Jeffrey, are you the admin of this group? PlanetMath.org is well-established free/open project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlanetMath which has contributed a lot of content to Wikipedia over the years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mathematics/PlanetMath_E…. Mentioning the project is hardly advertising it. Joe On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu> wrote:

I am bringing this to attention in the #wikimedia IRC channel. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu> wrote:

It is a website that isn't Wikimedia. It is a competitor. Keep it up and I will inform the main list owners and ask that they strictly moderate the list to ensure that it is not used to promote competitors. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

Nkansah, Wikiversity is an entity that has a product (educational resources). There are other websites, some with advertisers, who tried to use Wikiversity to funnel viewers/contributors to their own projects. This has been a major problem for Wikiversity, and we are targeted because we have the connection to Wikipedia and its huge views. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

It is not about license. It is about volunteers. If you poach from Wikiversity, you should be banned. It is that simple. Our donors spend money on resources like this list. You are stealing our donors resources. That is theft. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Joe Corneli <holtzermann17(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

Really? By pointing out that directing people to other sites is wrong? Do you even have an account? Because too many people making claims about it acceptable to direct others to other sites don't. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Joe Corneli <holtzermann17(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

Mailing lists are not based on consensus, and the Foundation would never allow its sites to be used to direct people to non WMF sites and take away our volunteers. Put up your account name if you do instead of merely claiming you have one. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Joe Corneli <holtzermann17(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

I'm Ottava Rima, which would be known by most Wikiversity regulars. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

The original question was fine. The problem was that someone directed him elsewhere instead of trying to work with him on how to produce the content on Wikiversity. We've had a lot of problems with that in the past, and that is something everyone needs to look out for if we are going to have Wikiversity continue. It is a dying project because groups keep poaching our members. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 03:42:41PM -0500, Jeffrey Peters wrote: Maybe people are leaving because the project is dying. I have been dormant on wikiversity for a long time, in part because I now have less time for all WMF foundation projects, but also because of several weaknesses of the project and in part because of attitudes like yours here that are rather aggressive. It is a free project for volunteers. The word poaching should never be used in relation to those volunteers. After receiving no posts here for months, I was rather shocked to read all the posts that greeted me this morning here in Australia. Bduke -- Brian Salter-Duke bduke(a)wikimedia.org.au Active on English Wikipedia, Meta-Wiki, Wikiversity, and others. [[User:Bduke]] is single user account with en:Wikipedia main account.

Jesus wept. It's treason! Treason I say! Burn the witch! -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu> To: Mailing list for Wikiversity <wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Sun, Dec 22, 2013 1:06 pm Subject: Re: [Wikiversity-l] Are "solved problems" suitable for Wikiversity? It is not about license. It is about volunteers. If you poach from Wikiversity, you should be banned. It is that simple. Our donors spend money on resources like this list. You are stealing our donors resources. That is theft. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Joe Corneli <holtzermann17(a)gmail.com> wrote: Jeffrey: Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Wikiversity and PlanetMath use the same license. Yes, they compete for "mind-share" but the content on one can be used on the other. In this sense they are potential collaborators, and non-mutually-exclusive alternatives for the OP. Indeed, we talked at length about this kind of use in a grant proposal to the WMF: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/PlanetMath_Books_Project The proposal was not successful, partly for reasons similar to ones you mention - reviewers and community members felt, "This is great for PlanetMath, but does it really support Wikimedia projects in a concrete way?" But this does not mean that the idea behind the proposal was wrong! What I think it means is that IF this sort of proposal is to be successful in the future, the people (like me) working on external free/open projects will need to create a collaboration with members of the Wikimedia community. If we can create and work in the overlap then it is likely to be for the benefit of all. If you disagree with me about this, that's fine, but, please, since there is NOT a rule against having a discussion about this sort of thing, or about talking about other potentially supportive projects in this mailing list, I would appreciate it if you do not try to take it upon yourself to end this discussion, but instead, please DO consult with the mailing list owners, so that they can, if necessary, step in and clarify the rules. Joe On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu> wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l

