[Wikimedia-l] 2015 strategic plan

[ENWP Pine]

Hi, can someone with knowledge of WMF's thinking expand on this statement from 
Lila?

"Starting the process for our next strategic planning exercise, which will be 
different from last time, and focused on improving our ability to react quickly 
and adjust as necessary to opportunities and challenges."

Is this implying that the entire strategic plan will focus on agility, or that 
agility will be a priority in the next strategic plan? 

Also, how was this decision reached?

Thanks,

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

[Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Lila Tretikov]

Hi all,

This is a personal note to clarify a some questions that recently came up,
specifically in the context of my role as the incoming ED.


My partner Wil and I are partners in our private lives. We have always both
been extremely independent, and we respect that in each other. That said we
have different roles: I am the Executive Director with responsibilities
towards the Foundation and the movement, and he is an independent community
member with his own voice.

I make my decisions using my own professional judgement in conjunction with
input from the community and staff. I don’t consult Wil on these matters,
ask him to do anything on my behalf or monitor his engagements with the
community. When I speak here, it is in my capacity as an ED.

Wil, on the other hand, has a very strong personal interest in the
community and agreat deal of curiosity about how the Wikimedia
projectswork. It is very important to him that he remains an
independent individual
able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
employees.

I hope this addresses some of the questions and draws distinction between
my role as ED and Wil’s participation as an independent member. If you have
any questions for Wil you can reach him directly. If you have any questions
for me or the WMF, you can get a hold of me by email or on my talk page.


Thanks,

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 strategic plan

[rupert THURNER]

Am 28.05.2014 09:31 schrieb "ENWP Pine" :
>
> Hi, can someone with knowledge of WMF's thinking expand on this statement
from Lila?
>
> "Starting the process for our next strategic planning exercise, which
will be different from last time, and focused on improving our ability to
react quickly and adjust as necessary to opportunities and challenges."
>
> Is this implying that the entire strategic plan will focus on agility, or
that agility will be a priority in the next strategic plan?

_that_ is a real pleasure to hear ... and if the basic principles are set
and with them it is assured no quick jumping left, jumping right happens
before things get a chance to properly mature it would be even more
pleasure.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Chair of the Supervisory Board – the 14th WMDE General Assembly in retrospect

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Liam Wyatt, 28/05/2014 08:15:

I was surprised that the other major announcement
- about the fundamental changes at WMDE (particularly regarding Pavel
Richter) - were not discussed at all.


Do you mean you feel there was insufficient response to the 
announcement? Maybe you should reply there.

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-May/071815.html

It seems to me that WMDE is being very open and frank in this process by 
bringing it up for public discussion and decision-making since very 
early stages. There was a lot of discussion around the general assembly; 
it is my understanding that the WMDE board is digesting discussions and 
summarising their current thinking and the way ahead. For less active 
WMDE members and for non-members, it will be easier to understand and 
more appropriate to comment after that happens.


Nemo

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

[Wikimedia-l] Today I became member of WMDE

[David Cuenca]

Till now I had mixed feelings on the nature of Wikimedia Deutschland. On
the one hand, I was (and I am) very thankful for creating one of the
projects I'm active with, Wikidata, and supporting the one I most attached
to, Wikisource. On the other hand, I was wary of its professionalization
process and I had the feeling that it was developing away (or being led
away) from its volunteering community.

These last days have been a transformative experience for the organization.
I acknowledge that professional workers (including the outgoing ED) brought
a positive growth for the organization thanks to the donors' support and I
hope their great work continues. However it is worth remembering that
donors want to support mainly volunteers's work, and that any organization
growing around the management of funds should have in mind that supporting
the volunteer community and giving them control on how activities develop
and how funds are spent it is crucial to keep trust and develop in the same
direction.

As a member of another organization that also has volunteering at its core,
Amical Wikimedia, I want to congratulate WM-DE for giving this step and for
giving me the chance to increase my trust in WM-DE to the point of joining
them too.

Great days for the Wikimedia movement!

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Today I became member of WMDE

[Markus Glaser]

This is great, Micru! A very warm welcome, and thanks for the trust 
you're putting in WMDE!


Best,
Markus


Am 28.05.2014 10:57, schrieb David Cuenca:

Till now I had mixed feelings on the nature of Wikimedia Deutschland. On
the one hand, I was (and I am) very thankful for creating one of the
projects I'm active with, Wikidata, and supporting the one I most attached
to, Wikisource. On the other hand, I was wary of its professionalization
process and I had the feeling that it was developing away (or being led
away) from its volunteering community.

These last days have been a transformative experience for the organization.
I acknowledge that professional workers (including the outgoing ED) brought
a positive growth for the organization thanks to the donors' support and I
hope their great work continues. However it is worth remembering that
donors want to support mainly volunteers's work, and that any organization
growing around the management of funds should have in mind that supporting
the volunteer community and giving them control on how activities develop
and how funds are spent it is crucial to keep trust and develop in the same
direction.

As a member of another organization that also has volunteering at its core,
Amical Wikimedia, I want to congratulate WM-DE for giving this step and for
giving me the chance to increase my trust in WM-DE to the point of joining
them too.

Great days for the Wikimedia movement!

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



--
Markus Glaser
Präsidium
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The first three weeks.

[Anna Torres]

+1

Great to hearing your experience. As being a new ED too (3 months now) I
can indentify myself with your experience: the first month is about
listening and getting to know :)

All the best for what is to come! Hope to meeting you asap!

Hugs from Argentina.


2014-05-28 2:48 GMT-03:00 Nurunnaby Chowdhury :

> +1
> Thank you for this write-up. Happy to read..:)
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:24 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:
>
> > Lila Tretikov wrote:
> > >I wanted to give you an update on my first three weeks of Wikimedia
> > >immersion -- this will also go on the blog.  As you probably noticed, my
> > >leadership approach is rooted in observation and focused discussions --
> > >this means I watch and listen more than I talk. But I expect that you
> are
> > >probably curious about what I have observed and learned so far, and to
> > >know a little more about who I am.
> > >
> > > [...]
> >
> > Thank you for this write-up. It was nice to read. :-)
> >
> > >Your recommendations on areas you see as priorities for development
> > >(while keeping in mind that not everything can be a priority at
> > >once!); [...]
> >
> > I think this continues to be a huge pain point. Developer resources are
> > scarce and expensive and there's often a feeling that the latest
> Wikimedia
> > Foundation initiatives trump all other worthwhile projects. I think we
> > need to find a better way to more fairly allocate resources.
> >
> > As a concrete example, there continue to be dozens of Wikimedia
> Foundation
> > developers and other staff specifically focused on the English Wikipedia
> > and sometimes Wikimedia Commons, while the other sister projects such as
> > Wiktionary, Wikibooks, and Wikisource continue to receive almost no
> direct
> > attention. (Over the past few years, even the term "sister projects" has
> > become mildly insulting. These projects are more accurately the
> red-headed
> > stepchild projects.) This won't happen quickly, but we must make it a
> goal
> > to do better in this area.
> >
> > MZMcBride
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive*
> Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia<
> http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:nhasive>
> Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia
> Foundation
> Social Media Interaction Expert | The Daily
> Prothom-Alo
> Bangladesh Ambassador | Open Knowledge Foundation Network
> 
> Treasurer | Bangladesh Open Source Network (BdOSN) 
> Task Force Member | Mozilla Bangladesh 
> fb.com/nhasive | @nhasive  | Skype:
> nhasive
> | www.nhasive.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Anna Torres Adell
Directora Ejecutiva
*A.C Wikimedia Argentina*

*Imprime este correo solo si es realmente necesario*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Fæ]

On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
...
> independent individual
> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
> employees.

Thanks for making these distinctions. It is sad to see that your time
and energy is being used so early on in your introduction to the
Wikimedia community, in creating a political distance between yourself
and the public actions of your life partner, due to his casual
curiosity about Wikimedia projects. A curiosity that only manifested
itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
Foundation board.

I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
(emails?) with some WMF employees.

Thanks again for clarifying your position during this difficult start
to your engagement.

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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 05/28/2014 08:59 AM, Fæ wrote:
> A curiosity that only manifested
> itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
> Foundation board.

In all fairness, Fæ, if my spouse had been hired as the leader of a very
visible and significant business or nonprofit, I too would find myself
interested in what it is, what its values are, and how it goes about
things even if I had been previously unaware or uninterested in it.

So that Wil's interest manifested around the time Lila was announced as
the next ED seems to me to be perfectly natural, even if I have
expressed serious concerns about *how* that interest was expressed.

-- Marc


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Everton Zanella Alvarenga]

Just a personal testimonial also to emphasize Marc's point and not
necessarily when I did a work for WMF as a contractor, my previous
girlfriend got interesting in Wikimedia projects after she saw somethings I
worked on my spare time as a volunteer. She even began to write at
Wikimedia Brasil mailing list and outreach Wikimedia projects. ;)

In fact, she still does sometimes some outreach and have even participate
of a Wikimedia meeting recently. (Well, better not say her opinion on
Wikidramas, totally aligned with mine : )

Tom


2014-05-28 11:04 GMT-03:00 Marc A. Pelletier :

> On 05/28/2014 08:59 AM, Fæ wrote:
> > A curiosity that only manifested
> > itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
> > Foundation board.
>
> In all fairness, Fæ, if my spouse had been hired as the leader of a very
> visible and significant business or nonprofit, I too would find myself
> interested in what it is, what its values are, and how it goes about
> things even if I had been previously unaware or uninterested in it.
>
> So that Wil's interest manifested around the time Lila was announced as
> the next ED seems to me to be perfectly natural, even if I have
> expressed serious concerns about *how* that interest was expressed.
>
> -- Marc
>
> --
> Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
> Open Knowledge Brasil - Rede pelo Conhecimento Livre
> http://br.okfn.org
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Jon Davies]

My wife, thanks to Viisual Editor, now creates pages!


On 28 May 2014 16:21, Everton Zanella Alvarenga
wrote:

> Just a personal testimonial also to emphasize Marc's point and not
> necessarily when I did a work for WMF as a contractor, my previous
> girlfriend got interesting in Wikimedia projects after she saw somethings I
> worked on my spare time as a volunteer. She even began to write at
> Wikimedia Brasil mailing list and outreach Wikimedia projects. ;)
>
> In fact, she still does sometimes some outreach and have even participate
> of a Wikimedia meeting recently. (Well, better not say her opinion on
> Wikidramas, totally aligned with mine : )
>
> Tom
>
>
> 2014-05-28 11:04 GMT-03:00 Marc A. Pelletier :
>
> > On 05/28/2014 08:59 AM, Fæ wrote:
> > > A curiosity that only manifested
> > > itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
> > > Foundation board.
> >
> > In all fairness, Fæ, if my spouse had been hired as the leader of a very
> > visible and significant business or nonprofit, I too would find myself
> > interested in what it is, what its values are, and how it goes about
> > things even if I had been previously unaware or uninterested in it.
> >
> > So that Wil's interest manifested around the time Lila was announced as
> > the next ED seems to me to be perfectly natural, even if I have
> > expressed serious concerns about *how* that interest was expressed.
> >
> > -- Marc
> >
> > --
> > Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
> > Open Knowledge Brasil - Rede pelo Conhecimento Livre
> > http://br.okfn.org
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
*Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*.  Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169
tweet @jonatreesdavies

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990.

Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Fæ]

On 28 May 2014 15:04, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
...
> So that Wil's interest manifested around the time Lila was announced as
> the next ED seems to me to be perfectly natural, even if I have
> expressed serious concerns about *how* that interest was expressed.
> -- Marc

There is a big difference between your partner having an interest in
your organization, and going on to publish public complaints about the
staff that you have complete authority and responsibility for
employing.

