text:
Hermann Kutter

Hermann Kutter (1863–1931) was a Swiss Protestant theologian. Together with Leonhard Ragaz, he was one of the founders of Christian socialism in Switzerland. He was heavily influenced by Christoph Blumhardt. He combined Blumhardt's expectation of a coming Kingdom of God with a belief in socialist progress. He saw social democracy as a "tool" of the living God, and its followers as unwitting servants of God. He authored 11 books.

Early life and academic pursuits
Hermann Kutter, born on September 12, 1863, in Bern, Switzerland, was the son of Wilhelm Rudolf and Maria Albertine König. Raised in a pietistic household, Kutter's formative years were deeply influenced by the religious atmosphere of his family. His academic journey led him to study theology in Basel and Berlin, culminating in a Licentiate in Theology earned in 1896. Ordained in 1886, Kutter commenced his pastoral career, beginning in Vinelz in 1887 and later serving at Zürich's Neumünster from 1898 to 1926. His early inclination towards academia was evident, driven by a desire for a broader understanding of faith and spirituality.

Theological contributions and social engagement
Hermann Kutter's theological outlook was molded by encounters with thinkers like Christoph Blumhardt and philosophical influences from Kant, Fichte, and Schelling. Notably, his work "Das Unmittelbare, eine Menschheitsfrage" (1902) challenged prevailing theological intellectualism, advocating for a direct experience of the divine. Kutter's engagement extended beyond theology; in "Sie müssen" (1904), he expressed support for social democracy as a divine instrument. His publication "Wir Pfarrer" (1907) cautioned against narrow social pastoral activities, emphasizing the preaching of a living God. However, political differences emerged, leading to a distancing from Leonhard Ragaz during World War I. Despite this, Kutter's lasting impact on dialectical theology and his role as a prominent figure in Swiss religious socialism endure as key aspects of his legacy. In recognition of his contributions, he received an honorary doctorate in theology from the University of Zurich in 1923.

Philosophy
Under the impression of a combination of the Christian expectation of the Kingdom of God, the life philosophies of the time, and the socialistic faith in the future of the younger Blumhardt, as well as the philosophy of German idealism, Kutter reached a dynamic view of God: God, who through Christ penetrates humankind and the world in eternal reality is the only reality of life. With this theocentric theology Kutter paved the way for so-called "dialectical theology" (Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Eduard Thurneysen). For Kutter, the return to "direct life" is completed in the history of humankind; socialism is a sign of this. But for Kutter this return to the direct is at the same time the meaning and goal of Christendom. For him, social democrats are instruments of the living God; "they must" proclaim to the world the judgment and the great turning point in their service to God, without realizing it themselves. Nonetheless, Kutter never joined the Social Democratic Party (as Leonhard Ragaz and Karl Barth did); neither did he identify the gospel with socialism.

He was a pacifist. <!-- (translated from http://www.bautz.de/bbkl/k/Kutter.shtml)

Translation of article by Otto Herpel, published in "Das neue Werk" 1919:

The Religious-Social Movement: HERMANN KUTTER

Hermann Kutter, the actual founder of religious socialism and its most prominent and ruthless prophet, launched his compelling words shortly after 1900. The atmosphere which surrounded this challenge came from several different sources: a reformed Christianity in action, which had received its impulse from the young Neumann; the strong influence of Blumhardt's faith and active example; and the earliest pioneering work of the Swiss liberal theologians in promoting a positive view of social democracy. Hermann Kutter, born 1863 in Bern, the son of an engineer, was pastor in Vinelz in 1887 and pastor in the Neumünster in Zürich from 1898 on. His first book was published in 1897. Like his following work it was a scientific study on early Christian piety. Yet already in these books traces of his future message can be found. This comes more clearly to expression in the volume of sermons of 1901, Die Welt des Vaters [The Father's World], with its subtitle Geld oder Gott, Christentum oder Christus [Money or God. Christianity or Christ]. In 1902 he published Das Unmittelbare, eine Menschheitsfrage  [What Lies Before Us, a question for mankind], where his message is intensified. But the actual religious-socialist point of view comes explicitly to the fore in his following main works. Sie Müssen [You Must] (1904) is a passionate defense of social democracy drawn from the experience of Christian faith. Gerechtigkeit, ein altes Wort an die moderne Christenheit [Righteousness, an old word to the modern Christian World] (1905) is an interpretation of Romans 1-8, from our time and for our time with its tangle of social problems. Wir Pfarrer [We Pastors] (1907), in the same vein as his previous writings, is an accusation against pastors and a prodding of their consciences that verges on injustice. Die Revolution des Christentums (1908) [The Revolution of Christianity] is a most brilliant explanation of his great, wonderful, and fundamental conviction that love is the only truly revolutionary power in the world. Reden an die deutsche Nation [Address to the German Nation] (1916) contains basic warnings to the German nation at war. From time to time other articles were published in Neue Wege [New Ways]. What does Kutter say in all these writings? The central recognition that gave him his starting point is genuinely prophetic--a new experience of God. A thousand times he puts it into expression: "The living God." In this he is very aware of a great and sharp contrast between the living God and the traditional church of present-day Christianity, which does not know this God. The living God used to be there earlier, in the early Christian and Reformation times, but the church did not hold on to him as a living God and made him little by little into an idol. God became a mere devotional object, a matter of frequent crooked dealings with sin, redemption, and grace; the servant of egoistic interests for the salvation of one's own soul; a general excuse for the need of the destitute: a bogeyman making inexplicable decisions; a comfortable cushion for our inadequacy in the fight that Christ demands against sin, suffering, and misery in this world. Therefore the God of today's Christianity is a dead God. "We repeat, Christendom does not know the living God!" All its worship of God is false. For in truth, God is a living God. "Should not the same God, who works in the inner life, also change the outer form of the world? Should not the One who through the sharpness of his word cuts the root of sin in our hearts, also use his sharpness where sin has spread its rank growth into our economic life?  Does God make a distinction between inner and outer life?  Does not his energy exist in every corner of His boundless creation?  Is not everything inspired by his invisible Word?  Yet you want to prevent shattering the community of men when sin leads them to a false unity, and from building up a new united mankind in which justice dwells?       "Should God inactively and idly look on, while helpless masses go under and criminal imposters set their feet on the necks of the poor? Should he placidly allow land and soil-- this inexhaustible earth which God has given for men's delight and joy--to be a monopoly, of a self-indulgent class, while other people have to beg bread? Should this madness, plotted by the cunning of mammon, go unpunished on its predatory rampage from one part of the earth to another? Why do you avoid these questions? Why do you say they have nothing to do with the Gospel? Does not the same fire that blazes at the root burn the branches and twigs to ashes too? Shouldn't the same lips that denounce greed, attack what arises from it? Can he who condemns greed as sin, let our conditions of economic production pass?"--'But', you say, 'greed rules the world in any case. Sin and destruction cannot be banished from this world.  Only when the last day breaks will these conditions change and be made new?  I have often heard you talk like that.  Allow me to answer: 'Such talk, is a sign of nothing but faithlessness and godlessness.'       "Does faith in Jesus mean nothing more than consolation when we have sinned and hope for the heavenly home? Are not all the powers of heaven revealed in him? Doesn't he say that he has come to give life in all its fullness? Doesn't he want to redeem the world? Doesn't he show mammon, the prince of these earthly conditions, as the opponent of God? Is his love only a gentle breeze--or is it a blazing fire which John the Baptist foresaw and which consumes the chaff?"      "In Jesus is the living God!"  "Believing in Jesus means saying to sin, 'You have to stop;' and to evil, 'You must disappear.'  Believing in Jesus means protesting against the powers which oppose him. Believing in Jesus means being grounded in the strength of the living God,--God who is coming, and is leading all eras toward his justice. Believing in Jesus means being on fire for justice and against injustice, embracing suffering to its depths, not regarding it with cool consideration. It means we cannot do anything else than give witness and cry out against evil. It means to make what is impossible become true, to bring the unattainable within reach, to give what has never existed a present reality. For Jesus, and only Jesus, makes everything new. Jesus, and only Jesus, has instilled into men belief in the kingdom of heaven on earth! What kind of Jesus would he be if he acknowledged the ideals of our presentday churches as his final word? To believe in Jesus means to love. But love burns and illumines. God is love, and God is a consuming fire."      It is clear, that this living God demonstrates his life in continually creating something new, continually waging a fight.  He is always drawing near; he is always creating anew. All who follow him are fellow fighters and fellow creators, never satisfied or at rest in present conditions.  The church holds fast to the present ungodly conditions, and this by itself proves that it has a dead God.  Even Naumann--and this typifies Kutter's vigor in a flash--falls under this verdict.  "The shortcoming in Naumann's Christianity is his complete ignorance of the apocalyptical in the coming of Jesus, and the efforts to fit Jesus into a world which he (Naumann) knows is in sharpest contrast."       The question arises, where did Kutter find and discern this very living and "zealous" God?  He can supply his own answer: "Everything depends on an understanding of the living God in the social problem. Here we perceive the importance and centrality of Kutter's concern for society in his whole experience of God. This is because social problems have a very special significance for him: They are not simply a combination of independent economic movements. "In social problems we are not dealing with something materialistic but with immortal souls, with human beings enslaved by material things, and therefore with the highest interest of mankind" It is a matter of fighting against the dominating power of material things, "against enslavement of free individuals under the materialistic power, against the power of possessions, which drives men apart in irreconcilable animosity.  It is a matter of fighting against class distinction and casts, which have risen from the false evaluation of material goods, from judging and rating people according to how much money they have.  It is a matter of fighting against everything which has forced itself as a dead and deadening power between God and men, and between one man and another in our human fellowship:" What causes this fight? What makes it fundamentally necessary? The root cause is that God himself took up the fight against mammon, sin, and misery--he, the living God, who is life and love. Therefore social problems cannot be solved without God. Have this clearly in mind, however: we cannot do it without the living God, but we can leave aside the God of the churches. For the God of the churches is a dead God, a God preserving things as they are, and, by submitting to the lies of this world and its misery and sin, avoiding any change. Instead of this we say, "If there is a living God,--if, rather than a God enthroned above the stars, unconcerned about men's toil and struggle and satisfied by the homage regularly offered in church services, there is a God who takes the world and its destiny into his almighty hand, and transforms it according to his purpose--then everything will have to change.  The crooked shall be made straight; what is high shall be made low; what is low shall be raised up; mountains have to fall and valleys to be lifted.  Official worship services, led by priests and pastors according to set forms, are of no help.  Public life, the state and society, nations, and all humanity will be reborn to new life.       "Need and misery will disappear from among men; injustice will end; mammon, the lord of this world, will pale with terror and plunge from his golden throne to the dust....  Then streams of truth, light, and love will be poured out. Then hired pastors will no longer, in their embarrassed way, murmur little lectures about God in front of a scanty congregation. Not at all. God himself will speak to us in the stormwind of his judgements, in the spirit of his eternal truth."      It goes without saying that the religious fire which strikes home to us in such words, must correspond to a definite living moral power-- a power which devotes its full energy to carrying out in action the recognition received from religious terms, to actively fulfilling the will of the living God.  In fact this prophetic aspect does not fall short in Kutter's proclamation.  You can gather this from the strength of the following words, "Suffering is not to be understood in a higher context. It is not to be understood at all. It must come to an end!" "We carry in our own bosom the revolution which will make everything new. In us slumbers the love to which nothing is impossible. The only impossibility is that this love should remain hidden forever and is never be raised to victorious power from out of the temporal grave."      Following the ideas of the reform movement, Kutter finds in the concept of the kingdom of God the tangible form for all he understands and represents with so clear a view of his goal, all he hopes to attain through his labors in the service of the living God.       Certainly, it will not be possible to present the inner structure of the kingdom of God in greater detail.  We are too lacking in the living Spirit and therefore in the appropriate and meaningful language to express our recognitions.  First and foremost is the tremendous demand made by the kingdom of God.... It is a matter of facing right around: not simply a few improvements here and there, but a new Spirit for Christianity as a whole.       Just as the Spirit of former times runs through everything that is valued and in power today and the concrete examples are not important here, so the Spirit of the kingdom of God must express itself by creating from within ever new conditions--revelations of its intrinsic character and not always of principle importance in themselves...."Just as today selfishness permeates the whole of Christianity, so the new Spirit shall pour the life of God into our hearts and circumstances." Accordingly Kutter has no clearly outlined program; for him the kingdom of God does not depend on new settings, but on the right leading of the Spirit. Therefore he warns with good reason: "Do not be impatient and try too early to set up something that will happen only in its own time." But when at last the time comes, the whole world will experience a transformation; "love will be raised to the guiding principal of human existence on earth" and "justice will reign in all levels of creation." Everything we now see as a social concern for society is nothing other than the living God approaching to fight in the spirit of love for this complete justice. And here is the starting point for Kutter's positive evaluation of social democracy. It is the obvious consequence of this interpretation of the historic present. If the whole concern about social problems is nothing other than a result of God's fight for the kingdom of justice, then inevitably the living God will be seen most forcibly, and in the final analysis, only, where the fight for social justice is waged most vigorously and consistently. And this is the case in organized social democracy. So for Kutter's religious experience, God and social democracy are closely interconnected: for the present day the living God manifests himself in social democracy. It is unique, even ingenious, in what a simple, yet forceful way Kutter proves this point in the introduction of his book, You Must--a work that conveys with amazing power his conception of God in social democracy. He says; "The social democrats also hunger and thirst for just conditions--and are supposed to be godless! They fight for mercy--should they not obtain mercy?  They hate what is mean, common, dirty and lustful--and why should they not be called God's children?  They are abused and persecuted from all sides--and should God push them into hell?  They don't gather treasures for themselves...,they declare war on mammon--why should they not belong to God and serve him?  They are doing what God has demanded through his witnesses from the beginning:  They actively take up the cause of the poor and enslaved--take it up as their one and only concern yet they are supposed to be without God!  In fact, nothing throws a more glaring light on the godlessness of Christians than the attacks they make against social democracy."-->

