[Wikipedia-l] My apologies

Tue Jul 4 10:05:08 UTC 2006

Hoi,
For your information, the mo.cyr.wikipedia is not a viable compromise. 
It offends to applicable standards.
Thanks,
     GerardM


Liviu Andronic wrote:
> No, Mark. The status quo is what you want. Not a compromise.
>
> Deleting/closing the Moldovan Wikipedia is - generally speaking - what we
> want.
>
> Moving the existing contents from mo.wikipedia.org to a certain
> mo-cyr.wikipedia.org would be a compromise. And, once again,
>  this compromise doesn't destroy anyone's work. Just as Sabine said: "Vivi e
> lascia vivere".
>
> On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Please see the messages from Sabine Cretella.
>>
>> The status quo is the compromise.
>>
>> If you care about Wikipedia, it makes sense to take care of your own
>> instead of trying to destroy what others have built, which is exactly
>> what you are doing here. There is no reason for this to continue.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> On 03/07/06, TSO1D From Wikpedia <tso1d at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> Of course, a conflict requires at least to sides, and only leaving one
>>>       
>> side standing would end the dispute. However, I don't believe that this is
>> likely to happen in this case. By the same token one could make the argument
>> that if you would disappear (as you are virtually the only active
>> contributor on mo) then viable opposition to the closure of the project
>> would cease and the admnistration would have to acquiesece. Nevertheless, at
>> this point, the unwillingness of some administrators to act on a resolution
>> reached almost by concensus (with few dissents), practically constitutes
>> endorsement of the current status quo, thus autmatically negating the
>> partiality claimed by them.
>>     
>>>   I agree with you, though, that simply closing the encyclopedia might
>>>       
>> not bring about a complete end to the dispute, though you ability to reopen
>> the debate and subjequently the wiki will be greatly reduced unless you were
>> to produce a native speaker intersted in pursuing the project. For this
>> reason, I find it best if all sides could agree on one solution and
>> compromise if need be. For example would you agree to set up a
>> transliteration tool that would convert articles from RO to Cyrillic and
>> have that available at ro-cyr or mo-cyr (assuming the tool could be
>> perfected to funciton adequately)?
>>     
>>> Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>   The conflict will end if you stop making it such an issue.
>>>
>>> Without you and your friends, there simply is no conflict.
>>>
>>> Enforcement is not all that is lacking. There are many issues here.
>>>
>>> Currently, the position of those in charge seems to be to try to seal
>>> the situation off from the outside and let both sides duke it out.
>>>
>>> And who's to say the conflict would end if the Wikipedia were closed?
>>> I know that I would hold polls for it to be reopened, try to put the
>>> content elsewhere, etc.
>>>
>>> Until Bogdan and Jacky made an issue of this, it was dormant, nobody
>>> paid attention to mo.wiki except those who actually care about it.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> On 03/07/06, TSO1D From Wikpedia wrote:
>>>       
>>>> In my view this is discussion cannot be viewed as separate from the
>>>>         
>> past ones on the topic, but rather the continuation (and hopefully the
>> culmination) of the issue. If such a resolution has already been made, then
>> what is the purpose of continuing this discussion and wasting even more
>> time. The only thing lacking is enforcement, and why souldn't that be
>> carried out in accordance with the general conclusion of the debate, whether
>> in the past or the present.
>>     
>>>> I understand how some users might feel frustrated with the
>>>>         
>> continuation of the discussion and the war of words, however by not acting
>> the conflict will not end, and I believe you are actually giving tacit
>> approval to the project in its current state. I am sorry if others spent a
>> great deal of time looking at the dispute and now may feel irritated, but
>> others also were involved in this debate, to an even higher degree, and
>> simply stating that all this work was in waste as you do not intend to act
>> in any way seems a grave neglect of your duties and even a lack of respect
>> for those who have invested their time to try to find a solution to the
>> problem and find the best way to resolve it.
>>     
>>>> Mark Williamson wrote:
>>>> Is this relevant to the *current* discussion?
>>>>
>>>> Everybody already knew about that. It was clear that that decision was
>>>>         
>> made.
>>     
>>>> However, it was never enforced, and since then, you have taken against
>>>> yourselves by turning the heat up where it was absolutely not
>>>> necessary and making everyone stop caring.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>> On 03/07/06, Jacky PB wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to apologize to all of you for my
>>>>> interventions here. I just missed an e-mail of anthere
>>>>> more than 6 months old.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2006-March/043897.html
>>>>>           
>>>>> My only excuse is that it happened on another thread
>>>>> than the one I followed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yours,
>>>>> :en:Dpotop, :ro:Dpotop
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> Do You Yahoo!?
>>>>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> --
>>>> Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.