Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Medicine: Changes in Board Compositions

[Rajeeb Dutta]

Congrats Shani & Doug Taylor and all my best wishes for your upcoming future 
endeavour.

Best Regards,
Rajeeb Dutta.
(U: Marajozkee)
Sent from my iPhone 

> On 13-Aug-2019, at 4:43 AM, Shani Evenstein  wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> If you've seen my post yesterday then you might have expected this this
> announcement as well; if you haven't -- as some of you may know, I will
> soon be joining the Board of Trustees (August 15), and am therefore
> required to resign my formal role as Chair of Wikimedia Medicine (a.k.a.
> WikiProject Medicine Foundation). This means a new vacancy in the board has
> to be filled and a new Chair must be appointed.
> 
> I'm happy to report that in an online board meeting earlier this month the
> board chose *Doug Taylor* to serve as the new Chair for our newly approved
> Thematic Organization. Doug has been part of WikiProject Medicine for years
> now and has diligently served as the group's formal secretary. Doug not
> only has the institutional memory of the organization, but has actively
> taken part in a variety related activities in the UK and in collaboration
> with other countries. Doug also brings management skills to the board,
> experience from the board of Wikimedia UK, as well as a deep understanding
> of the movement as a whole, which I have no doubt will allow the
> organization to grow and expand its activities around the world.
> 
> As Doug transitions into his new position as Chair, *Dr. Stuart Ray* will
> be supporting him as Vice Chair and continue to serve as co-treasurer, and
> *Mossab* will continue to serve as Membership Admin. A new secretary will
> be appointed soon, hopefully during the board's in-person meeting at
> Wikimania. The board will also soon co-opt a new board member to fill out
> the vacant spot, till the next election in 2022.
> 
> I'll remain involved in the organization as an 'adviser to the board' and
> look forward to seeing this Thematic Organization grow, as well as to
> continue contributing to medical-related topics as a volunteer and lecturer
> at the Tel Aviv University.
> 
> Best,
> Shani Evenstein.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Affiliations Committee - Call for Advisors

[Kirill Lokshin]

Hi everyone!

The Affiliations Committee – the committee responsible for guiding
volunteers in establishing Wikimedia chapters, thematic organizations, and
user groups – is looking for advisors!

The main role of the Affiliations Committee is to guide groups of
volunteers that are interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review
applications from new groups, answer questions and provide advice about the
different Wikimedia affiliation models and processes, review affiliate
bylaws for compliance with requirements and best practices, and advise the
Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees on issues connected to chapters,
thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.

We are looking for advisors who are excited by the challenge of empowering
volunteers to get organized and form communities that further our mission
around the world. In exchange, committee advisors selected will gain the
experience of supporting their world-wide colleagues to develop their
communities as well as personal development in guiding organizational
development, facilitating affiliate partnerships, and professional
communications.

*Key skills*

We look for a healthy mix of different skill sets in our advisors,
including the following key skills and experience:

   1. Strong understanding of the structure and work of Wikimedia
   affiliates and the Wikimedia Foundation.
   2. Readiness to participate in political discussions on the role and
   future of affiliates, models of affiliation, and similar topics.
   3. Availability of up to 2 hours per week, and the time to participate
   in a monthly two-hour voice/video meeting
   4. International orientation and ability to work and communicate with
   other languages and cultures.
   5. Knowledge of different legal systems and experience in community
   building and organizing are a plus.
   6. Fluency in English is required; skills in other languages are a major
   plus.
   7. Experience with or in an active Wikimedia affiliate is a major plus.
   8. Strong track record of effective collaboration (such as evidenced
   skills at facilitation, mediation, negotiation, and so forth) is a major
   plus.
   9. Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities (including
   contacts with current and potential affiliates) when appropriate.

*Selection process*

As a reflection of our commitment to openness, transparency, and bilateral
engagement with the Wikimedia community, the 2019 advisor selection process
will include a public review and comment period. All applications received
by the committee will be posted on Meta, and the community will be invited
to provide comments and feedback about each candidate. At the end of the
public comment period, the applications will be voted on by the members of
the committee, taking into account comments put forward by the committee's
members and advisors, Wikimedia Foundation staff and board liaisons, and
the community. A final decision will be made in October 2019, with new
advisors expected to begin later that month.

*How to apply*

If you are interested in advising the committee, please send an email
announcing your application to aff...@lists.wikimedia.org by 20 September
2019. Your application must include the following information:

   - Your full name and Wikimedia username
   - A statement describing your relevant experience, skills, and
   motivation for joining the committee as an advisor.
   - Answers to the following three questions:


   1. How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on
  effective projects and initiatives?
  2. What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia
  movement in the next three years?
  3. What do you feel you will bring as an advisor to the committee
  that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us. We are
happy to chat or have a phone call with anyone about our work if this helps
them decide to apply. Please distribute this call among your networks, and
do apply if you are interested!

Regards,
Kirill Lokshin
Chair, Affiliations Committee
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Pine W]

Thanks for the update, Nicole.

As I have been reading portions of the recommendations, I am finding it
helpful to remind myself that these proposals are drafts, and to assume
good faith when reading them. I have a variety of thoughts regarding
proposals, including "I completely agree", "This is less ambitious than I
think it should be", "That is impractical", "That is an interesting idea
that we should consider in more detail", "I agree that there is problem X
but this proposal would lead to more harm than good".

I suggest that the strategy team and working groups develop these drafts
into thoughtful and deep documents with extensive supporting references
where possible, so that we can have a more informed discussion about the
merits of the ideas. I would like to encourage working group members to
keep their minds open to the possibility that proposals may be good to
modify, enhance, diminish, or withdraw based on the additional research and
their discussions with the broader community. Collegial and thoughtful
discussions will probably be fruitful in the long term.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )




On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, 11:37 Nicole Ebber  wrote:

> Dear fellow Wikimedians,
>
> They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> draft recommendations for structural change within our movement have
> been published. The recommendations have been developed by the nine
> Wikimedia 2030 working groups and are a key tool to help us build the
> future of our movement.
>
> Working group members have been working tirelessly for a year to
> research the movement, analyze community input shared via community
> conversations, and gain insight into external trends. A huge thank you
> to each and every member for helping us reach this key milestone.
>
> The draft recommendations are a first look at ways we can adapt our
> movement’s structures to help us advance in our strategic direction.
> They are the starting point for conversations about what kind of
> future we want to create together.
>
> The recommendations are not final. In order to get them to that stage,
> your input is needed! We would like to hear from you all what these
> changes would mean for you in your local or thematic context, what do
> you like about them, and where you potentially see any red flags. And
> of course, always critically question whether these recommendations
> support the strategic direction.
>
> There are a few ways to do this:
> * Read through the recommendations online and provide your input
> directly on Meta. [2]
> * If you will be at Wikimania, join us in the Wikimedia 2030 space. [3]
> * Attend a Strategy Salon hosted by an affiliate where you live. [4]
> * Reach out to a Strategy Liaison in your language to share feedback,
> or lead a conversation of your own. [5]
>
> Over the next month, working groups will take the input they receive
> into the recommendations, alongside external advice and research, and
> use it to refine and finalize them. Share your views, and help shape
> what Wikimedia will look like in 2030 and beyond.
>
> If you have any questions or feedback, please feel free to get in touch.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Nicole
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> [3] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Wikimedia_2030
> [4]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Strategy_Salons
> [5]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People/Community_Strategy_Liaisons
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns
> dabei! https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.
> V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
> Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
> anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
> Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Pete Forsyth]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 4:18 PM Nathan  wrote:

>
> One counter-argument that doesn't seem to come up that often is that the
> movement as a whole may be better placed to decide the needs of the
> movement as a whole than smaller, more local communities.


I think that idea does come up pretty often, and is usually, and
appropriately, viewed with some skepticism.

