위키백과 <회원 탈퇴>를 원합니다.
성명 : 마상호
비밀번호 : abcd1234
또한, foundation-l 메일링 리스트 가입은 원하지 않습니다.
회원 가입은 잘못된 것입니다.
아무튼 <위키백과>나 <위키미디어>든 간에 모든 위키에서 나는 회원 탈퇴를 원합니다.
확인 메일을 E-mail로 보내 주시면 고맙겠습니다. <끝>
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To: george17(a)naver.com
Cc:
Sent: 08-01-20(일) 06:56:52
Subject: confirm ae9d0457125c9d7fb337128f0691f017ea5c5598
foundation-l 메이링 리스트 가입 확인 공지
저희는 ::ffff:125.146.113.247 부터 에서 당신의 E메일 주소(
george17(a)naver.com )의
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org 메일링 리스트 가입 요청을
받았습니다. 요청에 대한 확인
을 위해서 이 메일을 foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org 로
보내주시기 바랍니다. 주의해야 할 사항은 아래와 같습니다.
- 편지의 제목을 그대로 유지하십시오. ( "Re:" 가 붙은 것은 허락합니다.
),
- 혹은 아래의 줄만 포함하여 보내주어도 되며, 모두 보내주어도 됩니다.
confirm ae9d0457125c9d7fb337128f0691f017ea5c5598
(간단히 이 메세지에 대해 'Reply' 를 함으로써 대부분의 메일 환경에서는
손쉽게 가입하실 수 있습니다.)
혹은 편리하게 웹 사이트를 방문하셔도 무방합니다.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/confirm/foundation-l/ae9d0457125c9d7fb33…
만약 여러분이 이 메일링 리스트에 가입하길 원하지 않는다면, 간단히 이
메일을 무시하시기 바랍니다. 질문 사항은
foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org 로 보내주시기 바랍니다.
On Jan 20, 2008 12:13 AM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19/01/2008, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The thing that jumps out at me is the unqualified use of "must". This
> > policy would make it impossible to use content for which there are no
> > free formats (not that I can think of any examples of such content at
> > the moment). Is that intentional? A "where possible" could be added to
> > get around it if it's not intentional. (I'm undecided on whether it
> > would be good to completely ban such material or not.)
>
>
> Are there formats that *cannot* be transcoded into something free?
>
> (e.g. the Library of Congress has some fantastic US public domain
> scans ... as TIFFs; but these can be made into PNGs losslessly. MPEG2
> is unacceptable, transcode to Theora isn't *too* lossy, MS Word can be
> transformed into ODF [even though Wikimedia only allows OpenOffice 1.x
> and not ODF as yet], etc.)
>
Ahem, I changed the topic, the old one was hurting my eyes ;-)
Michael
I believe, not wholly irrationally, that much of the discussion about
how or whether to engage third parties in the free-software, free-
culture movements is essentially religious.
For some people, the only approach that feels right is a
Fundamentalist approach -- a potential convert must surrender
everything, and must prove having surrendered everything, before we
will even begin to work with the potential convert and teach what we
believe is the right path.
For others -- think of them as Proselytizers -- the potential convert
is engaged with, persuaded, argued with, and a little progress is
given a little reward, while a lot of progress is given a lot of reward.
Me, I tend to side with the Proselytizers, although of course I
respect the doctrinal purity of the Fundamentalists.
At the same time, I'm wary, because Fundamentalists tend to hate
heretics more than they hate infidels. When they get angry, it's not
just the infidels they're ready to string up.
Movements expand, I think, when they welcome potential converts at
least as much as they test them. I suspect that anyone here who has a
criticism of Kaltura would find that, if he or she directed their
criticisms directly to Shay David at Kaltura rather than the
Foundation for daring to think that Kaltura might be converted, he or
she would find that Shay is actually quite interested in addressing
(and fixing) whatever problems you address.
--Mike
위키백과 <회원 탈퇴>를 원합니다.
성명 : 마상호
비밀번호 : abcd1234
또한, foundation-l 메일링 리스트 가입은 원하지 않습니다.
회원 가입은 잘못된 것입니다.
아무튼 <위키백과>나 <위키미디어>든 간에 모든 위키에서 나는 회원 탈퇴를 원합니다.
확인 메일을 E-mail로 보내 주시면 고맙겠습니다. <끝>
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To: george17(a)naver.com
Cc:
Sent: 08-01-20(일) 06:56:52
Subject: confirm ae9d0457125c9d7fb337128f0691f017ea5c5598
foundation-l 메이링 리스트 가입 확인 공지
저희는 ::ffff:125.146.113.247 부터 에서 당신의 E메일 주소(
george17(a)naver.com )의
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org 메일링 리스트 가입 요청을
받았습니다. 요청에 대한 확인
을 위해서 이 메일을 foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org 로
보내주시기 바랍니다. 주의해야 할 사항은 아래와 같습니다.