I may be wrong, perhaps someone has some examples of where this worked
out well? The only examples from history and the political world I can
recall, did not.

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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcome Rachel diCerbo, Director of Community Engagement

[Birgit Müller]

Welcome, Rachel. Congratulations on your new job!

Birgit




2014-05-28 2:26 GMT+02:00 Erik Moeller :

> Hi folks,
>
> It’s my great pleasure to tell you that Rachel diCerbo is joining us
> as Director of Community Engagement (Product), starting today. In this
> role, Rachel will manage the community liaison team (Keegan Peterzell,
> Sherry Snyder, Nick Wilson, and Erica Litrenta) and ensure that our
> technical projects receive community engagement support throughout
> their development.
>
> Rachel discovered her love for collaborative communities with
> Couchsurfing. When she joined the community in 2005, Couchsurfing was
> a small non-profit, with essential functions being filled by
> volunteers. This included responding to safety issues: staying at
> someone else’s home or hosting a stranger carries risks, some obvious,
> some less so. Rachel founded and led the community’s all-volunteer
> safety team. She was also a member of the non-profit’s Board of
> Directors from 2007-2011.
>
> After volunteering for two years, she joined the organization
> full-time as Head of Trust & Safety in 2008. She was responsible for
> enacting policies related to incident reporting, profile removal, and
> other safety issues, and handled any high level legal issues and
> communications related to Couchsurfing member safety. She implemented
> training, documentation, and case review processes for her team.
>
> As part of her role, she also directly interfaced with Couchsurfing’s
> engineering team and helped scope functionality related to safety &
> moderation. The work on the safety team also equipped her well for
> working across culture and languages, as issues would often arise
> around differing cultural sensitivities. She’s travelled to 38
> countries and lived on 5 continents.
>
> Prior to Couchsurfing, Rachel pursued a passion for theater while
> temping in various roles for various companies. Her additional
> interests include digital rights, women’s rights and safety worldwide,
> and scuba diving. In her spare time, she seeks to perfect her pulled
> pork recipe, sews, and reads all the things.
>
> Rachel is new to the community, and due to the nature of her role,
> she’ll be spending some time just learning how to edit and how things
> work in our weird & wonderful world. She’s planning a face-to-face
> meeting with her team the week of June 9th and will be attending
> WikiConference USA later this week.
>
> Please join me in welcoming Rachel to the Wikimedia Foundation and to
> the community.
>
> Warmly,
>
> Erik
>
> PS: Big thanks to everyone who’s been part of the search process, to
> the liaison team for doing awesome work in an emerging structure, and
> to Philippe, Maggie and Howie for all their work in bootstrapping the
> team, and for supporting Rachel as she steps into the role. :-)
>
> --
> Erik Möller
> VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ___
> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ___
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Birgit Müller
Team Communitys

Community Liaison
Volunteer Support Department

E-Mail: birgit.muel...@wikimedia.de


Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
http://wikimedia.de

Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://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 27/681/51985.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Victor Grigas]

My significant other applied for a grant and got 500 Wikireaders
distributed to 3 schools:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Aislinn_Dewey/Distribute_WikiReaders_to_Schools/Report

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/help-distribute-wikireaders-and-provide-an-opportunity-for-kids-to-learn


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> On 28 May 2014 15:04, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
> ...
> > So that Wil's interest manifested around the time Lila was announced as
> > the next ED seems to me to be perfectly natural, even if I have
> > expressed serious concerns about *how* that interest was expressed.
> > -- Marc
>
> There is a big difference between your partner having an interest in
> your organization, and going on to publish public complaints about the
> staff that you have complete authority and responsibility for
> employing.
>
> I may be wrong, perhaps someone has some examples of where this worked
> out well? The only examples from history and the political world I can
> recall, did not.
>
> 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
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 

*Victor Grigas*
Storyteller 
Wikimedia Foundation
vgri...@wikimedia.org
https://donate.wikimedia.org/
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Fæ]

Hi Victor,

That's great. I can't see any complaints about WMF employees in the
links you provided.

I am sure that we could find 100 examples of the partners of
Wikimedians doing something on Wikimedia projects, it would be a great
topic for "reasons why I love Wikimedia"... That is not the issue
here, in fact I encouraged Wil to get experience contributing to the
projects *before* using highly public platforms to complain about
Wikimedia and Lila's new employees.

Thanks,
Fae

On 28 May 2014 16:49, Victor Grigas  wrote:
> My significant other applied for a grant and got 500 Wikireaders
> distributed to 3 schools:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Aislinn_Dewey/Distribute_WikiReaders_to_Schools/Report
>
> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/help-distribute-wikireaders-and-provide-an-opportunity-for-kids-to-learn
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> On 28 May 2014 15:04, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
>> ...
>> > So that Wil's interest manifested around the time Lila was announced as
>> > the next ED seems to me to be perfectly natural, even if I have
>> > expressed serious concerns about *how* that interest was expressed.
>> > -- Marc
>>
>> There is a big difference between your partner having an interest in
>> your organization, and going on to publish public complaints about the
>> staff that you have complete authority and responsibility for
>> employing.
>>
>> I may be wrong, perhaps someone has some examples of where this worked
>> out well? The only examples from history and the political world I can
>> recall, did not.
>>
>> 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
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Victor Grigas*
> Storyteller 
> Wikimedia Foundation
> vgri...@wikimedia.org
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 



-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Michael Snow]

On 5/28/2014 5:59 AM, Fæ wrote:

On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
...

independent individual
able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
employees.

I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
(emails?) with some WMF employees.
I believe the point is that Wil, in particular, will not interfere with 
Wikimedia staff in carrying out their duties, assign them specific 
tasks, or otherwise attempt to supervise and direct their work. These 
functions properly belong to the employee's supervisor, so it's good for 
community members to keep this in mind generally, but especially 
important for Wil because otherwise his connection to Lila might create 
concern or confusion for the staff (as in the recent GitHub situation, 
which I believe was already mentioned). If those guidelines are 
respected, there should be no problem about Wil interacting with staff 
in an ordinary fashion. I'm sure Wil understands this and will be 
careful about it, and it's also good that Lila has said this publicly so 
that people have something to point to, in case anything is uncertain 
about whether Wil has some sort of special authority.


--Michael Snow

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcome Rachel diCerbo, Director of Community Engagement

[Lila Tretikov]

Welcome Rachel!


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Birgit Müller
wrote:

> Welcome, Rachel. Congratulations on your new job!
>
> Birgit
>
>
>
>
> 2014-05-28 2:26 GMT+02:00 Erik Moeller :
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It’s my great pleasure to tell you that Rachel diCerbo is joining us
> > as Director of Community Engagement (Product), starting today. In this
> > role, Rachel will manage the community liaison team (Keegan Peterzell,
> > Sherry Snyder, Nick Wilson, and Erica Litrenta) and ensure that our
> > technical projects receive community engagement support throughout
> > their development.
> >
> > Rachel discovered her love for collaborative communities with
> > Couchsurfing. When she joined the community in 2005, Couchsurfing was
> > a small non-profit, with essential functions being filled by
> > volunteers. This included responding to safety issues: staying at
> > someone else’s home or hosting a stranger carries risks, some obvious,
> > some less so. Rachel founded and led the community’s all-volunteer
> > safety team. She was also a member of the non-profit’s Board of
> > Directors from 2007-2011.
> >
> > After volunteering for two years, she joined the organization
> > full-time as Head of Trust & Safety in 2008. She was responsible for
> > enacting policies related to incident reporting, profile removal, and
> > other safety issues, and handled any high level legal issues and
> > communications related to Couchsurfing member safety. She implemented
> > training, documentation, and case review processes for her team.
> >
> > As part of her role, she also directly interfaced with Couchsurfing’s
> > engineering team and helped scope functionality related to safety &
> > moderation. The work on the safety team also equipped her well for
> > working across culture and languages, as issues would often arise
> > around differing cultural sensitivities. She’s travelled to 38
> > countries and lived on 5 continents.
> >
> > Prior to Couchsurfing, Rachel pursued a passion for theater while
> > temping in various roles for various companies. Her additional
> > interests include digital rights, women’s rights and safety worldwide,
> > and scuba diving. In her spare time, she seeks to perfect her pulled
> > pork recipe, sews, and reads all the things.
> >
> > Rachel is new to the community, and due to the nature of her role,
> > she’ll be spending some time just learning how to edit and how things
> > work in our weird & wonderful world. She’s planning a face-to-face
> > meeting with her team the week of June 9th and will be attending
> > WikiConference USA later this week.
> >
> > Please join me in welcoming Rachel to the Wikimedia Foundation and to
> > the community.
> >
> > Warmly,
> >
> > Erik
> >
> > PS: Big thanks to everyone who’s been part of the search process, to
> > the liaison team for doing awesome work in an emerging structure, and
> > to Philippe, Maggie and Howie for all their work in bootstrapping the
> > team, and for supporting Rachel as she steps into the role. :-)
> >
> > --
> > Erik Möller
> > VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > ___
> > Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> > directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> > community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ___
> > WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> > wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
>
> --
> Birgit Müller
> Team Communitys
>
> Community Liaison
> Volunteer Support Department
>
> E-Mail: birgit.muel...@wikimedia.de
>
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> http://wikimedia.de
>
> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
> Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> http://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 27/681/51985.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Fæ]

On 28 May 2014 16:55, Michael Snow  wrote:
> On 5/28/2014 5:59 AM, Fæ wrote:
...
>> I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
...
> I believe the point is that Wil, in particular, will not interfere with
> Wikimedia staff in carrying out their duties, assign them specific tasks, or
> otherwise attempt to supervise and direct their work. These functions
> properly belong to the employee's supervisor, so it's good for community
> members to keep this in mind generally, but especially important for Wil
> because otherwise his connection to Lila might create concern or confusion
> for the staff (as in the recent GitHub situation, which I believe was
> already mentioned). If those guidelines are respected, there should be no
> problem about Wil interacting with staff in an ordinary fashion. I'm sure
> Wil understands this and will be careful about it, and it's also good that
> Lila has said this publicly so that people have something to point to, in
> case anything is uncertain about whether Wil has some sort of special
> authority.

Thanks, that is a nice interpretation, it would be useful to have a
confirmation that this was the intention of Lila's email.

It will be interesting to see whether in practice Wil has special
authority, or not. It is quite hard to judge right now, having made so
few contributions to Wikimedia projects, and as in the majority of
discussions in various places (including Wil's English Wikipedia user
page) his preferred form of first introduction is as "Lila Tretikov's
significant other", which colours everyone's perception of how he
should be treated.

Thanks,
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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Lila Tretikov]

Thanks Michael for spelling this out further. Your understanding is correct.


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Michael Snow wrote:

> On 5/28/2014 5:59 AM, Fæ wrote:
>
>> On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> independent individual
>>> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
>>> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the
>>> WMF
>>> employees.
>>>
>> I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
>>
>> with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
>> and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
>> appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
>> public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
>> (emails?) with some WMF employees.
>>
> I believe the point is that Wil, in particular, will not interfere with
> Wikimedia staff in carrying out their duties, assign them specific tasks,
> or otherwise attempt to supervise and direct their work. These functions
> properly belong to the employee's supervisor, so it's good for community
> members to keep this in mind generally, but especially important for Wil
> because otherwise his connection to Lila might create concern or confusion
> for the staff (as in the recent GitHub situation, which I believe was
> already mentioned). If those guidelines are respected, there should be no
> problem about Wil interacting with staff in an ordinary fashion. I'm sure
> Wil understands this and will be careful about it, and it's also good that
> Lila has said this publicly so that people have something to point to, in
> case anything is uncertain about whether Wil has some sort of special
> authority.
>
> --Michael Snow
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
going forward: 
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.

