Re: [Foundation-l] Call for volunteers: 2009-2010 Audit Committee
Hoi, Congratulations with this highly qualified list of people for the Audit Committee :) I hope they will have a good time and an uneventful time .. :) Thanks, GerardM 2009/7/20 Stuart West stuw...@gmail.com Just a quick follow-up note to thank everyone who expressed interest in serving on the Foundation's Audit Committee. I'm pleased to announced the following membership of the 2009-2010 Audit Committee, which represents a mix of four community members with financial backgrounds and two San Francisco-area business people who can help provide local oversight: * Matt Bisanz -- Matt was founding treasurer of the Wikimedia New York chapter and is an administrator on the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons (User:MBisanz). His past experience includes exempt organization tax compliance with a Big Four accounting firm and federal grants reporting compliance in an educational setting. He holds an MBA in accounting from Hofstra University and a graduate certificate in strategy and leadership from NYU. * Ad Huikeshoven -- Ad Huikeshoven lives in the Hague, the Netherlands. He is an economist and a professional auditor, a long time trusted editor (User:Dedalus since 2005) and the longest server member on the Audit Committee (since 2007). * Renata Stasaityte -- Renata has been working as a tax accountant at a mid-size accounting firm in New York City since 2006. She has BBA in Accounting and MS in Taxation. She is an editor (since 2005) and an administrator (since 2006) on English Wikipedia (User:Renata3). * Anders Wennersten -- Anders lives in Stockholm and is now retired after a career including being senior manager at Ericsson and with an university degree in mathematics and economics. He is Treasurer of Wikimedia Sverige, a member of the Chapters Committee, and an active Wikipedian (User:Anders_Wennersten), doing over 30,000 edits a year mainly as patroller on the Swedish Wikipedia reviewing and fixing all new articles. * Alan Bauer -- Alan was most recently a Group President at Progressive Insurance, where he was responsible for $4 billion in revenue and took car insurance online in 1997. His non-profit experience includes serving on the Board of Trustees and Finance/Planning Committee of Carlton College. He has a BA in Math and Philosophy from Carlton and an MBA from the Univ of Chicago. * Sandy Gallanter -- Sandy is CEO of the Aspen Group, a real-estate development company that focuses on low-income housing. His non-profit experience includes serving as an officer and on the Boards of the New Israel Fund and the San Francisco Jewish Community Center. He earned both a BS and JD from Rutgers, and is an attorney and Certified Public Accountant. * Myself * Executive Director Sue Gardner, and Foundation Chair Michael Snow, both as observers On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Stu West s...@wikimedia.org wrote: As many of you know, the Foundation has an Audit Committee which represents the Board in oversight of financial and accounting issues, including planning, reporting, audits, and internal controls (see http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Audit_committee for details). The Committee typically serves for one year, starting in May/June and ending a year later when the Foundation files its annual tax return in the U.S. (the IRS Form 990). For the past year, the committee has consisted of two Board members (Michael Snow and me as Committee chair) and one long-serving and incredibly helpful community member, Ad Huikeshoven. We've recently started forming the 2009-2010 Audit Committee, and the current team has generously agreed to serve another year. We are keenly interested in increasing community participation. The time commitment is modest, as far as Wikimedia goes: review the Foundation's general financial practices and draft financial statements/filings, and then participate in three or four conference calls during the year with the staff and our independent auditors, KPMG. The one requirement for membership is financial literacy, usually some kind of professional experience with finance, accounting or audit. If you're interested in serving on the Committee, please email us at audit-l at lists.wikimedia.org and let us know how you think you could contribute. Thanks. -s === Stu West Wikimedia Foundation Trustee Board Treasurer stu mailto:s...@wikimedia.org at wikimedia.org [User:Stu] ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list
[Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad --- The NY Times has an article investigating why, unlike the articles on Wikipedia which in theory are improved, fact checked, footnoted, and generally enhanced over time, the photos that go with Wikipedia articles are so bad[1] and in many cases there is no photo at all for even well known public figures. Few high-quality photographs, particularly of celebrities, make it onto on Wikipedia because Wikipedia runs only pictures with the most permissive Creative Commons license[2], which allows anyone to use an image, for commercial purposes or not, as long as the photographer is credited. 'Representatives or publicists will contact us' horrified at the photographs on the site, says Jay Walsh, a spokesman for the Wikimedia Foundation. 'They will say: I have this image. I want you to use this image. But it is not as simple as uploading a picture that is e-mailed to us.' Recent photographs on Wikipedia are almost exclusively the work of amateurs who don't mind giving away their work. 'Amateur may be too kind a word; their photos tend to be the work of fans who happen to have a camera,' opines the Times's author. Ultimately the issue for professional photographers who might want to donate their work is copyright. 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.' [1]. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/arts/20funny.html [2]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_use_policy [3]. http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/20/0044240/Why-the-Photos-On-Wikipedia-Are-So-Bad ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
