Dear all,
I am happy to announce that the Board of Trustees has now *unanimously* approved this resolution [1] rescinding our previous direction to the Executive Director to develop a personal image hiding feature.
At our in-person board meeting of 11 July 2012, the vote on this was provisionally recorded at 9-1, with Jimmy voting against. Jimmy has since changed his vote to a yes, on reviewing an FAQ accompanying this resolution which notes that the board is willing to approve a plan broadly backed by the community.
Thus the vote on this has now been changed to 10-0.
The FAQ accompanying the board resolution on this has been published at: Talk:Personal_image_hiding_featurehttp://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Talk:Resolution:Personal_image_hiding_feature
The resolution remains at: [1] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:_Personal_Image_Hiding_Featur... Best Bishakha
PS - I will be on a 24-hour plane ride in a few hours, so please excuse any delayed responses.
Bishakha Datta, 16/07/2012 18:53:
At our in-person board meeting of 11 July 2012, the vote on this was provisionally recorded at 9-1, with Jimmy voting against. Jimmy has since changed his vote to a yes, on reviewing an FAQ accompanying this resolution which notes that the board is willing to approve a plan broadly backed by the community.
What community? Jimbo often declares that en.wiki community should rule Commons, for instance;[1] will an en.wiki community plan be considered enough to impose something on everyone?
Nemo
[1] Most recently: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=501492599 (although ArbCom is technically controlled by himself, not by en.wiki community).
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.comwrote:
Bishakha Datta, 16/07/2012 18:53:
At our in-person board meeting of 11 July 2012, the vote on this was
provisionally recorded at 9-1, with Jimmy voting against. Jimmy has since changed his vote to a yes, on reviewing an FAQ accompanying this resolution which notes that the board is willing to approve a plan broadly backed by the community.
What community? Jimbo often declares that en.wiki community should rule Commons, for instance;[1] will an en.wiki community plan be considered enough to impose something on everyone?
Nemo
[1] Most recently: <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/** index.php?title=User_talk:**Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=**501492599https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=501492599> (although ArbCom is technically controlled by himself, not by en.wiki community).
It's like you read the first 14 words, ignored everything else, and twisted it around until it doesn't even resemble what he actually said....
-Dan
Dan Rosenthal, 16/07/2012 20:01:
It's like you read the first 14 words, ignored everything else, and twisted it around until it doesn't even resemble what he actually said....
Oh really? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=481889811 What does it mean in your opinion then?
Anyway, letting this aside, will the board consider whether all slightly affected communities agree with whatever request happened to receive community support somewhere? For instance, I'm not sure there's any simple solution which can be implemented on a single wiki without affecting Commons.
Nemo
On 16 July 2012 14:44, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, letting this aside, will the board consider whether all slightly affected communities agree with whatever request happened to receive community support somewhere? For instance, I'm not sure there's any simple solution which can be implemented on a single wiki without affecting Commons.
Try reading the linked FAQ.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.comwrote:
Dan Rosenthal, 16/07/2012 20:01:
It's like you read the first 14 words, ignored everything else, and
twisted it around until it doesn't even resemble what he actually said....
Oh really? <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/**index.php?title=User_talk:** Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=**481889811https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=481889811
What does it mean in your opinion then?
It means exactly what Jimmy said.
"Commons would be a lot better off placed under the jurisdiction of our ArbCom, but that isn't going to happen. What would be best would be for Commons to get their house in order themselves. I hope people are willing to help them with that. There are good people at commons who are trying.-"
Jimmy is saying that Commons should fix their own problems, and that it ISN'T going to be placed under ArbCom's jurisdiction. The words "en.wiki community should rule Commons" are not anywhere to be found, either in letter or in spirit. What you suggested that he said rises to the Fox News level of misleading.
On 7/16/12 6:57 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
What community? Jimbo often declares that en.wiki community should rule Commons, for instance;[1] will an en.wiki community plan be considered enough to impose something on everyone?
I have not said any such thing, and indeed in the very text you quote I said exactly the opposite.
For clarity, I do not think that the en.wikipedia community should rule Commons.
--Jimbo
On 7/16/12 6:57 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
What community? Jimbo often declares that en.wiki community should rule Commons, for instance;[1] will an en.wiki community plan be considered enough to impose something on everyone?
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 3:14 AM, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia-inc.com wrote:
I have not said any such thing, and indeed in the very text you quote I said exactly the opposite. For clarity, I do not think that the en.wikipedia community should rule Commons.
Cunningham's classic criticism of Wikipedia was that it's status as an encyclopedia would be only temporary and that it eventually would become just a wiki. Wikipedia has been sucessful in proving him wrong, but Commons has been making that task much more difficult, as Commons is, under its overly broad usage, in fact 'just a wiki.' And Commons' overbroad self-concept directly impacts Wikipedia.
Certainly one of the keys to Wikipedias success is our clear self-concept of being an encyclopedia, and by exercising what we think of as encyclopedic judgment. How that encyclopedic judgment gets put into practice is not always pretty, and this is one case where one side are promoting a concept of unusable exhibitionism over Wikipedias WP:PRIME objective.
Regards, -SC (resent with copyedits)
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org