To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
I tried clicking on the link.

In any case, it should be made clear that the WMF did not ask me to
disengage with employees and has not yet asked me to stop posting to
Wikipediocracy directly. So far, the organization itself has respected
my individuality; I can only appeal to everyone in the WP community
and all WMF employees to do the same in the future. I will be engaging
with the broader WP community in whatever way I can, but I've made the
hard decision to limit my engagement with WMF employees to public,
logged forums from now on.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
> On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
> ...
>> independent individual
>> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
>> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
>> employees.
>
> Thanks for making these distinctions. It is sad to see that your time
> and energy is being used so early on in your introduction to the
> Wikimedia community, in creating a political distance between yourself
> and the public actions of your life partner, due to his casual
> curiosity about Wikimedia projects. A curiosity that only manifested
> itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
> Foundation board.
>
> I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
> with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
> and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
> appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
> public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
> (emails?) with some WMF employees.
>
> Thanks again for clarifying your position during this difficult start
> to your engagement.
>
> 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Brandon Harris]

A slight correction: the revision was rev-deleted by a member of the community 
- a member of ArbCom, in fact - and not an employee of the Foundation. 

Snt frm m Phn

> On May 28, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> 
> Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
> think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
> going forward: 
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.
> 
> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
> question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
> I tried clicking on the link.
> 
> In any case, it should be made clear that the WMF did not ask me to
> disengage with employees and has not yet asked me to stop posting to
> Wikipediocracy directly. So far, the organization itself has respected
> my individuality; I can only appeal to everyone in the WP community
> and all WMF employees to do the same in the future. I will be engaging
> with the broader WP community in whatever way I can, but I've made the
> hard decision to limit my engagement with WMF employees to public,
> logged forums from now on.
> 
> ,Wil
> 
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>>> On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
>>> ...
>>> independent individual
>>> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
>>> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
>>> employees.
>> 
>> Thanks for making these distinctions. It is sad to see that your time
>> and energy is being used so early on in your introduction to the
>> Wikimedia community, in creating a political distance between yourself
>> and the public actions of your life partner, due to his casual
>> curiosity about Wikimedia projects. A curiosity that only manifested
>> itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
>> Foundation board.
>> 
>> I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
>> with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
>> and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
>> appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
>> public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
>> (emails?) with some WMF employees.
>> 
>> Thanks again for clarifying your position during this difficult start
>> to your engagement.
>> 
>> 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
>> 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Erik Moeller]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Michael Snow  wrote:
> If those guidelines are respected, there should be no
> problem about Wil interacting with staff in an ordinary fashion. I'm sure
> Wil understands this and will be careful about it, and it's also good that
> Lila has said this publicly so that people have something to point to, in
> case anything is uncertain about whether Wil has some sort of special
> authority.

Yes - agreed. Let's judge Lila by her actions and Wil by his. To the
extent that her association with a quirky, curious, hyperactive guy
who enjoys poking things says anything about her, it's that she'll fit
right in :)

Erik
-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Erik Moeller]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
> question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
> I tried clicking on the link.

If you're talking about the message left on Oliver's talk page, it was
a threat by a banned user which included reference to a dream about
him where "knees were nailed to the floor from the back" and other
such lovely details. That's precisely what moderation features on any
site are for, and to the extent that it included implications of
violence, yes, bringing safety concerns to the attention of senior
staff at WMF is appropriate.

Cheers,

Erik

-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Risker]

Wil, the deletion log of the page in question is publicly visible.  There
are no WMF employees who have deleted anything on that page, ever. This is
information you can check for yourself instead of relying on the words of
others.

Risker


On 28 May 2014 12:23, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
> think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
> going forward:
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.
>
> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
> question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
> I tried clicking on the link.
>
> In any case, it should be made clear that the WMF did not ask me to
> disengage with employees and has not yet asked me to stop posting to
> Wikipediocracy directly. So far, the organization itself has respected
> my individuality; I can only appeal to everyone in the WP community
> and all WMF employees to do the same in the future. I will be engaging
> with the broader WP community in whatever way I can, but I've made the
> hard decision to limit my engagement with WMF employees to public,
> logged forums from now on.
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
> > On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
> > ...
> >> independent individual
> >> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
> >> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the
> WMF
> >> employees.
> >
> > Thanks for making these distinctions. It is sad to see that your time
> > and energy is being used so early on in your introduction to the
> > Wikimedia community, in creating a political distance between yourself
> > and the public actions of your life partner, due to his casual
> > curiosity about Wikimedia projects. A curiosity that only manifested
> > itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
> > Foundation board.
> >
> > I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
> > with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
> > and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
> > appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
> > public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
> > (emails?) with some WMF employees.
> >
> > Thanks again for clarifying your position during this difficult start
> > to your engagement.
> >
> > 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
> > 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> If you're talking about the message left on Oliver's talk page, it was
> a threat by a banned user which included reference to a dream about
> him where "knees were nailed to the floor from the back" and other
> such lovely details. That's precisely what moderation features on any
> site are for, and to the extent that it included implications of
> violence, yes, bringing safety concerns to the attention of senior
> staff at WMF is appropriate.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Erik

Again, this is not my concern. It is my prerogative whether to talk to
WMF employees privately, however, and I choose not to. My apologies
that we won't be able to carry on with our own private conversation,
Erik.

,Wil

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:

"
I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.

Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
"

There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
discussion that includes the comment above:
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Risker  wrote:
> Wil, the deletion log of the page in question is publicly visible.  There
> are no WMF employees who have deleted anything on that page, ever. This is
> information you can check for yourself instead of relying on the words of
> others.
>
> Risker
>
>
> On 28 May 2014 12:23, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
>> think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
>> going forward:
>> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.
>>
>> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
>> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
>> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
>> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
>> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
>> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
>> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
>> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
>> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
>> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
>> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
>> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
>> question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
>> I tried clicking on the link.
>>
>> In any case, it should be made clear that the WMF did not ask me to
>> disengage with employees and has not yet asked me to stop posting to
>> Wikipediocracy directly. So far, the organization itself has respected
>> my individuality; I can only appeal to everyone in the WP community
>> and all WMF employees to do the same in the future. I will be engaging
>> with the broader WP community in whatever way I can, but I've made the
>> hard decision to limit my engagement with WMF employees to public,
>> logged forums from now on.
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>> > On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
>> > ...
>> >> independent individual
>> >> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
>> >> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the
>> WMF
>> >> employees.
>> >
>> > Thanks for making these distinctions. It is sad to see that your time
>> > and energy is being used so early on in your introduction to the
>> > Wikimedia community, in creating a political distance between yourself
>> > and the public actions of your life partner, due to his casual
>> > curiosity about Wikimedia projects. A curiosity that only manifested
>> > itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
>> > Foundation board.
>> >
>> > I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
>> > with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
>> > and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
>> > appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
>> > public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
>> > (emails?) with some WMF employees.
>> >
>> > Thanks again for clarifying your position during this difficult start
>> > to yo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcome Rachel diCerbo, Director of Community Engagement

[Nathan]

Welcome Rachel!

Erik (or someone else), is there a succinct description of the mission of
the Community Engagement and Community Advocacy departments, and/or
especially a summary of the difference between their roles? Your e-mail
from December included some of this information, I'm just curious if it has
been codified in a way that would allow an outsider to quickly grok the
split.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Martijn Hoekstra]

On May 28, 2014 7:09 PM, "Wil Sinclair"  wrote:
>
> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
>
> "
> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
>
> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
> disallowed).

I think you may have misunderstood. Public logging is not allowed, but it's
fine to keep logs for yourself.

I wouldn't mind public logging myself, by the way.

Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
> "

Your observation is correct. It is possible to delete revisions from
history. This will be logged. I'm a little surprised you seem surprised by
this. Am I misunderstanding what you mean?

>
> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
> discussion that includes the comment above:
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Risker  wrote:
> > Wil, the deletion log of the page in question is publicly visible.
 There
> > are no WMF employees who have deleted anything on that page, ever. This
is
> > information you can check for yourself instead of relying on the words
of
> > others.
> >
> > Risker
> >
> >
> > On 28 May 2014 12:23, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
> >> think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
> >> going forward:
> >> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.
> >>
> >> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
> >> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
> >> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
> >> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
> >> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
> >> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
> >> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
> >> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
> >> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
> >> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
> >> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
> >> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
> >> question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
> >> I tried clicking on the link.
> >>
> >> In any case, it should be made clear that the WMF did not ask me to
> >> disengage with employees and has not yet asked me to stop posting to
> >> Wikipediocracy directly. So far, the organization itself has respected
> >> my individuality; I can only appeal to everyone in the WP community
> >> and all WMF employees to do the same in the future. I will be engaging
> >> with the broader WP community in whatever way I can, but I've made the
> >> hard decision to limit my engagement with WMF employees to public,
> >> logged forums from now on.
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
> >> > On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
> >> > ...
> >> >> independent individual
> >> >> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does
not
> >> >> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with
the
> >> WMF
> >> >> employees.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for making these distinctions. It is sad to see that your time
> >> > and energy is being used so early on in your introduction to the
> >> > Wikimedia community, in creating a political distance between
yourself
> >> > and the public actions of your life partner, due to his casual
> >> > curiosity about Wikimedia projects. A curiosity that only manifested
> >> > itself shortly after

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Nathan]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
>
> "
> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
>
> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
> disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
> "
>
> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
> discussion that includes the comment above:
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
>
> ,Wil
>
>

Hi Wil,

This is exactly why others have suggested that you slow down, and focus on
learning the basics of the Wikimedia projects and movements before jumping
into the hottest, most controversial issues. It takes time to develop the
understanding necessary to draw conclusions, especially in areas most
likely to erupt into drama and heated exchanges.

To wit, I don't believe it can even be determined if someone is logging a
channel, and many people (including Wikimedians) log all of their channels.
Several Wikimedia-related channels are publicly logged. Other channels
prohibit people from publishing logs.

It's also quite common knowledge that revisions can be deleted (by any
administrator, where they remain viewable by administrators) or suppressed
altogether (by users with Oversight rights). I think if you considered it
with a full possession of the facts, you would agree that this is good and
necessary.

In any case, thank you Lila for your note! I appreciate that you have made
it clear you've seen the threads of the last few weeks and understand the
concerns that posters have described.

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

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia UK report April 2014

[Stevie Benton]

Hello everyone,

Please see below for the Wikimedia UK monthly report for April 2014. If you
prefer, the report can be read on wiki
here
.

Thanks and regards,

Stevie

Reports/2014/April

Below is the Wikimedia UK monthly report
 for the period 1st to 30th April 2014. If you want to keep up with the
chapter's activities as they happen, please subscribe to our
blog
, join a UK mailing
list,
and/or follow us on Twitter . If you have
any questions or comments, please drop us a line on this report's talk
page
.

Program activitiesGLAM activitiesEditathonsLive Art


The Editathon focussed on Women artists, and was at LADA so the editors had
access to their archives. Discussions have already started re a follow up
event.Wikimedia UK and the Live Art Development Agency (LADA) ran a very
successful editathon on Feminism and Live Art at the LADA offices.
Tank Museum photography

Wikimedia UK is running a tripod friendly photography event at the Tank
Museum in Dorset, the museum has given us some free tickets for Wikimedia
photographers and various participants online are assembling a wish
list.
As we go to press there are still some tickets available for interested
photographers.
Battle of Clontarf

*Wikimedia UK gave logistical support to some Wikimedians in Ireland in
order to support their first editathon.*

The Battle of Clontarf .
A thousand years on, was this defining moment in Irish history the occasion
when Brian Boru  himself drove
the Vikings out of Ireland much as Saint Patrick had driven the snakes out
a few hundred years earlier; Or was it a Game of
Thrones style
slaughter with two alliances of Irish and Vikings killing each other in
sight of the walls of Dublin, leaving Dublin an independent Viking city
state for a generation after?