An idea I think is too little discussed is that, when you've had great
success at assembling hundreds of thousands of people to work on something,
it is a very risky proposition to make fundamental changes to that
"something" without first undergoing a deliberate and comprehensive
approach to building buy-in throughout that community. (See "Spanish Fork")

-Pete
--
Pete Forsyth
User:Peteforsyth on (primarily) English Wikipedia, English Wikisource,
Wikidata, Commons, and Meta Wiki.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Nathan]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:12 PM Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Ziko's original comment appears to derive from the "Terms of Use/Licensing"
> section of the Recommendations.[1] It says: "Present licensing for both
> text and photographs should change to allow restrictions for non-commercial
> use and no derivative works, if those will improve the ability of the
> project to better reflect diverse knowledge on a global scale, such as by
> including videos, allowing culturally significant text or photos to remain
> intact without misappropriation, etc."
>
> The recommendation appears to have been written in the absence of a full
> awareness of the extensive debate throughout the Wikimedia movement that
> resulted in the present policies. That debate exists in mailing list
> archives, Board of Trustees minutes, on Meta Wiki, and elsewhere.
>
> Wikimedia already has a framework for permitting non-free files. It's
> called an "Exemption Doctrine Policy"[2]; any project may adopt such a
> policy according to a framework defined by the WMF in a 2007 resolution.[3]
>
> I am someone who has tried hard to get such a policy passed on English
> Wikisource, and I have failed. I believe it would be the right choice for
> English Wikisource, but the people I have to persuade are English
> Wikisource volunteers.
>
> To have any weight, a recommendation like this one would need to
> demonstrate familiarity with the history behind Wikimedia's current
> policies toward licensing. Absent that, there is plenty of room to advocate
> for the use of non-free files on a project-by-project basis. Demonstrating
> an ability to win support at specific projects, and then demonstrating that
> implementing an EDP paved the way toward good results, could form a
> compelling argument.
>
> Strong advocacy in a strategy document does not form a compelling argument.
>
> -Pete
> --
> Pete Forsyth
> Volunteer primarily on English Wikipedia, English Wikisource, Wikidata,
> Commons, and Meta Wiki.
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9#Q_3_What_will_change_because_of_the_Recommendation
> ?
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non-free_content#Exemption_Doctrine_Policy
> [3] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy
>
>
>
>
One counter-argument that doesn't seem to come up that often is that the
movement as a whole may be better placed to decide the needs of the
movement as a whole than smaller, more local communities. We limit the
autonomy of local communities in many ways in order to serve the mission
and directives of the global community. Do we exclude the possibility that
the global community may decide, and may have the authority to decide, that
the mission or approach of Commons (or English Wikisource) should be
adjusted? Or if the Wikimedia movement wants a repository for NC/ND
content, should it be forced to create a new version of Commons with a
different starting policy foundation?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Medicine: Changes in Board Compositions

[Shani Evenstein]

Dear all,

If you've seen my post yesterday then you might have expected this this
announcement as well; if you haven't -- as some of you may know, I will
soon be joining the Board of Trustees (August 15), and am therefore
required to resign my formal role as Chair of Wikimedia Medicine (a.k.a.
WikiProject Medicine Foundation). This means a new vacancy in the board has
to be filled and a new Chair must be appointed.

I'm happy to report that in an online board meeting earlier this month the
board chose *Doug Taylor* to serve as the new Chair for our newly approved
Thematic Organization. Doug has been part of WikiProject Medicine for years
now and has diligently served as the group's formal secretary. Doug not
only has the institutional memory of the organization, but has actively
taken part in a variety related activities in the UK and in collaboration
with other countries. Doug also brings management skills to the board,
experience from the board of Wikimedia UK, as well as a deep understanding
of the movement as a whole, which I have no doubt will allow the
organization to grow and expand its activities around the world.

As Doug transitions into his new position as Chair, *Dr. Stuart Ray* will
be supporting him as Vice Chair and continue to serve as co-treasurer, and
*Mossab* will continue to serve as Membership Admin. A new secretary will
be appointed soon, hopefully during the board's in-person meeting at
Wikimania. The board will also soon co-opt a new board member to fill out
the vacant spot, till the next election in 2022.

I'll remain involved in the organization as an 'adviser to the board' and
look forward to seeing this Thematic Organization grow, as well as to
continue contributing to medical-related topics as a volunteer and lecturer
at the Tel Aviv University.

Best,
Shani Evenstein.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Pete Forsyth]

Ziko's original comment appears to derive from the "Terms of Use/Licensing"
section of the Recommendations.[1] It says: "Present licensing for both
text and photographs should change to allow restrictions for non-commercial
use and no derivative works, if those will improve the ability of the
project to better reflect diverse knowledge on a global scale, such as by
including videos, allowing culturally significant text or photos to remain
intact without misappropriation, etc."

The recommendation appears to have been written in the absence of a full
awareness of the extensive debate throughout the Wikimedia movement that
resulted in the present policies. That debate exists in mailing list
archives, Board of Trustees minutes, on Meta Wiki, and elsewhere.

Wikimedia already has a framework for permitting non-free files. It's
called an "Exemption Doctrine Policy"[2]; any project may adopt such a
policy according to a framework defined by the WMF in a 2007 resolution.[3]

I am someone who has tried hard to get such a policy passed on English
Wikisource, and I have failed. I believe it would be the right choice for
English Wikisource, but the people I have to persuade are English
Wikisource volunteers.

To have any weight, a recommendation like this one would need to
demonstrate familiarity with the history behind Wikimedia's current
policies toward licensing. Absent that, there is plenty of room to advocate
for the use of non-free files on a project-by-project basis. Demonstrating
an ability to win support at specific projects, and then demonstrating that
implementing an EDP paved the way toward good results, could form a
compelling argument.

Strong advocacy in a strategy document does not form a compelling argument.

-Pete
--
Pete Forsyth
Volunteer primarily on English Wikipedia, English Wikisource, Wikidata,
Commons, and Meta Wiki.

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9#Q_3_What_will_change_because_of_the_Recommendation
?
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non-free_content#Exemption_Doctrine_Policy
[3] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy



On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 3:41 PM Aron Manning  wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 22:45, Ziko  wrote:
>
> The concern is that allowing NC and ND would lead to more content being
> > uploaded under these "unfree" conditions that otherwise would be uploaded
> > as "free".
>
>
> I share those concerns, and believe it's not in the general interest of
> uploaders to use nonfree licenses. These licenses limit the visibility of
> the content, therefore uploaders are generally demotivated from using it. I
> think we should focus on how to communicate that the use of these licenses
> do not benefit the uploader, or Wikipedia as a whole, or its users, except
> in a few marginal cases, when it is a necessity.
>
> There are a few options to do so, and minimize the proportion of free
> content converted to "unfree":
>
>- Free is the default. Make it a significant effort (multiple steps) to
>choose NC or ND license. This is what the cookie opt-out UIs do, very
>successfully.
>- At each step inform the uploader, that an unfree license severely
>limits the visibility of the content (no media, no private schools, no
>Internet-in-a-Box).
>- If a user mostly uploads non-free content, notify them, this
>negatively affects Wikipedia as whole in its mission to be a free
>encyclopedia.
>- If non-free content is uploaded in great quantity, that content should
>be examined by other editors, and proposed for deletion, if similar
> content
>is available with free license.
>- If some content is available elsewhere with free license, the content
>and license can be replaced with that. This can be automated to an
> extent
>with reverse-image search.
>- After all these measures, I will have good faith, that most editors
>understand the benefit of free content over non-free, and only uses
> these
>licenses when it's truly necessary.
>
>
>
> > See the excellent brochure published by WMDE some years ago.
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Free_Knowledge_thanks_to_Creative_Commons_Licenses.pdf
>
>
> Thank you, it's really excellent.
>
>
> > I fail to see how these two articles "explain the need for ND". The -
> >
> interesting - article about the daguerrotypes relates to images that are
> > long in the Public Domain.
> >
>
> My bad. 1st article
>  is
> about commercial use (NC): "the university is illegally profiting from the
> images by using them for “advertising and commercial purposes,” such as by
> using Renty’s image on the cover of a $40 anthropology book."
> 2nd article
> <
> https://s3.amazonaws.com/documents.lexology.com/10a84c6c-538e-41d6-816e-f61460946a79.pdf
> >
> is
> about derivative work (ND): "The past year has had several high 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Aron Manning]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 22:45, Ziko  wrote:

The concern is that allowing NC and ND would lead to more content being
> uploaded under these "unfree" conditions that otherwise would be uploaded
> as "free".


