Anarchopedia - User contributions [en]

Anarchopedia talk:en:proposal for new project

2011-05-16T14:13:22Z

Libre: rv spam ?

==ToDo==
alpha-2 links must fixed in spain, polish and russian. --[[User:X|X]] 13:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

==Navigationblock for Mainpage==
<nowiki>
[[ar:Ø§Ù„ØµÙØØ© Ø§Ù„Ø±Ø¦ÙŠØ³ÙŠØ©]]
[[id:Halaman Utama]]
[[zh:é¦–é¡µ]]
[[da:Forside]]
[[de:Hauptseite]]
[[en:Main Page]]
[[es:Portada]]
[[eo:ÄˆefpaÄo]]
[[fr:Accueil]]
[[it:Prima Pagina]]
[[ja:ãƒ¡ã‚¤ãƒ³ãƒšãƒ¼ã‚¸]]
[[nl:Hoofdpagina]]
[[no:Hovedside]]
[[nn:Hovudside]]
[[pl:Strona gÅ‚Ã³wna]]
[[pt:PÃ¡gina principal]]
[[ru:Ð—Ð°Ð³Ð»Ð°Ð²Ð½Ð°Ñ ÑÑ‚Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ†Ð°]]
[[sr:Ð“Ð»Ð°Ð²Ð½Ð° ÑÑ‚Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ð°]]
[[sv:Huvudsida]]
</nowiki>

== hey ==

hello

just registered and put on my todo list

hopefully this is just what im looking for, looks like i have a lot to read.

== Patronizing old ucius had bearing cloud her neglect these features, unbearable irony contained. ==

Maybe I`ll be Captain Obvious, but... it's only few days to New Year last, so let's be happy!
Hoho3ho!)

Anarchopedia talk:en:proposal for new project

2011-05-16T14:11:43Z

Libre: Reverted edits by 94.142.128.140 (Talk) to last version by 91.201.67.91

Anarchopedia:Finances

2011-05-13T08:30:23Z

Libre: /* paypal */

==paypal==
{| border="3"
|+ All Activity Paypal - first to '''13 May. 2011'''
|-
! Date
! Name/pseudo
! */*
! Gross
! Fee
! Net Amount
|-
| ''1 Feb. 2011'' || KF || - || 4,39 â‚¬ || -0,40 â‚¬ || '''3,99 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''7 Sept. 2010'' || treasurer || sent to tachanka || 121 â‚¬ / 150 $ || || '''- 121 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''26 Aug. 2008'' || I || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''2 Mar. 2008'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''17 Dec. 2007'' || H || - || 40,00 EUR || -1,61 EUR || '''38,39 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''19 Nov. 2007'' || G || - || 15,12 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,36 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''11 Oct. 2007'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''20 Sep. 2007'' || F || - || 15,00 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,24 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''3 Aug. 2007'' || E || - || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''5 Jul. 2007'' || D || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''27 May 2007'' || C || '''Returned''' || 20,00 EUR || 0,00 EUR || 20,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''23 Feb. 2007'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Dec. 2006'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Oct. 2006'' || Libre || '''â†’ TRANSFERED in BANK''' || -'''27,73 EUR''' || -'''1,00 EUR''' || -28,73 EUR ||
|-
| ''13 Jul. 2006'' || A || '''transfered''' || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
|
|-
| || || || '''TOTAL''' || '''=''' || '''45,05 EUR''' ||
|}

==Donations promises==

* Libre : '''150 â‚¬uros''' (1 time per year)
* Milos: 10 EUR/month from March 2008, probably in amounts of 50 or 100 EUR (once in 5 or 10 months), probably via Moneybookers. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
** Renewed domains anarch(o|a)pedia.(org|net|info) for two years (now, until September 2010), which is ~75 EUR. (BTW, I think that the best idea for my donations is to renew our domains every year or so for two more years, for the next 5 years.) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 07:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
**the account for moneybookers has been removed. [[User:Libre|Libre]] 08:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

Anarchopedia:Finances

2011-05-13T08:29:48Z

Libre: /* paypal */

==paypal==
{| border="3"
|+ All Activity Paypal - first to '''13 May. 2011'''
|-
! Date
! Name/pseudo
! */*
! Gross
! Fee
! Net Amount
|-
| ''1 Feb. 2011'' || KF || - || 4,39 â‚¬ || -0,40 â‚¬ || '''3,99 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''7 Sept. 2010'' || treasurer || sent to tachanka || 121 â‚¬ / 150 $ || || '''- 121 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''26 Aug. 2008'' || I || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''2 Mar. 2008'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''17 Dec. 2007'' || H || - || 40,00 EUR || -1,61 EUR || '''38,39 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''19 Nov. 2007'' || G || - || 15,12 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,36 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''11 Oct. 2007'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''20 Sep. 2007'' || F || - || 15,00 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,24 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''3 Aug. 2007'' || E || - || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''5 Jul. 2007'' || D || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''27 May 2007'' || C || '''Returned''' || 20,00 EUR || 0,00 EUR || 20,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''23 Feb. 2007'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Dec. 2006'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Oct. 2006'' || Libre || '''â†’ TRANSFERED in BANK''' || -'''27,73 EUR''' || -'''1,00 EUR''' || -28,73 EUR ||
|-
| ''13 Jul. 2006'' || A || '''transfered''' || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
|
|-
| || || || '''TOTAL''' || '''=''' || '''45,05 EUR''' ||
|}

However, we have to make a substraction about 1 EURO by transfer (for each, except for A which has been transfered on 4 oct 2006).
Then we have by paypal : 180,41 - 7 â‚¬ = '''173,41 â‚¬uro'''

==Donations promises==

* Libre : '''150 â‚¬uros''' (1 time per year)
* Milos: 10 EUR/month from March 2008, probably in amounts of 50 or 100 EUR (once in 5 or 10 months), probably via Moneybookers. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
** Renewed domains anarch(o|a)pedia.(org|net|info) for two years (now, until September 2010), which is ~75 EUR. (BTW, I think that the best idea for my donations is to renew our domains every year or so for two more years, for the next 5 years.) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 07:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
**the account for moneybookers has been removed. [[User:Libre|Libre]] 08:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

Anarchopedia:Finances

2011-05-13T08:28:57Z

Libre: /* Donations promises */

==paypal==
{| border="3"
|+ All Activity Paypal - first to '''2 Mar. 2008'''
|-
! Date
! Name/pseudo
! */*
! Gross
! Fee
! Net Amount
|-
| ''1 Feb. 2011'' || KF || - || 4,39 â‚¬ || -0,40 â‚¬ || '''3,99 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''7 Sept. 2010'' || treasurer || sent to tachanka || 121 â‚¬ / 150 $ || || '''- 121 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''26 Aug. 2008'' || I || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''2 Mar. 2008'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''17 Dec. 2007'' || H || - || 40,00 EUR || -1,61 EUR || '''38,39 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''19 Nov. 2007'' || G || - || 15,12 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,36 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''11 Oct. 2007'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''20 Sep. 2007'' || F || - || 15,00 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,24 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''3 Aug. 2007'' || E || - || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''5 Jul. 2007'' || D || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''27 May 2007'' || C || '''Returned''' || 20,00 EUR || 0,00 EUR || 20,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''23 Feb. 2007'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Dec. 2006'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Oct. 2006'' || Libre || '''â†’ TRANSFERED in BANK''' || -'''27,73 EUR''' || -'''1,00 EUR''' || -28,73 EUR ||
|-
| ''13 Jul. 2006'' || A || '''transfered''' || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
|
|-
| || || || '''TOTAL''' || '''=''' || '''45,05 EUR''' ||
|}

However, we have to make a substraction about 1 EURO by transfer (for each, except for A which has been transfered on 4 oct 2006).
Then we have by paypal : 180,41 - 7 â‚¬ = '''173,41 â‚¬uro'''

==Donations promises==

* Libre : '''150 â‚¬uros''' (1 time per year)
* Milos: 10 EUR/month from March 2008, probably in amounts of 50 or 100 EUR (once in 5 or 10 months), probably via Moneybookers. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
** Renewed domains anarch(o|a)pedia.(org|net|info) for two years (now, until September 2010), which is ~75 EUR. (BTW, I think that the best idea for my donations is to renew our domains every year or so for two more years, for the next 5 years.) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 07:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
**the account for moneybookers has been removed. [[User:Libre|Libre]] 08:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

Anarchopedia:Finances

2011-05-13T08:27:49Z

Libre: /* TOTAL */

Anarchopedia:Finances

2011-05-13T08:27:00Z

Libre: /* paypal */

==paypal==
{| border="3"
|+ All Activity Paypal - first to '''2 Mar. 2008'''
|-
! Date
! Name/pseudo
! */*
! Gross
! Fee
! Net Amount
|-
| ''1 Feb. 2011'' || KF || - || 4,39 â‚¬ || -0,40 â‚¬ || '''3,99 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''7 Sept. 2010'' || treasurer || sent to tachanka || 121 â‚¬ / 150 $ || || '''- 121 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''26 Aug. 2008'' || I || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''2 Mar. 2008'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''17 Dec. 2007'' || H || - || 40,00 EUR || -1,61 EUR || '''38,39 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''19 Nov. 2007'' || G || - || 15,12 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,36 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''11 Oct. 2007'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''20 Sep. 2007'' || F || - || 15,00 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,24 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''3 Aug. 2007'' || E || - || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''5 Jul. 2007'' || D || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''27 May 2007'' || C || '''Returned''' || 20,00 EUR || 0,00 EUR || 20,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''23 Feb. 2007'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Dec. 2006'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Oct. 2006'' || Libre || '''â†’ TRANSFERED in BANK''' || -'''27,73 EUR''' || -'''1,00 EUR''' || -28,73 EUR ||
|-
| ''13 Jul. 2006'' || A || '''transfered''' || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
|
|-
| || || || '''TOTAL''' || '''=''' || '''45,05 EUR''' ||
|}

However, we have to make a substraction about 1 EURO by transfer (for each, except for A which has been transfered on 4 oct 2006).
Then we have by paypal : 180,41 - 7 â‚¬ = '''173,41 â‚¬uro'''

==Donations promises==

* Libre : '''150 â‚¬uros''' (1 time per year)
* Milos: 10 EUR/month from March 2008, probably in amounts of 50 or 100 EUR (once in 5 or 10 months), probably via Moneybookers. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
** Renewed domains anarch(o|a)pedia.(org|net|info) for two years (now, until September 2010), which is ~75 EUR. (BTW, I think that the best idea for my donations is to renew our domains every year or so for two more years, for the next 5 years.) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 07:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

==TOTAL==

: '''173,41 â‚¬uros + 150 â‚¬uros'''
:::::=
::::'''323,41 â‚¬uros'''

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

Anarchopedia:Finances

2011-05-13T08:15:06Z

Libre: /* moneybookers */ -

==paypal==
{| border="3"
|+ All Activity Paypal - first to '''2 Mar. 2008'''
|-
! Date
! Name/pseudo
! */*
! Gross
! Fee
! Net Amount
|-
| ''26 Aug. 2008'' || I || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''2 Mar. 2008'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''17 Dec. 2007'' || H || - || 40,00 EUR || -1,61 EUR || '''38,39 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''19 Nov. 2007'' || G || - || 15,12 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,36 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''11 Oct. 2007'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''20 Sep. 2007'' || F || - || 15,00 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,24 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''3 Aug. 2007'' || E || - || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''5 Jul. 2007'' || D || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''27 May 2007'' || C || '''Returned''' || 20,00 EUR || 0,00 EUR || 20,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''23 Feb. 2007'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Dec. 2006'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Oct. 2006'' || Libre || '''â†’ TRANSFERED in BANK''' || -'''27,73 EUR''' || -'''1,00 EUR''' || -28,73 EUR ||
|-
| ''13 Jul. 2006'' || A || '''transfered''' || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
|
|-
| || || || '''TOTAL''' || '''=''' || '''180,41 EUR''' ||
|}

However, we have to make a substraction about 1 EURO by transfer (for each, except for A which has been transfered on 4 oct 2006).
Then we have by paypal : 180,41 - 7 â‚¬ = '''173,41 â‚¬uro'''

==Donations promises==

* Libre : '''150 â‚¬uros''' (1 time per year)
* Milos: 10 EUR/month from March 2008, probably in amounts of 50 or 100 EUR (once in 5 or 10 months), probably via Moneybookers. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
** Renewed domains anarch(o|a)pedia.(org|net|info) for two years (now, until September 2010), which is ~75 EUR. (BTW, I think that the best idea for my donations is to renew our domains every year or so for two more years, for the next 5 years.) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 07:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

==TOTAL==

: '''173,41 â‚¬uros + 150 â‚¬uros'''
:::::=
::::'''323,41 â‚¬uros'''

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

File:Vivelanarchisme.png

2011-04-20T13:06:35Z

Libre: fichier pour exteriorisation.

fichier pour exteriorisation.

User talk:Millosh

2011-04-20T12:40:56Z

Libre: /* Thank you */

hi! :) thanks for the welcome :) [[User:Tsunamic|Tsunamic]] 14:58, 30 Sep 2004 (CDT)

== Main page ==

Main page needs organizing, but that doesn't mean you should remove all the links in the mean time. --[[User:Paragon|Paragon]] 11:02, 2 Oct 2004 (CDT)

== New Main Page ==

Uh, it's all in Russian, and a bit glitchy.<br>
Thx for the welcome. --[[User:Paragon|Paragon]] 11:16, 2 Oct 2004 (CDT)

==Spanish==
I let the old link for Spanish today because the Spanish translator hat to find it!
It is no problem to move within the week
--[[User:Oui|Oui]] 15:51, 5 Oct 2004 (CDT)

== Hey there ==

Hey there! Glad to be aboard, we'll see how it goes, eh? [[User:Emeraldimp|emeraldimp]] 23:55, 7 Oct 2004 (CDT)

== Please reconsider your appearance theme ==

(pasted from discussion on main page...)

I work on user interfaces in my day job, and although I can sympathize with the apparent intent of this visual appearance, if you will take these comments as a constructive criticism - this appearance is a big mistake!

Although it might be an effective gimmick to use a reversed text appearance for the front page, to use this appearance theme globally will make it too difficult to use the site for hours at a time. (I've only read a few pages, and I already have a headache from the harsh appearance of the text - especially on the talk pages.) There is a reason why reversed text is used sparingly - it is simply too tiring to the human eye to look at reversed text for long periods of time.

If you ever want this site to grow beyond an opening statement, into a site with real "legs", you'll inevitably need to use a more sane text color scheme for the bulk of your pages, as serious readers will simply not put up with this look.

Computer screens used to have this appearance a few decades ago, but once it became feasible to show high contrast, black on white text, user interface designers, and later almost all users, quickly abandoned the bizarre-looking reverse text appearance en masse, and this apperance has now faded into obscurity. These days you only see this scheme in odd places - point of sale terminals used in discount stores, or in military installations that are stuck on the macho green on black thing. :)

Please, more serious discussion and articles, and fewer gimmicks with the appearance. You've got a great start here on an alternative to Wikipedia, so please don't turn away your potential audience because of a gimmicky design that makes it tiring to read your text! --[[User:69.110.24.8|69.110.24.8]] 13:11, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

*I am not designer and I would like not to work on user interface. Also, here are some notes: --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 14:30, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
*#Maybe I am not like others, but it is more easy for me to read white letter at black background. Of course, faction of Unix admins is not relevant part of community :) --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 14:30, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
*#All users can change their skins. The question is only default and we can vote about default (I will vote for usual colors (black letter, white background or something like that) because of your reasons; as well as I will use this (inverse) skin for myself :) But, we should see what others think.). --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 14:30, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
*#I'll make virtual host "test-design.anarchopedia.org" where you (and others) can test design. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 14:30, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
*#Also, it seems that you didn't log in and I don't know who you are. And I would like to know :) Of course, if you don't prefer to work anonymously. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 14:30, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
*#And, the most important thing: This is anarchist project. I started it, but I am not the only who is making decisions. Decisions are made by all of users. So, I think we should move this talk to: [[Anarchopedia:en:Design]]. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 14:33, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
*#Also, I didn't see that anyone is designer here. I think you should have initiative about that questions. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 14:34, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

::: I think #2 is the important one. We already can choose whatever skins we want. If I didn't like Anarchopedia's design, I would have changed it already. As far as what the default should look like, I don't really have an opinion. [[User:Lance Murdoch|Lance Murdoch]] 01:41, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
:::: I understand that default is important for new users. (New users maybe don't know how to change skin; maybe they are too lazy to change it; etc.) Also, in this moment we have only A-Monobook style; we don't have original Monobook (or we don't have usable original Monobook). So, we should think about what new users like to see. (As I said, it seems that I am not so relevant: White letters with black background is easy to read for me.) If competent person says that it is obsolate, we should take care about it. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 03:34, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

== Meta Question ==

Pray tell, what goes in the meta. and what goes in the eng.? The factions are currently all in the meta, but is this merely because they haven't been moved yet? Or is the meta a repository of things that are administrational in nature? --[[User:atotland|Anni]] 10:30, 5 Jan 2005 (JAP)
:I think that Meta should be repository of things that are administrational in nature. I don't have an idea should it be copied on eng: or not. Do you think that it should be done in some other way? Btw, you are from Japan? Do you want Anarchopedia in Japanese language? :) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:45, 4 Jan 2005 (CST)
::No, from Norway. But I wouldn't mind doing it in Norwegian, perhaps. Regardlessy, I have some ideas regarding factions, that might be fun? Tell me if you care.. --[[User:atotland|Anni]] 00:31, 5 Jan 2005 (CST)
:::It's OK :) The idea about factions came from trolls. Almost all of texts about factions are written by some of them. And it became the part of Anarchopedia's identity. Also, all of contributors works on the Anarchopedia's identity. And I don't see any problem if all of us are writting about Anarchopedia's identity. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:06, 5 Jan 2005 (CST)
:::And about Japan: I don't know why system said that you are in JAP time zone... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:06, 5 Jan 2005 (CST)
::::I am a Norwegian, currently living in Japan :)
::::Also, what I meant for the factions was making them actual administrative (political?) units, where every user is assosiated with a faction and it's points of view, and Site-Wide political questions are decided using free voting on suggestions proposed by the factions. I'm gonna write a better explanation in the [[Anarchopedia:en:Faction|faction]]s talkspace. --[[User:atotland|Anni]] 07:35, 5 Jan 2005 (CST)
::::And while I'm at it, is case sensitivity really necessary? --[[User:atotland|Anni]] 07:36, 5 Jan 2005 (CST)

:::::Factions Question/Propsal [[Anarchopedia talk:en:Faction|here]].

== Jumping ==

I miss a control for moving easily from one page in the meta or eng to the corresponding page on the other side. Would it be impossible to add a widget (say, under the toolbox) "This page in:" (meta, eng, fra, spa, deu). For easy jumping and editing. Is that your boat? --[[User:atotland|Anni]] 02:22, 5 Jan 2005 (CST)
:See [[Anarchopedia:eng:Syndicate]] --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:12, 5 Jan 2005 (CST)

== Logo vote ==

Hey Milo, I was thinking it might be a good idea to copy the news item regarding the logo vote from meta to eng, deu, etc. [[User:Christiaan|Christiaan]] 16:01, 25 Jan 2005 (CST)
:Yes, it is good idea and you don't need to ask to copy :) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:55, 26 Jan 2005 (CST)

Shall we put a closing date on voting for the logo? â€”[[User:Christiaan|Christiaan]] 16:08, 4 Feb 2005 (CST)
== Ð‘Ð¾Ð½Ð·Ð¾ ÑÐ²ÑƒÐ´Ð° Bonzo everywhere ==
Ð”Ð° Ð¿Ð¾Ð·Ð´Ñ€Ð°Ð²Ð¸Ð¼ Ð¼Ð¾Ð³ Ð´Ñ€ÑƒÐ³Ð° Ð¸ ÐºÐ°Ð¾ Ð¸ ÑƒÐ²ÐµÐº Ð´Ð° Ð½Ð°Ð¿Ñ€Ð°Ð²Ð¸Ð¼ Ð³ÑƒÐ¶Ð²Ñƒ :).
[[User:bonzo|Ð‘Ð¾Ð·Ð°Ð»Ð¾ ÐÐµÐ±Ð¾Ñ˜ÑˆÐ°]] 20:30, 7 Mar 2005 (CST)

== HI Here ==

Hi, i'm french, i want to create a forum phpbb for anarchopedia's users (a french or a english forum)

Do yo agree ???

ThAnks

<s>I agree. Do you want to make it on Anarchopedia server or not? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 14:07, 16 May 2005 (CDT)</s>

Please, look at [[Anarchopedia:en:proposal for new project]]. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 14:13, 16 May 2005 (CDT)

== Spam ==

Hi Milosh,

It's enough. Please Block every access to the server from IP 69.50.#.# . --[[User:X|X]] 20:50, 27 Jul 2005 (UTC)

== Cruft ==

I've replied. — [[User:Xiong|Xiong]][[Special:Emailuser/Xiong|<font color="#997749">熊</font>]][[User talk:Xiong|talk]] 13:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

== different anarchopedias ==

*please fix database in hrv. or/and redirect it (it's negative promotion if something not works)
*alpha-2-code need fixing in pol.,rus. and spa.

greetings [[User:X|X]] 23:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

== Russian and me ==

Hi, have i lost my priveledges on Russian anarchopedia at some point? If so can you restore me please, there seems to be a lot of vandalism going on there, i've even received complaints of people deleting content. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

== Norwegian ==

Hi. I have copied everything over to .nor now. Could you please unlock the main page on .nor so i can add that to? I don't have sysop status at .nor yet. btw, the main page on .meta should be changed too. Thanks [[User:Pyramide|Pyramide]] 12:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

== Is Anarchopedia only about anarchism ? ==

Hi, Millosh. Are you the founder of the Anarchopedia? In the Russian part we argue whether Anarchopedia is devoted only to anarchism. People, who came there earlier, clame that this is so. But it is unclear, who decides whether or not an article has relation to anarchism. Does Anarchopedia imply some hierarchical system of censorship, like that in Wikipedia? Thank you. Dmitry

'''Addition.''' I have read many texts here, and it seems to me that I understand the answer: No, Anarchopedia is a ''universal'' encyclopedia edited by anarchiÑal community. (?) But the problem is that the main page of the Russian section denies this, and it is protected from editing. Dmitry

=== Anarchopedian International ===

I propose this title for the homepage.--[[User:K2|K2]] 14:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

== Advertisement ==

Hey guys, want to see some real articles on this website? Check out MetalHeadsRejoice, where you can find some '''REAL''' cool articles about comedy, and the music of HEAVY FUCKING METAL!!!!!!! Do it now!

--[[User:MetalHeadsRejoice|MetalHeadsRejoice]] 15:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)MetalHeadsRejoice

== Spammers ==

Could you please give me block rights so I can help you stop them? --[[User:OOPowerMexicoOo|OOPowerMexicoOo]] 19:59, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

There is a supposed Nazi-troll in german anarchopedia called "WeiÃŸe Feder". Deleting whole articels (Racism, Sexism) and exchanging them with "anarchy has failed/ user xyz is a utopian dreamer". Can you block this guy?

== Thank you ==

I will keep an eye on recent changes. Btw, isnt there like a spam blacklist where we can add words like "jobs", "weight loss", etc?
:doesn't Captcha work anymore ? [[User:Libre|Libre]] 12:40, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Anarchie.png

2011-04-17T13:08:11Z

Libre:

File:Anarchisme.png

2011-04-10T13:56:46Z

Libre: Redirecting to File:Organisation Anarchisme.png

#REDIRECT [[File:Organisation_Anarchisme.png]]

File:Organisation Anarchisme.png

2011-04-10T13:55:24Z

Libre: Organisation politique et économique de l'Anarchisme. Positionnement de l'Anarchisme vis à vis d'autres idéologies.

Organisation politique et Ã©conomique de l'Anarchisme. Positionnement de l'Anarchisme vis Ã vis d'autres idÃ©ologies.

File:Anarchisme.png

2011-04-10T13:40:51Z

Libre: redir...

#REDIRECT [[File:Grilleanalyse eco-pol-soc fr.png]]

File:politicaleconomicalsocialanalysis.png

2011-03-26T17:35:27Z

Libre: uploaded a new version of "File:politicaleconomicalsocialanalysis.png": Reverted to version as of 08:48, 6 February 2011

Map of political, economical, social view.

File:politicaleconomicalsocialanalysis.png

2011-03-26T17:33:04Z

Libre: uploaded a new version of "File:politicaleconomicalsocialanalysis.png"

Map of political, economical, social view.

User talk:XXPowerMexicoXx

2011-03-21T21:51:32Z

Libre: New page: it seems you are not blocked. ~~~~

it seems you are not blocked. [[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:51, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Grillecarre3.png

2011-03-20T09:49:03Z

Libre: grille analyse ideologico-politique.

grille analyse ideologico-politique.

File:politicaleconomicalsocialanalysis.png

2011-02-06T08:48:06Z

Libre: Map of political, economical, social view.

Map of political, economical, social view.

File:Grilleesanarquismo.png

2011-02-06T08:13:52Z

Libre: uploaded a new version of "File:Grilleesanarquismo.png"

panel ideologico politico.

File:Grilleesanarquismo.png

2011-01-24T11:57:05Z

Libre: uploaded a new version of "File:Grilleesanarquismo.png"

panel ideologico politico.

