I've just noticed the list archives for this list (accessible via the link in the footer) are restricted to subscribers only (although there is no restriction on who can subscribe). Is that intentional and, if so, why?
On 29 March 2012 13:29, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I've just noticed the list archives for this list (accessible via the link in the footer) are restricted to subscribers only (although there is no restriction on who can subscribe). Is that intentional and, if so, why?
Shouldn't be, I'd have thought.
The only reason I can think of is that few months ago we had a confidential message accidentally sent to the list - but if that's been removed from the archive (which requires someone with server access actually removing it, listadmins can't) then opening it up would be fine.
- d.
It is deliberate. Unless someone else puts an explanation up I can post something about this next week when I'm not traveling.
Thanks, Fae -- http://enwp.org/user_talk:fae Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/faetags
On 29 March 2012 13:38, Fae faenwp@gmail.com wrote:
It is deliberate. Unless someone else puts an explanation up I can post something about this next week when I'm not traveling.
That'd be good :-) It does break convention that public Wikimedia lists have public archives.
- d.
I actually quite like this way - I think it's more conducive to frank exchange of views, a lot of people here connect their usernames to their real names, and anybody who's really interested in WMUK can subscribe.
Of course, it means we should try to avoid discussions that should be had on Wikipedia, lest we appear like a cabal (the Eastern European Mailing List comes to mind...).
Harry
________________________________ From: David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, 29 March 2012, 13:41 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
On 29 March 2012 13:38, Fae faenwp@gmail.com wrote:
It is deliberate. Unless someone else puts an explanation up I can post something about this next week when I'm not traveling.
That'd be good :-) It does break convention that public Wikimedia lists have public archives.
- d.
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Oh, Harry - everyone knows that there is no cabal! (ignore the CC)
Richard Symonds Office& Development Manager Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 207 065 0992
Oh, did we forget to induct you ? ;)
Where does that email address go, anyway?
Harry
________________________________ From: Richard Symonds richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: cabal@wikimedia.org.uk Sent: Thursday, 29 March 2012, 17:37 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
Oh, Harry - everyone knows that there is no cabal! (ignore the CC)
Richard Symonds Office & Development Manager Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 207 065 0992
On Mar 29, 2012 5:50 PM, "Chris Keating" chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, did we forget to induct you ? ;)
Where does that email address go, anyway?
We could tell you. But I'm not sure you want to know the answer.
Please, stop this conversation before you get us all in trouble. You remember what happened last time, don't you? I couldn't sit down for a week...
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.comwrote:
On Mar 29, 2012 5:50 PM, "Chris Keating" chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, did we forget to induct you ? ;)
Where does that email address go, anyway?
We could tell you. But I'm not sure you want to know the answer.
Please, stop this conversation before you get us all in trouble. You remember what happened last time, don't you? I couldn't sit down for a week...
Fortunately my mind seems to have been completely wiped of that memory ;-)
On 29/03/2012 13:29, Thomas Dalton wrote:
I've just noticed the list archives for this list (accessible via the link in the footer) are restricted to subscribers only (although there is no restriction on who can subscribe). Is that intentional and, if so, why?
There are (public) clones of the archives....
Gordo
On 29 March 2012 21:43, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 29/03/2012 13:29, Thomas Dalton wrote:
I've just noticed the list archives for this list (accessible via the link in the footer) are restricted to subscribers only (although there is no restriction on who can subscribe). Is that intentional and, if so, why?
There are (public) clones of the archives....
And it takes all of a few seconds to subscribe and get access to the official ones. That's why I'm struggling to see the point of having them restricted.
On 29 March 2012 21:59, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2012 21:43, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 29/03/2012 13:29, Thomas Dalton wrote:
I've just noticed the list archives for this list (accessible via the
link
in the footer) are restricted to subscribers only (although there is no restriction on who can subscribe). Is that intentional and, if so, why?
There are (public) clones of the archives....
And it takes all of a few seconds to subscribe and get access to the official ones. That's why I'm struggling to see the point of having them restricted.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
So just to confirm, if I sign up to this mailing list and click the confirmation email link, I'm subscribed? There's no moderation by a list admin or anything like that? If that's the case, then I agree that there's no point having a private list archive.
On 30 March 2012 01:04, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonewiki@gmail.com wrote:
So just to confirm, if I sign up to this mailing list and click the confirmation email link, I'm subscribed? There's no moderation by a list admin or anything like that? If that's the case, then I agree that there's no point having a private list archive.
I believe so. That's certainly how it used to be.
I thought you had to wait for approval by a list admin, but that approval was more-or-less automatic...