I write this because Ottava (Jeffrey Peters) is insane, and I don't want people here to think that he has any actual power or serious influence. He has long threatened users like this. I have never seen anyone blocked as a result, except when Ottava was a sysop, which ultimately became a disaster because of his habit of calling people liars. After he was desysopped, he then threatened users that stewards would descend on Wikiversity and block those people who were frustrating Ottava's agenda, just as here he is threatening removal from the list. One the other hand, if anyone is removed from this list for behavior here in this thread, I want to hear about it. I can be reached by reply to the address for this mail, or through the Wikiversity user email interface, user Abd. Anyone but Ottava, that is. He is *only* on this list to make trouble. He doesn't care at all about Wikiversity. There is no WMF policy that he imagines. I just reviewed the posts here, and Ottava's incursion here was utterly outrageous. There is no "competition" between Planet Math and Wikiversity or Wikipedia. See the Planet Math article on Wikipedia, as was suggested. It appears that content on Planet Match can be reused on Wikiversity if anyone so desires. Further, Planet Math appears to have a process that could be a bit more likely to produce reliable content (in math). (To answer another question, nobody reliably validates content on Wikiversity. Wikiversity hosts, in addition to expert content, content written by *students*. Some are very young. We have "inexplicable physics" pages, so categorized because a certain WMF board member thought the physics was idiosyncratic. Perhaps it was, but they were not deleted. Warnings were placed on them. If a page on Wikiversity has possible educational usage, which could include the study of error, or, for that matter, fringe science or even pseudoscience, it will normally be kept. If it's on the edge, it might be userfied, we readily move pages into user space if there is a question about appropriateness. Let's say that, as a user, it is far less disconcerting to find the page I worked on for so many hours has been moved to my user space, than to find it deleted! Basically, because of Wikiversity traditions and practices, including the allowance of subpages in mainspace, conflict on Wikversity over content is rare.) The original question here, by Robert Dodier, was if a certain kind of math article would be welcome on Wikiversity, and the immediate answer (by me) was that it would be likely. Then Joe suggested "as an alternative," Planet Math. This is a discussion among WMF volunteers, and it could have taken place on, say, the Wikiversity Colloquium, the same. If Ottava had jumped in to excoriate Joe, on Wikiversity, as he did here, I'd be betting that he'd be blocked. And that's on a wiki that rarely blocks anyone other than vandals. And I see that the user who asked here has now asked there, on Planet Math. He is not so likely to meet someone like Ottava there, Contributing to Wikiversity could be easier, but the user might have more sympathetic company on Planet Math. All I can say for sure is that the Robert is welcome on Wikiversity., and likewise Joe Corneli, Steve Foerster, and Nkansah Rexford. The idea of collaboration with Planet Math is excellent, and the more that users who really want to build free educational materials collaborate and support each other, the more difficult it is for the snipers to pick people off. Most of us just want to build content, but we do need to ensure that someone is minding the space, keeping it safe. I notice that Ottava, in his message, threatened "moderation" because Nkansah argued with him if he were to "keep it up." Ottava seems to not understand that he's yelling at a whole group of people, each one of whom is different and each one of whom is not responsible for what the others do or say. For Ottava, it doesn't matter. They are the enemy. Whatever is happening with Ottava, it seems to be getting more pronounced. He used to be far more cogent. Abd ul-Rahman Lomax (413) 584-3151 business (413) 695-7114 cell I'm so excited I can't wait for Now.

