[Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Hi Jan, It is not a problem of lack of time or lack of communication channels. It is a problem of lack of participation of chapters and fear of change. These proposals have been in meta for months. [1] The answer to many of the questions raised here have been in meta for months. [2] The problem is that it is very difficult to reform a cemetery if you need the participation of inmates and even more if when you're about to decide then all of them suddenly resurrect to oppose. The movement roles group has worked and made his proposal. It has members that also are active in chapters who were well aware of chapter’s needs and sensitivity. I think that from the beginning the chapters have been afraid to change and believed that it was they who had the authority to decide or at least to block any decision. That’s why IMO they have not felt the need to participate and that’s why they now raise their voice with thousand arguments to block the decision. In theory and to some extent I could agree with chapters that creating any new model is their death. (particularly the dead of dorment or inactive chapters) But in practice things are exactly the reverse. Wikimedia Spain [3] is the best evidence that having other organizations in the same territory is highly healthy for chapters. Although while these organizations are not formally recognized and there are no mechanisms for communication and coordination between them and the chapters there will be misunderstandings and inconveniences. I think that many participants in this debate are not grasping what decision we are talking about. We are not proposing the creation of new organizations. We are not deciding whether there will be new organizations that compete with chapters or not. The creation of new models and new organizations is not in our hands. In many countries in the world there is freedom of association and those new models and organizations may perfectly appear. They don’t need our approval. What we are deciding here is whether we want to create channels of communication and cooperation with these new models and encourage them to appear or if we give them back and tries to discourage more people joining to promote free knowledge. I think Florence and Lodewijk have understood. But while the proposal of Florence seems to me that leads us to give them back by creating two sides with the WMF and the new institutions in one and chapters in the other the proposal of Lodewijk leads to create mechanisms to ensure that we have good understanding. I like more the proposal of Lodewijk. I also have given my view to the questions Achal so kindly had the patience to collect in meta. [4] [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Movement_roles/summary/modelsdirection=prevoldid=2979496 [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_roles/models#Partner_organizations_2 [3] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports/Wikimedia_Espa%C3%B1a [4] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_affiliation_models#Questions Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:41:49 +0100 From: Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012 Message-ID: 268bd4b0-7e6f-43fe-bcc6-03b486877...@wikimedia.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Ziko and Lodewijk, Thank you for this feedback. I must say that I was not intimately involved in these recommendations, and my take was that this was something that came out of the MR workgroup, and we had actually waited too long to approve these recommendations. It is clear to me that there is a close link between the fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of organising ourselves. I am also convinced that we need to increase the different kinds of organisation methods that we support. But lets take the time to discuss the content of this proposal. If that means we need to take an extra month, so be it (would be my personal opinion) and make sure that we end up with something that is a marked improvement on the current situation. And we might have to refine it in the coming years (as we will have to do with most of the things we are trying to settle at this point :) Thanks for your constructive feedback! Jan-Bart ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
You have not understood the difference between a discussion in Meta and the transformation of this discussion in an operational implementation in the organization. This proposal has a lot of bugs, it seems like a discussion made in front of the coffee machine. Formally your point of view is acceptable, but this solution cannot be implemented as is because your point of view remains hard to implement. I would be an inmate instead of a participant in Pindaric flights. Ilario On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Joan Goma jrg...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jan, It is not a problem of lack of time or lack of communication channels. It is a problem of lack of participation of chapters and fear of change. These proposals have been in meta for months. [1] The answer to many of the questions raised here have been in meta for months. [2] The problem is that it is very difficult to reform a cemetery if you need the participation of inmates and even more if when you're about to decide then all of them suddenly resurrect to oppose. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Just to provide some background to my previous mail and left clear that there is not offensive intention. In Spanish the cemetery is a well known metaphor for the difficulties of reforming universities and educational systems. For example in Uruguay: http://www.ort.edu.uy/home/rectorado/pdf/vocesrector101209.pdf Headline says: EDUCATIONAL REFORM: ... difficult as reforming cemeteries can not be counted with much help from those inside. I chose this example because I hope somebody will like the picture. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Fwd: [Wikimediaindia-l] Improving outreach efforts in India