Harry
________________________________ From: Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonewiki@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 30 March 2012, 1:04 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
On 29 March 2012 21:59, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 March 2012 21:43, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 29/03/2012 13:29, Thomas Dalton wrote:
I've just noticed the list archives for this list (accessible via the link in the footer) are restricted to subscribers only (although there is no restriction on who can subscribe). Is that intentional and, if so, why?
There are (public) clones of the archives....
And it takes all of a few seconds to subscribe and get access to the official ones. That's why I'm struggling to see the point of having them restricted.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
So just to confirm, if I sign up to this mailing list and click the confirmation email link, I'm subscribed? There's no moderation by a list admin or anything like that? If that's the case, then I agree that there's no point having a private list archive.
On 30 March 2012 01:33, HJ Mitchell hjmitchell@ymail.com wrote:
I thought you had to wait for approval by a list admin, but that approval was more-or-less automatic...
I just subscribed a new email address and I was able to read the archives immediately.
I think Mike can answer a few of these questions, but he's extremely busy over the weekend with conferences etc.
Richard Symonds Office& Development Manager Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 207 065 0992
Is there any possibility of having question answered? I am somewhat dissapointed at this list no longer being publically archived. Seddon
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:32:21 +0100 From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
I think Mike can answer a few of these questions, but he's extremely busy over the weekend with conferences etc.
Richard Symonds Office& Development Manager Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Charitable Company Registered in England and Wales, No: 6741827. Charity No:1144513 Office: 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. Wikimedia UK is the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent non-profit organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.
On 30/03/2012 01:37, Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 30 March 2012 01:33, HJ Mitchellhjmitchell@ymail.com wrote:
I thought you had to wait for approval by a list admin, but that approval was more-or-less automatic...
I just subscribed a new email address and I was able to read the archives immediately.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Well, as no one has answered...
It's related to an incident not long ago where there was a complaint over a message posted here about a named individual (not going to rehash that whole issue). The message was objected to (very strongly) and the archives were made subscriber only; I guess to mitigate the matter (and obviously avoid future incidents of the same type).
I'm sure others can fill in more details than I can. Just answering the basic question.
Tom
On 5 April 2012 04:57, joseph seddon life_is_bitter_sweet@hotmail.co.ukwrote:
Is there any possibility of having question answered?
I am somewhat dissapointed at this list no longer being publically archived.
Seddon
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:32:21 +0100 From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
I think Mike can answer a few of these questions, but he's extremely busy over the weekend with conferences etc.
Richard Symonds Office& Development Manager Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Charitable
Company
Registered in England and Wales, No: 6741827. Charity No:1144513 Office:
4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4LT. Wikimedia UK is the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate
Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent non-profit organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.
On 30/03/2012 01:37, Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 30 March 2012 01:33, HJ Mitchellhjmitchell@ymail.com wrote:
I thought you had to wait for approval by a list admin, but that
approval
was more-or-less automatic...
I just subscribed a new email address and I was able to read the archives immediately.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
By whom, and on whose advice? Why weren't the subscribers to this list informed?
I don't expect you'll be able to answer those questions, Tom, but they're worth asking.
Harry
________________________________ From: Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, 5 April 2012, 22:48 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
Well, as no one has answered...
It's related to an incident not long ago where there was a complaint over a message posted here about a named individual (not going to rehash that whole issue). The message was objected to (very strongly) and the archives were made subscriber only; I guess to mitigate the matter (and obviously avoid future incidents of the same type).
I'm sure others can fill in more details than I can. Just answering the basic question.
Tom
On 5 April 2012 04:57, joseph seddon life_is_bitter_sweet@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
Is there any possibility of having question answered?
I am somewhat dissapointed at this list no longer being publically archived.
Seddon
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:32:21 +0100 From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
I think Mike can answer a few of these questions, but he's extremely busy over the weekend with conferences etc.
Richard Symonds Office& Development Manager Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Charitable Company Registered in England and Wales, No: 6741827. Charity No:1144513 Office: 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. Wikimedia UK is the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent non-profit organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.
On 30/03/2012 01:37, Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 30 March 2012 01:33, HJ Mitchellhjmitchell@ymail.com wrote:
I thought you had to wait for approval by a list admin, but that approval was more-or-less automatic...
I just subscribed a new email address and I was able to read the archives immediately.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Well; someone just told me I was mistaken and that wasn't the reason. Sorry!
For some reason I have a note in my records about the incident I was thinking of leading to the archive closure, but no idea why now :s
Again; sorry for the confusion!
Tom Morton
On 5 Apr 2012, at 23:06, HJ Mitchell hjmitchell@ymail.com wrote:
By whom, and on whose advice? Why weren't the subscribers to this list informed?