File:Grilleesanarquismo.png

2010-07-11T08:51:53Z

Libre: uploaded a new version of "File:Grilleesanarquismo.png": modifs -l - m

panel ideologico politico.

File:Grilleesanarquismo.png

2010-07-11T08:40:31Z

Libre: panel ideologico politico.

panel ideologico politico.

Network

2009-02-27T23:09:53Z

Libre: /* blocked by a capitalist on the ap spanish */

As Anarchopedia doesn't have [[en:power structure|power structure]], it should have at least one page for coordination of our work: from talk about what Anarchopedia should be to talk how to organize content. This page should be used for these questions.

== blocked by a capitalist on the ap spanish ==

I want [http://spa.anarchopedia.org/index.php?title=Discusi%C3%B3n:Anarquismo&action=edit&redlink=1 making a direct action against a capitalist action] on the [http://spa.anarchopedia.org/Anarquismo anarchism's article] on the spanish AP (where he want to make slowly believe that capitalism is good and that anarchism can be capitalism), he could [http://spa.anarchopedia.org/Especial:Registro/block blockade me] cause he owns admistrations rights. i don't want to discuss with a capitalist, i use direct action. someone would be able to [http://spa.anarchopedia.org/Especial:Contribuciones/F.1 desysop this capitalist] user about administrations rights please ? i don't accept anything from a capitalist. we haven't to discuss if some capitalists are right or not, anarcho-capitalism is a fake. i had just began to [http://spa.anarchopedia.org/index.php?title=Anarquismo&diff=prev&oldid=12000 modify the introduction of the article], before others perspectives. thanks... -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 18:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)'''

I propose to suspend sysop rights from
http://spa.anarchopedia.org/Usuario:F.1
because of autority abuse.
--[[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]] 10:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

:Thanks for your support... -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 23:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)'''

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

Network

2009-02-13T20:20:26Z

Libre: /* blocked by a capitalist on the ap spanish */

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-02-07T14:47:04Z

Libre: /* what's an APOV */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

== About general meetings ==
=== Introduction ===
First of all I want to talk about General Meetings. This page was started 7 July 2007. Today is 22 January 2009. Year and a half! We must be honest with oneself: there are only 2 answers: either Anarchopedia has no questions that must be solved by all users; or general meeting is not an acceptable way for this.

Indeed, the truth is in the middle. On the one hand, we have no '''urgent''' questions (just look at this page. There are many questions, no one was solved during 1.5 years, but Anarchpedia is still alive). On the other hand, online general meeting is no more acceptable because we have too many users, but we have almost no permanently active users. If we fix the day for general meeting (e.g. in a month), some people, who today think they'll attend it, won't; but some other people, who today think they'll be busy, will. In any event, it won't be really GENERAL meeting as it was when Anarchopedia had much less users. So we must find another way to make general decision.

=== My suggestion ===
So now we have only one general question: how to organize decision of general questions? :) I think the best way is:
# New question is posted in wiki (e.g. this page. Or on it's own page, but link must be here). Author must post not only question, but at least one decision (if more than one, he must mark one he mostly likes).
# Users discuss question and try to reach consensus.
# After consensus is reached we should wait some time (e.g. one week or one month maybe). If there are no objection during this time, the decision is considered accepted.

==== Comments ====
* I believe we will always reach consensus in reasonable time. But ''reasonable time'' is different for different questions.
* I think it's a good idea to discuss not only in wiki, but in IM (Jabber, Skype, ICQ...). In this way two people would understand each other and reach consensus faster.
* We should avoid accept irreversible decisions (e.g. deleting logs). We should think twice and accept it only if there is absolutely no doubt. On the contrary, if decision is reversible (e.g. page protection), we shouldn't spent much time for decision. Even if there are doubts, but no objections, consensus should be considered reached. It is always possible to change reversible decision.

[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 19:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

==Organizational==

===Date and time===
Please put down when you can attend the General Meeting in order of preference:
* December 4 (8-20 UTC), December 1 (8-12 UTC), December 8 (8-12 UTC), December 11 (8-20 UTC) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] - Sorry can't do December 11th [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 12:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 4 (16-20 UTC), December 11 (16-20 UTC) [[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]]
* Unfortunately I will be out of the Internet for some days, so I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I will try to provide some suggestions regarding technical issues in this page. --[[User:Cercopithecus|Cercopithecus]] 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 8 and after. - Samarre, french encyclopedia

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
*:::I can't disagree with you on that but I think that the main goal of a blog, for a group or collective, is to get a way of communicating what's around, what's being done, to invite to participation,... I think it could bring the project to more real-life-connectedness (new word) - samarre (''french AP'')
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:: I propose this page: [[Anarchopedia:Inter-projects]]. If you have anything to add or note, feel free to do so. If a more international expression could fit, I would personally find it better. - samarre

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

==what's an APOV==
*Following the last G.M., some anarchists were leaving the project cause that acceptance of capitalistsPOV in here. do we have to leave all this project and going on (e.g) infoshop ?
*post-modernism terminology, capitalist terminology, socialist terminology, anarchist terminology ? what's freedom and equality ? do we need authoritarians theories to live and practice anarchy ?

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

----

(The next text was originally written in Russian about ruWikipedia and posted at [[rus:User:Caesarion/ÐÐ¢Ð—]]. There are minor differences between ru and en Wikipedias, but you should understand me)

One of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:5 five pillars] of Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV NPOV] (neutral point of view). In a nutshell: 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.' I want to remind two types of violation: 1) bias; 2) incompleteness.

There is APOV (anarchistic point of view) in Anarchopedia, but there is no concensus what it is. I'll try to formulate it.

Well. Wikipedia's definition consists of 2 parts. The first tells that editors must present facts, but mustn't propagandize that one fact is true and other is wrong. The second tells that all points of view must be presented fully and proportionally.

APOV consist of 2 parts, too. And the first is the same as Wikipedia has: APOV requires only presentation of facts, but no propaganda. The difference is in the second part.

APOV requires acquaintance with all points of view (completeness must be), but only acquaintance. And fully consideration is needed only from the view of anarchist (or anarchists, because anarchism consists of many schools). Also there must be criticism (if any) of these points of view.

Well, I'll try to formulate the second part of APOV: all point of view must be presented, but fully consideration is needed only for the anarchists points of view (and their criticism).

Finally I want to remind, that Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, but not a mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha_Verbitsky Misha Verbitsky] wrote in his book 'Anticopyright' words, which, I think, must be the first rule of any thematic wiki-encyclopaedia:
<blockquote>
<p>Discussion of arguments pros and cons copyright is a stupid work; it is like religious debate about advantages of Linux over Microsoft (and vice versa) or criminal Yeltsin's gang (which must be judged) and necessity of market reforms. Adherents of different points of view have no chances to come to an agreement, and even won't listen to each other.</p>
<p>Of cource, it is impossible to get any sense from these arguments. Idea, any idea, could win only if its opponents will die. Point of this book is not to persuade anyone; persuasion is the product of high salary or when someone is hit with something heavy on the head. This book is not for that, but for fixing of different instructive stories about anticopyright.</p>
</blockquote>

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:oops sorry, i didn't see that there were a response.
:i think APOV have to be depending of an anarchist perspective. all point of view can be stated but the perspective of articles have to be anarchist. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]''' 7 February 2009.

== Case-sensitivity of the first character ==
First of all two links: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgCapitalLinks] and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name#Case-sensitivity_of_the_first_character]. So, let's talk about $wgCapitalLinks. Now the first character is case-sensitive in many (A)pedias. I'm not sure it is the best. I'll try to summarize the pros and cons (please feel free to edit).

=== Arguments for the first character ''should'' be case-sensitive ===
* Depending on the first character some words have different meanings. E.g. '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Internet Internet]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/internet internet]''' or '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/God God]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god god]'''.
* The only extra action editor must do is to add '''''also''''' template in the beginning of the article.

=== Arguments for the first character ''should not'' be case-sensitive ===
* Not so mush words have different meanings. Wikipedia also has articles '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet Internet]''' and '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God God]''', but it is not a problem. (A)pedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so it is better to do as Wikipedia does.
* Somebody could forget to add '''''also''''' template. And somebody could forget the meaning of the word when he or she makes link. Mechanism of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] garantees no errors like these.
* Sometimes link could be in the beginning of sentence, sometimes in the middle. There are 2 solutions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Piped_links piped links] and redirects. But it is easier to make unpiped links then piped. And make redirects for MOST articles is not the best.

=== Discussion ===
We must understand the goal and the means. The goal is clear: to differ meanings of one word. The means is also clear: each meaning should have its own article. I hope everyone agrees with this.

The question is which mechanism is better: case-sensitivity of the first character or disambiguation page? Ex facte the first mechanism is looked more natural. But judge not of men and things at first sight! Yes, I agree, the second mechanism is more sophisticated, but it has one really big advantage: it prevents errors. It will be impossible to confuse one article with another, because there will be only one disambiguation page for both links and two articles with really different names. So I think we should use case-'''in'''sensitive first character in all (A)pedias. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is... ==
What is Anarchopedia? Now this simple question doesn't have the only answer. Look at this:
* A People's Encyclopedia. Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.' -- [[Main Page]]
* NULL -- [[eng:Main Page]]
* Anarchopedia is a repository of information freely editable by anyone with few, if any restrictions.' -- [[eng:Anarchopedia:About]]
* Anarcopedia es la primera enciclopedia wiki anarquista.' -- [[spa:Portada]]
* AnarcopÃ©dia, A enciclopÃ©dia libertÃ¡ria.' -- [[por:PÃ¡gina principal]]
* a primeira enciclopÃ©dia wiki anarquista' -- [[por:AnarcopÃ©dia]]

I think it is very important to understand what we are (and what we are not) and to formulate it in a few sentonces and post it in every main page (and other suitable places). So let's write down statements (to reach a consensus) and then we should combine them in a few (better one) sentences.

=== Anarchopedia is ===
* '''Multilanguage wiki-face of world anarchism.'''
: Is it forever, that anarchopedia.org uses wiki and only wiki? Will we use any other technology together with wiki?
: Is it true that we are the world face? Is there any bigger, more popular site like Anarchopedia?
* '''An experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.'''
* '''At least a part of Anarchopedia is encyclopaedia.'''

=== Is Anarchopedia? ===
* '''Anarchist community?'''
: I disagree that Anarchopedia is a place for anarchists only. I think Anarchopedia is a place where all people could get (and put) information about anarchism.
* '''Nothing but encyclopaedia?'''
: Of cource, encyclopaedia about anarchism is the main idea of this site. I think we shouldn't stop. We have wiki, so it is possible for example to publish online (or store scans of offline) newpaper about anarchism.

=== Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not ===
* '''Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda.'''
: Encyclopaedia must contain no propaganda. Encyclopaedia must tell truth independently of its authors views. In other places (e.g. on the users personal pages) propaganda is acceptable, but not in encyclopaedia.

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:What is truth ? isn't there capitalist's truth, statist's truth, anarchist's truth and others differents truth depending on your point of view ? i think there's an anarchist's truth, and that anarchopedia have to take an APOV, or, to die in post-modernism restricto-terminologisation novlang. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)'''
[[Category:General Meetings]]
:: Scientific facts are truth. I hope everyone agree that there is no capitalism/statist/anarchistic/other science. 'There are much more straights than gays' -- it is fact. 'Gays are worse/better than straight' -- it is not fact, it is opinion of some people. If we write an article about gays, we must tell about this opinion and about people who participate it, but we mustn't assert that it is true or false. And even in the article 'anarchy' we mustn't assert that anarchy is better than authority. -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 21:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:::
:::Ok i understand what you meant first ; It is taking a scientific POV about truth. But it exist differents scientific POV about things, differents theories... and some theories can be false (Geocentric model, Germ theory of disease), cause basis are bad.
:::"terminology" can having differents meanings depending POV. And that even science can't cut and saying what is the good terminology or good signifiance of words... there's history of terminology depending movements. Anarchism own his terminology, by his history, which is not the same that capitalists/statists/others ones... Meanings can change with history and evolution of life/society, but not the basis (hypothesis, axioms ?)...
:::By example : Anarchism fight for Liberty and equality which are the opposite to authority. Hierarchical is authoritarian, then theories which defend hierarchical are authoritarian, and are opposite to liberty and equality, then to anarchism. by example, "anarcho"-capitalism defend hierarchical, then there's nothing anarchism in that theory. Then a definition/introduction must explain clearly in the article that it is not anarchism, but an oxymoron, a false theory.
:::And to reply to "Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not... Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda" ; it existed an "[[anarchistic encyclopaedia|anarchist encyclopedia]]" which was written by anarchists (and near) in which you can read some really good anarchist propaganda... Then if Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, and that there's no anarchist propaganda, why this "Anarcho"-encyclopaedia-project ?
:::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''
:::: If there are several definitions of a term, must write down all of them. E.g. for the article 'anarcho-capitalism' it should be something like this:<blockquote>
::::: Anarcho-capitalists (and most researchers and some other anarchists, e.g. anarcho-individualists) state, that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism...<br><br>Most other anarchists (especially anarcho-communists and anarcho-collectivists) state, that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other.
</blockquote>
:::: Such definition covers all of the meanings and propagandizes nothing. This is what any encyclopedia must be.

:::: I didn't read "anarchist encyclopedia", but who calls it an 'encyclopedia'? Themselves, I think. To call oneself and to be -- it is not the same. If they propagandize something, they are not an encyclopedia.

:::: And Anarchopedia is 'anarcho' because, firstly, it isn't a general encyclopedia like Wikipedia is. There must be no articles in Anarchopedia which have no relation to anarchism. And secondly, Anarchopedia is an experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.

:::: -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 08:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::In that example of definition, it take a capitalist POV, under a scientific neutral POV bias. It define implicitly hypothesis that "Anarchism" beeing only against state, then like capitalists are against actual form of state (in fact "a"-c want their private state, their private monopole of force to protect their private property) it allow to enounce it like being in anarchism, but it's a false hypothesis, cause anarchism is against all form of state (private, public, etc) and hierarchies... The hypothesis of this definition is false. with a such hypothesis, we can add in all sort of authoritarian theories/movements, which don't accept actual State... but would want their particular State. That is a scientific and libertarian POV i enounce, and not a scientific and neutral POV. I don't believe in neutrality. Neutrality is for wp. Neutralism is for mainstream. I am for an anarchist perspectivism. The aim is anarchy, means have to be connected to that, and vis versa.
:::::This definition take a capitalist POV, it use in the defintion all their ideological/terminological bias. And that is scientific, it just search all their propaganda, it use the same. it reproducte their ideology.
:::::There's no need to allow capitalist propaganda to use Anarchopedia, wikipedia (or others) is enough for them.
:::::I am an anarchist without adjectives, i recognize all form of anarchism, and i reject all '''archists'''. '''capitalists''' can't be anarchists, cause they are '''hierarchists'''. they are only a radical form of liberalism.
:::::What it is written like example of definition can't be an introduction. it can be just a debate beetween Anarchism and "A"-capitalism. But an introduction need a scientific and non-neutral POV.
:::::in [[:eng:anarcho-capitalism]], i propose to enounce a minimal introduction of that theory depdnding a anarchist perspective :<blockquote>
:::::"''The "anarcho"-capitalism is a liberal political philosophy and theory, non-anarchist, who want to privatize state for the benefit of capitalist competing companies. They defend actual economical and social hierarchy. Anarcho-capitalists state that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism... They attempts to reconcile capitalism, as defined in classical liberalism, with Anarchism and anarchist themes such as opposition to the State and individual freedom. Most other anarchists state that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other, and that anti-statism and individual freedom aren't sufficient to be enounced like "anarchist"''"
:::::</blockquote>
:::::About the "anarchist encyclopedia" (only in french), it is sure it wasn't a "neutralist encyclopedia". Articles of that "anarchist encyclopedia" are reproducted in here : [http://www.encyclopedie-anarchiste.org/index.html l'EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste de SÃ©bastien Faure].
:::::In fact, even the "Encyclopedia - a systematic dictionary of the sciences, arts, and crafts -" from Diderot and d'Alembert had the aim to fight religious and political fanatism, and apologize rational and freedom spirit. I think Anarchopedia can fight against economical and political authoritarism in all sorts... like capitalism, statism, nationalism, etc. Do we have to support authoritarians views which presents themselves like libertarians ? no. We know what was/is wrong with moralist (religious & co) authoritarians, we know what was/is wrong with economics (capitalists & co) and politicals (statists & co) authoritarians... and we are, anarchist, anti-authoritarians. do we have to having shame of that ?
:::::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 11:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-02-07T14:41:32Z

Libre: /* what's an APOV */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

== About general meetings ==
=== Introduction ===
First of all I want to talk about General Meetings. This page was started 7 July 2007. Today is 22 January 2009. Year and a half! We must be honest with oneself: there are only 2 answers: either Anarchopedia has no questions that must be solved by all users; or general meeting is not an acceptable way for this.

Indeed, the truth is in the middle. On the one hand, we have no '''urgent''' questions (just look at this page. There are many questions, no one was solved during 1.5 years, but Anarchpedia is still alive). On the other hand, online general meeting is no more acceptable because we have too many users, but we have almost no permanently active users. If we fix the day for general meeting (e.g. in a month), some people, who today think they'll attend it, won't; but some other people, who today think they'll be busy, will. In any event, it won't be really GENERAL meeting as it was when Anarchopedia had much less users. So we must find another way to make general decision.

=== My suggestion ===
So now we have only one general question: how to organize decision of general questions? :) I think the best way is:
# New question is posted in wiki (e.g. this page. Or on it's own page, but link must be here). Author must post not only question, but at least one decision (if more than one, he must mark one he mostly likes).
# Users discuss question and try to reach consensus.
# After consensus is reached we should wait some time (e.g. one week or one month maybe). If there are no objection during this time, the decision is considered accepted.

==== Comments ====
* I believe we will always reach consensus in reasonable time. But ''reasonable time'' is different for different questions.
* I think it's a good idea to discuss not only in wiki, but in IM (Jabber, Skype, ICQ...). In this way two people would understand each other and reach consensus faster.
* We should avoid accept irreversible decisions (e.g. deleting logs). We should think twice and accept it only if there is absolutely no doubt. On the contrary, if decision is reversible (e.g. page protection), we shouldn't spent much time for decision. Even if there are doubts, but no objections, consensus should be considered reached. It is always possible to change reversible decision.

[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 19:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

==Organizational==

===Date and time===
Please put down when you can attend the General Meeting in order of preference:
* December 4 (8-20 UTC), December 1 (8-12 UTC), December 8 (8-12 UTC), December 11 (8-20 UTC) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] - Sorry can't do December 11th [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 12:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 4 (16-20 UTC), December 11 (16-20 UTC) [[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]]
* Unfortunately I will be out of the Internet for some days, so I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I will try to provide some suggestions regarding technical issues in this page. --[[User:Cercopithecus|Cercopithecus]] 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 8 and after. - Samarre, french encyclopedia

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
*:::I can't disagree with you on that but I think that the main goal of a blog, for a group or collective, is to get a way of communicating what's around, what's being done, to invite to participation,... I think it could bring the project to more real-life-connectedness (new word) - samarre (''french AP'')
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:: I propose this page: [[Anarchopedia:Inter-projects]]. If you have anything to add or note, feel free to do so. If a more international expression could fit, I would personally find it better. - samarre

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

==what's an APOV==
*Following the last G.M., some anarchists were leaving the project cause that acceptance of capitalistsPOV in here. do we have to leave all this project and going on (e.g) infoshop ?
*post-modernism terminology, capitalist terminology, socialist terminology, anarchist terminology ? what's freedom and equality ? do we need authoritarians theories to live and practice anarchy ?

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

----

(The next text was originally written in Russian about ruWikipedia and posted at [[rus:User:Caesarion/ÐÐ¢Ð—]]. There are minor differences between ru and en Wikipedias, but you should understand me)

One of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:5 five pillars] of Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV NPOV] (neutral point of view). In a nutshell: 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.' I want to remind two types of violation: 1) bias; 2) incompleteness.

There is APOV (anarchistic point of view) in Anarchopedia, but there is no concensus what it is. I'll try to formulate it.

Well. Wikipedia's definition consists of 2 parts. The first tells that editors must present facts, but mustn't propagandize that one fact is true and other is wrong. The second tells that all points of view must be presented fully and proportionally.

APOV consist of 2 parts, too. And the first is the same as Wikipedia has: APOV requires only presentation of facts, but no propaganda. The difference is in the second part.

APOV requires acquaintance with all points of view (completeness must be), but only acquaintance. And fully consideration is needed only from the view of anarchist (or anarchists, because anarchism consists of many schools). Also there must be criticism (if any) of these points of view.

Well, I'll try to formulate the second part of APOV: all point of view must be presented, but fully consideration is needed only for the anarchists points of view (and their criticism).

Finally I want to remind, that Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, but not a mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha_Verbitsky Misha Verbitsky] wrote in his book 'Anticopyright' words, which, I think, must be the first rule of any thematic wiki-encyclopaedia:
<blockquote>
<p>Discussion of arguments pros and cons copyright is a stupid work; it is like religious debate about advantages of Linux over Microsoft (and vice versa) or criminal Yeltsin's gang (which must be judged) and necessity of market reforms. Adherents of different points of view have no chances to come to an agreement, and even won't listen to each other.</p>
<p>Of cource, it is impossible to get any sense from these arguments. Idea, any idea, could win only if its opponents will die. Point of this book is not to persuade anyone; persuasion is the product of high salary or when someone is hit with something heavy on the head. This book is not for that, but for fixing of different instructive stories about anticopyright.</p>
</blockquote>

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:oops sorry, i didn't see that there were a response. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

== Case-sensitivity of the first character ==
First of all two links: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgCapitalLinks] and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name#Case-sensitivity_of_the_first_character]. So, let's talk about $wgCapitalLinks. Now the first character is case-sensitive in many (A)pedias. I'm not sure it is the best. I'll try to summarize the pros and cons (please feel free to edit).

=== Arguments for the first character ''should'' be case-sensitive ===
* Depending on the first character some words have different meanings. E.g. '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Internet Internet]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/internet internet]''' or '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/God God]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god god]'''.
* The only extra action editor must do is to add '''''also''''' template in the beginning of the article.

=== Arguments for the first character ''should not'' be case-sensitive ===
* Not so mush words have different meanings. Wikipedia also has articles '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet Internet]''' and '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God God]''', but it is not a problem. (A)pedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so it is better to do as Wikipedia does.
* Somebody could forget to add '''''also''''' template. And somebody could forget the meaning of the word when he or she makes link. Mechanism of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] garantees no errors like these.
* Sometimes link could be in the beginning of sentence, sometimes in the middle. There are 2 solutions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Piped_links piped links] and redirects. But it is easier to make unpiped links then piped. And make redirects for MOST articles is not the best.

=== Discussion ===
We must understand the goal and the means. The goal is clear: to differ meanings of one word. The means is also clear: each meaning should have its own article. I hope everyone agrees with this.

The question is which mechanism is better: case-sensitivity of the first character or disambiguation page? Ex facte the first mechanism is looked more natural. But judge not of men and things at first sight! Yes, I agree, the second mechanism is more sophisticated, but it has one really big advantage: it prevents errors. It will be impossible to confuse one article with another, because there will be only one disambiguation page for both links and two articles with really different names. So I think we should use case-'''in'''sensitive first character in all (A)pedias. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is... ==
What is Anarchopedia? Now this simple question doesn't have the only answer. Look at this:
* A People's Encyclopedia. Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.' -- [[Main Page]]
* NULL -- [[eng:Main Page]]
* Anarchopedia is a repository of information freely editable by anyone with few, if any restrictions.' -- [[eng:Anarchopedia:About]]
* Anarcopedia es la primera enciclopedia wiki anarquista.' -- [[spa:Portada]]
* AnarcopÃ©dia, A enciclopÃ©dia libertÃ¡ria.' -- [[por:PÃ¡gina principal]]
* a primeira enciclopÃ©dia wiki anarquista' -- [[por:AnarcopÃ©dia]]

I think it is very important to understand what we are (and what we are not) and to formulate it in a few sentonces and post it in every main page (and other suitable places). So let's write down statements (to reach a consensus) and then we should combine them in a few (better one) sentences.

=== Anarchopedia is ===
* '''Multilanguage wiki-face of world anarchism.'''
: Is it forever, that anarchopedia.org uses wiki and only wiki? Will we use any other technology together with wiki?
: Is it true that we are the world face? Is there any bigger, more popular site like Anarchopedia?
* '''An experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.'''
* '''At least a part of Anarchopedia is encyclopaedia.'''

=== Is Anarchopedia? ===
* '''Anarchist community?'''
: I disagree that Anarchopedia is a place for anarchists only. I think Anarchopedia is a place where all people could get (and put) information about anarchism.
* '''Nothing but encyclopaedia?'''
: Of cource, encyclopaedia about anarchism is the main idea of this site. I think we shouldn't stop. We have wiki, so it is possible for example to publish online (or store scans of offline) newpaper about anarchism.

=== Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not ===
* '''Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda.'''
: Encyclopaedia must contain no propaganda. Encyclopaedia must tell truth independently of its authors views. In other places (e.g. on the users personal pages) propaganda is acceptable, but not in encyclopaedia.