- 편지의 제목을 그대로 유지하십시오. ( "Re:" 가 붙은 것은 허락합니다.
),
- 혹은 아래의 줄만 포함하여 보내주어도 되며, 모두 보내주어도 됩니다.
confirm ae9d0457125c9d7fb337128f0691f017ea5c5598
(간단히 이 메세지에 대해 'Reply' 를 함으로써 대부분의 메일 환경에서는
손쉽게 가입하실 수 있습니다.)
혹은 편리하게 웹 사이트를 방문하셔도 무방합니다.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/confirm/foundation-l/ae9d0457125c9d7fb33…
만약 여러분이 이 메일링 리스트에 가입하길 원하지 않는다면, 간단히 이
메일을 무시하시기 바랍니다. 질문 사항은
foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org 로 보내주시기 바랍니다.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kurt Leesmeister <danrike(a)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 18, 2008 5:12 PM
Subject: Tokipona-Wikipedia
To: foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Dear Wikipedia,
I would like to ask you whether it will be possible to reopen the
tokipona-Wikipedia. It had been closed for some time and obviously it
was founded by fare to early as he tokipona-language is a new one and
the number of tokipona-speakers had been much to low at that time. In
the meantime the number of tokipona-speaking people increased and the
limited response shouldn't be a problem anymore. As the
tokipona-wikipedia exists already it should only be a restart of an
existing program. This will tokipona give a chance to be used in a
well known forum once again. If the response will not be as expected
the current status can be reached and will be final.
I will be plesed hearing from you.
Best regards
Kurt Leesmeister (registred as BBKurt in the German or English Wikipedia)
On Jan 18, 2008 8:25 PM, Mike Godwin <mgodwin(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> I believe, not wholly irrationally, that much of the discussion about
> how or whether to engage third parties in the free-software, free-
> culture movements is essentially religious.
I hear your belief but I do not share it.
Here you provide exactly the sort of counter productive dismissal of
contrasting views that so frequently escalates disagreements in to
incivil arguments.
In the future I would prefer it if you present your disagreement
without copping out by calling the other side a bunch of fundies.
It's effectively an ad-homnie, and it doesn't further the discourse.
> For some people, the only approach that feels right is a
> Fundamentalist approach -- a potential convert must surrender
> everything, and must prove having surrendered everything, before we
> will even begin to work with the potential convert and teach what we
> believe is the right path.
There are clear and articulable reasons why *successful* free formats
are critical to the success of Foundation's mission, and how the
Foundation's exclusive use of these formats is important in their
success.
If I failed to make that argument clear enough recent messages its
only because we've heard them before, and I'm trying to keep my output
to semi-tsunami level. If you have doubt or confusion on this matter
please express it and I'd be glad to explain it in detail.
There are clear and articulable reasons why adopting proprietary
formats, despite some short term benefit, will delay or disrupt
further adoption of the free formats which are important to the
mission.
Because you have taken the approach of casing my position as one of
irrationality and not given me the courtesy of an actual counter
argument I am unable to determine exactly where your views and mine
differ.
No religion is required. Only a willingness to value long term goals
over short term convenience.
Certainly there are places where proprietary things still make sense
in the origination, the CPU designs are still proprietary.. Server
firmware.. ;) The lines shift over time and are interesting to
discuss.. but given Wikimedia's mission there is one clear answer for
the question of where proprietary things should be used: "As
infrequently as possible, and no more infrequently".
But content we push out onto users? Whos use of which will encourage
others to use it? Where reasonable, if imperfect, alternatives exist?
Alternatives which if used exclusively are not as good as the
proprietary, but which can be if someone is willing to suck up the
soft costs, break the tie-ins, overcome the [[network effect]]s and
drive the adoption?
[snip]
> At the same time, I'm wary, because Fundamentalists tend to hate
> heretics more than they hate infidels. When they get angry, it's not
> just the infidels they're ready to string up.
Here is a point where you've left me enough information to post an
material disagreement.
In my eyes there is nothing wrong with the existence of proprietary
software, or non-free content. Let each do as he will. They are not
infidels, they are people with families and children to feed. They are
people want to do some much good that people will shower them with
money. They are working within the law, within the set of compromises
that our society has chosen to make. If we think the compromises are
not ideal we should negotiate a new social contract by revising the
laws, but until then while these people try to do good, and try to
follow the law, we should not begrudge them, beyond letting them know
that there are other paths.
