Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ Bureaucracy _ The Research Committee

Posted by: thekohser

Jeez, http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060306.html I'll have to sign up for. I wonder, maybe a famous London statistician will also get involved.

Posted by: EricBarbour

......here we go again..........

Posted by: Cock-up-over-conspiracy

QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 3rd August 2010, 4:25am) *

Jeez, http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060306.html I'll have to sign up for. I wonder, maybe a famous London statistician will also get involved.

It unpaid Public Relationship assistant work. Gosh, how important I would feel doing it. Unfortunately, my CV does not have the space to fit in more slave labor.

What is "support the management ... of relationships with researchers" anyway?
QUOTE
Erik Moeller erik at wikimedia.org
Tue Aug 3 01:39:44 UTC 2010

Hello all,

The Wikimedia Foundation is looking for volunteers who would like to
support the management of relationships between Wikimedia communities
and the broader communities of researchers who study Wikimedia
projects. We hope to create a committee with volunteers from both
groups with a rich combination of skills and backgrounds.

Here are some areas of work that this new Wikimedia Research
Committee, with help from the Wikimedia Foundation staff, is intended
to explore:

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 3rd August 2010, 12:25am) *

Jeez, http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060306.html I'll have to sign up for. I wonder, maybe a famous London statistician will also get involved.


Yet Another Logo And Motto Exhibition (WP:YALAME)

Howsabout —Watcha wanna bet the Credulous Point Of View (CPOV) folks already know about this?

Something for you “Follar the Dollar” gumpshoes to look into …

Time will tell whether they Leipzigged when they shoulda Leapzagged …

Jon dry.gif

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Tue 3rd August 2010, 6:50am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 3rd August 2010, 12:25am) *

Jeez, http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060306.html I'll have to sign up for. I wonder, maybe a famous London statistician will also get involved.


Yet Another Logo And Motto Exhibition (WP:YALAME)

Howsabout —
  • Wikipediot Resuck Committee : The Best Phony Research (PR) Your Money Can Buy
Watcha wanna bet the Credulous Point Of View (CPOV) folks already know about this?

Something for you “Follar the Dollar” gumpshoes to look into …

Time will tell whether they Leipzigged when they shoulda Leapzagged …

Jon dry.gif


Imagine some other subject of research wanting to determine what information to provide, what avenues of inquiry to pursue and what standards of review to be used. I mean other than maybe http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128929784&ft=1&f=1001

Posted by: thekohser

It may be appropriate here to copy a would-be post of mine to the Foundation-l mailing list, which is currently on hold for "moderation".

QUOTE
Erik,

Will critics of less-than-best-practices within the Wikimedia Foundation be considered for invitation to the Wikimedia Research Committee, or is there some sort of loyalty "litmus test" going to be applied?

I've sent my self-nomination by private e-mail anyway, but I thought a public clarification of this question would be a helpful learning.

Thanks,

Greg

--
Gregory Kohs

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 3rd August 2010, 2:13pm) *

It may be appropriate here to copy a would-be post of mine to the Foundation-l mailing list, which is currently on hold for "moderation".

QUOTE
Erik,

Will critics of less-than-best-practices within the Wikimedia Foundation be considered for invitation to the Wikimedia Research Committee, or is there some sort of loyalty "litmus test" going to be applied?

I've sent my self-nomination by private e-mail anyway, but I thought a public clarification of this question would be a helpful learning.

Thanks,

Greg

--
Gregory Kohs




Ha ha! They http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060384.html. And it drew two responses from "the Gerards". Here's my response, which won't likely get published:

QUOTE
Gerard M. says:

Dear Greg,
This is not about criticism but about research. With respect I have not seen
your research papers, I am not aware of your credentials that would make you
a choice to be considered for being part of a research committee.

Given that the work of the committee includes work on policies that have to
do with access to confidential data, it seems to me only natural that your
status as being banned from several Wikis is an other reason why you are
easily disqualified from participating in a research committee.