I don't expect you'll be able to answer those questions, Tom, but they're worth asking.
Harry
------------------------------ *From:* Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com *To:* wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org *Sent:* Thursday, 5 April 2012, 22:48 *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
Well, as no one has answered...
It's related to an incident not long ago where there was a complaint over a message posted here about a named individual (not going to rehash that whole issue). The message was objected to (very strongly) and the archives were made subscriber only; I guess to mitigate the matter (and obviously avoid future incidents of the same type).
I'm sure others can fill in more details than I can. Just answering the basic question.
Tom
On 5 April 2012 04:57, joseph seddon life_is_bitter_sweet@hotmail.co.ukwrote:
Is there any possibility of having question answered?
I am somewhat dissapointed at this list no longer being publically archived.
Seddon
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 11:32:21 +0100 From: richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
I think Mike can answer a few of these questions, but he's extremely busy over the weekend with conferences etc.
Richard Symonds Office& Development Manager Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Charitable
Company
Registered in England and Wales, No: 6741827. Charity No:1144513 Office:
4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4LT. Wikimedia UK is the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent non-profit organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.
On 30/03/2012 01:37, Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 30 March 2012 01:33, HJ Mitchellhjmitchell@ymail.com wrote:
I thought you had to wait for approval by a list admin, but that
approval
was more-or-less automatic...
I just subscribed a new email address and I was able to read the archives immediately.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 5 April 2012 23:10, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Well; someone just told me I was mistaken and that wasn't the reason. Sorry!
Perhaps that someone would like to tell us what the actual reason was?
All having the archives private does is make it more inconvenient. Anyone can still access them by subscribing. They are still indexed by search engines because there are unofficial archives elsewhere on the web. What is the gain?
I have raised an action to the WM-UK board to provide a formal explanation. This relates to some issues that we should handle with sensitivity.
From mid January 2012, this list was changed so that you have to be a
list subscriber to read the archives, you just have to log in to access it.
Some interesting points have been raised about who is responsible for this list and its scope. I would like to see a definition that could be added to https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l. Perhaps someone would like to kick off a statement of purpose and scope on :wmuk ?
Cheers, Fae -- http://enwp.org/user_talk:fae Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/faetags
The counter-argument is, of course, if the archives are trivially available, what is the problem? On Apr 5, 2012 11:20 PM, "Thomas Dalton" thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 April 2012 23:10, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Well; someone just told me I was mistaken and that wasn't the reason.
Sorry!
Perhaps that someone would like to tell us what the actual reason was?
All having the archives private does is make it more inconvenient. Anyone can still access them by subscribing. They are still indexed by search engines because there are unofficial archives elsewhere on the web. What is the gain?
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Its the perception of openness. I will note that this list pre-dates the existence of the chapter. Such a fundamental change in how the openess of list is percieved is an unbelievably important concept, and without even discussing with the list community involved wouldn't be tolerated elsewhere should it have been done by the foundation. Its been used by both incarnations of chapter, wiki-meets, wikimania bids, in fact this list was pretty much the sole catalyst why the chapter got rebooted. This is list for use by the UK community as a whole. The chapter supports that community not control it. I know that this is such a minor matter but it really is something that the board and whoever sits on it now and in the future has got to remember. I don't question the motives or integrity or the board. I am 100% certain that this was done in complete good faith but its a trap that I know people on and off the board are always worried about and that's the role of the chapter in the UK community. This is the kind of action that should not happen by committee. Its a unilateral move that is unwarrented and is simply unacceptable. The action is pointless and I dont think that the archives should remain closed but the main point and one I have a major issue with, is how this action occured. I do not want to have to start making arguments to the board that we make to the foundation. Seddon Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 00:31:04 +0100 From: james.farrar@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
The counter-argument is, of course, if the archives are trivially available, what is the problem? On Apr 5, 2012 11:20 PM, "Thomas Dalton" thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 April 2012 23:10, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Well; someone just told me I was mistaken and that wasn't the reason. Sorry!
Perhaps that someone would like to tell us what the actual reason was?
All having the archives private does is make it more inconvenient.
Anyone can still access them by subscribing. They are still indexed by
search engines because there are unofficial archives elsewhere on the
web. What is the gain?
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
The chapter doesn't in any sense control this list, does it?
As you note, the chapter is a subset of the UK community, and this list exists for the latter not the former. As such, holding the chapter liable for actions of the list admin(s) would not be entirely rational. On Apr 6, 2012 12:49 AM, "joseph seddon" life_is_bitter_sweet@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
Its the perception of openness. I will note that this list pre-dates the existence of the chapter. Such a fundamental change in how the openess of list is percieved is an unbelievably important concept, and without even discussing with the list community involved wouldn't be tolerated elsewhere should it have been done by the foundation.
