[06:17:21] hi [21:36:29] !seen howief [21:36:29] --elephant-- I don't know anything about "seen". [21:36:38] elephant: You should :-) [21:39:01] About that link... From the "Rate this article"-box to the project page of it... Any news? [21:42:43] The "Article feedback"-project... [21:44:46] A request backed by three other editors here: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Talk:Article_feedback/Public_Policy_Pilot/Workgroup#A_link_to_project_page [21:55:39] jorm: Do you know if the "Article feedback"-project is a community project or if it is a foundation project? [21:56:24] It is a foundation project. [21:56:45] Do you know who's in charge of it? [21:57:09] That is in flux, but you can talk to me about it. [21:58:47] Do you know about that link from the Rating-box I asked for? [21:59:26] I know that it's intended to happen, and it's in a version waiting for deployment. [21:59:35] Or it should be. It's high on the list. [22:00:20] I'm glad to hear that. Do you have an approximate date? (So I don't come back and bug you more that I have to :-)) [22:02:39] No, I do not. [22:02:57] In the future, I'll be able to be more helpful; I am only now starting to rotate back onto the project. [22:03:31] OK. I'm also curious on what (or who's initiative) this project was started. [22:04:07] It is part of the Foundation's goal towards improving overall quality and quality metrics in a measurable way. [22:04:36] However, it is also now being rolled into the -1 to 100 Edits project for some of its other qualities. [22:05:28] I don't understand what that last thing means. Can you rephrase it? [22:06:05] There is a larger "Umbrella" project involving editor retention and lifecycle. [22:06:17] OK. [22:06:46] While quality metrics don't necessarily have much to do with editor lifecycle, there are several other things that Article Feedback provides that *do*. [22:07:36] So it is being pulled under that project, which is currently being spearheaded by me. Which is why the project is in flux. [22:08:19] "in flux" = no particular person in charge ? [22:09:20] No; just that the ownership is changing and people have been on vacation and/or traveling. The primary kick-off meeting hasn't happened yet. Etc. So the transition hasn't completed. [22:10:54] Reading https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Talk:Article_feedback/Public_Policy_Pilot/Workgroup i see editors voicing complaints about the project. People feel left out. I do too. [22:11:34] I don't know what to tell you about that. I have not been on the project for some months now. [22:13:12] Also I'm concerned the foundation is taking a role it may not have mandate for... Isn't the foundation supposed to support the community, not the other way around? [22:13:46] I am not in a position to discuss the parameters of the Foundation's mandate. [22:14:01] You should talk to Sue or Erik about that. [22:14:11] OK. [22:15:33] Ok I'm out of questions. Thanks for you time :-) [22:16:07] Personally, I can say that many times the definition of "helping and supporting the community" in reality is at odds with what a percentage of the community expects. [22:16:15] at least, that's my experience. [22:16:24] <^demon> Can't please everybody. [22:16:36] no. [22:17:19] As in "the community doesn't know what's best for itself"? [22:17:26] i think a lot of people interpret "supporting the community" as "doing exactly what the community says to do always" when that's actually not a good interpretation. [22:17:44] Something like that, but I don't know that I would use that phrase. [22:17:55] more like "sometimes, the community tries to accidentally poison itself." [22:18:19] Can you give an example? [22:18:29] these types of things become especially egregious when the demographics of a particular group are heavily skewed. [22:18:31] well, okay. [22:18:43] the current discussion to require autoconfirmed to create articles. [22:18:57] that's a horrible, horrible idea, and may very well *kill* the community. [22:19:06] Man, I AM out of the loop! :-) [22:19:27] Nobody in their right mind can think that's a good idea! [22:19:32] or the fact that the demographic makeup of commons POTD voters skews to something like 