At that you have had your "test" several times and as a result you are a
known entity.
Thanks,
GerardM

++++++++++++++++++++

Allow me to make you aware of my credentials, Gerard, since you asked "with respect".

I'm the Director of Market Research for a company valued at $52 billion. I've been making a living with market research for 18 years now.

One of my co-authored research papers was published in a scientific journal supplement:
http://www.ajronline.org/cgi/data/183/3/DC1/1

I've written a white paper about research for public relations:
http://www.icrsurvey.com/docs/MR%20for%20PR.doc

For the more casual reader, I've maintained an occasional blog on research since 2005:
http://insidemr.blogspot.com/

And, I've conducted numerous informal but systematic research studies about Wikimedia properties:
http://www.wikipediareview.com/Wikipedia_Vandalism_Study
http://toolserver.org/~mzmcbride/watcher/ (You'll have to ask around about that one.)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Survey_about_Wikipedia (Currently, a bit slow-going on the analysis, due to editing parameters imposed on the Wikiversity community by Jimmy Wales)

I am curious about this "access to confidential data" of which you speak. This presupposes that other members of the vast Wikimedia community do currently have access to this confidential data. Have they been vetted in some way that you can be assured that they won't do something with that data more monstrous than what I would ever do with such data? I'm trusted with confidential customer account data by a $52 billion company. Respectfully, how about you?


******************
Meanwhile, D. Gerard says:

Trolling blogs probably isn't the best resume item, no. HTH!

******************

Playing dress-up probably is an "interesting" resume item, no?

http://tinyurl.com/david-gerard-wikipedia

Hope that helps!

Greg

--
Gregory Kohs
Cell: 302.463.1354

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 6th August 2010, 10:39am) *

******************
Meanwhile, D. Gerard says:

Trolling blogs probably isn't the best resume item, no. HTH!

******************

Playing dress-up probably is an "interesting" resume item, no?

http://tinyurl.com/david-gerard-wikipedia

Hope that helps!

Greg


Give it up, Greg. David "The" Gerard will never let you in to do anything.

If you want someone to compare him to, how about http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050030?
Raging egomaniac, http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008050034 and silly-website generator.

David Gerard is the pseudo-libertarian alterna-culture wiki-universe Bizarro Kevin Pezzi.
But both assholes. biggrin.gif

Posted by: Seurat

bored.gif I thought that the folks around here would enjoy seeing a group of identifiable people, including wtf.gif experts, participating in "steering" roles on Wikipedia. I wonder what Sanger thinks about this.

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 2:57pm) *
I thought that the folks around here would enjoy seeing a group of identifiable people, including wtf.gif experts, participating in "steering" roles on Wikipedia.

Well, an expert just offered his services, and was rejected out of hand.
Because he's a well-known critic of Wikipedia and Jimbo, and was banned
from WMF sites for that reason. The only reason.

Seems to me that if they were serious, they'd accept a wide range of "experts".
But they're not serious. They only want "experts" who are willing to suck the
teeny-tiny knobs of Jimbo and Friends, and salute the Wiki-Flag each day.

QUOTE
I wonder what Sanger thinks about this.

Feel free to send him a message. You might not like the response.

Posted by: Seurat

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Fri 6th August 2010, 10:16pm) *

Seems to me that if they were serious, they'd accept a wide range of "experts".
But they're not serious. They only want "experts" who are willing to suck the
teeny-tiny knobs of Jimbo and Friends, and salute the Wiki-Flag each day.

dry.gif I think it's entirely reasonable of them to limit such a committee to people who want Wikipedia to succeed. If you want to make lulzy analogies about "saluting the Wiki-Flag each day", that's your prerogative, but it doesn't negate the fact that the folks making the decisions do not trust Gregory Kohs to act in their best interest. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Cock-up-over-conspiracy

I don't mean to flatter Kohs, but the problem is that he is just too intelligent for them.

I see this a lot. it is not a question of "right" and "wrong", adherence to the cult etc ...

It is just that any editor that is too quick and too clever will make the inmates unhappy because they don't understand what is going on and he is moving too quickly for them.