The First Wikipedia Edit-a-thon in the Republic of
Ireland,
held in partnership with 1014 Retold , brought
historians, Wikipedians and others together to improve the articles on
Gormlaith , her various husbands
and other interested parties.

The battle of Clontarf edit-a-thon took place in the Science Gallery in Trinity
College, Dublin  on
Easter Saturday and was written up by 1014
retold.
Coverage has been on Silicon
Republic
 and Buzzfeed in their article *the real Game of
Thrones*.
WIR Review

Daria Cybulska is leading a review of the Wikimedian in Residence
program,
anyone wishing to give feedback is welcome to contact her.
Future Events

The program for Wikimania is firming up as the Program committee decides which
of 64 GLAM 
submissions
to
include in the GLAM track. Potential attendees of Wikimania and others are
welcome to join in the assessment process by signing up for the talks they
would like to attend and querying on the talkpages those that need
discussion.

The Fringe is also expanding with several GLAM events for those staying on
after Wikimania.

Later events include an editathon at the Institute of Classics in September
and *WW1 and Dissent* in November
Education and expert outreach

On 3 April WMUK supported a volunteer-led Editathon at University of St
Mark and St John in Plymouth,
organised by Harry Mitchell, along with Doug Taylor and Chris McKenna who
provided training for the attendees.

This was the most recent event in a string of education outreach activities
during the first quarter of 2014. WMUK staff members Richard Nevell and Dr
Toni Sant are in the process of collating basic information (mainly
usernames and contact details, where appropriate) from all participants at
these events to ensure appropriate follow-up and engagement through future
Education-related activities.
Wikimedia Ambassador at Jisc

Dr Martin Poulter engagement as Wikimedia Ambassador with Jisc has come to
an 
end.
Details about his work during the period J

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Risker]

Wil, if you want to use email lists for your discussions, you may find a
better reception if you use one of the project- or task-specific lists.
There is a page on English Wikipedia with links to mailing lists that most
closely relate to that project[1] and a more extensive list at Meta that
describes lists for many other projects and specific areas of interest.[2]
One is more likely to get a positive response when the audience is more
accurately targeted.

You will probably find that a lot of practical questions you have asked
could easily be answered at the English Wikipedia Teahouse page, where you
have been invited.  That would include questions about how to tell if
something has been deleted from a page, how to read page histories, or even
how to tell whether or not someone is WMF staff.


Risker




[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mailing_lists

 [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Overview




On 28 May 2014 13:07, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
>
> "
> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
>
> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
> disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
> "
>
> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
> discussion that includes the comment above:
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Risker  wrote:
> > Wil, the deletion log of the page in question is publicly visible.  There
> > are no WMF employees who have deleted anything on that page, ever. This
> is
> > information you can check for yourself instead of relying on the words of
> > others.
> >
> > Risker
> >
> >
> > On 28 May 2014 12:23, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
> >> think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
> >> going forward:
> >> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.
> >>
> >> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
> >> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
> >> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
> >> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
> >> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
> >> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
> >> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
> >> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
> >> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
> >> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
> >> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
> >> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
> >> question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
> >> I tried clicking on the link.
> >>
> >> In any case, it should be made clear that the WMF did not ask me to
> >> disengage with employees and has not yet asked me to stop posting to
> >> Wikipediocracy directly. So far, the organization itself has respected
> >> my individuality; I can only appeal to everyone in the WP community
> >> and all WMF employees to do the same in the future. I will be engaging
> >> with the broader WP community in whatever way I can, but I've made the
> >> hard decision to limit my engagement with WMF employees to public,
> >> logged forums from now on.
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
> >> > On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
> >> > ...
> >> >> independent individual
> >> >> ab

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcome Rachel diCerbo, Director of Community Engagement

[Philippe Beaudette]

Hi Nathan,

Succinctly, at a 30,000 foot level:

The Community Engagement team (staffed with Community Liaisons and the
Director of Community Engagement, Product) leads the efforts to engage the
community around the development and deployment of new tools and
product/features for the projects.

The Community Advocacy team (staffed with Community Advocates and the
Director, Community Advocacy) leads engagement with the community around
strategic change management and major policy rollouts (Terms of Use,
Privacy Policy) and serves as an entry point for things related to
governance functions (Arbcoms, Checkusers and Oversighters, etc).

The descriptions of the work of each team can be found in more depth in the
appendix to WMF's FDC submission. [1].

Best,
pb


[1] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Wikimedia_Foundation/Proposal_form/Ongoing_work_areas#Legal_and_Community_Advocacy


*Philippe Beaudette * \\  Director, Community Advocacy \\ Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc.
 T: 1-415-839-6885 x6643 |  phili...@wikimedia.org  |  :
@Philippewiki


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Nathan  wrote:

> Welcome Rachel!
>
> Erik (or someone else), is there a succinct description of the mission of
> the Community Engagement and Community Advocacy departments, and/or
> especially a summary of the difference between their roles? Your e-mail
> from December included some of this information, I'm just curious if it has
> been codified in a way that would allow an outsider to quickly grok the
> split.
>
> Thanks!
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcome Rachel diCerbo, Director of Community Engagement

[Nathan]

Perfect. Thanks as always Philippe for being awesome.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcome Rachel diCerbo, Director of Community Engagement

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Philippe Beaudette, 28/05/2014 19:27:

The descriptions of the work of each team can be found in more depth in the
appendix to WMF's FDC submission. [1].

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Wikimedia_Foundation/Proposal_form/Ongoing_work_areas#Legal_and_Community_Advocacy


«We support the rollouts of major Foundation initiatives - such as 
software changes or site policy updates [...] among them the 
VisualEditor beta launch»



Nemo

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcome Rachel diCerbo, Director of Community Engagement

[Philippe Beaudette]

Right, we did that last year.  It occurred to me after I sent that that it
wasn't up to date on that section, but you're quite correct.  That work has
now transitioned to the CE team  :)

pb


*Philippe Beaudette * \\  Director, Community Advocacy \\ Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc.
 T: 1-415-839-6885 x6643 |  phili...@wikimedia.org  |  :
@Philippewiki


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:

> Philippe Beaudette, 28/05/2014 19:27:
>
>> The descriptions of the work of each team can be found in more depth in
>> the
>> appendix to WMF's FDC submission. [1].
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/
>> 2013-2014_round2/Wikimedia_Foundation/Proposal_form/
>> Ongoing_work_areas#Legal_and_Community_Advocacy
>>
>
> «We support the rollouts of major Foundation initiatives - such as
> software changes or site policy updates [...] among them the VisualEditor
> beta launch»
>  2013-2014_round2/Wikimedia_Foundation/Proposal_form/
> Ongoing_work_areas#Community_Advocacy>
>
> Nemo
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] About Wikipedia medical entries

[Cristian Consonni]

2014-05-28 7:42 GMT+02:00 Nurunnaby Chowdhury :
> Thanks everyone. Last day when this news published i receive lots of phone
> call from our journalist friend. You know all journalist just check the
> news media. Not check details issue.

This news found is way also on Italian media:
http://www.corriere.it/salute/14_maggio_27/occhio-wikipedia-nove-voci-mediche-dieci-sono-sbagliate-02d46f6a-e5b1-11e3-8e3e-8f5de4ddd12f.shtml

The good thing is that the articles mentions that the author of the
original study invited physicians to participate in Wikipedia to raise
the quality of its articles.

Cristian

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] About Wikipedia medical entries

[Jane Darnell]

What I think is funny about this whole article and this email thread
is that the quality of Wikipedia is not brought into relation with
anything else. For example, I know that one of the main causes of
death in the Netherlands today has to do with improper dosages of
medicine, caused both by failure to follow instructions in the medical
information accompanying pharmaceuticals and by mistakes in that
medical information.

Wikipedia may be full of mistakes, but so is the "official" medical
information offered to doctors and patients.

2014-05-28 20:03 GMT+02:00, Cristian Consonni :
> 2014-05-28 7:42 GMT+02:00 Nurunnaby Chowdhury :
>> Thanks everyone. Last day when this news published i receive lots of phone
>> call from our journalist friend. You know all journalist just check the
>> news media. Not check details issue.
>
> This news found is way also on Italian media:
> http://www.corriere.it/salute/14_maggio_27/occhio-wikipedia-nove-voci-mediche-dieci-sono-sbagliate-02d46f6a-e5b1-11e3-8e3e-8f5de4ddd12f.shtml
>
> The good thing is that the articles mentions that the author of the
> original study invited physicians to participate in Wikipedia to raise
> the quality of its articles.
>
> Cristian
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] About Wikipedia medical entries

[Martijn Hoekstra]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> What I think is funny about this whole article and this email thread
> is that the quality of Wikipedia is not brought into relation with
> anything else. For example, I know that one of the main causes of
> death in the Netherlands today has to do with improper dosages of
> medicine, caused both by failure to follow instructions in the medical
> information accompanying pharmaceuticals and by mistakes in that
> medical information.
>
> Wikipedia may be full of mistakes, but so is the "official" medical
> information offered to doctors and patients.
>

Let's not focus on what others are doing wrong, but improve on what we may
be doing wrong - that's the only thing we have most influence on in
changing.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Yes, that was mentioned on the Wikipediocracy thread, as well. I
apologize to that person and the WMF for my misunderstanding.

Other than establishing the fact that I wrongly stated that this
person is a WMF employee, the revdelete doesn't seem to warrant more
investigation according to existing policy. As I mentioned before, I
assume this revdelete was justified by published policy, so it doesn't
matter who made it beyond correcting my mistake. I would like to
protect that person's ability to act in good faith going forward.

The IRC conversation could warrant more discussion based on whether
there is interest. I've said all I wanted to say on the matter (that I
will not be engaging in private conversations with WMF employees for
the time being), but I'd be happy to answer any questions that others
might have.

Again, I'm sorry for my mistake, and thanks for pointing it out.
,Wil



On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Brandon Harris  wrote:
> A slight correction: the revision was rev-deleted by a member of the 
> community - a member of ArbCom, in fact - and not an employee of the 
> Foundation.
>
> Snt frm m Phn
>
>> On May 28, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
>> think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
>> going forward: 
>> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.
>>
>> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
>> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
>> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
>> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
>> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
>> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
>> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
>> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
>> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
>> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
>> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
>> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
>> question in the ~10 minutes between when it was first posted and when
>> I tried clicking on the link.
>>
>> In any case, it should be made clear that the WMF did not ask me to
>> disengage with employees and has not yet asked me to stop posting to
>> Wikipediocracy directly. So far, the organization itself has respected
>> my individuality; I can only appeal to everyone in the WP community
>> and all WMF employees to do the same in the future. I will be engaging
>> with the broader WP community in whatever way I can, but I've made the
>> hard decision to limit my engagement with WMF employees to public,
>> logged forums from now on.
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Fæ  wrote:
 On 28/05/2014, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
 ...
 independent individual
 able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
 take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
 employees.
>>>
>>> Thanks for making these distinctions. It is sad to see that your time
>>> and energy is being used so early on in your introduction to the
>>> Wikimedia community, in creating a political distance between yourself
>>> and the public actions of your life partner, due to his casual
>>> curiosity about Wikimedia projects. A curiosity that only manifested
>>> itself shortly after the public announcement of your employment by the
>>> Foundation board.
>>>
>>> I do not really understand the point being made about not "engaging"
>>> with WMF employees, any active volunteer on Wikimedia projects should
>>> and must be free to engage with WMF employees. The statement does not
>>> appear to match actions over the last 24 hours, with Wil freely making
>>> public comments about his dissatisfaction after conversations
>>> (emails?) with some WMF employees.
>>>
>>> Thanks again for clarifying your position during this difficult start
>>> to your engagement.
>>>
>>> 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
>>> 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
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
>> 
>
> __

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

If people don't want me to discuss this here, of course we can take it
elsewhere.