80% male. [22:19:43] and yet, that policy is possibly going to pass. [22:20:18] But that's insane! [22:20:28] i don't disagree. [22:20:49] <^demon> jorm: enwiki already disallows anonymous page creation as it is. [22:20:54] Of course you don't. If you did that would make YOU insane ;-) [22:21:06] yeah, chad. which i'm okay with on that one. [22:21:09] but still. [22:21:42] I'm not... We need better tools to screen new articles, not stop new articles from being created. [22:22:37] <^demon> Anonymous page creation was disabled years ago as an open-ended "test." [22:22:55] Marshall law you mean ;-) [22:24:06] <^demon> However you put it :) The problem was a proliferation of spam pages created by anonymous users. [22:24:22] Yeah. There's talks of doing the autoconfirmed thing as an open-ended test. [22:24:24] <^demon> Did it solve that problem? Yep. But I'm willing to bet we've lost some good content over the years as collateral damage. [22:24:50] yeah. that always seems to be the trade-off. [22:25:03] the numbers regarding the editors we kill off are really depressing. [22:25:55] Not allowing article creations sounds more like a tight-ass foundation thing than a community thing. IMHO. [22:27:15] <^demon> It was a decision by the god-king :) [22:27:22] Was it? [22:27:28] I never knew the origin of that. [22:27:50] Funnily, I think of that as the exact type of thing that the foundation doesn't want to do. [22:27:58] That makes me not like god-king very much. [22:30:06] heh. i like that term for him. [22:30:20] I read about LibriVox and how they oppose a ratings system for their audiobooks. They stress their mission to produce and leave it to other to evaluate it. [22:32:50] I miss that in WM-projects. Used to be "come as you are, do what you can", now it's... Less so... [22:34:24] <^demon> I think some of the blame is with the community as well. Not exactly inviting at times. [22:34:37] Absolutely! [22:35:13] <^demon> I think some of it is a scaling problem and I've said it for years. Some of the ideas/processes we had way back in 03-05 just *don't scale* to this level. [22:35:27] <^demon> MW development being a prime example. [22:36:42] Or maybe MW'dev is focusing on the wrong things. (i.e. Article feedback) [22:41:27] Bensin: why do you feel as if you can't do what you want? [22:42:34] <^demon> Bensin: I haven't written a single line of code for article feedback, so I don't think we can say we're focusing our efforts on it :) [22:43:15] I haven't either :) [22:43:43] I never get time to maintain most of my extensions now either though :( [22:43:44] Ryan_Lane: I don't. In the case of Article Feedback I get the feeling of a project nobody really wants, but it's being forced down my throat... [22:43:59] ah. ok. I get that [22:44:18] that's the thing though??? the foundation writes code the community isn't willing to [22:44:34] I actually like the idea of article feedback [22:44:41] But does the community want the code written? [22:44:51] as a community member, I do [22:45:05] Or does the community have other priorities? [22:45:29] the community has put a large priority on increasing the number of editors we have [22:45:37] getting clear metrics helps with that goal [22:46:04] I don't. At least I don't think I do. And when the project is propelled by the foundation there is no natural platform to voice complaints or to suggest improvements. [22:46:26] the mailing lists are a good platform for that [22:46:42] <^demon> The platforms have always been the same. Mailing lists, bugzilla, and on-wiki. [22:46:43] No, the wikis are a good platform. [22:46:49] foundation-l for politically oriented posts, and wikitech-l for technology focused posts [22:47:01] you can also use the wikis [22:47:19] which is fine for politically oriented things, but terrible for technology oriented things [22:47:34] <^demon> Aww, I like on-wiki rfcs. [22:47:35] the devs use mailing lists [22:47:44] ah, yeah. that's true [22:47:47] we do use wikis for that [22:47:52] that's more of a documentation thing though [22:48:06] you advertise that via the mailing lists though ;) [22:48:25] The problem with ML is that the discussion is not in the open, and less inviting. [22:48:35] how is it not