Pastoral visionary
Beyond Hermann Kutter's academic pursuits, his pastoral career and social advocacy were integral to his life's work. Ordained in 1886, he began his pastoral journey in Vinelz in 1887, cultivating a reputation for connecting with congregants. His subsequent move to Zürich's Neumünster in 1898 marked a significant chapter in his pastoral service, where he continued to impact the lives of those he served. Kutter's approach to pastoral care was characterized by a balance between spiritual guidance and a commitment to addressing social issues. In the early 20th century, his work "Sie müssen" (1904) notably expressed his positive stance towards social democracy, framing it as a tool aligned with divine intentions. Additionally, his active involvement with organizations like the Knights of St. John and YMI, along with volunteering for Meals on Wheels, underscored his dedication to community well-being.

Theological pioneer
Hermann Kutter's intellectual legacy extended far beyond his immediate pastoral and social engagements. Inspired by the eschatological ideas of Christoph Blumhardt, Kutter's theological approach emphasized a clear distinction between the Kingdom of God and the worldly realm. His writings, such as "Das Unmittelbare, eine Menschheitsfrage" (1902), were instrumental in shaping early dialectical theology, influencing subsequent theologians like Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, and Eduard Thurneysen. Kutter's commitment to theological renewal and his insistence on the immediate experience of God left an indelible mark on the theological landscape of his time. Despite political differences and theological debates, Kutter's enduring influence is evident in the continued exploration of his ideas by scholars and theologians in the realms of religious socialism and dialectical theology.

title: Hermann Kutter


text:
Talk:Production logo

Some thoughts

 * "Closing" logos are pretty specific to television, and "opening" logos on movies serve much the same purpose, so I wonder if there should be one page for both. Production logo perhaps? Done
 * A history of opening/closing logos would be good. Most of the early history would be shared with logo, but this article would cover Hollywood's take on the subject. Done
 * Finally, keep in mind that Wikipedia keeps to a neutral point of view. On this particular subject, there's lots of cases where the scariest logo someone's ever seen won't bother someone else, and vice versa, so it'd be good to couch this in some sort of consensus. Also, write clearly and refrain from using CLGisms unless you explain them -- remember that this is here for the whole Internet to see, not just the CLG or its spinoffs. See Guide to writing better articles for more on Wikipedia's writing style.

-lee 23:49, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) (wakkymse on CLG)

 * Why does 'Vanity Card' redirect here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.68.31.102 (talk) 21:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Warner Bros.
Is there any reason why warner brothers are not listed on list of major closing logos? Warner brothers uses both an opening logo and a closing logo on all of its films too. Borb 15:06, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Added it finally. --Seishirou Sakurazuka 00:41, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Company list
Is there any real reason to list companies with logos? It's not as though they are all that uncommon. tregoweth 16:01, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * I could see there being a list of studios with particularly notable (or notorious, for that matter) logos, though I don't quite know where it would fit inside this article. I have noticed that most of the studios' own pages have had discussion about their particular logos on them, but beyond that I'm not sure (for one thing, how to define "notable" is fuzzy in this case). -lee 17:34, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Boo!

 * Logos of the era made heavy use of abstract art motifs and music generated by analog synthesizers, creating an unfamiliar look and sound that, while modern, was bombastic and often scared children.

Are there any reliable, non-original sources for this? My sense is that children this delicate probably shouldn't be allowed around movies and television at all. —phh 17:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Most examples will be anecdotal for sure, but that doesn't mean that logophobia doesn't exist... or that the people who fear these logos are unbalanced. Trust me, when you're three years old, with your face pressed against the television screen because your parents don't have a remote control, it's likely that you're going to have mental scars when obnoxious music blares from the set and a big logo leaps out at you.