2009/7/20 K. Peachey p858sn...@yahoo.com.au Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad --- Recent photographs on Wikipedia are almost exclusively the work of amateurs who don't mind giving away their work. 'Amateur may be too kind a word; their photos tend to be the work of fans who happen to have a camera,' opines the Times's author. Ultimately the issue for professional photographers who might want to donate their work is copyright. 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.' [1]. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/arts/20funny.html [2]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_use_policy [3]. http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/20/0044240/Why-the-Photos-On-Wikipedia-Are-So-Bad ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l And if we truly wanted to elevate the text on the site, we should allow *writers* to maintain the copyright? This is, I am sorry to say, sloppy thinking. The images have been improved greatly, but that is not as visible as on the text side - one minute there is no picture, the next one there is a bad one, and the next minute there is a better one, and soon somebody comes along and uploads a truly great one. It takes a little bit more time, because it's a bit harder to contribute a picture than it is to contribute with proofreading or fact checking - you actually have to meet the person you want to portrait or go to the geographical area you want to show. But improvement is certainly on the way - and I am confident that this trend will improve as a) more amateurs have a chance to meet celebrities (statistically, even blind chicken find their food...), b) Commons becomes better known, and c) chapters can learn from each other how to get museums and archives to donate their pictures. Best wishes, -- Lennart Guldbrandsson, chair of Wikimedia Sverige and press contact for Swedish Wikipedia // ordförande för Wikimedia Sverige och presskontakt för svenskspråkiga Wikipedia ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad ... 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.' We should definitely take advice from a professional photographer who doesn't understand what a licence is. -- Stephen Bain stephen.b...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
Hello, I think the writer should have looked on Commons longer and he would have find beautifull images. We work on Wikimedia with a lot of people doing the best the can, and the message read above is disrespectfull to our volunteers. Nobody start with perfect photo's, even the best photographer starts with bad pictures and grows slowly to perfect pictures. So yes we have pictures that are not so good, but the people that made that photo will grow grow grow and make a perfect picture in a few years. Commons is good in stimulating people to grow, you start with a fan picture than you want a QI and after that you want a FP. Huib Http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:Abigor ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
Hello, I think the writer should have looked on Commons longer and he would have find beautifull images. We work on Wikimedia with a lot of people doing the best the can, and the message read above is disrespectfull to our volunteers. Nobody start with perfect photo's, even the best photographer starts with bad pictures and grows slowly to perfect pictures. So yes we have pictures that are not so good, but the people that made that photo will grow grow grow and make a perfect picture in a few years. Commons is good in stimulating people to grow, you start with a fan picture than you want a QI and after that you want a FP. Huib Http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:Abigor ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
2009/7/20 Stephen Bain stephen.b...@gmail.com: 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.' We should definitely take advice from a professional photographer who doesn't understand what a licence is. He does - he's a Wikimedia contributor! I'd suggest a quote got over-compressed there. The Slashdot coverage appears surprisingly clueful - i.e., that reusability and a proper free license comes first. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Stephen Bainstephen.b...@gmail.com wrote: Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad ... 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.' We should definitely take advice from a professional photographer who doesn't understand what a licence is. I think that when we're dealing with celebrities, it is both in our and their interest to have a good photo on Wikipedia or Commons. They look very happy to pay a good photographer to get a good photo of them, why can't they pay a bit more so that the photographer releases some photos under a free license? Is the lobby of photographers really so powerful? At the moment the only alternative celebs have is hoping no random Wikipedian takes a photo of them and once they're dead a nice copyrighted photo can be uploaded on the projects that allow fairuse... I don't think many celebs really want this ;) Cruccone ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
