User talk:Daniel Mietchen/bot-recent: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Daniel Mietchen
imported>D. Matt Innis
(→‎approval discussion: additional email approval discussion)
Line 6: Line 6:
===approval discussion===
===approval discussion===
<pre>
<pre>
Daniel Mietchen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 10:36 PM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
> 
>> Okay, if we create a general bot account,
>>
>> 1) what would we name it?
>>   
> Generalist Bot
> 
That sounds so... general :) ... Since this account is going to be used for various maintenance features, how about Maintenance bot?
> 
>> 2) who would have access to it?
>>   
> Let's start with me. Later on, this should be the Bot Manager and his deputies.
> 
Okay, let's put me on the list, too, for now, although I have no earthly idea why.
> 
>> 3) under what circumstances could we shut it down (or more importantly, does
>> anything bad happen IF we have to shut it down?)
>>   
> The easiest way for you to shut it down would be to block the account
> temporarily for some minutes - the script will then receive a server
> access error and stop executing (We can use one of the chunks of this
> one to test this).
> 
So any sysop can shut it down.  We should put instructions on the bot user page..
> 
>> Will it be able to start
>> where it left off?
>>   
> Yes. I will have to do this manually.
> 
okay.
> 
>> 4) how do we warn people about how to shut it down and who will be watching
>> it?
>>   
> The point of automation is not having to watch or interfere
> constantly. Given that over 100 test edits went smoothly, I am
> confident the script can be run without oversight, though I will
> certainly keep track of error messages that may come up.
>
> At the Wikipedias, they have a stop button for bots but I do not know
> how this is coded or operated. In the long run, I envision something
> like this, or having the script read a value from a page on the wiki
> which determines whether it will continue or not.
> However, with me currently being the only one doing automated edits, I
> do not see this as urgent, especially given that the antidote can undo
> any changes made by the script.
> 
That's what I thought...  that is the scary part (that no-one will be watching).  I agree the antidote feature is a good idea for this purpose and we should likely require this in all bots especially until we can assure that it will stop itself.
I think I'm about ready, how about you?
As a test to see if we are going to cause any wiki problems, let's try running it for a two hour period starting when you want and wait a few hours then try running it for a little while during a peak time and see what happens... what do you think?
Matt
> 
>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>   
>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 4:51 PM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>     
>>>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 3:03 AM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
>>>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>>>> This is 7300 edits, by definition a bot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>           
>>>>> OK, a bot - I added the 500 edit limit to save others the potential
>>>>> annoyance of seeing the Related Changes cluttered with more than 500
>>>>> automated edits, and had forgotten about that aspect now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>> Agree about the annoyance, and that is part of the reason for the bot
>>>> policy
>>>> in the first place; to try and avoid the annoyance.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> yes.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>> It does slow down the
>>>> wiki as well.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> I know that it does in theory, but have never heard the complaint at
>>> CZ, nor seen actual data on this.
>>> My impression was that the wiki is set up to handle much larger
>>> numbers of edits than we typically have in a given period of time, and
>>> that the my scripts have so far operated within this safety margin
>>> (when running scripts/ bots, I never received an error message
>>> indicative of server overload, while I often experience the wiki being
>>> slow when no automated edits are being done by anyone).
>>>
>>> Anyway, the standard way of dealing with server load is to change the
>>> -pt:1 in the command (pause time, which defines the number of seconds
>>> the script pauses between processing two consecutive edits). Most
>>> Wikipedias use values around 10 or, during peak hours, even 20 or 30.
>>> I would assume (I have no data on this) that setting it to 3 would be
>>> a sufficient reduction in server load for the present CZ. Of course,
>>> this means the total run time would change to about 21h.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>> Can this be run several times for about an 30 minutes each
>>>> time during a time when the wiki is not as busy?
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> It can, of course, but there are times (around 7AM-3PM UCT) where I am
>>> often alone on the wiki, or with just one or two others. Then, doing
>>> it in larger chunks probably wouldn't annoy anyone, even with pt:1.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>>>         
>>>>>> If we create a bot, we can flag it as a bot and run it at certain
>>>>>> times,
>>>>>> right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>           
>>>>> As just explained in a previous mail, it would be run only once.
>>>>> Creating a _separate_ bot account in such cases is not a good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>> See question above.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>> I see the currently discussed code as a "well-defined minor job" in
>>>>> the sense of point 3 of
>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Bot_policy and think it could be
>>>>> performed equally well from the "maintenance bot" mentioned therein
>>>>> (which I would now rather call Generalist bot) that is dedicated to
>>>>> such minor jobs, or it could be performed as a one-time minor task (as
>>>>> opposed to the recurring major one) of the Related Articles Bot, to
>>>>> which it functionally belongs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>> This sounds like a good idea.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>> So I suggest to set up the Related Articles Bot now (do you still have
>>>>> my application for it?) and run it from there, since the idea of a
>>>>> maintenance bot or Generalist bot has not received much thought yet.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>> We could also set up a Generalist Bot account now and run this same
>>>> script?
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> yes.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>>  I realize that you are very interested in just running the darn script
>>>> and
>>>> getting this over with, but I am more interested in setting up the
>>>> process
>>>> so I don't have to have this discussion several more times.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> fair enough.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>>  What I need is
>>>> to make sure that any bot that you are intending to run does not result
>>>> in
>>>> users calling constables to shut it down like last time.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> I hope that we will soon have procedures in place which do not call the
>>> constable in such cases, but where all automated actions are vetted by a
>>> bot manager before they are being performed. Here, also the test wiki may
>>> be an interesting tool, but I haven't explored this option yet.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>>  The complaints
>>>> that we had before were related to 1) making changes that were not
>>>> wanted,
>>>> 2) clogging the related changes page with bot activity, and 3) slowing
>>>> the
>>>> wiki down.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> You know that I didn't know the details, especially 3. And for any
>>> dispute in content, it has been time-honoured practice to leave a note
>>> on the talk page of articles or Citizens concerned - why not in case
>>> of the bot activities??
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>>  1) has passed,
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> dunno.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>> 2) can be fixed with a bot that does not show up
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> yes.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>> in related changes, and 3) since this will run for about 7 hours, we
>>>> could
>>>> run it in smaller pieces.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> yes.
>>>
----
This is 7300 edits, by definition a bot.
This is 7300 edits, by definition a bot.