People grow up to be afraid of all kinds of crazy stuff- clowns, Santa Claus, dogs- because their sudden movements and loud noises were perceived as threats at a very early age. -M.Neko

 * Logophobia is a very real threat to American society. I am scared to DEATH of the Renaissance Pictures logo at the end of Xena, and the Klasky-Csupo logo with that weird face. Both are tied IMO as the scariest production logos of all time. Those '60s and '70s logos don't even come close. WizardDuck 19:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The only real sources for "logophobia" are Internet postings, nothing that's an acceptable source for an article. —tregoweth (talk) 20:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

 * And seriously, who really wants to be scared of a logo that was really created by graphic designers? Two words, GROW UP.
 * This is about an article, not logophobia people... Keenrich 04:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Hey, guy above Keenrich who's not Tregoweth, it's OK to be scared of these things. It dosen't mean we're immature. I concur with M.Neko. Let's say, here, ohhh, this kid David. He's afraid of recliners. Why? Because when he was little, the footrest came up with NO WARNING and hit him in the face. Same with logos. You don't know what's gonna be in them, or when they'll come on. We all grow up scared of something. WizardDuck 04:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Checking through the history, everything from "And seriously..." to "not logophobia people" is by Keenrich; the formatting just came out weird. —tregoweth (talk) 04:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm disappointed that the part about logos scaring children was taken out of the article. They are a major part of logos' impact on pop culture. I don't know about them being "a real threat to American society," but logophobia has been reported by enough people to be acknowledged by a Wikipedia entry. Besides, the S From Hell still creeps me out. 24.3.56.102 03:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It still counts as original research and/or unverifiable, though, unless we can get cites from reliable sources. Has anyone ever covered this in the mainstream media, or is it just too strange? -lee 18:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * We should be able to mention that there exists a community of logo aficionados on the net, and that they have nicknames for the logos like "S from Hell". What we can't do is say things like "often scared children" because that's just an assumption.  My take on it, is that the kids who were startled by logos when they were small, grew up to be interested in production logos.  Self-selection bias. Squidfryerchef 12:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Recreate this article
What happened? I see that a long time ago that this article had a long description. now people are messing it up, especially when people are talking about some club I left a long time ago.

Keenrich 04:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Paramount Logo
There are some good sites out there with some detailed chronologies, specifically | this one about Paramount. The information is there, but this article really lacks in that respect.

John Pouliot 12:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I checked the link just now, and it's broken. Also, this article isn't about the histories of individual logos, it's more about how the production logo developed over time, or at least that's what I had in mind for it back in 2005. -lee 18:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism?
The information given at the "History" section does not cite its sources at all. It might be copied from somewhere else. Therefore I think that this article must be re-written and the sources must be cited. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by T-9000 (talk • contribs) 11:36, 31 March 2007 (UTC).
 * I originally wrote the bulk of the History section myself, especially for Wikipedia. If there's another site using the same text, it's most likely a mirror of this page. That said, it could use some cleaning up. -lee 18:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Music
Does anybody know about who writes the music for the logos?

The composers I know are Alfred Newman (The 20th Century Fox fanfare), Jerry Goldsmith (The Universal Studios current logo) and Thomas Newman (the Imagine logo). It would be interesting if someone could mention more composers in the article. Thanks--Surten (talk) 05:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)Surten

 * Oh, and the music from the Warner Bros. logo is "As Time Goes By", though I'm pretty sure you knew that.--Surten (talk) 05:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)Surten

The Simpsons Movie: Logo variant
When I saw the trailer for The Simpsons Movie, I saw that the 20th Century Fox logo at the beginning of the trailer had the "0" replaced by a donut with pink frosting. Shouldn't we add a reference to it? Sean90 13:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No; this is an article about logos, not a listing of them. —tregoweth (talk) 02:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Fixing things up

 * We really, really need some cites for the things mentioned in the History section; they're all factual, but they're also incomplete, and I'm not sure what books would have the information. Perhaps it's time to recruit an expert? (in the meantime, I'm considering just removing the section until we have enough references to do a rewrite. Better a stub than the mess that's there now.)
 * Speaking of which, this article is within the scope of at least WikiProject Filmmaking and WikiProject Visual arts. Other suggestions would be great. -lee 21:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Does this include things like the DTS logo?
These days whenever I go to see a movie in a theater there's always multiple logos for multiple companies. There's usually one for the theater, one for the sound system, maybe one for the projection technology, a couple for the production companies, and then one for the movie studio. Are all of these considered "production logos?" Is there a name for the whole set ("opening production credits" or something like that)? --76.123.176.14 (talk) 21:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Futurama
Doesn't Futurama use a 30th Century Fox variation? That should probably be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammi.mcclain (talk • contribs) 03:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Movie about the "S from Hell" in Sundance?
Apparently someone made a short film about the old Screen Gems logo, concentrating on phobias about it, and it got into the Sundance Film Festival. It's called "The S from Hell"(!) and is showcasing on Youtube for a limited time. I wonder if this counts towards secondary-source attention to the phenomenon. Squidfryerchef (talk) 23:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

 * More sources: http://www.ifc.com/blogs/indie-eye/2009/12/logophobia.php, http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/william-bostwick/architecture-design/logo-hell-graphic-design-gone-bad Squidfryerchef (talk) 14:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Logos on video format
Hey, does what this article discuss include motion logos for home video distributors appearing on video releases of sorts? Sean Michael (Seaners 2010) (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Suspected logo recreation
Excuse me, but the following image in this article: Image:PBS 1971 id.svg (PBS logo seen at the end of its programs from 1971 to 1984)) Happens to look like it was a recreation using some photo editing software. Should we be concerned? Sean Michael (Seaners 2010) (talk) 16:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Production logo


text:
File:Umbra01.gif

Umbra & penumbra. Drawing by D.M. Short.

title: File:Umbra01.gif


text:
Gradient (disambiguation)

Gradient in vector calculus is a vector field representing the maximum rate of increase of a scalar field or a multivariate function and the direction of this maximal rate.

Gradient may also refer to:
 * Gradient sro, a Czech aircraft manufacturer
 * Image gradient, a gradual change or blending of color
 * Color gradient, a range of position-dependent colors, usually used to fill a region
 * Texture gradient, the distortion in size which closer objects have compared to objects farther away
 * Spatial gradient, a gradient whose components are spatial derivatives
 * Grade (slope), the inclination of a road or other geographic feature
 * Slope, a number that describes both the direction and the steepness of a line

title: Gradient (disambiguation)


text:
Anna Maria Jopek

Anna Maria Jopek (born 14 December 1970) is a Polish vocalist, songwriter, and improviser. She represented Poland in the 1997 Eurovision Song Contest, with the song "Ale jestem" and finished 11th out of 25 participating acts; and in 2002, she collaborated on an album with jazz guitarist Pat Metheny. She has received numerous awards for her music, including Michel Legrand's Personal Award in Vitebsk in 1994, as well as all of the awards for music in Poland, together with gold and platinum records.

Biography
She is the daughter of Mazowsze singer Stanisław Jopek (1935–2006), known as the "First Coachman of Poland" for his signature song "Furman" (The Coachman), and former Mazowsze dancer Maria Stankiewicz. Her 1999 Christmas album, Dzisiaj z Betleyem, features two duets with her father. Anna Maria's sister, Patrycja is a violinist.

In Poland she has sung with Marek Grechuta, Jeremi Przybora and Wojciech Młynarski. Abroad she has performed with Pat Metheny, Youssu'n Dour, Bobby McFerrin, Ivan Linz, Branford Marsalis, Nigel Kennedy, Richard Bona, Oscar Castro-Neves, Makoto Ozone and Gonzalo Rubalcaba among others. In 2017 Jopek also sung a duet with Sting on a New Year's TV program.

Jopek has performed at the world's leading concert venues such as Carnegie Hall, Hollywood Bowl, Royal Festival Hall, Tokyo Opera City Concert Hall, Blue Note Tokyo, The Israeli Opera in Tel Aviv or Hamer Hall in Melbourne. She has recorded at Peter Gabriel's Real World studio, Abbey Road in London and Power Station in New York.

In 2015 she received the Knight's Cross Order of Polonia Restituta conferred by President Bronisław Komorowski for promoting Polish art worldwide.

In 2019 Jopek released a new album "Ulotne" (Elusive) with Branford Marsalis.

Currently, she is working on a new concert project titled "Przestworza" (The Expanses). In August 2021, she will continue this tour at Poland's most popular concert venues.

Over the past few years, Jopek has been experimenting with various stage forms. She has performed in "Czas Kobiety" (A Woman's Time), a play staged at Teatr Stary in Lublin, directed by the legend of Polish theatre – professor Leszek Mądzik. The music was written by Jopek and Robert Kubiszyn. In 2014, she accepted Song of the Goat Theatre's invitation to perform in an oratory "Return to the Voice". They held a series of performances over a month as part of the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, where she was noticed by Michael Hirst, creator of HISTORY's flagship series Vikings. The producers offered her to record a song to be featured in the show.

title: Anna Maria Jopek


text:
Leonhard Ragaz

Leonhard Ragaz (28 July 1868 – 6 December 1945) was a Swiss Reformed theologian and, with Hermann Kutter, one of the founders of religious socialism in Switzerland. He was influenced by Christoph Blumhardt. He was married to the feminist and peace activist Clara Ragaz-Nadig.

Biography
Born to a farmer family in Tamins, Grisons, on 28 July 1868, Ragaz studied theology in Basel, Jena, and Berlin. In 1890, he was elected as minister in Flerden, Heinzenberg. In 1893, he moved to Chur, working as a teacher of language and religion, and from 1895 to 1902 as municipal minister. In 1902, Ragaz was elected as minister at the Basel Minster.