I only reply to this publicly to suggest that you and others help me
out with that. For example, you have plenty of options beyond replying
list-wide to communicate the very thing you're telling me below. As
long as none of these concerns boil down to "Just shut up, Wil," I'm
all for optimizing communication. I think it's interesting, however,
that no one seems to think that messages containing +1's to other
people saying thanks aren't a waste of bandwidth or not entirely
appropriate for this list.

Thanks for the suggestion, in any case.
,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Risker  wrote:
> Wil, if you want to use email lists for your discussions, you may find a
> better reception if you use one of the project- or task-specific lists.
> There is a page on English Wikipedia with links to mailing lists that most
> closely relate to that project[1] and a more extensive list at Meta that
> describes lists for many other projects and specific areas of interest.[2]
> One is more likely to get a positive response when the audience is more
> accurately targeted.
>
> You will probably find that a lot of practical questions you have asked
> could easily be answered at the English Wikipedia Teahouse page, where you
> have been invited.  That would include questions about how to tell if
> something has been deleted from a page, how to read page histories, or even
> how to tell whether or not someone is WMF staff.
>
>
> Risker
>
>
>
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mailing_lists
>
>  [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Overview
>
>
>
>
> On 28 May 2014 13:07, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
>> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
>> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
>>
>> "
>> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
>> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
>> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
>> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
>> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
>> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
>> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
>>
>> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
>> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
>> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
>> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
>> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
>> disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
>> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
>> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
>> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
>> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
>> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
>> "
>>
>> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
>> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
>> discussion that includes the comment above:
>> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Risker  wrote:
>> > Wil, the deletion log of the page in question is publicly visible.  There
>> > are no WMF employees who have deleted anything on that page, ever. This
>> is
>> > information you can check for yourself instead of relying on the words of
>> > others.
>> >
>> > Risker
>> >
>> >
>> > On 28 May 2014 12:23, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Fae, if you're referring to the discussion on this page, then I
>> >> think I make it quite clear why I won't engage with WMF employees
>> >> going forward:
>> >> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&start=150.
>> >>
>> >> To be sure, I'm not used to having anyone from Lila's team immediately
>> >> emailing her through their official company addresses as soon as I ask
>> >> a question in a public forum. In this case, the WMF has made it quite
>> >> clear that the IRC channels aren't official and/or sponsored by the
>> >> WMF, and I was asking about community affairs WRT to those channels.
>> >> So my question about why a user was kicked from the channel didn't
>> >> have anything to do with the WMF. I still don't understand why this
>> >> employee felt it was necessary to bring Lila's attention to "safety
>> >> concerns" through official WMF employee channels, although I'm sure he
>> >> or she felt it was the right thing to do and I've given them the
>> >> benefit of the doubt that it was. Of course, I can't form my own
>> >> independent opinion, since a WMF employee revdeleted the rev in
>> >> question in the ~10 minutes between 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Nathan, I was responding to Lila's note to clarify that I had made the
decision to not discuss anything privately with any WMF employee. The
IRC discussion was referenced by Fae, so I sent a link to the
discussion so everyone could see what he was talking about; I will
absolutely stand by my words. I think it's very important for everyone
to understand that the WMF is not trying to directly control my
communication with the community and with WMF employees. These are all
my decisions.

Everyone who is encouraging me to stop posting on this thread seem to
be the people who were asking for the clarification of my role in the
first place. These people seemed to think this matter was urgent and
that we shouldn't wait any longer- much less for me to understand the
intricacies of those IRC channels- to get clarification. I was not the
person to bring up the IRC discussion, but once it was brought up, I
don't think many people would disagree that it was appropriate for me
to respond with my account.

We are all interested in hearing all sides of every story here, aren't
we? I'm starting to get the feeling that there are things that some
people on this list don't want *anyone* to discuss. After all, you
could simply ignore my messages or even filter them from your inbox,
if you are so inclined. This impression has been troubling me greatly.
Do you know that this is *precisely* what many on Wikipediocracy are
saying about this list? Are they right?

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Nathan  wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
>> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
>> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
>>
>> "
>> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
>> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
>> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
>> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
>> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
>> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
>> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
>>
>> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
>> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
>> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
>> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
>> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
>> disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
>> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
>> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
>> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
>> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
>> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
>> "
>>
>> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
>> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
>> discussion that includes the comment above:
>> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>>
>
> Hi Wil,
>
> This is exactly why others have suggested that you slow down, and focus on
> learning the basics of the Wikimedia projects and movements before jumping
> into the hottest, most controversial issues. It takes time to develop the
> understanding necessary to draw conclusions, especially in areas most
> likely to erupt into drama and heated exchanges.
>
> To wit, I don't believe it can even be determined if someone is logging a
> channel, and many people (including Wikimedians) log all of their channels.
> Several Wikimedia-related channels are publicly logged. Other channels
> prohibit people from publishing logs.
>
> It's also quite common knowledge that revisions can be deleted (by any
> administrator, where they remain viewable by administrators) or suppressed
> altogether (by users with Oversight rights). I think if you considered it
> with a full possession of the facts, you would agree that this is good and
> necessary.
>
> In any case, thank you Lila for your note! I appreciate that you have made
> it clear you've seen the threads of the last few weeks and understand the
> concerns that posters have described.
>
> ~Nathan
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Nathan]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Nathan, I was responding to Lila's note to clarify that I had made the
> decision to not discuss anything privately with any WMF employee. The
> IRC discussion was referenced by Fae, so I sent a link to the
> discussion so everyone could see what he was talking about; I will
> absolutely stand by my words. I think it's very important for everyone
> to understand that the WMF is not trying to directly control my
> communication with the community and with WMF employees. These are all
> my decisions.
>
> Everyone who is encouraging me to stop posting on this thread seem to
> be the people who were asking for the clarification of my role in the
> first place. These people seemed to think this matter was urgent and
> that we shouldn't wait any longer- much less for me to understand the
> intricacies of those IRC channels- to get clarification. I was not the
> person to bring up the IRC discussion, but once it was brought up, I
> don't think many people would disagree that it was appropriate for me
> to respond with my account.
>
> We are all interested in hearing all sides of every story here, aren't
> we? I'm starting to get the feeling that there are things that some
> people on this list don't want *anyone* to discuss. After all, you
> could simply ignore my messages or even filter them from your inbox,
> if you are so inclined. This impression has been troubling me greatly.
> Do you know that this is *precisely* what many on Wikipediocracy are
> saying about this list? Are they right?
>
> ,Wil


I'm way post having posted too much on this subject, so one last brief
message and that will be it for me. Wil, I don't think anyone has objected
to criticism of Wikimedia or enwp policies on this list (other than over
forum selection for certain issues). People *have* objected to your
decision to associate with WO, and have attempted to describe to you why
they object.

Others (including me) have pointed out that your inexperience hampers your
power as a critic of internal processes. There are just a long list of
things you don't know much about, but that doesn't seem to prevent you from
complaining about them in high visibility forums like this list. My advice
is to take time away from lists and forums and controversial discussions
and just learn and experience the projects. Then come back and join the
more meta discussions.

I suspect you won't choose to follow that advice, since its been given
multiple other times and you haven't yet, but I hope you understand the
distinction between suggesting that you listen and learn before you opine
and demanding that you piss off and stop posting full stop. I'm doing the
former, no one has done the latter.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Molly White]

Wil Sinclair  writes:

> 
> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too.

Indeed you can. If you navigate to
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log and enter the title
of the page in the "Target (title or user)" field, you can see
"GorillaWarfare (talk | contribs | block) changed visibility of a revision".

I was the one who deleted the revision in question. I'd like to clarify that
I'm not an employee of the WMF. I'm an administrator, and a member of the
Arbitration Committee, but my membership on that committee is by community
election. It is neither paid by nor decided by the WMF. The deletion of that
revision was done in my administrator, not arbitrator, capacity.

As for determining who is and is not an employee of the WMF, WMF employees
editing as employees (and not community members) tend to have "(WMF)" in
their usernames. If nothing else, you can check their userpages, where they
will mention if they are employees.

> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
> disallowed). 

As some have already pointed out, it is in fact just fine to log Wikimedia
channels. It is the publishing of these logs (from channels that restrict
logging) that is considered to be a bannable offense.

> "
> 
> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
> discussion that includes the comment above:
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
> 
> ,Wil

In fact, I'd suggest you *do* begin logging your IRC communications. Had you
been logging, you would have been able to refer to your logs to review my
explanation of why the user in question is typically immediately banned from
Wikimedia-related IRC channels. You also would have been able to refer to
the conversation in which I pointed you to the revision deletion policy, and
the specific criterion under which I removed the revision. You would also
have remembered that you did not ask me for any more detail about the
relationship between Wikimedia-related IRC channels and Wikimedia projects
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRC#How_is_Wikipedia_IRC_related_to
_Wikipedia.3F), about the IRC channel guidelines
(https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/wikipedia/Guidelines, also linked from
the channel topic in #wikipedia-en) or expectations of channel operators
(https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/wikipedia/Channel_operator_guidelines),
or about the revision itself and its contents.

Yours,
Molly (GorillaWarfare)


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note

[ENWP Pine]

Thank you for the explanations, Lila, Molly, and everyone else.

Wil, I happen to be waiting on an email right now so I have a few minutes to 
spare. If you need clarification on anything that has been said in this 
discussion I am happy to meet you on IRC or have a Skype conversation. I would 
suggest that this thread is consuming a lot of bandwidth in this email list and 
we should move the discussion elsewhere. We can also talk on your talk page, 
although I think your more conversational style is better suited to IRC or 
Skype.

Cheers,

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Martijn Hoekstra]

>
>
> We are all interested in hearing all sides of every story here, aren't
> we? I'm starting to get the feeling that there are things that some
> people on this list don't want *anyone* to discuss.


Which things, and which people are you aiming at, particularly?