Will you release this quote under the GPL I would like to use it elsewhere. -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu> To: Abd ulRahman Lomax <abdlomax(a)yahoo.com>om>; Mailing list for Wikiversity <wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Mon, Dec 23, 2013 9:06 pm Subject: Re: [Wikiversity-l] Are "solved problems" suitable for Wikiversity? I sometimes wonder if you are a creation of Ellison's AM and exist only to torture others. On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Abd ulRahman Lomax <abdlomax(a)yahoo.com> wrote: I write this because Ottava (Jeffrey Peters) is insane, and I don't want people here to think that he has any actual power or serious influence. He has long threatened users like this. I have never seen anyone blocked as a result, except when Ottava was a sysop, which ultimately became a disaster because of his habit of calling people liars. After he was desysopped, he then threatened users that stewards would descend on Wikiversity and block those people who were frustrating Ottava's agenda, just as here he is threatening removal from the list. One the other hand, if anyone is removed from this list for behavior here in this thread, I want to hear about it. I can be reached by reply to the address for this mail, or through the Wikiversity user email interface, user Abd. Anyone but Ottava, that is. He is *only* on this list to make trouble. He doesn't care at all about Wikiversity. There is no WMF policy that he imagines. I just reviewed the posts here, and Ottava's incursion here was utterly outrageous. There is no "competition" between Planet Math and Wikiversity or Wikipedia. See the Planet Math article on Wikipedia, as was suggested. It appears that content on Planet Match can be reused on Wikiversity if anyone so desires. Further, Planet Math appears to have a process that could be a bit more likely to produce reliable content (in math). (To answer another question, nobody reliably validates content on Wikiversity. Wikiversity hosts, in addition to expert content, content written by *students*. Some are very young. We have "inexplicable physics" pages, so categorized because a certain WMF board member thought the physics was idiosyncratic. Perhaps it was, but they were not deleted. Warnings were placed on them. If a page on Wikiversity has possible educational usage, which could include the study of error, or, for that matter, fringe science or even pseudoscience, it will normally be kept. If it's on the edge, it might be userfied, we readily move pages into user space if there is a question about appropriateness. Let's say that, as a user, it is far less disconcerting to find the page I worked on for so many hours has been moved to my user space, than to find it deleted! Basically, because of Wikiversity traditions and practices, including the allowance of subpages in mainspace, conflict on Wikversity over content is rare.) The original question here, by Robert Dodier, was if a certain kind of math article would be welcome on Wikiversity, and the immediate answer (by me) was that it would be likely. Then Joe suggested "as an alternative," Planet Math. This is a discussion among WMF volunteers, and it could have taken place on, say, the Wikiversity Colloquium, the same. If Ottava had jumped in to excoriate Joe, on Wikiversity, as he did here, I'd be betting that he'd be blocked. And that's on a wiki that rarely blocks anyone other than vandals. And I see that the user who asked here has now asked there, on Planet Math. He is not so likely to meet someone like Ottava there, Contributing to Wikiversity could be easier, but the user might have more sympathetic company on Planet Math. All I can say for sure is that the Robert is welcome on Wikiversity., and likewise Joe Corneli, Steve Foerster, and Nkansah Rexford. The idea of collaboration with Planet Math is excellent, and the more that users who really want to build free educational materials collaborate and support each other, the more difficult it is for the snipers to pick people off. Most of us just want to build content, but we do need to ensure that someone is minding the space, keeping it safe. I notice that Ottava, in his message, threatened "moderation" because Nkansah argued with him if he were to "keep it up." Ottava seems to not understand that he's yelling at a whole group of people, each one of whom is different and each one of whom is not responsible for what the others do or say. For Ottava, it doesn't matter. They are the enemy. Whatever is happening with Ottava, it seems to be getting more pronounced. He used to be far more cogent. Abd ul-Rahman Lomax (413) 584-3151 business (413) 695-7114 cell I'm so excited I can't wait for Now. From: Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu> To: Mailing list for Wikiversity <wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2013 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [Wikiversity-l] Are "solved problems" suitable for Wikiversity? It is a website that isn't Wikimedia. It is a competitor. Keep it up and I will inform the main list owners and ask that they strictly moderate the list to ensure that it is not used to promote competitors. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com> wrote: @jeffery, mentioning Planet math here is advertising? Really? When did that become advertising? Hmmmm, still wondering. Its not as if the link is to Joe's personal website or something. Its a website known by many. Joe is just bringing up an issue and I believe its great considering the matter than banning the matter saying its advertising. "Not an advertising group"? Apart from the mailing list of Wikiversity, where else can discussions of this sort be held? I'm in this mailing list, Wikimania, Wikipedia, and other mailing lists. Links are posted to references and stuffs like that. They're all Wikimedia mailing list, but how come such links never get categorized as adverts but are used in discussion? Is this "not advertising group" idea applied to only Wikiversity? Cmon google.com/+Nkansahrexford | sent from Tab On Dec 22, 2013 4:03 PM, "Joe Corneli" <holtzermann17(a)gmail.com> wrote: I am bringing this to attention in the #wikimedia IRC channel. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Jeffrey Peters <17peters(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu> wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l