If someone will tell me how to get messages to thread if you're in
digest mode - I've been making honest efforts to try and get threading
- I will happily use whatever technique is suggested. Until then, I
apologise for killing threads.
-Adam.
I noticed Jimbo has also sysadmin flag recently. The change was about 2
months ago on enwikiversity.[1] The reason was "need to view deleted
revisions", but sysadmin group does hold no rights about deleted revisions.
Instead they have globalgroup[permissions/membership].
Originally, Jimbo doesn't need to have sysadmin flag and doesn't have root
or shell access. So sysadmin bit should be removed.
Best regards.
--
김우진
Woojin Kim
Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia-inc.com> wrote:
> My purpose here is for us to stop chattering about this aspect of things
> - which I don't care about. People seem to want to fight me on it,
> perhaps expecting me to dig in my heels. Everyone loves a good fight,
> even me, but this is not a fight that we need to have.
While I support your actions in principle, the issues with your
"status" come from the fact that you've been a shoot first kind of guy
for a while now, and that mode of action belies your founder
mentality, which was (IIRC) to roll up your sleeves and try at least
to sorting things out personally and via open discussion.
It's clear that there is a undercurrent of support for keeping Commons
a bit naked. How nakedness jives with other cultures depends on a few
things, and how censoring ourselves might have a
counterintuitive/positive impact of opening us up to more
conservative/prudish/puritannical cultures of course needs discussing.
-Stevertigo
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Kim Bruning <kim(a)bruning.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> I was just about to post about the need to assure the commons community
> that there would be no repeat performance.
That need is still there, Kim.
Just in case anyone hasn't noticed, Jimbo kept his power to give
himself whatever powers he wants.
So, instead of giving up "virtually all" of his founder powers, he
actually still has total access to all of them.
This looks, to my eyes, to be one of those "subtle miscommunications"
where Jimbo implies one thing is true, we all buy it, and then it
turns out we all just misunderstood him.
----
For example, that new policy the board was about to announce any
second-- only to see that the "new policy" is that the board is not
starting any new policies.
Or, the time Jimbo somehow got us all to think that this was a legal
issue, before the foundation lawyers set us straight.
Or the time Jimbo claimed to have lost "virtually all of his powers"
except 'view delete', and it turned out he actually still had access
to all of his powers. Oh wait-- already mentioned that one.
This may seem overly melodramatic but I want to quote from Gore Vidal:
"Tiberius, when he became Emperor, the Senate sent him a message saying that whatever he wanted enacted would become law. And he sent it back to them and he said, 'Now don't be stupid. Suppose the Emperor has gone mad. Suppose he's ill. Suppose he's been replaced secretly. You can't give such powers.' And they sent it back to him, and he sent back a message, 'How eager you are to be slaves.'"
Jimbo has allegedly removed some of his rights on Commons but he still has his founder flags and can restore all his rights if and when he pleases. As long as he still has those rights, he's still a risk to the project. He's shown over the last few days that he's abused his powers. Very few people still trust him (people have questioned whether I'm right about this but I think various polls speak for themselves) and shouldn't have any special priviliges. These are priviliges that other users ''earn'' because they are trusted. Wales isn't trusted by the community and therefore shouldn't have any special powers. And this is not just a matter about deleting pictures on a whim, but about the integrity of the entire Wikimedia project. How can it be trusted when one man has absolute power to override consensus and policy? It's bad enough that Wales is a member of the foundation board, but as long as he's still here (the best thing would be if he left and never
came back) he should have no special powers to wreak havoc on the projects. Please remove his founder flag, like well over 200 people have petitioned.
This wonderful project that Mr. Wales started has grown to a collaborative project with thousands of users who volunteer their time, talent and energy to make it what is's become. It must not be ruled by the whims of one man. Again, I may sound melodramatic but I gues just like Wikipedia too much to see it potentially destroyed by an emperor gone mad.
User:Entheta
Hi guys,
As everyone can see, the list is a-flurry with discussion about
Jimmy's recent actions on Commons. (And whatever other topics people
want to spin the situation into.)
I'm not commenting on the topic itself, but I would like to urge
everyone to direct their comments to the appropriate discussions on
(meta|commons|enwiki). There are a lot of posts in a lot of threads,
and if this debate is going to be useful, it should take place on a
medium better organized than a mailing list.
I thank everyone for being remarkably civil to date, and for keeping
the signal:noise ratio fairly high despite the large volume of
messages. With this in mind, I'm hopeful that you can direct your
energies in the most productive way possible.
Thanks,
Austin Hair
List administration
I think it's time to back away from this issue. Jimbo may,
technically, be able to restore his powers, however, if he decided to
use them in order to make another controversial action, they wouldn't
last five minutes.
Let the man save a little face, by doing this voluntarily instead of
having it taken away by force. If nothing else, it avoids a bit of bad
publicity for the project.
Marc Riddell writes:
> Mike, please stop and listen. The Community, which is the heart and soul of
> this very Project, is ventilating, and making some extremely important
> points. Please stop trying to control, and re-direct, this dialogue in a
> more Foundation-comfortable direction. Listen and Learn.
>
Marc, I've been listening all along. Neither expression of disagreement nor
an effort to focus on constructive solutions entails the conclusion that
someone isn't listening.
Now, did you hear and learn from what I just said?
Best regards,
--Mike
By now, just two Board members explicitly stated what do they think
about Jimmy's action: Jan-Bart de Vreede and Ting Chen (who explained
his position in details).
According to not precise Board's statement I may guess who supports
Jimmy's action and who doesn't. However, I don't want to guess. As a
member of community who directly or through the chapters elects five
Board members and other four through the delegation given to the
previous five members, I want to know positions of other Board
members.
Position of two of them (Michael Snow and Arne Klempert) will directly
affect my position toward their reelection as chapters members and
thus the position of one chapter (the has process already begun).
Position of directly elected Board members (Kat Walsh, Ting Chen and
Samuel Klein) will affect how I will vote next year. Position of
professional Board members (Jan-Bart de Vreede, Stu West, Matt Halprin
and Bishakha Datta) will affect what would I require from my
representatives inside of the Board.
The MMORPG Ryzom goes Free Software [1]. Although it was just a matter
of time, this event is very important for shaping our future. MMORPG
is virtual reality and VR worlds will be [a significant part of] our
future.
Wikimedia should join FSF and Winch Gate Properties in shaping the future.
[1] - http://dev.ryzom.com/news/13