Ultimately the issue for professional photographers who might want to donate their work is copyright. 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.' Apart from the clueless phrasing (which may or may not be due to the news reporter instead of Mr. Avenaim) what he doesn't seem to understand is that the pictures are what they are BECAUSE HE does not want to release EVEN ONE of his photographs to make it better. Basically he says I do not like the look of it but I do not offer my work but you have to change your rules instead. And I'd basically say it is as bad as it is because YOU have the means but not the will to enrichen public content, and I may have added that calling those people names who offer their resources, time and money to make Wikipedia better while you don't is hypocrisy. But I guess they aren't really care. As a sidenote I always wonder what amount of money would a professional photographer lose to release only one quality photo for a topic. He must be credited, so his name would be still famous if the picture ever would find its way into the mainstream media; and I it doesn't s/he didn't lose money but the community wins. Usually I do not get it why people choose NC licenses all the time while there's usually a low probability to actually _lose_ money by making it public. But maybe I'm wrong and people get heaps of cash for these pictures, and every bit counts. Peter ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
I think there ate two issues here, not one, even though all the replies concentrate on just one issue: 1) why (good quality) pictues do not make it to Commons, or make it insufficiently; 2) why they do not make it ot the articles. I tried to make the point in the recent thread on the purpose of Commons, but somehow it did not draw enough attention. Realistically, if somebody uploaded a good picture (not necessarily of a person, it could also be a landscape, a PD piece of art or smth else), and if this somebody is an active editor of only one Wikipedia, this picture has very little chance to make it to other Wikipedia articles, except may be for the ones which are created after the file has been uploaded. I believe that this problem is a meta issue and can be solved (i) either by the Commons itself actively promoting newly uploaded files or (ii) by writing a bot updating all Wikipedias on newly uploaded files (for instance, if the article exists and does not contain any illustrations). Cheers Yaroslav ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] new list summaries
Dear all, I swear I'll try to get back on a bi-weekly schedule. Note: If anyone wants to try their hand at summarizing some of the other lists, there are lots of low-traffic project lists that could gain a bigger audience if summarized. Thanks Phoebe for keeping this up. Cheers Yaroslav ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: it to Commons, or make it insufficiently; 2) why they do not make it ot the articles. I tried to make the point in the recent thread on the purpose of Commons, but somehow it did not draw enough attention. Realistically, if somebody uploaded a good picture (not necessarily of a person, it could also be a landscape, a PD piece of art or smth else), and if this somebody is an active editor of only one Wikipedia, this picture has very little chance to make it to other Wikipedia articles, except may be for the ones which are created after the file has been uploaded. There are tools such as http://toolserver.org/~magnus/fist.php that address this, perhaps they could be more advertised. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Actual lawyers discussing the NPG vs. WP situation
http://lawclanger.blogspot.com/2009/07/its-not-often-that-copyright-cases-get.html Enjoy. Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] RE; Announcing Philippe Beaudette as the Strategy Project Facilitator
2009/7/19 geni geni...@gmail.com 2009/7/19 Philippe Beaudette pbeaude...@wikimedia.org: Thanks, Jaroslav - I'm really glad (truly) that there are people like you who think through those issues of values. I want to reinforce that my offer to resign was the very first email that I sent after accepting the job. I think enough of the folks with the Really Big Brains got together and the rest, as they say, is history. But please, please, please, continue to question. More important than getting our process right is getting our ethics right. The extension of the time in which candidates can nominate themselves is not under the control of a third party. Something that so clearly has the potential to influence the candidate pool presents a conflict of interest. Sue's claim it would be hard to find a replacement is not credible considering the number of OTRS, Checkusers and others who have identified themselves to the foundation. When you made the decision not th resign I doubt you could have foreseen the extension issue coming up but it does suggest that conflict of interest resignations should probably be a matter of course rather than debate or convince. -- geni I fail to understand how the extension of the candidacy period can pose a possible conflict of interest on Philippe's part at all. Please explain. -- Jon Harald Søby http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections candidacy period time change