--Martijn


> After all, you
> could simply ignore my messages or even filter them from your inbox,
> if you are so inclined. This impression has been troubling me greatly.
> Do you know that this is *precisely* what many on Wikipediocracy are
> saying about this list? Are they right?
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Nathan  wrote:
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
> >> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
> >> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
> >>
> >> "
> >> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
> >> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
> >> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
> >> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
> >> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
> >> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
> >> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
> >>
> >> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
> >> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
> >> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
> >> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
> >> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
> >> disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
> >> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
> >> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
> >> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
> >> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
> >> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
> >> "
> >>
> >> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
> >> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
> >> discussion that includes the comment above:
> >>
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Hi Wil,
> >
> > This is exactly why others have suggested that you slow down, and focus
> on
> > learning the basics of the Wikimedia projects and movements before
> jumping
> > into the hottest, most controversial issues. It takes time to develop the
> > understanding necessary to draw conclusions, especially in areas most
> > likely to erupt into drama and heated exchanges.
> >
> > To wit, I don't believe it can even be determined if someone is logging a
> > channel, and many people (including Wikimedians) log all of their
> channels.
> > Several Wikimedia-related channels are publicly logged. Other channels
> > prohibit people from publishing logs.
> >
> > It's also quite common knowledge that revisions can be deleted (by any
> > administrator, where they remain viewable by administrators) or
> suppressed
> > altogether (by users with Oversight rights). I think if you considered it
> > with a full possession of the facts, you would agree that this is good
> and
> > necessary.
> >
> > In any case, thank you Lila for your note! I appreciate that you have
> made
> > it clear you've seen the threads of the last few weeks and understand the
> > concerns that posters have described.
> >
> > ~Nathan
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Well, we were discussing IRC and my experience there in this thread,
and many people were asking me to "wait." I find this interesting,
because some on Wikipediocracy also asked me to "wait," with the
significant exception that this was to "wait until I so something,
then come back." In this case, it was "wait until you've read these
articles and seen this stuff on-wiki, then come back." I agreed. They
then checked in with me regularly (I think most of them thought I was
going to bail), and once I had read the material I had agreed to read,
we resumed the discussion. It's all here: It's all here on this
thread: http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4531

But I think I've figured out a way for me to bring up topics without
worrying about my level of experience with Wikipedia/Wikimedia. I'll
start a new thread with my concerns and what I've come up with.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Martijn Hoekstra
 wrote:
>>
>>
>> We are all interested in hearing all sides of every story here, aren't
>> we? I'm starting to get the feeling that there are things that some
>> people on this list don't want *anyone* to discuss.
>
>
> Which things, and which people are you aiming at, particularly?
>
> --Martijn
>
>
>> After all, you
>> could simply ignore my messages or even filter them from your inbox,
>> if you are so inclined. This impression has been troubling me greatly.
>> Do you know that this is *precisely* what many on Wikipediocracy are
>> saying about this list? Are they right?
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Nathan  wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>> >
>> >> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
>> >> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted the
>> >> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
>> >>
>> >> "
>> >> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
>> >> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
>> >> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
>> >> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
>> >> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
>> >> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow misrepresented
>> >> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
>> >>
>> >> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
>> >> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
>> >> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
>> >> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
>> >> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
>> >> disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to wikimedia-l
>> >> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
>> >> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
>> >> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
>> >> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds, but
>> >> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
>> >> "
>> >>
>> >> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
>> >> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
>> >> discussion that includes the comment above:
>> >>
>> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
>> >>
>> >> ,Wil
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > Hi Wil,
>> >
>> > This is exactly why others have suggested that you slow down, and focus
>> on
>> > learning the basics of the Wikimedia projects and movements before
>> jumping
>> > into the hottest, most controversial issues. It takes time to develop the
>> > understanding necessary to draw conclusions, especially in areas most
>> > likely to erupt into drama and heated exchanges.
>> >
>> > To wit, I don't believe it can even be determined if someone is logging a
>> > channel, and many people (including Wikimedians) log all of their
>> channels.
>> > Several Wikimedia-related channels are publicly logged. Other channels
>> > prohibit people from publishing logs.
>> >
>> > It's also quite common knowledge that revisions can be deleted (by any
>> > administrator, where they remain viewable by administrators) or
>> suppressed
>> > altogether (by users with Oversight rights). I think if you considered it
>> > with a full possession of the facts, you would agree that this is good
>> and
>> > necessary.
>> >
>> > In any case, thank you Lila for your note! I appreciate that you have
>> made
>> > it clear you've seen the threads of the last few weeks and understand the
>> > concerns that posters have described.
>> >
>> > ~Nathan
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikime

[Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Wil Sinclair]

Martijn asked me which things I thought that some people on this list
don't want anyone to discuss, so here are the two examples that I'm
most interested in:

Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be
changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the
content on Commons. I'd also like to hear about specific examples of
content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their
children. Note that this is not a repeat of the discussion to
understand what policies are in place, as I have already opened a
specific thread for that.

Harassment- I'd like to hear about existing policies around harassment
and potential changes to such policies. In particular, I'm interested
in how the community might tackle this problem to make the site a more
comfortable place for the oft-mentioned female constituent that has
long been in decline.

Since I don't have enough experience with the community and WP yet to
discuss controversial topics myself, I will not chime in unless the
thread has very obviously gone off topic. Just to pick an arbitrary
about of time that is more than the few months that others have
mentioned here, let's say that you can only participate in this
discussion if you have at least one year of experience as an active
contributor.

Now, I'll just sit back and hear all sides of the story.

,Wil

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[David Cuenca]

Wil, I have been following the conversation and I can feel your
good-hearted nature.
Please do not be offended when they say "wait" to you. They mean no harm to
you, just the opposite.

I know how frustrating it is to have to wait, because all of us have gone
through the same...
Just to give you an example of my experience, it took me almost a year
until I felt comfortable editing in my home project. Understanding the
subjective experience of editing is something you will not find in any
book, you have to go through it and then some opinions will make more sense
to you. It took me many more years until I ventured to bring up topics that
affect bigger communities. And now after ten years I am still learning...
just figure.

Patience is a very positive trait and we never have enough of it. They have
been giving it to you because they appreciate you, and if you give it back
to them they will appreciate you even more.

Welcome to the community and an internet hug for you!

Micru

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Well, we were discussing IRC and my experience there in this thread,
> and many people were asking me to "wait." I find this interesting,
> because some on Wikipediocracy also asked me to "wait," with the
> significant exception that this was to "wait until I so something,
> then come back." In this case, it was "wait until you've read these
> articles and seen this stuff on-wiki, then come back." I agreed. They
> then checked in with me regularly (I think most of them thought I was
> going to bail), and once I had read the material I had agreed to read,
> we resumed the discussion. It's all here: It's all here on this
> thread: http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4531
>
> But I think I've figured out a way for me to bring up topics without
> worrying about my level of experience with Wikipedia/Wikimedia. I'll
> start a new thread with my concerns and what I've come up with.
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Martijn Hoekstra
>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> We are all interested in hearing all sides of every story here, aren't
> >> we? I'm starting to get the feeling that there are things that some
> >> people on this list don't want *anyone* to discuss.
> >
> >
> > Which things, and which people are you aiming at, particularly?
> >
> > --Martijn
> >
> >
> >> After all, you
> >> could simply ignore my messages or even filter them from your inbox,
> >> if you are so inclined. This impression has been troubling me greatly.
> >> Do you know that this is *precisely* what many on Wikipediocracy are
> >> saying about this list? Are they right?
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Nathan  wrote:
> >> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
> >> >> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too. I posted
> the
> >> >> following to Wikipediocracy a few minutes ago:
> >> >>
> >> >> "
> >> >> I may have misread which page the rev was on, or I misunderstood the
> >> >> person who said s/he revdeleted it in thinking that it had been
> >> >> revdeleted in the previous few minutes. This is exactly why I prefer
> >> >> public recorded forums. Now no one can go back to clear up the
> >> >> confusion. For all I know, I might have to apologize for a
> >> >> misunderstanding, and it would really suck if I somehow
> misrepresented
> >> >> things and didn't have any opportunity to straighten things out.
> >> >>
> >> >> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
> >> >> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
> >> >> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
> >> >> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
> >> >> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
> >> >> disallowed). Next time I have a concern, I will take it to
> wikimedia-l
> >> >> or one of the other mailing lists. As this example also shows, one
> >> >> can't be sure that the revs on a page within Wikimedia's wikis
> >> >> themselves won't be redacted after-the-fact. I'm not expressing an
> >> >> opinion about whether stuff should be redacted or on what grounds,
> but
> >> >> I am asserting that it is possible to do so.
> >> >> "
> >> >>
> >> >> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
> >> >> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
> >> >> discussion that includes the comment above:
> >> >>
> >>
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
> >> >>
> >> >> ,Wil
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Hi Wil,
> >> >
> >> > This is exactly why others have suggested that you slow down, and
> focus
> >> on
> >> > learning the basics of the Wikimedia projects and movements before
> >> jumping
> >> > into the hottest, most controversial issues. It takes time to develop
> the
> >> > understanding ne

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Everton Zanella Alvarenga]

Hi Will, we generally can find critics mainly from those who cannot
understand or do not have patience when newbies make mistakes. Obviously I
also have this problem sometimes (for this some ironic comments when I
suggested in a recent topic suggesting  we should criticize more
kindly),
for this I believe it'll take sometime for we, as a group or even Wikimedia
Foundation as an organization, to realise the importance of making mistakes
 and give more
importance on our learnings.

My general feeling is that we lack the necessary patience and the
limitation of online communication tends to raise unnecessary issues
(sometimes called wikidramas), but I have no idea how this cultural change
can be achieved in the Wikimedia community. Maybe it will come with
nonviolent communication <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication> or when we learn to
ignore the violence and deal with it with wisdom.

Leadership in this (crazy, in the good sense :) horizontal community can
also be a factor to improve the discussions environment, be it on mailing
lists, forums or the wiki. The TeaHouse is a great example. The ideia of
Wikipedia ambassadors to work on educational environments, although not
sustainable in the mid term, is another cool idea. Those great videos made
by Victor idem. More ideias will come, I believe. :)

Tom


2014-05-28 17:18 GMT-03:00 Wil Sinclair :

> Well, we were discussing IRC and my experience there in this thread,
> and many people were asking me to "wait." I find this interesting,
> because some on Wikipediocracy also asked me to "wait," with the
> significant exception that this was to "wait until I so something,
> then come back." In this case, it was "wait until you've read these
> articles and seen this stuff on-wiki, then come back." I agreed. They
> then checked in with me regularly (I think most of them thought I was
> going to bail), and once I had read the material I had agreed to read,
> we resumed the discussion. It's all here: It's all here on this
> thread: http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4531
>
> But I think I've figured out a way for me to bring up topics without
> worrying about my level of experience with Wikipedia/Wikimedia. I'll
> start a new thread with my concerns and what I've come up with.
>
> ,Wil
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Russavia]

Wil,

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

As you can see there is a lot of consternation being directed your
way, and at some stage, and this will teach you well for the future as
well, you have to learn to walk away from the keyboard. If you can't
do this, and I have a feeling you might have difficulty doing so, try
to at least delay hitting the send button, but this is something else
you may have trouble doing. This is especially important on this list,
as there is a sending limit per month that people are able send, and
this is obviously done to prevent the drowning out of other
participants by any single personyou would likely be well on your
way to this limit by now.

Wil, if you truly wanted to see how the projects work, usually the
best way is to get involved at the ground level. Some people may want
to make some edits on Wikipedia to an article on a subject that
interest them. Others might add some information on one of their
favourite holiday spots on Wikivoyage. Others might prefer to take a
photo of their penis and upload it to Commons. There are literally
plenty of ways for a n00b get involved on our projects.

You have missed an opportunity here to be able to help Lila with her new job.

Firstly, this is Lila's moment to shine and an opportunity for the
community to get to know her and vice versa. It's a bit difficult for
a sense of trust to be built when you have an overbearing partner
essentially publicly pushing her aside and taking all of our
attention. For example, I really don't know much about Lila, but I
know more about you. And that presents a massive problem, and believe
you me, others are thinking it, I'm willing to say it publicly.

Secondly, as a n00b, you would have been a great person for Lila to
use as a sounding board as to how it is for new editors on our
projects to be able to edit and understand how to navigate our
projects. You may not be aware but our projects have a dire editor
retention rate, and your experiences, given that it is evident you are
green to our projects, may have been able to help Lila understand that
particular issue.

Getting involved as you have done has only gone to serve
Wikipediocracy by handing them the best PSA they could hope for on a
silver platter.

Having said that, if you want to get involved on Commons,
#wikimedia-commons is full of helpful editors who might be able to
give you some further ideas on how to contribute to that project.

Learn the ropes first; there's plenty of time for wikipolitics and the
like later on.

Cheers

Russavia

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Thomas Morton]

I cannot believe I am saying this; but I totally agree with Russavia.

Wil; why not have a go contributing to some WP articles and seeing what
your experience is.

