At most four Korean Wikipedians are charged with defamation of Song
Young-gil, the Mayor of Incheon Metropolitan City.
According to the contributors, the prosecution is upon the Song's own
request, and is going to be over publicizing a fabricated sex scandal
in the article about him and (semi-)protecting it. The text in
question is merely a sum-up of various reports about the speculations
eventually found to be a hoax. Non-logged-in user(s) from various IP
addresses have tried to remove the whole controversy section,
including not only the scandal but other arguments about him,
replacing it with personal contrary comments and legal threats. The
edits are consequently reverted by some users and rollbacked by one
administrator. The admin, [[ko:User:Kys951]], is also accused of
being an abettor just because he is an admin.
In the South Korean legal system, criminal defamation is partially a
"crime upon complaint," (친고죄/親告罪) which becomes irrelevant to be a
crime when the complainant chose to withdraw the case. (Note that I'm
not a specialist of law, especially in English terminology.) The
police of Southeastern Incheon thought the case itself is too
insignificant to be a criminal case and tried to persuade him to
withdraw it, only to be declined.
Song has reportedly demanded the admin to remove the paragraph in
exchange for fixing the charge, which is definitely not the way how
Wikipedia works.
Another concern about this incident is that this could happen to every
bit of contribution to the project. South Korean government had been
censoring any scribble on the web they think beneficial to North
Korea,[2] and for later on, anything they think "fraudulent" whenever
the state is in "threat," according to an exclusive report.[3]
[1] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ko/w/index.php?title=%EC%86%A1%EC%98…
[2] http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/shame_on_democratic_south_korea_for_ce…
[3] http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/economy/it/455022.html
Hi everyone,
A quick announcement: we are temporarily turning off the fundraising banners for most logged in users. This will continue most likely through the end of the year. We did some quick checking and realized that most people who are logged in and intend to give have already given. The banners will stay off for a while, and we'll most likely not turn them on until after the first of the year for a final wrap-up push.
For those of you in chapter areas, as always, the chapters control messaging in their territories - this should only impact users who are in the areas where the fundraiser messaging is controlled by the Foundation.
Enjoy the respite :)
Philippe
_______________________
Philippe Beaudette
Head of Reader Relations
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
pbeaudette(a)wikimedia.org
Imagine a world in which every human being can freely share
in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
http://donate.wikimedia.org
Please send me only necessary massege. Thanke, by- yeske group
On 12/19/10, foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of foundation-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Dan Rosenthal)
> 2. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Dan Rosenthal)
> 3. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Dan Rosenthal)
> 4. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Huib Laurens)
> 5. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Pedro Sanchez)
> 6. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Dan Rosenthal)
> 7. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Casey Brown)
> 8. Re: How to contact the foundation's legal department?
> (Dan Rosenthal)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 11:50:52 -0500
> From: Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <8C7DD397-F412-43A2-9103-7F8575F57E53(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Nemo,
>
> It is in fact correct. I can confirm this, because I am the primary person
> who screens those questions that come in to legal-en.
>
> Sue or Steven can correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I'm 99% sure that
> they misspoke -- legal@wikimedia has been a broken and useless address for
> long before I started working for the WMF.
>
> -Dan Rosenthal
> On Dec 18, 2010, at 5:13 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>
>> Dan Rosenthal, 17/12/2010 01:01:
>>> If you have a legal question, best to send it to legal-en(a)wikimedia.org.
>>> It will be routed much faster and is much preferable.
>>
>> Please stop it: this is incorrect and perhaps you should at least double
>> check if someone says it's incorrect, especially after a WMF staffer
>> like Jon has confirmed so.
>> ?00:18 <+sgardner> If anyone (editors, chapters people, etc.) have legal
>> questions or problems, Steven's correct -- legal_AT_wikimedia.org is
>> where to send them?
>> (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2010-10-27
>> ).
>> I hope this is enough.
>>
>> Nemo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 11:59:37 -0500
> From: Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <E44661F2-541C-4C61-B617-A2F3E4548E2A(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Jon,
>
> That must be a new change about legal(a)wikimedia.org, as the email didn't
> work as of a few weeks ago. I wasn't aware of that.
>
> However, from a policy perspective, we've always screened the email first at
> legal-en(a)wikimedia.org before sending it on to the GC. So in fact, that
> would still be the better place for it to go.