It's not our job to convert people. Perhaps convincing a company or
two to change their ways might be helpful, but a nearly unheard of
startup? If it were without compromises ... but I don't think this is,
certainly this indirect promotion of flash is seen as harmful to those
who have built some of the free tools we are already using.
At the same time, the world has a dire need for free tools, free
knowledge, increased sharing, and freedom from obligations to pay
others. When we pay the proprietary content/software authors we
should be doing so only of our own free will.
For that to be possible there must be at a minimum, alternative set of
software, and alternative set of content, a free baseline. Wikimedia
is building part of that.
[snip; out of order]
> Fundamentalist approach -- a potential convert must surrender
> everything, and must prove having surrendered everything, before we
> will even begin to work with the potential convert and teach what we
> believe is the right path
I don't want Kaltura to abandon anything. I want them to do what they
want. I want them to succeed. Though I want all that to happen with a
clear, frank, and honest understanding of what is happening.. I don't
want things being claimed to be free which are not.
I also want us to succeed. And for us to succeed it must be perfectly
viable to use only free formats, not just in parallel where those
without the cash or clout to use proprietary formats can be our
equals. When you suggest an interest in using a non-free format, your
are inherently telling me there is some cost or negative to the free
format that needs to be corrected.
I don't expect Kaltura to see an exclusive use of free formats as a
net-win for them. The licensing structures for proprietary codecs
are carefully adjusted to make sure that they present less costs of
all commercially interesting forms (usability, adoption, patents; mp3
licensing went to something like ~1/10th what it was pre-Vorbis after
Vorbis was released) than the free alternatives.
I do expect Wikimedia to have a different perspective here because
freedom is a absolute aspect of the mission, and as a non-profit I
would expect a pattern of planning which is much more long term
oriented than a VC driven for-profit startup.
Wikimedia can afford to absorb the "cost" of driving adoption of the
free formats. And once they are adopted, the cost is gone forever...
No one is arguing that we need to use proprietary replacements for
HTML or JPG.
This doesn't mean Kaltura is bad, only that I expect them to be
different. If I've miscalculated and they can solve the issues.. If
they can offer a solution which completely eschews proprietary
formats, if they can find a business model that allowed them to be
profitable while releasing the back-end and letting us host our own
material...
Then by all means a partnership is in order! But at this point there
is no road expressed to achieving that, and it appears that we've got
foundation staff expressing that it isn't the case... that we can use
proprietary formats. I don't agree with it, the community doesn't
agree with it, I'd put money on the board not agreeing with it.
> Movements expand, I think, when they welcome potential converts at
> least as much as they test them. I suspect that anyone here who has a
> criticism of Kaltura would find that, if he or she directed their
> criticisms directly to Shay David at Kaltura rather than the
> Foundation for daring to think that Kaltura might be converted, he or
> she would find that Shay is actually quite interested in addressing
> (and fixing) whatever problems you address.
Most of the criticism here has not been of Kaltura directly. Though I
could provide some, I thought it would only be a distraction since
there are so many 'killer' issues that are not 'personal' affronts to
Kaltura. A lot of what I would say there are more subjective and less
objective.
There is the simple fact that Kaltura is flash based, which the
Foundation should have well known to establish as a deal breaker form
day one, since that has been the outcome of all previous discussions
on the matter. Though that isn't really much of a criticism of Kaltura
itself, though it's a solid reason why it should not be used on
Wikimedia sites.
There is a lot of criticism to make of the press release. There are
many claims of openness which are marginal. The Kaltura 'extension'
they've placed in SVN is a slight fancy <embed> tag adder. It
requires the Kaltura site to operate, which is not open. Flash
itself is not open by any standards that we would reasonably apply.
There is also a lot of criticism to make about the foundation's
handling of this: I found out about this because Kaltura was pushing
their press release all around weeks ago, and free software developers
came to me to chew me out for not warning them that Wikimedia was
switching to flash, and in their view undermining their efforts. Gee.
Thanks!
And on with the other points I made in prior mails which will never be
answered ... Kaltura is mostly slideshow software, we have slideshow
pre-existing software made by our own contributors which requires no
proprietary technology at all, where is the foundation support and for
that? etc.
I ask these questions, and I know others have asked them before me.
Can we not simply communicate without the constant accusations bad
faith, fundamentalism, failure to assume good faith, accusations of
hate for commercialism, NIH syndrome, or all the other ways we use to
politely insult each other?
There are important issues with substantial practical impact over the
long term. They deserve our attention and consideration.
