Talk:Export-import: Difference between revisions
Tim Starling (talk | contribs) (GetWiki encourages dependence on Wikimedia, and editorial control by Wikipedians) |
(typical threat, but a shallow one in this case - it's easy to get around any attempts by Wikimedia to technically control the GFDL corpus and cut off GFDL corpus access providers) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
GetWiki discourages the construction of a proper fork by allowing users to fetch articles from Wikipedia on demand, whenever they access a page which doesn't exist. This means that a large proportion of the content hosted by a GetWiki site is actually controlled by Wikipedians. What's more, Wikimedia would be within its rights to cease service to any GetWiki site, leaving them out in the cold with a useless leech script. Why not just [http://download.wikimedia.org/ download the database] and end your dependence on Wikimedia? -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 11:50, 23 Jun 2004 (EEST) | GetWiki discourages the construction of a proper fork by allowing users to fetch articles from Wikipedia on demand, whenever they access a page which doesn't exist. This means that a large proportion of the content hosted by a GetWiki site is actually controlled by Wikipedians. What's more, Wikimedia would be within its rights to cease service to any GetWiki site, leaving them out in the cold with a useless leech script. Why not just [http://download.wikimedia.org/ download the database] and end your dependence on Wikimedia? -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 11:50, 23 Jun 2004 (EEST) | ||
:This is fascist bullshit but it does prove [[Wikimedia]] is a menace to the [[GFDL corpus]]. Wikipedia is not "within its rights to cease service" under some reasonable interpretations of the [[GFDL]]; Since very few [[trolls]] are blocked in both places, the availability of current articles both ways is one way [[Wikimedia]] avoids being called on its frequent [[GFDL violation]]s. It is easy enough to suck the appropriate articles in through various read-only proxies that the [[developer vigilantiism|vigilante]] [[usurper]]s don't know about, and never will know about. They can't track all the tools trolls use. | |||
:As for "control", so what? The point is that [[GFDL corpus access provider]]s can cooperate, so that anyone else could feed [[Wikinfo]] if [[Wikimedia]] cut it off fascistically. That would put the new feeder in power position, as it could serve any other [[mirror web site]] that [[Wikimedia corruption]] deemed a threat to its monopoly. | |||
:[[Wikipedia]] unrighteously uses a mass of [[GFDL corpus]] content that was donated "to the GFDL itself" not "to Wikipedia" - no ownership rights were ever ceded to [[Wikimedia]] in particular, and even new contributions are not so deeded. So the rights of those contributors and those who you call "wikipedians" are not the same thing, and attempts to make them the same thing are easy enough to slap down legally. We're watching all your mistakes. | |||
Revision as of 23:18, 23 June 2004
What chance is there that MediaWiki will *ever* be useful for this purpose? Its developers are only interested in Wikipedia, and in increasing the power of their sysop power structure by adding on a permission-based model no one really needs, but which makes them feel powerful.
They haven't even cloned the GetWiki facility yet, and it's the ideal way to keep those who fork off the GFDL corpus as close to the core corpus as possible. That is of course because they are trying to stop all other GFDL corpus access providers, and retain trademark power over the name "wikipedia", which is actually generic. There are many wikipedias, and the contributor is not seeking to enable or give their work to any specific bunch of "Wikimedia" thugs, they're seeking to give it to all wikipedias.
We should be more concerned with edits, votes and bets and how answer recommendation might move things from Research Wiki to Publish Wiki. Importing a lot of sysop-approved biased nonsense from Wikipedia should be low on our list of priorities. Why not just use GetWiki and get it from Wikinfo instead?
GetWiki discourages the construction of a proper fork by allowing users to fetch articles from Wikipedia on demand, whenever they access a page which doesn't exist. This means that a large proportion of the content hosted by a GetWiki site is actually controlled by Wikipedians. What's more, Wikimedia would be within its rights to cease service to any GetWiki site, leaving them out in the cold with a useless leech script. Why not just download the database and end your dependence on Wikimedia? -- Tim Starling 11:50, 23 Jun 2004 (EEST)
- This is fascist bullshit but it does prove Wikimedia is a menace to the GFDL corpus. Wikipedia is not "within its rights to cease service" under some reasonable interpretations of the GFDL; Since very few trolls are blocked in both places, the availability of current articles both ways is one way Wikimedia avoids being called on its frequent GFDL violations. It is easy enough to suck the appropriate articles in through various read-only proxies that the vigilante usurpers don't know about, and never will know about. They can't track all the tools trolls use.
- As for "control", so what? The point is that GFDL corpus access providers can cooperate, so that anyone else could feed Wikinfo if Wikimedia cut it off fascistically. That would put the new feeder in power position, as it could serve any other mirror web site that Wikimedia corruption deemed a threat to its monopoly.
- Wikipedia unrighteously uses a mass of GFDL corpus content that was donated "to the GFDL itself" not "to Wikipedia" - no ownership rights were ever ceded to Wikimedia in particular, and even new contributions are not so deeded. So the rights of those contributors and those who you call "wikipedians" are not the same thing, and attempts to make them the same thing are easy enough to slap down legally. We're watching all your mistakes.