Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On 09/01/2014 02:45, MZMcBride wrote: Clarifying whether it's appropriate for anyone, Wikimedia Foundation employee or otherwise, to engage with oDesk's... other services seems like a pretty high priority. And, in general, there needs to be clarification about the distinction between paid editing versus paid advocacy editing, especially if it's going to be treated as a bright line. If there isn't already a bright line in the employment contracts then today's announcement smacks of arbitrary treatment on the part of management. A practice that most decent people would consider distasteful. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not employees know how to go get some money from their hobby. To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly. Fae On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Hi. Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors to track their hours. (Right?) But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a hybrid of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you can post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services? Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page saying I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no exception and expressing his usual principled objections to such things in the strongest possible terms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131 I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular examples. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
Hoi, Odesk is the way the WMF pays people who do not live in the USA. What is expected of a contractor or employee is to register the time worked for the WMF and the contractor is paid through Odesk. This has all kinds of legal reasons. When an employee / contractor wants to use Odesk in addition to work done for the WMF, they can as long as the contract with WMF does not require exclusivity. Typically people working through Odesk work in the area of software development. Thanks, Gerard On 8 January 2014 09:04, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote: I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not employees know how to go get some money from their hobby. To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly. Fae On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Hi. Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors to track their hours. (Right?) But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a hybrid of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you can post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services? Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page saying I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no exception and expressing his usual principled objections to such things in the strongest possible terms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131 I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular examples. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
Thought paid editing is prohibited. It could be nice to find ways to enforce that. On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, at 21:50, Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Odesk is the way the WMF pays people who do not live in the USA. What is expected of a contractor or employee is to register the time worked for the WMF and the contractor is paid through Odesk. This has all kinds of legal reasons. When an employee / contractor wants to use Odesk in addition to work done for the WMF, they can as long as the contract with WMF does not require exclusivity. Typically people working through Odesk work in the area of software development. Thanks, Gerard On 8 January 2014 09:04, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote: I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not employees know how to go get some money from their hobby. To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly. Fae On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Hi. Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors to track their hours. (Right?) But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a hybrid of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you can post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services? Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page saying I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no exception and expressing his usual principled objections to such things in the strongest possible terms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131 I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular examples. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Gryllida gryll...@fastmail.fm wrote: Thought paid editing is prohibited. It could be nice to find ways to enforce that. I don't think it's expressly forbidden, 'frowned upon' would be the words I'd use. Apart from that, I have a feeling this whole thread is a storm in less than a glass of water. Odesk is a system where people can offer or take jobs. Wikimedia uses it (though in a somewhat different way). How on Earth do those two facts imply Odesk is probably used for paid editing? -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On 8 January 2014 12:12, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think it's expressly forbidden, 'frowned upon' would be the words I'd use. Apart from that, I have a feeling this whole thread is a storm in less than a glass of water. Odesk is a system where people can offer or take jobs. Wikimedia uses it (though in a somewhat different way). How on Earth do those two facts imply Odesk is probably used for paid editing? Because it's feed the trolls week, obviously. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On 8 January 2014 12:14, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Because it's feed the trolls week, obviously. Here David, have a cookie. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
Hello dear all, I won't impose my standard to other people, I just want to tell you what is the standard I setup for myself, and I will also tell you why. I won't accept payment or gift exceeding a certain amount (means 20 Euro) or search for payment for my volunteer's work that is however related to Wikimedia. Especially when I was on my travel reject gift may be considered as unfriendly or even insulting, this is the ONLY reason why I do accept small gifts. And by larger gift, like a quite expansive looking image band I received in Kazakhstan I brought it to the office and left it there. There are a few reasons for this: At first a very personal one: I made the experience in my life again and again that I lost my fun and my interest on something as soon as I got paid for it. Get paid = in debt of = duty = no fun. Second is a philosophical one: I believe that getting paid do have a desruptive effect on the free and collaboratory character of our projects. The philosophical background is that I believe knowledge and education is something like air, it is the basics of human live and humanity and should not be charged. But well, I know, not all people, (maybe most people) don't share this view point. Third is a practical one: And this especially for people who occupy a position in the movement, be it an employee of one of the organizations, or be it a volunteer board member or a committee member: If you need to fend off an accusation (most probably conflict of interest, or misuse of power), you are in a bad position. It is in this case unimportant if the accusation is true or not, battling against rumors and emotions is a hard battle. And the limbo of being stained will always be with you. Sadly, I have seen this too often by people inside of the movement and outside of the movement (mainly in the politics) that I actually wonder why people still fall into these pitfalls again and again. So try to stay in a position in which you will not be confronted with such a battle. It is simply like in the medicine: prophylax is better than antibiotics. A few words to my view on paid edition: I think this is something that we cannot avoid happening. Prohibition just drives them into secrecy. As such, I prefer it to be done openly instead of in secrecy. My personal aversion against paid edition should be quite obvious from the above account, just I don't feel I can (or should) enforce it upon other people. Greetings Ting Am 1/8/2014 9:04 AM, schrieb Fæ: I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not employees know how to go get some money from their hobby. To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly. Fae On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Hi. Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors to track their hours. (Right?) But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a hybrid of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you can post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services? Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page saying I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no exception and expressing his usual principled objections to such things in the strongest possible terms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131 I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular examples. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
+1 to Ting's philosophy. Best WMF trustee ever. ;-) It may be worth illustrating how I might draw the line between my unpaid volunteer work and taking payment for some tasks. To date I have uploaded something like 160,000+ images to Commons and never been paid anything for my time. My work has been in fits and starts and my attention wanders from one project to the next, like most unpaid volunteers. :-D The sort of task that I would like to get some remuneration for, would be where an archive or GLAM wanted me to work closely with them to achieve their public access objectives, rather than leaving it to me just to upload the best bits in ways that I thought were most appropriate. Spending significant time helping paid staff to run public volunteer events, process their in-house metadata, choose what to scan, video or record, decide how to release it online (either on Commons or elsewhere), what licence to choose, and help with writing code for tools like pywikipediabot or reprocessing to open media formats, seems a perfectly reasonable thing to charge for, particularly if they would like me to do this to satisfy their schedule rather than leaving it to me to stick it on my ever lengthening back-burner of interesting stuff. Cheers, Fae -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote: Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as freelancer.com and its ilk. The foundation is simply a client, and uses it only to pay its contractors and (most of)* their non-US workforce; and AFAIK never just contract out from postings. Contractors input work hours, WMF pays oDesk, oDesk sends monies to contractor. The system itself is a little shitty and quite a bit expensive, but considerably less so than it would be to set up legal entities able to directly pay people outside the US as local employees (including the horrible mess that it actually /is/ to have employees in other countries rather than contract out). -- Marc * some staffers instead work for a business entity that /itself/ contracts out to the WMF in which case it works a bit differently because then oDesk is no longer necessary as a middle man. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote: Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as freelancer.com and its ilk. The foundation is simply a client, and uses it only to pay its contractors and (most of)* their non-US workforce; and AFAIK never just contract out from postings. Contractors input work hours, WMF pays oDesk, oDesk sends monies to contractor. The system itself is a little shitty and quite a bit expensive, but considerably less so than it would be to set up legal entities able to directly pay people outside the US as local employees (including the horrible mess that it actually /is/ to have employees in other countries rather than contract out). -- Marc * some staffers instead work for a business entity that /itself/ contracts out to the WMF in which case it works a bit differently because then oDesk is no longer necessary as a middle man. Marc said everything I was going to say. This was my experience with oDesk as a US-based contractor as well. The contracting process was done like the normal hiring process and completely apart from oDesk. oDesk was simply used to input hours and receive payment. -Chad ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On 01/08/2014 11:07 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote: The system itself is a little [suboptimal] It should go without saying (but may be worth clarifying) that this is my personal opinion from having suffered oDesk for a year and not that of the Foundation. :-) -- Marc ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
Andre Engels wrote: oDesk is a system where people can offer or take jobs. Wikimedia uses it (though in a somewhat different way). How on Earth do those two facts imply oDesk is probably used for paid editing? I'm not sure probably is necessary. The evidence strongly suggests that it _is_ used for paid editing. Whether it's used for paid advocacy is another matter, of course. https://www.odesk.com/o/profiles/browse/?q=wikipedia I think oDesk serves multiple functions. The Wikimedia Foundation is apparently a client, but individual Wikimedians have also apparently been posting hire me to write an article for you entries. That said, either oDesk's search functionality is terrible or the practice doesn't seem to be particularly common. I've only found a few Wikipedia Expert or Wikipedia Writer listings off-hand. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
Marc A. Pelletier wrote: On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote: Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as freelancer.com and its ilk. The foundation is simply a client, and uses it only to pay its contractors and (most of)* their non-US workforce; and AFAIK never just contract out from postings. Contractors input work hours, WMF pays oDesk, oDesk sends monies to contractor. The system itself is a little shitty and quite a bit expensive, but considerably less so than it would be to set up legal entities able to directly pay people outside the US as local employees (including the horrible mess that it actually /is/ to have employees in other countries rather than contract out). Thank you for this. It helped me better understand the business relationship between the Wikimedia Foundation and oDesk. Clarifying whether it's appropriate for anyone, Wikimedia Foundation employee or otherwise, to engage with oDesk's... other services seems like a pretty high priority. And, in general, there needs to be clarification about the distinction between paid editing versus paid advocacy editing, especially if it's going to be treated as a bright line. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
Hi. Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors to track their hours. (Right?) But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a hybrid of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you can post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services? Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page saying I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no exception and expressing his usual principled objections to such things in the strongest possible terms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131 I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular examples. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