I share those concerns, and believe it's not in the general interest of
uploaders to use nonfree licenses. These licenses limit the visibility of
the content, therefore uploaders are generally demotivated from using it. I
think we should focus on how to communicate that the use of these licenses
do not benefit the uploader, or Wikipedia as a whole, or its users, except
in a few marginal cases, when it is a necessity.

There are a few options to do so, and minimize the proportion of free
content converted to "unfree":

   - Free is the default. Make it a significant effort (multiple steps) to
   choose NC or ND license. This is what the cookie opt-out UIs do, very
   successfully.
   - At each step inform the uploader, that an unfree license severely
   limits the visibility of the content (no media, no private schools, no
   Internet-in-a-Box).
   - If a user mostly uploads non-free content, notify them, this
   negatively affects Wikipedia as whole in its mission to be a free
   encyclopedia.
   - If non-free content is uploaded in great quantity, that content should
   be examined by other editors, and proposed for deletion, if similar content
   is available with free license.
   - If some content is available elsewhere with free license, the content
   and license can be replaced with that. This can be automated to an extent
   with reverse-image search.
   - After all these measures, I will have good faith, that most editors
   understand the benefit of free content over non-free, and only uses these
   licenses when it's truly necessary.



> See the excellent brochure published by WMDE some years ago.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Free_Knowledge_thanks_to_Creative_Commons_Licenses.pdf


Thank you, it's really excellent.


> I fail to see how these two articles "explain the need for ND". The -
>
interesting - article about the daguerrotypes relates to images that are
> long in the Public Domain.
>

My bad. 1st article
 is
about commercial use (NC): "the university is illegally profiting from the
images by using them for “advertising and commercial purposes,” such as by
using Renty’s image on the cover of a $40 anthropology book."
2nd article

is
about derivative work (ND): "The past year has had several high profile
examples of the perceived misuse of Native American culture find
significant echo in the media. These include a Victoria’s Secret model
wearing a headdress during a fashion show, the No Doubt music bands
’cowboys and Indians' themed music video, and the use of the “Navajo” name
and symbols on various goods by the clothing company Urban Outfitters
attracting legal proceedings for misrepresenting the products’ origins as
well as public ire."

It's my conclusion these "explain the need" for *some* solution to disallow
such usages. NC and ND is one way to express this prohibition.


Aron
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Andy Mabbett]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 21:43, Philip Kopetzky  wrote:

> these are still rather talking points than specific
> visions of the future and it would be great to discuss them in that way.

Beyond what I have already said, I do not see any merit in discussing
glib statements like "All change has negative connotations to some
members of the community", whether as "talking points" or anything
else

I would be happy to understand the thought process behind the working
group's proposals, and to discuss that, if they care to explain it by
giving a sensible and considered set of answers to the question "Could
this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?".

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Ziko van Dijk]

Hello Aron,

Am Mo., 12. Aug. 2019 um 22:34 Uhr schrieb Aron Manning <
aronmanni...@gmail.com>:

>
> Part of this would be the addition of NC and ND licenses. This doesn't mean
> that there will be less free content, but instead more material will be
> possible to be uploaded, from underrepresented communities. This would be a
> very welcome change.
>


The concern is that allowing NC and ND would lead to more content being
uploaded under these "unfree" conditions that otherwise would be uploaded
as "free". See the excellent brochure published by WMDE some years ago.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Free_Knowledge_thanks_to_Creative_Commons_Licenses.pdf



> The draft already refers to 2 articles (1
> ,2
> <
> https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c0043945-852b-4d7e-94ad-1859f91ba418
> >)
> that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show the
> benefits of NC and ND licensed materials.
>
>
I fail to see how these two articles "explain the need for ND". The -
interesting - article about the daguerrotypes relates to images that are
long in the Public Domain.

Kind regards
Ziko





> Aron
>
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 11:25, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > The justifications for the change read as unsourced and arbitrary. In
> > particular there is no evidence that using Commons to host NC ND
> > material that may be important to minority communities, such as
> > traditional folk art, would help better to educate the public about
> > those arts when the same NC restriction would halt in its
> > tracks the general use of Commons by educators and universities. The
> > change in commons policies would have the consequence of advice to
> > educators being against using our media in lectures, study materials,
> > academic papers, academic books etc.
> >
> > The Meta page that is linked to verges on being blatantly hostile to
> > the views of the Wikimedia Commons communities
> > * Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
> > * (Answer) All change has negative connotations to some members of the
> > community.
> > This appears deliberately flippant and provocative. Bizarre.
> >
> >
>
> ᐧ
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Philip Kopetzky]

Hi Andy,

the way the recommendations were drafted was not straightforward and they
are still drafts, some less defined than might be ideal at this point in
time. Personally I would not accept such a statement in a final
recommendation, but these are still rather talking points than specific
visions of the future and it would be great to discuss them in that way.

Best,
Philip

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 18:53, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 16:51, Nicole Ebber 
> wrote:
>
> > This is a
> > process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
> > engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.
>
> Perhaps it would also be in keeping with that spirit for this:
>
> Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
>
> All change has negative connotations to some members of the community
>
> to be re-written, to actually reflect the proposal's real and significant
> risks?
>
> As it stands, I do not find it to be "solution-oriented", nor
> indicative of "due review and reflection", nor "in the spirit of
> collegial collaboration", and I do not think anyone could plausibly
> argue that it is any of those things.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Aron Manning]

We've been waiting for the moment the WMF starts a conversation of proposed
changes. It finally came, and I appreciate this good faith effort.
I hope we can give constructive feedback and get involved in a civil
manner, without focusing on perceived hostilities.

The Terms of Use/Licensing Policy recommendation

is
more broad than the addition of NC and ND licensing.
"we assume that it would be necessary to *modify the “Terms of Use”
especially to address community health, foster diversity and address
systemic biases.*"
This would be a clear statement of the Foundation's future purpose,
therefore I strongly agree with it.

Part of this would be the addition of NC and ND licenses. This doesn't mean
that there will be less free content, but instead more material will be
possible to be uploaded, from underrepresented communities. This would be a
very welcome change.
The draft already refers to 2 articles (1
,2
)
that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show the
benefits of NC and ND licensed materials.