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:What is truth ? isn't there capitalist's truth, statist's truth, anarchist's truth and others differents truth depending on your point of view ? i think there's an anarchist's truth, and that anarchopedia have to take an APOV, or, to die in post-modernism restricto-terminologisation novlang. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)'''
[[Category:General Meetings]]
:: Scientific facts are truth. I hope everyone agree that there is no capitalism/statist/anarchistic/other science. 'There are much more straights than gays' -- it is fact. 'Gays are worse/better than straight' -- it is not fact, it is opinion of some people. If we write an article about gays, we must tell about this opinion and about people who participate it, but we mustn't assert that it is true or false. And even in the article 'anarchy' we mustn't assert that anarchy is better than authority. -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 21:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:::
:::Ok i understand what you meant first ; It is taking a scientific POV about truth. But it exist differents scientific POV about things, differents theories... and some theories can be false (Geocentric model, Germ theory of disease), cause basis are bad.
:::"terminology" can having differents meanings depending POV. And that even science can't cut and saying what is the good terminology or good signifiance of words... there's history of terminology depending movements. Anarchism own his terminology, by his history, which is not the same that capitalists/statists/others ones... Meanings can change with history and evolution of life/society, but not the basis (hypothesis, axioms ?)...
:::By example : Anarchism fight for Liberty and equality which are the opposite to authority. Hierarchical is authoritarian, then theories which defend hierarchical are authoritarian, and are opposite to liberty and equality, then to anarchism. by example, "anarcho"-capitalism defend hierarchical, then there's nothing anarchism in that theory. Then a definition/introduction must explain clearly in the article that it is not anarchism, but an oxymoron, a false theory.
:::And to reply to "Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not... Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda" ; it existed an "[[anarchistic encyclopaedia|anarchist encyclopedia]]" which was written by anarchists (and near) in which you can read some really good anarchist propaganda... Then if Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, and that there's no anarchist propaganda, why this "Anarcho"-encyclopaedia-project ?
:::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''
:::: If there are several definitions of a term, must write down all of them. E.g. for the article 'anarcho-capitalism' it should be something like this:<blockquote>
::::: Anarcho-capitalists (and most researchers and some other anarchists, e.g. anarcho-individualists) state, that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism...<br><br>Most other anarchists (especially anarcho-communists and anarcho-collectivists) state, that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other.
</blockquote>
:::: Such definition covers all of the meanings and propagandizes nothing. This is what any encyclopedia must be.

:::: I didn't read "anarchist encyclopedia", but who calls it an 'encyclopedia'? Themselves, I think. To call oneself and to be -- it is not the same. If they propagandize something, they are not an encyclopedia.

:::: And Anarchopedia is 'anarcho' because, firstly, it isn't a general encyclopedia like Wikipedia is. There must be no articles in Anarchopedia which have no relation to anarchism. And secondly, Anarchopedia is an experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.

:::: -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 08:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::In that example of definition, it take a capitalist POV, under a scientific neutral POV bias. It define implicitly hypothesis that "Anarchism" beeing only against state, then like capitalists are against actual form of state (in fact "a"-c want their private state, their private monopole of force to protect their private property) it allow to enounce it like being in anarchism, but it's a false hypothesis, cause anarchism is against all form of state (private, public, etc) and hierarchies... The hypothesis of this definition is false. with a such hypothesis, we can add in all sort of authoritarian theories/movements, which don't accept actual State... but would want their particular State. That is a scientific and libertarian POV i enounce, and not a scientific and neutral POV. I don't believe in neutrality. Neutrality is for wp. Neutralism is for mainstream. I am for an anarchist perspectivism. The aim is anarchy, means have to be connected to that, and vis versa.
:::::This definition take a capitalist POV, it use in the defintion all their ideological/terminological bias. And that is scientific, it just search all their propaganda, it use the same. it reproducte their ideology.
:::::There's no need to allow capitalist propaganda to use Anarchopedia, wikipedia (or others) is enough for them.
:::::I am an anarchist without adjectives, i recognize all form of anarchism, and i reject all '''archists'''. '''capitalists''' can't be anarchists, cause they are '''hierarchists'''. they are only a radical form of liberalism.
:::::What it is written like example of definition can't be an introduction. it can be just a debate beetween Anarchism and "A"-capitalism. But an introduction need a scientific and non-neutral POV.
:::::in [[:eng:anarcho-capitalism]], i propose to enounce a minimal introduction of that theory depdnding a anarchist perspective :<blockquote>
:::::"''The "anarcho"-capitalism is a liberal political philosophy and theory, non-anarchist, who want to privatize state for the benefit of capitalist competing companies. They defend actual economical and social hierarchy. Anarcho-capitalists state that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism... They attempts to reconcile capitalism, as defined in classical liberalism, with Anarchism and anarchist themes such as opposition to the State and individual freedom. Most other anarchists state that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other, and that anti-statism and individual freedom aren't sufficient to be enounced like "anarchist"''"
:::::</blockquote>
:::::About the "anarchist encyclopedia" (only in french), it is sure it wasn't a "neutralist encyclopedia". Articles of that "anarchist encyclopedia" are reproducted in here : [http://www.encyclopedie-anarchiste.org/index.html l'EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste de SÃ©bastien Faure].
:::::In fact, even the "Encyclopedia - a systematic dictionary of the sciences, arts, and crafts -" from Diderot and d'Alembert had the aim to fight religious and political fanatism, and apologize rational and freedom spirit. I think Anarchopedia can fight against economical and political authoritarism in all sorts... like capitalism, statism, nationalism, etc. Do we have to support authoritarians views which presents themselves like libertarians ? no. We know what was/is wrong with moralist (religious & co) authoritarians, we know what was/is wrong with economics (capitalists & co) and politicals (statists & co) authoritarians... and we are, anarchist, anti-authoritarians. do we have to having shame of that ?
:::::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 11:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-02-07T12:56:50Z

Libre: /* Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

== About general meetings ==
=== Introduction ===
First of all I want to talk about General Meetings. This page was started 7 July 2007. Today is 22 January 2009. Year and a half! We must be honest with oneself: there are only 2 answers: either Anarchopedia has no questions that must be solved by all users; or general meeting is not an acceptable way for this.

Indeed, the truth is in the middle. On the one hand, we have no '''urgent''' questions (just look at this page. There are many questions, no one was solved during 1.5 years, but Anarchpedia is still alive). On the other hand, online general meeting is no more acceptable because we have too many users, but we have almost no permanently active users. If we fix the day for general meeting (e.g. in a month), some people, who today think they'll attend it, won't; but some other people, who today think they'll be busy, will. In any event, it won't be really GENERAL meeting as it was when Anarchopedia had much less users. So we must find another way to make general decision.

=== My suggestion ===
So now we have only one general question: how to organize decision of general questions? :) I think the best way is:
# New question is posted in wiki (e.g. this page. Or on it's own page, but link must be here). Author must post not only question, but at least one decision (if more than one, he must mark one he mostly likes).
# Users discuss question and try to reach consensus.
# After consensus is reached we should wait some time (e.g. one week or one month maybe). If there are no objection during this time, the decision is considered accepted.

==== Comments ====
* I believe we will always reach consensus in reasonable time. But ''reasonable time'' is different for different questions.
* I think it's a good idea to discuss not only in wiki, but in IM (Jabber, Skype, ICQ...). In this way two people would understand each other and reach consensus faster.
* We should avoid accept irreversible decisions (e.g. deleting logs). We should think twice and accept it only if there is absolutely no doubt. On the contrary, if decision is reversible (e.g. page protection), we shouldn't spent much time for decision. Even if there are doubts, but no objections, consensus should be considered reached. It is always possible to change reversible decision.

[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 19:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

==Organizational==

===Date and time===
Please put down when you can attend the General Meeting in order of preference:
* December 4 (8-20 UTC), December 1 (8-12 UTC), December 8 (8-12 UTC), December 11 (8-20 UTC) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] - Sorry can't do December 11th [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 12:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 4 (16-20 UTC), December 11 (16-20 UTC) [[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]]
* Unfortunately I will be out of the Internet for some days, so I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I will try to provide some suggestions regarding technical issues in this page. --[[User:Cercopithecus|Cercopithecus]] 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 8 and after. - Samarre, french encyclopedia

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
*:::I can't disagree with you on that but I think that the main goal of a blog, for a group or collective, is to get a way of communicating what's around, what's being done, to invite to participation,... I think it could bring the project to more real-life-connectedness (new word) - samarre (''french AP'')
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:: I propose this page: [[Anarchopedia:Inter-projects]]. If you have anything to add or note, feel free to do so. If a more international expression could fit, I would personally find it better. - samarre

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

==what's an APOV==
*Following the last G.M., some anarchists were leaving the project cause that acceptance of capitalistsPOV in here. do we have to leave all this project and going on (e.g) infoshop ?
*post-modernism terminology, capitalist terminology, socialist terminology, anarchist terminology ? what's freedom and equality ? do we need authoritarians theories to live and practice anarchy ?

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

----

(The next text was originally written in Russian about ruWikipedia and posted at [[rus:User:Caesarion/ÐÐ¢Ð—]]. There are minor differences between ru and en Wikipedias, but you should understand me)

One of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:5 five pillars] of Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV NPOV] (neutral point of view). In a nutshell: 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.' I want to remind two types of violation: 1) bias; 2) incompleteness.

There is APOV (anarchistic point of view) in Anarchopedia, but there is no concensus what it is. I'll try to formulate it.

Well. Wikipedia's definition consists of 2 parts. The first tells that editors must present facts, but mustn't propagandize that one fact is true and other is wrong. The second tells that all points of view must be presented fully and proportionally.

APOV consist of 2 parts, too. And the first is the same as Wikipedia has: APOV requires only presentation of facts, but no propaganda. The difference is in the second part.

APOV requires acquaintance with all points of view (completeness must be), but only acquaintance. And fully consideration is needed only from the view of anarchist (or anarchists, because anarchism consists of many schools). Also there must be criticism (if any) of these points of view.

Well, I'll try to formulate the second part of APOV: all point of view must be presented, but fully consideration is needed only for the anarchists points of view (and their criticism).

Finally I want to remind, that Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, but not a mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha_Verbitsky Misha Verbitsky] wrote in his book 'Anticopyright' words, which, I think, must be the first rule of any thematic wiki-encyclopaedia:
<blockquote>
<p>Discussion of arguments pros and cons copyright is a stupid work; it is like religious debate about advantages of Linux over Microsoft (and vice versa) or criminal Yeltsin's gang (which must be judged) and necessity of market reforms. Adherents of different points of view have no chances to come to an agreement, and even won't listen to each other.</p>
<p>Of cource, it is impossible to get any sense from these arguments. Idea, any idea, could win only if its opponents will die. Point of this book is not to persuade anyone; persuasion is the product of high salary or when someone is hit with something heavy on the head. This book is not for that, but for fixing of different instructive stories about anticopyright.</p>
</blockquote>

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

== Case-sensitivity of the first character ==
First of all two links: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgCapitalLinks] and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name#Case-sensitivity_of_the_first_character]. So, let's talk about $wgCapitalLinks. Now the first character is case-sensitive in many (A)pedias. I'm not sure it is the best. I'll try to summarize the pros and cons (please feel free to edit).

=== Arguments for the first character ''should'' be case-sensitive ===
* Depending on the first character some words have different meanings. E.g. '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Internet Internet]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/internet internet]''' or '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/God God]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god god]'''.
* The only extra action editor must do is to add '''''also''''' template in the beginning of the article.

=== Arguments for the first character ''should not'' be case-sensitive ===
* Not so mush words have different meanings. Wikipedia also has articles '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet Internet]''' and '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God God]''', but it is not a problem. (A)pedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so it is better to do as Wikipedia does.
* Somebody could forget to add '''''also''''' template. And somebody could forget the meaning of the word when he or she makes link. Mechanism of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] garantees no errors like these.
* Sometimes link could be in the beginning of sentence, sometimes in the middle. There are 2 solutions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Piped_links piped links] and redirects. But it is easier to make unpiped links then piped. And make redirects for MOST articles is not the best.

=== Discussion ===
We must understand the goal and the means. The goal is clear: to differ meanings of one word. The means is also clear: each meaning should have its own article. I hope everyone agrees with this.

The question is which mechanism is better: case-sensitivity of the first character or disambiguation page? Ex facte the first mechanism is looked more natural. But judge not of men and things at first sight! Yes, I agree, the second mechanism is more sophisticated, but it has one really big advantage: it prevents errors. It will be impossible to confuse one article with another, because there will be only one disambiguation page for both links and two articles with really different names. So I think we should use case-'''in'''sensitive first character in all (A)pedias. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is... ==
What is Anarchopedia? Now this simple question doesn't have the only answer. Look at this:
* A People's Encyclopedia. Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.' -- [[Main Page]]
* NULL -- [[eng:Main Page]]
* Anarchopedia is a repository of information freely editable by anyone with few, if any restrictions.' -- [[eng:Anarchopedia:About]]
* Anarcopedia es la primera enciclopedia wiki anarquista.' -- [[spa:Portada]]
* AnarcopÃ©dia, A enciclopÃ©dia libertÃ¡ria.' -- [[por:PÃ¡gina principal]]
* a primeira enciclopÃ©dia wiki anarquista' -- [[por:AnarcopÃ©dia]]

I think it is very important to understand what we are (and what we are not) and to formulate it in a few sentonces and post it in every main page (and other suitable places). So let's write down statements (to reach a consensus) and then we should combine them in a few (better one) sentences.

=== Anarchopedia is ===
* '''Multilanguage wiki-face of world anarchism.'''
: Is it forever, that anarchopedia.org uses wiki and only wiki? Will we use any other technology together with wiki?
: Is it true that we are the world face? Is there any bigger, more popular site like Anarchopedia?
* '''An experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.'''
* '''At least a part of Anarchopedia is encyclopaedia.'''

=== Is Anarchopedia? ===
* '''Anarchist community?'''
: I disagree that Anarchopedia is a place for anarchists only. I think Anarchopedia is a place where all people could get (and put) information about anarchism.
* '''Nothing but encyclopaedia?'''
: Of cource, encyclopaedia about anarchism is the main idea of this site. I think we shouldn't stop. We have wiki, so it is possible for example to publish online (or store scans of offline) newpaper about anarchism.

=== Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not ===
* '''Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda.'''
: Encyclopaedia must contain no propaganda. Encyclopaedia must tell truth independently of its authors views. In other places (e.g. on the users personal pages) propaganda is acceptable, but not in encyclopaedia.

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:What is truth ? isn't there capitalist's truth, statist's truth, anarchist's truth and others differents truth depending on your point of view ? i think there's an anarchist's truth, and that anarchopedia have to take an APOV, or, to die in post-modernism restricto-terminologisation novlang. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)'''
[[Category:General Meetings]]
:: Scientific facts are truth. I hope everyone agree that there is no capitalism/statist/anarchistic/other science. 'There are much more straights than gays' -- it is fact. 'Gays are worse/better than straight' -- it is not fact, it is opinion of some people. If we write an article about gays, we must tell about this opinion and about people who participate it, but we mustn't assert that it is true or false. And even in the article 'anarchy' we mustn't assert that anarchy is better than authority. -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 21:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:::
:::Ok i understand what you meant first ; It is taking a scientific POV about truth. But it exist differents scientific POV about things, differents theories... and some theories can be false (Geocentric model, Germ theory of disease), cause basis are bad.
:::"terminology" can having differents meanings depending POV. And that even science can't cut and saying what is the good terminology or good signifiance of words... there's history of terminology depending movements. Anarchism own his terminology, by his history, which is not the same that capitalists/statists/others ones... Meanings can change with history and evolution of life/society, but not the basis (hypothesis, axioms ?)...
:::By example : Anarchism fight for Liberty and equality which are the opposite to authority. Hierarchical is authoritarian, then theories which defend hierarchical are authoritarian, and are opposite to liberty and equality, then to anarchism. by example, "anarcho"-capitalism defend hierarchical, then there's nothing anarchism in that theory. Then a definition/introduction must explain clearly in the article that it is not anarchism, but an oxymoron, a false theory.
:::And to reply to "Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not... Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda" ; it existed an "[[anarchistic encyclopaedia|anarchist encyclopedia]]" which was written by anarchists (and near) in which you can read some really good anarchist propaganda... Then if Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, and that there's no anarchist propaganda, why this "Anarcho"-encyclopaedia-project ?
:::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''
:::: If there are several definitions of a term, must write down all of them. E.g. for the article 'anarcho-capitalism' it should be something like this:<blockquote>
::::: Anarcho-capitalists (and most researchers and some other anarchists, e.g. anarcho-individualists) state, that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism...<br><br>Most other anarchists (especially anarcho-communists and anarcho-collectivists) state, that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other.
</blockquote>
:::: Such definition covers all of the meanings and propagandizes nothing. This is what any encyclopedia must be.

:::: I didn't read "anarchist encyclopedia", but who calls it an 'encyclopedia'? Themselves, I think. To call oneself and to be -- it is not the same. If they propagandize something, they are not an encyclopedia.

:::: And Anarchopedia is 'anarcho' because, firstly, it isn't a general encyclopedia like Wikipedia is. There must be no articles in Anarchopedia which have no relation to anarchism. And secondly, Anarchopedia is an experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.

:::: -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 08:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::In that example of definition, it take a capitalist POV, under a scientific neutral POV bias. It define implicitly hypothesis that "Anarchism" beeing only against state, then like capitalists are against actual form of state (in fact "a"-c want their private state, their private monopole of force to protect their private property) it allow to enounce it like being in anarchism, but it's a false hypothesis, cause anarchism is against all form of state (private, public, etc) and hierarchies... The hypothesis of this definition is false. with a such hypothesis, we can add in all sort of authoritarian theories/movements, which don't accept actual State... but would want their particular State. That is a scientific and libertarian POV i enounce, and not a scientific and neutral POV. I don't believe in neutrality. Neutrality is for wp. Neutralism is for mainstream. I am for an anarchist perspectivism. The aim is anarchy, means have to be connected to that, and vis versa.
:::::This definition take a capitalist POV, it use in the defintion all their ideological/terminological bias. And that is scientific, it just search all their propaganda, it use the same. it reproducte their ideology.
:::::There's no need to allow capitalist propaganda to use Anarchopedia, wikipedia (or others) is enough for them.
:::::I am an anarchist without adjectives, i recognize all form of anarchism, and i reject all '''archists'''. '''capitalists''' can't be anarchists, cause they are '''hierarchists'''. they are only a radical form of liberalism.
:::::What it is written like example of definition can't be an introduction. it can be just a debate beetween Anarchism and "A"-capitalism. But an introduction need a scientific and non-neutral POV.
:::::in [[:eng:anarcho-capitalism]], i propose to enounce a minimal introduction of that theory depdnding a anarchist perspective :<blockquote>
:::::"''The "anarcho"-capitalism is a liberal political philosophy and theory, non-anarchist, who want to privatize state for the benefit of capitalist competing companies. They defend actual economical and social hierarchy. Anarcho-capitalists state that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism... They attempts to reconcile capitalism, as defined in classical liberalism, with Anarchism and anarchist themes such as opposition to the State and individual freedom. Most other anarchists state that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other, and that anti-statism and individual freedom aren't sufficient to be enounced like "anarchist"''"
:::::</blockquote>
:::::About the "anarchist encyclopedia" (only in french), it is sure it wasn't a "neutralist encyclopedia". Articles of that "anarchist encyclopedia" are reproducted in here : [http://www.encyclopedie-anarchiste.org/index.html l'EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste de SÃ©bastien Faure].
:::::In fact, even the "Encyclopedia - a systematic dictionary of the sciences, arts, and crafts -" from Diderot and d'Alembert had the aim to fight religious and political fanatism, and apologize rational and freedom spirit. I think Anarchopedia can fight against economical and political authoritarism in all sorts... like capitalism, statism, nationalism, etc. Do we have to support authoritarians views which presents themselves like libertarians ? no. We know what was/is wrong with moralist (religious & co) authoritarians, we know what was/is wrong with economics (capitalists & co) and politicals (statists & co) authoritarians... and we are, anarchist, anti-authoritarians. do we have to having shame of that ?
:::::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 11:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-02-07T12:12:49Z

Libre: /* Anarchopedia is... */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

== About general meetings ==
=== Introduction ===
First of all I want to talk about General Meetings. This page was started 7 July 2007. Today is 22 January 2009. Year and a half! We must be honest with oneself: there are only 2 answers: either Anarchopedia has no questions that must be solved by all users; or general meeting is not an acceptable way for this.

Indeed, the truth is in the middle. On the one hand, we have no '''urgent''' questions (just look at this page. There are many questions, no one was solved during 1.5 years, but Anarchpedia is still alive). On the other hand, online general meeting is no more acceptable because we have too many users, but we have almost no permanently active users. If we fix the day for general meeting (e.g. in a month), some people, who today think they'll attend it, won't; but some other people, who today think they'll be busy, will. In any event, it won't be really GENERAL meeting as it was when Anarchopedia had much less users. So we must find another way to make general decision.

=== My suggestion ===
So now we have only one general question: how to organize decision of general questions? :) I think the best way is:
# New question is posted in wiki (e.g. this page. Or on it's own page, but link must be here). Author must post not only question, but at least one decision (if more than one, he must mark one he mostly likes).
# Users discuss question and try to reach consensus.
# After consensus is reached we should wait some time (e.g. one week or one month maybe). If there are no objection during this time, the decision is considered accepted.

==== Comments ====
* I believe we will always reach consensus in reasonable time. But ''reasonable time'' is different for different questions.
* I think it's a good idea to discuss not only in wiki, but in IM (Jabber, Skype, ICQ...). In this way two people would understand each other and reach consensus faster.
* We should avoid accept irreversible decisions (e.g. deleting logs). We should think twice and accept it only if there is absolutely no doubt. On the contrary, if decision is reversible (e.g. page protection), we shouldn't spent much time for decision. Even if there are doubts, but no objections, consensus should be considered reached. It is always possible to change reversible decision.

[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 19:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

==Organizational==

===Date and time===
Please put down when you can attend the General Meeting in order of preference:
* December 4 (8-20 UTC), December 1 (8-12 UTC), December 8 (8-12 UTC), December 11 (8-20 UTC) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] - Sorry can't do December 11th [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 12:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 4 (16-20 UTC), December 11 (16-20 UTC) [[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]]
* Unfortunately I will be out of the Internet for some days, so I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I will try to provide some suggestions regarding technical issues in this page. --[[User:Cercopithecus|Cercopithecus]] 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 8 and after. - Samarre, french encyclopedia

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
*:::I can't disagree with you on that but I think that the main goal of a blog, for a group or collective, is to get a way of communicating what's around, what's being done, to invite to participation,... I think it could bring the project to more real-life-connectedness (new word) - samarre (''french AP'')
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:: I propose this page: [[Anarchopedia:Inter-projects]]. If you have anything to add or note, feel free to do so. If a more international expression could fit, I would personally find it better. - samarre

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

==what's an APOV==
*Following the last G.M., some anarchists were leaving the project cause that acceptance of capitalistsPOV in here. do we have to leave all this project and going on (e.g) infoshop ?
*post-modernism terminology, capitalist terminology, socialist terminology, anarchist terminology ? what's freedom and equality ? do we need authoritarians theories to live and practice anarchy ?

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

----

(The next text was originally written in Russian about ruWikipedia and posted at [[rus:User:Caesarion/ÐÐ¢Ð—]]. There are minor differences between ru and en Wikipedias, but you should understand me)

One of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:5 five pillars] of Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV NPOV] (neutral point of view). In a nutshell: 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.' I want to remind two types of violation: 1) bias; 2) incompleteness.

There is APOV (anarchistic point of view) in Anarchopedia, but there is no concensus what it is. I'll try to formulate it.

Well. Wikipedia's definition consists of 2 parts. The first tells that editors must present facts, but mustn't propagandize that one fact is true and other is wrong. The second tells that all points of view must be presented fully and proportionally.

APOV consist of 2 parts, too. And the first is the same as Wikipedia has: APOV requires only presentation of facts, but no propaganda. The difference is in the second part.

APOV requires acquaintance with all points of view (completeness must be), but only acquaintance. And fully consideration is needed only from the view of anarchist (or anarchists, because anarchism consists of many schools). Also there must be criticism (if any) of these points of view.

Well, I'll try to formulate the second part of APOV: all point of view must be presented, but fully consideration is needed only for the anarchists points of view (and their criticism).

Finally I want to remind, that Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, but not a mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha_Verbitsky Misha Verbitsky] wrote in his book 'Anticopyright' words, which, I think, must be the first rule of any thematic wiki-encyclopaedia:
<blockquote>
<p>Discussion of arguments pros and cons copyright is a stupid work; it is like religious debate about advantages of Linux over Microsoft (and vice versa) or criminal Yeltsin's gang (which must be judged) and necessity of market reforms. Adherents of different points of view have no chances to come to an agreement, and even won't listen to each other.</p>
<p>Of cource, it is impossible to get any sense from these arguments. Idea, any idea, could win only if its opponents will die. Point of this book is not to persuade anyone; persuasion is the product of high salary or when someone is hit with something heavy on the head. This book is not for that, but for fixing of different instructive stories about anticopyright.</p>
</blockquote>

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

== Case-sensitivity of the first character ==
First of all two links: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgCapitalLinks] and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name#Case-sensitivity_of_the_first_character]. So, let's talk about $wgCapitalLinks. Now the first character is case-sensitive in many (A)pedias. I'm not sure it is the best. I'll try to summarize the pros and cons (please feel free to edit).

=== Arguments for the first character ''should'' be case-sensitive ===
* Depending on the first character some words have different meanings. E.g. '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Internet Internet]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/internet internet]''' or '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/God God]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god god]'''.
* The only extra action editor must do is to add '''''also''''' template in the beginning of the article.