We have a comment statement that gets made on flame threads, which boils
down to "isn't there an article you could be writing?"

Tom


On 28 May 2014 21:44, Russavia  wrote:

> Wil,
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
> As you can see there is a lot of consternation being directed your
> way, and at some stage, and this will teach you well for the future as
> well, you have to learn to walk away from the keyboard. If you can't
> do this, and I have a feeling you might have difficulty doing so, try
> to at least delay hitting the send button, but this is something else
> you may have trouble doing. This is especially important on this list,
> as there is a sending limit per month that people are able send, and
> this is obviously done to prevent the drowning out of other
> participants by any single personyou would likely be well on your
> way to this limit by now.
>
> Wil, if you truly wanted to see how the projects work, usually the
> best way is to get involved at the ground level. Some people may want
> to make some edits on Wikipedia to an article on a subject that
> interest them. Others might add some information on one of their
> favourite holiday spots on Wikivoyage. Others might prefer to take a
> photo of their penis and upload it to Commons. There are literally
> plenty of ways for a n00b get involved on our projects.
>
> You have missed an opportunity here to be able to help Lila with her new
> job.
>
> Firstly, this is Lila's moment to shine and an opportunity for the
> community to get to know her and vice versa. It's a bit difficult for
> a sense of trust to be built when you have an overbearing partner
> essentially publicly pushing her aside and taking all of our
> attention. For example, I really don't know much about Lila, but I
> know more about you. And that presents a massive problem, and believe
> you me, others are thinking it, I'm willing to say it publicly.
>
> Secondly, as a n00b, you would have been a great person for Lila to
> use as a sounding board as to how it is for new editors on our
> projects to be able to edit and understand how to navigate our
> projects. You may not be aware but our projects have a dire editor
> retention rate, and your experiences, given that it is evident you are
> green to our projects, may have been able to help Lila understand that
> particular issue.
>
> Getting involved as you have done has only gone to serve
> Wikipediocracy by handing them the best PSA they could hope for on a
> silver platter.
>
> Having said that, if you want to get involved on Commons,
> #wikimedia-commons is full of helpful editors who might be able to
> give you some further ideas on how to contribute to that project.
>
> Learn the ropes first; there's plenty of time for wikipolitics and the
> like later on.
>
> Cheers
>
> Russavia
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Thanks for all the pointers, Molly, and for disclosing that it was you
for the sake of adding a bit more info to the discussion; you haven't
done anything wrong as far as I know, and I didn't feel comfortable
mentioning your IRC nick in case there were any confusion. I simply
didn't get a chance to look at that diff before you revdeleted it; it
was the only concrete evidence that I saw linked there for why
badmachine was kicked. I probably should have clicked on it
immediately. My bad.

I've apologized to you here and on Wikipediocracy, but apologies are
always worth doing directly and for as many to see as possible: I'm
very sorry for mistaking you for a WMF employee. I take full
responsibility for my words and actions. I hope you can forgive me.

To be clear, a WMF employee did mail Lila with "safety concerns." That
was obviously not Molly, and, ultimately, I don't think it's important
who it was. It just made me personally uncomfortable communicating
with WMF employees in any private setting. I'm hoping that will change
as we all begin to trust each other more. Even then, I have no plans
to discuss WMF matters of any sort with WMF employees; that's to
everyone's benefit IMO.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Molly White
 wrote:
> Wil Sinclair  writes:
>
>>
>> Thanks, I wasn't aware I could do this. I'm assuming that it would be
>> obvious who was an employee at Wikimedia in the log, too.
>
> Indeed you can. If you navigate to
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log and enter the title
> of the page in the "Target (title or user)" field, you can see
> "GorillaWarfare (talk | contribs | block) changed visibility of a revision".
>
> I was the one who deleted the revision in question. I'd like to clarify that
> I'm not an employee of the WMF. I'm an administrator, and a member of the
> Arbitration Committee, but my membership on that committee is by community
> election. It is neither paid by nor decided by the WMF. The deletion of that
> revision was done in my administrator, not arbitrator, capacity.
>
> As for determining who is and is not an employee of the WMF, WMF employees
> editing as employees (and not community members) tend to have "(WMF)" in
> their usernames. If nothing else, you can check their userpages, where they
> will mention if they are employees.
>
>> Of course, it is entirely on me. I knew that the IRC channels weren't
>> logged, and that it was a bannable offense to log them (for those who
>> aren't familiar with IRC, this essentially means that you aren't
>> supposed to save conversations there; in most channels that's A-OK,
>> but on all of the most used wikipedia channels it seems to be
>> disallowed).
>
> As some have already pointed out, it is in fact just fine to log Wikimedia
> channels. It is the publishing of these logs (from channels that restrict
> logging) that is considered to be a bannable offense.
>
>> "
>>
>> There is a discussion about this issue there, as well. It can be
>> followed at the link I posted earlier. Here's the last page of the
>> discussion that includes the comment above:
>> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4680&p=96600#p96600
>>
>> ,Wil
>
> In fact, I'd suggest you *do* begin logging your IRC communications. Had you
> been logging, you would have been able to refer to your logs to review my
> explanation of why the user in question is typically immediately banned from
> Wikimedia-related IRC channels. You also would have been able to refer to
> the conversation in which I pointed you to the revision deletion policy, and
> the specific criterion under which I removed the revision. You would also
> have remembered that you did not ask me for any more detail about the
> relationship between Wikimedia-related IRC channels and Wikimedia projects
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRC#How_is_Wikipedia_IRC_related_to
> _Wikipedia.3F), about the IRC channel guidelines
> (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/wikipedia/Guidelines, also linked from
> the channel topic in #wikipedia-en) or expectations of channel operators
> (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/wikipedia/Channel_operator_guidelines),
> or about the revision itself and its contents.
>
> Yours,
> Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> I'd also like to hear about specific examples of
> content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their
> children.



Wil and all,

Note that all the links I am posting below are NSFW.


1.

The other day I found that if a Portuguese or Russian child searches in
Commons for the word "Mom" in their language, on the first page of search
results they will find this NSFW image:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Martin_Van_Maele_-_La_Grande_Danse_macabre_des_vifs_-_29.jpg

In the Portuguese case, it's actually the top result.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=mam%C3%A3&fulltext=Search

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B0&fulltext=Search

There are many other images by the same artist in Commons that parents
might find inappropriate:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:La_Grande_Danse_macabre_des_vifs


2.

A while ago, the top result for the French word for "homework" was an old
b&w video showing sex between an actress dressed as a nun and a dog. That
particular video was eventually deleted, after enjoying a half-year stint
as one of the most-viewed files on Commons, with 20,000 to 30,000 views per
month:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Devoirs_de_vacances.ogv
http://stats.grok.se/commons.m/201203/File:Devoirs_de_vacances.ogv

However, all the other videos from the same series are still on Commons:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Videos_from_Polissons_et_galipettes

Most of them show various forms of unsimulated intercourse etc.


3.

Commons contains dozens of masturbation videos uploaded by volunteers,
housed in

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Videos_of_masturbation

Check the various subcategories like

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:GIF_videos_of_male_masturbation
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ogv_videos_of_male_masturbation

and so forth.


There is much more of that ilk, but it's a start.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Molly White]

Wil Sinclair  writes:
 
> I've apologized to you here and on Wikipediocracy, but apologies are
> always worth doing directly and for as many to see as possible: I'm
> very sorry for mistaking you for a WMF employee. I take full
> responsibility for my words and actions. I hope you can forgive me.

No need to apologize. I'm really not horrified at being mistaken for a
staffer, I'm just trying to clear up any confusion.

> To be clear, a WMF employee did mail Lila with "safety concerns." That
> was obviously not Molly, and, ultimately, I don't think it's important
> who it was. It just made me personally uncomfortable communicating
> with WMF employees in any private setting. I'm hoping that will change
> as we all begin to trust each other more. Even then, I have no plans
> to discuss WMF matters of any sort with WMF employees; that's to
> everyone's benefit IMO.

Ah, this segues well into the email I was just drafting: I have to say that
I was surprised to see the contents of what appears to be an internal staff
email being brought up both on Wikipediocracy and here by a non-staff
member. Wil, can you clarify if you were copied on the email, and if not,
how you gained access to it? You've repeatedly emphasized that you are not
affiliated with/do not influence/are completely separate from the WMF, and
even that you and Lila are not even discussing Wikimedia-related matters
with one another at home, so I'm sure you can understand the confusion.

Yours,
Molly (GorillaWarfare)


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Thomas Morton]

>
> Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be
> changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the
> content on Commons. I'd also like to hear about specific examples of
> content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their
> children. Note that this is not a repeat of the discussion to
> understand what policies are in place, as I have already opened a
> specific thread for that.
>

You seem to have conflated two items here... one is the idea of child
protection, and the other is of objectionable items on commons. I don't
think that in any way works.

Our child protection policies are about protecting children when they
interact online. This is a perennial problem for any internet site, as I am
sure you know. We do have some policies that help a lot (for example,
admins always err on the side of caution and delete personal details that
underage editors post). We have avenues to report potential issues such as
grooming.

Could more be done? Yes, I've thought so; for example publicising the
problem more.

But is WP worse that other communities (note; not site) of similar size?
Probably not. At least not in my experience (which, of course, is pretty
extensive given my former job).

Child protection from porn, etc.? I think it's well established that kids
can come across porn anywhere (apparently, Facebook, if my cousins'
activity on there are anything to go by :S). And frankly, it's never struck
me as an issue under the umbrella of "xhild protection".

How far does policing it become our job and not that of a parent? It's a
difficult decision... especially when browser-based content filters are
prevelant and easy to set up.

I've always said; we should educate our users about how to install and use
content filters, as this will benefit them outside WP too!

So then, on the flip side of your comment here you have the global issue of
objectionable images.

This is a much broader issue that the narrow one you're focusing on here.
For example, one of the main (and by main I mean constant and persistent,
beyond any complaints of porn!) complaints we see relate to images of the
prophet mohammed.

How do you, then, feel about Commons hosting images like that?

One of the tenets of the projects are that they are not censored, which I
think is a good thing. However, we've not yet struck a balance between
displaying everything and filtering things an individual doesn't want to
see.

I like the Mohammed example because it emphasises the problem where those
of us who are not Muslim find a subset of images perfectly okay, but a
Muslim might not.



>
> Since I don't have enough experience with the community and WP yet to
> discuss controversial topics myself, I will not chime in unless the
> thread has very obviously gone off topic. Just to pick an arbitrary
> about of time that is more than the few months that others have
> mentioned here, let's say that you can only participate in this
> discussion if you have at least one year of experience as an active
> contributor.
>

I'm not sure what purpose it serves to bring up controversial topics, in
this forum, with an express note that you have nothing new to bring? ;)

Not to be too critical; but do you imagine that these issues aren't being
discussed on the various projects - hopefully with incremental improvement
each time. Or that individuals here are not aware of them?

More than anything though, I'm sure you're an experienced internet chap -
what did you expect to recieve in stirring up two relatively ingrained
"sides"? It wasn't very deft, I have to observe :)

One thing it might be important to communicate is that whilst this list is
useful for global discussion, it's not a venue that any agreement or
consensus is reached. So these discussions are really best conducted
on-wiki. I'm not sure if you've actually attempted to open such topics on
any of the projects, but the discussion you appear to be looking for can
really only happen there (rather than here, or IRC, for example).

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Slide deck about Wikimedia?

[Yves Z]

Thank you, Federico and Jean-Frédéric.  This is what I was looking for.

