this list
> and hopefully at least make him hesitate before sending unworthy
> messages off list.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado (Vapmachado)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado <vam(a)fct.unl.pt> wrote:
> Andrew Garrett wrote, Sun Apr 3 10:13:26 UTC 2011, "Your messages are
> deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to boot." it is
> unclear what messages he is referring to, but these are not
> acceptable terms to classify anybody's messages, unless it is
> acceptable that others classify Andrew Garrett's or anybody else's
> messages as "deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to
> boot." and therefore asks him or them to "Cut it out, please." "What
> is good for the goose is good for the gander."
Wow, Andrew was defending you. I'm sure this is going to be the last
time he attempts to do such a thing though.
> After engaging in a "friendly and polite exchange" with Dan
> Rosenthal, he saw fit to send me an e-mail, Sun, 3 Apr 2011 05:26,
[snip]
And he has since stopped after nearly all of the other list members
who responded disagreed with his comments, so there's no need to bring
it up again and try to cause more problems.
--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023
Oh dear. In the hurly-burly of Wikipedia especially, trenchant, even strong,
language seems to be accepted from some but not from others. Some give and
take should be allowed but when a top 100 contributor is desysopped for
little else by WP's ArbCom, who knows where the limits may be? This is a
mailing list, and not a discussion forum or chatroom, where little really
persists for that long, so perhaps higher standards might prevail. However,
if the comments were that gross (and I don't see that they are), a temporary
moderation might be seen to be fair by some, although my gut feeling tells
me that a warning should siffice, lest such a reaction be seen to be
punitive.
wp:User:Rodhullandemu (retired, although I can't even put that on my own
user page at present!)
Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> After a cool off period of about 48 hours and considerable
> reflection, it is my conviction that the posts of two above mentioned
> editors should be moderated from now on.
>
> Andrew Garrett wrote, Sun Apr 3 10:13:26 UTC 2011, "Your messages are
> deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to boot." it is
> unclear what messages he is referring to, but these are not
> acceptable terms to classify anybody's messages, unless it is
> acceptable that others classify Andrew Garrett's or anybody else's
> messages as "deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to
> boot." and therefore asks him or them to "Cut it out, please." "What
> is good for the goose is good for the gander."
>
> After engaging in a "friendly and polite exchange" with Dan
> Rosenthal, he saw fit to send me an e-mail, Sun, 3 Apr 2011 05:26,
> concerning "[Foundation-l] Wiki-revolution," using language
> unbecoming to a gentleman, that I'll not repeat. This kind of
> behavior cannot and should not be tolerated from members of this
> list. Should everybody start sending unspeakable messages to other
> members of the list? I do have experience of exchanging off list
> messages with other members, but those were used for clarification,
> to reach a mutual understanding and establish new bridges and avenues
> of communication. They were used to improve relations with other
> members and, as a result, improve the peaceful and cordial exchanges
> that should take place on this list, despite any disagreements and
> differences of opinion. There can never be any disagreements or
> differences of opinion as far as the level of education and manners
> used on this list, and towards members of this list both on and off
> list. This is no army barracks, farm stables, or brawl among
> drunkards on the town fairgrounds.
>
> As Dan Rosenthal might wish to present evidence that no harm was
> intended or done, by making public his message, I authorize that he
> so does. I have no trouble in reproducing Dan Rosenthal's message on
> this list, provided he grants me, here, in public, on this list,
> authorization to do it.
>
> I believe that Dan Rosenthal's action called for more severe
> sanctions, but I have many reservations concerning all sorts of so
> called severe sanctions on this list and Wikimedia projects in
> general. We all know how easily they can be circunvented by the less
> scrupulous. Therefore, as in the case of Andrew Garrett, my request
> is that their posts to be moderated from now on. That should be
> sufficient to prevent Dan Rosenthal from coughing again on this list
> and hopefully at least make him hesitate before sending unworthy
> messages off list.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado (Vapmachado)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
After a cool off period of about 48 hours and considerable
reflection, it is my conviction that the posts of two above mentioned
editors should be moderated from now on.
Andrew Garrett wrote, Sun Apr 3 10:13:26 UTC 2011, "Your messages are
deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to boot." it is
unclear what messages he is referring to, but these are not
acceptable terms to classify anybody's messages, unless it is
acceptable that others classify Andrew Garrett's or anybody else's
messages as "deliberately obnoxious, unpleasant, and off-topic to
boot." and therefore asks him or them to "Cut it out, please." "What
is good for the goose is good for the gander."
After engaging in a "friendly and polite exchange" with Dan
Rosenthal, he saw fit to send me an e-mail, Sun, 3 Apr 2011 05:26,
concerning "[Foundation-l] Wiki-revolution," using language
unbecoming to a gentleman, that I'll not repeat. This kind of
behavior cannot and should not be tolerated from members of this
list. Should everybody start sending unspeakable messages to other
members of the list? I do have experience of exchanging off list
messages with other members, but those were used for clarification,
to reach a mutual understanding and establish new bridges and avenues
of communication. They were used to improve relations with other
members and, as a result, improve the peaceful and cordial exchanges
that should take place on this list, despite any disagreements and
differences of opinion. There can never be any disagreements or
differences of opinion as far as the level of education and manners
used on this list, and towards members of this list both on and off
list. This is no army barracks, farm stables, or brawl among
drunkards on the town fairgrounds.
As Dan Rosenthal might wish to present evidence that no harm was
intended or done, by making public his message, I authorize that he
so does. I have no trouble in reproducing Dan Rosenthal's message on
this list, provided he grants me, here, in public, on this list,
authorization to do it.
I believe that Dan Rosenthal's action called for more severe
sanctions, but I have many reservations concerning all sorts of so
called severe sanctions on this list and Wikimedia projects in
general. We all know how easily they can be circunvented by the less
scrupulous. Therefore, as in the case of Andrew Garrett, my request
is that their posts to be moderated from now on. That should be
sufficient to prevent Dan Rosenthal from coughing again on this list
and hopefully at least make him hesitate before sending unworthy
messages off list.
Sincerely,
Virgilio A. P. Machado (Vapmachado)