In Basel, Ragaz came into contact with the labour movement. As construction workers went on strike in 1903, Ragaz delivered a sermon in the minster which came to be known as the "bricklayers' strike sermon" (Maurerstreikpredigt), in which he said that "if institutional Christendom were to be cold and incomprehending towards the becoming of a new world, which after all emerged from the heart of the gospel, then the salt of the earth would have become putrid".

In 1908, Ragaz was called to a professorship at the theological faculty of the University of Zurich. During the Swiss general strike of 1918, he took sides with the workers, and as the authorities sent troops to protect the university buildings from the strikers, he protested.

In 1921, he resigned as professor, stating that he could not continue to educate ministers for the bourgeois Swiss Reformed Church. He and his family moved to the proletarian Aussersihl district of Zürich. He remained involved with the labour movement, editing his journal Neue Wege, until his death in Zürich on 6 December 1945.

Religious socialism and pacifism
For Ragaz, the Early Church was based on a spirit of cooperation and collectivity. As a consequence, the socialist ideal of self-administered cooperatives owned by the workers themselves was a postulate directly derived from the gospel and the promise of justice in God's kingdom.

Also as a consequence of his Christian belief in justice and peace, Ragaz staunchly opposed the First World War, from a stance of active pacifism: he called for all religious socialists to unite in protesting the war. He taught that if capitalism resorted to force and violence, that was a true reflection of its nature, but that if socialism did the same, it was a treason to its ideals.

Ragaz' main work is Die Bibel – eine Deutung ("The Bible - An Interpretation"), written during the Second World War and published in seven volumes in 1947–1950.

Works

 * Du sollst. Grundzüge einer sittlichen Weltanschauung, Waetzel, Freiburg im Breisgau 1904
 * Dein Reich komme. Predigten, Helbing & Lichtenhahn, Basel 1909
 * Religionsphilosophie, 2 vols., Zürich 1909
 * Die neue Schweiz. Ein Programm für Schweizer und solche, die es werden wollen,
 * Weltreich, Religion und Gottesherrschaft, 2 vols., Rotapfel, Zürich/Leipzig 1922
 * Der Kampf um das Reich Gottes in Blumhardt, Vater und Sohn – und weiter!, Rotapfel, Zürich/Leipzig 1922
 * Von Christus zu Marx – von Marx zu Christus. Ein Beitrag, Harder, Wernigerode 1929
 * Das Reich und die Nachfolge. Andachten, Herbert Lang, Bern 1937
 * Gedanken. Aus vierzig Jahren geistigen Kampfes (anthology), Herbert Lang, Bern 1938
 * Die Botschaft vom Reiche Gottes. Ein Katechismus für Erwachsene, Herbert Lang, Bern 1942
 * Die Gleichnisse Jesu, Herbert Lang, Bern 1944
 * Die Bergpredigt Jesu, Herbert Lang, Bern 1945
 * Die Geschichte der Sache Christi. Ein Versuch, Herbert Lang, Bern 1945
 * Die Bibel. Eine Deutung, 7 vols., Diana, Zürich 1947–50
 * Mein Weg. Eine Autobiographie, autobiography, 2 vols., Diana, Zürich 1952
 * Eingriffe ins Zeitgeschehen. Reich Gottes und Politik. Texte von 1900 bis 1945, eds. Ruedi Brassel and Willy Spieler, Exodus, Luzern 1995, ISBN 978-3-905575-56-9
 * Leonhard Ragaz in seinen Briefen, eds. Christine Ragaz et al. (letters):
 * vol. 1: 1887–1914, Zürich 1966, ISBN 978-3-290-11187-8
 * vol. 2: 1914–1932, Zürich 1982, ISBN 978-3-290-11469-5
 * vol. 3: 1933–1945, Zürich 1992, ISBN 978-3-290-10869-4

title: Leonhard Ragaz


text:
USS Putnam (DD-287)

USS Putnam (DD-287) was a Clemson-class destroyer in the United States Navy following World War I. She was named for Charles Putnam.

History
Putnam was laid down by the Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Squantum, Massachusetts 30 June 1919, launched 30 September 1919, sponsored by Miss Katherine Brown; and commissioned at Boston, Massachusetts 18 December 1919.

Upon completion of shakedown out of Boston, Putnam was assigned to Division 43, Squadron 3, Destroyer Force Atlantic Fleet based at Newport, Rhode Island. She sailed from Newport 8 February 1920 for Guantanamo Bay where she carried out target practice until 26 April. Putnam was later sent to Tampico, Mexico, to join USS Isherwood (DD-284) and USS Reid (DD-292) in observing the volatile political situation there 10 May – 14 June. She made a reservist training cruise between Philadelphia and Newport before being placed in reserve at Charleston 22 September.

Putnam was reassigned to Destroyer Division 49, Squadron 1 upon returning to active duty 1 May 1921 and took part in summer exercises with the Destroyer Force out of Newport until 16 November. After spending the winter in reserve at Charleston, South Carolina, she was ordered to Destroyer Division 25 Squadron 9 at Newport 27 June 1922. Putnam engaged in gunnery drills at Guantanamo Bay (16 April – 25 May 1923) before returning to Boston for periodic overhaul. She rejoined her division at Guantanamo Bay 5 April 1924 for maneuvers with Scouting Fleet Destroyers there and later off Hampton Roads until 29 October. Putnam rendezvoused with the fleet for torpedo exercises in the Caribbean again 6 January – 10 February 1925.

Following repairs at Boston (14 February – 1 July 1925), Putnam reported to the Newport Naval Torpedo Station for experimental duty and participated in the search to locate the wreck of USS S-51 on 26 September. She departed Newport 2 October for Gonaïves, Haiti, Guantanamo Bay and the Panama Canal Zone to continue her readiness operations with Scouting Fleet Destroyers. Putnam sailed for Boston 20 February 1926 for a refit.

Upon completion of repairs at Boston 28 April 1926, Putnam resumed her schedule of experimental torpedo duty at Newport and fleet maneuvers off Haiti until October 1927. She then proceeded to Charleston for Fleet Problem II (30 October – 2 December).

After exercises off Haiti in January and February, Putnam completed three reservists' training cruises between Philadelphia and Newport (30 June – 24 August) before sailing 31 August for Charleston and depth charge practice. She resumed operations in Panamanian waters 16 January 1929, participated in Fleet Problem IX, transited and retransmitted the Panama Canal and later engaged in gunnery drills off Haiti before sailing for Boston 27 April. Putnam served as a reservists' training ship for two cruises out of Tompkinsville, New York (19 July – 30 August).

Fate
Putnam decommissioned at Philadelphia 21 September 1929; was struck from the Navy List 22 October 1930, sold 17 January 1931. The ship was converted to the MV Teapa that was acquired by the Army in an effort to resupply Corregidor.

title: USS Putnam (DD-287)


text:
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Slovenian vs Slovene)/Archive 3

 * Archive 4
 * Archive 5

Leaving this aside, as I can find many notable organizations that use either Slovene or Slovenian both as an adjective and a noun and some use Slovenian as an adjective and Slovene as a noun, I am now nevertheless more in favor of Slovenian both as an adjective and a noun, after having found two interesting and independent web pages.

 * The first one is a paper written by a very prominent Slovenian Canadian scholar and professor emeritus Edward Gobetz. It is available here and clearly shows why Slovenian is the preferred term.

 * The second one sufficiently well demonstrates why Google is not reliable in regards to this matter, although one should check these things independently as there are also some misinformations. Nevertheless, although the results are inconclusive, one could probably more reliably show that Google has more content-specific hits for Slovenian than for Slovene. It is available here. As to the number of pages that offer Slovene as a noun, be careful, as there may be many others that use Slovenian as a noun.

So, XJaM, could you too now - after I have presented these arguments - agree with us that Slovenian is the correct term or at least that it should be preferentially used? -- Eleassar777 my talk 19:27, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * No, sorry I still can not. But not because that I might be stubborn, but simply because all arguments that were presented here for using 'Slovenian' instead of "Slovene" did not persuade me. Saying that etymology is not relevant, that learning English language in Slovenia is not relevant and so on is one-sided point of view. The only argument worth investigating for me was Nohat's about how these two words came into English dictionaries and perhaps to literature. We all know, yes, that English language is a living thing, but how it can change so rapidly in these 10-20 years. BTW U.S. ambassador in Slovenia uses "Slovenian". We should further ask some Anglicists because discussions in this level are just not enough. You're getting your arguments from sleeves and you are thinking that they are valid all over. I guess that in these three years I have the largest number of contributions from Slovene users. Just because of these tottering statements I shall be forced to stop writing for English Wikipedia. --xJaM 14:09, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I like you to be stubborn. I have been thinking much about these things and have already before agreed that authorities are important, under one condition: that their views are presented clearly and verifiably. I also have not said that etymology is not important. I only said that it is not very important which one of the terms appeared earlier, but how it came into use and how it developed subsequently. If you have read the links I provided you would see that it is not only 10 - 20 years, but at least! from 1949 since Slovenian has been advocated by respected scholars and as I already said it would be more easier to demonstrate Slovenian is preferred nowadays. And if you would go to NUK and read Zarja (November, 1949), you would probably find out that Slovenian has been used and advocated from much earlier. Although this is not certain, the majority seems to follow this nowadays. Also tell me, who was then if not me that suggested asking an etymologist here on WP and I even provided an etymological paper. However, if you can point me to a paper where Mr Košuta presented his arguments for using Slovene clearly, I will read them with interest and respect his opinion, otherwise it's impossible to judge them.