=== Arguments for the first character ''should not'' be case-sensitive ===
* Not so mush words have different meanings. Wikipedia also has articles '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet Internet]''' and '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God God]''', but it is not a problem. (A)pedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so it is better to do as Wikipedia does.
* Somebody could forget to add '''''also''''' template. And somebody could forget the meaning of the word when he or she makes link. Mechanism of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] garantees no errors like these.
* Sometimes link could be in the beginning of sentence, sometimes in the middle. There are 2 solutions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Piped_links piped links] and redirects. But it is easier to make unpiped links then piped. And make redirects for MOST articles is not the best.

=== Discussion ===
We must understand the goal and the means. The goal is clear: to differ meanings of one word. The means is also clear: each meaning should have its own article. I hope everyone agrees with this.

The question is which mechanism is better: case-sensitivity of the first character or disambiguation page? Ex facte the first mechanism is looked more natural. But judge not of men and things at first sight! Yes, I agree, the second mechanism is more sophisticated, but it has one really big advantage: it prevents errors. It will be impossible to confuse one article with another, because there will be only one disambiguation page for both links and two articles with really different names. So I think we should use case-'''in'''sensitive first character in all (A)pedias. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is... ==
What is Anarchopedia? Now this simple question doesn't have the only answer. Look at this:
* A People's Encyclopedia. Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.' -- [[Main Page]]
* NULL -- [[eng:Main Page]]
* Anarchopedia is a repository of information freely editable by anyone with few, if any restrictions.' -- [[eng:Anarchopedia:About]]
* Anarcopedia es la primera enciclopedia wiki anarquista.' -- [[spa:Portada]]
* AnarcopÃ©dia, A enciclopÃ©dia libertÃ¡ria.' -- [[por:PÃ¡gina principal]]
* a primeira enciclopÃ©dia wiki anarquista' -- [[por:AnarcopÃ©dia]]

I think it is very important to understand what we are (and what we are not) and to formulate it in a few sentonces and post it in every main page (and other suitable places). So let's write down statements (to reach a consensus) and then we should combine them in a few (better one) sentences.

=== Anarchopedia is ===
* '''Multilanguage wiki-face of world anarchism.'''
: Is it forever, that anarchopedia.org uses wiki and only wiki? Will we use any other technology together with wiki?
: Is it true that we are the world face? Is there any bigger, more popular site like Anarchopedia?
* '''An experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.'''
* '''At least a part of Anarchopedia is encyclopaedia.'''

=== Is Anarchopedia? ===
* '''Anarchist community?'''
: I disagree that Anarchopedia is a place for anarchists only. I think Anarchopedia is a place where all people could get (and put) information about anarchism.
* '''Nothing but encyclopaedia?'''
: Of cource, encyclopaedia about anarchism is the main idea of this site. I think we shouldn't stop. We have wiki, so it is possible for example to publish online (or store scans of offline) newpaper about anarchism.

=== Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not ===
* '''Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda.'''
: Encyclopaedia must contain no propaganda. Encyclopaedia must tell truth independently of its authors views. In other places (e.g. on the users personal pages) propaganda is acceptable, but not in encyclopaedia.

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:What is truth ? isn't there capitalist's truth, statist's truth, anarchist's truth and others differents truth depending on your point of view ? i think there's an anarchist's truth, and that anarchopedia have to take an APOV, or, to die in post-modernism restricto-terminologisation novlang. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)'''
[[Category:General Meetings]]
:: Scientific facts are truth. I hope everyone agree that there is no capitalism/statist/anarchistic/other science. 'There are much more straights than gays' -- it is fact. 'Gays are worse/better than straight' -- it is not fact, it is opinion of some people. If we write an article about gays, we must tell about this opinion and about people who participate it, but we mustn't assert that it is true or false. And even in the article 'anarchy' we mustn't assert that anarchy is better than authority. -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 21:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:::
:::Ok i understand what you meant first ; It is taking a scientific POV about truth. But it exist differents scientific POV about things, differents theories... and some theories can be false (Geocentric model, Germ theory of disease), cause basis are bad.
:::"terminology" can having differents meanings depending POV. And that even science can't cut and saying what is the good terminology or good signifiance of words... there's history of terminology depending movements. Anarchism own his terminology, by his history, which is not the same that capitalists/statists/others ones... Meanings can change with history and evolution of life/society, but not the basis (hypothesis, axioms ?)...
:::By example : Anarchism fight for Liberty and equality which are the opposite to authority. Hierarchical is authoritarian, then theories which defend hierarchical are authoritarian, and are opposite to liberty and equality, then to anarchism. by example, "anarcho"-capitalism defend hierarchical, then there's nothing anarchism in that theory. Then a definition/introduction must explain clearly in the article that it is not anarchism, but an oxymoron, a false theory.
:::And to reply to "Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not... Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda" ; it existed an "[[anarchistic encyclopaedia|anarchist encyclopedia]]" which was written by anarchists (and near) in which you can read some really good anarchist propaganda... Then if Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, and that there's no anarchist propaganda, why this "Anarcho"-encyclopaedia-project ?
:::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''
:::: If there are several definitions of a term, must write down all of them. E.g. for the article 'anarcho-capitalism' it should be something like this:<blockquote>
::::: Anarcho-capitalists (and most researchers and some other anarchists, e.g. anarcho-individualists) state, that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism...<br><br>Most other anarchists (especially anarcho-communists and anarcho-collectivists) state, that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other.
</blockquote>
:::: Such definition covers all of the meanings and propagandizes nothing. This is what any encyclopedia must be.

:::: I didn't read "anarchist encyclopedia", but who calls it an 'encyclopedia'? Themselves, I think. To call oneself and to be -- it is not the same. If they propagandize something, they are not an encyclopedia.

:::: And Anarchopedia is 'anarcho' because, firstly, it isn't a general encyclopedia like Wikipedia is. There must be no articles in Anarchopedia which have no relation to anarchism. And secondly, Anarchopedia is an experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.

:::: -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 08:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::In that example of definition, it take a capitalist POV, under a scientific neutral POV bias. It define implicitly hypothesis that "Anarchism" beeing only against state, then like capitalists are against actual form of state (in fact "a"-c want their private state, their private monopole of force to protect their private property) it allow to enounce it like being in anarchism, but it's a false hypothesis, cause anarchism is against all form of state (private, public, etc) and hierarchies... The hypothesis of this definition is false. with a such hypothesis, we can add in all sort of authoritarian theories/movements, which don't accept actual State... but would want their particular State. That is a scientific and libertarian POV i enounce, and not a scientific and neutral POV. I don't believe in neutrality. Neutrality is for wp. Neutralism is for mainstream. I am for an anarchist perspectivism. The aim is anarchy, means have to be connected to that, and vis versa.
:::::This definition take a capitalist POV, it use in the defintion all their ideological/terminological bias. And that is scientific, it just search all their propaganda, it use the same. it reproducte their ideology.
:::::There's no need to allow capitalist propaganda to use Anarchopedia, wikipedia (or others) is enough for them.
:::::I am an anarchist without adjectives, i recognize all form of anarchism, and i reject all '''archists'''. '''capitalists''' can't be anarchists, cause they are '''hierarchists'''. they are only a radical form of liberalism.
:::::What it is written like example of definition can't be an introduction. it can be just a debate beetween Anarchism and "A"-capitalism. But an introduction need a scientific and non-neutral POV.
:::::in [[:eng:anarcho-capitalism]], i propose to enounce a minimal introduction of that theory depdnding a anarchist perspective :<blockquote>
:::::"''The "anarcho"-capitalism is a liberal political philosophy and theory, non-anarchist, who want to privatize state for the benefit of capitalist competing companies. They defend actual economical and social hierarchy. Anarcho-capitalists state that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism... They attempts to reconcile capitalism, as defined in classical liberalism, with Anarchism and anarchist themes such as opposition to the State and individual freedom. Most other anarchists state that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other, and that anti-statism and individual freedom aren't sufficient to be enounced like "anarchist"''"
:::::</blockquote>
:::::About the "anarchist encyclopedia" (only in french), it is sure it wasn't a "neutralist encyclopedia". Articles of that "anarchist encyclopedia" are reproducted in here : [http://www.encyclopedie-anarchiste.org/index.html l'EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste de SÃ©bastien Faure].
:::::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 11:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-02-07T11:08:44Z

Libre: /* Anarchopedia is... */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

== About general meetings ==
=== Introduction ===
First of all I want to talk about General Meetings. This page was started 7 July 2007. Today is 22 January 2009. Year and a half! We must be honest with oneself: there are only 2 answers: either Anarchopedia has no questions that must be solved by all users; or general meeting is not an acceptable way for this.

Indeed, the truth is in the middle. On the one hand, we have no '''urgent''' questions (just look at this page. There are many questions, no one was solved during 1.5 years, but Anarchpedia is still alive). On the other hand, online general meeting is no more acceptable because we have too many users, but we have almost no permanently active users. If we fix the day for general meeting (e.g. in a month), some people, who today think they'll attend it, won't; but some other people, who today think they'll be busy, will. In any event, it won't be really GENERAL meeting as it was when Anarchopedia had much less users. So we must find another way to make general decision.

=== My suggestion ===
So now we have only one general question: how to organize decision of general questions? :) I think the best way is:
# New question is posted in wiki (e.g. this page. Or on it's own page, but link must be here). Author must post not only question, but at least one decision (if more than one, he must mark one he mostly likes).
# Users discuss question and try to reach consensus.
# After consensus is reached we should wait some time (e.g. one week or one month maybe). If there are no objection during this time, the decision is considered accepted.

==== Comments ====
* I believe we will always reach consensus in reasonable time. But ''reasonable time'' is different for different questions.
* I think it's a good idea to discuss not only in wiki, but in IM (Jabber, Skype, ICQ...). In this way two people would understand each other and reach consensus faster.
* We should avoid accept irreversible decisions (e.g. deleting logs). We should think twice and accept it only if there is absolutely no doubt. On the contrary, if decision is reversible (e.g. page protection), we shouldn't spent much time for decision. Even if there are doubts, but no objections, consensus should be considered reached. It is always possible to change reversible decision.

[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 19:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

==Organizational==

===Date and time===
Please put down when you can attend the General Meeting in order of preference:
* December 4 (8-20 UTC), December 1 (8-12 UTC), December 8 (8-12 UTC), December 11 (8-20 UTC) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] - Sorry can't do December 11th [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 12:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 4 (16-20 UTC), December 11 (16-20 UTC) [[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]]
* Unfortunately I will be out of the Internet for some days, so I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I will try to provide some suggestions regarding technical issues in this page. --[[User:Cercopithecus|Cercopithecus]] 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 8 and after. - Samarre, french encyclopedia

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
*:::I can't disagree with you on that but I think that the main goal of a blog, for a group or collective, is to get a way of communicating what's around, what's being done, to invite to participation,... I think it could bring the project to more real-life-connectedness (new word) - samarre (''french AP'')
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:: I propose this page: [[Anarchopedia:Inter-projects]]. If you have anything to add or note, feel free to do so. If a more international expression could fit, I would personally find it better. - samarre

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

==what's an APOV==
*Following the last G.M., some anarchists were leaving the project cause that acceptance of capitalistsPOV in here. do we have to leave all this project and going on (e.g) infoshop ?
*post-modernism terminology, capitalist terminology, socialist terminology, anarchist terminology ? what's freedom and equality ? do we need authoritarians theories to live and practice anarchy ?

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

----

(The next text was originally written in Russian about ruWikipedia and posted at [[rus:User:Caesarion/ÐÐ¢Ð—]]. There are minor differences between ru and en Wikipedias, but you should understand me)

One of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:5 five pillars] of Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV NPOV] (neutral point of view). In a nutshell: 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.' I want to remind two types of violation: 1) bias; 2) incompleteness.

There is APOV (anarchistic point of view) in Anarchopedia, but there is no concensus what it is. I'll try to formulate it.

Well. Wikipedia's definition consists of 2 parts. The first tells that editors must present facts, but mustn't propagandize that one fact is true and other is wrong. The second tells that all points of view must be presented fully and proportionally.

APOV consist of 2 parts, too. And the first is the same as Wikipedia has: APOV requires only presentation of facts, but no propaganda. The difference is in the second part.

APOV requires acquaintance with all points of view (completeness must be), but only acquaintance. And fully consideration is needed only from the view of anarchist (or anarchists, because anarchism consists of many schools). Also there must be criticism (if any) of these points of view.

Well, I'll try to formulate the second part of APOV: all point of view must be presented, but fully consideration is needed only for the anarchists points of view (and their criticism).

Finally I want to remind, that Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, but not a mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha_Verbitsky Misha Verbitsky] wrote in his book 'Anticopyright' words, which, I think, must be the first rule of any thematic wiki-encyclopaedia:
<blockquote>
<p>Discussion of arguments pros and cons copyright is a stupid work; it is like religious debate about advantages of Linux over Microsoft (and vice versa) or criminal Yeltsin's gang (which must be judged) and necessity of market reforms. Adherents of different points of view have no chances to come to an agreement, and even won't listen to each other.</p>
<p>Of cource, it is impossible to get any sense from these arguments. Idea, any idea, could win only if its opponents will die. Point of this book is not to persuade anyone; persuasion is the product of high salary or when someone is hit with something heavy on the head. This book is not for that, but for fixing of different instructive stories about anticopyright.</p>
</blockquote>

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

== Case-sensitivity of the first character ==
First of all two links: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgCapitalLinks] and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name#Case-sensitivity_of_the_first_character]. So, let's talk about $wgCapitalLinks. Now the first character is case-sensitive in many (A)pedias. I'm not sure it is the best. I'll try to summarize the pros and cons (please feel free to edit).

=== Arguments for the first character ''should'' be case-sensitive ===
* Depending on the first character some words have different meanings. E.g. '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Internet Internet]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/internet internet]''' or '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/God God]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god god]'''.
* The only extra action editor must do is to add '''''also''''' template in the beginning of the article.

=== Arguments for the first character ''should not'' be case-sensitive ===
* Not so mush words have different meanings. Wikipedia also has articles '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet Internet]''' and '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God God]''', but it is not a problem. (A)pedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so it is better to do as Wikipedia does.
* Somebody could forget to add '''''also''''' template. And somebody could forget the meaning of the word when he or she makes link. Mechanism of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] garantees no errors like these.
* Sometimes link could be in the beginning of sentence, sometimes in the middle. There are 2 solutions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Piped_links piped links] and redirects. But it is easier to make unpiped links then piped. And make redirects for MOST articles is not the best.

=== Discussion ===
We must understand the goal and the means. The goal is clear: to differ meanings of one word. The means is also clear: each meaning should have its own article. I hope everyone agrees with this.

The question is which mechanism is better: case-sensitivity of the first character or disambiguation page? Ex facte the first mechanism is looked more natural. But judge not of men and things at first sight! Yes, I agree, the second mechanism is more sophisticated, but it has one really big advantage: it prevents errors. It will be impossible to confuse one article with another, because there will be only one disambiguation page for both links and two articles with really different names. So I think we should use case-'''in'''sensitive first character in all (A)pedias. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is... ==
What is Anarchopedia? Now this simple question doesn't have the only answer. Look at this:
* A People's Encyclopedia. Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.' -- [[Main Page]]
* NULL -- [[eng:Main Page]]
* Anarchopedia is a repository of information freely editable by anyone with few, if any restrictions.' -- [[eng:Anarchopedia:About]]
* Anarcopedia es la primera enciclopedia wiki anarquista.' -- [[spa:Portada]]
* AnarcopÃ©dia, A enciclopÃ©dia libertÃ¡ria.' -- [[por:PÃ¡gina principal]]
* a primeira enciclopÃ©dia wiki anarquista' -- [[por:AnarcopÃ©dia]]

I think it is very important to understand what we are (and what we are not) and to formulate it in a few sentonces and post it in every main page (and other suitable places). So let's write down statements (to reach a consensus) and then we should combine them in a few (better one) sentences.

=== Anarchopedia is ===
* '''Multilanguage wiki-face of world anarchism.'''
: Is it forever, that anarchopedia.org uses wiki and only wiki? Will we use any other technology together with wiki?
: Is it true that we are the world face? Is there any bigger, more popular site like Anarchopedia?
* '''An experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.'''
* '''At least a part of Anarchopedia is encyclopaedia.'''

=== Is Anarchopedia? ===
* '''Anarchist community?'''
: I disagree that Anarchopedia is a place for anarchists only. I think Anarchopedia is a place where all people could get (and put) information about anarchism.
* '''Nothing but encyclopaedia?'''
: Of cource, encyclopaedia about anarchism is the main idea of this site. I think we shouldn't stop. We have wiki, so it is possible for example to publish online (or store scans of offline) newpaper about anarchism.

=== Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not ===
* '''Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda.'''
: Encyclopaedia must contain no propaganda. Encyclopaedia must tell truth independently of its authors views. In other places (e.g. on the users personal pages) propaganda is acceptable, but not in encyclopaedia.

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:What is truth ? isn't there capitalist's truth, statist's truth, anarchist's truth and others differents truth depending on your point of view ? i think there's an anarchist's truth, and that anarchopedia have to take an APOV, or, to die in post-modernism restricto-terminologisation novlang. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)'''
[[Category:General Meetings]]
:: Scientific facts are truth. I hope everyone agree that there is no capitalism/statist/anarchistic/other science. 'There are much more straights than gays' -- it is fact. 'Gays are worse/better than straight' -- it is not fact, it is opinion of some people. If we write an article about gays, we must tell about this opinion and about people who participate it, but we mustn't assert that it is true or false. And even in the article 'anarchy' we mustn't assert that anarchy is better than authority. -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 21:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:::
:::Ok i understand what you meant first ; It is taking a scientific POV about truth. But it exist differents scientific POV about things, differents theories... and some theories can be false (Geocentric model, Germ theory of disease), cause basis are bad.
:::"terminology" can having differents meanings depending POV. And that even science can't cut and saying what is the good terminology or good signifiance of words... there's history of terminology depending movements. Anarchism own his terminology, by his history, which is not the same that capitalists/statists/others ones... Meanings can change with history and evolution of life/society, but not the basis (hypothesis, axioms ?)...
:::By example : Anarchism fight for Liberty and equality which are the opposite to authority. Hierarchical is authoritarian, then theories which defend hierarchical are authoritarian, and are opposite to liberty and equality, then to anarchism. by example, "anarcho"-capitalism defend hierarchical, then there's nothing anarchism in that theory. Then a definition/introduction must explain clearly in the article that it is not anarchism, but an oxymoron, a false theory.
:::And to reply to "Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not... Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda" ; it existed an "[[anarchistic encyclopaedia|anarchist encyclopedia]]" which was written by anarchists (and near) in which you can read some really good anarchist propaganda... Then if Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, and that there's no anarchist propaganda, why this "Anarcho"-encyclopaedia-project ?
:::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''
:::: If there are several definitions of a term, must write down all of them. E.g. for the article 'anarcho-capitalism' it should be something like this:<blockquote>
::::: Anarcho-capitalists (and most researchers and some other anarchists, e.g. anarcho-individualists) state, that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism...<br><br>Most other anarchists (especially anarcho-communists and anarcho-collectivists) state, that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other.
</blockquote>
:::: Such definition covers all of the meanings and propagandizes nothing. This is what any encyclopedia must be.

:::: I didn't read "anarchist encyclopedia", but who calls it an 'encyclopedia'? Themselves, I think. To call oneself and to be -- it is not the same. If they propagandize something, they are not an encyclopedia.

:::: And Anarchopedia is 'anarcho' because, firstly, it isn't a general encyclopedia like Wikipedia is. There must be no articles in Anarchopedia which have no relation to anarchism. And secondly, Anarchopedia is an experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.

:::: -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 08:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::In that example of definition, it take a capitalist POV, under a scientific neutral POV bias. It define implicitly hypothesis that "Anarchism" beeing only against state, then like capitalists are against actual form of state (in fact "a"-c want their private state, their private monopole of force to protect their private property) it allow to enounce it like being in anarchism, but it's a false hypothesis, cause anarchism is against all form of state (private, public, etc) and hierarchies... The hypothesis of this definition is false. with a such hypothesis, we can add in all sort of authoritarian theories/movements, which don't accept actual State... but would want their particular State. That is a scientific and libertarian POV i enounce, and not a scientific and neutral POV. I don't believe in neutrality. Neutrality is for wp. Neutralism is for mainstream. I am for an anarchist perspectivism. The aim is anarchy, means have to be connected to that, and vis versa.
:::::This definition take a capitalist POV, it use in the defintion all their ideological/terminological bias. And that is scientific, it just search all their propaganda, it use the same. it reproducte their ideology.
:::::There's no need to allow capitalist propaganda to use Anarchopedia, wikipedia (or others) is enough for them.
:::::I am an anarchist without adjectives, i recognize all form of anarchism, and i reject all '''archists'''. '''capitalists''' can't be anarchists, cause they are '''hierarchists'''. they are only a radical form of liberalism.
:::::What it is written like example of definition can't be an introduction. it can be just a debate beetween Anarchism and "A"-capitalism. But an introduction need a scientific and non-neutral POV.
:::::in [[:eng:anarcho-capitalism]], i propose to enounce a minimal introduction of that theory depdnding a anarchist perspective :<blockquote>
:::::"''The "anarcho"-capitalism is a liberal political philosophy and theory, non-anarchist, who want to privatize state for the benefit of capitalist competing companies. They defend actual economical and social hierarchy. Anarcho-capitalists state that '''anarcho-capitalism''' is a school in anarchism... They attempts to reconcile capitalism, as defined in classical liberalism, with Anarchism and anarchist themes such as opposition to the State and individual freedom. Most other anarchists state that the word '''anarcho-capitalism''' is an oxymoron, a false theory, because anarchism and capitalism are not compatible with each other, and that anti-statism and individual freedom aren't sufficient to be enounced like "anarchist"''"
:::::</blockquote>
:::::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 11:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-02-06T20:44:09Z

Libre: /* Anarchopedia is... */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

== About general meetings ==
=== Introduction ===
First of all I want to talk about General Meetings. This page was started 7 July 2007. Today is 22 January 2009. Year and a half! We must be honest with oneself: there are only 2 answers: either Anarchopedia has no questions that must be solved by all users; or general meeting is not an acceptable way for this.

Indeed, the truth is in the middle. On the one hand, we have no '''urgent''' questions (just look at this page. There are many questions, no one was solved during 1.5 years, but Anarchpedia is still alive). On the other hand, online general meeting is no more acceptable because we have too many users, but we have almost no permanently active users. If we fix the day for general meeting (e.g. in a month), some people, who today think they'll attend it, won't; but some other people, who today think they'll be busy, will. In any event, it won't be really GENERAL meeting as it was when Anarchopedia had much less users. So we must find another way to make general decision.

=== My suggestion ===
So now we have only one general question: how to organize decision of general questions? :) I think the best way is:
# New question is posted in wiki (e.g. this page. Or on it's own page, but link must be here). Author must post not only question, but at least one decision (if more than one, he must mark one he mostly likes).
# Users discuss question and try to reach consensus.
# After consensus is reached we should wait some time (e.g. one week or one month maybe). If there are no objection during this time, the decision is considered accepted.

==== Comments ====
* I believe we will always reach consensus in reasonable time. But ''reasonable time'' is different for different questions.
* I think it's a good idea to discuss not only in wiki, but in IM (Jabber, Skype, ICQ...). In this way two people would understand each other and reach consensus faster.
* We should avoid accept irreversible decisions (e.g. deleting logs). We should think twice and accept it only if there is absolutely no doubt. On the contrary, if decision is reversible (e.g. page protection), we shouldn't spent much time for decision. Even if there are doubts, but no objections, consensus should be considered reached. It is always possible to change reversible decision.

[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 19:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

==Organizational==

===Date and time===
Please put down when you can attend the General Meeting in order of preference:
* December 4 (8-20 UTC), December 1 (8-12 UTC), December 8 (8-12 UTC), December 11 (8-20 UTC) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] - Sorry can't do December 11th [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 12:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 4 (16-20 UTC), December 11 (16-20 UTC) [[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]]
* Unfortunately I will be out of the Internet for some days, so I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I will try to provide some suggestions regarding technical issues in this page. --[[User:Cercopithecus|Cercopithecus]] 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 8 and after. - Samarre, french encyclopedia

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
*:::I can't disagree with you on that but I think that the main goal of a blog, for a group or collective, is to get a way of communicating what's around, what's being done, to invite to participation,... I think it could bring the project to more real-life-connectedness (new word) - samarre (''french AP'')
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:: I propose this page: [[Anarchopedia:Inter-projects]]. If you have anything to add or note, feel free to do so. If a more international expression could fit, I would personally find it better. - samarre

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

==what's an APOV==
*Following the last G.M., some anarchists were leaving the project cause that acceptance of capitalistsPOV in here. do we have to leave all this project and going on (e.g) infoshop ?
*post-modernism terminology, capitalist terminology, socialist terminology, anarchist terminology ? what's freedom and equality ? do we need authoritarians theories to live and practice anarchy ?

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

----

(The next text was originally written in Russian about ruWikipedia and posted at [[rus:User:Caesarion/ÐÐ¢Ð—]]. There are minor differences between ru and en Wikipedias, but you should understand me)

One of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:5 five pillars] of Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV NPOV] (neutral point of view). In a nutshell: 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.' I want to remind two types of violation: 1) bias; 2) incompleteness.

There is APOV (anarchistic point of view) in Anarchopedia, but there is no concensus what it is. I'll try to formulate it.

