Those points make sense-however the only issue with having multiple
blogs is they look unused and dormant If there are too many.
On Sunday, October 4, 2009, <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:
#blog on front page
I know who past accredited reporters were, and who some of those who
still are, are.
Sooner or later someone will "rant" in an inappropriate and extremely
poorly thought out way. Sure, it is themselves they're opening up to
comments that rip their arguments apart for being poorly thought out and
not based in reality. But it will reflect poorly on us all, and look
highly unprofessional. That's why I would rather have more than one
blog, define a clear scope for any blogs we do have, not have them
in-your-face up-front, and if anyone does feel the need to "rant" they
do it on their own personal blog.
#list of accredited users on wikinewsie
The email domain is @http://wikinewsie.org. If you contact someone, and they
decide to see who/what a "Wikinewsie" is, they'll look at that
domain's
website. If they're redirected to en.wn, they could attach all the
"unreliable", "anyone can change it", &c connotations from seeing
a
wiki. Presenting the data (list of reporters & bios) in such a way that
it looks 'cast-in-stone', and unalterable is more credible.
I am also on ComCom, and have access to the OTRS queue for press queries
sent to the WMF. You do tend to carry out these sort of checks, you do
want to "know thine enemy" before responding. Just like when someone
emails from a gmail address, and says they're from the NYT, you make an
effort to verify this is true. This can even be emailing back and asking
for contact from a @nyt address.
#google for email
I'm doing my best to keep my email out of the UK government's
super-database. I have zero assurances or trust Google won't give up
that information if told "He's a UK peon, we say you're one of his ISPs,
give all the data". If you think it won't happen, look at how they
cooperate with China. At least USians have the current attempt to get
telcos bitchslapped for warantless wiretapping, not so for many others.
I have used gmail accounts as a convenient and semi-anonymous free email
address. If I ever intend to say something I would prefer difficult to
pin on me, I always retrieve and send email with POP/SMTP *through Tor*.
Let's see a show of hands as to how many people on this list, accredited
or not, could actually do that.
I am disinclined to use Google for wikinewsie stuff on that basis,
they're not really the techie "do-no-evil" company anymore, they're an
advertising and marketing company. They will always collect data to make
saleable statistics - I prefer to "poison the well" and skew the
statistics over helpfully providing such data.
As Jon says, we've had this Google Apps argument before. I've 20 years
experience in IT with a big chunk of that in cellular telecoms, I used
to get my hands on 1/4" mag tapes with a full month's call details for
all a service provider's subscribers; who called, for how long, which
tower(s) handled the call, all the numbers dialled that didn't answer.
There has never been any thought that this data belongs to the
subscriber. That attitude has never changed, just a variety of
concessions to stop customers running away screaming, or compliance with
whatever government legislation is enacted to give the appearance of
privacy.
So I'm fairly sure my position is well-informed. Google will quickly and
quietly fold in the face of concerns from a sovereign government. We're
trying to be journalists, using Google is like Bob Woodward faxing all
his reporter's notes to a document storage company that would hand them
over the second Tricky Dicky asked.
Brian.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] Wikinewsie
> From: Tristan Thomas <tris(a)waterhay.co.uk>
> Date: Sun, October 04, 2009 9:22 am
> To: Wikinews mailing list <wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>
>
> I like Jon's proposal. I want to keep list of accredited users on Wikinews
> as there's no reason it needs to be anywhere else. We can start having
> quick biogs of reporters on there if that's what people want. Agree with
> Gmail-Godaddy is forwarded to it anyway for me, so not too bothered. TBH I
> can't see it is worth it to get SUL-it's only a few things & you can
have
> the same details.
> Thoughts on Jon's idea?
>
> 2009/10/4 Jon Davis <wiki(a)konsoletek.com>
>
> > I was thinkin about this problem and here's what I came up with.
> >
> > - Make
Wikinewsie.org (main page), the blog.
> > - Allow trusted users to have an account on the blog to basically post what
> > they want. We always tell people "We don't do editorials, thats what
blogs
> > are for", well there you go. We can have our Offsite, non-official blog,
> > where we can be POV. Well at least some people can do that stuff. Some
> > people like me can stick to posting technical news.
> > - Stick to maintaining the accredited user list on en.Wikinews
> > - GoDaddy email/Calendar get replaced by Gmail Apps for your Domain. I
> > know their free version supports up to 25 users, we can probably email them
> > and get more because we're kinda sorta non-profit.
> > - Keep the Wikinewsie wiki an embargoed wiki, we don't need a public
> > namespace on that.