If there was intelligent leadership, they would take on board someone like Kohs. it is far better to have the best or most committed critics "inside the tent" pissing out, rather than "outside the tent pissing in" to quote Lyndon B. Johnson.

It is far better to enfranchise your opponents rather than feed them with the material they need to destroy you.

This is what Wikipedian cultists fail to realise time and time again.

Posted by: Cedric

Is it just me, or is this just a ploy by the WMF to steer research studies on their websites to conclusions more friendly to the WMF? Look at the "areas of work" that Erik outlines:

QUOTE
* developing policy around researcher permissions for non-public data
* supporting the development of subject recruitment processes
* reviewing research projects when conflicts-of-interest arise
* articulating and channeling requests for data and technical resources
* helping to formulate the key strategic research objectives of the
Wikimedia movement (see strategy.wikimedia.org)
* helping to formulate small tactical experiments related to
Wikimedia's strategic goals
* developing an open access policy as a requirement for significant
support from the Wikimedia Foundation
* helping create a "starter kit" for researchers to avoid duplication of effort


And what's up with the call for volunteers? If it is that important, why aren't WMF staff being assigned to this "Research Committee"? Like so much else with the WMF, this looks rather hinky and makes little sense. Do they actually think a truly independent and ethical researcher would fall for any of this bilge?

Posted by: Eva Destruction

QUOTE(Seurat @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:04am) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Fri 6th August 2010, 10:16pm) *

Seems to me that if they were serious, they'd accept a wide range of "experts".
But they're not serious. They only want "experts" who are willing to suck the
teeny-tiny knobs of Jimbo and Friends, and salute the Wiki-Flag each day.

dry.gif I think it's entirely reasonable of them to limit such a committee to people who want Wikipedia to succeed. If you want to make lulzy analogies about "saluting the Wiki-Flag each day", that's your prerogative, but it doesn't negate the fact that the folks making the decisions do not trust Gregory Kohs to act in their best interest. rolleyes.gif

Subtle but important error there. Most folk who know Greg do know he'd act in what he believes to be Wikipedia's best interest; he's a pretty enthusiastic banger of the open-editing drum. The issue is that Jimbo and co aren't willing to accept anyone whose vision of where Wikipedia ought to go differs in any way from their own party line.

Posted by: Moulton


http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research_Network

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Chief_Research_Coordinator

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chief_Research_Officer

Posted by: Seurat

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Fri 6th August 2010, 11:32pm) *

QUOTE(Seurat @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:04am) *

dry.gif I think it's entirely reasonable of them to limit such a committee to people who want Wikipedia to succeed. If you want to make lulzy analogies about "saluting the Wiki-Flag each day", that's your prerogative, but it doesn't negate the fact that the folks making the decisions do not trust Gregory Kohs to act in their best interest. rolleyes.gif

Subtle but important error there. Most folk who know Greg do know he'd act in what he believes to be Wikipedia's best interest; he's a pretty enthusiastic banger of the open-editing drum. The issue is that Jimbo and co aren't willing to accept anyone whose vision of where Wikipedia ought to go differs in any way from their own party line.

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know Greg" ≠ "the folks making the decisions". And as a result of the way he goes about his criticisms, the folks making the decisions aren't so interested in getting to know Greg. rolleyes.gif

I'm not against Greg being part of this research group, nor against him being excluded. I'm merely pointing out that it's a natural consequence of his vociferous criticism that the generalization will be made that he wishes to "hasten the day".

Posted by: Eva Destruction

QUOTE(Seurat @ Sat 7th August 2010, 1:35am) *

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know Greg" ≠ "the folks making the decisions".

Bullshit. I can guarantee that everyone at the WMF is well aware of Greg (who remains, AFAIK, the only person ever to have wrung an apology from Jimmy Wales for his treatment at the hands of the Wikipedia goon-squad).

Posted by: Subtle Bee

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 5:35pm) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Fri 6th August 2010, 11:32pm) *

Subtle but important error there. Most folk who know Greg do know he'd act in what he believes to be Wikipedia's best interest; he's a pretty enthusiastic banger of the open-editing drum. The issue is that Jimbo and co aren't willing to accept anyone whose vision of where Wikipedia ought to go differs in any way from their own party line.