>
> -Dan
>
> On Dec 16, 2010, at 2:54 PM, Jon Davis wrote:
>
>> I've been taking care of these aliases, so to be clear: *
>> legal(a)wikimedia.org is a good and valid address to use*. It is an alias
>> that goes to the correct person(s), being our interim legal council. When
>> we get a new full time council, the alias will be repointed to them. So
>> legal(a)wikimedia.org will always be a good and safe bet.
>>
>> -Jon
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 07:28, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That email is incorrect.
>>>
>>> The direct email is legal-en(a)wikimedia.org.
>>>
>>> As far as I know, simply legal(a)wikimedia.org forwards to
>>> board(a)wikimedia.org or some other email address; either way, not where it
>>> needs to go.
>>>
>>> -Dan
>>> On Dec 16, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Huib Laurens wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> As far as I know: Legal(a)wikimedia.org
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Huib
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jon Davis
>> Office IT System & Network Administrator
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> 415-839-6885
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 12:04:26 -0500
> From: Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <47A9CF88-CA59-429B-82AA-FE047117D51E(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Correction. I've just seen Jon's email about having fixed legal@.
>
> However, it is still preferable to send legal email to
> legal-en(a)wikimedia.org for a faster resolution and for ease on our end.
> Nobody has made the OTRS team (especially the legal team) aware of any
> policy changes on that end, so if something major has changed without
> telling us, someone's got some explaining to do.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Dec 18, 2010, at 5:13 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>
>> Dan Rosenthal, 17/12/2010 01:01:
>>> If you have a legal question, best to send it to legal-en(a)wikimedia.org.
>>> It will be routed much faster and is much preferable.
>>
>> Please stop it: this is incorrect and perhaps you should at least double
>> check if someone says it's incorrect, especially after a WMF staffer
>> like Jon has confirmed so.
>> ?00:18 <+sgardner> If anyone (editors, chapters people, etc.) have legal
>> questions or problems, Steven's correct -- legal_AT_wikimedia.org is
>> where to send them?
>> (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2010-10-27
>> ).
>> I hope this is enough.
>>
>> Nemo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 18:21:10 +0100
> From: Huib Laurens <sterkebak(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=2VBivnKDcZ5XYv4BMo-drcG1nVx=O0qG0dd=7(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Why are you saying the staff answer is wrong? If staff says use
> legal(a)wikimedia.org why are you changing it?
>
> Best,
>
> Huib
>
> 2010/12/18 Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com>
>
>> Correction. I've just seen Jon's email about having fixed legal@.
>>
>> However, it is still preferable to send legal email to
>> legal-en(a)wikimedia.org for a faster resolution and for ease on our end.
>> Nobody has made the OTRS team (especially the legal team) aware of any
>> policy changes on that end, so if something major has changed without
>> telling us, someone's got some explaining to do.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2010, at 5:13 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>>
>> > Dan Rosenthal, 17/12/2010 01:01:
>> >> If you have a legal question, best to send it to
>> >> legal-en(a)wikimedia.org.
>> It will be routed much faster and is much preferable.
>> >
>> > Please stop it: this is incorrect and perhaps you should at least double
>> > check if someone says it's incorrect, especially after a WMF staffer
>> > like Jon has confirmed so.
>> > ?00:18 <+sgardner> If anyone (editors, chapters people, etc.) have legal
>> > questions or problems, Steven's correct -- legal_AT_wikimedia.org is
>> > where to send them?
>> > (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2010-10-27).
>> > I hope this is enough.
>> >
>> > Nemo
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Huib "Abigor" Laurens
>
>
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 11:22:49 -0600
> From: Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=UvXh5mdpDnci9f6ZLoj+jmWAEe2o1PjH3PxR9(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Huib Laurens <sterkebak(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why are you saying the staff answer is wrong? If staff says use
>> legal(a)wikimedia.org why are you changing it?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Huib
>>
>>
>
> wasn't legal-en@ about english queries?
>
> in any case, it makes more sense to have legal@ for a *foundation*
> contact, and then have legal-en as a subqueue for english wikipedia
> (and related projects)
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 12:38:37 -0500
> From: Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <8E73F7FD-0E3C-43B3-A0C8-627D036567E9(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Pedro-
>
> Correct, it's just set up wrong on OTRS. Right now Legal@ is not even an
> OTRS email address. If it were, we could then structure it so the languages
> were subqueues. But that'd require legal@ becoming an OTRS email address.
>
> Huib - The staff (myself and Jon) are saying two different, contradictory
> things. We are trying to figure out if this is because of an undiscussed
> change of policy, or because Jon misspoke. It is of major concern, because
> if all legal emails are now going directly to the interim GC, then what is
> the point of having a legal queue for OTRS? But none of this was ever
> discussed with us, making me think that it is more likely just a mistake.