in the open? [22:48:40] anyone can subscribe [22:48:42] Yeah; it's totally in the open. [22:48:52] and anyone can search them from the mailman search [22:48:58] I *do* hate that we don't index them [22:49:02] Or read the archives. [22:49:12] I hate that we use mailman. [22:49:18] what else is there? [22:49:33] With what? :-) [22:49:42] Bensin: eh? [22:50:23] What else is the problem with ML? [22:50:36] Yeah, I got nothin' on a replacement. Just sayin' that I hate it. [22:50:42] we don't index mailman because it sucks [22:50:45] :) [22:50:52] pipermail? [22:50:57] doesn't that index? [22:51:10] specifically, when you delete mail from mailman, it screws up the numbering of the posts [22:51:17] which of course screws up the urls [22:51:32] and thereby makes any indexing done worthless [22:52:04] I'm just saying a community who handle wikis as well as we do would benefit from keeping as much of the talk as possible on the wikis. [22:52:10] we occasionally need to delete mail because of morons that send private info to mailing lists, and then freak out on us because they posted something private on the internet [22:52:26] communication in MW sucks [22:52:37] seriously, it's worse than useless [22:52:37] LiquidThreads ROCK! [22:52:49] LQT is nice, but it isn't as nice as mailing lists [22:53:12] <^demon> We could move everything to Google Groups. [22:53:19] *Ryan_Lane slaps ^demon [22:53:26] To me ML is just people taking turns with a megaphone. [22:53:43] and wiki discussion isn't? [22:54:00] ^demon: thar be ads in thar [22:54:05] Ryan_Lane: Yeah! Trout that bastard demon! [22:54:52] someone just needs to write a mailman replacement [22:54:57] I'm sure it couldn't be *that* hard [22:55:00] No, with LQT you can break down everything to smaller topics. [22:55:15] what would be cool would be LQT with proper email support [22:55:17] <^demon> Ryan_Lane: Well the open source community has been living with mailman for how long now? [22:55:37] <^demon> I fear a replacement is not in the works anytime soon. [22:55:50] where you could have a LQT page that is a mailing list [22:56:04] people who subscribe to the page get subscribed to the list [22:56:26] all posts/threads get sent to the list like email, and you can reply to the email just like a mailing list [22:56:27] I'm sure you can with ML too, but ML feels so "spammy". Have to read everyones talk about everyting only tangentally related to the things you're interested in. [22:56:34] and LQT would be the web frontend portion of that [22:57:06] how's that different from LQT? [22:57:20] because you can subscribe to individual threads? [22:57:32] that is a pretty nice plus [22:58:02] I could see LQT as a replacement for mailman :) [22:58:08] jorm: get on that [22:58:09] :D [22:58:34] would you be able to read the thread just from the mail? [22:58:49] that's what *I* would like [22:58:53] and reply to it. [22:58:53] or would you need to keep following a link to read it ? [22:59:07] as we have to do with mediawiki comments currently [22:59:15] I get an email 'revision changed' [22:59:16] yeah, I'm not a fan of that [22:59:36] and I need to go there to find out if it's a revision I did, a followup to one of mine, or one i commented [22:59:37] I'd like to get an email that shows the full response [22:59:59] also, I'd like to have the author in the email From: [23:00:03] and be able to reply to the email and have a reply post automatically generated [23:00:21] I think LQT have RSS-feed... [23:00:21] yeah, would be a plus. only if the user allows it though [23:00:33] I don't use RSS for communications [23:00:46] it doesn't handle threading, for one [23:00:52] email clients do [23:00:53] "Too spammy"? :-) [23:01:01] no, it's a bad tool for the job [23:01:16] I don't find email lists spammy [23:01:27] if the subject doesn't sound interesting, I mark as read [23:01:47] my email client (gmail) puts threads together [23:01:47] E-mail is spammy by default. [23:01:59] I can ignore a thread in my client as well [23:02:09] by "hiding" it [23:02:36] Gmail = 1984-mail [23:02:53] most email clients have this capability now adays [23:03:13] *^demon reports Bensin to the Thought Police. [23:03:19] Letting a company store private