Well. Wikipedia's definition consists of 2 parts. The first tells that editors must present facts, but mustn't propagandize that one fact is true and other is wrong. The second tells that all points of view must be presented fully and proportionally.

APOV consist of 2 parts, too. And the first is the same as Wikipedia has: APOV requires only presentation of facts, but no propaganda. The difference is in the second part.

APOV requires acquaintance with all points of view (completeness must be), but only acquaintance. And fully consideration is needed only from the view of anarchist (or anarchists, because anarchism consists of many schools). Also there must be criticism (if any) of these points of view.

Well, I'll try to formulate the second part of APOV: all point of view must be presented, but fully consideration is needed only for the anarchists points of view (and their criticism).

Finally I want to remind, that Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, but not a mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha_Verbitsky Misha Verbitsky] wrote in his book 'Anticopyright' words, which, I think, must be the first rule of any thematic wiki-encyclopaedia:
<blockquote>
<p>Discussion of arguments pros and cons copyright is a stupid work; it is like religious debate about advantages of Linux over Microsoft (and vice versa) or criminal Yeltsin's gang (which must be judged) and necessity of market reforms. Adherents of different points of view have no chances to come to an agreement, and even won't listen to each other.</p>
<p>Of cource, it is impossible to get any sense from these arguments. Idea, any idea, could win only if its opponents will die. Point of this book is not to persuade anyone; persuasion is the product of high salary or when someone is hit with something heavy on the head. This book is not for that, but for fixing of different instructive stories about anticopyright.</p>
</blockquote>

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

== Case-sensitivity of the first character ==
First of all two links: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgCapitalLinks] and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name#Case-sensitivity_of_the_first_character]. So, let's talk about $wgCapitalLinks. Now the first character is case-sensitive in many (A)pedias. I'm not sure it is the best. I'll try to summarize the pros and cons (please feel free to edit).

=== Arguments for the first character ''should'' be case-sensitive ===
* Depending on the first character some words have different meanings. E.g. '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Internet Internet]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/internet internet]''' or '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/God God]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god god]'''.
* The only extra action editor must do is to add '''''also''''' template in the beginning of the article.

=== Arguments for the first character ''should not'' be case-sensitive ===
* Not so mush words have different meanings. Wikipedia also has articles '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet Internet]''' and '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God God]''', but it is not a problem. (A)pedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so it is better to do as Wikipedia does.
* Somebody could forget to add '''''also''''' template. And somebody could forget the meaning of the word when he or she makes link. Mechanism of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] garantees no errors like these.
* Sometimes link could be in the beginning of sentence, sometimes in the middle. There are 2 solutions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Piped_links piped links] and redirects. But it is easier to make unpiped links then piped. And make redirects for MOST articles is not the best.

=== Discussion ===
We must understand the goal and the means. The goal is clear: to differ meanings of one word. The means is also clear: each meaning should have its own article. I hope everyone agrees with this.

The question is which mechanism is better: case-sensitivity of the first character or disambiguation page? Ex facte the first mechanism is looked more natural. But judge not of men and things at first sight! Yes, I agree, the second mechanism is more sophisticated, but it has one really big advantage: it prevents errors. It will be impossible to confuse one article with another, because there will be only one disambiguation page for both links and two articles with really different names. So I think we should use case-'''in'''sensitive first character in all (A)pedias. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is... ==
What is Anarchopedia? Now this simple question doesn't have the only answer. Look at this:
* A People's Encyclopedia. Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.' -- [[Main Page]]
* NULL -- [[eng:Main Page]]
* Anarchopedia is a repository of information freely editable by anyone with few, if any restrictions.' -- [[eng:Anarchopedia:About]]
* Anarcopedia es la primera enciclopedia wiki anarquista.' -- [[spa:Portada]]
* AnarcopÃ©dia, A enciclopÃ©dia libertÃ¡ria.' -- [[por:PÃ¡gina principal]]
* a primeira enciclopÃ©dia wiki anarquista' -- [[por:AnarcopÃ©dia]]

I think it is very important to understand what we are (and what we are not) and to formulate it in a few sentonces and post it in every main page (and other suitable places). So let's write down statements (to reach a consensus) and then we should combine them in a few (better one) sentences.

=== Anarchopedia is ===
* '''Multilanguage wiki-face of world anarchism.'''
: Is it forever, that anarchopedia.org uses wiki and only wiki? Will we use any other technology together with wiki?
: Is it true that we are the world face? Is there any bigger, more popular site like Anarchopedia?
* '''An experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.'''
* '''At least a part of Anarchopedia is encyclopaedia.'''

=== Is Anarchopedia? ===
* '''Anarchist community?'''
: I disagree that Anarchopedia is a place for anarchists only. I think Anarchopedia is a place where all people could get (and put) information about anarchism.
* '''Nothing but encyclopaedia?'''
: Of cource, encyclopaedia about anarchism is the main idea of this site. I think we shouldn't stop. We have wiki, so it is possible for example to publish online (or store scans of offline) newpaper about anarchism.

=== Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not ===
* '''Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda.'''
: Encyclopaedia must contain no propaganda. Encyclopaedia must tell truth independently of its authors views. In other places (e.g. on the users personal pages) propaganda is acceptable, but not in encyclopaedia.

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:What is truth ? isn't there capitalist's truth, statist's truth, anarchist's truth and others differents truth depending on your point of view ? i think there's an anarchist's truth, and that anarchopedia have to take an APOV, or, to die in post-modernism restricto-terminologisation novlang. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)'''
[[Category:General Meetings]]
:: Scientific facts are truth. I hope everyone agree that there is no capitalism/statist/anarchistic/other science. 'There are much more straights than gays' -- it is fact. 'Gays are worse/better than straight' -- it is not fact, it is opinion of some people. If we write an article about gays, we must tell about this opinion and about people who participate it, but we mustn't assert that it is true or false. And even in the article 'anarchy' we mustn't assert that anarchy is better than authority. -- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 21:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:::
:::Ok i understand what you meant first ; It is taking a scientific POV about truth. But it exist differents scientific POV about things, differents theories... and some theories can be false (Geocentric model, Germ theory of disease), cause basis are bad.
:::"terminology" can having differents meanings depending POV. And that even science can't cut and saying what is the good terminology or good signifiance of words... there's history of terminology depending movements. Anarchism own his terminology, by his history, which is not the same that capitalists/statists/others ones... Meanings can change with history and evolution of life/society, but not the basis (hypothesis, axioms ?)...
:::By example : Anarchism fight for Liberty and equality which are the opposite to authority. Hierarchical is authoritarian, then theories which defend hierarchical are authoritarian, and are opposite to liberty and equality, then to anarchism. by example, "anarcho"-capitalism defend hierarchical, then there's nothing anarchism in that theory. Then a definition/introduction must explain clearly in the article that it is not anarchism, but an oxymoron, a false theory.
:::And to reply to "Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not... Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda" ; it existed an "[[anarchistic encyclopaedia|anarchist encyclopedia]]" which was written by anarchists (and near) in which you can read some really good anarchist propaganda... Then if Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, and that there's no anarchist propaganda, why this "Anarcho"-encyclopaedia-project ?
:::-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-02-05T21:03:13Z

Libre: /* Anarchopedia is... */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

== About general meetings ==
=== Introduction ===
First of all I want to talk about General Meetings. This page was started 7 July 2007. Today is 22 January 2009. Year and a half! We must be honest with oneself: there are only 2 answers: either Anarchopedia has no questions that must be solved by all users; or general meeting is not an acceptable way for this.

Indeed, the truth is in the middle. On the one hand, we have no '''urgent''' questions (just look at this page. There are many questions, no one was solved during 1.5 years, but Anarchpedia is still alive). On the other hand, online general meeting is no more acceptable because we have too many users, but we have almost no permanently active users. If we fix the day for general meeting (e.g. in a month), some people, who today think they'll attend it, won't; but some other people, who today think they'll be busy, will. In any event, it won't be really GENERAL meeting as it was when Anarchopedia had much less users. So we must find another way to make general decision.

=== My suggestion ===
So now we have only one general question: how to organize decision of general questions? :) I think the best way is:
# New question is posted in wiki (e.g. this page. Or on it's own page, but link must be here). Author must post not only question, but at least one decision (if more than one, he must mark one he mostly likes).
# Users discuss question and try to reach consensus.
# After consensus is reached we should wait some time (e.g. one week or one month maybe). If there are no objection during this time, the decision is considered accepted.

==== Comments ====
* I believe we will always reach consensus in reasonable time. But ''reasonable time'' is different for different questions.
* I think it's a good idea to discuss not only in wiki, but in IM (Jabber, Skype, ICQ...). In this way two people would understand each other and reach consensus faster.
* We should avoid accept irreversible decisions (e.g. deleting logs). We should think twice and accept it only if there is absolutely no doubt. On the contrary, if decision is reversible (e.g. page protection), we shouldn't spent much time for decision. Even if there are doubts, but no objections, consensus should be considered reached. It is always possible to change reversible decision.

[[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 19:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

==Organizational==

===Date and time===
Please put down when you can attend the General Meeting in order of preference:
* December 4 (8-20 UTC), December 1 (8-12 UTC), December 8 (8-12 UTC), December 11 (8-20 UTC) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] - Sorry can't do December 11th [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 12:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 4 (16-20 UTC), December 11 (16-20 UTC) [[User:Esperanza|Esperanza]]
* Unfortunately I will be out of the Internet for some days, so I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I will try to provide some suggestions regarding technical issues in this page. --[[User:Cercopithecus|Cercopithecus]] 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
* December 8 and after. - Samarre, french encyclopedia

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
*:::I can't disagree with you on that but I think that the main goal of a blog, for a group or collective, is to get a way of communicating what's around, what's being done, to invite to participation,... I think it could bring the project to more real-life-connectedness (new word) - samarre (''french AP'')
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:: I propose this page: [[Anarchopedia:Inter-projects]]. If you have anything to add or note, feel free to do so. If a more international expression could fit, I would personally find it better. - samarre

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

==what's an APOV==
*Following the last G.M., some anarchists were leaving the project cause that acceptance of capitalistsPOV in here. do we have to leave all this project and going on (e.g) infoshop ?
*post-modernism terminology, capitalist terminology, socialist terminology, anarchist terminology ? what's freedom and equality ? do we need authoritarians theories to live and practice anarchy ?

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

----

(The next text was originally written in Russian about ruWikipedia and posted at [[rus:User:Caesarion/ÐÐ¢Ð—]]. There are minor differences between ru and en Wikipedias, but you should understand me)

One of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:5 five pillars] of Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV NPOV] (neutral point of view). In a nutshell: 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.' I want to remind two types of violation: 1) bias; 2) incompleteness.

There is APOV (anarchistic point of view) in Anarchopedia, but there is no concensus what it is. I'll try to formulate it.

Well. Wikipedia's definition consists of 2 parts. The first tells that editors must present facts, but mustn't propagandize that one fact is true and other is wrong. The second tells that all points of view must be presented fully and proportionally.

APOV consist of 2 parts, too. And the first is the same as Wikipedia has: APOV requires only presentation of facts, but no propaganda. The difference is in the second part.

APOV requires acquaintance with all points of view (completeness must be), but only acquaintance. And fully consideration is needed only from the view of anarchist (or anarchists, because anarchism consists of many schools). Also there must be criticism (if any) of these points of view.

Well, I'll try to formulate the second part of APOV: all point of view must be presented, but fully consideration is needed only for the anarchists points of view (and their criticism).

Finally I want to remind, that Anarchopedia is an encyclopaedia, but not a mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha_Verbitsky Misha Verbitsky] wrote in his book 'Anticopyright' words, which, I think, must be the first rule of any thematic wiki-encyclopaedia:
<blockquote>
<p>Discussion of arguments pros and cons copyright is a stupid work; it is like religious debate about advantages of Linux over Microsoft (and vice versa) or criminal Yeltsin's gang (which must be judged) and necessity of market reforms. Adherents of different points of view have no chances to come to an agreement, and even won't listen to each other.</p>
<p>Of cource, it is impossible to get any sense from these arguments. Idea, any idea, could win only if its opponents will die. Point of this book is not to persuade anyone; persuasion is the product of high salary or when someone is hit with something heavy on the head. This book is not for that, but for fixing of different instructive stories about anticopyright.</p>
</blockquote>

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

== Case-sensitivity of the first character ==
First of all two links: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgCapitalLinks] and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_name#Case-sensitivity_of_the_first_character]. So, let's talk about $wgCapitalLinks. Now the first character is case-sensitive in many (A)pedias. I'm not sure it is the best. I'll try to summarize the pros and cons (please feel free to edit).

=== Arguments for the first character ''should'' be case-sensitive ===
* Depending on the first character some words have different meanings. E.g. '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Internet Internet]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/internet internet]''' or '''[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/God God]/[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god god]'''.
* The only extra action editor must do is to add '''''also''''' template in the beginning of the article.

=== Arguments for the first character ''should not'' be case-sensitive ===
* Not so mush words have different meanings. Wikipedia also has articles '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet Internet]''' and '''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God God]''', but it is not a problem. (A)pedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so it is better to do as Wikipedia does.
* Somebody could forget to add '''''also''''' template. And somebody could forget the meaning of the word when he or she makes link. Mechanism of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] garantees no errors like these.
* Sometimes link could be in the beginning of sentence, sometimes in the middle. There are 2 solutions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Piped_links piped links] and redirects. But it is easier to make unpiped links then piped. And make redirects for MOST articles is not the best.

=== Discussion ===
We must understand the goal and the means. The goal is clear: to differ meanings of one word. The means is also clear: each meaning should have its own article. I hope everyone agrees with this.

The question is which mechanism is better: case-sensitivity of the first character or disambiguation page? Ex facte the first mechanism is looked more natural. But judge not of men and things at first sight! Yes, I agree, the second mechanism is more sophisticated, but it has one really big advantage: it prevents errors. It will be impossible to confuse one article with another, because there will be only one disambiguation page for both links and two articles with really different names. So I think we should use case-'''in'''sensitive first character in all (A)pedias. [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

== Anarchopedia is... ==
What is Anarchopedia? Now this simple question doesn't have the only answer. Look at this:
* A People's Encyclopedia. Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.' -- [[Main Page]]
* NULL -- [[eng:Main Page]]
* Anarchopedia is a repository of information freely editable by anyone with few, if any restrictions.' -- [[eng:Anarchopedia:About]]
* Anarcopedia es la primera enciclopedia wiki anarquista.' -- [[spa:Portada]]
* AnarcopÃ©dia, A enciclopÃ©dia libertÃ¡ria.' -- [[por:PÃ¡gina principal]]
* a primeira enciclopÃ©dia wiki anarquista' -- [[por:AnarcopÃ©dia]]

I think it is very important to understand what we are (and what we are not) and to formulate it in a few sentonces and post it in every main page (and other suitable places). So let's write down statements (to reach a consensus) and then we should combine them in a few (better one) sentences.

=== Anarchopedia is ===
* '''Multilanguage wiki-face of world anarchism.'''
: Is it forever, that anarchopedia.org uses wiki and only wiki? Will we use any other technology together with wiki?
: Is it true that we are the world face? Is there any bigger, more popular site like Anarchopedia?
* '''An experiment in Anarchy and anarchistic management.'''
* '''At least a part of Anarchopedia is encyclopaedia.'''

=== Is Anarchopedia? ===
* '''Anarchist community?'''
: I disagree that Anarchopedia is a place for anarchists only. I think Anarchopedia is a place where all people could get (and put) information about anarchism.
* '''Nothing but encyclopaedia?'''
: Of cource, encyclopaedia about anarchism is the main idea of this site. I think we shouldn't stop. We have wiki, so it is possible for example to publish online (or store scans of offline) newpaper about anarchism.

=== Anarchopedia as encyclopaedia is not ===
* '''Mouthpiece for anarchism propaganda.'''
: Encyclopaedia must contain no propaganda. Encyclopaedia must tell truth independently of its authors views. In other places (e.g. on the users personal pages) propaganda is acceptable, but not in encyclopaedia.

-- [[User:Caesarion|Caesarion]] 16:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
:What is truth ? isn't there capitalist's truth, statist's truth, anarchist's truth and others differents truth depending on your point of view ? i think there's an anarchist's truth, and that anarchopedia have to take an APOV, or, to die in post-modernism restricto-terminologisation novlang. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 21:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)'''
[[Category:General Meetings]]

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2009-01-30T20:38:13Z

Libre: what's an APOV

Anarchopedia:Finances

2008-12-15T12:08:47Z

Libre: updating

==paypal==
{| border="3"
|+ All Activity Paypal - first to '''2 Mar. 2008'''
|-
! Date
! Name/pseudo
! */*
! Gross
! Fee
! Net Amount
|-
| ''26 Aug. 2008'' || I || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''2 Mar. 2008'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''17 Dec. 2007'' || H || - || 40,00 EUR || -1,61 EUR || '''38,39 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''19 Nov. 2007'' || G || - || 15,12 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,36 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''11 Oct. 2007'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''20 Sep. 2007'' || F || - || 15,00 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,24 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''3 Aug. 2007'' || E || - || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''5 Jul. 2007'' || D || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''27 May 2007'' || C || '''Returned''' || 20,00 EUR || 0,00 EUR || 20,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''23 Feb. 2007'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Dec. 2006'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Oct. 2006'' || Libre || '''â†’ TRANSFERED in BANK''' || -'''27,73 EUR''' || -'''1,00 EUR''' || -28,73 EUR ||
|-
| ''13 Jul. 2006'' || A || '''transfered''' || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
|
|-
| || || || '''TOTAL''' || '''=''' || '''180,41 EUR''' ||
|}

However, we have to make a substraction about 1 EURO by transfer (for each, except for A which has been transfered on 4 oct 2006).
Then we have by paypal : 180,41 - 7 â‚¬ = '''173,41 â‚¬uro'''

==moneybookers==

TOTAL = 0 â‚¬

==Donations promises==

* Libre : '''150 â‚¬uros''' (1 time per year)
* Milos: 10 EUR/month from March 2008, probably in amounts of 50 or 100 EUR (once in 5 or 10 months), probably via Moneybookers. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
** Renewed domains anarch(o|a)pedia.(org|net|info) for two years (now, until September 2010), which is ~75 EUR. (BTW, I think that the best idea for my donations is to renew our domains every year or so for two more years, for the next 5 years.) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 07:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

==TOTAL==

: '''173,41 â‚¬uros + 150 â‚¬uros'''
:::::=
::::'''323,41 â‚¬uros'''

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

anarchistic encyclopaedia/fra

2008-05-05T18:45:01Z

Libre: lien pillé

http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/BB/encyclopedia.jpg
copiÃ© de [bibliolib]
== PRÃ‰FACE ==

Aux Anarchistes RÃ©volutionnaires de toutes tendances et de tous pays

Chers Compagnons,

Depuis longtemps je songe et je travaille Ã un projet dont lâ€™exÃ©cution sera, pour la diffusion des IdÃ©es Anarchistes Ã travers le Monde, dâ€™une exceptionnelle utilitÃ©.

Ce projet, dâ€™accord avec les camarades de tous les pays, et grÃ¢ce Ã lâ€™appui qui mâ€™est apportÃ© par Â« lâ€™Å’uvre Internationale des Editions Anarchistes Â», je le rÃ©alise en publiant Â« Lâ€™EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste Â».

== IMMENSE UTILITÃ‰ DE CET OUVRAGE. - LES SERVICES QUâ€™IL RENDRA ==

II sâ€™agit dâ€™un ouvrage destinÃ© Ã embrasser, dans la mesure du possible, toutes les conceptions et toute la documentation se rapportant au mouvement anarchiste et, par extension, au mouvement social tout entier.

Le puissant intÃ©rÃªt de cet ouvrage consistera :

# Ã grouper toutes les connaissances que peut et doit possÃ©der un militant rÃ©volutionnaire ;
# Ã les prÃ©senter dans un ordre mÃ©thodique, en conformitÃ© dâ€™un plan gÃ©nÃ©ral bien conÃ§u et bien exÃ©cutÃ© ;
# Ã les exposer sous une forme simple, claire, prÃ©cise, vivante, Ã la portÃ©e de tous ;
# Ã les traduire en diverses langues, afin de les rÃ©pandre Ã peu prÃ¨s partout.

***

Des considÃ©rations multiples et dâ€™ordres divers mâ€™ont insensiblement amenÃ© Ã lâ€™idÃ©e de cet ouvrage et graduellement convaincu de son immense utilitÃ©.

Je veux indiquer briÃ¨vement les services essentiels que cette EncyclopÃ©die anarchiste rendra Ã nos camarades du monde entier et Ã la Cause magnifique quâ€™ils ont embrassÃ©e :

* a) Sur presque toutes choses - et câ€™est logique - les Anarchistes ont une faÃ§on de concevoir, de sentir, dâ€™apprÃ©cier, de vouloir et dâ€™agir qui nâ€™appartient quâ€™Ã eux, et les sÃ©pare de tous les autres. Cela Ã©tant, il est naturel quâ€™ils possÃ¨dent une multitude dâ€™IdÃ©es et, cent fois pour une, jâ€™ai eu lâ€™occasion et la joie de constater cette extraordinaire richesse de conceptions personnelles.

Mais que de fois aussi jâ€™ai eu le regret dâ€™observer que, chez la plupart, ces conceptions sont en vrac, câ€™est-Ã -dire : pÃªle-mÃªle, sans classement, sans ordre, sans mÃ©thode !

Telle que je la conÃ§ois, cette EncyclopÃ©die anarchiste aura lâ€™Ã©norme avantage dâ€™ajouter aux idÃ©es et aux connaissances que possÃ¨de chaque anarchiste, celles qui lui font dÃ©faut et dâ€™introduire, dans cet ensemble plus ou moins disparate, broussailleux et touffu, le classement et lâ€™ordonnance qui, mettant chaque idÃ©e Ã la place quâ€™elle doit rationnellement occuper, confÃ¨re Ã celle-ci toute la force et toute la clartÃ© dÃ©sirables.

* b) La littÃ©rature anarchiste est dÃ©jÃ fort copieuse. Rares, trÃ¨s rares sont les compagnons, les curieux, les chercheurs et les studieux qui ont les moyens de se procurer et le temps de Â« potasser Â» les livres, brochures, journaux, revues et Ã©crits innombrables oÃ¹ se reflÃ¨te, sous une forme extrÃªmement variÃ©e et intÃ©ressante, la PensÃ©e anarchiste.

II serait pourtant de la plus vive utilitÃ©, que tous ceux - anarchistes ou non - qui dÃ©sirent se renseigner exactement sur lâ€™Anarchisme, pussent le faire sans Ãªtre dans la nÃ©cessitÃ© de compulser une foule dâ€™Ã©crits, dont chacun ne traite que dâ€™un aspect spÃ©cial ou dâ€™un problÃ¨me fragmentaire de lâ€™Anarchisme.

Sorte de synthÃ¨se claire et condensÃ©e de lâ€™Anarchisme, cette EncyclopÃ©die sera une Å“uvre relativement complÃ¨te, conÃ§ue et prÃ©sentÃ©e dans un ordre dÃ©terminÃ© et qui, intelligemment et facilement consultÃ©e, renseignera chacun - Ã son grÃ© et selon ses besoins de documentation - sur lâ€™ensemble et sur le dÃ©tail des conceptions anarchistes.

* c) De toutes les doctrines sociales, aucune nâ€™est ignorÃ©e, mÃ©connue, dÃ©formÃ©e, travestie, ridiculisÃ©e autant que lâ€™Anarchisme ; lâ€™intÃ©rÃªt de tous ceux qui dÃ©tiennent actuellement le Pouvoir se confond, ici, avec lâ€™intÃ©rÃªt de tous ceux qui ambitionnent de le conquÃ©rir. Eh bien ! sans Ãªtre un catÃ©chisme ni un Ã©vangile, cet ouvrage sera un recueil unique et complet, aussi bien quâ€™un guide impartial et sÃ»r, en mÃªme temps quâ€™un rÃ©pertoire prÃ©cieux que, en toutes circonstances, pourront consulter avec fruit ceux qui dÃ©sireront sâ€™instruire et se documenter exactement, loyalement.

* d) Un camarade voudra-t-il traiter publiquement - par lâ€™Ã©crit ou la parole - un sujet ressortissant Ã la propagande anarchiste ? Il lui suffira, aprÃ¨s avoir rassemblÃ©, par la mÃ©ditation, les idÃ©es que lui suggÃ¨re le sujet Ã traiter, dâ€™ouvrir cette Â« EncyclopÃ©die anarchiste Â» Ã la page voulue et il y trouvera des considÃ©rations, des thÃ¨ses et une documentation adÃ©quates au sujet Ã dÃ©velopper. Il nâ€™aura plus quâ€™Ã ajouter Ã ses propres idÃ©es et Ã celles qui lui seront fournies par cette recherche, les illustrations quâ€™il empruntera aux Ã©vÃ©nements les plus rÃ©cents.

Que de propagande en perspective !

* e) Par essence et par dÃ©finition, lâ€™Anarchisme est international. Il est donc indispensable que tout anarchiste non seulement possÃ¨de une notion claire des courants dâ€™idÃ©e et des mÃ©thodes de lutte qui existent dans le pays quâ€™il habite, mais encore quâ€™il se mette et se tienne Ã la page de tout ce qui a trait au mouvement anarchiste mondial.