Revision as of 16:28, 10 January 2010

Add_Workgroup_to_Related_Articles_bot

Hi Daniel, I saw that you added a statement about an antidote to a test edit. We should make sure that works, too. D. Matt Innis 21:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. --Daniel Mietchen 21:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

approval discussion

Daniel Mietchen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 10:36 PM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>  
>> Okay, if we create a general bot account,
>>
>> 1) what would we name it?
>>     
> Generalist Bot
>   
That sounds so... general :) ... Since this account is going to be used for various maintenance features, how about Maintenance bot?
>  
>> 2) who would have access to it?
>>     
> Let's start with me. Later on, this should be the Bot Manager and his deputies.
>   
Okay, let's put me on the list, too, for now, although I have no earthly idea why.
>  
>> 3) under what circumstances could we shut it down (or more importantly, does
>> anything bad happen IF we have to shut it down?)
>>     
> The easiest way for you to shut it down would be to block the account
> temporarily for some minutes - the script will then receive a server
> access error and stop executing (We can use one of the chunks of this
> one to test this).
>   
So any sysop can shut it down.  We should put instructions on the bot user page..
>  
>> Will it be able to start
>> where it left off?
>>     
> Yes. I will have to do this manually.
>   
okay.
>  
>> 4) how do we warn people about how to shut it down and who will be watching
>> it?
>>     
> The point of automation is not having to watch or interfere
> constantly. Given that over 100 test edits went smoothly, I am
> confident the script can be run without oversight, though I will
> certainly keep track of error messages that may come up.
>
> At the Wikipedias, they have a stop button for bots but I do not know
> how this is coded or operated. In the long run, I envision something
> like this, or having the script read a value from a page on the wiki
> which determines whether it will continue or not.
> However, with me currently being the only one doing automated edits, I
> do not see this as urgent, especially given that the antidote can undo
> any changes made by the script.
>   
That's what I thought...  that is the scary part (that no-one will be watching).  I agree the antidote feature is a good idea for this purpose and we should likely require this in all bots especially until we can assure that it will stop itself.

