Thomas Dalton writes:
> It only takes one for it to be immoral to take advantage of their
> ignorance. "Don't be evil" and all that.
> It's that last sentence which concerns me. There is a difference
> between something being illegal, and it getting you sent to jail or
> sued. I, for one, am not comfortable with relying on people's apathy
> to get away with breaking the law, however safe it may be.
If you're saying there's such a thing as being "illegal" but not
resulting potentially in a criminal or civil penalty, then you're
using "illegal" in a way that it is not normally used.
As for "immoral," Thomas also writes:
> The fact that
> Mike is suggesting we would need to give people the option of opting
> out implies there is a legal issue involved in invoking the clause.
I am primarily suggesting the opt-out option because I believe it's
the moral thing to do. The fact is, I don't think there's much legal
risk associated with even the most high-handed implementation of the
migration, but I expect us not to be high-handed and instead to
accommodate all reasonable complaints from contributors, up to and
including removal of identifiable content they've generated under
older GFDL expectations.
(So far as the question of whether French and German users would no
longer be able to reuse Wikipedia content, I cannot imagine how a
license migration of the sort we're talking about here -- a
harmonization of GFDL and CC-BY-SA -- could possibly lead to such a
result. The endpoint license would unquestionably allow for reuse in
France or Germany or anywhere else.)
--Mike (still trying not to be evil)
Dear Madams and Sirs,
I would like to suggest that the Centralnotice gets a link to
the untranslated form, since it can't be translated locally and not
everyone knows of the possibility to translate it on Meta.
Furthermore I would like to express my regret, that lots of
"MediaWiki:Centralnotice-meter/xx" are not created even though
translated. (this notice is shown, if the sitenotice is minimized)
In my humble opinion speaking to people in their own language is a
If it is not possible to create all those graphics due to technical
problems, I think we should provide something different than the current
meter, e.g. making a graphic without text, or having the text on the
right or left of it.
We are supporting many languages and in my opinion we should reflect
that also in the actual Fundraiser.
Thank You, best regards,
Elisabeth Anderl (aka spacebirdy)
> Hello dear Wikipedians,
> Please allow me to briefly present my project and please feel free to post your suggestions.
> I was discussing ecology with a friend and I was supporting the argument : the consumer has the power.
> His daily choices direct industries towards ecology or not. Towards fair trade. Towards quality.
> Then I thought : wouldn't it be great if a website enabled each user to rate companies and products.
> I imagined an ecology rate, a fair trade rate, a quality rate, a "workman's rights" rate.
> I have programming skills in PHP, ASP.Net and am currently looking for advice (technical, GUI, ...) and suggestions about this idea.
> Any colloboration would be of course welcome.
> Thanks in advance,
> Peace ,
> * <http://www.alamut.com/images/2003_misc/treeFace.jpg> Avant d'imprimer, pensez à l'environnement. <http://www.alamut.com/images/2003_misc/treeFace.jpg>
Ce message et toutes les pièces jointes sont confidentiels et établis à l'intention exclusive
de son ou ses destinataires. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur, merci d'en avertir
immédiatement l'émetteur et de détruire le message. Toute modification, édition, utilisation ou
diffusion non autorisée est interdite. L'émetteur décline toute responsabilité au titre de ce
message s'il a été modifié, déformé, falsifié, infecté par un virus ou encore édité ou diffusé
This message and any attachments are confidential and intended for the named addressee(s) only.
If you have received this message in error, please notify immediately the sender, then delete
the message. Any unauthorized modification, edition, use or dissemination is prohibited.
The sender does not be liable for this message if it has been modified, altered, falsified,
infected by a virus or even edited or disseminated without authorization.
Build your own dump? :)
Sent to you by Brianna via Google Reader: Access Any Web Site (Like
Wikipedia) Offline with GearsMonkey via Lifehacker Australia on
21/11/07 Firefox with Greasemonkey and Google Gears: The Wikipedia
Offline Greasemonkey script plugs Greasemonkey into Google Gears (the
offline web access extension that works with Google Reader and other
sites) to provide offline access and syncing with Wikipedia. Once
you've installed the script, head to Wikipedia and enable Gears. Now,
when browsing any page on Wikipedia, you'll notice a small frame that
contains links to cache the current page or access other pages you've
already cached. Even better, the author of the script provides a howto
guide for taking virtually any web site offline with Gears and
start building Gears access for their favourite sites (here's hoping we
see a lot more of these). The Wikipedia Offline script is free,
requires Greasemonkey and Google Gears. GearsMonkey: Google Gears +
Greasemonkey to take Wikipedia offline [Google Code]
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Lifehacker Australia using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your
>> I don't think the problem is quite as intractable as all that,
>> although I will grant it is a tricky problem. In my (possibly
>> misinformed) view, FSF is the custodian of the meaning and terms of
>> the GFDL, which allows for migration to later versions of GFDL, which
>> creates the possibility of an approved GFDL that is essentially an
>> equivalent to an updated CC-BY-SA license.