Aron


On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 11:25, Fæ  wrote:

> The justifications for the change read as unsourced and arbitrary. In
> particular there is no evidence that using Commons to host NC ND
> material that may be important to minority communities, such as
> traditional folk art, would help better to educate the public about
> those arts when the same NC restriction would halt in its
> tracks the general use of Commons by educators and universities. The
> change in commons policies would have the consequence of advice to
> educators being against using our media in lectures, study materials,
> academic papers, academic books etc.
>
> The Meta page that is linked to verges on being blatantly hostile to
> the views of the Wikimedia Commons communities
> * Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
> * (Answer) All change has negative connotations to some members of the
> community.
> This appears deliberately flippant and provocative. Bizarre.
>
>

ᐧ
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Education] [Eduwiki] The Wikipedia & Education User Group: Changes in Board Composition

[Nichole Saad]

Congrats, Filip,  João & LiAnna! We look forward to working closely with
you :)

best,

Nichole

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 4:41 AM Rajeeb Dutta  wrote:

> Congrats João & LiAnna, thanks Shani for the updates and wishing Shani and
> Ananth all my best wishes for your upcoming future endeavour.
>
> Best Regards,
> Rajeeb Dutta.
> (U: Marajozkee)
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 12-Aug-2019, at 5:46 AM, Shani Evenstein 
> wrote:
> >
> > João Alexandre Peschanski from Brazil, who has served as an adviser to
> the board since the UG's approval, throughout the board election process
> and ever since; and LiAnna Davis, Chief
> ___
> Education mailing list
> educat...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
>


-- 
*Nichole Saad*
Wikimedia Foundation | Senior Program Manager, Education
ns...@wikimedia.org
user: NSaad (WMF)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Anders Wennersten]

I want to express my appreciation for the work being done and the result.

I am not able to get to grips with all parts of the recommendation but 
as I understand there are two key messages:


*To distribute  many of the function now at WMF in SF to different 
locations in the world (whereof 50% in Global south). I find this is 
most appropriate, both to lessen the feeling of We-them, but also to get 
more salaried people spread over the World. It is also a natural 
development as out organisation mature over time


*To really go, without any compromise for the discussion in the movement 
in our communities must be held in a civil tone and in a friendly 
atmosphere  where respect for everyone is a key. I believe also this is 
long overdue and necessary when we now are over 15 years of age.


I love these two issues and hope it will be implemented in full.

 Anders



Den 2019-08-12 kl. 17:51, skrev Nicole Ebber:

Dear all,

We would like to offer further clarification that the recommendations for
Wikimedia 2030 [1] that were shared earlier with you are indeed drafts.
They represent discussions around a wide array of topics that the nine
thematic working groups, affiliates and communities had identified
important for our movement’s future. They are the product of conversations
over many months with a variety of stakeholders, and the working groups are
eager to hear from you. The draft recommendations are neither final nor
complete, but a continuation of an ongoing conversation happening across
wikis, platforms, surveys, meetings, and meet-ups. As such, constructive
feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed. The draft
recommendations are based on contexts that deserve due review and
reflection, and are the result of the efforts of many, rather than single
individuals.

Many of the draft recommendations underline structural changes needed for
the growth and expansion of a movement like ours. Many are representative
of wider societal, historical and global dynamics around us. Please take
the time to review the draft recommendations in their entirety, pose
questions, hear from others, and in the spirit of collegial collaboration,
offer suggestions that you think can address the issues at hand. This is a
process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.

Best wishes,
Nicole

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:49, Todd Allen  wrote:


"And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
incorporate
indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
licensing scheme?"

We can't and no one can.

Knowledge, ideas, and concepts cannot be copyrighted to begin with. Now,
specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work under
an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place for
it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter what
one does.

Todd

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky 
Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.

You're

the only one telling people to shut up here.

And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can

incorporate

indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
licensing scheme?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,






___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Andy Mabbett]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 16:51, Nicole Ebber  wrote:

> This is a
> process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
> engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.

Perhaps it would also be in keeping with that spirit for this:

Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?

All change has negative connotations to some members of the community

to be re-written, to actually reflect the proposal's real and significant risks?

As it stands, I do not find it to be "solution-oriented", nor
indicative of "due review and reflection", nor "in the spirit of
collegial collaboration", and I do not think anyone could plausibly
argue that it is any of those things.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Risker]

Ziko and others - please, please provide your feedback to all of the
working groups on all of the ideas.  Please tell us when you see a draft
recommendation that seems to be right.  Please tell us when you see a draft
recommendation that you think is unreasonable - and tell us what causes
your concern.  Some of the draft recommendations are likely to sound like
good ideas (or even "this is what we do now!") while others will seem to be
pretty radical.  If you see a draft recommendation that you think is really
going "too far", it would be really helpful to hear from you as community
members what you'd consider to be a reasonable alternative, or a middle
ground that you think would be acceptable.

I'm on the Roles & Responsibilities working group, and I am seeing several
recommendations from other groups that I plan to comment upon, too; some of
them seem like really good ideas to me, but there are ones that I don't
really think are a great idea, too.

Risker/Anne


On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 12:25, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:

> Am Mo., 12. Aug. 2019 um 17:51 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
> nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:
>
> > Dear all,.
>
>
>
> > As such, constructive
> > feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed.
>
>
> Hello Nicole,
> For example, if I say that I am against NC and ND content on Commons, would
> such a feedback be welcome? Or would it be dismissed as not "constructive"
> and not "solution-oriented"?
> Maybe you can explain to me what the actual problem is that is supposed to
> be solved by ND and NC content?
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
> > > specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the
> underlying
> > > facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> > > Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> > > without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> > under
> > > an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> > for
> > > it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But
> even
> > > then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter
> what
> > > one does.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> > > You're
> > > > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> > > >
> > > > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> > > incorporate
> > > > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the
> current
> > > > licensing scheme?
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nicole Ebber
> > Adviser International Relations
> > Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > https://wikimedia.de
> >
> > Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> Menschheit
> > teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> > https://spenden.wikimedia.de
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter
> > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Chris Keating]

Hi Ziko,

There is in fact a rationale within the text of the recommendation. In
essence, it's that some communities will never share their heritage if it
can then be re-used in a manner they consider disrespectful.

Of course one can disagree with that statement on a factual level, or ask
for evidence behind it.

Or one can agree with it but disagree with the intention of the
recommendation.

Or one can agree with the intention, but disagree about the the
effectiveness of allowing some NC or ND content on some Wikimedia projects
as a method of achieving it.

What is rather less constructive is gathering pitchforks and flaming
torches against the OUTRAGE of THE WMF making every Wikimedia project
immediately accept unfree content.

Chris


On Mon, 12 Aug 2019, 17:25 Ziko van Dijk,  wrote:

> Am Mo., 12. Aug. 2019 um 17:51 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
> nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:
>
> > Dear all,.
>
>
>
> > As such, constructive
> > feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed.
>
>
> Hello Nicole,
> For example, if I say that I am against NC and ND content on Commons, would
> such a feedback be welcome? Or would it be dismissed as not "constructive"
> and not "solution-oriented"?
> Maybe you can explain to me what the actual problem is that is supposed to
> be solved by ND and NC content?
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
> > > specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the
> underlying
> > > facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> > > Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> > > without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> > under
> > > an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> > for
> > > it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But
> even
> > > then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter
> what
> > > one does.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> > > You're
> > > > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> > > >
> > > > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> > > incorporate
> > > > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the
> current
> > > > licensing scheme?
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nicole Ebber
> > Adviser International Relations
> > Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > https://wikimedia.de
> >
> > Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> Menschheit
> > teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> > https://spenden.wikimedia.de
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter
> > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Ziko van Dijk]

Am Mo., 12. Aug. 2019 um 17:51 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:

> Dear all,.



> As such, constructive
> feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed.


Hello Nicole,
For example, if I say that I am against NC and ND content on Commons, would
such a feedback be welcome? Or would it be dismissed as not "constructive"
and not "solution-oriented"?
Maybe you can explain to me what the actual problem is that is supposed to
be solved by ND and NC content?
Kind regards
Ziko





> > specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
> > facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> > Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> > without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> under
> > an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> for
> > it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
> > then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter what
> > one does.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> > You're
> > > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> > >
> > > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> > incorporate
> > > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> > > licensing scheme?
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Chris Keating]

Hi Yaroslav,


> No, it does not work like this. Large communities are only going to accept
> decisions which were discussed with them properly, on their project and in
> the two-way interaction mode. The discussions on Meta in the mode "we will
> listen to you and then let you know of our decision" are not going to be
> accepted. We have had enough recent examples to illustrate this.
>
>
And that is why, even a year into this working group process, a number of
the recommendations are *still* phrased as suggestions that the Wikimedia
movement collectively should develop principles for such-and-such an area.