> The policy as long as I've been answering emails for the legal queue (and to
> be clear, it was still the policy when I started working full time for the
> foundation and at a meeting about a month ago it was still the policy) was
> that legal emails were to go through OTRS, where they would be routed into
> the legal queue (more accurately, the legal-en queue. We also have a very
> full legal-it subqueue and some specific trademark subqueues.) Those emails
> would then be screened by the OTRS legal volunteers, and some would be
> answered or weeded out there. The more important ones would be forwarded on
> to the General Counsel (or now, Interim General Counsel). Why would it make
> sense at all to get rid of the screening on OTRS, without discussion with
> the OTRS team, and suddenly route ALL emails directly to the Interim General
> Counsel. Does that make any logical sense? Again, this is why I think that
> there has been a mistake somewhere.
>
> We're emailing internally to figure out what the right answer is.
>
> -Dan
>
> (PS: this is my personal account, my staff account is not subscribed to
> foundation-l).
>
>
> On Dec 18, 2010, at 12:22 PM, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Huib Laurens <sterkebak(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Why are you saying the staff answer is wrong? If staff says use
>>> legal(a)wikimedia.org why are you changing it?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Huib
>>>
>>>
>>
>> wasn't legal-en@ about english queries?
>>
>> in any case, it makes more sense to have legal@ for a *foundation*
>> contact, and then have legal-en as a subqueue for english wikipedia
>> (and related projects)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 14:24:10 -0500
> From: Casey Brown <lists(a)caseybrown.org>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=tfuus49_irDAsNDY-9n1pFHEvgF07ZbcdvYQB(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:13 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
> <nemowiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Please stop it: this is incorrect and perhaps you should at least double
>> check if someone says it's incorrect, especially after a WMF staffer
>> like Jon has confirmed so.
>
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Huib Laurens <sterkebak(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why are you saying the staff answer is wrong? If staff says use
>> legal(a)wikimedia.org why are you changing it?
>
> Wow, you guys need to stop being so accusatory and rude; please stop
> assuming bad faith. No one's calling anyone a liar and they're both
> actually right, but in different ways.
>
> Dan's working with the Foundation for the fundraiser (so he's a
> "staffer" too), was an early legal intern, and has manned the legal
> queue on OTRS for years. Jon is a relatively new staffer with Office
> IT who's been helping cleanup e-mail addresses, aliases, and
> everything else related to Office IT.
>
> Stated simply, Jon was giving a *technical* answer, while Dan was
> giving a more *procedural* and policy-based answer.
>
> Here's the full story/background, as far as I know:
>
> Traditionally, we never really published a "legal" address. All
> complaints/issues were directed to the general Wikimedia contact
> address (info@wikimedia), which leads to OTRS. These complaints were
> then later sorted to their proper destination: info-en, another
> language queue, out to a staff member, to the legal queue, etc.
> Tickets needing legal team attention, like from real lawyers talking
> about litigation, went to the legal queue. Since the legal queue/team
> is quite small and most people do not actually need to talk to them,
> we never publicized the direct address to the legal queue... this is
> the legal-en@ address that Dan's talking about.
>
> More recently, a "legal@" alias has been created which goes straight
> to the current/interim General Counsel. I would assume that the
> reason this was created was because the Foundation has started using
> aliases a lot more. They probably didn't realize that we
> intentionally didn't make that address since most people didn't
> actually *need* the GC... or they did realize that, but decided it
> wouldn't be an issue anymore and decided that an alias would be a good
> idea anyway. :-)
>
> As Dan says, they'll need to figure out internally how mail should be
> redirected properly and how to make the best use of both the legal
> team and the interim GC's times. However, I wanted to make it clear
> that neither of them is really "wrong" or calling each other a liar.
> :-)
>
> --
> Casey Brown
> Cbrown1023
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 14:38:40 -0500
> From: Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to contact the foundation's legal
> department?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <79CAEDFE-C8D4-4725-83B9-92A5142F2799(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Kibble, you never cease to amaze. Much <3. That's a great summary.
>
> -Dan
> On Dec 18, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:13 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
>> <nemowiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Please stop it: this is incorrect and perhaps you should at least double
>>> check if someone says it's incorrect, especially after a WMF staffer
>>> like Jon has confirmed so.
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Huib Laurens <sterkebak(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Why are you saying the staff answer is wrong? If staff says use
>>> legal(a)wikimedia.org why are you changing it?