You know, after your last post I am wondering what do you mean by saying that I am getting my arguments from sleeves?

Mr Gobetz and other scholars he mentions are not from sleeves, are they? As we can read on the page I provided, he himself "is professor emeritus of sociology at Kent State University and executive director of The Slovenian Research Center of America, Inc. He is an author or editor of sixteen books (with additional volumes now in print) and of scores of articles and book reviews which have been published in American and international scholarly journals and popular magazines. For many years, he was also a contributor to most Slovenian American newspapers and to several papers in other countries. He has lectured widely at scholarly conferences and has been much in demand as speaker for various Slovenian affairs in several American states, as well as in Canada." And his paper is very well and fairly written and quite well supported. If you would re-read it and would forgot your history here for a moment, it would help much. As for Google, I still believe it is true what I wrote - it is not very reliable, but probably it would be easier to demonstrate it has more hits for Slovenian and Slovenians than Slovene and Slovenes.

To the contrary, I find the claims you made till now quite unsupported, although it is possible that I have missed some of your arguments. You have been mentioning Mr Wales - he is not an authority as he is not an etymologist (as far as I know). You have been telling us to ask Slovenian children - do they or their teachers know better than respected scholars? Of course not. I asked my niece today and she doesn't have a slightest idea although otherwise she has very good grades. Nevertheless, I am open to new arguments you would present and would be especially happy if you presented any respected papers that oppose to Mr Gobetz.

As to one-sidedness, please note that if my arguments are one-sided, they nevertheless seem to be strong. Also note that the two lists that had been added above and their titles were later rewritten by BT2 as I had made them purposefully neutral and had added absolutely no link. There were only titles (different than now - neutral) and blank lines. I was naive expecting that everyone will add links under both titles. Therefore, I have removed them now so that you won't be able to say I am not playing a fair game. As I have already said and also written below, these notable pages don't matter much, if anything, as long as we do not have complete numbered lists of pages that use Slovene only, those that use Slovenian only and those that use Slovenian as an adjective and Slovene as a noun.

And also note, I have not yet said what Wikimedia should use preferentially or what Wikimedia's policy should be towards these questions.

Please rethink this - especially what is on this page (last version edited by me - probably this) - with cool head and carefully, whatever point you may choose to defend in the future. -- Eleassar777 my talk 17:45, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Eleassar777, what I wrote above, it does not turn against you at all. You must know that. This debate is going on quite a while, so I have meant all those participants in it, who are getting their arguments from sleeves - not directly you. I do respect sholars as Mr. Gobetz is, and I have read those links carefully. For Mr. Košuta I can not give any links because he is deceased and he was 'merely' a primary school teacher - but a very good one, as I have already wrote. But if I wrote 'Slovenian' at my schoolwork in his lessons those days I surely would get bad mark. You must know that he gave 5s (the highest mark) only if a schoolboy did just one or two mistakes. This is just BTW. It is also true that my arguments here do not find fruitful soil at all and are for the most part unsupported, but somehow I know I am right, you know. Saying that (again I do not mean you directly) "Slovene" came into English via French word is so so. Many French words also came into Slovene language, for example Židje (Jews), but we do not name them so, but Judje, because classical languages as Greek and Latin are important here. Momentarily I do not have any other arguments to show my point of view, so it is better to wait for futher development. It is true, yes, that Jimmy is not etymologist, but he used "Slovene language" at Slovene national TV broadcast as U.S. ambassador used 'Slovenian' on the other side. If I'll meet him this october somewhere in Balkans, I'll sure aks him for his opinion on this matter. I have alredy asked Brion on IRC channel, and he said that both terms are equally valid. If I admit I do not know who to ask further more. Perhaps I shall also ask Anton since he has very shrewd answers and solutions. Someone someday will have to solve 'this problem' - and if you're (not again you Eleassar777 directly) satisfied with the solution of using strictly "Slovenian", then be it. As I have written several times, I shall always be Slovene no matter what they say. See dem a come... --Joseph Hill. --xJaM 22:39, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

BTW the COBISS system says:

 * Slovenes: 203 hits, Slovenians: 40 hits (already shown by Eleassar777)
 * Slovene: 18775 hits, Slovenian: 9371 hits

Nova beseda (it is not much relevant since it deals mostly with Slovene, but anyway it is a good corpus laboratory):

 * Slovenes:  17 hits, Slovenians:  6 hits (already shown by Eleassar777)
 * Slovene:  104 hits, Slovenian: 277 hits

--xJaM 00:23, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your list names had to be modified because the most significant thing here is that Slovenian organizations are moving away from Slovene and embracing Slovenian. There are no (at least to my knowledge for sure) organizations replacing Slovenian in their name with Slovene. NONE. Same thing with regards to book publishings. For the last century, Slovene dominated the very small number of English (largely British) books on Slovenia and Yugoslavia. Things are changing. Compare the ratio of books published employing Slovene and Slovenian before and after 1991. Understandably, the internet is moving and expressing this change a lot faster. BT2 02:33, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC).

 * Yes, indeed, internet is expressing this stupidity very fast. Please you wise guy, there are many scholars that you did not mention and I do believe that they can prove you are not quite right. But if you like to generalize everything, that is your right - but here we are trying to write encyclopedia, not just some local preferences. British books might be very important still. What is changing? Things are just coming from bad to worse, as one song sings. From 1991 only 14 yeras have passed, so I can not imagine how this time is more significant than, let us say, years from 17th or 18th century. Slovenes are here from 6th century at least. Do no forget this. Do not delete everything that does not suit you (etimology of the word "Slovene" from French, ...) Okay, I see it now that it was not deliberately deleted and I accept your apology BT2. I just want to contribute here, so someone in the beginning could make clear these things to me and spare me some precious time, because I do not want to argue with no one. --xJaM 15:33, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I just wish to point out that this discussion is on a very low level and I am quiting it. Anyone has every right to use whatever they like. Time will show what will prevail - perhaps wisdom, perhaps stupidity - who knows what is what. I don't want fist fighting because of such unimportant things. I'm sure someone smarter than us will come by. Just do not revert me. Thanks. -- Eleassar777 my talk 15:52, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Etymology of the word Slovene (non-English sources)
Marko Snoj's Slovenski etimološki slovar (Slovene Etymological Dictionary), Mladinska knjiga, Ljubljana 1997, at page 582 says (translated and written without accents):

slovenski (Slovene) slovenska (Slovene - feminine gender) adjective Slovene, Slovene (f), older Sloven; Slovene language, to slovene (to slovenicize ?), to translate into Slovene, Slovenia. The same or related is cslovan. sloveninь 'Slav', stcslovan. slovenьsky 'Slovene', hrv. kajk. Slovenci 'Kajkavci, residents between Drave, Sotla and Mura', literary Croatian Slovenac 'Slovene', slovēnski, slovènski 'Slovene', rus. славянин (slavyanin) 'Slav', словенец (slovenec) 'Slovene', češ. Slovan 'Slav', slovensky 'Slovak', older Slovenec 'Slav', young(er) Slovinec 'Slovene'. Pslovan. *sloveninъ 'Slav', *slovene 'Slavs' is derived from one basis *slov-, known in geographical names and is preserved in names of rivers lit. Šlave, rus. Sluja, polj. Sława, Sławica. Very similar is also hrv., srb. slavelj, slavina 'bung, 'pipe'. If a hypothesis is correct *Slovene firstly meant *'inhabitants along the river *Slova or *Slovy '. Ide. basis is *klou- 'to wash, to rinse', and is known, for example, in lat. cluere 'to clean, to wash', lit. šluoti 'to clean, to wipe'. After older interpretation, which is weaker in word formation and stronger in meaning, the name of the nation *slovene might be derived from pslovan. *slovo 'word' (see sloves, slovo). If this surmise is correct regardless to word formation, the name of the nation primarily meant something like *'people, to whom is possible to talk and who understand our language'. For behalf of this surmise could be a fact that Slavs called their Eastern neighbours, Germanic tribes, later Germans, *nemьci, sloven. Nemci, primarily *'nemi ljudje' ('speechless, people'), namely *'poeple, who can not speak (in our tongue)'.

--xJaM 17:40, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * "Avoid reverts and deletions whenever possible, and stay within the three-revert rule except in cases of clear vandalism." Wikiquette Dystopos 20:14, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * For what it's worth as a native English speaker and son of an immigrant from Slovenia, learning Slovene at an old age, I much prefer "Slovene" to "Slovenian." "Slovene" sounds more elegant, in my opinion. "Slovenian" can easily be made to sound derrogatory, I think. Anton Mravcek 20:40, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

No offense, but perhaps you are too old. And it is Slovene that is just one letter off of the derogatory Sloven. Nothing elegant about Slovene. You said in another thread that you remember your father speaking to you in English and saying Slovene. Maybe this memory is having some influence on you. Do you keep in touch with any Slovenian communities in the US? The vast majority of native-English speaking Slovenians shun Slovene, particularly because it sounds (to most of us) so clumsy and awkward.