Its been used by both incarnations of chapter, wiki-meets, wikimania bids, in fact this list was pretty much the sole catalyst why the chapter got rebooted. This is list for use by the UK community as a whole. The chapter supports that community not control it. I know that this is such a minor matter but it really is something that the board and whoever sits on it now and in the future has got to remember. I don't question the motives or integrity or the board. I am 100% certain that this was done in complete good faith but its a trap that I know people on and off the board are always worried about and that's the role of the chapter in the UK community. This is the kind of action that should not happen by committee. Its a unilateral move that is unwarrented and is simply unacceptable.
The action is pointless and I dont think that the archives should remain closed but the main point and one I have a major issue with, is how this action occured. I do not want to have to start making arguments to the board that we make to the foundation.
Seddon
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 00:31:04 +0100 From: james.farrar@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
The counter-argument is, of course, if the archives are trivially available, what is the problem? On Apr 5, 2012 11:20 PM, "Thomas Dalton" thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 April 2012 23:10, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Well; someone just told me I was mistaken and that wasn't the reason.
Sorry!
Perhaps that someone would like to tell us what the actual reason was?
All having the archives private does is make it more inconvenient. Anyone can still access them by subscribing. They are still indexed by search engines because there are unofficial archives elsewhere on the web. What is the gain?
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
The impression I have got is that this decision has stemmed from the chapter board. Seddon
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 01:00:33 +0100 From: james.farrar@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
The chapter doesn't in any sense control this list, does it? As you note, the chapter is a subset of the UK community, and this list exists for the latter not the former. As such, holding the chapter liable for actions of the list admin(s) would not be entirely rational. On Apr 6, 2012 12:49 AM, "joseph seddon" life_is_bitter_sweet@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
Its the perception of openness. I will note that this list pre-dates the existence of the chapter. Such a fundamental change in how the openess of list is percieved is an unbelievably important concept, and without even discussing with the list community involved wouldn't be tolerated elsewhere should it have been done by the foundation.
Its been used by both incarnations of chapter, wiki-meets, wikimania bids, in fact this list was pretty much the sole catalyst why the chapter got rebooted. This is list for use by the UK community as a whole. The chapter supports that community not control it. I know that this is such a minor matter but it really is something that the board and whoever sits on it now and in the future has got to remember. I don't question the motives or integrity or the board. I am 100% certain that this was done in complete good faith but its a trap that I know people on and off the board are always worried about and that's the role of the chapter in the UK community. This is the kind of action that should not happen by committee. Its a unilateral move that is unwarrented and is simply unacceptable.
The action is pointless and I dont think that the archives should remain closed but the main point and one I have a major issue with, is how this action occured. I do not want to have to start making arguments to the board that we make to the foundation.
Seddon Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 00:31:04 +0100 From: james.farrar@gmail.com
To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
The counter-argument is, of course, if the archives are trivially available, what is the problem?
On Apr 5, 2012 11:20 PM, "Thomas Dalton" thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 April 2012 23:10, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Well; someone just told me I was mistaken and that wasn't the reason. Sorry!
Perhaps that someone would like to tell us what the actual reason was?
All having the archives private does is make it more inconvenient.
Anyone can still access them by subscribing. They are still indexed by
search engines because there are unofficial archives elsewhere on the
web. What is the gain?
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
If there's no problem, then we should restore the status quo ante bellum - not being a problem is not a reason to not do (or undo) anything.
I think the members of this list are entitled to know when, why, by whom, and on whose instruction or advice the archives were made subscriber-only, and I think we're owed an explanation as to why nobody notified the list of this action.
Personally, I'm not especially fussed if the archives are public or private or what, but it's not the sort of thing that should be done without so much as a by-your-leave to the community - the list exists for the UK community, and the chapter and its board should not be attempting to govern it (especially not in camera), however pure their motives.
Harry
________________________________ From: James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 6 April 2012, 0:31 Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
The counter-argument is, of course, if the archives are trivially available, what is the problem? On Apr 5, 2012 11:20 PM, "Thomas Dalton" thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 April 2012 23:10, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Well; someone just told me I was mistaken and that wasn't the reason. Sorry!
Perhaps that someone would like to tell us what the actual reason was?
All having the archives private does is make it more inconvenient. Anyone can still access them by subscribing. They are still indexed by search engines because there are unofficial archives elsewhere on the web. What is the gain?
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 6 April 2012 00:31, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
The counter-argument is, of course, if the archives are trivially available, what is the problem?
