I fully understand and have no intention of causing pointless strife. I simply do not think that the Eygptian police have proven themselves trustworthy.
----- Original Message ----
From: Jon <scream(a)datascreamer.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2008 8:47:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] (Flashback) A short (and revised) FAQ about Wikimania in Alexandria
I just wanted you to keep in mind that this list is global, and some
terms probably need rephrasing, or not phrased at all.
Warmly,
Jon
Mark Williamson wrote:
> Underdeveloped is a very judgemental term.
>
> On 20/04/2008, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.plrd(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Apologies for offending anyone, would underdeveloped be better?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Jon <scream(a)datascreamer.com>
>> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 6:51:14 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] (Flashback) A short (and revised) FAQ about Wikimania in Alexandria
>>
>>
>> Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
>> > Unfortuantely, I will have to agree with Dan. Asking people with a vested interest is never a good idea. I would recommend hitting up a travel agent/academic expert/security consultant specializing in the Middle East for information that should be incorporated. Also, I wouldn't have blind faith in the police in a third world country.
>> >
>> >
>> Especially in our global community, the term "Third world country" may
>> not be appropriate, in this context. Let's keep that in mind.
>>
>> Warm,
>> Jon
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and
>> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Fine, i was just continuing the point that this area of Afro-Asia is not the most peaceful place in the world. That being said, are any travelers to Egypt reading this list who can shed light on travel issues?
----- Original Message ----
From: Austin Hair <adhair(a)gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2008 8:29:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Contingency plans for Wikimania
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.plrd(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> What about Israel-Palestine, they are right next door ;)
I know you're only joking (hence the winky face), but that's the kind
of comment that can kick off a seemingly endless thread that's as
bitter as it is pointless. It's sad that the prospect is even an
issue, but let's not exacerbate things further.
Austin
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Austin writes:
> There are currently five people on moderation on this list, and I
> don't know if you've noticed, but it's been a struggle to maintain a
> bare minimum of civility on the list.
I've noticed.
> That you would set such a bad
> example while posting as a staff member (@wikimedia.org) certainly
> doesn't make it any easier.
You are absolutely right. Mark is right too. I apologize again for
being so cranky.
--Mike
>
Apologies for offending anyone, would underdeveloped be better?
----- Original Message ----
From: Jon <scream(a)datascreamer.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 6:51:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] (Flashback) A short (and revised) FAQ about Wikimania in Alexandria
Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
> Unfortuantely, I will have to agree with Dan. Asking people with a vested interest is never a good idea. I would recommend hitting up a travel agent/academic expert/security consultant specializing in the Middle East for information that should be incorporated. Also, I wouldn't have blind faith in the police in a third world country.
>
>
Especially in our global community, the term "Third world country" may
not be appropriate, in this context. Let's keep that in mind.
Warm,
Jon
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Gregory Maxwell writes:
> The lack of interest in making an optional request for information
> which may be useful seems seems callous to me.
WP:SOFIXIT
It seems to me that this is a function that community members could
implement themselves, almost certainly better than the Foundation
could, especially if a significant number of community members care
about it. The Foundation would certainly be happy to coordinate with
such a volunteer-driven project.
I personally believe there are more efficient and effective means of
creating such a list than to ask the Foundation to do it for you. The
Foundation is already doing other contingency planning. Surely this is
something you could do, Greg, especially if you personally believe it
is "callous" to have a "lack of interest" in doing it.
--Mike
i found a notice in the incubator test page of ancient
greek.
http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/grc
i ask: it is possible to the editors to continue
working in this test page? writing articles and
localize it? for a future request?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Danny writes:
> As such, I ask, are there contingencies for
> unanticipated changes in the coming weeks/months? ...