 * No offense taken. Besides, I've never claimed that childhood memories don't influence me. No, I don't keep in touch with Slovenian communities in the US, but given that, for practical reasons, I can't travel to Slovenia, traveling to one such community might be a good second best. Anton Mravcek 20:09, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * For the record, my father also used to say Slovene. But now, he says Slovenian. It took a while for him (and friends in Slovenia) to break the bad habit. ;)

 * I am sorry to hear something is preventing you from visiting Slovenia. I believe you will really enjoy your time at local Slovenian picnics, though. (Great food, lots of Avsenik music, dancing, etc.) BT2 20:42, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Further, Slovenes is a completely unnatural derivative for a country called Slovenia. Austrian, Australian, Scandinavian, Estonian, Virginian, Latvian, Lithuanian, etc. -ia, get it?

Think of a fictional country called, say, Blabenia. Naturally, you'd call the people of Blabenians. This may sound trivial, but it is a significant point. If one were to know nothing about Slovenia other than it existed and was called Slovenia..what do you think he or she would refer to its people as? Slovenes? NO. Slovenes is derived from the French Slovėnes, and it is actually pronounced Sloven. BT2 21:09, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I was drawn to this debate because of the several references to Jews, but I find this issue itself quite interesting. In all my reading, I think I've seen the term "Slovene" twice, and the term "Slovenian" also twice. In my own poetry magazine I used the term "Slovene", but probably only because it was the one I had seen most recently.

 * Both terms probably have instances of nearly equal recency. In the September 2002 issue of Score, Zalec native Cassandra is referred to as "our horny Slovenian" (page Xtra 13). In the March 2, 2005 issue of The South End, in the article "Although current, Wikipedia not always reliable source of information", the writer speculates:

 * "An article on a more esoteric topic in a Wikipedia in a less used language, such as the article on the number 47 in the Slovene language Wikipedia, might only have been looked at and edited by a couple of people."

 * Between a porn magazine and a student newspaper, you might wonder which one has greater credibility in matters of spelling and usage. In this case, the porn magazine has greater credibility, though a large portion of its subscribership might not appreciate that. The student newspaper is guilty of some pretty damn embarrassing spelling mistakes (one of the most recent being the word "dissolved" with just one 's' in yesterday's paper, in a headline, no less!). Robert Happelberg 17:17, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Hm, Slovenian is just three words off Sloven (-ian). I could call those inhabitant Blabenes (and also I can form adjective from Anglia as Anglian (or Anglic) meaning English). Are you sure that Slovenes was derived from that French word? I would like to see some serious English etymological sources on the word "Slovene" (yes, Eleassar777 had provided some sources - Mr. Gobetz, ...) Does other non-English etymology has nothing to do with this term? See above - a word  Slovene  in Proto-Slavic means Slavs and is derived from one basis *slov- ~, which I guess have nothing to do with (most likely later) English word sloven. Also consider the similar situation with the word Jew, which came into Slovene from French word, but in modern Slovene Jews are called Judje and not Židje, becase the later term is considered mainly as an offensive word. I do believe that there are many words, both in English and in Slovene, which have similar ways of formation. Very similar is a word college, which in past 10-20 years is now in modern Slovene (okay, let us say Slovenian for a change) called merely kolidž and not koledž anymore. I guess it has to do with a pronunciation of this English word - [ko´lidž] (as is written in Veliki angleško slovenski slovar (Great English Slovene Dictionary)) How about if we can not agree and we 'better' form a few new words  'Slovic'/'Slovenic'  for Slovene/Slovenian, or  'Slovens'  for Slovenes/Slovenians, a... --xJaM 22:25, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As Dystopos have already warned us for obeying three-revert rule and that you do not considerate that I have protected some pages which you have been almost vandalised BT2. I know this won't help much, but I am trying to do my best. You are simply not able to discuss one thing at all. You are just accusing others being hypocrites and irational. There is nothing more I really can do. But I won't subordinate to no-one until a good and fair consensus is found. Good night - I have to sleep a bit yet. I am also glad that Anton gave his opinion in this matter and I respect it. If he would say that using 'Slovenian' is better and preferred I would also respect that, because he really helps if you ask him. In contrast to some users here, who don't actually and are just playing smart. --xJaM 23:05, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Interesting, it appears Slovenian American Frederic Baraga already used the word Slovenian some 150 years ago. http://www.prah.net/slovenia/history/inbaraga.htm

Also interesting, XJam claims he would call the people of fictional country Blabenia Blabenes. For real? Earlier today he posted to me the "Okay BT2 what can I say more? I am prepared to use 'preferred' terms here (just for the sake of the order), but you must know that your actions do not show high productive work." just minutes before going on a revert rampage again replacing Slovenian with Slovene. In the past he blasted me for doing the opposite while replacing Slovenian with Slovene in documents of others (documents I had never touched). He's been doing this since at least October 2002! (Proof: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maribor&diff=383198&oldid=380931). So he's the biggest wikipedia contributor from Slovenia, by far. Much of his contributions have only lessened the quality level at Wikipedia. He's already been scolded for trying to stuff unsupported and highly controversial material into the (soon to be renamed) Timeline of Slovene history and recently he cheapened the page on Slovenian Americans by adding Jewish-American astronaut Resnik based solely on her surname. I'm wondering how long before we see Denis Rodman and his arguably Slovenian surname in there too. :( BT2 00:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I do not claim - I just might say..., as you might say. I've posted that message because I am forced to use some 'preferred' terms here. If I want to write good articles I have to use bad words and terms. So what do you expect of me? To stop writing for Wikipedia or what? I can do, and you can write you own Wikipedia related to Slovenes and Slovenia if you please. Yes, I have changed Zocky's term 'Slovenian' to Slovene, because I was taught so and because I know it is a valid term - so I did nothing wrong on that October three years ago. When did you come to WP? Some year after that or even later - I can't even remember correctly. As I see you have been mostly reverting.
 * I was not trying to stuff unsupported material there. I just collected what I have found from other sources. Of course there are greater specialists on history as I am - I am not a professional historian, but I am trying to be at least good wikipedian.
 * As for Resnik. It is not based just on her surname. I've told you that I have found only one dead link on the net (now it works as it seems) (DOGODKI IN ODMEVI IZ VESOLJA Events and echoes from space) (in Slovene). It says:
 * Judith Resnik, rojena leta 1949, po izobrazbi pianistka ter diplomirana elektroinženirka, članica posadke Discoveryja in po neuradnih podatkih slovenskega porekla…;
 * Judith Resnik, born 1949, pianist by education and graduated electrical engineer, member of Challenger team and by unofficial data of Slovene origin…;

 * As I recall and I went to find how Vojko Kogej in his booklet Vesoljske pasti (Space traps, 4) wrote (sorry for fast translation): Is Judith Resnik of our origin? Further inthere: In the year 1978 when she was elected for astronaut, her surname woke my interest. I've asked NASA if Resnik is perhaps of Slovene origin. What a question, suchlike the answer: "NASA astronaut is not of Slovene origin." Obviously I've asked to the wrong adress, even for astronaut Walter Schirra, who was born in 1923 in a family of pilots ~ Istrian emigrants have reported in 1971 from US that he comes from Labin (a small town in Istria note-xJaM) ~ According to one surmise a Slovene Jakob Resnik, who has emigrated to USA in 1912, was married there twice, secondly without fail to Slovene Brigita from Vodice near Ljubljana. He was among others a butcher and he lived for 90 years, perhaps a grandfather of Judith Resnik. After information from 1978 which came from Cleveland I have said during the first start of Challenger in 1984 on TV that after unofficial data she is of Slovene origin and I have pulled the trigger of avalanches of guesses, which have not yet given any more reliable results.
 * I hope this will silence you a bit. --xJaM 01:44, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, if Resnik was indeed of Slovenian ethnicity..that's great! I wouldn't call it "probable" though. As for your claim that you are being forced to use 'Slovenian'.. huh?? Nobody is forcing you. If a native-English Slovenian refines info you contributed a little, what does this have to do with you personally? Call yourself Slovene, if you like. But please try and accept the huge difference between an insignificant naming style difference like 'organization' vs 'organisation' or 'favour' vs 'favor' and the difference between using 'Slovenian' and 'Slovene'. You referred to the considerable trend (especially rapid on the Internet) of moving away from Slovene and to Slovenian as stupidity. The trend is not stupid but natural and logical. Slovenian, as does Californian, Austrian, Australian, Estonian, etc, dervies naturally from Slovenia and this is simply how any English speaker would call people of a country called Slovenia. Efforts to continue supporting 'Slovene' in any way (e.g. reverting, coming up with new definitions for Slovene, etc) only helps to maintain the confusion over Slovenia, Slovakia, Slavonia, etc. BT2 04:57, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Darling, you do realise of course that the adjective used of Slovakia, a country ending in '-ia', is preferably Slovak rather than Slovakian, don't you? The article below, I find, is written without much substantiation; mere analogy does not make something right. Its only point is that countries ending in -ia have adjectives ending in -ian; and by finding a counterexample this rule has been proved false. That this may be a general trend is acceptable, but this has little influence on how a specific instance to which this 'rule' might apply should behave. Besides, 'Slovenes' are special. :) (And no, 'Slovak' is not really that similar to 'Slovene' to warrant a much more unwieldy name for either one.)