I think I'm about ready, how about you?

As a test to see if we are going to cause any wiki problems, let's try running it for a two hour period starting when you want and wait a few hours then try running it for a little while during a peak time and see what happens... what do you think?

Matt


>  
>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>    
>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 4:51 PM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 3:03 AM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
>>>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>> This is 7300 edits, by definition a bot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>>> OK, a bot - I added the 500 edit limit to save others the potential
>>>>> annoyance of seeing the Related Changes cluttered with more than 500
>>>>> automated edits, and had forgotten about that aspect now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> Agree about the annoyance, and that is part of the reason for the bot
>>>> policy
>>>> in the first place; to try and avoid the annoyance.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> yes.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>> It does slow down the
>>>> wiki as well.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> I know that it does in theory, but have never heard the complaint at
>>> CZ, nor seen actual data on this.
>>> My impression was that the wiki is set up to handle much larger
>>> numbers of edits than we typically have in a given period of time, and
>>> that the my scripts have so far operated within this safety margin
>>> (when running scripts/ bots, I never received an error message
>>> indicative of server overload, while I often experience the wiki being
>>> slow when no automated edits are being done by anyone).
>>>
>>> Anyway, the standard way of dealing with server load is to change the
>>> -pt:1 in the command (pause time, which defines the number of seconds
>>> the script pauses between processing two consecutive edits). Most
>>> Wikipedias use values around 10 or, during peak hours, even 20 or 30.
>>> I would assume (I have no data on this) that setting it to 3 would be
>>> a sufficient reduction in server load for the present CZ. Of course,
>>> this means the total run time would change to about 21h.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>> Can this be run several times for about an 30 minutes each
>>>> time during a time when the wiki is not as busy?
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> It can, of course, but there are times (around 7AM-3PM UCT) where I am
>>> often alone on the wiki, or with just one or two others. Then, doing
>>> it in larger chunks probably wouldn't annoy anyone, even with pt:1.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>>>> If we create a bot, we can flag it as a bot and run it at certain
>>>>>> times,
>>>>>> right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>>> As just explained in a previous mail, it would be run only once.
>>>>> Creating a _separate_ bot account in such cases is not a good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> See question above.
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> I see the currently discussed code as a "well-defined minor job" in
>>>>> the sense of point 3 of
>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Bot_policy and think it could be
>>>>> performed equally well from the "maintenance bot" mentioned therein
>>>>> (which I would now rather call Generalist bot) that is dedicated to
>>>>> such minor jobs, or it could be performed as a one-time minor task (as
>>>>> opposed to the recurring major one) of the Related Articles Bot, to
>>>>> which it functionally belongs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> This sounds like a good idea.
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> So I suggest to set up the Related Articles Bot now (do you still have
>>>>> my application for it?) and run it from there, since the idea of a
>>>>> maintenance bot or Generalist bot has not received much thought yet.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> We could also set up a Generalist Bot account now and run this same
>>>> script?
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> yes.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>>  I realize that you are very interested in just running the darn script
>>>> and
>>>> getting this over with, but I am more interested in setting up the
>>>> process
>>>> so I don't have to have this discussion several more times.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> fair enough.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>>  What I need is
>>>> to make sure that any bot that you are intending to run does not result
>>>> in
>>>> users calling constables to shut it down like last time.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> I hope that we will soon have procedures in place which do not call the
>>> constable in such cases, but where all automated actions are vetted by a
>>> bot manager before they are being performed. Here, also the test wiki may
>>> be an interesting tool, but I haven't explored this option yet.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>>  The complaints
>>>> that we had before were related to 1) making changes that were not
>>>> wanted,
>>>> 2) clogging the related changes page with bot activity, and 3) slowing
>>>> the
>>>> wiki down.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> You know that I didn't know the details, especially 3. And for any
>>> dispute in content, it has been time-honoured practice to leave a note
>>> on the talk page of articles or Citizens concerned - why not in case
>>> of the bot activities??
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>>  1) has passed,
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> dunno.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>> 2) can be fixed with a bot that does not show up
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> yes.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>> in related changes, and 3) since this will run for about 7 hours, we
>>>> could
>>>> run it in smaller pieces.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> yes.
>>>