Generally speaking, people acting with malicious intent are more willing to jump through hoops than people acting in good faith. That means having the archives private is more of a problem for people acting in good faith than it is for people acting with malicious intent. That is obviously a bad thing.
On 6 April 2012 07:14, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Generally speaking, people acting with malicious intent are more willing to jump through hoops than people acting in good faith.
{{citation needed}}
I think that those acting with malicious intent are unlikely to do great research. It is more likely that they will just repeat gossip, cherry pick sources, or even just make it up for the lolz.
Fae
On 6 April 2012 07:25, Fae faenwp@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 April 2012 07:14, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Generally speaking, people acting with malicious intent are more willing to jump through hoops than people acting in good faith.
{{citation needed}}
I think that those acting with malicious intent are unlikely to do great research. It is more likely that they will just repeat gossip, cherry pick sources, or even just make it up for the lolz.
If that's all they're doing, then just ignore them. It's the ones that do jump through hoops that actually cause problems.
On 7 April 2012 12:48, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
Yes, and the archives are cloned elswhere.
Gordo
Consensus seems to be relatively clear - can a list admin make the appropriate tweak?
Er.....
If the list archive is already cloned, there seems no point to protect it.
Do we agree?
Gordo
On 10/04/12 01:24, Thehelpfulone wrote:
On 7 April 2012 12:48, Gordon Joly <gordon.joly@pobox.com mailto:gordon.joly@pobox.com> wrote:
Yes, and the archives are cloned elswhere. GordoConsensus seems to be relatively clear - can a list admin make the appropriate tweak?
-- Thehelpfulone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone English Wikipedia Administrator
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 10 April 2012 14:45, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
Er..... If the list archive is already cloned, there seems no point to protect it. Do we agree?
It does indeed appear to be security theatre at best. But Fae said he'd get back to us with why it was locked ...
- d.
I don't know whether is was made so as a result of my strenuous complaints about the libellous and untrue and vicious allegations made about me by WMUK management, but the list being private suits me fine. (Clones are fine - they are not the 'official record').
If it goes public again, I go ballistic.
Ed
Ed,
It is public.
Anyone can add their email address to the list, without any form of approval, and then read all posts freely. They can them remove themselves from the list freely.
Equally, the "official record" can be consulted if someone reads material on a mirror and wishes to check it, in just the same way.
So, there is very little realistic difference to the archives being open or behind this "unlocked door".
Your vague threat is not helpful.
Cheers Martin (long time lurker..)
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 19:30, Edward at Logic Museum edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
I don't know whether is was made so as a result of my strenuous complaints about the libellous and untrue and vicious allegations made about me by WMUK management, but the list being private suits me fine. (Clones are fine - they are not the 'official record').
If it goes public again, I go ballistic.
Ed
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
So, there is very little realistic difference to the archives being
open or behind this "unlocked door".
The difference is that I am happy with them being the way they are. I would be happier if the insulting messages were completely removed
Your vague threat is not helpful.
Nor is your indifference to the way that individuals are insulted in public with libellous and false and outrageous claims very helpful either. Persuading someone to remove these vile and insulting messages sent by WMUK would be much more helpful. Are you going to help?
Ed
----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Peeks" martinp23@googlemail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:38 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
Ed,
It is public.
Anyone can add their email address to the list, without any form of approval, and then read all posts freely. They can them remove themselves from the list freely.
Equally, the "official record" can be consulted if someone reads material on a mirror and wishes to check it, in just the same way.
So, there is very little realistic difference to the archives being open or behind this "unlocked door".
Your vague threat is not helpful.
Cheers Martin (long time lurker..)
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 19:30, Edward at Logic Museum edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
I don't know whether is was made so as a result of my strenuous complaints about the libellous and untrue and vicious allegations made about me by WMUK management, but the list being private suits me fine. (Clones are fine - they are not the 'official record').
If it goes public again, I go ballistic.
Ed
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 10 April 2012 19:45, Edward at Logic Museum edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
So, there is very little realistic difference to the archives being
open or behind this "unlocked door".
The difference is that I am happy with them being the way they are. I would be happier if the insulting messages were completely removed
I'm afraid your happiness is a very minor concern to us and is outweighed by the inconvenience of having the archives private and the message it sends about how little we care about transparency.
I'm afraid your happiness is a very minor concern to us
Of course not.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Dalton" thomas.dalton@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:50 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
On 10 April 2012 19:45, Edward at Logic Museum edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
So, there is very little realistic difference to the archives being
open or behind this "unlocked door".