Given that CentralNotice still isn't working, I've taken the hopefully temporary and short-lived approach of simulating the candidate notice using enwiki's local site notice. Extending the nomination period does little if people don't actually know about it. Philippe has been posting a notice about the extension at various community noticeboards, but that will of course be rather hit and miss. At the same time, creating a local site notice on one (or just a few) wikis could also be seen as quite hit and miss. For that reason, I wanted to mention this action here in case people wanted to take similar steps on other wikis. Hopefully though some form of CentralNotice will be restored shortly. -Robert Rohde On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 2:07 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Ladies and Gentlemen, As you may be aware, there is concern that the sitenotices regarding submission of candidacy for the Board of Trustees election were not seen anywhere but Meta after the 11th of this month. Because of the potentially massive consequence of this, and to encourage a full and active election, the election committee has determined that: - Candidacies will be accepted through July 27th at 23:59 (UTC) - The period for questioning candidates begins immediately. Candidates that are late to the party will, no doubt, be scrutinized by the community. The Committee hopes that the community will work to actively ensure that all candidates receive equivalent questioning. - The dates of election will not change. The election will begin on 28 July and end on 10 August. Please know that we recognize the radical nature of altering the schedule in the midst of the election and would not do it if we did not absolutely believe that there was a possibility that others may be interested and qualified and may not have known about the key dates. For the committee, Philippe (in my capacity as a volunteer, and not as an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections candidacy period time change
Hello, I have imported the En.wiki sitenotice on Commons and Incubator. This isn't the best way offcourse but it will let more people know about it. Best regards, Huib -- Http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:Abigor ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections candidacy period time change
Thanks Robert - You're correct that extending it doesn't do much good if we don't get the word out. Thanks for doing this. Philippe On Jul 20, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Robert Rohde wrote: Given that CentralNotice still isn't working, I've taken the hopefully temporary and short-lived approach of simulating the candidate notice using enwiki's local site notice. Extending the nomination period does little if people don't actually know about it. Philippe has been posting a notice about the extension at various community noticeboards, but that will of course be rather hit and miss. At the same time, creating a local site notice on one (or just a few) wikis could also be seen as quite hit and miss. For that reason, I wanted to mention this action here in case people wanted to take similar steps on other wikis. Hopefully though some form of CentralNotice will be restored shortly. -Robert Rohde On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 2:07 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Ladies and Gentlemen, As you may be aware, there is concern that the sitenotices regarding submission of candidacy for the Board of Trustees election were not seen anywhere but Meta after the 11th of this month. Because of the potentially massive consequence of this, and to encourage a full and active election, the election committee has determined that: - Candidacies will be accepted through July 27th at 23:59 (UTC) - The period for questioning candidates begins immediately. Candidates that are late to the party will, no doubt, be scrutinized by the community. The Committee hopes that the community will work to actively ensure that all candidates receive equivalent questioning. - The dates of election will not change. The election will begin on 28 July and end on 10 August. Please know that we recognize the radical nature of altering the schedule in the midst of the election and would not do it if we did not absolutely believe that there was a possibility that others may be interested and qualified and may not have known about the key dates. For the committee, Philippe (in my capacity as a volunteer, and not as an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Peter Gervaigrin...@gmail.com wrote: Ultimately the issue for professional photographers who might want to donate their work is copyright. 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow photographers to maintain the copyright.' Apart from the clueless phrasing (which may or may not be due to the news reporter instead of Mr. Avenaim) what he doesn't seem to understand is that the pictures are what they are BECAUSE HE does not want to release EVEN ONE of his photographs to make it better. Basically he says I do not like the look of it but I do not offer my work but you have to change your rules instead. And I'd basically say it is as bad as it is because YOU have the means but not the will to enrichen public content, and I may have added that calling those people names who offer their resources, time and money to make Wikipedia better while you don't is hypocrisy. Hold up! This is User:Jerry Avenaim, and he has contributed some of his low-resolution photographs, and even a higher-resolution one of Mark Marmon that is a Featured Picture on en-wiki. -Sage ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections candidacy period time change