<...>
> While something like this recurring is unlikely, it is probably best
> to have
> contingencies for just such an event. This could be as simple as
> plans in
> case the conference must be cancelled at the very last minute, or
> contact
> numbers for family members of participants in the event of an
> emergency
I think privacy concerns would prevent the Foundation's keeping
contact information for everyone's parents and families, extra
personally identifying information and the like (where they would
subject to legal process and perhaps abuse, depending on whether we
kept them privately or publicly). I also don't think the Foundation
is the logical place to focus on being able to contact your family in
the event of an emergency. WikiParenting is not exactly our strength.
See below.
We are considering other contingency planning, of course.
> --as simple
> as making sure someone is picking up phones in the SF office while
> the event
> is underway.
Certainly we will have people at the office to answer phones during
Wikimania. I don't think we're going to shoot for 24-hour staffing of
the office, though.
There is lots of standard advice for individuals engaging in foreign
travel, including contacting your local embassy before or after you
arrive and giving them your contact information and likely location.
I don't think the Foundation is in the position to do the work of
multiple embassies in this regard.
Anyone who wants to start up WikiEmbassies, however, has my
encouragement.
---Mike
Guillaume writes:
> I thought the meaning was understandable with the rest of my email :
You seemed to be implying something by "internal" that either I don't
fully grasp or that is flatly contradictory to what actually has been
occurring.
> I understand you have consulted various outside experts. And although
> I am convinced you know you have a variety of competences besides
> being an attorney, I am not aware of "risk assessment expert" being
> one of them.
I am not characterizing myself that way. But I do know a range of
security experts, both academic and professional, and have government
contacts as well.
> In March, Sue told she had asked you to have a
> professional firm assess the security at Wikimania. I would like to
> know if that was just a calming promise nobody really intends to keep,
> or if there is actually an assessment being conducted by a
> professional firm.
It is now April. This is an ongoing process, and the security FAQ that
I reposted to this list was not meant to be understood as fulfillment
of Sue's promise, but as an interim progress report. It was aimed
both at giving the Board an update on what we had learned so far (in
time for their April board meeting) and also providing pointers for
the community who might want to answer questions for themselves. One
of the reasons I republished the FAQ this week was that there had been
so little response to its first publication (I think people were
preoccupied with the debate about ancient languages), and I wanted to
make sure we at the Foundation adequately understood whether we were
raising the right questions for whatever resources we invest in. As I
have said, it would be a very poor investment of Foundation funds to
spend perhaps tens of thousands of Euros on answering the wrong
questions, addressing the wrong issues, or in some other way failing
to resolve the controversy adequately. Instead, what I get mostly is
public sniping (although at least one person has been privately
helpful). If you believe that foundation-l has something to offer,
surely that involves constructive feedback on whether we are going
down the right path rather than trying to interrogate us as to "a
calming promise that nobody really intends to keep." (I can't believe
you said that, actually.)
So here's the process so far. We have talked to some risk-assessment
firms. They have asked what issues concern us and instructed us also
to use public resources (such as the state department website, which
lists travel advisories and alerts) as well as contact both the
Egyptian government and our local contacts. We have followed their
suggestions. In response to the question about issues, I have put
together a list of questions and concerns, based on the discussion on
this list, and submitted it to our local contacts -- *just as I was
advised to do by security experts*. This helps us refine our inquiry
and ensure that we continue to ask the right questions as the
conference date grows nearer. It also enabled me to draft an initial
FAQ, which I have since updated.
Why not simply hire a generalized risk assessment in March? In some
small part because I wasn't sure we had found the right firm yet (I
won't name the ones we talked to, but I will say that trying to frame
a risk assessment for a diverse population of largely young,
frequently pseudonymous attendees is not a normal query for a security
firm that normally provides corporate or government services for
easily identifiable individuals under contract), but primarily because
things can change quickly between March and July in terms of site
assessment.
So, the natural development of this inquiry, it seems to me, is to do
just what I have been doing -- continuing to seek information from a
variety of sources and uncovering the depth and range of concerns.