See below for a great presentation of problems in conducting outreach events and wiki workshop by Nitika Tandon. It discusses events in India, but most of it is relevant for the whole world. -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore -- Forwarded message -- From: Nitika ntan...@wikimedia.org Date: 2012/2/13 Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Improving outreach efforts in India To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindi...@lists.wikimedia.org Dear All, The following is a post I've put up on the India Program page on meta regarding outreach (Please see:http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:India_Program/Outreach_Programs). Please do comment on the page itself; I'm posting it on this mailing list only to make sure it doesn't slip your attention. We have conducted over 13 outreach sessions in the past one month and have many more events scheduled to participate in over the coming weeks. (Please see: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Program/Outreach_Programs/Outreach_Sessions). It's amazing that we're doing so many outreach events all over the country to create awareness about Wikipedia, motivate attendees to learn about editing and training newbies to contribute to Wikipedia in their own special way. The single biggest challenge is that we don't know the actual outcome of these efforts in most cases, and the results are weak when we have the data. I think most of us agree that outreach can be made to work better. (For example, 2 outreach sessions conducted recently by the Assamese community had about 80 participants, and 8 active editors emerged - which is a hit rate of 10% - which is FANTASTIC!) For most other sessions, the results have been closer to 1-2% or even lower - which is depressing. What makes outreach work? How can outreach work better? Is there anything you need from me? Over the past 3 months, I have been working on building a handbook for Outreach (Please see: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Program/Outreach_Programs/Handbook) where you can get presentation material and tips. Please do go through it and help me build it. My post consists of 5 (deliberately) provocative statements on the day of and the days after an outreach session. These are framed with the objective of generating debate and suggestions. THE DAY OF Hypthesis 1: Don't Shoot the Puppy: Outreach is not being done effectively and we aren't adequately introspecting on what we can do better; instead choosing to lose faith in attendees Should we discontinue general introduction sessions completely and just convert everything into Wiki workshops? Every second of volunteer time is precious and we need to make sure that every second is made to count. The good sessions appear to be those where people are actually shown how to edit - rather than just doing a song-and-dance about Wikipedia. The best sessions are those where people have actual hands-on editing opportunity. Shall we limit the intro session on Wikipedia to just 15 minutes and then spend 45 minute on basic editing, 30 minutes on hand-on editing and leave 30 minutes for QA? Not everyone is a natural presenter and might need help on basic outreach skills. Is there value and interest in a capacity building roadshow where we help existing editors who want to improve their outreach and presentation skills? Is it useful to pair up a good presenter with a not-so-confident presenter when we are doing outreach? THE DAY AFTER Hypothesis #2: Staying in Touch: We assume the job is complete after the outreach session when in fact the journey has only just begun Can we gather (basic) information about attendees (e.g., names, usernames email IDs?) so that we can stay in touch with them after sessions? Can we get feedback on sessions (duration, level of detail, quality of presenters, etc.?) so that we can all improve? Do we need some sort of CRM solution for this or will something like Google Docs suffice? How do we get more folks to actually provide their contact details and feedback? Which of the following will get higher response rates: asking for these just before the end, immediately after the end or the day after a session? Hypothesis #3: Nudge-Nudge: Newbies struggle with the most basic things - including which article to select Should we send links to useful wiki pages and tutorial videos where they can read up more about how Wikipedia works and how to edit Wikipedia? Can we leave handouts on basic editing after all sessions? Can we send them links to the actual presentations made at the session. Can we suggest / elicit potential articles that individual newbies will work on after the workshop? Can we give them individual pointers on what they can do with each article by reviewing them there-and-then during the session? Can we schedule a follow-up session (even if virtually using google+ hangout) to clarify any doubts about Wikipedia
