2008/12/8 David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>:
> Still need someone. Alison definitely can't, unfortunately. We have an
> actual clueful reporter at Sky!
>
>
> - d.
>
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140812080644v121692e9m23ff350f8204bf9e(a)mail.gmail.com>
I'm afraid that I can't do it either. I'm not at my best anyway and I'm
getting enough stress from the JIDF cranking up their campaign against me
on several fronts without getting involved in this business too.
Peter
The Co-op are saying they can't open the bank account until we're approved
as an official chapter of WMF. I tried to convince them that we're an
independent organisation and that if the worst came to the worst and we
weren't approved we'd still continue on with out charitable work, but they
didn't seem persuadable. I also told them that our confirmation as an
official chapter was now just a formality, but it's clearly the formality
they are interested in. (TBH if I were in their place I probably would have
made the same decision, since realistically if negotiations with WMF did
break down irredeemably we would end up between somewhere between
permanently tiny and dead.)
The good news on the other hand is that they said everything else in the
application was fine, and that as soon they get our official confirmation
they'll be able to open the account.
So I'm sorry about any part in this delay caused by my personal ineptitude.
Perhaps had I phrased things slightly differently on the application
form/business plan they would not have realised the importance of these
negotiations for us, but I hope you agree this is far from the end of the
world. We'll get the official confirmation from WMF in early January, which
puts the AGM in March at the latest, which is still within our self-imposed
6 month timeframe.
Your continued patience is much appreciated.
Tom
(Treasurer)
In-Reply-To: <d2d333a0812080701i59597daco80a05edf39587ed4(a)mail.gmail.com>
> I think a better analogy would be paintings in galleries which
> depict under
> 18s, many of which could be considered "Images depicting erotic
> posing with
> no sexual activity". I am thinking of some of the paintings of
> Caravaggio, almost any depiction of Ganymede etc.
I was about to mention Amor Vincit Omnia where Carvaggio's model's pose
strikes me as having something in common with that of the girl album cover
despite that he's upright and she isn't.
Peter
The Open Rights Group has, this morning, blogged about the issue; see the
message from their open discussion list (below) for details.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Glyn Wintle <glynwintle(a)yahoo.com>
Date: 2008/12/8
Subject: [ORG-discuss] ORG blog post on IWF
To: Open Rights Group open discussion list <
org-discuss(a)lists.openrightsgroup.org>
ORG blog post on IWF
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/12/08/iwf-censors-wikipedia-chaos-ensue…
An example of an MP asking to expand the work of the IWF to include
copyright infringement.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-06-04b.893.0#g894.3
Still trying to find the statement by the government that they would force
all ISPs to following the IWF block list. I know I have got it some where.
_______________________________________________
ORG-discuss mailing list
ORG-discuss(a)lists.openrightsgroup.org
http://lists.openrightsgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/org-discuss
I am not suggesting that WMUK do anything about this whatsoever.
However, I do suggest that all readers of this list try the pages and
share the results they get (and their ISP).
More specifically, if you're on any of:
* Be/O2/Telefonica
* Virgin Media
* EasyNet/UK Online/Sky
* PlusNet
* Demon
* TalkTalk
- then you need to try the link, and if it doesn't work, contact your
ISP and ask WTF.
This is likely to hit the papers soon. BIG FUSS. We (the community and
the Foundation and everyone) need to know the precise parameters of
whatever's going on.
- d.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
Date: 2008/12/6
Subject: Wikipedia quietly censored by Internet Watch Foundation
To: Open Rights Group open discussion list
<org-discuss(a)lists.openrightsgroup.org>
Cc: Mike Godwin <mgodwin(a)wikimedia.org>, Cary Bass <cbass(a)wikimedia.org>
... by transparent proxying on some ISPs, not others.
Surmise is that it's because of the album cover on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer (the page about the
Scorpions album "Virgin Killer") - some people can't acces the page.
The image is distasteful but not (AFAIK) actually illegal (yet). And
is also famous and encyclopedic in itself.
Practical upshot is that every user on *some* ISPs has been put
through one of just two IPs. This means that vandal blocks have
widespread collateral damage.
(I'm on Zen and I can get to the page and image.)
The question now is: how do we find out what the hell is going on, and
who has done this?
Somewhat confusing page about the matter from the admins' noticeboard,
where the admins try to work out wtf:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Major_…
- d.