> Not exactly. The FSF is unlikely to accept the loss of invariant
> sections in the GFDL. Fortunately they do appear to be prepared to
> accept the loss of the obvious invariant sections by shifting to the
I think the FSF is perhaps even more flexible than this, at least
>> FSF is currently in dialog
>> with Creative Commons about harmonizing GFDL with CC-BY-SA.
> Do you have a source for this and is this dialog likely to produce a
> result in the next year?
My sources include Larry Lessig and Richard Stallman. Do they count?
Some WMF Board members and I are also engaged in this discussion. I
think a result is possible in the next year. Whether it's likely or
not is hard to guess -- how to calculate the probability of a first-of-
> No. If the FSF shift to new licenses with better terms we update with
> no opt out clause (we've been doing this with CC for years) simply
> because any re-user could update the work regardless of any attempted
> opt out. At the present time it is not meaningfully possible to change
> from the GFDL without action from the FSF.
This is what I'm saying too. I think FSF is inclined to take action in
concert with CC and WMF, if a consensus
Few days ago a pretty neat idea was proposed, an idea which could
involves all of the community members, all of you: the "Edit Wikipedia
Week". That week will take place from December 3 to 8, 2007 and the
concept is pretty simple: you, as a community member, will have the
chance to spread the word about how to edit Wikipedia or learn how to
work on one of the other sister projects. We want it to be a worldwide
event, and why not, transforming it into an annual event.
Everyone can be involved in helping to stage a bunch of "Edit
Wikipedia Week" events during that week. The idea is to stage outreach
events around the world designed to encourage people to participate in
The events can be practically anything – big or small. It doesn't
matter how simple they seem to be, everything counts. You can talk
about the project at a local school; get yourself booked for a
television appearance; have a chat for a local photography club about
the advantages of contributing to Commons; organize a marathon weekend
for translations; discuss the different uses of the WikiPolicies to a
group of regular users you know in your place, recruit new people to
help you launch a WikiProject, or even just teach your mom how to
press a button, edit an article and save. Simple steps that will help
the world to know just what are we doing here, and why are we doing
it. Anything you think will improve the projects is valid: the idea is
to reach out to people who don't edit, or have no idea what Wikipedia
is, and encourage them to contribute on the project.
Edit Wikipedia Week is intended to be an experiment. The premise is
that anyone can organize an event for Edit Wikipedia Week, and it can
take whatever form makes sense to them. You don't need a permission,
it's a community event: feel free to just participate.
There are no fixed rules, except the following:
* Spread the word as you see it fit in your language community,
local chapter, project, family etc.
* Make sure to record the ideas that are developed in your
community, local chapter, project, family etc, in order to share your
experiences with all of us.
* Start your own Edit Wikipedia week metapage in your own
language, if you consider it useful to promote and monitor the ideas.
Spread knowledge. Spread the Wiki love. :)
Please translate this mail as much as you can, and spread it all
around you. Your local mailing lists, your local village pump, your
* See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Edit_Wikipedia_Week for more informations
On Nov 20, 2007 3:54 PM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20/11/2007, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > (This is also why it gets annoying when people start bickering about
> > things like Citizendium. We don't see eye to eye, we generally each
> > think the other's made a fairly big practical error, but fundamentally
> > we're *on the same side*, we're working towards the same goals...)
> Assuming they actually do adopt a free content license, which they're
> on the verge of not doing ...
David, do you actually know something about that situation, or are you just
frustrated by their lack of action?
Every now and again I will pass by and try to see if they have adopted a
free license (or otherwise made much progress), but to date they seem to be
largely spinning their wheels on issues like licensing. I can't help but
wonder what is going on behind the scenes.
On 21/11/2007, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> - Commons currently doesn't accept any RAW formats for uncompressed
> original digital photography files.
> - DNG is a RAW format developed by Adobe, intended to be an open
> format. http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/index.html
> - ImageMagick supports DNG. http://www.imagemagick.org/script/formats.php
> - Format "patent license":
> http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/license.html Is this acceptable?
cc'd to foundation-l for inspection by the querulous.
We allow PDFs, don't we? Are they under any similar terms?
> If the terms of the DNG format are acceptable, is there any reason we
> shouldn't request MW support for this format to be enabled and begin
> encouraging photographers to start using it?
> (I presume thumbnails would be generated as JPGs)
Assuming the licence isn't problematic, that'd be fantastic IMO. Need
a bigger upload limit.