User talk:CT Cooper

I confirm that my freenode nick is Camaron-Chris. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! Camaron · Christopher · talk 13:20, 25 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! CT Cooper 13:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hey,

I've summarily changed the date of London meetup 38 to a week later (as I'll be out of the country) - does this work for you? No-one else is signed up yet, you see... :-)

James F. (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have no plans at the moment for either Sunday, so the change shouldn't be a problem, though there may be something that comes up quickly which stops me from going whatever the day. CT Cooper · talk 10:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hey,

WMUK are having a Board meeting and meetup in Birmingham on Sunday 12th June so have asked if we can change the date of London meetup 46 - would moving it to Sunday 19th June work for you?

James F. (talk) 19:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I can't see any problem with moving it a week later at the present time, as I should be available for both dates, so feel free to move it a week forward. CT Cooper · talk 21:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Fab, thanks. :-)

James F. (talk) 21:35, 27 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm sensing a definite pattern to these messages on your talk page. ;-)

I'm proposing to move the date of London meetup #50 a week later, as I'll be out of the country. Does that work for you?

James F. (talk) 12:24, 23 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you're the only person that makes use of my talk page on Meta. :p I should on paper be able to make either date, but I can never be sure on when Freshers' Flu might strike, since I am going back to university at the start of October. I will comment on the meetup talk page. CT Cooper · talk 10:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have created a template for the London Meetup 64.... and beyond! Gordo (talk) 18:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for creating that. However, I'm not calling the change permanent until London 64 has been and gone, just in case people really don't like the change, so it was sensible to create a second template and keep the old one. CT Cooper · talk 14:11, 25 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi CT, I just saw your edit summary, and looked at the relevant page histories. I now see that I have been unknowingly working at cross purposes with another user. (I have been working to organize the Wikimania pages under a coherent system for about a year; recently I was starting to get some "deja vu" about my page moves, but hadn't looked closely enough at the edit histories to see what was going on.)

Anyway, thank you for calling this to my attention. I think it would be a good idea for me to write up my reasons for doing things in the way I have, so that people can either agree, or have something specific to critique. I will try to do that in the next few days, and as you suggest, I'll defer any potentially controversial further page moves until I've done that. -Pete F (talk) 22:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I see, not to worry. I was wondering what was going on since my watchlist was becoming full of page moves and things were getting a bit confusing. I don't have a strong opinion on how the pages should be organized, but we probably should reach some kind of agreement so things are standardised for future Wikimanis; I will happily participate in a discussion that you start on the subject. CT Cooper · talk 23:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Do we really need this? Gordo (talk) 17:09, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

In the rare event of a kitchen closure or another problem at the Penderel's Oak, the meetup will be relocated to the Shakespeare's Head – another Wetherspoons pub located nearby. To get there from the Penderel's Oak, when exiting onto the street turn left, then when walking past Holborn tube station turn left again down Kingsway Street, and after a short walk the pub may be found on the left-hand side.

I think it would be helpful for those without a mobile devise to know in advance where the group has likely re-located in the event of a problem. CT Cooper · talk 17:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

This diff it to confirm that that owner of the User:CT Cooper global account has sent an e-mail to secure-infowikimedia.org identifying themselves to the Foundation. CT Cooper · talk 20:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! CT Cooper · talk 21:28, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Can you really resist the offer of cake?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by YellowFratello (talk • contribs) .

Tempting, very tempting, but it turns out I'm occupied tomorrow. I'll have to have some cake another day! CT Cooper · talk 19:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi CT Cooper! Great to see you active on the Wiki Usergroup LGBT page. Based on your User page, it appears you live in London? Might you have any suggestions for LGBT museums/archives/sites/businesses that would be interesting for me, as a traveler from the US to see, and also as potential sites for the LGBT meetup to happen. Thanks! OR drohowa (talk) 19:41, 30 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. I'm afraid I don't live in London, only within commuting distance, and London LGBT sites isn't a side to London I've had the chance to explore yet. I'll ping someone who'll probably be able to help you out more though. CT Cooper · talk 10:01, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

The Wikimedia Foundation recently created a new feature, "superprotect" status. The purpose is to prevent pages from being edited by elected administrators -- but permitting WMF staff to edit them. It has been put to use in only one case: to protect the deployment of the Media Viewer software on German Wikipedia, in defiance of a clear decision of that community to disable the feature by default, unless users decide to enable it.

If you oppose these actions, please add your name to this letter. If you know non-Wikimedians who support our vision for the free sharing of knowledge, and would like to add their names to the list, please ask them to sign an identical version of the letter on change.org.

• Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer
• Letter on change.org

I'm notifying you because you participated in one of several relevant discussions. -Pete F (talk) 22:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

I'm currently pondering whether to sign it. CT Cooper · talk 16:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your attention to it, CT. -Pete F (talk) 16:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

I've now signed it. CT Cooper · talk 16:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi CT Cooper,

Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.

Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on change.org, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.

I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.

Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.

Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.

Thank you for your engagement on this issue, and please stay in touch. -Pete F (talk) 18:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Consider this invite a formality. :) --Another Believer (talk) 04:40, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Let me know what I can do to help with a Wikimedia LGBT+ table. Feel free to email me at: dorohowardgmailcom. Vaughn88 (talk) 23:45, 8 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Vaughn88: Thank you again for your offer to help. I'll be posting and update shortly and will be giving further guidance then. CT Cooper · talk 01:36, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi! The Wikimedia Foundation would like your input on how we can reimagine Wikimedia Foundation grants to better support people and ideas in your Wikimedia project.

After reading the Reimagining WMF grants idea, we ask you to complete this survey to help us improve the idea and learn more about your experience. When you complete the survey, you can enter to win one of five Wikimedia globe sweatshirts!

In addition to taking the the survey, you are welcome to participate in these ways:

• Respond to questions on the discussion page of the idea.
• Join a small group conversation.
• Learn more about this consultation.

This survey is in English, but feedback on the discussion page is welcome in any language.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 01:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Done, thanks for the invite. CT Cooper · talk 22:11, 19 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Were all in this together you'll make it—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 156.57.253.219 (talk) 09:19, 2 September 2015

That's kind of you to say, though I'm not sure what it's in reference to. CT Cooper · talk 04:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi, this is a reminder that the consultation about Reimagining WMF grants is closing on 8 September (0:00 UTC). We encourage you to complete the survey now, if you haven't yet done so, so that we can include your ideas.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 19:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I've recently launched an Inspire Campaign to encourage new ideas focusing on content review and curation in Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia volunteers collaboratively manage vast repositories of knowledge, and we’re looking for your ideas about how to manage that knowledge to make it more meaningful and accessible. We invite you to participate and submit ideas, so please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 28th.

All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is welcome - your skills and experience can help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign to improve review and curation tasks so that we can make our content more meaningful and accessible! I JethroBT (WMF) 05:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery.

Through June, we’re organizing an Inspire Campaign to encourage and support new ideas focusing on addressing harassment toward Wikimedia contributors. The 2015 Harassment Survey has shown evidence that harassment in various forms - name calling, threats, discrimination, stalking, and impersonation, among others - is pervasive. Available methods and systems to deal with harassment are also considered to be ineffective. These behaviors are clearly harmful, and in addition, many individuals who experience or witness harassment participate less in Wikimedia projects or stop contributing entirely.

Proposals in any language are welcome during the campaign - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign so that we can work together to develop ideas around this important and difficult issue. With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 17:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC) (Opt-out instructions)Reply

Describing contributions as "nonsense", as you did here, is likely to prove unhelpful, unless of course you are literally unable to understand them, in which case there are more effective responses such as "Please clarify" or "I don't understand". The fact that you understand it well enough to disagree with is in itself a sufficient refutation of the "nonsense" label. In future you may find discussions go better if you are slower to use that particular word. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

The word nonsense has multiple meanings, though I think you know that already. As for Talk:Wikimania 2016 bids, you were welcome to your own opinion, but you do not speak for everyone in that discussion, and your attempts to do so were presumptuous and patronising. I should warn you, other community members who are on the receiving end of such behaviour will not be as restrained in their choice of words as I have been. CT Cooper · talk 17:49, 26 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

It would appear that you take the view that people who disagree with you are welcome to hold their opinions but that you feel free to react in a negative fashion towards those who dare to express them. As I said before, this rarely leads to a constructive resolution. Indeed, at this point in time, what is needed is concerete evidence on this situation rather than an ill-tempered debate about opinions. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 19:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

There is a difference between expressing a disagreeing opinion and engaging in presumptuous and patronising behaviour and it is to the latter that I "react in a negative fashion towards". Ideally, a discussion on the rights of the community to have a discussion shouldn't have to happen, but was clearly necessary in this case. Given the sudden change in topic to the apparent need for "concrete evidence", I'm going to presume that my point has been made successfully. CT Cooper · talk 19:16, 26 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

A community discussion on a factual matter held without reference to concrete evidence is unlikely to be productive. I do not know which of your points you feel you have made successfully. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 19:22, 26 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Insulting my intelligence and that of the community is not productive either. CT Cooper · talk 19:53, 26 June 2016 (UTC)Reply