La vie internationale tient, en effet, eIle est appelÃ©e Ã prendre de plus en plus, une si large place, quâ€™un homme de notre temps ne peut plus se contenter dâ€™une information locale, rÃ©gionale ou nationale. Toutes les parties du monde ont, par des traits multiples et importants, par le jeu des rÃ©percussions et des contre-coups, une existence commune et, pour ainsi dire, solidaire. Accords ou discordances politiques, ententes ou conflits Ã©conomiques, manifestations scientifiques et artistiques, mouvements sociaux : tout, Ã lâ€™heure actuelle, revÃªt un caractÃ¨re mondial. Le militant trouvera, dans cette EncyclopÃ©die anarchiste, nombre de renseignements et de prÃ©cisions qui lâ€™aideront Ã se guider dans lâ€™Ã©tude extrÃªmement complexe de la vie sociale universelle.

Par ce qui prÃ©cÃ¨de - et sans que jâ€™insiste davantage - on doit Ãªtre pÃ©nÃ©trÃ© du haut intÃ©rÃªt et de lâ€™utilitÃ© considÃ©rable de cette EncyclopÃ©die anarchiste.

On en sera plus profondÃ©ment encore convaincu, quand on en connaÃ®tra le plan gÃ©nÃ©ral.

=='''PLAN GÃ‰NÃ‰RAL DE Lâ€™ENCYCLOPÃ‰DIE ANARCHISTE'''==

DestinÃ©e Ã rÃ©unir et Ã exposer, aussi complÃ¨tement que possible, les principes, les tendances, le but et les mÃ©thodes de lâ€™Anarchisme, cette EncyclopÃ©die comprendra cinq parties.

===PREMIERE PARTIE.===
'''Dictionnaire anarchiste. Aspect philosophique et doctrinal de lâ€™Anarchisme. ExposÃ© des principes, thÃ©ories, conceptions, tendances et mÃ©thodes de la PensÃ©e et de lâ€™Action vÃ©ritablement rÃ©volutionnaires, câ€™est-Ã -dire anarchistes.'''

Les mots qui figurent dans cette partie Â« Dictionnaire Â» ont Ã©tÃ© rationnellement choisis. La plupart de ces mots possÃ¨dent, du point de vue anarchiste, une signification spÃ©ciale et une portÃ©e particuliÃ¨re. Les autres se rapportent au vocabulaire indispensable Ã tous ceux qui, dÃ©sireux de se documenter exactement ou de propager lâ€™IdÃ©al anarchiste, ont le devoir de connaÃ®tre le sens exact des mots dont ils sont appelÃ©s Ã se servir et la somme dâ€™idÃ©es et de connaissances que chacun de ces mots reprÃ©sente, afin de nâ€™en faire usage quâ€™Ã bon escient et dâ€™en extraire toutes les considÃ©rations qui en dÃ©coulent.

Sachez, chers compagnons, que cette premiÃ¨re partie de Â« Lâ€™EncyclopÃ©die anarchiste Â», rÃ©sumera tout lâ€™ensemble des connaissances dont vous avez soif et dont lâ€™acquisition fera de vous des militants sÃ©rieux et des propagandistes compÃ©tents.

Il vous suffira de consulter ce dictionnaire anarchiste pour vous documenter sur lâ€™ensemble et sur les dÃ©tails de notre Doctrine.

La forme Â« dictionnaire Â» - et câ€™est pour cela quâ€™elle a Ã©tÃ© adoptÃ©e - facilitera, simplifiera et activera vos recherches.

===DEUXIEME PARTIE===
'''Histoire de la PensÃ©e et de lâ€™Action anarchistes, pays par pays.'''

Câ€™est un drame dâ€™une intense Ã©motion et dâ€™un enseignement prÃ©cieux que lâ€™historique substantiel et prÃ©cis du mouvement anarchiste international.

RÃ©digÃ© par des compagnons puissamment documentÃ©s, cet historique vous fera connaÃ®tre les magnifiques efforts tentÃ©s par les camarades du monde entier. Vous pourrez suivre ainsi les progrÃ¨s quâ€™ils ont rÃ©alisÃ©s, connaÃ®tre les atroces persÃ©cutions quâ€™ils ont subies et les prodiges dâ€™activitÃ© quâ€™ils ont accomplis ; et le rÃ©cit de cette Ã‰popÃ©e superbe de lâ€™Esprit de RÃ©volte se soulevant, sous les formes les plus diverses et les plus hÃ©roÃ¯ques, contre lâ€™AutoritÃ© et ses crimes, stimulera votre propre Ã©nergie et dÃ©cuplera votre courage, par le fait mÃªme que vous puiserez dans cet exposÃ© fidÃ¨le, vÃ©ridique et bourrÃ© de prÃ©cisions, de faits et de statistiques, la certitude que, en dÃ©pit des persÃ©cutions et des embÃ»ches, lâ€™Anarchisme se dÃ©veloppe, Ã travers le monde, et apporte Ã 1â€™HumanitÃ© la seule Doctrine qui, tÃ´t ou tard, la rendra maÃ®tresse de ses destinÃ©es et la libÃ©rera totalement, dÃ©finitivement.

Cette Ã©tude historique aura pour rÃ©sultat de mettre en lumiÃ¨re ce fait unique et dâ€™un enseignement capital : que la fermetÃ© des principes, voire leur rigiditÃ©, peut sâ€™allier Ã une extraordinaire diversitÃ© dâ€™applications, Ã une prodigieuse variÃ©tÃ© de moyens de lutte.

Elle Ã©tablira, en outre, que, tout en tenant compte, ainsi quâ€™il sied, des circonstances de temps et de lieu, la doctrine anarchiste sâ€™affirme beaucoup plus constante, et lâ€™action libertaire bien plus continue, dans le temps et lâ€™espace, que tous les autres mouvements internationaux : syndicalisme, socialisme, communisme, qui se flattent de transformer le monde Ã grand renfort de dÃ©cisions, de mots dâ€™ordre et de rÃ©glementations sâ€™appuyant sur une discipline de fer et de rigoureuses sanctions.

=== TROISIEME PARTIE ===
'''Vie et Å’uvre des principaux militants ayant appartenu ou appartenant au mouvement anarchiste : philosophes, thÃ©oriciens, Ã©crivains, orateurs, artistes, agitateurs, hommes dâ€™action. (Ordre alphabÃ©tique).'''

A lâ€™exception de quelques thÃ©oriciens puissants dont les Å“uvres traduites dans presque toutes les langues sont universellement rÃ©pandues et dont le nom, qui brille dâ€™un exceptionnel Ã©clat, est Ã©troitement liÃ© au mouvement anarchiste, un grand nombre de compagnons ayant, par leurs Ã©crits, leurs discours ou leur Action, contribuÃ© au dÃ©veloppement de lâ€™Anarchisme, sont ignorÃ©s du grand public et insuffisamment connus des libertaires eux-mÃªmes.

Les uns ont eu Ã subir - et pour cause - la conspiration du silence, les autres ont Ã©tÃ© jetÃ©s en prison ou envoyÃ©s au bagne ; ceux-ci sont tombÃ©s dans lâ€™oubli, et ceux-lÃ ont Ã©tÃ© accablÃ©s dâ€™injures ou victimes des plus odieuses calomnies.

Lâ€™EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste ne tressera pas de couronnes Ã ces inconnus, mÃ©connus, persÃ©cutÃ©s ou diffamÃ©s ; elle ne les Ã©lÃ¨vera pas au rang des demi-Dieux ; elle nâ€™en fera ni des hÃ©ros, ni des martyrs. Les anarchistes dÃ©daignent, ils mÃ©prisent ces procÃ©dÃ©s dont ils laissent le monopole aux Partis politiques qui, pour capter la confiance aveugle des foules et hisser leurs chefs au Pouvoir, ont besoin dâ€™entourer ceux-ci dâ€™un culte idolÃ¢tre.

Mais cet ouvrage - que nous voulons Ãªtre un monument Ã©levÃ© Ã la pensÃ©e et Ã lâ€™action anarchistes - projettera la lumiÃ¨re nÃ©cessaire sur la personne, sur lâ€™effort, sur lâ€™action de nos chers militants, disparus ou vivants ; il rendra justice Ã leur activitÃ© et Ã leur dÃ©sintÃ©ressement.

Et les plus indiffÃ©rents seront obligÃ©s de reconnaÃ®tre que, de tous les mouvements sociaux qui, depuis un siÃ¨cle, agitent lâ€™humanitÃ© et tendent Ã la faire sortir de lâ€™orniÃ¨re et Ã la jeter sur des pistes nouvelles, il nâ€™en est pas un qui ait suscitÃ© plus dâ€™ardente sincÃ©ritÃ© et de rÃ©el dÃ©vouement ; pas un qui puisse sâ€™enorgueillir dâ€™aussi magnifiques caractÃ¨res, dâ€™exemples aussi frappants de dignitÃ© ; pas un qui soit Ã mÃªme de mettre en ligne une plÃ©iade aussi nombreuse et aussi brillante de lutteurs et de propagandistes sans ambition ni arrivisme ; pas un qui compte des apÃ´tres Ã la vie plus belle, Ã lâ€™esprit plus Ã©levÃ©, Ã la volontÃ© plus ferme, au cÅ“ur plus gÃ©nÃ©reux.

=== QUATRIEME PARTIE ===
'''Vie et Å’uvre des hommes qui, sans Ãªtre Ã proprement parler des anarchistes, ont, nÃ©anmoins, dans le domaine de la Philosophie, de la Science, des Lettres, des Arts et de lâ€™Action, contribuÃ© Ã lâ€™Ã©mancipation humaine par leur lutte contre la routine mortifÃ¨re, contre les traditions paralysantes, contre les mÃ©thodes et forces stÃ©rilisantes de leur temps. (Ordre alphabÃ©tique.)'''

Les anarchistes nâ€™ont pas sans cesse sur les lÃ¨vres le mot Â« Justice Â». Mais leur conscience est pÃ©nÃ©trÃ©e du sentiment profond de cette vertu aussi rare quâ€™admirable, et ils sâ€™efforcent Ã la pratiquer dans toute la mesure du possible, et en toutes circonstances.

Aussi, sont-ils persuadÃ©s quâ€™ils manqueraient aux plus Ã©lÃ©mentaires devoirs dâ€™Ã©quitÃ©, sâ€™ils nâ€™attribuaient pas la place qui leur revient Ã ceux qui : philosophes, savants, Ã©crivains, artistes, Ã©ducateurs, hommes de rÃ©volte, ont contribuÃ© - si peu que ce soit, sans Ãªtre spÃ©cifiquement anarchistes et, parfois mÃªme, Ã leur insu - au dÃ©blaiement de la route, au renversement des obstacles, Ã la ruine des prÃ©jugÃ©s, Ã la transformation des mÃ©thodes, au perfectionnement des formes, en un mot au labeur sÃ©culaire dâ€™une humanitÃ© sâ€™acheminant, douloureusement et lentement, vers des sommets toujours plus Ã©levÃ©s, des horizons toujours plus vastes et une beautÃ© de plus en plus rayonnante.

Les anarchistes savent que, si leur IdÃ©al nâ€™est plus considÃ©rÃ©, de nos jours, comme une hallucination de cerveaux en dÃ©lire et un enfantement dâ€™imaginations maladives ayant soif dâ€™absolu, ce rÃ©sultat nâ€™est pas le salaire de leurs seuls efforts. Ils ont conscience quâ€™ils sont les bÃ©nÃ©ficiaires du travail opiniÃ¢tre et le plus souvent ingrat, des grands prÃ©curseurs. Ils conÃ§oivent que, si lâ€™heure de la rÃ©volte est relativement proche, il est juste dâ€™en faire remonter le mÃ©rite - en partie du moins - aux illustres et hÃ©roÃ¯ques semeurs qui ont jetÃ©, avant eux, le bon grain.

Ils se rendent compte que, pour Ãªtre fÃ©conde et positivement libÃ©ratrice, il est indispensable que la RÃ©volution, quand elle Ã©clatera, soit lâ€™aboutissant et comme le point terminus dâ€™une longue Ã©volution prÃ©disposant les esprits Ã accueillir avec faveur, la naissance du Monde nouveau et Ã en favoriser le dÃ©velopement et la stabilitÃ©, en sâ€™adaptant aux nouvelles formes de vie.

Pour ces motifs, Lâ€™EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste consacrera sa quatriÃ¨me partie Ã lâ€™exposÃ© de la Vie et de lâ€™Å’uvre de cette lÃ©gion dâ€™hommes grands par le cÅ“ur, lâ€™esprit et la volontÃ©, qui ont collaborÃ©, sans quâ€™ils se rÃ©clament de lâ€™Anarchisme, Ã 1â€™Ã©laboration dâ€™une mentalitÃ© nouvelle, Ã lâ€™Ã©dification dâ€™une philosophie et dâ€™une morale plus humaines, Ã la gestation dâ€™IdÃ©es, de sentiments et de modes de vie supÃ©rieurs, Ã la formation de gÃ©nÃ©rations traversÃ©es par le grand souffle Ã©mancipateur.

=== CINQUIEME PARTIE ===
'''Catalogue des livres, brochures, Journaux, revues et publications de toutes sortes, de propagande anarchiste ou anarchisante. (Ordre par pays et par langues.)'''

Dans les quatre premiÃ¨res parties de cette EncyclopÃ©die, il sera frÃ©quemment fait mention des ouvrages dans lesquels se trouvent exposÃ©es les thÃ©ories anarchistes. Ce catalogue prÃ©sentera ceux-ci, langue par langue, en conformitÃ© dâ€™un classement rationnel. Le lecteur pourra, ainsi, se reporter facilement aux ouvrages citÃ©s, les consulter dans leur entier et y puiser la documentation dont il aura besoin.

On sera Ã©tonnÃ© de lâ€™incroyable richesse de la littÃ©rature anarchiste et anarchisante et de lâ€™abondance des Å“uvres de premier ordre quâ€™y peuvent rencontrer les personnes studieuses, dÃ©sireuses de se renseigner sur toutes les doctrines sociales.

== PRÃ‰CIEUSES INDICATIONS ==

Tel est le plan gÃ©nÃ©ral de cette Â« EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste Â».

On peut estimer quâ€™il est vaste ; en rÃ©alitÃ©, il sera plus vaste encore que, Ã premiÃ¨re vue, on serait disposÃ© Ã le croire.

Je mâ€™explique :

* 1Â° Dâ€™un part, toutes les tendances, toutes les thÃ¨ses qui, dans leur ensemble, constituent lâ€™Anarchisme, y seront impartialement exposÃ©es. Eliminer, de propos dÃ©libÃ©rÃ©, une seule de ces thÃ¨ses, câ€™eÃ»t Ã©tÃ© faire Å“uvre de partisans et non dâ€™Ã©ducateurs consciencieux ; câ€™eÃ»t Ã©tÃ© enlever Ã ce mouvement, une partie de son ampleur, de sa majestÃ© ; câ€™eÃ»t Ã©tÃ© mutiler volontairement lâ€™Anarchisme, en le privant dâ€™un de ses traits distinctifs.

Sous peine dâ€™Ãªtre incomplÃ¨te et de trahir son but, cette EncyclopÃ©die doit Ãªtre le reflet de toutes les conceptions sâ€™inspirant de lâ€™Anarchisme ; elle doit abandonner Ã chacun de ses lecteurs, le soin de choisir entre les diverses tendances et de se rallier librement Ã celle qui, Ã ses yeux, se rapproche le plus de lâ€™exactitude, et cadre le mieux avec son tempÃ©rament. Ennemi de toute contrainte, lâ€™Anarchiste nâ€™impose jamais : il expose, il propose, il attire lâ€™attention, il provoque la rÃ©flexion, il suscite la mÃ©ditation. Quand il convie Ã se prononcer, ceux qui lâ€™Ã©coutent ou le lisent, il ne se croit autorisÃ© Ã le faire, quâ€™aprÃ¨s avoir placÃ© ses lecteurs ou ses auditeurs en face des aspects multiples et parfois opposÃ©s de la thÃ¨se soumise Ã lâ€™examen et Ã la controverse. Il sâ€™inscrirait en faux contre lâ€™essence mÃªme de lâ€™Anarchisme si, pour faire triompher son propre point de vue, il passait sous silence les autres ou, de sa propre autoritÃ©, en Ã©touffait lâ€™expression.

* 2Â° Dâ€™autre part, un anarchiste et, Ã plus forte raison, un militant est dans lâ€™obligation de connaÃ®tre le mouvement social dans toutes ses manifestations et non pas uniquement dans ses rapports avec lâ€™Anarchisme qui nâ€™est, en rÃ©alitÃ©, quâ€™une des variÃ©tÃ©s de ce mouvement. Sâ€™il veut examiner un problÃ¨me non seulement sur le plan idÃ©al et idÃ©ologique, mais encore sur celui des rÃ©alitÃ©s, il est nÃ©cessaire quâ€™il soit Ã©clairÃ©, renseignÃ©, documentÃ© sur tous les faits, chiffres et prÃ©cisions qui touchent Ã ce problÃ¨me.

Pour rÃ©pondre Ã cette nÃ©cessitÃ©, lâ€™EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste doit Ãªtre une mine dans laquelle le lecteur puisera Ã pleines mains les indications de toute nature qui lui sont indispensables.

Câ€™est pourquoi, je me suis adressÃ© Ã des collaborateurs qui, en se spÃ©cialisant, ont acquis, en philosophie, en histoire, en science, en art, en sociologie, des connaissances sÃ»res, substantielles et Ã©tendues.

Jâ€™ai demandÃ© : au philosophe de nous dÃ©voiler la profondeur, la subtilitÃ© et la justesse de ses cogitations ; au sociologue de nous concÃ©der le fruit de ses Ã©tudes ; Ã lâ€™homme de science de nous faire bÃ©nÃ©ficier de ses recherches et constatations ; Ã lâ€™Ã©crivain de nous renseigner sur les trÃ©sors dâ€™imagination et de savoir que renferment les bibliothÃ¨ques ; Ã lâ€™artiste de nous faire connaÃ®tre et aimer les merveilles oÃ¹ sâ€™avÃ¨re le sens pur de la beautÃ© ; au mÃ©decin de nous enseigner lâ€™art de lutter contre les maladies qui dÃ©ciment lâ€™espÃ¨ce et, par lâ€™hygiÃ¨ne, de doter les humains de la robustesse et de lâ€™endurance dÃ©sirables ; Ã lâ€™Ã©ducateur de nous initier au problÃ¨me dÃ©licat de la formation des intelligences qui sâ€™Ã©veillent, des jugements qui se forment et des cÅ“urs qui sâ€™Ã©panouissent.

Jâ€™ai demandÃ© au Â« Sans-Dieu Â» de nous indiquer les motifs profonds de son athÃ©isme, au Â« Sans-Patrie Â» de nous exposer les causes de son antipatriotisme ; au Â« Sans-Ã‰tat Â» de nous faire connaÃ®tre les raisons de son antiÃ©tatisme ; au Â« Sans-PropriÃ©tÃ© Â» de nous dire le pourquoi de son anticapitalisme, au Â« Sans-MaÃ®tre Â» de nous ouvrir son cÅ“ur pour que nous y dÃ©couvrions les ressorts puissants de ses farouches rÃ©voltes.

Oui : Ã tous ceux qui ont qualitÃ© pour Ã©noncer quelque chose de vÃ©ritablement intÃ©ressant et nouveau sur la multitude des questions qui tourmentent actuellement la conscience humaine, jâ€™ai demandÃ© de sâ€™exprimer loyalement, franchement, librement dans cette EncyclopÃ©die que je voudrais Ãªtre une page nouvelle et lumineuse dans lâ€™Ã©volution sociale.

Et tout cet ouvrage tÃ©moignera que mon appel a Ã©tÃ© entendu et que ma requÃªte a Ã©tÃ© exaucÃ©e.

***

Ceci est singulier, mais exact : lâ€™Anarchisme envahit tous les domaines quâ€™embrasse lâ€™activitÃ© humaine : politique, Ã©conomie sociale, religion, morale, patrie, famille, arts, sciences, etc...

Il a son mot Ã dire, son point de vue Ã exprimer, ses conclusions Ã formuler sur toutes les questions que posent le cours des Ã©vÃ©nements, la marche des idÃ©es, la vie sentimentale, le dÃ©veloppement complexe de la SociÃ©tÃ©.

Câ€™est pourquoi le lecteur aura la trÃ¨s agrÃ©able surprise et la trÃ¨s vive satisfaction de trouver dans cet ouvrage - bien quâ€™il porte un titre en apparence limitatif - des Ã©tudes extrÃªmement variÃ©es concernant nombre de sujets, principes, thÃ©ories et faits que les esprits Ã©troits ont le tort de considÃ©rer comme Ã©tant en dehors de lâ€™Anarchisme.

Les intelligences obtuses assignent Ã lâ€™Anarchisme les limites dâ€™une doctrine sociale, enfermÃ©e dans quelques formules lapidaires et ayant pour fin lâ€™assouvissement des appÃ©tits les plus grossiers et des instincts les plus bas, par le Â« chambardement Â» des Institutions actuelles.

Il suffira Ã ces ignorants de consulter cette EncyclopÃ©die, pour apprendre - enfin - que lâ€™Anarchisme a son point de dÃ©part dans les poussÃ©es les plus nobles, que les convictions anarchistes ne se dÃ©veloppent et ne sâ€™affermissent que dans les cerveaux les plus clairs, les jugements les plus sÃ»rs, les cÅ“urs les plus affectueux, les volontÃ©s les plus fortes et les consciences les plus droites, et que le but de lâ€™Anarchisme est dâ€™Ã©lever tous les Individus, sans distinction de sexe ni de race, par le Bien-ÃŠtre et la LibertÃ©, jusquâ€™aux purs sommets de la sensibilitÃ© et de la raison.

Chers Compagnons,

Tous les partisans de lâ€™AutoritÃ© et de sa fille : la Contrainte, tous les dÃ©fenseurs de ce quâ€™on appelle bien Ã tort Â« lâ€™Ordre Social Â», basÃ© sur lâ€™Ã‰tat et la PropriÃ©tÃ©, sur la Patrie et la Religion, sur le Code et la Morale officielle, sont les dÃ©tracteurs systÃ©matiques de lâ€™Anarchisme.

Ils dÃ©naturent Ã plaisir les fondements de notre doctrine ; ils ridiculisent Ã lâ€™envi nos principes et nos mÃ©thodes dâ€™action ; ils nous prÃªtent, sans compter, les desseins les plus vils ou les intentions les plus folles ; ils entravent avec acharnement notre propagande, par lâ€™Ã©touffement et la rÃ©pression

Pour tous, lâ€™Anarchisme est lâ€™ennemi et nous sommes, en effet, les ennemis dÃ©terminÃ©s de toutes les AutoritÃ©s qui sâ€™exercent et, au surplus, ne peuvent sâ€™exercer que par la contrainte, la violence et la persÃ©cution

Depuis des temps immÃ©moriaux, deux principes se disputent lâ€™empire des Ãªtres et des choses :

le principe dâ€™AutoritÃ© et le principe de LibertÃ©.

Pour conserver les multiples profits quâ€™ils tirent du Principe dâ€™AutoritÃ© dont ils se rÃ©clament, et plutÃ´t que de se les voir ravis tout Ã fait, les tenants de lâ€™AutoritÃ© ont Ã©tÃ© obligÃ©s de faire des concessions, dâ€™admettre des tempÃ©raments et de donner leur acquiescement Ã un rÃ©gime social paraissant concilier ces deux principes contradictoires, en accordant Ã chacun dâ€™eux, la juste part qui lui est due.

Â« Dans ces conditions, disent-ils, lâ€™Ã‰tat, expression souveraine de lâ€™AutoritÃ© lÃ©gitime, est le plus ferme soutien et le garant le plus sÃ»r de la libertÃ© de chacun. Â»

Dans cette alliance de lâ€™AutoritÃ© et de la LibertÃ©, il nâ€™y a quâ€™une mystification, un trompe-lâ€™Å“il venant sâ€™ajouter aux innombrables duperies dont les pauvres et les asservis ont Ã©tÃ©, dans le passÃ©, les victimes.

Les Anarchistes ont assumÃ© la charge de dÃ©masquer et de combattre ce mensonge.

Peu nombreux ils sont et en ce qui concerne effectifs, ressources, moyens de combat, ils sont innexprimablement infÃ©rieurs Ã leurs ennemis.

Ceux-ci possÃ¨dent un outillage de guerre perfectionnÃ© ; ils ont pour eux lâ€™Ã‰tat avec tout son cortÃ¨ge de Magistrats, de Policiers et de Soldats, sans compter lâ€™appui de lâ€™Ã‰cole, de la Caserne et de la Sacristie. Ils ont la formidable puissance de la Richesse et de la Presse qui lui obÃ©it.

Câ€™est contre cette ligue innombrable et solidement organisÃ©e, que, minoritÃ© infime et Ã peu prÃ¨s dÃ©pourvue de lâ€™outillage dont leurs adversaires sont si abondamment approvisionnÃ©s, les Anarchistes mÃ¨nent le combat.

Ils savent que la lutte sera longue et pÃ©nible ; ils nâ€™ignorent pas que beaucoup dâ€™entre eux, et les meilleurs, succomberont ; mais ils savent aussi que cette guerre implacable se terminera par leur victoire, parce quâ€™ils ont pour eux et avec eux, ces armes invincibles : la VÃ©ritÃ© et la Justice, soutenues par des convictions inÃ©branlables.