----
This is 7300 edits, by definition a bot.

If we create a bot, we can flag it as a bot and run it at certain times, right?

Matt

Daniel Mietchen wrote:
> both definitions linked from
> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Bot_policy -
> the difference is, in brief: script for once, bot for regular action.
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 2:18 AM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>  
>> What's the difference between a bot and a script?
>>
>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>    
>>> All bots yes, but not scripts - that's just too tedious.
>>> For definitions, see
>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Bot_policy .
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 2:04 AM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>> Are we not expecting that one day ALL bots will be separate accounts?
>>>>
>>>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> No, it is a one-time script, not a regular one.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 1:59 AM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
>>>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Excellent, sorry I missed that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you think we should create a bot account for this one?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/bot-recent#Planned
>>>>>>> links to
>>>>>>> them:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Special:Contributions&offset=2010-01-08+12%3A53%3A04%2B00&limit=193&target=Daniel+Mietchen&month=&year=
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 1:51 AM, The Citizendium Constabulatory [131]
>>>>>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>> Give me a link to the test articles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>> It is documented in the edit summaries: I ran the command listed at
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/bot-recent#Planned
>>>>>>>>> , and just added a link to the test edits.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 1:31 AM, The Citizendium Constabulatory
>>>>>>>>> [131]
>>>>>>>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>> Have you (or can you) document the test somewhere?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Matt,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> no trouble - script worked as expected (though I tried, on top of
>>>>>>>>>>> it,
>>>>>>>>>>> to number the test edits in the edit summary, which did not work
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>> intended, so I skipped the numbering).
>>>>>>>>>>> An example is at
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Adriatic_Sea/Related_Articles&diff=prev&oldid=100616933
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 11:28 PM, The Citizendium Constabulatory
>>>>>>>>>>> [131]
>>>>>>>>>>> <constables@citizendium.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Danel,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any trouble with the test edits?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel Mietchen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                        
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also ran about 20 manually controlled and 100 automated test
>>>>>>>>>>>>> edits
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and will wait for your approval to run the script on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> remaining
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ca.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7300 entries, which will take about 7h.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Daniel Mietchen
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <daniel.mietchen@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Update:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Latest and tested version of the code at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/bot-recent#Planned
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No edit made yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 12:03 AM, Daniel Mietchen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <daniel.mietchen@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                            
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Cops,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish to run a script that does this change
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=1_Timothy_%28Bible%29%2FRelated_Articles&diff=100616602&oldid=100570370
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for all pages listed at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:Bot-created_Related_Articles_subpages
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> , so as to allow a listing of the bot-created pages by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> workgroup.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The command would be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> python replace.py -cat:Bot-created_Related_Articles_subpages
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -regex
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "[[Category:Bot-created Related Articles subpages]]"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "{{Bot-created_related_article_subpage}}" -summary:"Robot:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [[CZ:Workgroups]] to bot-created Related Articles subpage"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I will run ten pages first and then 100 pages (for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> testing)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going for all (which will take several hours).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that I consider this a script, not a bot, but to avoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confusion,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I ask for your permission to run it anyway.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Daniel_Mietchen/bot-recent&oldid=716664"