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know Greg" ≠ "the folks making the decisions". And as a result of the way he goes about his criticisms, the folks making the decisions aren't so interested in getting to know Greg. rolleyes.gif

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know shit" ≠ "the folks making the decisions". And as a result of the way they go about avoiding criticism, the folks making the decisions aren't so interested in getting to know shit. rolleyes.gif


Posted by: Seurat

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:51am) *

QUOTE(Seurat @ Sat 7th August 2010, 1:35am) *

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know Greg" ≠ "the folks making the decisions".

Bullshit. I can guarantee that everyone at the WMF is well aware of Greg (who remains, AFAIK, the only person ever to have wrung an apology from Jimmy Wales for his treatment at the hands of the Wikipedia goon-squad).

Can you similarly guarantee that they know to what extent he would act in their best interests? I'm not arguing that they're not aware of Greg, I'm arguing that they don't know that he might be helpful. They do not find his criticisms helpful, and that weighs against him. They don't comment here talking to him or about him, and they therefore do not get to know him. What leads from that is obvious: if you want Greg to be included in this sort of thing, work on convincing them that he can, in fact, be helpful to their mission, that he does have their interests at heart despite his criticism.

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:52am) *

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 5:35pm) *

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know Greg" ≠ "the folks making the decisions". And as a result of the way he goes about his criticisms, the folks making the decisions aren't so interested in getting to know Greg. rolleyes.gif

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know shit" ≠ "the folks making the decisions". And as a result of the way they go about avoiding criticism, the folks making the decisions aren't so interested in getting to know shit. rolleyes.gif

There are a number of ways I could answer this. Choose one:
  1. "Wait, did you just compare Greg to shit? confused.gif"
  2. "I can totally understand! I don't want to grok fecal matter myself. I prefer to flush it. wink.gif"
  3. Hey, let's play some Mad Libs! laugh.gif

Posted by: Subtle Bee

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 6:56pm) *

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:52am) *

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 5:35pm) *

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know Greg" ≠ "the folks making the decisions". And as a result of the way he goes about his criticisms, the folks making the decisions aren't so interested in getting to know Greg. rolleyes.gif

Subtle but important error there. "Most folk who know shit" ≠ "the folks making the decisions". And as a result of the way they go about avoiding criticism, the folks making the decisions aren't so interested in getting to know shit. rolleyes.gif

There are a number of ways I could answer this. Choose one:
  1. "Wait, did you just compare Greg to shit? confused.gif"
  2. "I can totally understand! I don't want to grok fecal matter myself. I prefer to flush it. wink.gif"
  3. Hey, let's play some Mad Libs! laugh.gif

1. Yeah. But he's a pretty good shit. smile.gif
2. Kinda ironic, given your username...
3. Way ahead of you.

But no matter which gambit you choose, you'll still miss the point, which in a way is the point. Or at least illustrates it.

Posted by: Seurat

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 2:06am) *

2. Kinda ironic, given your username...

Why is that ironic? The only part of my username that might be relevant to shit is the "rat" part, and for that I might as well be calling you a naval man, "Sub".

Either way, this is getting off topic. I'm not going to argue your point, because I don't care about whether this incident can be used to call them stupid or ignorant, or not. I think that it's reasonable to exclude people from your committees that don't have your best interests at heart, and it's clear that those who chose the members of this committee think that Greg does not have their best interests at heart. That's the entirety of the point I wanted to make. Whether their decision is misguided I leave as an exercise to the reader, regardless of whether they think that he's the Lucifer of the Wiki World or the light-bearer on all WikiMistakes. evilgrin.gif

"BREAKING NEWS: Seurat does not give a shit either way." Whoops, there's that shit popping up again. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: Subtle Bee

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 8:12pm) *

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 2:06am) *

2. Kinda ironic, given your username...

Why is that ironic? The only part of my username that might be relevant to shit is the "rat" part, and for that I might as well be calling you a naval man, "Sub".