I think many people are reading these draft recommendations as something
they are not.

Also, I find it very ironic that many people are reacting to these strategy
process as if it was some method of the WMF inflicting its will on everyone
else, when actually many of the recommendations would result in very
significant changes to the WMF as an organisation.

Chris
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Yaroslav Blanter]

No, it does not work like this. Large communities are only going to accept
decisions which were discussed with them properly, on their project and in
the two-way interaction mode. The discussions on Meta in the mode "we will
listen to you and then let you know of our decision" are not going to be
accepted. We have had enough recent examples to illustrate this.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:51 PM Nicole Ebber 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We would like to offer further clarification that the recommendations for
> Wikimedia 2030 [1] that were shared earlier with you are indeed drafts.
> They represent discussions around a wide array of topics that the nine
> thematic working groups, affiliates and communities had identified
> important for our movement’s future. They are the product of conversations
> over many months with a variety of stakeholders, and the working groups are
> eager to hear from you. The draft recommendations are neither final nor
> complete, but a continuation of an ongoing conversation happening across
> wikis, platforms, surveys, meetings, and meet-ups. As such, constructive
> feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed. The draft
> recommendations are based on contexts that deserve due review and
> reflection, and are the result of the efforts of many, rather than single
> individuals.
>
> Many of the draft recommendations underline structural changes needed for
> the growth and expansion of a movement like ours. Many are representative
> of wider societal, historical and global dynamics around us. Please take
> the time to review the draft recommendations in their entirety, pose
> questions, hear from others, and in the spirit of collegial collaboration,
> offer suggestions that you think can address the issues at hand. This is a
> process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
> engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.
>
> Best wishes,
> Nicole
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:49, Todd Allen  wrote:
>
> > "And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> > incorporate
> > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> > licensing scheme?"
> >
> > We can't and no one can.
> >
> > Knowledge, ideas, and concepts cannot be copyrighted to begin with. Now,
> > specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
> > facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> > Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> > without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> under
> > an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> for
> > it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
> > then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter what
> > one does.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> > You're
> > > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> > >
> > > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> > incorporate
> > > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> > > licensing scheme?
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Nicole Ebber]

Dear all,

We would like to offer further clarification that the recommendations for
Wikimedia 2030 [1] that were shared earlier with you are indeed drafts.
They represent discussions around a wide array of topics that the nine
thematic working groups, affiliates and communities had identified
important for our movement’s future. They are the product of conversations
over many months with a variety of stakeholders, and the working groups are
eager to hear from you. The draft recommendations are neither final nor
complete, but a continuation of an ongoing conversation happening across
wikis, platforms, surveys, meetings, and meet-ups. As such, constructive
feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed. The draft
recommendations are based on contexts that deserve due review and
reflection, and are the result of the efforts of many, rather than single
individuals.

Many of the draft recommendations underline structural changes needed for
the growth and expansion of a movement like ours. Many are representative
of wider societal, historical and global dynamics around us. Please take
the time to review the draft recommendations in their entirety, pose
questions, hear from others, and in the spirit of collegial collaboration,
offer suggestions that you think can address the issues at hand. This is a
process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.

Best wishes,
Nicole

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:49, Todd Allen  wrote:

> "And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> incorporate
> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> licensing scheme?"
>
> We can't and no one can.
>
> Knowledge, ideas, and concepts cannot be copyrighted to begin with. Now,
> specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
> facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work under
> an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place for
> it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
> then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter what
> one does.
>
> Todd
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky  >
> wrote:
>
> > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> You're
> > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> >
> > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> incorporate
> > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> > licensing scheme?
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
Nicole Ebber
Adviser International Relations
Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
https://wikimedia.de

Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
https://spenden.wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NC and ND content (was: Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations...)

[Todd Allen]

NC would also create a nightmare for downstream reusers.

If I want to use some portions of a Wikipedia article in a blog post, and I
have a couple ads on my blog to help defray the hosting costs, does that
violate NC? And certainly the stuff James brings up, regarding providing
mechanisms for offline access, even if no profit is made from such an
endeavor and the "sale" only helps to defray part of the costs.

The decision to require open content licenses was not an arbitrary one.
When we say "The free encyclopedia", that means in terms of "libre", not
just "gratis". Sure, we can legally use "noncommercial" or "no derivatives"
or "for educational purposes only" licensed works--but our users cannot
reuse it, and that they can do that has always been part of what we have
promised them. Our current minimal acceptance of nonfree content already
makes that a bit of a morass for would-be reusers; doing so on a wide scale
would make it a hopeless minefield.

Todd

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:45 AM James Heilman  wrote:

> Yah I have mixed feelings about NC. There is a lot of great content under
> this license which would benefit our readers if we could use it. We for
> example have folks like Khan Academy and the World Health Organization who
> refuse to adopt open licenses. They tell us that we can use their content
> right now as we are a non commercial project but that they will not chance.
>
> Yet us allowing NC will keep us from forcing those who are currently using
> this horribly unclear license to adopt an actual open one. I have had those
> who create NC context explicitly say we CANNOT use it on
> "Internet-in-a-Box" as even though we are selling the devices at below the
> cost of making them in the developing world, they are still being sold.
> This makes me want to have nothing to do with NC.
>
> ND is even worse. This means we cannot translate content and I am not
> interested in seeing us adopt anything which we cannot translate.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 3:29 PM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > There was once a report in which I read: Wikimedia Commons should allow
> NC
> > and ND content because that is somehow good for "communities that are
> > historically prohibited from telling their stories".
> > Then I asked on the talk page for the reasoning behind this
> > demand/postulation.
> > The answer I got was not very substantial.
> > I am very open to discuss the pros and cons of e.g. opening Wikimedia
> > Commons to NC or ND. But sorry, I find it very difficult to have a
> > meaningful conversation on this basis.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Reports/March-April_Community_Conversations_Monthly_Report
> >
> >
> > Am Fr., 9. Aug. 2019 um 20:37 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
> > nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:
> >
> > > Dear fellow Wikimedians,
> > >
> > > They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> > > draft recommendations for structural change within our movement have
> > > been published. The recommendations have been developed by the nine
> > > Wikimedia 2030 working groups and are a key tool to help us build the
> > > future of our movement.
> > >
> > > Working group members have been working tirelessly for a year to
> > > research the movement, analyze community input shared via community
> > > conversations, and gain insight into external trends. A huge thank you
> > > to each and every member for helping us reach this key milestone.
> > >
> > > The draft recommendations are a first look at ways we can adapt our
> > > movement’s structures to help us advance in our strategic direction.
> > > They are the starting point for conversations about what kind of
> > > future we want to create together.
> > >
> > > The recommendations are not final. In order to get them to that stage,
> > > your input is needed! We would like to hear from you all what these
> > > changes would mean for you in your local or thematic context, what do
> > > you like about them, and where you potentially see any red flags. And
> > > of course, always critically question whether these recommendations
> > > support the strategic direction.
> > >
> > > There are a few ways to do this:
> > > * Read through the recommendations online and provide your input
> > > directly on Meta. [2]
> > > * If you will be at Wikimania, join us in the Wikimedia 2030 space. [3]
> > > * Attend a Strategy Salon hosted by an affiliate where you live. [4]
> > > * Reach out to a Strategy Liaison in your language to share feedback,
> > > or lead a conversation of your own. [5]
> > >
> > > Over the next month, working groups will take the input they receive
> > > into the recommendations, alongside external advice and research, and
> > > use it to refine and finalize them. Share your views, and help shape
> > > what Wikimedia will look like in 2030 and beyond.
> > >
> > > If you have any questions or feedback, please feel 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Todd Allen]

"And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can incorporate
indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
licensing scheme?"