The difference is that I am happy with them being the way they are. I would be happier if the insulting messages were completely removed
I'm afraid your happiness is a very minor concern to us and is outweighed by the inconvenience of having the archives private and the message it sends about how little we care about transparency.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
David Gerard: >>It does indeed appear to be security theatre at best. You are another of those who like to repeat these lies and accusations on various boards, and making serious threats like 'harassment'. It may be theatre and make-believe to you, for others it is very real.
ed
On 10 April 2012 19:48, Edward at Logic Museum edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
David Gerard: >>It does indeed appear to be security theatre at best. You are another of those who like to repeat these lies and accusations on various boards, and making serious threats like 'harassment'. It may be theatre and make-believe to you, for others it is very real.
Your claim of threats is itself defamatory.
- d.
Your claim of threats is itself defamatory.
They are entirely true, and so they are not.
E
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:51 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] List archives
On 10 April 2012 19:48, Edward at Logic Museum edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
David Gerard: >>It does indeed appear to be security theatre at best. You are another of those who like to repeat these lies and accusations on various boards, and making serious threats like 'harassment'. It may be theatre and make-believe to you, for others it is very real.
Your claim of threats is itself defamatory.
- d.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
You've still not really learnt how to press your case, have you? On Apr 10, 2012 7:30 PM, "Edward at Logic Museum" edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
** I don't know whether is was made so as a result of my strenuous complaints about the libellous and untrue and vicious allegations made about me by WMUK management, but the list being private suits me fine. (Clones are fine - they are not the 'official record').
If it goes public again, I go ballistic.
Ed
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Well, I think that Edward has given an apt demonstration of the problems that we're facing here.
I'll say that I was the one that made the archives for this list restricted to subscribers only. I took this course of action because the list archives were being data mined with the aim of harassing and invading the privacy of its subscribers via the posts that they had made. Restricting the list to subscribers appeared to provide a good way of removing the list archives from search engines, and hence making it more difficult to data-mine the archives efficiently. It also provided a reasonable alternative to simply deleting the archives, which was being mooted at the time. I didn't particularly want to make the change (I'm always going to prefer things being as open and transparent as possible), but it seemed to be the only reasonable course of action possible given the situation at the time.
However, this approach of 'security by obscurity' has now been shown to be ineffective due to the list being publicly archived by other means, as well as this being pointed out on-list.. The approach of moderating who subscribes to this list is not a good one to take since that's effectively exclusion rather than obscuration.
Given the weight of opinion in favour of making the archives publicly visible again, and the lack of a rationale for not doing so, I'll make the archives publicly visible again. But before that happens, I think that there needs to be an option to redact past posts. So:
If you have posted something to this list that you would like to be redacted from the archives, for the sake of privacy or potential harassment, then please let me know within the next 3 days. I'll then confidentially send a request to the server administrators to get those posts removed from the archive. After they've been removed, then we'll open up the archives again. If you let me know outside of those three days, then I'll request their removal, but they may not be removed before the archive is made public.
Three notes. 1) I'll only request the removal of emails sent by those asking for them to be removed, unless there are *very* good reasons for their removal. 2) This only means that they will be removed from the archive hosted at lists.wikimedia.org - I'm not aware of any available ability to request the removal of posts from archives hosted by those apart from the WMF. 3) As a result of (2), this option depends on the ethical behaviour of those reading the list archives, which obviously cannot be guaranteed.
Thanks, Mike P.S. for those that the difference matters to: please note that my actions were made as a community member, not as a trustee of WMUK. No decision was made by the WMUK board on this issue. (And why, exactly, does this difference matter? We're all Wikimedians here.) P.P.S. sorry, I'm only human, I can't resist ending on a cheap shot. So, Edward: "Nor is your indifference to the way that individuals are insulted in public with libellous and false and outrageous claims very helpful either. Persuading someone to remove these vile and insulting messages would be much more helpful." Yes please, I'd really like those insults and claims to be removed from Wikipedia Review, please.
If this is sort of thing is going to continue now that the list is public, I'll probably leave it. Life's too short and I haven't subscribed to the list to read this sort of thing. Doug
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Michael Peel michael.peel@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Well, I think that Edward has given an apt demonstration of the problems that we're facing here.
I'll say that I was the one that made the archives for this list restricted to subscribers only. I took this course of action because the list archives were being data mined with the aim of harassing and invading the privacy of its subscribers via the posts that they had made. Restricting the list to subscribers appeared to provide a good way of removing the list archives from search engines, and hence making it more difficult to data-mine the archives efficiently. It also provided a reasonable alternative to simply deleting the archives, which was being mooted at the time. I didn't particularly want to make the change (I'm always going to prefer things being as open and transparent as possible), but it seemed to be the only reasonable course of action possible given the situation at the time.
