Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

[Tito Dutta]

Hello,
My comments are in a personal capacity, and kindly note my posts are not
directed towards anyone specifically/at all. Sincere thanks for
understanding these two points.

" We recommend you to have a look at these updates before making further
conclusions here.
-- Thanks for the recommendation. Kindly do not assume that we are not
reading the updates "before making further conclusions here".

" the Brand team has been watching the RfC and has written a summary about
it"
--Yes, RfC needs a closure/summary, from which we get action points. Now,
there is something called WP:INVOLVED. Someone who is
supporting/opposing/promoting/demoting an idea or in other words someone
who is "involved" often may not close or summarise a debate/discussion with
due weight to all the arguments. As a result, conclusions may be faulty,
and action points may not reflect the actual opinion of the RfC. Example
below.

FAQ: Why is this project moving forward after the RfC resulted in clear
majority opposition?
(
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/FAQ#Why_is_this_project_moving_forward_after_the_RfC_resulted_in_clear_majority_opposition
?)
-- Even after reading the answer I also don't understand "why?" A point I
get there is "exploring further options". On the report page, "What is
happening with the feedback?" (intended action points section perhaps) is
taking me to FAQ page. From the FAQ page the last paragraph sends me back
to the report page, making it a loop.

" The team has integrated the feedback of the RfC in the development
process, just as we did with the activities organized by the project
itself. "
-- unlike other statements here any footnote or reference is not given.
Would love to learn what are those activities and how was the RfC feedback
integrated into the agenda/activity. (Please note that I have read the
brand workshop report.)

That's all for now, with regards, and good wishes during the global
pandemic time,
User:Titodutta


On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 14:19, Samir Elsharbaty 
wrote:

> Hi, the Brand team has been watching the RfC and has written a summary
> about it [1] that was shared both in the RfC [2] and the project page [3]
> in Meta. The team has integrated the feedback of the RfC in the development
> process, just as we did with the activities organized by the project
> itself.
>
> The RfC is covered in the main project page as well as in the FAQ [4]. The
> RfC has been a recurrent topic of discussion in the Brand project talk page
> [5], where we are answering questions and discussing topics whenever they
> are posted. We recommend you to have a look at these updates before making
> further conclusions here.
>
> The RfC is about the use of the word “Wikipedia” in the name of the
> Foundation, and by extension the names of affiliates were discussed as
> well. The project team has clarified that many options for a naming
> convention are being explored. While having Wikipedia as a central concept
> is a project requirement, It is very unlikely that any naming convention
> proposal will be based on a simple substitution of the word "Wikimedia"
> with the word "Wikipedia". Brand systems offer many more possibilities.
>
> Another important point to clarify is that the proposals for naming
> conventions haven’t been defined yet. According to the project timeline
> [6], several proposals for a naming convention will be shared with the
> communities for feedback in May, at the earliest. At the end of this
> review, one proposal will be selected and refined. You can check the
> timeline to learn about further phases with public reviews before the full
> proposal for a brand system is presented to the Wikimedia Foundation
> leadership and the Board.
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia
>
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia#Report_about_this_RfC_by_the_Brand_Project_team
>
> [3]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
>
> [4]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/FAQ
>
> [5]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
>
>
>
>
> Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
>
> Community Brand and Marketing coordinator
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 1:12 AM David Gerard  wrote:
>
> > Yes. Who's the person telling Samir to post this stuff, which comes
> > across as aggressively ignoring all feedback to date? Could we have a
> > word with them here?
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 14:12, Peter Southwood
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > When you speak for someone who is hard of listening, it is an
> > occupational hazard that you will be shouted at 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

[Ilario valdelli]

More complicated.

The process has been managed as a "pure" marketing and communication 
process while it concerns more community management.


I don't see here (honestly) any community management.

Knd regards

On 11/04/2020 12:27, Gnangarra wrote:

Since the process has decided its not hearing that the community doesnt
want the change why continue to pretend the communities input or interest
in the project is even wanted.

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 17:25, John Erling Blad  wrote:


This is a reply Shamir, but it is more a reply to the process and Wikimedia
Foundation.

Reading [1] my immediate thought is that whoever wrote it is more focused
on reputing the core finding than respecting the outcome. It is a reaction
to the statement “We do not know what the Wikimedia Foundation’s new name
would be, only that it would utilize Wikipedia not Wikimedia.” and 91% says
“no”. Still the process continues as nothing has happen. When 91% opposes a
change in volunteer organization you stop and listen, this is an
earthquake.

I opposed the name change, even if I don't really agree with the RFC, but
what happen later I find perhaps more troublesome. This shows a real lack
of understanding of why people objected to the idea. People have said no to
this several times now, and the process continues like nothing has happen.
Someone must clarify what this is, and who is behind it, and why, because
as it is now the chance of onboarding the communities are virtually zero.