We can't and no one can.

Knowledge, ideas, and concepts cannot be copyrighted to begin with. Now,
specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work under
an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place for
it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter what
one does.

Todd

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky 
wrote:

> Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list. You're
> the only one telling people to shut up here.
>
> And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can incorporate
> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> licensing scheme?
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NC and ND content (was: Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations...)

[James Heilman]

Yah I have mixed feelings about NC. There is a lot of great content under
this license which would benefit our readers if we could use it. We for
example have folks like Khan Academy and the World Health Organization who
refuse to adopt open licenses. They tell us that we can use their content
right now as we are a non commercial project but that they will not chance.

Yet us allowing NC will keep us from forcing those who are currently using
this horribly unclear license to adopt an actual open one. I have had those
who create NC context explicitly say we CANNOT use it on
"Internet-in-a-Box" as even though we are selling the devices at below the
cost of making them in the developing world, they are still being sold.
This makes me want to have nothing to do with NC.

ND is even worse. This means we cannot translate content and I am not
interested in seeing us adopt anything which we cannot translate.

James

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 3:29 PM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> There was once a report in which I read: Wikimedia Commons should allow NC
> and ND content because that is somehow good for "communities that are
> historically prohibited from telling their stories".
> Then I asked on the talk page for the reasoning behind this
> demand/postulation.
> The answer I got was not very substantial.
> I am very open to discuss the pros and cons of e.g. opening Wikimedia
> Commons to NC or ND. But sorry, I find it very difficult to have a
> meaningful conversation on this basis.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Reports/March-April_Community_Conversations_Monthly_Report
>
>
> Am Fr., 9. Aug. 2019 um 20:37 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
> nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:
>
> > Dear fellow Wikimedians,
> >
> > They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> > draft recommendations for structural change within our movement have
> > been published. The recommendations have been developed by the nine
> > Wikimedia 2030 working groups and are a key tool to help us build the
> > future of our movement.
> >
> > Working group members have been working tirelessly for a year to
> > research the movement, analyze community input shared via community
> > conversations, and gain insight into external trends. A huge thank you
> > to each and every member for helping us reach this key milestone.
> >
> > The draft recommendations are a first look at ways we can adapt our
> > movement’s structures to help us advance in our strategic direction.
> > They are the starting point for conversations about what kind of
> > future we want to create together.
> >
> > The recommendations are not final. In order to get them to that stage,
> > your input is needed! We would like to hear from you all what these
> > changes would mean for you in your local or thematic context, what do
> > you like about them, and where you potentially see any red flags. And
> > of course, always critically question whether these recommendations
> > support the strategic direction.
> >
> > There are a few ways to do this:
> > * Read through the recommendations online and provide your input
> > directly on Meta. [2]
> > * If you will be at Wikimania, join us in the Wikimedia 2030 space. [3]
> > * Attend a Strategy Salon hosted by an affiliate where you live. [4]
> > * Reach out to a Strategy Liaison in your language to share feedback,
> > or lead a conversation of your own. [5]
> >
> > Over the next month, working groups will take the input they receive
> > into the recommendations, alongside external advice and research, and
> > use it to refine and finalize them. Share your views, and help shape
> > what Wikimedia will look like in 2030 and beyond.
> >
> > If you have any questions or feedback, please feel free to get in touch.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Nicole
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> > [2]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> > [3] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Wikimedia_2030
> > [4]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Strategy_Salons
> > [5]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People/Community_Strategy_Liaisons
> >
> > --
> > Nicole Ebber
> > Adviser International Relations
> > Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > https://wikimedia.de
> >
> > Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> > Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns
> > dabei! https://spenden.wikimedia.de
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.
> > V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
> > Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Yury Bulka]

> I think that re-imagining the governance of this movement is going to be the 
> first step towards making any sort of progress towards the goals of either 
> group.

I think this is what the Roles and Responsibilities working group was trying to 
do.



12 серпня 2019 р. 15:41:13 EEST, Adrian Raddatz  написав:
>I'm tempted to sit this one out. The Foundation has organized a bunch
>of
>working groups, staffed primarily through volunteers of various types,
>to
>present some strategic recommendations for moving forward into the
>future.
>We are a movement with flaws and opportunities for improvement, as with
>any
>large organization, and it would be a mistake for us to assume that
>because
>we found the winning formula in the early 2000s we are completely set
>for
>the future. But already, the discussions on Meta are dominated by
>representatives of The Community™ showing up with all of the usual
>toxic
>vested contributor behaviour that I've grown to know and love in my
>time
>with this movement.
>
>That said, it is apparent how broken the community/WMF governance model
>is.
>Large portions of the community feel disenfranchised on the projects
>they
>helped to create, and the WMF is increasingly separate from the
>community
>in terms of its goals and priorities. I think that re-imagining the
>governance of this movement is going to be the first step towards
>making
>any sort of progress towards the goals of either group.
>
>Adrian
>
>
>On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:54 AM Yury Bulka
>
>wrote:
>
>> Maybe it is better to discuss specific recommendations on their talk
>> pages?
>>
>>
>>
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
>>
>> We might find ourselves discussing here only one specific
>recommendation
>> while the other working groups' recommendations might fade in shadows
>of
>> this particular discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> Philip Kopetzky  writes:
>>
>> > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
>> You're
>> > the only one telling people to shut up here.
>> >
>> > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
>> incorporate
>> > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the
>current
>> > licensing scheme?
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe:
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe:
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>___
>Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>

-- 
Sent from my PDP-11.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NC and ND content (was: Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations...)

[Ziko van Dijk]

Hello,

There was once a report in which I read: Wikimedia Commons should allow NC
and ND content because that is somehow good for "communities that are
historically prohibited from telling their stories".
Then I asked on the talk page for the reasoning behind this
demand/postulation.
The answer I got was not very substantial.
I am very open to discuss the pros and cons of e.g. opening Wikimedia
Commons to NC or ND. But sorry, I find it very difficult to have a
meaningful conversation on this basis.

Kind regards
Ziko


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Reports/March-April_Community_Conversations_Monthly_Report


Am Fr., 9. Aug. 2019 um 20:37 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:

> Dear fellow Wikimedians,
>
> They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> draft recommendations for structural change within our movement have
> been published. The recommendations have been developed by the nine
> Wikimedia 2030 working groups and are a key tool to help us build the
> future of our movement.
>
> Working group members have been working tirelessly for a year to
> research the movement, analyze community input shared via community
> conversations, and gain insight into external trends. A huge thank you
> to each and every member for helping us reach this key milestone.
>
> The draft recommendations are a first look at ways we can adapt our
> movement’s structures to help us advance in our strategic direction.
> They are the starting point for conversations about what kind of
> future we want to create together.
>
> The recommendations are not final. In order to get them to that stage,
> your input is needed! We would like to hear from you all what these
> changes would mean for you in your local or thematic context, what do
> you like about them, and where you potentially see any red flags. And
> of course, always critically question whether these recommendations
> support the strategic direction.
>
> There are a few ways to do this:
> * Read through the recommendations online and provide your input
> directly on Meta. [2]
> * If you will be at Wikimania, join us in the Wikimedia 2030 space. [3]
> * Attend a Strategy Salon hosted by an affiliate where you live. [4]
> * Reach out to a Strategy Liaison in your language to share feedback,
> or lead a conversation of your own. [5]
>
> Over the next month, working groups will take the input they receive
> into the recommendations, alongside external advice and research, and
> use it to refine and finalize them. Share your views, and help shape
> what Wikimedia will look like in 2030 and beyond.
>
> If you have any questions or feedback, please feel free to get in touch.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Nicole
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> [3] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Wikimedia_2030
> [4]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Strategy_Salons
> [5]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People/Community_Strategy_Liaisons
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns
> dabei! https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.
> V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
> Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
> anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
> Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Adrian Raddatz]

I'm tempted to sit this one out. The Foundation has organized a bunch of
working groups, staffed primarily through volunteers of various types, to
present some strategic recommendations for moving forward into the future.
We are a movement with flaws and opportunities for improvement, as with any
large organization, and it would be a mistake for us to assume that because
we found the winning formula in the early 2000s we are completely set for
the future. But already, the discussions on Meta are dominated by
representatives of The Community™ showing up with all of the usual toxic
vested contributor behaviour that I've grown to know and love in my time
with this movement.

