On Sunday, December 20, 2015, Brian Wolff bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
If you want to get Dispenser his hard disk space, you should take it up with the labs people, or at the very least some thread where it would be on-topic.
The labs people are so understaffed that two extremely important anti-spam bots recently had to be taken offline for much longer than in recent years.
I propose Foundation management allocate the necessary resources and recommend the hiring of sufficient personnel and purchasing of sufficient, non NSA-compatible (i.e., discount and homebrew style) equipment to properly support both existing infrastructural bots and similar projects such as Dispenser's reflinks cache.
I would also like to propose that the Foundation oppose the TPP provisions deleterious to our interests, and that this position be endorsed on the Public Policy list.
Then by definition it wouldn't be a third-party spam framework if WMF was running it.
I am not proposing that the WMF take the bots over, just meet their necessary service level requirements.
Sincerely, Jim
If anyone is opposed to any of these things, please say so:
(1) adding database administration staff;
(2) not buying premium name-brand equipment or any equipment with e.g. BIOS-to-JTAG back doors;
(3) opposing the TPP portions deleterious to movement interests;
(4) opposing the recently omnibus-enacted CISA and its Chinese counterpart;
(5) caching cited references at Foundation expense under volunteer review;
(6) re-evaluating the FTE cost of supporting the different varieties of JavaScript on the different varieties of browsers on the different varieties of platforms including O(N^2) structures like cross-browser copy/paste. I think Visual Editor is sucking up the oxygen in Foundation engineering at the moment, leaving the lengthy community backlog mostly in the lurch; and
(7) funding the Foundation Engineering Community backlog, and lengthening it from 10 items to 20.
I am also fascinated by the discussion about whether a Florida law selection trumps an advertised election, but more interested in why Kevin wrote that I don't understand the Foundation mission. I proposed years ago that all Board meetings' open sessions should be live-streamed and recorded. The Foundation does that for monthly meetings, why not the Board too?
Regards, Jim
On Tuesday, December 22, 2015, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, December 20, 2015, Brian Wolff <bawolff@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','bawolff@gmail.com');> wrote:
If you want to get Dispenser his hard disk space, you should take it up with the labs people, or at the very least some thread where it would be on-topic.
The labs people are so understaffed that two extremely important anti-spam bots recently had to be taken offline for much longer than in recent years.
I propose Foundation management allocate the necessary resources and recommend the hiring of sufficient personnel and purchasing of sufficient, non NSA-compatible (i.e., discount and homebrew style) equipment to properly support both existing infrastructural bots and similar projects such as Dispenser's reflinks cache.
I would also like to propose that the Foundation oppose the TPP provisions deleterious to our interests, and that this position be endorsed on the Public Policy list.
Then by definition it wouldn't be a third-party spam framework if WMF was running it.
I am not proposing that the WMF take the bots over, just meet their necessary service level requirements.
Sincerely, Jim
No idea since I have no idea what most of those things are. You could try making it more clear, for starts by using the full expressions rather than the abbreviations. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of James Salsman Sent: Sunday, 03 January 2016 11:12 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Database administration support (was Re: IRC office hours: Shared hosting)
If anyone is opposed to any of these things, please say so:
(1) adding database administration staff;
(2) not buying premium name-brand equipment or any equipment with e.g. BIOS-to-JTAG back doors;
(3) opposing the TPP portions deleterious to movement interests;
(4) opposing the recently omnibus-enacted CISA and its Chinese counterpart;
(5) caching cited references at Foundation expense under volunteer review;
(6) re-evaluating the FTE cost of supporting the different varieties of JavaScript on the different varieties of browsers on the different varieties of platforms including O(N^2) structures like cross-browser copy/paste. I think Visual Editor is sucking up the oxygen in Foundation engineering at the moment, leaving the lengthy community backlog mostly in the lurch; and
(7) funding the Foundation Engineering Community backlog, and lengthening it from 10 items to 20.
I am also fascinated by the discussion about whether a Florida law selection trumps an advertised election, but more interested in why Kevin wrote that I don't understand the Foundation mission. I proposed years ago that all Board meetings' open sessions should be live-streamed and recorded. The Foundation does that for monthly meetings, why not the Board too?
Regards, Jim
On Tuesday, December 22, 2015, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, December 20, 2015, Brian Wolff <bawolff@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','bawolff@gmail.com');> wrote:
If you want to get Dispenser his hard disk space, you should take it up with the labs people, or at the very least some thread where it would be on-topic.
The labs people are so understaffed that two extremely important anti-spam bots recently had to be taken offline for much longer than in recent years.
I propose Foundation management allocate the necessary resources and recommend the hiring of sufficient personnel and purchasing of sufficient, non NSA-compatible (i.e., discount and homebrew style) equipment to properly support both existing infrastructural bots and similar projects such as Dispenser's reflinks cache.
I would also like to propose that the Foundation oppose the TPP provisions deleterious to our interests, and that this position be endorsed on the Public Policy list.
Then by definition it wouldn't be a third-party spam framework if WMF was running it.
I am not proposing that the WMF take the bots over, just meet their necessary service level requirements.
Sincerely, Jim
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11319 - Release Date: 01/04/16
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org