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? You're after all deciding their lifes or death, can't we at least choose the way we are going to die? _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 05:30, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote: 2012/2/14 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org: It is clear to me that there is a close link between the fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of organising ourselves. I am also convinced that we Indeed, and it may not be a coincidence that these two letters came out more or less at the same time. :-) I find it good that the WMF board is taking up these discussions and opens them again. How about asking the *official* opinion of the chapters, within a certain time frame (e.g. 1 or 2 months)? Meaning? I continue to think it would be great if we had a wide range of opinion on this - both from chapters and from others in the movement. Because the MR process has gone on for so long, I'm personally sceptical of extending the deadline. (I'm not convinced we will actually get more discussion with more time - that has not necessarily been the history of MR since 2010 July, when it began. So at this moment, I'm leaning towards a one-month focused period of discussion. Best Bishakha Then we would have a more substantial and reliable feedback, compared to the mails on a mailinglist or talk page comments, all done by people as individuals. Kind regards Ziko -- --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ --- ___ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
this would be called: too much drama There is no life and death situation for the chapters here. See my earlier mails for ways of getting to a sustainable organization... Secondly: When faced with a life or death situation, most people try to trick death and stay alive.. most don't repeat: I am going to die for weeks on end. In short: Come up with conditions that can make this work for you, try to think in opportunities rather that not think at all. Jan-Bart On 15 feb. 2012, at 14:47, Béria Lima wrote: Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? You're after all deciding their lifes or death, can't we at least choose the way we are going to die? _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 05:30, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote: 2012/2/14 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org: It is clear to me that there is a close link between the fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of organising ourselves. I am also convinced that we Indeed, and it may not be a coincidence that these two letters came out more or less at the same time. :-) I find it good that the WMF board is taking up these discussions and opens them again. How about asking the *official* opinion of the chapters, within a certain time frame (e.g. 1 or 2 months)? Meaning? I continue to think it would be great if we had a wide range of opinion on this - both from chapters and from others in the movement. Because the MR process has gone on for so long, I'm personally sceptical of extending the deadline. (I'm not convinced we will actually get more discussion with more time - that has not necessarily been the history of MR since 2010 July, when it began. So at this moment, I'm leaning towards a one-month focused period of discussion. Best Bishakha Then we would have a more substantial and reliable feedback, compared to the mails on a mailinglist or talk page comments, all done by people as individuals. Kind regards Ziko -- --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ --- ___ 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@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] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Jan for the million time: Give me the parameters and we can discuss. I will not put my faith in another great-and-solver-of-all-Wikimedians-problems-but-not-yet-funded Committe. When you have a clear way to choose people for this FDC, a clear way of how it will going to work and most important: How much real power they will have we can talk. Until there, is just you and me talking about philosophical situations. We can spend all day here, but isn't going to come to any result until we have the data. ... And quite frankly I have too much thing to do to engage in any meaningless talk. _ *Béria Lima* * Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 15:34, Jan-bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.orgwrote: this would be called: too much drama There is no life and death situation for the chapters here. See my earlier mails for ways of getting to a sustainable organization... Secondly: When faced with a life or death situation, most people try to trick death and stay alive.. most don't repeat: I am going to die for weeks on end. In short: Come up with conditions that can make this work for you, try to think in opportunities rather that not think at all. Jan-Bart On 15 feb. 2012, at 14:47, Béria Lima wrote: Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? You're after all deciding their lifes or death, can't we at least choose the way we are going to die? _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 05:30, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote: 2012/2/14 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org: It is clear to me that there is a close link between the fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of organising ourselves. I