Puisse cette EncyclopÃ©die, Ã laquelle les Antiautoritaires du monde entier ont donnÃ©, de plein cÅ“ur, leur prÃ©cieuse collaboration, contribuer largement Ã la fÃ©conditÃ© de cette victoire, en amenant Ã la petite armÃ©e des champions de la LibertÃ© de nombreuses et vaillantes recrues et en plaÃ§ant dans leurs mains lâ€™armement qui leur est nÃ©cessaire.

Pour la RÃ©daction de Â« Lâ€™EncyclopÃ©die Anarchiste Â» (1927)

SÃ‰BASTIEN FAURE.

Anarchopedia:Site support

2008-03-05T20:26:00Z

Libre: + AP:Fin

{{langs}}

As you know almost everything in capitalism costs a lot of money, even resistance. Anarchopedia constantly needs funds to run the servers that run the MediaWiki instances.

At this time you can :

donate via [http://www.paypal.com paypal] :

Recipient's email: '''donate@anarchopedia.org'''

* [https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?PPREDIRECT=yhw4IIsjSipUpb3kvsGBqTA8cNRGLbccSvsOrr5rfgo2gzFFpLpmu4YL59apROH25fv70Ljd0HR2_M31974A7DMfx7U9mWsbToajLwEeF-pBdExO5t9uDmj8IyeHb_wetFsKJ7Tth_HkpGXfFbLH5xePG_e '''direct link'''] (secure)

Or you can send by Bank account to :

'''FR 10 20041 01012 6068686N033 81'''

Or donate via [http://moneybookers.com Moneybookers.com] :

Recipient's email: '''donate@anarchopedia.org'''

* See also [[Anarchopedia:Finances|Donations's list]].

Anarchopedia talk:Site support

2008-03-05T20:24:23Z

Libre: /* changing intro */ new section

The page it links to is in french so I cann`t understand a word, can someone creat a multilingual link or something? --[[User:Blackredisbeautiful|Blackredisbeautiful]] 17:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

:I found that I can't send money via PayPal... Hm. I'll find some way to do so. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

::BRiB, just log in www.paypal.com and then clic the paiement button : fill donate@anarchopedia.org and the others stuff and that's all. it's true that the link is in french, i don't know if someone can change the link... --doud

The link is now in english language :) [[User:Libre|Libre]] 18:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

:The problem is that I can't make donation if I am from Serbia... And I am wandering about it just because I made a donation to Mutualaid six-nine months ago via Paypal. I am still checking. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]]

----

Version of the page by [[User:Imatroll]]:
<blockquote>
Please don't offend us by providing us with money, the food of the capitalist pig.
</blockquote>

== site support in all languages ==

i ve putted a template "langs" for that peoples see the article in their language, if it exists... maybe some others languages are to be translated. [[User:Libre|Libre]] 20:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

== changing intro ==

For now, the intro is :
:''As you know almost everything in capitalism costs a lot of money, even resistance. Anarchopedia constantly needs funds to run the servers that run the MediaWiki instances.''

All that is right, but i think that it is an evidence. And it is like an ideologic justification of the need of funds... I think we don't need justification, we just need money to pay servers, to make open project. And peoples know and have their justifications for why they make a donation. It can be "resistance", "offensive", or others views else...

Then i propose an other introduction, which would be :
:''Beyond the contributions that each one can bring to this project, Anarchopedia constantly needs funds to run the servers which lodge it. If the project interests you, you can also contribute to it by offering a financial participation to it.''

-- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 20:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2008-03-05T20:10:24Z

Libre: /* Finances */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

==Organizational==

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''
*** I think that our finances should be transparent. This means that we should announce publicly how much money do we have and how do we spend them. People who gave money should have possibility to decide would they do that anonymously or not, but we should put the list of donations (like: person1 -- 10 EUR, anon1 -- 10 EUR, anon2 -- 20 EUR...). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
*** Yes, it is a good idea to have more than one person as treasurer. I shouldn't be that, Beta_M is willing to take a responsibility of general secretary, X doesn't like to deal with banks, so Rev is the only person on my mind now (however, maybe we have other people who are able/willing to be treasurers). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 18:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
****In fact, i think too that it must be transparent. But i thank with some last discussions, that there were a problem with money transparence... I've put [[Anarchopedia:Finances|donations's list here]]. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]]'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Anarchopedia:Finances

2008-03-05T19:26:05Z

Libre: Total money for AnarchoPedia

==paypal==
{| border="3"
|+ All Activity Paypal - first to '''2 Mar. 2008'''
|-
! Date
! Name/pseudo
! */*
! Gross
! Fee
! Net Amount
|-
| ''17 Dec. 2007'' || H || - || 40,00 EUR || -1,61 EUR || '''38,39 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''19 Nov. 2007'' || G || - || 15,12 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,36 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''11 Oct. 2007'' || B || '''Returned''' || 30,00 EUR || 0 EUR || 30,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''20 Sep. 2007'' || F || - || 15,00 EUR || -0,76 EUR || '''14,24 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''3 Aug. 2007'' || E || - || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''5 Jul. 2007'' || D || - || 20,00 EUR || -0,93 EUR || '''19,07 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''27 May 2007'' || C || '''Returned''' || 20,00 EUR || 0,00 EUR || 20,00 EUR ||
|-
| ''23 Feb. 2007'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Dec. 2006'' || B || - || 10,00 EUR || -0,59 EUR || '''9,41 EUR''' ||
|-
| ''4 Oct. 2006'' || Libre || '''â†’ TRANSFERED in BANK''' || -'''27,73 EUR''' || -'''1,00 EUR''' || -28,73 EUR ||
|-
| ''13 Jul. 2006'' || A || '''transfered''' || 30,00 EUR || -1,27 EUR || '''28,73 EUR''' ||
|-
|
|-
| || || || '''TOTAL''' || '''=''' || '''161,34 EUR''' ||
|}

However, we have to make a substraction about 1 EURO by transfer (for each, except for A which has been transfered on 4 oct 2006).
Then we have by paypal : 161,34 - 7 â‚¬ = '''154,34 â‚¬uro'''

==moneybookers==

TOTAL = 0 â‚¬

==Donations promises==

*Libre : '''150 â‚¬uros''' (1 time per year)

==TOTAL==

: '''154,34 â‚¬uros + 150 â‚¬uros'''
:::::=
::::'''304,34 â‚¬uros'''

Ideas for the 4th General Meeting

2008-03-05T17:06:27Z

Libre: /* Finances */

Please, add your ideas here. If there is no section for your idea, please, add it.

==Organizational==

===General secretary?===
* We need at least a person who would take care about daily jobs in our community; i.e. we need a secretary. I think that it shouldn't be one person (first of all, because it is hard to work alone), so I suggest a three persons secretariat. Also, I think that people in secretariat should rotate every three months (maybe more, maybe less, we should talk about it). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*What involves the "daily work" of the general secretariat?
--[[User:LibertÃ |LibertÃ ]] 14:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

===General meetings on the wiki?===
* I think that our IRC General Meetings are not so useful because not all people have enough of free time at the particular moment. We have a wiki and I think that we should use it. According to my experience, I suggest three-phases wiki General Meetings: (1) one week for gathering proposals, (2) one week for discussions about proposals and (3) one week for voting (if voting is needed). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
** I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Voting and members===
* I agree with this and think it will be very useful. What sort of voting are we talking about, however? I'm very much opposed to majoritarian politics... [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 07:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I don't think that simple majority is a good solution. Consensus-like system should be good enough (I think that 80% majority is OK). But, as I remember, we didn't have any non-consensual decision through our almost three years of history ;) Also, a good questions are: who is voting?, which people are "us"? We should define at least a person per language who would be responsible for new people; or we should make some other mechanism... --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
* I think that the [http://rampart.co.nr rampART collective] constitution deals with that quite well. When you simply use their services you are a visitor, if you want to join you simply have to begin participating and on the second participation you are a part of it. Now they are quite weird, as it doesn't actually work this way in real life... but i think it would be a good thing. Let's say that if a person has at least 2 days of contritubions (whether that is articles or any other sort of contributions) the person is a part of the collective. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I learned one good lesson while participating on Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia: Until we were small and unknown project, we were very good. When we started to go to public, we became an easy target for people who were trying to heal their frustrations there... I don't want to talk a lot here about that experience, but I don't participate there since April. So, the point is to find a good defense positions for the community. Even we have much more similar political positions then any community on Wikipedia has, I know destructive anarchists (and what about non-anarchists who are willing to spend a lot of time to destruct one anarchist project?). So, if we want to have such fast adoption in the community, we need a fast exclusion, too... But, I think that better idea is to find some slower and safer method for adopting new members. Some of the ideas for thinking are:
**# Local adoption and local rules. This may mean, but not necessarily (and maybe better not) language-based local communities. In general, this should be a model of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/affinity_group affinity groups] (btw, we don't have that article on eng:). So, we should constitute some number of affinity groups (for the beginning, we may say that we have as many affinity groups as languages Anarchopedia has) and to leave to the particular groups a way of adoption of new members (which would become members of Anarchopedian community, too). Also, we should find some way for relatively fast recognizing of affinity groups: a procedure of one week voting after some group express desire to become Anarchopedian affinity group? (We should talk a lot more about this issue. This paragraph is just a scratch...) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
**# The crucial thing in the world full of hierarchies is to find a solution between openness and integrity of our own community. So, the previous model (above) may be a good one, but, for sure, it is not the only one. So, we should talk about possible models of organizing our community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Publicity of work===
* There is one more thing: If we have something which shouldn't be decided publicly (I know people who don't like to work publicly ;) ), then such decisions may be made on IRC. However, the main idea is to relax IRC decisions because of the main reason (see above). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 08:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
** I'm for public decisions for things that are public. For example the discussion on Anarchist Point of View must be public... but the discussion how we pay for something that needs to be paid for needs to be private if it names some people or something. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

===Time of the next session===
* <s>In that sense, I suggest that we make 4th General Meeting on IRC (for example, at Sunday, 22nd July) just to delegate three persons for temporary secretariat who would prepare the 5th General Meeting on wiki.</s> --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
* So, when would we have another session? For sure, after the a-camp, but when? Maybe to wait people to back from a-camp and to decide then? --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 06:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

===Transparency===
There will eventually be some major problems if Anarchopedia doesn't become more transparent. There needs to be a clear explanation, a '''single''' place where all the agreed rules are listed. At the very most it should be two places, one for the Anarchopedia as the whole, and one for the particular language. It should not be like Wikipedia where users learn the rules slowly as the time goes by, as this creates preferential treatment for the users that have already been a part of the project, and as such is in fact a form of hidden hierarchy. The rules that must be listed (whatever we decide these rules should say):
* Point of view on Anarchopedia
* Giving people software access priviledges
* Blocking people for vandalism
* How to propose changes to the rules
[[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 15:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Please see [[Anarchopedia:Policy]] [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 16:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

==Finances==
* We need to gather some money for hosting and domains... However, Libre should tell more where we are standing. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
**how do we organise the donations's data backup ? do i have to put that in clear (and the fact that all peoples can see it) or do i have to put the list in private just for anarchopedian peoples ? or do we put it on public/private anarchopedian-lists ? i think names don't have to be enounced in the donation's list, or maybe just pseudo (but no one could have put their pseudo when they have send their donation). problem is that, like i am the treasurer, it would need maybe some controls on money which go on accounts... you can trust in me, don't quiet. But if we were two peoples to verify money account (paypal, others), it would be best, maybe. -- '''[[User:Libre|Libre]] 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)'''

==Technical issues==
* Anarchopedia is taking a lot of Tachanka's CPU (sometimes 70%). The only relevant solution is to find some money and get more resources... See finances for details ;) --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*: This is a critical problem, I think. CPU usage is high but still we are not serving many pages per second. Our number of users is limited by the number of pages we can serve. I have enabled [http://anarchopedia.org/server-statistics this page] via the apache configuration, to estimate any speed improvements. Possible solutions:
*:# Compiling PHP or trying other PHP code optimization. (using php5-xcache meant a 3x speed up, but we are still below 2 pages served per second). More optimization should be possible by not compiling separately the code for each language-based anarchopedia.
*:# Installing and configuring an HTTP caching proxy like squid (as was used in the past), this should speed up especially the requests from search engine bots and the occasional readers, leaving more space for contributors.
*:# Rate limiting the requests from search engine bots.
*:# Changing from Mediawiki to a different, faster software (may not be easy).
*:# Trying a different version of Mediawiki.
*:# Hardware upgrade (eg. more RAM)
*:~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]'' 14:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
* We should set up a standard regarding the icons we use for certain actions of categories. This should be set up global, since the upload is on meta. This way we wonâ€™t fill up the hdds with useless images, and everything will become way more accessible. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
* People upload images with lowercase first letter... this makes them inaccessible ([[:Image:black cat.png]]) and this in turn leads to duplication ([[:Image:99051.jpg]]), can this be changed in any way... possibly just by making a note on the upload page saying that it's important to keep the first letter capital. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

===Server===
I'm not content with our server-place in USA. I also dislike a place in Europe and prefer a place in south/middle-america. How about Mexico (in example vientos.info) or Venezuela? --[[User:X|X]] 17:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

==Ideas==
* I opened test phase of "[[Anarchopedian blog]]". I think that we should talk about it at the linked page (at the moment nothing is there; I'll write something about it, but anyone who has some questions, ideas, suggestions etc. about this issue -- let (s)he feel free to start the page. The main idea of the blog is to gather community. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:Maybe you already know about this, maybe you don't. I've just found it now. http://anarchoblogs.protest.net/ [[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
*::Good point, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when the resources (specifically 'human resources') are not that great in our project yet. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
* Also, I think that we should start a project "[[people.anarchopedia.org]]", which should be a social networking site for anarchists, which would allow categorization by interests, ideas etc. What others think about it? I made a link to the page, so anyone interested in such project may add her/his comments there. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 19:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I don't know if this is such a good idea. I understand you are trying to get more people on anarchopedia, and this will definitely get them, but it wonâ€™t get the type of people that would actually contribute to anarchopedia. Theyâ€™ll basically just fill up their profile pages with useless junk, and use up the space on the servers for nothing. --[[User:Blindattack|Blindattack]] 08:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
*::Yes, this is always a problem. Maybe we should introduce blog now and to see how it is going with that... If our experience with blogs would be good enough (i.e. we got some new editors), maybe social public networking site wouldn't be so bad idea. I think that such things are needed by the online anarchist community and that we should try to make it. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 11:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
*:I wish to disagree with this. Let's think about who will actually blog. Most likely it will be only some of the people who are already on anarchopedia, it will not bring up more people. Social networking however, does help. The problem is that it needs to be very well throught through, and it should be something well done or not done at all. I think this topic has been discussed on #anarchopedia before. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

==Projects space==
I would like to add space on meta wiki that would be used on contact between the different apedias. A page where different apedias could explain their projects would be very helpful to understand others and maybe inspire from what they create. - [[User:Samarre-fr]]

: IÊ¼ll definitely second this proposal. I think that there needs to be enough autonomy for the decisions made in the different communities, but others should know of what is going on. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 10:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

==Are the projects saved?==
This one will maybe be answered without needing a general assembly, but I still have this question unresolved: are the projects saved somewhere so if the site is hacked, internet goes down or whatever, the texts will be available? - samarre

==ThreadMode==
I think that having people discuss articles in http://uesmod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ThreadMode is a great idea, and have articles look more like MeatballWiki-like discussions than "articles" which seems too much like NPOV to me. I believe we should include, welcome all points of view (except if they are to promote spam), but this view may be a bit flawed when it comes to authoritarians or people on the "side" of neutrality. But I think that things would be better with ThreadMode, not DocumentMode. Another thing is that we could eliminate talk pages and user talk pages (because user pages and mainspace pages will be discussions) which will save some server space. --[[User:Anonymity|'''<span style="font-family:FreeSans,'Bitstream Vera Sans';"><font color="#a00">A<font color="#a44">n<font color="#c22">o<font color="#b60">n<font color="#a77">y</font>m</font>i</font>t</font>y</font></span>''']] ''(aka Ionas_Freeman)'' 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't like that idea. There are already thousands upon thousands of forums for anarchist discussion. There are also wikis which have "All Points of View" policy. But currently there is nothing like Anarchopedia. If we will try to make this project like all the others, we will lose the diversity and any reason for people to be here. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Protection==
I believe that protection of pages should be a last resort, there should be a limited number of pages protected. Also protecting talk pages should not be allowed, as it disallows people from expressing something. I think that this should be one of the policies. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

==Anonymity==
===IP addresses in database===
I am currently working on the simple way to make the IP addresses stored in the database almost useless to the attacker who manages to get ahold of our database (either through social engineering or other means). My plan is to hash all the IP addresses before they get stored in the database. This way we can still compare if two IP addresses are in fact the same (allowing us to check for sockpoppetry, or to block spammers), but makes it more expensive to track down the person from the hash in the database. Negative aspects include that i'll probably have to make a slight hack in the code of MediaWiki (i will announce before doing it, and will definitely back everything up prior to that) which will make it more difficult to update to newer versions (as the hack will have to be replecated). The database aspect will be done with the trigger on mysql tables, so that change will be seemless. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
===freekiwiki===
Please accept my apologies for the slowness of the delivery of the workable [http://freekiwiki.sf.net freekiwiki], i am working on it, and hope to have a release which can work propperly in synchrony with MediaWiki. I do not have the release schedule, and cannot say when i will be done, as i am performing a major redesign at the moment. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

=== Compatibility etc. ===
The only thing which I would like to be implemented in all changes is the compatibility with MediaWiki code. If we don't have such compatibility, we wouldn't be able to upgrade MediaWiki, which usually includes a very basic things, like anti-spam prevention. The best way for doing so is to make an extension for MediaWiki. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should be possible to see if two addresses belongs to the same C class. I think that such solution was made by IRC daemon (on irc.indymedia.org). In brief, particular numbers inside of IPv4 notation should be encrypted. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:I have been writing a lengthy response to your post disagreeing with you, and realised that my IP hashing project won't help. If two people use the same IP they will still show up identical after the hash, and if the person can use proxy, nothing stops one from using proxy in the different C class. So here-by i am stopping the hash project. (see my proposal now below) [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::New CheckUser interface (our is very old) may see client software, too (or, at least, how client software introduces themselves to web server). Very often way for making (stupid) vandalism is to use dynamic IP address of one provider, which is usually inside of the same C class. So, having some kind of sum for each IP address may be very useful. Or, at least, having a separate sum for the first three numbers of an IP address (it is not so simple to crack 2^48 of combinations even with known algorithm). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, also, that one thing is encryption of MediaWiki database and the other thing is encryption of Apache logs. Without solving both things, the problem is not solved. --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

:Question: For how long do we keep the logs? Would it be possible to set up a simple script that would wipe the logs from January on Chinese New Year, and logs from February on April Fools? The same can be done with the IP addresses in the databases. I mean if after a month we still don't know if the person is a vandal or not, we won't learn that afterwards. I am not talking about IPs which were blocked, or even IPs of the users who aren't logged in, but rather the IPs which are stored for the logged in users in the recentchanges table. [[User:Beta M|Beta M]] 14:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
::Generally, until the disk is full (or until Anarchopedia is moving on some other server) and after that an Anarchopedian with good enough Internet connection and enough of space on their hard disk is backupping logs. My personal opinion about logs is that they are our history and that they should be kept somewhere out of servers (encrypted, whatever). However, if dominant opinion is to delete logs, it is OK for me (I understand privacy concerns). --[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] 17:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I also agree that we need to be compatible, but I cannot program, therefore, I don't think I can help. --[[User:Anonymity|Anon.]] | [[User talk:Anonymity|Talk]] ''([[Special:Emailuser/Anonymity|<font color="#d34700">@</font>]]'' 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Anarchopedia

2007-06-29T18:59:56Z

Libre: Reverted edits by 76.81.83.170 (Talk); changed back to last version by Rev 22

{{langs}}

'''Anarchopedia''' is a knowledge portal and online anarchist community. The project aims to build a multilingual encyclopedia, written cooperatively on the Internet, with a special focus on [[:eng:Anarchism|Anarchism]] and anarchist topics. This project is organized according to the means of [[:eng:unanimity|unanimity]], [[:eng:consensus|consensus]], [[:eng:voluntarism|voluntarism]], individual responsibility, and is founded upon the anarchist principles of [[:eng:direct democracy|direct democracy]] and [[:eng:autonomy|autonomy]].

==Nature of the Anarchopedia project==
===Significance of the name===

The word '''Anarchopedia''' is composed of the term â€œAnarchoâ€ (diminutive of anarchism/Anarchist), and of the term â€œpediaâ€, which comes from the ancient Greek ''paideia'' and meaning ''[[education]]'' (the project wants to be a kind of place to know, a base of knowledge of anarchism, even a place of exchange and studies on anarchism).

Anarchopedia means thus the idea that this encyclopaedia holds, by a whole of means (by the wiki), to allow the development of knowledge on anarchism.

===Tally of work of Anarchopedia===

Some of the articles were imported from [[Wikipedia]], and had to be reworked. This because it is not uncommon for articles on Wikipedia adopt pro-capitalist stances or to contain pro-authority bias, which are incompatible with the anarchist points of view.

[[Anarchopedia]] exists in various languages, including [[fra:|french]], [[eng:|english]], [[ger:|german]], [[pol:|polish]], [[ita:|italian]], [[rus:|russian]], [[spa:|spanish]] and others (but some little developed). A project exists or can exist for each language. A special multilingual wiki ([[m:|meta Anarchopedia]]) also exists, and can be used for inter-language coordination.

===Objectives of the Anarchopedia project===

An [[anarchistic encyclopaedia|anarchist encyclopedia]], the purpose of it is to clarify the subjects, the topics, to which the anarchistic movement usually refers. Among others: the organisational means specifically libertarian, the Actions or political theories suggested by the libertarians, of the history of the anarchists and anarchism, the social and economic questions, the anarchistic personalities and theorists, etc...

As an experiment in anarchistic management, Anarchopedia seeks to show how to create a successful website and a thriving community without resorting to social hierarchy as seen in other websites, while ensuring as much as possible the autonomy of the individuals and the groups involved in the project. This is what makes Anarchopedia different from other websites, and probably unique. The success or failure of this project will teach anarchists and political activists how to create Internet-based social networks according to anti-authoritarian principles.

===Characteristics of Anarchopedia===

The Anarchopedia project has specific characteristics which make it unique:

* The project aims to be an experiment in [[:eng:Anarchy|Anarchy]] and anarchistic management. The project is thus based on a Wiki (allowing a direct co-operative relation between editors and readers). A wiki allows creation and the modification by any person of any article. Wiki is a collective tool which makes it possible the anarchistic encyclopaedia to grow rich by work by each one and all, while specifying, while modifying or while adding to it of the articles. Anarchopedia does not have [[sysops]] (i.e. a power structure). All users have sysop permissions.

* Anarchopedia is not primarily intended as a â€œforum of discussionâ€ (if not outward journey on [http://yaff.net yaff.net]) nor a â€œWeb directoryâ€. Nevertheless, it is possible also to put comments on page of discussion for each article, at the time of dissent or for remarks about the treatment of an article. Anarchopedia is anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian.

* The articles of Anarchopedia are reusable according to terms' of the GNU Free Documentation License (whose name is also known in shortened form [[GFDL]]). Thus, an individual or an organization can use the contents of Anarchopedia, while conforming under the free Licence of documentation GNU. See [[Anarchopedia:Copyright]].

* [[Anarchistic points of view]] / [[APOV]]: as far as possible, any encyclopaedic writing in Anarchopedia must take part for one of the anarchistic point of view. The â€œneutrality of point of viewâ€ policy, such on wikipedia, is not considered too useful on Anarchopedia, because it relies on a central authority that should make decisions about the neutrality of an article and eventually carry out censorship when the article doesn't conform. Of course, it perhaps difficult to arrive to an anarchistic point of view in all the cases. On Anarchopedia, the writing rules aim at being appropriate to the rational people, even if those are not always of the same opinion. The anarchistic points of view indicate that all the facets of a discussed point must be evoked according to these points of view, and that the article must in no way of declaring, of implying or of even insinuating, that one from the points of view is that which is correct a priori. The anarchistic points of view do not imply however the representation with equality from these various points of view. Anarchopedia naturally grants place to from the traditional or recent anarchistic points of view, but nones from the being asserted point of view of certain worse anarchistic groupings (â€œanarchistâ€-capitalist, national-â€œanarchistsâ€, - and in the kind in reconversion, or reappropriation, to be made a new image -). Right-wing, pro-state, and pro-capitalist [[:en:point of view|POVs]] are not welcome on Anarchopedia. Moreover, if a point of view is for example only constant by certain groups of certain specific ideological tendencies, it will be described like that.

==Operation of Anarchopedia==
=== Modification of the articles ===
Concretely, each page of Anarchopedia has a button which any visitor, even not recorded, can click to modify, to add or remove what it contains. Each one can also create new pages, leading the site to grow.

For the edition of the pages, the wiki syntax, a kind of very simplified HTML language, makes it possible to format pages and to create links between them.

==== Principle of Wikis ====
Anarchopedia and its parallel projects are of the free â€œWikiWikiWebsâ€. Created in 1995 by â€œWard Cunninghamâ€, Wiki draws its name from the word hawaÃ¯en â€œWikiWikiâ€, which means â€œquicklyâ€. Developed originally by communities of free software developers, Wikis are dynamic Web sites, of which any visitor can modify the page which it is reading. Thanks to this characteristic, on Wiki, the limit between the reader and the author tends to disappear. The syntax of the wiki is much simpler than the â€œHTMLâ€, and it is enough to a few moments to learn it (two apostrophes to put in italic, three to boldface, two brakets for a links), nevertheless a toolbar is included in the interface to simplify the use of syntax (by buttons).