It appears that perhaps centralnotice might be working again once you've confirmed that on local wikis, would those of you who put up local notices kindly defer to the central notice? Many thanks! pb On Jul 20, 2009, at 10:08 AM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: Thanks Robert - You're correct that extending it doesn't do much good if we don't get the word out. Thanks for doing this. Philippe On Jul 20, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Robert Rohde wrote: Given that CentralNotice still isn't working, I've taken the hopefully temporary and short-lived approach of simulating the candidate notice using enwiki's local site notice. Extending the nomination period does little if people don't actually know about it. Philippe has been posting a notice about the extension at various community noticeboards, but that will of course be rather hit and miss. At the same time, creating a local site notice on one (or just a few) wikis could also be seen as quite hit and miss. For that reason, I wanted to mention this action here in case people wanted to take similar steps on other wikis. Hopefully though some form of CentralNotice will be restored shortly. -Robert Rohde On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 2:07 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Ladies and Gentlemen, As you may be aware, there is concern that the sitenotices regarding submission of candidacy for the Board of Trustees election were not seen anywhere but Meta after the 11th of this month. Because of the potentially massive consequence of this, and to encourage a full and active election, the election committee has determined that: - Candidacies will be accepted through July 27th at 23:59 (UTC) - The period for questioning candidates begins immediately. Candidates that are late to the party will, no doubt, be scrutinized by the community. The Committee hopes that the community will work to actively ensure that all candidates receive equivalent questioning. - The dates of election will not change. The election will begin on 28 July and end on 10 August. Please know that we recognize the radical nature of altering the schedule in the midst of the election and would not do it if we did not absolutely believe that there was a possibility that others may be interested and qualified and may not have known about the key dates. For the committee, Philippe (in my capacity as a volunteer, and not as an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ foundation-l Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] RE; Announcing Philippe Beaudette as the Strategy Project Facilitator
2009/7/20 Jon Harald Søby jhs...@gmail.com: I fail to understand how the extension of the candidacy period can pose a possible conflict of interest on Philippe's part at all. Please explain. The board are effectively going to be his future boss's boss. In theory as a member the election committee he is meant to make the decision on the basis of what is best for the election. Problem is he also has a clear personal interest in choosing the option that is most likely to give him the type of boss's boss he wants. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections candidacy period time change
I find it somewhat ridiculous that someone would not know about the key dates. I've had them on my calendar for at least a month, if not more. -Dan On Jul 20, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: It appears that perhaps centralnotice might be working again once you've confirmed that on local wikis, would those of you who put up local notices kindly defer to the central notice? Many thanks! pb On Jul 20, 2009, at 10:08 AM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: Thanks Robert - You're correct that extending it doesn't do much good if we don't get the word out. Thanks for doing this. Philippe On Jul 20, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Robert Rohde wrote: Given that CentralNotice still isn't working, I've taken the hopefully temporary and short-lived approach of simulating the candidate notice using enwiki's local site notice. Extending the nomination period does little if people don't actually know about it. Philippe has been posting a notice about the extension at various community noticeboards, but that will of course be rather hit and miss. At the same time, creating a local site notice on one (or just a few) wikis could also be seen as quite hit and miss. For that reason, I wanted to mention this action here in case people wanted to take similar steps on other wikis. Hopefully though some form of CentralNotice will be restored shortly. -Robert Rohde On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 2:07 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Ladies and Gentlemen, As you may be aware, there is concern that the sitenotices regarding submission of candidacy for the Board of Trustees election were not seen anywhere but Meta after the 11th of this month. Because of the potentially massive consequence of this, and to encourage a full and active election, the election committee has determined that: - Candidacies will be accepted through July 27th at 23:59 (UTC) - The period for questioning candidates begins immediately. Candidates that are late to the party will, no doubt, be scrutinized by the community. The Committee hopes that the community will work to actively ensure that all candidates receive equivalent questioning. - The dates of election will not change. The election will begin on 28 July and end on 10 August. Please know that we recognize the radical nature of altering the schedule in the midst of the election and would not do it if we did not absolutely believe that there was a possibility that others may be interested and qualified and may not have known about the key dates. For the committee, Philippe (in my capacity as a volunteer, and not as an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ foundation-l Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ foundation-l Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Donation Button Enhancement : Part 2