However, this approach of 'security by obscurity' has now been shown to be ineffective due to the list being publicly archived by other means, as well as this being pointed out on-list.. The approach of moderating who subscribes to this list is not a good one to take since that's effectively exclusion rather than obscuration.
Given the weight of opinion in favour of making the archives publicly visible again, and the lack of a rationale for not doing so, I'll make the archives publicly visible again. But before that happens, I think that there needs to be an option to redact past posts. So:
If you have posted something to this list that you would like to be redacted from the archives, for the sake of privacy or potential harassment, then please let me know within the next 3 days. I'll then confidentially send a request to the server administrators to get those posts removed from the archive. After they've been removed, then we'll open up the archives again. If you let me know outside of those three days, then I'll request their removal, but they may not be removed before the archive is made public.
Three notes. 1) I'll only request the removal of emails sent by those asking for them to be removed, unless there are *very* good reasons for their removal. 2) This only means that they will be removed from the archive hosted at lists.wikimedia.org - I'm not aware of any available ability to request the removal of posts from archives hosted by those apart from the WMF. 3) As a result of (2), this option depends on the ethical behaviour of those reading the list archives, which obviously cannot be guaranteed.
Thanks, Mike P.S. for those that the difference matters to: please note that my actions were made as a community member, not as a trustee of WMUK. No decision was made by the WMUK board on this issue. (And why, exactly, does this difference matter? We're all Wikimedians here.) P.P.S. sorry, I'm only human, I can't resist ending on a cheap shot. So, Edward: "Nor is your indifference to the way that individuals are insulted in public with libellous and false and outrageous claims very helpful either. Persuading someone to remove these vile and insulting messages would be much more helpful." Yes please, I'd really like those insults and claims to be removed from Wikipedia Review, please. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
I'm afraid that I will leave this list too if it gets officially publicly archived again. The malicious attack putting the career of a long term contributor at risk by data-mining the archives of this email list back to 2008, was deeply upsetting for all involved. The list is being openly used by stalkers and trolls, and being used to taunt the trolls.
I am aware that this list is currently used by the Wikimedia UK charity to communicate with members, but if it has significant risk for members to contribute to, then with my duties as a trustee, I cannot recommend it for members to join and it should carry an unambiguous warning of the same risks posed for future members who may want to join.
I will raise this for Jon Davies to track as a risk, and raise for a decision at the next board meeting as to discuss which alternative methods we should use for communications.
Thanks, Fae -- Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae@wikimedia.org.uk Wikimedia UK trustee - http://uk.wikimedia.org discuss: http://enwp.org/user_talk:fae
On 11 April 2012 06:15, Doug Weller dougweller@gmail.com wrote:
If this is sort of thing is going to continue now that the list is public, I'll probably leave it. Life's too short and I haven't subscribed to the list to read this sort of thing. Doug
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Michael Peel michael.peel@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Well, I think that Edward has given an apt demonstration of the problems that we're facing here.
I'll say that I was the one that made the archives for this list restricted to subscribers only. I took this course of action because the list archives were being data mined with the aim of harassing and invading the privacy of its subscribers via the posts that they had made. Restricting the list to subscribers appeared to provide a good way of removing the list archives from search engines, and hence making it more difficult to data-mine the archives efficiently. It also provided a reasonable alternative to simply deleting the archives, which was being mooted at the time. I didn't particularly want to make the change (I'm always going to prefer things being as open and transparent as possible), but it seemed to be the only reasonable course of action possible given the situation at the time.
However, this approach of 'security by obscurity' has now been shown to be ineffective due to the list being publicly archived by other means, as well as this being pointed out on-list.. The approach of moderating who subscribes to this list is not a good one to take since that's effectively exclusion rather than obscuration.
Given the weight of opinion in favour of making the archives publicly visible again, and the lack of a rationale for not doing so, I'll make the archives publicly visible again. But before that happens, I think that there needs to be an option to redact past posts. So:
If you have posted something to this list that you would like to be redacted from the archives, for the sake of privacy or potential harassment, then please let me know within the next 3 days. I'll then confidentially send a request to the server administrators to get those posts removed from the archive. After they've been removed, then we'll open up the archives again. If you let me know outside of those three days, then I'll request their removal, but they may not be removed before the archive is made public.
Three notes. 1) I'll only request the removal of emails sent by those asking for them to be removed, unless there are *very* good reasons for their removal. 2) This only means that they will be removed from the archive hosted at lists.wikimedia.org - I'm not aware of any available ability to request the removal of posts from archives hosted by those apart from the WMF. 3) As a result of (2), this option depends on the ethical behaviour of those reading the list archives, which obviously cannot be guaranteed.