Either way, this is getting off topic. I'm not going to argue your point, because I don't care about whether this incident can be used to call them stupid or ignorant, or not. I think that it's reasonable to exclude people from your committees that don't have your best interests at heart, and it's clear that those who chose the members of this committee think that Greg does not have their best interests at heart. That's the entirety of the point I wanted to make. Whether their decision is misguided I leave as an exercise to the reader, regardless of whether they think that he's the Lucifer of the Wiki World or the light-bearer on all WikiMistakes. evilgrin.gif

"BREAKING NEWS: Seurat does not give a shit either way." Whoops, there's that shit popping up again. rolleyes.gif

My misunderstanding then, I'd assumed your name was a novel spelling of "sewer rat", but of course it could be many things, including a proper last name, and I didn't mean to call you anything you don't already call yourself.

My point wasn't just to call names (even inadvertent ones!), but that there seems to be a reckless conflation of criticism with malice, and the result is that no one hears or sees anything they don't want to. Greg's bright, but he's no Lucifer.

Posted by: thekohser

What gets me, though, is:

(a) why can't Moeller bring himself to answer the question about a litmus test?

(b) why do all the other members of that list let him get away with it?

It is a good question. The non-answer speaks volumes. Of COURSE there is a litmus test that must be passed to be allowed to guide research on Wikimedia projects.



Meanwhile, here's Sue Gardner doing some of her http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060431.html...

The online questionnaire "doesn't seem to have any safeguards against spamming. But please just fill out the survey once :-)"

Sure, Sue. We'll be good kids and only fill out your survey once.

Posted by: lonza leggiera

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 1:35pm) *

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 8:12pm) *

...

My misunderstanding then, I'd assumed your name was a novel spelling of "sewer rat", but of course it could be many things, including a proper last name, ...


Or maybe even the proper surname, say, of some French post-impressionist painter.

Posted by: Subtle Bee

QUOTE(lonza leggiera @ Sat 7th August 2010, 1:49am) *

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 1:35pm) *

QUOTE(Seurat @ Fri 6th August 2010, 8:12pm) *

...

My misunderstanding then, I'd assumed your name was a novel spelling of "sewer rat", but of course it could be many things, including a proper last name, ...


Or maybe even the proper surname, say, of some French post-impressionist painter.

Well sure, I suppose. But which one?

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?act=findpost&pid=241777

Posted by: Subtle Bee

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:47pm) *

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?act=findpost&pid=241777


Posted by: Moulton

What is the name of the affective emotional state signaled by the expression in his eyes?

Posted by: Subtle Bee

QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 7th August 2010, 8:13pm) *

What is the name of the affective emotional state signaled by the expression in his eyes?

I dunno - what'd Neitsche call it before he went mad?

Great scene though. I may suck at art appreciation, but art appreciation appreciation is where I really am a Viking.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 11:02pm) *

QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 7th August 2010, 8:13pm) *

What is the name of the affective emotional state signaled by the expression in his eyes?

I dunno - what'd Neitsche call it before he went mad?

The syphilabyss.

I think he had only two neurons at the end, and they were only connected by a spirochete.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 8th August 2010, 3:51am) *

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 11:02pm) *

QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 7th August 2010, 8:13pm) *

What is the name of the affective emotional state signaled by the expression in his eyes?


I dunno — what'd [Nietzsche] call it before he went mad?


The syphilabyss.

I think he had only two neurons at the end, and they were only connected by a spirochete.


Agnew Spirochete.
Spirochete was not a friend o' mine!
But did he not make a very fine whine?

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 4:11pm) *

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:47pm) *




Uh-Oh, Yet Another Violation Of WR:POINTILLISM !!!



Standing too close to the picture does not make it The Big Picture.

Jon wtf.gif

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Sun 8th August 2010, 1:10am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 8th August 2010, 3:51am) *

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 11:02pm) *

QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 7th August 2010, 8:13pm) *

What is the name of the affective emotional state signaled by the expression in his eyes?