As it is now I would say call it a failure, and make a full halt.

[1]

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia

John Erling Blad
/jeblad

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:49 AM Samir Elsharbaty <
selsharb...@wikimedia.org>
wrote:






--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario
Skype: valdelli
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


___
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] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

[Gnangarra]

Since the process has decided its not hearing that the community doesnt
want the change why continue to pretend the communities input or interest
in the project is even wanted.

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 17:25, John Erling Blad  wrote:

> This is a reply Shamir, but it is more a reply to the process and Wikimedia
> Foundation.
>
> Reading [1] my immediate thought is that whoever wrote it is more focused
> on reputing the core finding than respecting the outcome. It is a reaction
> to the statement “We do not know what the Wikimedia Foundation’s new name
> would be, only that it would utilize Wikipedia not Wikimedia.” and 91% says
> “no”. Still the process continues as nothing has happen. When 91% opposes a
> change in volunteer organization you stop and listen, this is an
> earthquake.
>
> I opposed the name change, even if I don't really agree with the RFC, but
> what happen later I find perhaps more troublesome. This shows a real lack
> of understanding of why people objected to the idea. People have said no to
> this several times now, and the process continues like nothing has happen.
> Someone must clarify what this is, and who is behind it, and why, because
> as it is now the chance of onboarding the communities are virtually zero.
>
> As it is now I would say call it a failure, and make a full halt.
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia
>
> John Erling Blad
> /jeblad
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:49 AM Samir Elsharbaty <
> selsharb...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, the Brand team has been watching the RfC and has written a summary
> > about it [1] that was shared both in the RfC [2] and the project page [3]
> > in Meta. The team has integrated the feedback of the RfC in the
> development
> > process, just as we did with the activities organized by the project
> > itself.
> >
> > The RfC is covered in the main project page as well as in the FAQ [4].
> The
> > RfC has been a recurrent topic of discussion in the Brand project talk
> page
> > [5], where we are answering questions and discussing topics whenever they
> > are posted. We recommend you to have a look at these updates before
> making
> > further conclusions here.
> >
> > The RfC is about the use of the word “Wikipedia” in the name of the
> > Foundation, and by extension the names of affiliates were discussed as
> > well. The project team has clarified that many options for a naming
> > convention are being explored. While having Wikipedia as a central
> concept
> > is a project requirement, It is very unlikely that any naming convention
> > proposal will be based on a simple substitution of the word "Wikimedia"
> > with the word "Wikipedia". Brand systems offer many more possibilities.
> >
> > Another important point to clarify is that the proposals for naming
> > conventions haven’t been defined yet. According to the project timeline
> > [6], several proposals for a naming convention will be shared with the
> > communities for feedback in May, at the earliest. At the end of this
> > review, one proposal will be selected and refined. You can check the
> > timeline to learn about further phases with public reviews before the
> full
> > proposal for a brand system is presented to the Wikimedia Foundation
> > leadership and the Board.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia
> >
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia#Report_about_this_RfC_by_the_Brand_Project_team
> >
> > [3]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
> >
> > [4]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/FAQ
> >
> > [5]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
> >
> > Community Brand and Marketing coordinator
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation 
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 1:12 AM David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > > Yes. Who's the person telling Samir to post this stuff, which comes
> > > across as aggressively ignoring all feedback to date? Could we have a
> > > word with them here?
> > >
> > >
> > > - d.
> > >
> > > On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 14:12, Peter Southwood
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > When you speak for someone who is hard of listening, it is an
> > > occupational hazard that you will be shouted at occasionally by those
> > whose
> > > voices are being ignored. It is not necessarily anything personal, just
> > > part of the heat in the kitchen.
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Peter
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> On
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

[John Erling Blad]

This is a reply Shamir, but it is more a reply to the process and Wikimedia
Foundation.

Reading [1] my immediate thought is that whoever wrote it is more focused
on reputing the core finding than respecting the outcome. It is a reaction
to the statement “We do not know what the Wikimedia Foundation’s new name
would be, only that it would utilize Wikipedia not Wikimedia.” and 91% says
“no”. Still the process continues as nothing has happen. When 91% opposes a
change in volunteer organization you stop and listen, this is an earthquake.

I opposed the name change, even if I don't really agree with the RFC, but
what happen later I find perhaps more troublesome. This shows a real lack
of understanding of why people objected to the idea. People have said no to
this several times now, and the process continues like nothing has happen.
Someone must clarify what this is, and who is behind it, and why, because
as it is now the chance of onboarding the communities are virtually zero.

As it is now I would say call it a failure, and make a full halt.