I've received a small amount of helpful feedback here, but less than I
would prefer. At some point, assuming I get useful feedback about
community concerns, it should be easier to identify the precise issues
we could use to hire the right outside security firm for site and
event risk assessment.
My impression is that it's so easy to snipe with one-liners here that
the culture of foundation-l -- including the inevitable suggestion of
dishonesty (thank you, Guillaume!) -- somehow prefers that mode of
discourse. Plus, I get the impression that some people don't think
there's really an inquiry unless there has been an Inquisition.
--Mike
I think we need a more organized way to address this problem.
Some background from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GFDL_standardization
Pursuant to the Text of the GNU Free Documentation License:
*"The Document may include Warranty Disclaimers next to the notice which
states that this License applies to the Document. These Warranty Disclaimers
are considered to be included by reference in this License ..."*
and reusers are obliged to
*"Preserve any Warranty Disclaimers" *
For some time I have been trying to address this issue on my own with my
individual effort. I have not had much success. There still are wikis that
use a forced disclaimer on their GFDL licenses. I believe the disclaimer was
carried from the translation of the English wikipedia's GFDL template that
had such a note.
Many wikis such as the English, Russian, Arabic, Vietnamese wikis have
legally abolished the disclaimer from their standard GFDL template however
some wikis such as the Japanese wikipedia is still using a disclaimer.
Continued usage of disclaimers on {{GFDL}} templates is particularly
problematic because when such images are moved to commons the disclaimer is
not carried with the image. It is a serious pain to try to find and retag
images that were carelessly moved to commons w/o the license.
There is also the matter of wikis illegally abolishing the GFDL disclaimer
by removing it from the template without preserving the warranty disclaimer
as demanded by the GFDL license. All images tagged with a disclaimer version
of the GFDL template must be retagged. To make the matter more complicated,
some such additions and removals of the disclaimer were done accidentally
like how it was done on English wikibooks.
There is a potential legal dispute which may lead to court actions. As
unlikely as that may be, addressing it would nullify the potential.
I have a bot account on many wikis and I can make the necesary fixes on the
wikis such a thing is needed. Determining which wikis had a disclaimer in
what time frame is a different story. I would request a collaborative effort
to address the problem.
- White Cat
In a message dated 4/19/2008 12:33:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mgodwin(a)wikimedia.org writes:
Are there questions, other than the one in the FAQ, that we should
have asked, or should be asking?
I have one question, and I ask it with all seriousness. As someone who lived
in the Middle East for twenty years, I can attest that the situation
everywhere there is volatile and subject to sudden, unanticipated changes. It is
simply a fact of life over there. As such, I ask, are there contingencies for
unanticipated changes in the coming weeks/months?
Some background to this question: In 1990, I was a senior coordinator for
student summer tours in Israel, in charge of the well-being of some 40,000 kids
from North America, Britain, France, and Eastern Europe. After many
successful summers, this was the year from hell. On July 30, a Canadian student named
Marnie Kimmelman was killed by a bomb on a Tel Aviv beach. Since she was on
one of our groups, parents from all over were hysterical about the security of
their kids (exacerbated by the fact that some network news channel in the
US--I think it was CBS--mistakenly showed a different group standing outside my
office and identified it as Marnie's group). Parents called nonstop,
demanding that we get their kids on the first plane home. Three days later, Iraq
invaded Kuwait and then shit really hit the fan. This was before cell phones and
email too, and as I ran the largest facility in Jerusalem, all calls for the
kids staying there (500 beds) inevitably went through my office.
While something like this recurring is unlikely, it is probably best to have
contingencies for just such an event. This could be as simple as plans in
case the conference must be cancelled at the very last minute, or contact
numbers for family members of participants in the event of an emergency--as simple
as making sure someone is picking up phones in the SF office while the event
is underway. Like I said, a serious problem is highly unlikely, but better
safe than sorry, especially in the Middle East, where things can change
overnight. And announcing such plans might well remove some of the concerns.
Danny
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)