conversations and also use their search enging feels yucky... [23:03:21] xD [23:03:28] Google is yucky... [23:03:32] what I find annoying in gmail from when I used it on the hackaton [23:03:35] all I'm saying is it's unlikely that devs will move to using LQT if it doesn't work as well as email lists [23:03:45] I was reading a long thread of comments [23:03:53] while I'm halfway it reports a new one [23:03:57] ^demon: Don't make me go get the big trout! [23:04:02] if i open that mail, it marks all previous items as read [23:04:13] ugh. yeah' that sucks [23:04:18] <^demon> Platonides: {{sofix....oh wait [23:04:19] *all items on the previous thread [23:04:30] ^demon: you actually could fix it :) [23:04:38] ? [23:04:40] it's JS doing it [23:04:51] you can write JS to undo that action [23:04:52] ^demon: HAHA [23:05:07] <^demon> Not worth the time to write a chrome extension for it :p [23:05:15] <^demon> I'm not the one bothered by it, Platonides is. [23:05:21] greasemonkey? :) [23:05:28] <^demon> No greasemonkey for chrome :( [23:05:31] ah [23:05:46] You must mean "ChromIUM" [23:05:48] ^demon, I only use the web interface when I'm not at home [23:05:55] <^demon> Bensin: No, I mean Google Chrome :) [23:06:05] That is SO not OK... [23:06:12] why? [23:06:16] it's open souce [23:06:20] *source [23:06:22] Phoning home? [23:06:29] it doesn't phone home [23:06:49] unless you enable those settings [23:06:56] the default settings don't phone home [23:07:13] That's right! [23:07:21] note: I don't use chrome, I use firefox [23:07:34] and guess what. firefox phones home too, if you enable those settings [23:07:40] <^demon> I don't like firefox that much anymore. [23:07:52] <^demon> Granted, I haven't used it regularly since ~3.0.something. [23:08:46] "RLZ tracking" then. Sounds not so nice. [23:09:04] (No, it's not the end of the world either, but I'd rather it not be there.) [23:09:09] the bad thing is, they added phoning home without any setting or showing in the release notes [23:09:19] RLZ? [23:09:21] you need to disable it in about:config [23:09:35] Ryan_Lane: "when Chrome is downloaded as part of marketing promotions and distribution partnerships. This transmits information in encoded form to Google" [23:10:29] so when you click "download chrome" from an ad? [23:11:03] Who knows... And that's my point :-) [23:11:31] you don't expect that to be tracked? [23:12:16] I expect not to be tracked (or as little as possible) by open source products... [23:12:49] My problem is the Google attitude "Trust us. We don't do evil"... And then the go on a censor-spree in China... [23:12:56] i don't want to be tracked by anyone [23:13:10] open source products are usually a good way to avoid that [23:13:14] except they don't censor in china. they moved their search to hong kong [23:13:53] though all other search engines are censoring in china [23:14:07] so I'd say google gets a win there, and not a loss. [23:14:18] it's all good to hate google for being evil when they actually do evil [23:15:09] Platonides: generally, but in this case, google is doing the same amount of tracking as firefox [23:15:43] "Until March 2010, Google adhered to the Internet censorship policies of China" <- To little too late for me... [23:15:45] though mozilla isn't using the info gathered for advertising data [23:16:50] Bensin: meh. they were the only search engine that fought china on that. they were also the only ones to tell people searching that their results were being censored [23:18:38] Ryan_Lane, which tracking is mozilla doing? [23:18:57] Platonides: the safe site stuff [23:19:31] Not good enough for such a large company as Google. Very irresponsible. [23:20:21] Ryan_Lane, that is downloaded from google, not from mozilla [23:21:03] there was a bug about getting it computerwide but i think it was closed [23:21:10] ah [23:22:02] there was some tracking added in ff4 that you had to read the right blgo to find out, though [23:25:40] night [23:43:46] man. i so dearly love assassin's creed ii and brotherhood. [23:54:37] Are those ice-cream flavors? [23:55:53] People should not talk about things in IRC-channels without asserting there are WP-articles about it. There should be a rule, or something. ;-)