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia

John Erling Blad
/jeblad

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:49 AM Samir Elsharbaty 
wrote:

> Hi, the Brand team has been watching the RfC and has written a summary
> about it [1] that was shared both in the RfC [2] and the project page [3]
> in Meta. The team has integrated the feedback of the RfC in the development
> process, just as we did with the activities organized by the project
> itself.
>
> The RfC is covered in the main project page as well as in the FAQ [4]. The
> RfC has been a recurrent topic of discussion in the Brand project talk page
> [5], where we are answering questions and discussing topics whenever they
> are posted. We recommend you to have a look at these updates before making
> further conclusions here.
>
> The RfC is about the use of the word “Wikipedia” in the name of the
> Foundation, and by extension the names of affiliates were discussed as
> well. The project team has clarified that many options for a naming
> convention are being explored. While having Wikipedia as a central concept
> is a project requirement, It is very unlikely that any naming convention
> proposal will be based on a simple substitution of the word "Wikimedia"
> with the word "Wikipedia". Brand systems offer many more possibilities.
>
> Another important point to clarify is that the proposals for naming
> conventions haven’t been defined yet. According to the project timeline
> [6], several proposals for a naming convention will be shared with the
> communities for feedback in May, at the earliest. At the end of this
> review, one proposal will be selected and refined. You can check the
> timeline to learn about further phases with public reviews before the full
> proposal for a brand system is presented to the Wikimedia Foundation
> leadership and the Board.
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia
>
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia#Report_about_this_RfC_by_the_Brand_Project_team
>
> [3]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
>
> [4]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/FAQ
>
> [5]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
>
>
>
>
> Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
>
> Community Brand and Marketing coordinator
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 1:12 AM David Gerard  wrote:
>
> > Yes. Who's the person telling Samir to post this stuff, which comes
> > across as aggressively ignoring all feedback to date? Could we have a
> > word with them here?
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 14:12, Peter Southwood
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > When you speak for someone who is hard of listening, it is an
> > occupational hazard that you will be shouted at occasionally by those
> whose
> > voices are being ignored. It is not necessarily anything personal, just
> > part of the heat in the kitchen.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Yaroslav Blanter
> > > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 11:28 AM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?
> > >
> > > In all honesty, this should not have been directed at Samir. I do not
> > think
> > > he has the authority to stop the process. And whoever has probably
> spends
> > > more time in Twitter that in Wikimedia projects.
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Yaroslav
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 11:12 AM Tito Dutta 
> wrote:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

[David Gerard]

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 09:49, Samir Elsharbaty
 wrote:

> While having Wikipedia as a central concept
> is a project requirement,

... and here we have the source of all the problems here: the answer
has been predetermined.


- d.

___
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] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

[Samir Elsharbaty]

Sorry dropped footnote #[6] while sending:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Timeline

Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)

Community Brand and Marketing coordinator

Wikimedia Foundation 



On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:22 AM Samir Elsharbaty 
wrote:

> Hi, the Brand team has been watching the RfC and has written a summary
> about it [1] that was shared both in the RfC [2] and the project page [3]
> in Meta. The team has integrated the feedback of the RfC in the development
> process, just as we did with the activities organized by the project
> itself.
>
> The RfC is covered in the main project page as well as in the FAQ [4]. The
> RfC has been a recurrent topic of discussion in the Brand project talk page
> [5], where we are answering questions and discussing topics whenever they
> are posted. We recommend you to have a look at these updates before making
> further conclusions here.
>
> The RfC is about the use of the word “Wikipedia” in the name of the
> Foundation, and by extension the names of affiliates were discussed as
> well. The project team has clarified that many options for a naming
> convention are being explored. While having Wikipedia as a central concept
> is a project requirement, It is very unlikely that any naming convention
> proposal will be based on a simple substitution of the word "Wikimedia"
> with the word "Wikipedia". Brand systems offer many more possibilities.
>
> Another important point to clarify is that the proposals for naming
> conventions haven’t been defined yet. According to the project timeline
> [6], several proposals for a naming convention will be shared with the
> communities for feedback in May, at the earliest. At the end of this
> review, one proposal will be selected and refined. You can check the
> timeline to learn about further phases with public reviews before the full
> proposal for a brand system is presented to the Wikimedia Foundation
> leadership and the Board.
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia
>
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia#Report_about_this_RfC_by_the_Brand_Project_team
>
> [3]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
>
> [4]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/FAQ
>
> [5]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
>
>
>
>
> Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
>
> Community Brand and Marketing coordinator
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 1:12 AM David Gerard  wrote:
>
>> Yes. Who's the person telling Samir to post this stuff, which comes
>> across as aggressively ignoring all feedback to date? Could we have a
>> word with them here?
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>
>> On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 14:12, Peter Southwood
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > When you speak for someone who is hard of listening, it is an
>> occupational hazard that you will be shouted at occasionally by those whose
>> voices are being ignored. It is not necessarily anything personal, just
>> part of the heat in the kitchen.
>> > Cheers,
>> > Peter
>> >
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>> Behalf Of Yaroslav Blanter
>> > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 11:28 AM
>> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
>> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?
>> >
>> > In all honesty, this should not have been directed at Samir. I do not
>> think
>> > he has the authority to stop the process. And whoever has probably
>> spends
>> > more time in Twitter that in Wikimedia projects.
>> >
>> > Best
>> > Yaroslav
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 11:12 AM Tito Dutta 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > There is something called [[WP:IDHT,]] i.e. I didn't hear that.
>> > > No matter how many times, how many people (90% in the RFC) speak, I
>> just
>> > > didn't hear that.
>> > > Kind regards,
>> > > (Comment in personal capacity)
>> > >
>> > > Thanks
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 00:15, Samir Elsharbaty <
>> selsharb...@wikimedia.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi All,
>> > > >
>> > > > We wanted to follow up with a brief update on the project timeline
>> and
>> > > > share an invitation to join an event this month.
>> > > >
>> > > > We know there continues to be so much uncertainty in the world, so
>> we are
>> > > > slowing down the process of the project. Big changes are happening
>> to all
>> > > > of us these days. We want to make sure that we respect the time and
>> > > > priorities of the project collaborators. This means updating the
>> project
>> > > > timeline approach to have more flexibility for participants and
>> smaller
>> > > > time 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