Thanks, Mike P.S. for those that the difference matters to: please note that my actions were made as a community member, not as a trustee of WMUK. No decision was made by the WMUK board on this issue. (And why, exactly, does this difference matter? We're all Wikimedians here.) P.P.S. sorry, I'm only human, I can't resist ending on a cheap shot. So, Edward: "Nor is your indifference to the way that individuals are insulted in public with libellous and false and outrageous claims very helpful either. Persuading someone to remove these vile and insulting messages would be much more helpful." Yes please, I'd really like those insults and claims to be removed from Wikipedia Review, please. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
-- Doug Weller http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 11 April 2012 08:13, Fae fae@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
I'm afraid that I will leave this list too if it gets officially publicly archived again. The malicious attack putting the career of a long term contributor at risk by data-mining the archives of this email list back to 2008, was deeply upsetting for all involved. The list is being openly used by stalkers and trolls, and being used to taunt the trolls.
http://www.mail-archive.com/wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org/maillist.html
The horse bolted really rather some time ago. What on *earth* are you on about?
- d.
On 11/04/12 08:22, David Gerard wrote:
On 11 April 2012 08:13, Faefae@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
I'm afraid that I will leave this list too if it gets officially publicly archived again. The malicious attack putting the career of a long term contributor at risk by data-mining the archives of this email list back to 2008, was deeply upsetting for all involved. The list is being openly used by stalkers and trolls, and being used to taunt the trolls.
http://www.mail-archive.com/wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org/maillist.html
The horse bolted really rather some time ago. What on *earth* are you on about?
- d.
But there again, David, you are one the four list maintainers.
Gordo
On 11 April 2012 08:37, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
But there again, David, you are one the four list maintainers.
That appears to be a non sequitur with no bearing on whether anyone else is archiving the list publicly already, which they are.
- d.
On 11/04/12 08:42, David Gerard wrote:
On 11 April 2012 08:37, Gordon Jolygordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
But there again, David, you are one the four list maintainers.
That appears to be a non sequitur with no bearing on whether anyone else is archiving the list publicly already, which they are.
- d.
Very very true.
Gordo
I don't understand. The posting is already public, surely?
http://osdir.com/ml/general/2012-04/msg17128.html
Gordo
On 10/04/12 21:34, Michael Peel wrote:
Well, I think that Edward has given an apt demonstration of the problems that we're facing here.
I'll say that I was the one that made the archives for this list restricted to subscribers only. I took this course of action because the list archives were being data mined with the aim of harassing and invading the privacy of its subscribers via the posts that they had made. Restricting the list to subscribers appeared to provide a good way of removing the list archives from search engines, and hence making it more difficult to data-mine the archives efficiently. It also provided a reasonable alternative to simply deleting the archives, which was being mooted at the time. I didn't particularly want to make the change (I'm always going to prefer things being as open and transparent as possible), but it seemed to be the only reasonable course of action possible given the situation at the time.
However, this approach of 'security by obscurity' has now been shown to be ineffective due to the list being publicly archived by other means, as well as this being pointed out on-list.. The approach of moderating who subscribes to this list is not a good one to take since that's effectively exclusion rather than obscuration.
Given the weight of opinion in favour of making the archives publicly visible again, and the lack of a rationale for not doing so, I'll make the archives publicly visible again. But before that happens, I think that there needs to be an option to redact past posts. So:
If you have posted something to this list that you would like to be redacted from the archives, for the sake of privacy or potential harassment, then please let me know within the next 3 days. I'll then confidentially send a request to the server administrators to get those posts removed from the archive. After they've been removed, then we'll open up the archives again. If you let me know outside of those three days, then I'll request their removal, but they may not be removed before the archive is made public.
Three notes. 1) I'll only request the removal of emails sent by those asking for them to be removed, unless there are *very* good reasons for their removal. 2) This only means that they will be removed from the archive hosted at lists.wikimedia.org - I'm not aware of any available ability to request the removal of posts from archives hosted by those apart from the WMF. 3) As a result of (2), this option depends on the ethical behaviour of those reading the list archives, which obviously cannot be guaranteed.
Thanks, Mike P.S. for those that the difference matters to: please note that my actions were made as a community member, not as a trustee of WMUK. No decision was made by the WMUK board on this issue. (And why, exactly, does this difference matter? We're all Wikimedians here.) P.P.S. sorry, I'm only human, I can't resist ending on a cheap shot. So, Edward: "Nor is your indifference to the way that individuals are insulted in public with libellous and false and outrageous claims very helpful either. Persuading someone to remove these vile and insulting messages would be much more helpful." Yes please, I'd really like those insults and claims to be removed from Wikipedia Review, please. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org