> > - The answer to the "SUL-like" question is LDAP. I know you can
easily tie
> > Mediawiki to LDAP and from my quick google'ing, wordpress too. That being
> > said, is it worth it? I dunno. Then you have to maintain the LDAP service
> > too, and that doesn't even mention the mail issue (you'd have to have
your
> > own app for that, no hosted deal). Oh, and I forgot the issue of
> > permissions.
> >
> > I'd be willing to volunteer for some the technical stuff, after all servers
> > are kinda my thing.
> >
> > -SGN
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 05:46, <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I want to see the blog resurrected on Wikinewsie - and perhaps others
> >> added there too. You can pretty much forget us getting a WMF-provided
> >> blog of any particular sort until we prove such will clearly fit the
> >> remit laid out to justify 501(c) status.
> >>
> >> The Editors' Blog did not do too well for a variety of reasons. The
> >> scope was intended to be on the details of the news reporting process,
> >> yes with posts being single author and having a clear byline there is
> >> nothing wrong with opinion that would not meet NPOV. There is a problem
> >> with ranting anger that isn't cogently justified.
> >>
> >> A more technical blog, or one with a focus on recent meta-news might
> >> work. There certainly isn't much chance of us being able to make
> >> submissions to the official WMF tech blog. In this case, WordPress is
> >> more appropriate than wiki technology because there is little
> >> collaboration on the published item, and a need for a widely-known
> >> simple comment system.
> >>
> >> I set up
Wikinewsie.org because, despite asking again and again, nobody
> >> would agree to give us @http://wikinews.org or even @http://en.wikinews.org
email
> >> addresses. The rest is just because it'd be stupid not to have a web
> >> page matching the domain in the email addresses.
> >>
> >> At Wikimania in Alexandria, there were nods of agreement from Sue, Jay,
> >> and Michael when I said I would like the WMF to take over the domain and
> >> provide the hosting. Since then nothing, but it is clear from current
> >> discussions that Wikinews is not a remotely important project when
> >> prioritising the issues the WMF has to deal with. There is an open
> >> invitation fo> >> bawolff%2Bwn(a)gmail.com
<bawolff%252Bwn(a)gmail.com>>>
> >> > > > Date: Fri, October 02, 2009 11:26 pm
> >> > > > To: Wikinews mailing list
<wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In the interest of fairness, only one of thoose gadgets are
mine.
> >> The
> >> > > > other one is the original version stolen from the french
> >> wikinewsies.
> >> > > > Cheers.
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > - Brian
> >> > > > Caution: The mass of this product contains the energy
equivalent of
> >> 85
> >> > > > million tons of TNT per net ounce of weight.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Jon Davis
<wiki(a)konsoletek.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > > I've been told at one point in time, we had a
regularly scheduled
> >> > > newsletter
> >> > > > > of the important goings on at Wikinews. I can't
find it in the
> >> list
> >> > > > > archives, but no matter. I figured it was about time
to
> >> > > start/resurrect
> >> > > > > it. After all, we do important things around here and
if you
> >> aren't on
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > Wiki 24/7, you might miss something. So here are the
important
> >> > > highlights
> >> > > > > from last month:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > September 12th we had a banner day with 20 published
articles in
> >> one
> >> > > day.
> >> > > > > [[Category:September 12, 2009]] -
http://enwn.net/A029
> >> > > > > The RSS feed has been truncated to a more reasonable
number -
> >> > > > >
http://feeds.feedburner.com/WikinewsLatestNews
> >> > > > > We started a page to help Wikipedians better integrated
with
> >> Wikinews -
> >> > > > > [[Wikinews:For Wikipedians]] -
http://enwn.net/197b
> >> > > > > [[Wikinews:Make Lead]] has been integrated into Easy
Peer Review
> >> by
> >> > > Bawolff
> >> > > > > -
http://enwn.net/b05f
> >> > > > > Bawolff also gave us not one but two different gadgets
that
> >> integrate
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > Wiktionary [[WN:WiktLookup]] -
http://enwn.net/F52b
> >> > > > > As of September 16th, we're not being carried on
Google News, due
> >> to a
> >> > > > > change in MediaWiki. Bug #20818 -
http://enwn.net/246c
> >> > > > > Some article statistics were made
[[User:ShakataGaNai/Statistics
> >> > > Project]] -
> >> > > > >
http://enwn.net/5967
> >> > > > > The [[Main Page]] is getting an overhaul, with the new
design to
> >> show
> >> > > up in
> >> > > > > the next 24-48 hours -
http://enwn.net/h
> >> > > > > Policy proposed & passed to "Expire"
Accredited Reports after 2
> >> years.
> >> > > -
> >> > > > >
http://enwn.net/6972
> >> > > > > All the Water Coolers are now being archived (by month)
> >> automatically.
> >> > > > > New Administrators: 1, New Editors: 5
> >> >