am also convinced that we Indeed, and it may not be a coincidence that these two letters came out more or less at the same time. :-) I find it good that the WMF board is taking up these discussions and opens them again. How about asking the *official* opinion of the chapters, within a certain time frame (e.g. 1 or 2 months)? Meaning? I continue to think it would be great if we had a wide range of opinion on this - both from chapters and from others in the movement. Because the MR process has gone on for so long, I'm personally sceptical of extending the deadline. (I'm not convinced we will actually get more discussion with more time - that has not necessarily been the history of MR since 2010 July, when it began. So at this moment, I'm leaning towards a one-month focused period of discussion. Best Bishakha Then we would have a more substantial and reliable feedback, compared to the mails on a mailinglist or talk page comments, all done by people as individuals. Kind regards Ziko -- --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ --- ___ 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
On 15 feb. 2012, at 18:54, Béria Lima wrote: Jan for the million time: Give me the parameters and we can discuss. I will not put my faith in another great-and-solver-of-all-Wikimedians-problems-but-not-yet-funded Committe. Ok, in that case, just wait until we have all solved this without you... When you have a clear way to choose people for this FDC, a clear way of how it will going to work and most important: How much real power they will have we can talk. Ok, it might be too late for you to influence it at that point Until there, is just you and me talking about philosophical situations. We can spend all day here, but isn't going to come to any result until we have the data. Lets all come up with the best solution, we will refine it over de coming years and send you the data around 2015 :) ... And quite frankly I have too much thing to do to engage in any meaningless talk. _ I hate to say this: but you are doing quite well on the meaningless talk... (counting all your contributions to this topic on both internal and foundation). Yes: I am being confrontational (which I almost never am). EIther help think of something that will make this work or stop repeating that it will never work (because I get it, I really heard you the first X times) Jan-Bart *Béria Lima* * Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 15:34, Jan-bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.orgwrote: this would be called: too much drama There is no life and death situation for the chapters here. See my earlier mails for ways of getting to a sustainable organization... Secondly: When faced with a life or death situation, most people try to trick death and stay alive.. most don't repeat: I am going to die for weeks on end. In short: Come up with conditions that can make this work for you, try to think in opportunities rather that not think at all. Jan-Bart On 15 feb. 2012, at 14:47, Béria Lima wrote: Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? You're after all deciding their lifes or death, can't we at least choose the way we are going to die? _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 05:30, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote: 2012/2/14 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org: It is clear to me that there is a close link between the fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of organising ourselves. I am also convinced that we Indeed, and it may not be a coincidence that these two letters came out more or less at the same time. :-) I find it good that the WMF board is taking up these discussions and opens them again. How about asking the *official* opinion of the chapters, within a certain time frame (e.g. 1 or 2 months)? Meaning? I continue to think it would be great if we had a wide range of opinion on this - both from chapters and from others in the movement. Because the MR process has gone on for so long, I'm personally sceptical of extending the deadline. (I'm not convinced we will actually get more discussion with more time - that has not necessarily been the history of MR since 2010 July, when it began. So at this moment, I'm leaning towards a one-month focused period of discussion. Best Bishakha Then we would have a more substantial and reliable feedback, compared to the mails on a mailinglist or talk page comments, all done by people as individuals. Kind regards Ziko -- --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ --- ___ 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@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
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Jan Provide me a link to work and I will gladly tell on wiki how much your idea sucks and how I come up with a better one without dismiss community opinion and being condescending like you. Here we can't solve anything. _ *Béria Lima **Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 16:01, Jan-bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.orgwrote: On 15 feb. 2012, at 18:54, Béria Lima wrote: Jan for the million time: Give me the parameters and we can discuss. I will not put my faith in another great-and-solver-of-all-Wikimedians-problems-but-not-yet-funded Committe. Ok, in that case, just wait until we have all solved this without you... When you have a clear way to choose people for this FDC, a clear way of how it will going to work and most important: How much real power they will have we can talk. Ok, it might be too late for you to influence it at that point Until there, is just you and me talking about philosophical situations. We can spend all day here, but isn't going to come to any result until we have the data. Lets all come up with the best solution, we will refine it over de coming years and send you the data around 2015 :) ... And quite frankly I have too much thing to do to engage in any meaningless talk. _ I hate to say this: but you are doing quite well on the meaningless talk... (counting all your contributions to this topic on both internal and foundation). Yes: I am being confrontational (which I almost never am). EIther help think of something that will make this work or stop repeating that it will never work (because I get it, I really heard you the first X times) Jan-Bart *Béria Lima* * Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 15:34, Jan-bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org wrote: this would be called: too much drama There is no life and death situation for the chapters here. See my earlier mails for ways of getting to a sustainable organization... Secondly: When faced with a life or death situation, most people try to trick death and stay alive.. most don't repeat: I am going to die for weeks on end. In short: Come up with conditions that can make this work for you, try to think in opportunities rather that not think at all. Jan-Bart On 15 feb. 2012, at 14:47, Béria Lima wrote: Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? You're after all deciding their lifes or death, can't we at least choose the way we are going to die? _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 05:30, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote: 2012/2/14 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org: It is clear to me that there is a close link between the fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of organising ourselves. I am also convinced that we Indeed, and it may not be a coincidence that these two letters came out more or less at the same time. :-) I find it good that the WMF board is taking up these discussions and opens them again. How about asking the *official* opinion of the chapters, within a certain time frame (e.g. 1 or 2 months)? Meaning? I continue to think it would be great if we had a wide range of opinion on this - both from chapters and from others in the movement. Because the MR process has gone on for so long, I'm personally sceptical of extending the deadline. (I'm not convinced we will actually get more discussion with more time - that has not necessarily been the history of MR since 2010 July, when it began. So at this moment, I'm leaning towards a one-month focused period of discussion. Best Bishakha Then we would have a more substantial and reliable feedback, compared to the mails on a mailinglist or talk page comments, all done by people as individuals. Kind regards Ziko -- --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ --- ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? Awaiting your and others' thoughts on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_affiliation_models#Questions Cheers Bishakha ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
On 15 feb. 2012, at 19:07, Béria Lima wrote: Jan Provide me a link to work and I will gladly tell on wiki how much your idea sucks and how I come up with a better one without dismiss community opinion and being condescending like you. Actually that was not condescending (if anything: sarcasm?) A good example of condescending would be if you cannot be bothered to address someone by their proper name (say continually calling them Jan instead of Jan-Bart) even when several people have pointed out to you what the correct name is. Anyway, to end this thread: looking forward to your contributions on the relevant meta pages (for example: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_and_Funds_Dissemination/draft_Board_resolution) Jan-Bart Here we can't solve anything. _ *Béria Lima **Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 16:01, Jan-bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.orgwrote: On 15 feb. 2012, at 18:54, Béria Lima wrote: Jan for the million time: Give me the parameters and we can discuss. I will not put my faith in another great-and-solver-of-all-Wikimedians-problems-but-not-yet-funded Committe. Ok, in that case, just wait until we have all solved this without you... When you have a clear way to choose people for this FDC, a clear way of how it will going to work and most important: How much real power they will have we can talk. Ok, it might be too late for you to influence it at that point Until there, is just you and me talking about philosophical situations. We can spend all day here, but isn't going to come to any result until we have the data. Lets all come up with the best solution, we will refine it over de coming years and send you the data around 2015 :) ... And quite frankly I have too much thing to do to engage in any meaningless talk. _ I hate to say this: but you are doing quite well on the meaningless talk... (counting all your contributions to this topic on both internal and foundation). Yes: I am being confrontational (which I almost never am). EIther help think of something that will make this work or stop repeating that it will never work (because I get it, I really heard you the first X times) Jan-Bart *Béria