No, I had no idea Slovak was preferred by Slovaks. Your argument is ridiculous because we are discussing Slovene, not Sloven. Slovene was a British mistake (like the deportion that led to the massacre of 10,000 Slovenians). Does Slovene even LOOK like an English word? It is not natural at all. On the other hand, there is Slovenian. Perfectly valid, popular, and natural. BT2 14:51, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * There's no need to be condescending really. If you could be so kind and tell me what makes my argument ridiculous just because we are discussing Slovene and not Sloven, I'd appreciate it. I don't think I've mentioned Sloven anywhere here. The fact that there exists a nation which has an adjective ending in something other than -ian and whose country's name ends in -ia simply means that the rule put forward by that article by Dr Gobetz is not something rigid to which all adjectives from country names adhere. Therefore, since this is the only point the article appears to make, and it is not really true (disproved by counterexample), it follows that there is nothing unusual, let alone wrong, with using an adjective other than Slovenian to refer to Slovenes. I wish to make no such point that because the adjective from Slovakia omits -ia the adjective from Slovenia ought to do the same thing.
 * And yes, Slovene seems like a perfectly good English word to me. You can't just go on to call something a mistake when it is different from your standpoint. Many English people use Slovene; and because many do, it is part of our language and thus quite correct. No one has the right to tell me that what I (consciously) use as good language is wrong for whichever reason, etymology included. This is why I write realise rather than the "etymologically preferable" realize. Maybe you could read up on descriptive linguistics.

 * And of course the author is North American and can only speak for American practice. This has absolutely no bearing on how we use our language. It has absolutely no right to claim that a usage which speakers of English find appropriate is for one reason or another incorrect, as it attempts to do. And although 'Slovenian' may be more common of a word, this does not make 'Slovene' less valid. According to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, you're not supposed to change valid words to make them more suited to your regional variant of English (except perhaps in article titles if the word is much more common). In what way is there a huge difference between Slovene and Slovenian on the one and organisation and organization, or perhaps draughts and checkers, on the other hand?

Wikipedia is an ENCYCLOPEDIA. And the less correct, less popular, and less natural Slovene is sufficiently different from Slovenian to cause confusion.

 * This is your opinion. I have yet to meet anyone who would be confused by something so trivial.

 * The president of the United States confused Slovakia with Slovenia. Enough said. ;) BT2 17:00, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Personally, I find 'Slovene' to be a lovely, concise word. I don't see a pressing need to add new characters to the word if they don't convey any additional meaning. And whilst I don't see anything particularly wrong in using 'Slovenian' either, it does seem to me to be against the spirit of this project to insist on either form. Given that 'Slovene' was, if I understand this correctly, the one used initially, it seems to make sense to retain that usage, but only where it was originally used. 82.192.47.203

You are not correct, actually. Slovenian is on record as the older term.

 * The oldest version of this article used Slovene, as did the oldest version of Slovene language:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Slovenes&oldid=75152
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Slovenian_language&oldid=282599
 * 82.192.47.203

---

Slovenian the correct term, Slovene incorrectly copied from French
Since it hasn't been posted in full yet:

___________________________________________________________________________________

I can't take it any more. And there is an even longer archive of the dispute! This dispute is not worth having.

On a serious note, this seems to be no more than a difference between US (American) and UK (British) usage, and the word 'correct' does not apply, IMHO. With due respect to those who have a serious interest in being correct, I suggest that it is a matter of opinion at best, and a matter of comfort otherwise. So pick one and move on. Google-hits or oldest reference are irrelevant when the issue is 'correct' versus 'incorrect'. Just say which choice is your convention, without prejudice to other views.

On a less serious note: Wikipedia (the free encyclopedia) contains a passage under Slovak language stating that

The correct American English adjective for the language, people, and culture of Slovakia is 'Slovak;' Slovak belongs to the 'Slavic' group of languages. British usage sometimes employs 'Slovakian' for the American 'Slovak' and uses 'Slavonic' where the American usage is 'Slavic'.

On an even less serious note: I will continue to say Slovene, as do my relatives, and as did my ancestors when they immigrated (to the US). It is not a big deal; heck, it isn't even a Slovenian word.

Oh, yeah, one more thing, and I mean it with great affection: it's a bit amusing to see such interest in this topic (that is, to pick one of two words) from Slovenia, a land of about 40 dialects. To find consensus on Slovene versus Slovenian is like trying to find consensus on which dialect uses 'correct' pronunciation.

Signing off now, best regards to all for a great encyclopedia,

Anonymous (the famous author) - June 13, 2005

---

 December 1995 Slovenian Research Center of America, Inc. Dr. Edward Gobetz 29227 Eddy Road Willoughby Hills, OH 44092

Both 'Slovene' and 'Slovenian' have long been used in respectable books and the media, yet there is still considerable disagreement as to which of the two terms is correct or at least preferable.

As Dr. Frank J. Kern pointed out in Zarja-The Dawn (Nov., 1949), the use of the term 'Slovene' had been copied from French. It was particularly popularized at the end of the First World War, when a new kingdom, known in French, then the primary diplomatic language, as 'Royaume des Serbes, Croates et Slovenes,' was established. The British incorrectly adopted and in the first two instances only slightly modified theFrench terms, introducing the English use of the words Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. With the exception of an accent and pronunciation, the English name 'Slovenes' is, in its written form, identical with the French term. Yet, while the use in French is quite appropriate, the use of an identical term in English is not. As a general rule, whenever the English names of countries end in '-ia,' the names of their respective peoples end in '-ian.'

Thus, we have Austria-Austrian, Australia-Australian, Russia-Russian, Lithuania-Lithuanian, Estonia-Estonian, Romania-Romanian,Bosnia-Bosnian, Cambodia-Cambodian, California-Californian, etc. Obviously, it is only logical that we should also use Slovenia-Slovenian.

This rule is so well established that it is almost impossible to imagine such terms as Austrenes, Australenes, Italenes, Russeries, Estoneries, etc. Who in the world would be willing to accept such distortions of the English language and its established logic? Yet, somehow, this is what has happened to the people of Slovenia (and let us emphasize that contrary to a recently published statement of a SIM translator, the name Slovenia, while discouraged by the Germans for purposes of easier Germanization, has been known for centuries, as we will show and document elsewhere). Dr. Kern openly and honestly regretted the 'bad influence of his own English-Slovene Dictionary and The English-Slovene Reader.' To comply with the British version he, too, at first used the incorrect 'Slovene,' but later, for many decades, tried to correct his 1919 mistake and advocated the universal use of the term 'Slovenian,' both as a noun and an adjective. The defenders of the term Slovenian range from Dr. Kern and Dr. Vojmir Bratina, an internationally prominent Slovenian Canadian (not Canadene!) metallurgist, who is also a capable linguist and is exceptionally well versed in Slovenian literary history, archeology and the arts, to Dr. Charles Gribble, an American professor of Slavic languages and literatures and director of the Slavica Publishers, who, for instance, wrote us how glad he was that The Slovenian Research Center of America, Inc., used the correct term 'Slovenian' rather than the incorrect 'Slovene' (advocated by a Slovenian-born professor in New York).

It was, however, only in November, 1995, that we heard another very interesting and witty observation on this topic, as related by Mrs. Genevieve 'Gene' Drobnic. Her late father Frank Jaksic, like herself a noted Slovenian American civic leader, put it this way: 'When residents of Virginia will no longer be called Virginians but Virgins, then, and only then, I would be willing to call our people Slovenes rather than Slovenians.' While we hope that this logic will inevitably and increasingly prevail throughout the English-speaking world, it is nevertheless comforting to know that quite regardless of whether we use Slovenian or Slovene, love is in every Slovenian. Is there any other county in the entire world which contains love in its very name?"

______________________________________________________________________

 * Comment Wikipedia is not the place for original research. We could probably narrow the argument successfully by restricting our statements to the opinions of verifiable authorities rather than expounding on our own reasoning. Dystopos 12:55, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

I have translated a large amount of text from Slovene, where it is argued that Slovene is the right term both as a noun and an adjective. The source was:
 * S.Klinar. Slovene ali Slovenian. Slava. Debatni list No. plus 1994/1995. Pg. 105.

Unfortunately, the system crashed (that happens a lot of time - does anyone know why?). I'll try to post the complete text later - today or tomorrow.

It is interesting that S.Klinar posted an article with the same title two years later in cooperation with Mr Gobetz. I have ordered it and expect it will be available to me the following Monday or Tuesday.

I also took a look in the Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology (1967). It only has one entry: Slovene. It claims that Slovene was adopted from German slowene. Later, I'll post it too.

Greetings!