I dunno — what'd [Nietzsche] call it before he went mad?


The syphilabyss.

I think he had only two neurons at the end, and they were only connected by a spirochete.


Agnew Spirochete.
Spirochete was not a friend o' mine!
But did he not make a very fine whine?

Jon tongue.gif

I think it was more of a natter. Ironically.

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Sun 8th August 2010, 1:19am) *

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 7th August 2010, 4:11pm) *

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sat 7th August 2010, 12:47pm) *




Uh-Oh, Yet Another Violation Of WR:POINTILLISM !!!

You still haven't read Seurat's userbox on WR.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 6th August 2010, 1:39pm) *

Here's my response, which won't likely get published...


I was right. I received this yesterday in my e-mail inbox:

QUOTE
Your request to the foundation-l mailing list

Posting of your message titled "Re: Call for Volunteers: Wikimedia
Research Committee"

has been rejected by the list moderator. The moderator gave the
following reason for rejecting your request:

"Greg,

Obviously you're trolling here, particularly with your response to
David's comment. ("Playing dress-up probably is an 'interesting'
resume item, no?") And quite honestly, your last post was
borderline-trolling, but I let it slide because I'd rather err on the
side of letting you have your say.

If you tried to tone it down a little, I think you'd find much more
support within the Wikimedia community - you occasionally do have
valid points, but they're obscured by your vitriolic tone. At the
very least, if you stopped posting obviously inflammatory comments, I
would rarely have to reject your posts.

-Ral315"

Any questions or comments should be directed to the list administrator
at:

foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org


Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Uh-Oh! Looks like you get to be in the con-troll group again …

You'd think they'd tumble to that http://americanfolklore.net/folklore/2010/07/brer_rabbit_meets_a_tar_baby.html bit eventually —

But noooo.gif

Jon popcorn.gif

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Ral315)
Obviously you're trolling here, particularly with your response to David's comment. ("Playing dress-up probably is an 'interesting' resume item, no?")

Well, to be fair, Dave Gerard is awfully sensitive about the dozens of high-resolution drag-queen photos of himself that he's uploaded to his various personal websites over the years, not to mention the fact that he includes glossy 8x10 copies with his professional resumé. If a comment like that were allowed to get through to the mailing list, Dave's feelings might have been hurt!

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 8th August 2010, 9:48am) *
Well, to be fair, Dave Gerard is awfully sensitive about the dozens of high-resolution drag-queen photos of himself that he's uploaded to his various personal websites over the years, not to mention the fact that he includes glossy 8x10 copies with his professional resumé.

Does anyone have some of those photos?

I have a use for them. tongue.gif

Posted by: tarantino

The initial membership of the http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_Committee has been named. Included among the academics and scholars is an http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Eloquence and the cartoon character http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(tarantino @ Sat 28th August 2010, 6:00pm) *

The initial membership of the http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_Committee has been named. Included among the academics and scholars is an http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Eloquence and the cartoon character http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers.


Some of the people on the Committee look like they're appropriate for such a group, if a bit self-involved in the Wikimedia culture. Personally, I'm surprised that Erik found more than three others to help him with his ego. I wish them luck working with the Squirrelin' Merlin from Berlin.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 29th August 2010, 12:40am) *

QUOTE(tarantino @ Sat 28th August 2010, 6:00pm) *

The initial membership of the http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_Committee has been named. Included among the academics and scholars is an http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Eloquence and the cartoon character http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers.


Some of the people on the Committee look like they're appropriate for such a group, if a bit self-involved in the Wikimedia culture. Personally, I'm surprised that Erik found more than three others to help him with his ego. I wish them luck working with the Squirrelin' Merlin from Berlin.


It's also a sausage festival, except for http://iet-people.open.ac.uk/_people-images/F45BB1A2-CB2E-4BF1-AE03DA17DD41F0FB.jpg and http://media.linkedin.com/mpr/mpr/shrink_80_80/p/1/000/034/362/2dd3782.jpg.

(You're welcome, Horsey.)