That said, it is apparent how broken the community/WMF governance model is.
Large portions of the community feel disenfranchised on the projects they
helped to create, and the WMF is increasingly separate from the community
in terms of its goals and priorities. I think that re-imagining the
governance of this movement is going to be the first step towards making
any sort of progress towards the goals of either group.

Adrian


On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:54 AM Yury Bulka 
wrote:

> Maybe it is better to discuss specific recommendations on their talk
> pages?
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
>
> We might find ourselves discussing here only one specific recommendation
> while the other working groups' recommendations might fade in shadows of
> this particular discussion.
>
>
>
> Philip Kopetzky  writes:
>
> > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> You're
> > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> >
> > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> incorporate
> > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> > licensing scheme?
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Yury Bulka]

Maybe it is better to discuss specific recommendations on their talk
pages?

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9

We might find ourselves discussing here only one specific recommendation
while the other working groups' recommendations might fade in shadows of
this particular discussion.



Philip Kopetzky  writes:

> Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list. You're
> the only one telling people to shut up here.
>
> And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can incorporate
> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> licensing scheme?
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Fæ]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 12:47, Philip Kopetzky  wrote:
>
> Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list. You're
> the only one telling people to shut up here.

I have told nobody to shut up. This is a continuation of the use of
character assignation to shut up points of view you do not like. Lay
off, it's creating a hostile environment.

> And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can incorporate
> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> licensing scheme?

3rd time: Commons case book. Please make one. The community on Commons
can assist you with previous examples that have successfully been used
to change policy using evidence, not just rhetoric.


Fae
--
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Philip Kopetzky]

Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list. You're
the only one telling people to shut up here.

And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can incorporate
indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
licensing scheme?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Fæ]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 11:53, Philip Kopetzky  wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure that that licensing recommendation is still
> work-in-progress and the legal implications haven't been analysed yet.

Huh. Nobody has mentioned legal implications. Not sure there are any
that would be especially different to the challenges that Commons
volunteers handle every day with the current available licenses.

> I guess that assuming good faith is not your strong suit, Fae? Be part of
> the solution, for once.

Maybe you can focus on the points being raised, like how a case book
would actually help make a case for change, rather than hostile
character assassination against folks writing to this list? That would
be super, and show that you are also part of a "solution", though in
this case an actual verifiable "problem" has yet to be identified that
this particular recommendation might fix.

Thanks,
Fae

> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 11:25, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > I agree that the official announcement on Commons is worse than
> > unfortunate.
> >
> > The announcement by the Diversity Working Group on a sub-page of the
> > VP of their recommendation to permit NC and ND license restrictions on
> > Commons, comes after no attempt in advance to discuss the
> > recommendation or its wording with Wikimedia Commons community *on
> > Commons*. It is not helped by the poster being a volunteer with barely
> > any activity on Commons, so not the best person to discuss the future
> > of Commons with.
> > Link:
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump%2FCopyright=revision=361624891=361607626
> >
> > The justifications for the change read as unsourced and arbitrary. In
> > particular there is no evidence that using Commons to host NC ND
> > material that may be important to minority communities, such as
> > traditional folk art, would help better to educate the public about
> > those arts when the same NC restriction would halt in its
> > tracks the general use of Commons by educators and universities. The
> > change in commons policies would have the consequence of advice to
> > educators being against using our media in lectures, study materials,
> > academic papers, academic books etc.
> >
> > The Meta page that is linked to verges on being blatantly hostile to
> > the views of the Wikimedia Commons communities
> > * Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
> > * (Answer) All change has negative connotations to some members of the
> > community.
> > This appears deliberately flippant and provocative. Bizarre.
> >
> > If the WMF sponsored recommendation is hostile up front, I do not see
> > much point in the community discussing the change, it may as well just
> > be mass voted down. Discussion when the team recommending the strategy
> > is openly hostile to "some members of the community" on its own
> > recommendations page, will only lead to more polarization of the WMF
> > versus everyone else type.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > --
> > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >
> > On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 02:11, Todd Allen  wrote:
> > >
> > > (Response apparently wasn't sent to list previously.)
> > >
> > > Yes, I think there ought to be a place to discuss the whole thing, as
> > > several share a fatal flaw in that they advocate dictating to local
> > > communities from above.
> > >
> > > Is this getting announced anywhere other than on the mailing list? There
> > is
> > > a proposal in these to literally undermine Wikipedia's free content
> > mission
> > > by allowing nonfree licenses. (
> > >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
> > )
> > > Do you think, maybe, we shouldn't attempt to slip that through unnoticed
> > > and uncommented?
> > >
> > > For example, here's the notice that was left on Commons:
> > >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump=revision=360549650=360506118
> > > .
> > > It's totally anodyne, and gives absolutely no indication that such
> > massive
> > > changes, which would entirely strip the communities of autonomy, are
> > > proposed there. For example, I suspect Commons might be just a bit
> > > interested to know these proposals would force them to accept nonfree
> > > content. If this is in any way an honest process, make sure the
> > > announcements indicate how breathtakingly broad and destructive these
> > > proposals are.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 7:35 AM Isaac Olatunde  > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I believe there are related discussion pages, Todd. Do you think there
> > > > should have been separate pages for discussion aside the talk pages?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Isaac.
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 2:29 PM Szymon Grabarczuk <
> > tar.locesil...@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> How about talk pages?
> > > >>
> > > >> Z poważaniem / Kind regards
> > > >>
> > > >> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Philip Kopetzky]

I'm pretty sure that that licensing recommendation is still
work-in-progress and the legal implications haven't been analysed yet.

I guess that assuming good faith is not your strong suit, Fae? Be part of
the solution, for once.

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 11:25, Fæ  wrote:

> I agree that the official announcement on Commons is worse than
> unfortunate.
>
> The announcement by the Diversity Working Group on a sub-page of the
> VP of their recommendation to permit NC and ND license restrictions on
> Commons, comes after no attempt in advance to discuss the
> recommendation or its wording with Wikimedia Commons community *on
> Commons*. It is not helped by the poster being a volunteer with barely
> any activity on Commons, so not the best person to discuss the future
> of Commons with.
> Link:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump%2FCopyright=revision=361624891=361607626
>
> The justifications for the change read as unsourced and arbitrary. In
> particular there is no evidence that using Commons to host NC ND
> material that may be important to minority communities, such as
> traditional folk art, would help better to educate the public about
> those arts when the same NC restriction would halt in its
> tracks the general use of Commons by educators and universities. The
> change in commons policies would have the consequence of advice to
> educators being against using our media in lectures, study materials,
> academic papers, academic books etc.
>
> The Meta page that is linked to verges on being blatantly hostile to
> the views of the Wikimedia Commons communities
> * Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
> * (Answer) All change has negative connotations to some members of the
> community.
> This appears deliberately flippant and provocative. Bizarre.
>
> If the WMF sponsored recommendation is hostile up front, I do not see
> much point in the community discussing the change, it may as well just
> be mass voted down. Discussion when the team recommending the strategy
> is openly hostile to "some members of the community" on its own
> recommendations page, will only lead to more polarization of the WMF
> versus everyone else type.
>
> Fae
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 02:11, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> > (Response apparently wasn't sent to list previously.)
> >
> > Yes, I think there ought to be a place to discuss the whole thing, as
> > several share a fatal flaw in that they advocate dictating to local
> > communities from above.
> >
> > Is this getting announced anywhere other than on the mailing list? There
> is
> > a proposal in these to literally undermine Wikipedia's free content
> mission
> > by allowing nonfree licenses. (
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
> )
> > Do you think, maybe, we shouldn't attempt to slip that through unnoticed
> > and uncommented?
> >
> > For example, here's the notice that was left on Commons:
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump=revision=360549650=360506118
> > .
> > It's totally anodyne, and gives absolutely no indication that such
> massive
> > changes, which would entirely strip the communities of autonomy, are
> > proposed there. For example, I suspect Commons might be just a bit
> > interested to know these proposals would force them to accept nonfree
> > content. If this is in any way an honest process, make sure the
> > announcements indicate how breathtakingly broad and destructive these
> > proposals are.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 7:35 AM Isaac Olatunde  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe there are related discussion pages, Todd. Do you think there
> > > should have been separate pages for discussion aside the talk pages?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Isaac.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 2:29 PM Szymon Grabarczuk <
> tar.locesil...@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> How about talk pages?
> > >>
> > >> Z poważaniem / Kind regards
> > >>
> > >> *Szymon Grabarczuk*
> > >> userpage: pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tar_Lócesilion
> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> ᐧ
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 14:28, Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > There does not seem to be anywhere to comment on these, which there
> > >> should
> > >> > be. I saw at least one which is highly objectionable and which I
> would
> > >> like
> > >> > to object to.
> > >> >
> > >> > Todd
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 12:37 PM Nicole Ebber <
> nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de
> > >> >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Dear fellow Wikimedians,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> > >> > > draft recommendations 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Fæ]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 10:24, Fæ  wrote:
>
> I agree that the official announcement on Commons is worse than unfortunate.
>
> The announcement by the Diversity Working Group on a sub-page of the
> VP of their recommendation to permit NC and ND license restrictions on
> Commons, comes after no attempt in advance to discuss the
> recommendation or its wording with Wikimedia Commons community *on
> Commons*.[...]
> Link: 
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump%2FCopyright=revision=361624891=361607626

Correction: The note on VP/C was a volunteer's note, there was no
announcement by the Working Group.

To correct the absence of a Wikimedia Commons discussion about
recommendation to fundamentally change what Wikimedia Commons exists
for, the following proposal has been raised on Wikimedia Commons:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Proposal_to_introduce_Non-Commercial_media_on_Wikimedia_Commons

Everyone is free to add to discussion there, especially if there is
any verifiable evidence that allowing Non Commercial or No Derivatives
license constraints would enhance the mission of Wikimedia Commons
rather than hamper it.

I would be particularly interested to read the evidence and see a
(Wikimedia Commons) case book supporting the claim in the WG
recommendations that "Multiple studies have determined that extant
movement policies don’t just reflect the systemic biases, they make
biases against marginalized communities worse, in effect,
re-colonizing and oppressing diverse knowledge(ibid)" as the four
references given provide /no evidence/ about Wikimedia projects or
Wikimedia Commons in particular "re-colonizing", apart from
tangentially using a similar word and so is misrepresenting the
researchers and academics that wrote the referenced papers. Though I
would be sympathetic to the proper review of evidence when it comes to
decolonizing educational material, and taking action such as better
application of curation methods, this statement as written appears
unsourced political spin and is highly inappropriate from a WMF
sponsored working group.

Thanks,
Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Fæ]

I agree that the official announcement on Commons is worse than unfortunate.

The announcement by the Diversity Working Group on a sub-page of the
VP of their recommendation to permit NC and ND license restrictions on
Commons, comes after no attempt in advance to discuss the
recommendation or its wording with Wikimedia Commons community *on
Commons*. It is not helped by the poster being a volunteer with barely
any activity on Commons, so not the best person to discuss the future
of Commons with.
Link: 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump%2FCopyright=revision=361624891=361607626

The justifications for the change read as unsourced and arbitrary. In
particular there is no evidence that using Commons to host NC ND
material that may be important to minority communities, such as
traditional folk art, would help better to educate the public about
those arts when the same NC restriction would halt in its
tracks the general use of Commons by educators and universities. The
change in commons policies would have the consequence of advice to
educators being against using our media in lectures, study materials,
academic papers, academic books etc.

The Meta page that is linked to verges on being blatantly hostile to
the views of the Wikimedia Commons communities
* Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
* (Answer) All change has negative connotations to some members of the
community.
This appears deliberately flippant and provocative. Bizarre.

If the WMF sponsored recommendation is hostile up front, I do not see
much point in the community discussing the change, it may as well just
be mass voted down. Discussion when the team recommending the strategy
is openly hostile to "some members of the community" on its own
recommendations page, will only lead to more polarization of the WMF
versus everyone else type.

Fae

--
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 02:11, Todd Allen  wrote:
>
> (Response apparently wasn't sent to list previously.)
>
> Yes, I think there ought to be a place to discuss the whole thing, as
> several share a fatal flaw in that they advocate dictating to local
> communities from above.
>
> Is this getting announced anywhere other than on the mailing list? There is
> a proposal in these to literally undermine Wikipedia's free content mission
> by allowing nonfree licenses. (
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9)
> Do you think, maybe, we shouldn't attempt to slip that through unnoticed
> and uncommented?
>
> For example, here's the notice that was left on Commons:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump=revision=360549650=360506118
> .
> It's totally anodyne, and gives absolutely no indication that such massive
> changes, which would entirely strip the communities of autonomy, are
> proposed there. For example, I suspect Commons might be just a bit
> interested to know these proposals would force them to accept nonfree
> content. If this is in any way an honest process, make sure the
> announcements indicate how breathtakingly broad and destructive these
> proposals are.
>
> Todd
>
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 7:35 AM Isaac Olatunde 
> wrote:
>
> > I believe there are related discussion pages, Todd. Do you think there
> > should have been separate pages for discussion aside the talk pages?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Isaac.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 2:29 PM Szymon Grabarczuk  > wrote:
> >
> >> How about talk pages?
> >>
> >> Z poważaniem / Kind regards
> >>
> >> *Szymon Grabarczuk*
> >> userpage: pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tar_Lócesilion
> >> 
> >> 
> >>
> >> ᐧ
> >>
> >> On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 14:28, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >>
> >> > There does not seem to be anywhere to comment on these, which there
> >> should
> >> > be. I saw at least one which is highly objectionable and which I would
> >> like
> >> > to object to.
> >> >
> >> > Todd
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 12:37 PM Nicole Ebber  >> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Dear fellow Wikimedians,
> >> > >
> >> > > They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> >> > > draft recommendations for structural change within our movement have
> >> > > been published. The recommendations have been developed by the nine
> >> > > Wikimedia 2030 working groups and are a key tool to help us build the
> >> > > future of our movement.
> >> > >
> >> > > Working group members have been working tirelessly for a year to
> >> > > research the movement, analyze community input shared via community
> >> > > conversations, and gain insight into external trends. A huge thank you
> >> > > to each and every member for helping us reach this key milestone.
> >> > >
> >> > > The draft recommendations are a first look at ways we can 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Yury Bulka]

Todd Allen  writes:

> There does not seem to be anywhere to comment on these, which there should
> be. I saw at least one which is highly objectionable and which I would like
> to object to.
The Recommendations page contains a "How to Share Your Feedback"
section.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,