Anarchopedia functions with the free software â€œ[[:eng:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]]â€. The data of Anarchopedia (present in a database), all languages can be downloaded starting from the direction [[Anarchopedia:Technic|SERVER + /dev/db/ of each anarchopedia]].

===Monitoring of the quality of the articles===
The MediaWiki software, like all wiki-software, includes features that make it possible to facilitate the consultation and the management of the site. It is thus possible to constantly consult the last modifications made to the whole of the site (new pages, new contributions, recent Modificationsâ€¦).

In Anarchopedia, the participants add their contributions to those of the others. Thus, they correct the errors of other writers and work together on the topics possibly discussed by respecting APOV.

All the history of the contributions is preserved: successive versions of the text, authors, reasons for the modifications, dates. It can be consulted while clicking on the â€œhistory" button. This permanent device of safeguard makes it possible to return to the need to a preceding version. Thus, even in the presence of vandal, the encyclopaedia is not endangered.

The anarchopedians can specify which article they wish monitor for modification, often those on which they intervened. It is thus possible for them to periodicaly check the evolution of the contents of the articles which interest them. MediaWiki makes it possible to post the text modified between two versions, even if they are not followed.

The followed articles can thus be corrected if erroneous information entered, or if the quality of the article drops: style, orthography, poor presentation, lack of clearness, need for a synthesis of the data. This system of follow-up of the articles also makes it possible to locate the acts of vandalism, and to restore the preceding version of the text.

In the event of dissent on the contents of an article, a argued debate proceeds in the page of discussion annexed to the article. This discussion forms integral part of the encyclopaedia, and its reading can be instructive on the delicate points to treat in the contents of the article. This page is accessible via the button â€œdiscussionâ€.

===Participants===
The contributors can optionally create an account with a name and a password, so their modifications can be tracked and their contributions attributed. Registered contributors can profit from a personal page and additional functionalities. In fact, the majority of the contributors are registered. There are currently some contributors in differents languages.

There is no â€œchiefâ€ in the project Anarchopedia, the project is entirely self-managed by its voluntary participants, and aims to be as decentralized as possible in self-management. To contribute to Anarchopedia, it is sufficient to read some of the internal documentation and possibly create an account.

===An anarchistic encyclopaedia===
Anarchopedia is an [[anarchistic encyclopaedia]] in the political sense of the term : its operation is founded on the [[:en:autonomy|autonomy]] and the [[:en:self-management|self-management]] of Anarchopedians, and not on the [[:en:authority|authority]] (of some).

In this sense, it illustrates the famous saying of [[Pierre Joseph Proudhon]] : â€œ''Anarchy, it is the order, without the authority''â€ (Confessions of a revolutionist).

On the other hand, Anarchopedia is the opposite of an â€œanarchyâ€ within the meaning of a community struck by a state of disorder. Order is ensured by the individuals associated on anarchopedia.

Anarchopedians do not give orders to other anarchopedians. Mandates and tasks can be assigned to individuals during [[:Category:General Meetings|General Assemblies]].

==Anarchopedia and collective regulation==

===Why Anarchopedia doesn't break down ?===

By its open organization and because of the absence of holders of authority, Anarchopedia can appear like a project very fragile, ready to be broken down under the attacks of vandals, or with being submerged by contributions in disaccord with a general consensus. Anarchopedia undergoes, from time to time, the effect of individuals who seek degrade his contents, to even erase its pages. As for the them, they always showed less perseverance or persistence than Anarchopedians, so it is unlikely that they would be able to damage the project permanently.

On final, a report is essential: there are more Net surfers wishing to work for the interest of the realization of Anarchopedia, than people who seek to harm it.

===Why take part in Anarchopedia?===

With the first access, to devote time to Anarchopedia may not appear a particularly attractive activity. It is necessary:

* to experiment and learn the operating mode of wiki and anarchopedia,
* to show humility by accepting that its texts are modified by other participants,
* to accept that others can have another approach on a question that oneself,
* to respect radically different or opposite opinions which are often debated, under the Anarchist Points of view.
* to devote time to ungrateful tasks like the correction of the spelling mistakes or the errors of working.

==Criticisms==

The growing success of Anarchopedia led a great number of people to formulate a critical opinion on the reliability of the information presented in this encyclopaedia. The statute of Anarchopedia as a source of reference remains a subject of controversy. The principal objections are as follows:

* the absence of filtering of the editors according to their competences, which involves the risk of inaccuracies, and more generally the absence of a reading panel guaranteeing the quality of the articles,
* the heterogeneity of the quality of the articles,
* the preference for the [[consensus]] of the editors after a reasoned debate, rather than for the argument of authority,
* [[anarchistic points of view]], considered as an illusion or a political or cultural prejudice,
* the risk to seek the anarchistic [[consensus]] rather than the anarchistic [[truth]], and to support the relativism in the name of the anarchistic Point of view, even if it means to tolerate unfounded speeches on subjects concerned with personal philosophy, or propaganda for groups for example,
* the anonymity of the majority of the contributors,
* the vandalism, supported by the open nature of wiki.
* the risk to see groupings using Anarchopedia to make propaganda, or many geniuses autoclaimed to disseminate eccentric information,
* the systematic existence of skew in spite of the concern from the anarchistic point of view,
* apparent lack of responsibility and references compared with other encyclopaedias,
* skepticism on the capacity of Anarchopedia, considering its operation based on a collective regulation, to improve quality of the articles, even the prediction of an inescapable walk towards the mediocrity,
* a great number of articles are appeared as a compilation of rough information, without the effort of synthesis which should characterize an encyclopaedic text,
* the contents of Anarchopedia are closely related to the centers of interest of its contributors, from where lacks in the panorama of knowledge.

===Answers to the criticisms===

TODO

==Extent of the Anarchopedia project==

There are a number of language-local editions of Anarchopedia. Among them:

*[[m:|Anarchopedia]] (multi-lingual, for the discussions on the Anarchopedia project).
*[[eng:|english]],
*[[ger:|german]],
*[[pol:|polish]],
*[[ita:|italian]],
*[[rus:|russian]],
*[[spa:|spanish]],
*[[por:|portuguese]],
* Bahasa Indonesia
* Hrvatski
* Ð ÑƒÑÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹
* Ð¡Ñ€Ð¿ÑÐºÐ¸ / Srpski

==History==
===Antecedents===

The Anarchopedia project falls under a will to continue with â€œmodernâ€ means (Internet and wiki), the project of collection and organization of the knowledge on anarchism. The idea to gather the whole of knowledge on anarchism will be initiated by [[Sebastien Faure]] in the [[anarchistic encyclopaedia]] (1927), or by maitron in its works of history on the anarchists, and various anarchistic authors will gather documents or writings allowing a posteriori to carry out this base of knowledge on anarchism.

With the development of Internet, several people developed knowledge bases on anarchism by Internet (bibliotecs, writings, daily bleed, etc).

===Origin of the project===

Wikipedia will be another knowledge base under development, they will be one of the bases and inspirer of this project.

===Anarchopedia project===

[[User:Millosh|Milos Rancic]] launched the [http://meta.anarchopedia.org Anarchopedia project] (also as Anarchapedia) in ''[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2004-September/035299.html September 2004]'', with multiple languages, differing from wikipedia in that every user is granted sysop status; thus launching a direct experiment of anarchy.

Anarchopedia started in "September 2004", the anglophone wiki in November 2004, and several other projects carried out thereafter.

====Similar projects====

*A [http://encyclopedie.zaup.org parallel project], just in french language, and without sysop for all, was launched in november 2004 on [http://zaup.org zaup.org]. that project merged with the anarchopedia project on 12 March 2005.

*A [Indonesian parallel project], just in Indonesian language, was launched ??? on [???]. that project merged with the anarchopedia project on 17 September 2005.

*A [polish parallel project], just in polish language, was launched in ???? on [http://???? ????]. that project merged with the anarchopedia project on 28 August 2005.

*A [http://wiki.anarcho.dk parallel project], just in danish language, was launched at august 11 th in 2005 on [http://anarcko.dk anarko.dk]. that project merged with the anarchopedia project on 19 March 2006.

===Other forms of diffusion of Anarchopedia===

CD ? DVD ? P2P ? Papers ?

==advance of Anarchopedia==
===Outstanding dates of Anarchopedia===
*
*
*
*

===Principal indicators of the advance of Anarchopedia===

to be made, with the statisticsâ€¦

===Draft reports===

==See also==

In addition to this article, you can read some of the articles which intend describe individual aspects of '''Anarchopedia''':

*[[Anarchopedia:en:itself|Anarchopedia, itself]]
*[[Anarchopedia:en:purpose|Anarchopedia, purpose]]
*[[Anarchopedia:en:we|Anarchopedia, we]]
*[[Anarchopedia:en:policy|Anarchopedia, policy]]
*[[Anarchopedia:en:direct democracy|direct democracy]]
*[[Anarchopedia:en:Sysops|sysops]]
*[[:en:point of view|point of view]] (POV)
*[[:en:large public wiki|large public wiki]]
*[[Anarchopedia:en:faction|factions]]: [[Anarchopedia:en:Reds|Reds]], [[Anarchopedia:en:Pinks|Pinks]], [[Anarchopedia:en:Greens|Greens]], [[Anarchopedia:en:Blues|Blues]], [[Anarchopedia:en:Golds|Golds]], [[Anarchopedia:en:Trolls|Trolls]], [[Anarchopedia:en:Elves|Elves]]

==Bibliography==

[[pl:Anarchopedia]]
[[de:Anarchopedia]]
[[en:Anarchopedia]]
[[fr:Anarchopedia]]
[[it:Anarchopedia]]
[[id:Anarchopedia]]

[[Category:Anarchopedia]]

GFDL corpus access provider

2007-05-26T15:42:10Z

Libre: Reverted edits by 82.138.25.69 (Talk); changed back to last version by Libre

A '''GFDL corpus access provider''' or '''GFDLcap''' is a [[web service]] or other [[net media]], or potentially even [[email]] or [[CD-ROM]] distributor, that provides access to a large portion of the [[GFDL corpus]] [[open content]].

== current options ==

The best known of these is [[Wikipedia]]. There is often some confusion between that project and the corpus. ''This confusion is not only tolerated but created by its [[sysop power structure]], many of whom are implicated in [[sysop vandalism]]. Wikipedia likes to pretend it is the only such access provider.''

[[Wikinfo]] and [[Anarchopedia:Itself]] are lesser known '''access provider'''s, in stricter compliance with the GFDL, to the degree that is possible given that it relies on [[XML export]] by [[Wikipedia]] for most content.

[[Wikinfo]] takes a [[sympathetic point of view]], refusing to mix critical and sympathetic views in an article. ''This is a direct challenge to the [[neutral point of view]] [[wiki ideology]] that is promoted by Wikipedia, since that view gives maximum power to those who claim to be 'neutral' but are in a position of technologically granted power.''

[[Anarchopedia:Itself|Here at Anarchopedia]] [[Anarchopedia:We|we - whoever that is]] keep the critical and sympathetic views together but do not put a [[sysop power structure]] in charge of editorial decisions like [[deletion policy]] or who is a [[troll]] and what [[alleged or collective identity]] they do and do not share. ''See [[Anarchopedia:troll IP]], [[Anarchopedia:troll ID]] and [[Anarchopedia:faction]] and [[Anarchopedia:tendency]] for more on these questions and how we resolve Wikipedia's many authority and hierarchy problems in a more democratic way.''

Other corpus access providers focus on particular subsets of the material, and do not have facilities to automatically import via the Wikipedia interface:
*[[Consumerpedia]]
*[[Disinfopedia]]
*[[Consumerium]]
*[[Metaweb]]

In addition, there are many [[Wikipedia mirror]]s that do not provide edit access but read-only access. These might or might not be considered to be true '''access providers''' but in any case some of them, like [[NationMaster]] have added a lot of information that may be of interest for some purposes.

== challenges ==

There are several challenges common to all '''GFDL corpus access provider'''s:
*agreeing on a [[wikitext standard]] and priorities to guide [[wiki code]] changes to accomodate it; ''[[GetWiki]] and [[MediaWiki]] are so far the only options.''
*meeting the rigid terms of the [[GFDL]] itself, especially with regard to [[attribution]] and [[source access]], i.e. to the original text written in the [[wikitext standard]], not the [[HTML]] form into which it is rendered for [[printable page|print]]s or presentation.
::lack of [[interwiki identity standard]] makes attribution quite unreliable
::having one [[standard wiki URI]] from which to retrieve the source, that can be easily predicted and made permanent
::[[interwiki link standard]]s so that differently-purposed or POV'd [[large public wiki]]s can link to each other
*resolving [[point of view]] differences, to which there are several approaches:
::[[neutral point of view]] tries to do this always within one article, attributing disputed claims, but of course, a [[systemic bias]] then applies
::[[multiple point of view]] tries to separate views into articles of their own, e.g. as at [[Metaweb]] or via the "faction" system proposed at some wikis
::[[sympathetic point of view]] tries to separate positive and negative views, whatever that means
*dealing with [[server load]], especially for [[full text search]]
*inadequate PHP-based software like [[MediaWiki]] and [[GetWiki]] - a concern [[Metaweb]]'s supporters are paying particular attention to
*compiling and [[collaborative filter]]ing to present adapted articles - a concern [[Consumerium]] takes very seriously
*[[governance]] problems in deal with a very large group of editors, ''see [[rule of 150]] for one possible limit to this''
*Tracking with change to the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole, so that the best material can be copied into those services interested in presenting it to their users.

== future integration ==

There are proposals extant to track all changes to the GFDL corpus in any of the known '''access providers''', and perhaps simplify signup for [[jabber]] or other services that could serve as basis for [[interwiki identity standard]]. Such proposals are simplified by an [[interwiki link standard]] and [[standard wiki URI]], though they are not strictly required simply for tracking.

There are also proposals to work with [[FSF]] and [[Creative Commons]] much more closely to avoid abuses of the [[GFDL]]'s terms and spirit.

== External links ==

* [http://www.gnu.org/encyclopedia/announcement.html Richard Stallman's initial plans for the GFDL corpus]
* [http://www.arena.org.ar/gnupedia-historia.html History of the first GFDLcap, GNUpedia] (Spanish - [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arena.org.ar%2Fgnupedia-historia.html+&langpair=es%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools english translation])

Probably the best reference on this question is [http://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/GFDL_corpus_access_provider en: CreativeCommons: GFDL corpus access provider]] since [[Creative Commons]] and their [[Common Content]] initiative and [[CC-by-sa]] license provide a clear alternative to [[GFDL]] and they have a strong motive to work closely with all such access providers to achieve [[dual license]]d GFDL and [[CC-by-sa content]].

Talk:Main Page/index.php

2007-05-17T08:10:21Z

Libre:

article protected cause spam

GFDL corpus access provider

2007-05-17T07:28:06Z

Libre: Reverted edits by 210.169.252.101 (Talk); changed back to last version by X

Main Pageâ€Œ

2007-05-17T07:11:04Z

Libre: Reverted edits by 68.225.249.101 (Talk); changed back to last version by Rev 22

<div style="border:1px solid #444444;margin:10px;padding:0.1em">
{|width="100%" style="text-align: center;padding:0.8em" cellspacing="14px"
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[deu:|Deutschsprachige Anarchopedia]]'''</div>Anarchopedia ist ein offenes Wissensportal fÃ¼r und von AnarchistInnen.
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[fra:|Anarchopedia francophone]]'''</div> c'est un projet coopÃ©ratif et anarchiste de rÃ©alisation d'une base de connaissance ouverte sur des sujets liÃ©s Ã l'[[:fra:anarchisme|anarchisme]].
|width="33%"|A People's Encyclopedia.<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[eng:|Anarchopedia in English]]'''</div>Anarchopedia is an open knowledge-portal and online anarchist community.
|-
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[pol:|Polska]]'''</div>Polska wersja kompedium wiedzy o anarchizmie
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[:spa:Portada|Anarchopedia en Español]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|L'enciclopedia della gente.<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[ita:|Anarchopedia in Italiano]]'''</div>Anarchopedia Ã¨ il portale aperto del sapere, un progetto anarchico e cooperativo per la creazione di una enciclopedia multilingue
|-
|width="33%"|Uma EnciclopÃ©dia Popular<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[por:|Anarchopedia em portuguÃªs]]'''</div>Um projeto cooperativo para a criaÃ§Ã£o de um portal de conhecimento aberto e comunidade ''online'' anarquista.
|width="33%" rowspan="2"|[[Image:Anarchopedia.png]]</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[epo:|Anarchopedia en Esperanto]]'''</div>
La projekto Anarchopedia temas pri enciklopedio plurlingva - specife Anarkiisma - kiu celas klarigi la temojn kiujn la anarkiisma movado traktas kutime.
|-
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[ind:Halaman_Utama|Bahasa Indonesia]]'''</div>Anarchopedia adalah sebuah proyek pengembangan portal pengetahuan terbuka dan komunitas anarkis online.
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[lit:|LietuviÅ³]]'''</div>Anarchopedija tai atviras Å¾iniÅ³ portalas arba internetinÄ— enciklopedija, nuolat pildoma ir tobulinama savanoriÅ¡komis pastangomis.
|-
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[rus:|Ð ÑƒÑÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[ara:|Ø£Ù†Ø§Ø±Ø´ÙˆØ¨ÙŠØ¯ÙŠØ§]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[dan:|Dansk]]'''</div>
|-
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[bos:|Bosanski]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[hrv:|Hrvatski]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[srp:|Ð¡Ñ€Ð¿ÑÐºÐ¸ / Srpski]]'''</div>
|-
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[gre:|Î‘Î½Î±ÏÏ‡Î¿Ï€Î±Î¯Î´ÎµÎ¹Î±]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[jpn:|æ—¥æœ¬èªž]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[dut:|Nederlands]]'''</div>
|-
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[swe:|Svenska]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[zho:|ä¸æ–‡]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[nno:|Nynorsk]]'''</div>
|-
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%"> </div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%">'''[[rum:|RomÃ¢nÄƒ]]'''</div>
|width="33%"|<div style="font-size: 110%"> </div>
|}

{|border="0" cellspacing="0" style="border:1px solid #444444;margin:4em 1em 1em 1em;padding:1em"
|style="padding:1em 2em 1em 1em" width="40%" |
This [[Anarchopedia]] section is called '''"Meta.Anarchopedia"''' and is the place for general discussion about Anarchopedia.
<div style="border: 2px solid red;padding:0.7em">If you want to put some article in [[:eng:English language|English]], please use '''[[:eng:Main Page|English Anarchopedia]]'''. </div>
All the encyclopedic articles in other languages should be put in the language based Anarchopedias.

<div style="border-top:1px solid #444444;padding-top:1em">

'''Community'''


*Chat:
#<code> [irc://irc.indymedia.org/anarchopedia Server : irc.indymedia.org ; Channel : #anarchopedia] (SSL Port:994) ; or by [http://chat.indymedia.org/?chans=anarchopedia web]</code>
#<code> [irc://irc.indymedia.org/coders Server : irc.indymedia.org ; Channel : #coders] (SSL Port:994) </code>
#<code> [irc://irc.freenode.net/anarchopedia Server : irc.freenode.net ; Channel : #anarchopedia]</code>
<br />
<small>''If you want to make project related to Anarchopedia, please, write about your proposal at the page [[Anarchopedia:en:proposal for new project|proposal for new project]].''</small>
</div>
|valign="top" style="border-left:1px solid #444444"|
<div >
<div style="text-align:center;margin-bottom:1em">'''Events and Notes'''</div>
{{events and notes}}
<div style="text-align:right;margin-bottom:1em"><small>[[Archives of events and notes|archives]] | [http://meta.anarchopedia.org/index.php/Template:events_and_notes?action=edit edit]</small></div>

<div style="border-top:1px solid #444444;padding:1em;margin:0 1em 0 2em">
'''[[Anarchopedia:en:Network|coordination]]''' - [[Anarchopedia:en:itself|itself]] - [[Anarchopedia:en:purpose|purpose]] - [[Anarchopedia:en:we|we]] - [[Anarchopedia:Workshops|workshops]] - [[Anarchopedia:en:policy|policy]] - [[Anarchopedia:en:direct democracy|direct democracy]] - [[Anarchopedia:en:sysops|sysops]] - [[Anarchopedia:en:point of view|point of view]] - [[Anarchopedia:Copyright problems|copyright problems]]
</div>
|}
</div>

__NOTOC__
__NOEDITSECTION__
[[ar:Ø§Ù„ØµÙØØ© Ø§Ù„Ø±Ø¦ÙŠØ³ÙŠØ©]]
[[id:Halaman Utama]]
[[bs:Glavna_strana]]
[[zh:é¦–é¡µ]]
[[da:Forside]]
[[de:Hauptseite]]
[[el:Î‘ÏÏ‡Î¹ÎºÎ® ÏƒÎµÎ»Î¯Î´Î±]]
[[en:Main Page]]
[[es:Portada]]
[[eo:ÄˆefpaÄo]]
[[fr:Accueil]]
[[hr:Glavna strana]]
[[it:Prima Pagina]]
[[ja:ãƒ¡ã‚¤ãƒ³ãƒšãƒ¼ã‚¸]]
[[lt:index.php/PradÅ¾ia]]
[[nl:Hoofdpagina]]
[[no:Hovedside]]
[[nn:Hovudside]]
[[pl:Strona gÅ‚Ã³wna]]
[[pt:PÃ¡gina principal]]
[[ro:Pagina principalÄƒ]]
[[ru:Ð—Ð°Ð³Ð»Ð°Ð²Ð½Ð°Ñ ÑÑ‚Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ†Ð°]]
[[sr:Ð“Ð»Ð°Ð²Ð½Ð° ÑÑ‚Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ð°]]
[[sv:Huvudsida]]

Anarchopedia:Tech-Report

2007-05-16T20:18:07Z

Libre:

==2007/May==
*So i hope that i fixed all mistakes in search pages of all languages. Please tell if You find more. --[[User:X|X]] 16:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

*I found a solution for the question-mark-problem in article names. I changed Apache-config again and wrote a little php-tool for including in index.php. You can test it on Greece Anarchopedia. If nobody find new mistakes, I include it all languages. --[[User:X|X]] 23:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
*:OK... I fixed the recursive call for editing function, please tell if you find more mistakes. --[[User:X|X]] 00:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

*new problem in fra: about <nowiki>"<references>"</nowiki> which give strange words : "''Kesalahan pengutipan 5; Kesalahan masukan; seharusnya tidak ada''". There's maybe a problem on the mediawiki version ? [[User:Libre|Libre]] 20:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

==2007/April==
*I fixed the mistake (the index.php-problem) on server-configuration for Lietvian Anarchopedia.
*I also removed "index.php" for default path. Default is now for all languages
<nowiki>http://lng.anarchopedia.org/article-name</nowiki>
*I also removed google-map-plugin in German Anarchopedia. We don't need spies. ;-)
--[[User:X|X]] 16:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Sandbox

2007-03-09T21:07:38Z

Libre:

protected : cause spam.

Esperanto

2007-01-17T21:11:57Z

Libre: eo:

[[Image:espe.JPG|right]]
__NOTOC__

Mia amikoj, tio estas kurso de [[:eo:Esperanto|esperanto el anarchopedio]].<br />
Lerni esperanto estas tre facila. Esperanto habas tre malsaga gramatiko.

===Lessons===
* Lesson 1 : [[Esperanto - Lesson 1|eng]] <small> - [[Esperanto - Lesson 1/deu|deu]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 1/fra|fra]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 1/ita|ita]] - ...</small>
* Lesson 2 : [[Esperanto - Lesson 2|eng]] <small> - [[Esperanto - Lesson 2/deu|deu]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 2/fra|fra]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 2/ita|ita]] - ...</small>
*Lesson 3 : [[Esperanto - Lesson 3|eng]] <small> - [[Esperanto - Lesson 3/deu|deu]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 3/fra|fra]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 3/ita|ita]] - ...</small>
*Lesson 4 : [[Esperanto - Lesson 4|eng]] <small> - [[Esperanto - Lesson 4/deu|deu]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 4/fra|fra]] - [[Esperanto - Lesson 4/ita|ita]] - ...</small>
*Lesson 5 : [[Esperanto - Lesson 5|eng]]

===Tests===
*('''en''') [[Esperanto - Test 1|Test 1]]
*('''en''') [[Esperanto - Test 2|Test 2]]
*('''en''') [[Esperanto - Test 3|Test 3]]
*('''en''') [[Esperanto - Test 4|Test 4]]

===Studantoj===
#~''[[User:Rev 22|Rev 22]]''
#''[[User:Blackredisbeautiful|blackredisbeautiful]]''
#<strike>''[[User:Doud|doud]]''</strike> : I'm off. i'm trying lojban actually...

==links==
*[http://www.cursodeesperanto.com.br/bazo/index.html?de Kurso de Esperanto] a computer program with audio files
*[http://fr.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cat%C3%A9gorie:Esp%C3%A9ranto lessons in french]

[[Category:workshop]]

Site support/ita

2006-12-31T16:52:43Z

Libre: #redirect :it:Anarchopedia:Site support

#redirect [[:it:Anarchopedia:Site support]]

Anarchopedia talk:Site support

2006-12-18T20:56:59Z

Libre: site support in all languages