>>
>> Wow, you guys need to stop being so accusatory and rude; please stop
>> assuming bad faith. No one's calling anyone a liar and they're both
>> actually right, but in different ways.
>>
>> Dan's working with the Foundation for the fundraiser (so he's a
>> "staffer" too), was an early legal intern, and has manned the legal
>> queue on OTRS for years. Jon is a relatively new staffer with Office
>> IT who's been helping cleanup e-mail addresses, aliases, and
>> everything else related to Office IT.
>>
>> Stated simply, Jon was giving a *technical* answer, while Dan was
>> giving a more *procedural* and policy-based answer.
>>
>> Here's the full story/background, as far as I know:
>>
>> Traditionally, we never really published a "legal" address. All
>> complaints/issues were directed to the general Wikimedia contact
>> address (info@wikimedia), which leads to OTRS. These complaints were
>> then later sorted to their proper destination: info-en, another
>> language queue, out to a staff member, to the legal queue, etc.
>> Tickets needing legal team attention, like from real lawyers talking
>> about litigation, went to the legal queue. Since the legal queue/team
>> is quite small and most people do not actually need to talk to them,
>> we never publicized the direct address to the legal queue... this is
>> the legal-en@ address that Dan's talking about.
>>
>> More recently, a "legal@" alias has been created which goes straight
>> to the current/interim General Counsel. I would assume that the
>> reason this was created was because the Foundation has started using
>> aliases a lot more. They probably didn't realize that we
>> intentionally didn't make that address since most people didn't
>> actually *need* the GC... or they did realize that, but decided it
>> wouldn't be an issue anymore and decided that an alias would be a good
>> idea anyway. :-)
>>
>> As Dan says, they'll need to figure out internally how mail should be
>> redirected properly and how to make the best use of both the legal
>> team and the interim GC's times. However, I wanted to make it clear
>> that neither of them is really "wrong" or calling each other a liar.
>> :-)
>>
>> --
>> Casey Brown
>> Cbrown1023
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 81, Issue 54
> ********************************************
>
Hi,
How can one contact the Foundation's legal department nowadays? I can
find no contact email address, just the "WMF Legal" user account and I
would rather not leave a message on the talk page.
Thanks,
Strainu.
I was looking through some old files in our SourceForge project. I
opened a file called wiki.tar.gz, and inside were three complete
backups of the text of Wikipedia, from February, March and August 2001!
This is exciting, because there is lots of article history in here
which was assumed to be lost forever.
I've long been interested in Wikipedia's history, and I've tried in
the past to locate such backups. I asked various people who might have
had one. I had given up hope.
The history of particularly old Wikipedia articles, as seen in the
present Wikipedia database, is incomplete, due to Usemod's policy of
deleting old revisions of pages after about a month. The script which
Brion wrote to import the article histories from UseMod to MediaWiki
only fetched those revisions which hadn't been purged yet.
I didn't want to believe that those revisions had been lost forever,
and I even opened the UseMod source code and stared forlornly at the
unlink() call. What I (and Brion before) missed is that UseMod appends
a record of every change made to two files, called diff_log and rclog.
In these two files is a record of every change made to Wikipedia from
January 15 to August 17, 2001.
I've put the two log files up on the web, at:
http://noc.wikimedia.org/~tstarling/wikipedia-logs-2001-08-17.7z
The 7-zip archive is only 8.4MB -- much more manageable than today's
backups.
rclog contains IP addresses. The Usemod software made IP addresses of
logged-in users public, so the people who made these edits had no
expectation that their IP address would be kept private. That, coupled
with the passage of time, makes me think that no harm to user privacy
can come from releasing these files.
-- Tim Starling
So, thanks to everyone for talking me into donating - that was fun. I
felt good about it. But now I'm being asked for more money? I'm not
so into that, in fact, it's a bit off-putting. No doubt it's a
standard fundraising technique but frankly it doesn't seem like the
wiki way. Maybe the united way, but we're not them.
In a message dated 12/16/2010 2:14:01 AM Pacific Standard Time,
z(a)mzmcbride.com writes:
> Erik Zachte wrote:
> > On 12/16/2010 0:12, WJhonson(a)aol.com wrote:
> >> Why are these tables so out of date?
> >>
> >> http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesArticlesNewPerDay.htm
> >
> > Technical problems:
> > First the dump server needed fixing , now the wikistats server is
> > broken: power unit is no longer.
> > Replacement is on order.
>
> I don't follow. The latest stats at that link currently are from June
> 2009.
>
> MZMcBride
>
What don't you follow? That they are out of date? Or that something is
broken?
Can you be more clear.