Lima* * Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 15:34, Jan-bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org wrote: this would be called: too much drama There is no life and death situation for the chapters here. See my earlier mails for ways of getting to a sustainable organization... Secondly: When faced with a life or death situation, most people try to trick death and stay alive.. most don't repeat: I am going to die for weeks on end. In short: Come up with conditions that can make this work for you, try to think in opportunities rather that not think at all. Jan-Bart On 15 feb. 2012, at 14:47, Béria Lima wrote: Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? You're after all deciding their lifes or death, can't we at least choose the way we are going to die? _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 05:30, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote: 2012/2/14 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org: It is clear to me that there is a close link between the fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of organising ourselves. I am also convinced that we Indeed, and it may not be a coincidence that these two letters came out more or less at the same time. :-) I find it good that the WMF board is taking up these discussions and opens them again. How about asking the *official* opinion of the chapters, within a certain time frame (e.g. 1 or 2 months)? Meaning? I continue to think it would be great if we had a wide range of opinion on this - both from chapters and from others in the movement. Because the MR process has gone on for so long, I'm personally sceptical of extending the deadline. (I'm not convinced we will actually get more discussion with more time - that has not necessarily been the history of MR since 2010 July, when it began. So at this moment, I'm leaning towards a one-month focused period of discussion. Best Bishakha Then we would have a more substantial and reliable feedback, compared to the mails on a mailinglist or talk page
[Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Translations of January 2012 Wikimedia Highlights available in العربية (Arabic), Dansk (Danish), Français (French), Magyar (Hungarian), Italiano (Italian), N
The following translation are now available for the January 2012 Wikimedia Highlights, which combine some of the most relevant information from the Wikimedia Foundation Report and the Wikimedia engineering report for January 2012 with a selection of other important events from the Wikimedia movement. Help is welcome in spreading the translated versions among the project communities for these languages, where this has not already been done. Many thanks to all translators! https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012/vi Những điểm nổi bật từ Bản báo cáo Wikimedia Foundation và phản hồi kỹ thuật Wikimedia vào tháng 1 năm 2012, bao gồm các sự kiện quan trọng khác của phong trào Wikimedia https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012/nl Hoogtepunten uit de Wikimedia Foundationrapportage en de Wikimedia technische rapportage voor januari 2012, aangevuld met een selectie van andere belangrijke gebeurtenissen binnen de Wikimediabeweging. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012/it Punti salienti dal rapporto della Wikimedia Foundation e dal rapporto ingegneristico Wikimedia di gennaio 2012, con una selezione di altre importanti iniziative dagli eventi di Wikimedia https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012/hu A Wikimédia Alapítvány beszámolójának és a Wikimédia mérnöki beszámolónak fontosabb pontjai illetve más fontos események a Wikimédia-mozgalomból 2012 januárjában. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012/fr Éclairages sur le rapport de la Fondation Wikimédia et le rapport d’ingénierie Wikimédia pour janvier 2012, avec une sélection d’autres évènements importants du mouvement Wikimédia. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012/da Hovedpunkter fra Wikimedia Foundations månedsrapport og Wikimedias tekniske rapport for januar 2012 med et udvalg af andre betydningsfulde hændelser i Wikimedia-bevægelsen https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012/ar أهم المقتطفات من تقرير مؤسسة ويكيميديا و تقرير ويكيميديا الهندسي لشهر يناير 2012، مع مجموعة من أهم الأحداث لحركة ويكيميديا (Translations into other languages, such as Finnish, might become available later this month, check https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_January_2012 ). Suggestions for the movement news section in the upcoming Highlights issue are welcome until March 1, see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights . Also a quick note that on the suggestion of users Timeshifter and Buster Keaton, we have started a (still experimental) global subscription service for the Wikimedia Highlights, similar to that of the Signpost. If you would like to receive a summary message delivered to your user talk page on any Wikimedia project right after each issue is published, add yourself to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_message_delivery/Targets/Wikimedia_Highlights (at the moment this is for the English original, but eventually subscription should become available for the translated versions as well). -- Tilman Bayer Movement Communications Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Foundation-L, the public mailing list about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. For more information about Foundation-L: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