Wikimedians-- As many of you know, last month we began work on exploring the visibility of the donate button on all Wikimedia projects. After a long comment period, we received many comments and many new ideas. Some of these ideas we have incorporated into a new set of test buttons. Thank you to everyone who took the time to evaluate Round 1 buttons. You can see those discussions here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2009/Donation_buttons_upgrade/Round1 We have 4 designs that we will be testing on the Wikipedia:EN main skin during August and the first part of September. We are going to evaluate each button for one full week. This process will unfold over the next two months. You can see the designs and timeline at this link: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2009/Donation_buttons_upgrade -Rand -- Rand Montoya Head of Community Giving Wikimedia Foundation www.wikimedia.org Email: r...@wikimedia.org Phone: 415.839.6885 x615 Fax: 415.882.0495 Cell: 510.685.7030 “At some future time, I hope to have something witty, intelligent, or funny in this space.” ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Donation Button Enhancement : Part 2
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Rand Montoyarmont...@wikimedia.org wrote: Wikimedians-- As many of you know, last month we began work on exploring the visibility of the donate button on all Wikimedia projects. After a long comment period, we received many comments and many new ideas. Some of these ideas we have incorporated into a new set of test buttons. Thank you to everyone who took the time to evaluate Round 1 buttons. You can see those discussions here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2009/Donation_buttons_upgrade/Round1 We have 4 designs that we will be testing on the Wikipedia:EN main skin during August and the first part of September. We are going to evaluate each button for one full week. This process will unfold over the next two months. You can see the designs and timeline at this link: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2009/Donation_buttons_upgrade Testing should be done in parallel, not in sequence. History has demonstrated that donors have a tendency to respond disproportionately to the new thing. Which means that whatever button you test first will have an advantage over whichever one you test last. Probably the easiest way to get a reasonable distribution is to vary which button people see based on their IP. -Robert Rohde ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Donation Button Enhancement : Part 2
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Rand Montoyarmont...@wikimedia.org wrote: Wikimedians-- As many of you know, last month we began work on exploring the visibility of the donate button on all Wikimedia projects. After a long comment period, we received many comments and many new ideas. Some of these ideas we have incorporated into a new set of test buttons. Thank you to everyone who took the time to evaluate Round 1 buttons. You can see those discussions here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2009/Donation_buttons_upgrade/Round1 We have 4 designs that we will be testing on the Wikipedia:EN main skin during August and the first part of September. We are going to evaluate each button for one full week. This process will unfold over the next two months. You can see the designs and timeline at this link: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2009/Donation_buttons_upgrade Testing should be done in parallel, not in sequence. History has demonstrated that donors have a tendency to respond disproportionately to the new thing. Which means that whatever button you test first will have an advantage over whichever one you test last. Probably the easiest way to get a reasonable distribution is to vary which button people see based on their IP. -Robert Rohde It's also necessary to control for seasonal traffic (and thus donation) variations. I note that the first three button tests are at the end of summer while the fourth coincides with the beginning of the school year. It could be the case that there is no variation, or that the variation is highly significant. Since nobody has looked there is no way to tell if the test results are valid. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Donation Button Enhancement : Part 2
2009/7/21 Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com: Testing should be done in parallel, not in sequence. History has demonstrated that donors have a tendency to respond disproportionately to the new thing. Which means that whatever button you test first will have an advantage over whichever one you test last. Probably the easiest way to get a reasonable distribution is to vary which button people see based on their IP. Or simply to randomise it entirely. If either of those aren't possible for technical reasons, it might be practical to rotate them - run each button for x many hours at a stretch, rotating them so as to ensure they don't regularly go up at the same time (of the day or of the week) and so that they get roughly equal coverage. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Donation Button Enhancement : Part 2
2009/7/20 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com: Rotating them would seem like a more viable solution than randomised - We don't want the situation where every new page in WP someone reads there is a new/different coloured donation button where last week there was none at all - to go from nothing to that would be almost as bad as a flashing donate here, now! banner. Indeed, that's the reasoning behind the proposed approach. We don't want it to typically be changing constantly for an individual user. Yes, a sequential run does introduce various problematic biases. An IP-address based hack could work, but would need to take into account dynamic IP addresses and such, without introducing strange new biases of its own. We'll discuss a bit further - good ideas / algorithms welcome. :-) -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours
Hi everybody, We're still in the process of getting up to speed, but I'm anxious to start interacting with more of you and garnering some feedback as we prepare to initiate this process. As a way to get to know each other and talk about the process, Philippe and I will be holding IRC office hours tomorrow on freenode's #wikimedia channel from 8-10pm UTC. (You can convert this to your local timezone using: http://bit.ly/1aCw9p ). It will be informal. We'll be around to chat, hear your ideas, and tell you what we know thus far. Please join us, and please spread the word to others who might be interested! Thanks! =Eugene -- == Eugene Eric Kim http://xri.net/=eekim Blue Oxen Associates http://www.blueoxen.com/ == ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 3:47 AM, Eugene Eric Kimee...@blueoxen.com wrote: and talk about the process, Philippe and I will be holding IRC office hours tomorrow on freenode's #wikimedia channel from 8-10pm UTC. (You can convert this to your local timezone using: http://bit.ly/1aCw9p ). May you confirm that tomorrow is July 21st or July 22nd :) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours
Hi Eugene, very nice, thank you (and welcome!) * Could you please help update the meta page on the process with your thoughts and ideas? [[m:Strategic planning 2009]] What's your current rough timeline for the coming 12 months? * I see you are using a non-editable Chandler calendar to track tasks. Can you set up an editable one for the whole community to use? It also seems to me that more of the 'later' tasks, even at this early stage, should be milestones from / facilitated through / presented to the community, whereas they are currently designed around bridgespan and board meetings. * I have the impression that bridgespan would like to be brought up to speed on what the community's key issues, motivations, and priorities are. You probably know better than anyone; how can community members best help get outsiders (like BS) get up to speed on past discussions about WM and WP future planning? How have you been getting up to speed? This might be a good discussion to continue on-wiki -- I expect most of the community editing about this will take place on Meta, and its pages are watched by many people who don't read f-l. Warmly, SJ On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Eugene Eric Kim ee...@blueoxen.com wrote: Hi everybody, We're still in the process of getting up to speed, but I'm anxious to start interacting with more of you and garnering some feedback as we prepare to initiate this process. As a way to get to know each other and talk about the process, Philippe and I will be holding IRC office hours tomorrow on freenode's #wikimedia channel from 8-10pm UTC. (You can convert this to your local timezone using: http://bit.ly/1aCw9p ). It will be informal. We'll be around to chat, hear your ideas, and tell you what we know thus far. Please join us, and please spread the word to others who might be interested! Thanks! =Eugene -- == Eugene Eric Kim http://xri.net/=eekim Blue Oxen Associates http://www.blueoxen.com/ == ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Donation Button Enhancement : Part 2
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Erik Moellere...@wikimedia.org wrote: Indeed, that's the reasoning behind the proposed approach. We don't want it to typically be changing constantly for an individual user. Yes, a sequential run does introduce various problematic biases. An IP-address based hack could work, but would need to take into account dynamic IP addresses and such, without introducing strange new biases of its own. We'll discuss a bit further - good ideas / algorithms welcome. :-) For this the normal procedure is to give users a session cookie of some kind (either one handed out by the server or one just generated on the client) and base the selection on that. For caching reasons I suppose you'd just want to do this all client side. Should work fine. Alternatively, someone rigs up the front end caches to do this substitution based on IP at serving time. This would be non-trivial with squid. It would be much easier with varnish, alas. In any case, I strongly agree with the argument against running them sequentially. Not only do you get the uncertainty from changing habits over time but later buttons will suffer from the influence of prior ones. Whatever can be done to avoid sequential testing should be done. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Donation Button Enhancement : Part 2
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Erik Moellere...@wikimedia.org wrote: Indeed, that's the reasoning behind the proposed approach. We don't want it to typically be changing constantly for an individual user. Yes, a sequential run does introduce various problematic biases. An IP-address based hack could work, but would need to take into account dynamic IP addresses and such, without introducing strange new biases of its own. We'll discuss a bit further - good ideas / algorithms welcome. :-) For this the normal procedure is to give users a session cookie of some kind (either one handed out by the server or one just generated on the client) and base the selection on that. For caching reasons I suppose you'd just want to do this all client side. Should work fine. Alternatively, someone rigs up the front end caches to do this substitution based on IP at serving time. This would be non-trivial with squid. It would be much easier with varnish, alas. In any case, I strongly agree with the argument against running them sequentially. Not only do you get the uncertainty from changing habits over time but later buttons will suffer from the influence of prior ones. Whatever can be done to avoid sequential testing should be done. Didn't we do this kind of trial during the last fundraiser - with the messages at the top? They were rotated each new day weren't they? In any case, whatever we worked out for last time can't we use that method again? wittylama.com/blog Peace, love metadata Sent from Sydney, Nsw, Australia ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