[Samir Elsharbaty]

Hi, the Brand team has been watching the RfC and has written a summary
about it [1] that was shared both in the RfC [2] and the project page [3]
in Meta. The team has integrated the feedback of the RfC in the development
process, just as we did with the activities organized by the project
itself.

The RfC is covered in the main project page as well as in the FAQ [4]. The
RfC has been a recurrent topic of discussion in the Brand project talk page
[5], where we are answering questions and discussing topics whenever they
are posted. We recommend you to have a look at these updates before making
further conclusions here.

The RfC is about the use of the word “Wikipedia” in the name of the
Foundation, and by extension the names of affiliates were discussed as
well. The project team has clarified that many options for a naming
convention are being explored. While having Wikipedia as a central concept
is a project requirement, It is very unlikely that any naming convention
proposal will be based on a simple substitution of the word "Wikimedia"
with the word "Wikipedia". Brand systems offer many more possibilities.

Another important point to clarify is that the proposals for naming
conventions haven’t been defined yet. According to the project timeline
[6], several proposals for a naming convention will be shared with the
communities for feedback in May, at the earliest. At the end of this
review, one proposal will be selected and refined. You can check the
timeline to learn about further phases with public reviews before the full
proposal for a brand system is presented to the Wikimedia Foundation
leadership and the Board.

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/RfC_Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia

[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia#Report_about_this_RfC_by_the_Brand_Project_team

[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project

[4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/FAQ

[5]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project




Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)

Community Brand and Marketing coordinator

Wikimedia Foundation 



On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 1:12 AM David Gerard  wrote:

> Yes. Who's the person telling Samir to post this stuff, which comes
> across as aggressively ignoring all feedback to date? Could we have a
> word with them here?
>
>
> - d.
>
> On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 14:12, Peter Southwood
>  wrote:
> >
> > When you speak for someone who is hard of listening, it is an
> occupational hazard that you will be shouted at occasionally by those whose
> voices are being ignored. It is not necessarily anything personal, just
> part of the heat in the kitchen.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Yaroslav Blanter
> > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 11:28 AM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?
> >
> > In all honesty, this should not have been directed at Samir. I do not
> think
> > he has the authority to stop the process. And whoever has probably spends
> > more time in Twitter that in Wikimedia projects.
> >
> > Best
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 11:12 AM Tito Dutta  wrote:
> >
> > > There is something called [[WP:IDHT,]] i.e. I didn't hear that.
> > > No matter how many times, how many people (90% in the RFC) speak, I
> just
> > > didn't hear that.
> > > Kind regards,
> > > (Comment in personal capacity)
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 00:15, Samir Elsharbaty <
> selsharb...@wikimedia.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > We wanted to follow up with a brief update on the project timeline
> and
> > > > share an invitation to join an event this month.
> > > >
> > > > We know there continues to be so much uncertainty in the world, so
> we are
> > > > slowing down the process of the project. Big changes are happening
> to all
> > > > of us these days. We want to make sure that we respect the time and
> > > > priorities of the project collaborators. This means updating the
> project
> > > > timeline approach to have more flexibility for participants and
> smaller
> > > > time commitments [1], revising the project schedule month by month
> and
> > > > keeping the Brand Network [2] and other participants informed on a
> more
> > > > regular basis with any updates and changes. The naming discussions
> > > planned
> > > > for April are now pushed to May, at the earliest. Design proposals
> are
> > > > likewise shifted +4 weeks.
> > > >
> > > > But we do have things to share:
> > > >
> > > > *This month: live brand concept presentation!*
> > > >
> > > > To honor, celebrate,