-- Eleassar777 my talk 13:53, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Deltabeignet

Deltabeignet
final (2/5/2) ending 23:48 21 June 2005 (UTC)

I have recently passed the 1000 edit mark (see here) having been here since February 2005 (in addition to a number of anonymous edits I made before registering), and would like to become an administrator. I have spent much time on New Pages cleaning up and tagging stubs (and alternately, tagging many bits of nonsense for speedy deletion or making them redirects.) I've also spent a bit of time perusing RC for vandalism. Naturally, I've spent vast amounts of time fixing links and formatting. On the other hand, I've dedicated plenty of effort to large-scale constructive work and the like (see my responses for more on that.) Deltabeignet 23:52, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) I have had good experience with this user. He says he will be more careful when he has permanent deletion powers, and remember that nothing an admin does is "permanently permanent" anyway. His work on the Layla article really impressed me. He came in and picked up a piece to greatly improve it - which he has - and I feel this is the sort of stuff that shows he is ready to be an admin. Harro5 08:26, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) This should be no big deal. Benefit of the doubt. JuntungWu 11:40, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) 1000 is a bit low with just 4 months... A couple of improper speedy tags, one of which is a gimme redirect, and the other of which was a bit POV, but clearly not a speedy.  Just eyeballing it, about 1/3 of the edits have no edit summary.  Very sparse talk page. CryptoDerk 00:47, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Just for the hell of it...
 * 3) I rarely fail to use edit summaries nowadays (excepting talk pages, where there isn't much point, and minor edits).
 * 4) I've made a few mistakes, no doubt (New Pages turns into a "who can get the speedy delete tag down first" race if there are too many people), but those both look to be at least 500 edits ago. I promise that if made an admin, I will only speedy delete pages I'm completely sure of.
 * 5) I couldn't say why I don't get many messages; most of my work isn't especially confrontational.
 * 6) You're not still mad that I accidentally tagged that copyvio for Wiktionary, are you? Deltabeignet 03:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you replied with a numbered list, cause I wasn't really asking any questions. I don't recall any copyvio wiktionary thing, and I don't remember running into you before or being mad at you, so I'm not "still" mad at you.  CryptoDerk 04:56, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * The numbered list, well, that's just my style, I guess (too much time spent on IMDb message boards). On the other issue, I was just being a little paranoid (not to mention sleep deprived). I've got no problem with opposition because I don't have the experience (but I would really like to delete nonsense on sight instead of making it another admin's problem). Deltabeignet 17:45, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm neutral on this nomination, but regarding the improper speedy tags, I'd like to say this in Deltabeignet's defense: there's no good way to tell what his error rate is. Deleted pages don't show up on a user's contribution list.  He could have an error rate of 0.1% or 99%; we can't tell.  Everyone makes some mistakes, even admins.  --Xcali 23:09, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) OpposeAs of now, only has 26 edits to the user talk namespace. This does not show a sufficient amount of user interaction for an admin. Bratsche talk  5 pillars 22:48, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:36, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Because Boothy443 has opposed every adminship request on this page without reason, I have left him a polite comment/suggestion on his user talk page that he either provide reasons for his opposition or withdraw his votes. Flcelloguy [[Image:Bass clef2.gif|25px|Cello today?]] Give me a note! Eighth note (crop).gif Desk  21:30, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose, regretfully. In my opinion, self-nominations require an even more compelling case than other people's nominations, and 1000 edits isn't that high. Give it a little more time, and I'll change my vote. --Scimitar 13:31, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose [[Image:Flag_of_Australia.svg|15px]] Cyberjunkie   TALK  05:21, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Nothing obviously wrong with this candidate, but I am reluctant to support a candidacy for an editor with such low Talk: (63) and User talk: (14) edit count. Only has 75% use of edit summaries in article space, too.  Further, we have lots of people doing speedy deletes (usually when I sit down to do them there are maybe ten to do, and anyway I prefer the "tag and bag" approach to CSDs where the admin finding the page isn't the one deleting it) and being an admin isn't necessary to do RC/vandalism patrol. Kelly Martin 21:59, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

 * 1) I have had no interaction positive nor negative with this user and those won't vote either way, however I do not agree with edit counting as a qualifier, though I do feel that this request should be scrutinized due to apparent hastiness of some edits and the lack of justificating summaries for edits which though not sloppy by itself causes some concern. Jtkiefer 20:46, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Comments

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
 * A. Being able to speedy delete patent nonsense instead of passing the buck with a tag would be a huge help, so I foresee much more work on New Pages. I also imagine continuing the fight against vandalism, both reverting and warning/blocking.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I always take pleasure in cleaning up incoherent stubs and turning them into simple but reasonably comprehensive illustrated pieces (such as Overdub, Single coil, and Tremolo arm). Also, two of my favorite projects have been my solo, Rivalry between Fender and Gibson, and my extensive work in bringing Layla up from a two-paragraph blurb into a comprehensive and colorful piece that could probably get FA status if I was brave enough to nominate it. Also, I helped a good deal in de-POV'ing Tort reform.
 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * A. I've never been in any kind of conflict that I can think of; I do get a little stressed when I see people creating strings of unformatted stubs on topics of questionable notability (and slim chance of expansion). Usually I go work on something else or sleep it off, both of which never fail to calm my nerves and solve the problem.


text:
AOL Community Leader Program

The AOL Community Leader Program or AOL CLP was the official name for the large group of America Online online service volunteers who moderated chat rooms, message boards, and download libraries.

The program's roots dated back to the use of online remote volunteer "guides" by AOL predecessor QuantumLink at its start in 1985. The system which became AOL established the Community Leader Program officially in the early 1990s, and discontinued it in 2005. At the peak of the program, it is estimated that AOL had approximately 14,000 volunteers, including 350 non-adult teenagers.

Responsibilities
Community Leaders had a wide variety of responsibilities, ranging from hosting chat rooms, monitoring message boards and file libraries, providing customer service, teaching online classes, and particularly creating and managing forum content. However, toward the end of the program, Community Leader duties were generally restricted to monitoring chat and message boards. In exchange for their services, AOL provided free service to their volunteers. Community Leaders also received special accounts (Price Index 77 or Overhead Accounts) that allowed them to restrict disruptive chat, hide inappropriate message board postings, and access private areas on the AOL service, such as the Community Leader Headquarters (CLHQ).

Role
Although at times controversial, the Community Leader program arguably played a substantial role in the rapid growth and success of the America Online service in the mid-1990s. Because they were usually recruited from the more active users of a particular online forum, Community Leaders were often very passionate about the area for which they volunteered their time. This enthusiasm usually resulted in a greater sense of community and a higher level of professionalism in that forum. This in turn gave the AOL service more value over the less organized "frontier" of the Internet, at least in the eyes of users new to the online scene at the time. It also provided oversight with respect to forum content by knowledgeable individuals.

Department of Labor investigation
In May 1999, Kelly Hallisey and Brian Williams, two former Community Leaders, filed a class action lawsuit against AOL, claiming that AOL volunteers performed work equivalent to employees and thus should be compensated according to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The plaintiffs argued that the Community Leader position required a significant amount of effort and detail to qualify the position as having an "employee relationship" with AOL. The plaintiffs specifically demonstrated how Community Leaders had to undergo a thorough, 3-month training program and were required to file timecards for shifts, work at least four hours per week, and submit detailed reports outlining their work activity during each shift. When AOL first started the program it charged for access to its services by the hour, thus Community Leaders, i.e. those who were heavy Internet users saved hundreds of dollars each month. This fact actually hurt AOL when the lawsuit began, however, as the reception of benefits (along with whether the work is full-time and displaces regular employees) is a factor that helps the Department of Labor determine if a volunteer should actually be paid. The U.S. Department of Labor investigated the report, but came to no conclusions, officially closing the investigation in 2001. In response to the investigation, AOL began drastically reducing volunteer responsibilities. By 2000, nearly all Community Leaders had lost content-editing rights and no longer provided customer service or technical support to AOL customers. Additionally, in many AOL forums, Community Leader supervisors became more lax about paperwork and shift hours.

In February 2008, the court in which the lawsuit was filed denied AOL's Motion to Dismiss and certified the case for class-action status. The court has ordered AOL to provide the names and contact information for all former Community Leaders to notify them and give them the opportunity to join the class-action lawsuit.

In February 2010, the United States for the Southern District of New York gave preliminary approval to a settlement between AOL and the Community Leaders totaling 15 million dollars. Final approval was granted in May 2010.

End of Program
The Department of Labor investigation, which, at least in part prompted AOL to limit Community Leader responsibilities, caused issues for the company. Without unpaid volunteers, the company would have to hire employees to manage and post online content and run effective online communities previously done by Community Leaders. Leading up to and following the AOL Time Warner merger, AOL did not have the time or money to invest in building and maintaining its online community. The company's later focus on advertising as its major source of income rather than high quality bespoke online content, an intention that began earlier in 1996 when subscriber hourly rates were replaced with a single unlimited-use monthly fee, provided the company little apparent profit incentive to monetize community forums.

Along with the DOL investigation, and with less need for well-managed communities and membership in serious decline, AOL decided to terminate its volunteer program. In late May 2005, AOL informed its Community Leaders that they would be released from their positions on June 8 of that year. AOL offered volunteers 12 months of free service in compensation for their services. While many Community Leaders left the service after this announcement, others stayed with AOL and continued their efforts at building community, albeit in an unofficial role.

title: AOL Community Leader Program


text:
User:ShARpDPE

Big fan. Just starting

title: User:ShARpDPE