Andrew Gray writes:
> It certainly isn't an announcement that Evil Baby-Eating Adobe Flash
> will be put on Wikipedia tomorrow, and an awful lot of this seems to
> be a violent storm in a teacup incited by, at best, a rather
> impressive leap of logic.
That's perhaps a little harsher than I'd put it, but not by much.
> Me, I find it hard to care either way. I don't see it being up and
> running and clean and robust any time soon;
I agree.
> I don't see an
> implementation for us in the near or medium term;
I think that's highly probable.
> I am still not sold
> at all that we even *need* editable collaborative video as part of the
> toolbox for our projects.
I tend to favor video editing for the same reason I favor giving my
daughter, who's a fine reader and a decent coder, a video cam. There
are things she can do with a cam that she can't do with prose.
> But why the screaming? Baffling.
Obviously, it's because either (a) Wikimedia Foundation has been taken
over by the Devil, or (b) having cut ties with True Believers, the
Foundation has Lost Its Way.
What we definitely know is that (c) (the Foundation is engaging in an
experimental collaboration that may go nowhere, but seemed worth
trying) is totally impossible, because (c) would require us to Assume
Good Faith.
--Mike
Gregory writes:
> When the foundation demonstrates good performance at bringing needed
> love and attention to open projects, and initiatives by its own
> communities, then giving attention on those who have come from the
> proprietary world will be no cause for bad feelings.
I wholly agree with this sentiment.
I think nothing here is a zero-sum game. Telling people that Kaltura
would welcome some attention doesn't, in my view, drain love and
attention from open projects or from initiatives in its own
communities, any more than the prodigal son made the father love his
other sons any less.
I think what does drain love and attention is needless negativity on
mailing lists, among other things.
So, if I saw the Kaltura announcement and thought it was giving too
much attention to a privately funded experiment, I might say to the
rest of the community and to the Foundation, "what is it that we can
do right now to make sure that open projects and our own initiatives
get the attention they now need?" And then, presumably, people in the
community could reasonably decide to give time to Kalture, to give
time to other projects, or to continue to give time to baiting people
on mailing lists, depending on whatever pleases them most. Everything
can be understood as an opportunity cost, if you want to analyze the
world that way. But I think that's a pessimistic view. I wouldn't be
surprised if all these projects ultimately fed into each other,
inspired one another, and even lead to convergence -- just as
Wikipedia itself and other projects have.
We should be ready for the best to happen.
--Mike
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:21:33 EST
> From: daniwo59(a)aol.com
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Foundation's partnership
> with Kaltuna and l...
> To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <d05.262ea003.34c2aa9d(a)aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
> In a message dated 1/18/2008 8:06:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> shimgray(a)gmail.com writes:
>
> On 18/01/2008, Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We already delete a massive number of fair use images daily
>> simply being
>> a screenshot of XYZ singer or ABC video game. Are we to think this
>> won't
>> happen with video? Are the administrators of the various projects
>> ready to
>> deal with such an increased number of copyrighted pages that will
>> require
>> deletion? The only way to ensure that this isn't a problem would
>> to be to
>> extend our fair use provisions in the various projects, allowing
> copyrighted
>> media to be added more freely. We already see people taking the
>> easy way
>> out and uploading copyrighted images of famous people rather than
> attempting
>> to acquire them freely.
>
> It strikes me that this is a very fatalistic view.
>
>
>
>
> Actually, it is not quite as fatalistic as it would seem. I raised
> this
> issue on Techcruch regarding the sample Naruto video. I could easily
> have used
> the Xbox 360, the polar bears from National Geographic, or the long-
> awaited and
> much anticipated Spice Girl reunion tour (they aged well, didn't
> they?). The
> response is here:
> _http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/17/kaltura-partners-to-add-crowdsourced-…
> (http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/17/kaltura-partners-to-add-crowdsourced-v…
> )
>
> Michelle
> _January 18th, 2008 at 10:54 am_
> (http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/17/kaltura-partners-to-add-crowdsourced-v…
> )
> Danny,
>
>
>
>
>
> **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
> http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 46, Issue 130
> *********************************************
Danny writes:
> Gerard,
>
> You should probably reread the parable. It's in Luke 15.
I'm sure Gerard is quite familiar with the parable. But for anyone
who wants a refresher, this version is fine:
<http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2015:11-32;&version=31;
>
Me, I have always loved it, and I think the welcoming of the Prodigal
Son is a profoundly sweet and humane act.
So I'm a little weirded out at the notion that we should turn away the
prodigal sons who are trying to find a way to come into the free
culture community.
--Mike