I had wanted to keep out of this, but this is the third or fourth time that Jan-Bart has been referred to as Jan. It was an understandable enough mistake to make the first time, but it's been pointed out enough now that that is no longer an excuse. We do not all have to be best of mates, but it is not unreasonable that we all should show some basic courtesy towards each other, and taking the time to get each other's names right would be a good start. If you feel that Jan-Bart is being condescending towards you, the best solution to that problem is not more condescension thrown back in the opposite direction. Cheers, Craig Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:07:23 -0200 From: B?ria Lima berial...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012 Message-ID: caa2xhjag+ummrkskhe82hatxkocycxm_tsmkb6nmn36mkdj...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Jan Provide me a link to work and I will gladly tell on wiki how much your idea sucks and how I come up with a better one without dismiss community opinion and being condescending like you. Here we can't solve anything. _ *B?ria Lima ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Click in the tab History. You can see I already asked the question I've been questioning you and Jan there. sarcasmIf you can't do find a diff alone,/sarcasm I can help: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wikimedia_affiliation_modelsdiff=3441324oldid=3441316 _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 16:33, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha? Awaiting your and others' thoughts on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_affiliation_models#Questions Cheers Bishakha ___ 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] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Gomà called him Jan at least 3 times today and no one complained. Everyone in Brazil calls me B (yah, just the first letter) and here is VERY common to shortening people's names. Is more a way to write it fast than to offend anyone. I can call him Mister de Vreede if you all find this ok, but that would be even more condescending (In my country we only threat people we really dislike by their last name). _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 February 2012 23:09, Craig Franklin cr...@halo-17.net wrote: I had wanted to keep out of this, but this is the third or fourth time that Jan-Bart has been referred to as Jan. It was an understandable enough mistake to make the first time, but it's been pointed out enough now that that is no longer an excuse. We do not all have to be best of mates, but it is not unreasonable that we all should show some basic courtesy towards each other, and taking the time to get each other's names right would be a good start. If you feel that Jan-Bart is being condescending towards you, the best solution to that problem is not more condescension thrown back in the opposite direction. Cheers, Craig Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:07:23 -0200 From: B?ria Lima berial...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012 Message-ID: caa2xhjag+ummrkskhe82hatxkocycxm_tsmkb6nmn36mkdj...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Jan Provide me a link to work and I will gladly tell on wiki how much your idea sucks and how I come up with a better one without dismiss community opinion and being condescending like you. Here we can't solve anything. _ *B?ria Lima ___ 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] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: Gomà called him Jan at least 3 times today and no one complained. Everyone in Brazil calls me B (yah, just the first letter) and here is VERY common to shortening people's names. Is more a way to write it fast than to offend anyone. I can call him Mister de Vreede if you all find this ok, but that would be even more condescending (In my country we only threat people we really dislike by their last name). _ *Béria Lima* Jan-Bart and others have asked that you call him Jan-Bart. What part of that is confusing? You can ascribe your first error to different custom; continuing to ignore his wishes is simply arrogant and offensive, which of course I'm sure is not your intent. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Beria, You're behavior is simply unacceptable. Are you going to apologize to Jan-Bart or simply continue with your baseless justifications on why you are calling him this and not that? Abbas. Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:14:55 -0500 From: nawr...@gmail.com To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012 On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: Gomà called him Jan at least 3 times today and no one complained. Everyone in Brazil calls me B (yah, just the first letter) and here is VERY common to shortening people's names. Is more a way to write it fast than to offend anyone. I can call him Mister de Vreede if you all find this ok, but that would be even more condescending (In my country we only threat people we really dislike by their last name). _ *Béria Lima* Jan-Bart and others have asked that you call him Jan-Bart. What part of that is confusing? You can ascribe your first error to different custom; continuing to ignore his wishes is simply arrogant and offensive, which of course I'm sure is not your intent. ___ 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