> From: jeanfrederic.w...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 09:31:09 +0200
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Slide deck about Wikimedia?
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Hello, Where can I find recent presentations about Wikimedia and what each
> > of the main projects is for?  I visited outreach.wikimedia.org but didn't
> > see slides or overviews.  Thanks!
> >
> 
> You might want to check out .
> 
> It’s probably not super up-to-date, but many folks indicate a way to get
> the source ODP file  (usually by contacting them, SlideShare link, etc).
> 
> -- 
> Jean-Frédéric
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] About Wikipedia medical entries

[Yves Z]

> Let's not focus on what others are doing wrong, but improve on what we may
> be doing wrong - that's the only thing we have most influence on in
> changing.

Are there spot checks by professionals in medicine, or ways to flag often-read 
pages for peer review?  That seems like a way that experts could help without 
getting into edit wars.
The wikiproject medicine chat is fine but incomplete.   
  
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The first three weeks.

[Risker]

It is great to hear how you are working to learn about the vast Wikimedia
community, its projects, its priorities and its challenges, Lila.

I'm thinking there's something else that all of us should help you
celebrate as well:  after only a few weeks on the job, being named to the
Forbes list of the 100 most powerful women:
http://www.forbes.com/profile/lila-tretikov/

That's a great start.


Risker


On 28 May 2014 08:58, Anna Torres  wrote:

> +1
>
> Great to hearing your experience. As being a new ED too (3 months now) I
> can indentify myself with your experience: the first month is about
> listening and getting to know :)
>
> All the best for what is to come! Hope to meeting you asap!
>
> Hugs from Argentina.
>
>
> 2014-05-28 2:48 GMT-03:00 Nurunnaby Chowdhury :
>
> > +1
> > Thank you for this write-up. Happy to read..:)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:24 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> >
> > > Lila Tretikov wrote:
> > > >I wanted to give you an update on my first three weeks of Wikimedia
> > > >immersion -- this will also go on the blog.  As you probably noticed,
> my
> > > >leadership approach is rooted in observation and focused discussions
> --
> > > >this means I watch and listen more than I talk. But I expect that you
> > are
> > > >probably curious about what I have observed and learned so far, and to
> > > >know a little more about who I am.
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > >
> > > Thank you for this write-up. It was nice to read. :-)
> > >
> > > >Your recommendations on areas you see as priorities for development
> > > >(while keeping in mind that not everything can be a priority at
> > > >once!); [...]
> > >
> > > I think this continues to be a huge pain point. Developer resources are
> > > scarce and expensive and there's often a feeling that the latest
> > Wikimedia
> > > Foundation initiatives trump all other worthwhile projects. I think we
> > > need to find a better way to more fairly allocate resources.
> > >
> > > As a concrete example, there continue to be dozens of Wikimedia
> > Foundation
> > > developers and other staff specifically focused on the English
> Wikipedia
> > > and sometimes Wikimedia Commons, while the other sister projects such
> as
> > > Wiktionary, Wikibooks, and Wikisource continue to receive almost no
> > direct
> > > attention. (Over the past few years, even the term "sister projects"
> has
> > > become mildly insulting. These projects are more accurately the
> > red-headed
> > > stepchild projects.) This won't happen quickly, but we must make it a
> > goal
> > > to do better in this area.
> > >
> > > MZMcBride
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive*
> > Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia<
> > http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:nhasive>
> > Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia
> > Foundation
> > Social Media Interaction Expert | The Daily
> > Prothom-Alo
> > Bangladesh Ambassador | Open Knowledge Foundation Network
> > 
> > Treasurer | Bangladesh Open Source Network (BdOSN)  >
> > Task Force Member | Mozilla Bangladesh 
> > fb.com/nhasive | @nhasive  | Skype:
> > nhasive
> > | www.nhasive.com
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Anna Torres Adell
> Directora Ejecutiva
> *A.C Wikimedia Argentina*
>
> *Imprime este correo solo si es realmente necesario*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Amy Vossbrinck]

Hello Victor:

I continue to admire your persistence, and now it seems that of your
partner, to fully engage in the process of bringing your considerable
talent and seemingly boundless energy to making it possible for "very
single human being to freely share in the sum of all knowledge."

It reminds me of one of my favorite quotes from author James Baldwin:
"Those who say it can' be done are usually interrupted by others doing it.


Keep on keepin' on!

Amy






On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Victor Grigas 
wrote:

> My significant other applied for a grant and got 500 Wikireaders
> distributed to 3 schools:
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Aislinn_Dewey/Distribute_WikiReaders_to_Schools/Report
>
>
> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/help-distribute-wikireaders-and-provide-an-opportunity-for-kids-to-learn
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > On 28 May 2014 15:04, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
> > ...
> > > So that Wil's interest manifested around the time Lila was announced as
> > > the next ED seems to me to be perfectly natural, even if I have
> > > expressed serious concerns about *how* that interest was expressed.
> > > -- Marc
> >
> > There is a big difference between your partner having an interest in
> > your organization, and going on to publish public complaints about the
> > staff that you have complete authority and responsibility for
> > employing.
> >
> > I may be wrong, perhaps someone has some examples of where this worked
> > out well? The only examples from history and the political world I can
> > recall, did not.
> >
> > 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
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Victor Grigas*
> Storyteller 
> Wikimedia Foundation
> vgri...@wikimedia.org
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
*Amy Vossbrinck*
*Executive Assistant to the*
*Chief of Finance and Administration, Garfield Byrd*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
*149 New Montgomery Street*
*San Francisco, CA 94105*
*415.839.6885  ext 6628 <415.839.6885%20%C2%A0ext%206628>*
*avossbri...@wikimedia.org *
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[C. Scott Ananian]

You might be interested in look at projects like
http://schools-wikipedia.org/ and other "subset wikis".  When I worked
at One Laptop per Child we distributed a offline Wikipedia slice along
with the XO-1 laptops to many schools and children.  We were in fact
careful to curate our offline article/image slice to avoid
gratuitously inappropriate content.  We felt this to be an appropriate
thing for OLPC to do, for its audience, *not* something we expected
upstream Wikipedia to do.  There are many differences between a
"Children's Encyclopedia" and Britannica!  OLPC did not censor links
in any way, so a laptop connected to the internet could see and follow
links to any article/image on Wikipedia (not just articles/images in
our curated offline subset).  Often schools deployed their own
content-filtering firewalls on their network connections.  We felt
this was a matter best implemented and managed by the school, with
their own local community standards.

Erik and I were spitballing wiki ideas last week, and one of the
things we discussed was ways to make it easier for third parties to
curate wikipedia subsets, as OLPC and the schools project did.  It is
certainly already possible, but it could be made easier.   If you are
interested in making a "child friendly wikipedia", that is certainly
one way to go at it, and the ground is well trod.
  --scott

-- 
(http://cscott.net)

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

> Ah, this segues well into the email I was just drafting: I have to say that
> I was surprised to see the contents of what appears to be an internal staff
> email being brought up both on Wikipediocracy and here by a non-staff
> member. Wil, can you clarify if you were copied on the email, and if not,
> how you gained access to it? You've repeatedly emphasized that you are not
> affiliated with/do not influence/are completely separate from the WMF, and
> even that you and Lila are not even discussing Wikimedia-related matters
> with one another at home, so I'm sure you can understand the confusion.
>
> Yours,
> Molly (GorillaWarfare)

Of course. While I was talking to you and others on IRC, Lila came
over and asked me to stop. She usually doesn't do that under any
circumstances, because she respects my right to say what I want where
I want. She replied "a WMF employee emailed me that there are safety
concerns, and safety of my employees is a matter that I can't
compromise on." She didn't say who wrote her or what their specific
concerns were, but I'm not about to cause anyone concern over their
safety personally + Lila felt she was responsible for the employee's
well being in this case. I did find it somewhat annoying, since it
certainly wasn't anything that I said there that would cause safety
concerns and no one msg'd me about it directly. I just asked why
badmachine was kicked and about the rather mean manner under which he
was kicked. But I told you guys why I was leaving and left. FWIW, I
don't plan on coming back anytime soon.

This was the first time that Lila told me anything about internal
matters, and it was limited to exactly what I wrote above. Frankly, I
don't want to know about WMF's affairs, and I'm taking action to avoid
knowing anything more for the foreseeable future.

,Wil

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Craig Franklin]

On 29 May 2014 07:13, Thomas Morton  wrote:

> >
> > Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be
> > changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the
> > content on Commons. I'd also like to hear about specific examples of
> > content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their
> > children. Note that this is not a repeat of the discussion to
> > understand what policies are in place, as I have already opened a
> > specific thread for that.
> >
>
> You seem to have conflated two items here... one is the idea of child
> protection, and the other is of objectionable items on commons. I don't
> think that in any way works.
>

Indeed, and the "unexpected search results on Commons" matter has been
discussed at length here and on the projects, and at length, and recently.
 I don't think there's any reluctance to discuss this, there is a general
consensus that there's a problem, but different folks offer different
solutions.  On the other hand, coming out with ways to protect minors from
predators on our projects, without throwing out the bathwater as well,
would probably be an interesting discussion that I don't recall being
raised here recently.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Wil Sinclair]

Sorry, the n00b has to step in with a couple of clarifications. :) I
was asking about 2 separate issues, so no conflation there.

Also I asked very carefully for *all* sides of the issues: "Now, I'll
just sit back and hear all sides of the story."

All right, back on topic! :)

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Thomas Morton
 wrote:
>>
>> Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be
>> changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the
>> content on Commons. I'd also like to hear about specific examples of
>> content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their
>> children. Note that this is not a repeat of the discussion to
>> understand what policies are in place, as I have already opened a
>> specific thread for that.
>>
>
> You seem to have conflated two items here... one is the idea of child
> protection, and the other is of objectionable items on commons. I don't
> think that in any way works.
>
> Our child protection policies are about protecting children when they
> interact online. This is a perennial problem for any internet site, as I am
> sure you know. We do have some policies that help a lot (for example,
> admins always err on the side of caution and delete personal details that
> underage editors post). We have avenues to report potential issues such as
> grooming.
>
> Could more be done? Yes, I've thought so; for example publicising the
> problem more.
>
> But is WP worse that other communities (note; not site) of similar size?
> Probably not. At least not in my experience (which, of course, is pretty
> extensive given my former job).
>
> Child protection from porn, etc.? I think it's well established that kids
> can come across porn anywhere (apparently, Facebook, if my cousins'
> activity on there are anything to go by :S). And frankly, it's never struck
> me as an issue under the umbrella of "xhild protection".
>
> How far does policing it become our job and not that of a parent? It's a
> difficult decision... especially when browser-based content filters are
> prevelant and easy to set up.
>
> I've always said; we should educate our users about how to install and use
> content filters, as this will benefit them outside WP too!
>
> So then, on the flip side of your comment here you have the global issue of
> objectionable images.
>
> This is a much broader issue that the narrow one you're focusing on here.
> For example, one of the main (and by main I mean constant and persistent,
> beyond any complaints of porn!) complaints we see relate to images of the
> prophet mohammed.
>
> How do you, then, feel about Commons hosting images like that?
>
> One of the tenets of the projects are that they are not censored, which I
> think is a good thing. However, we've not yet struck a balance between
> displaying everything and filtering things an individual doesn't want to
> see.
>
> I like the Mohammed example because it emphasises the problem where those
> of us who are not Muslim find a subset of images perfectly okay, but a
> Muslim might not.
>
>
>
>>
>> Since I don't have enough experience with the community and WP yet to
>> discuss controversial topics myself, I will not chime in unless the
>> thread has very obviously gone off topic. Just to pick an arbitrary
>> about of time that is more than the few months that others have
>> mentioned here, let's say that you can only participate in this
>> discussion if you have at least one year of experience as an active
>> contributor.
>>
>
> I'm not sure what purpose it serves to bring up controversial topics, in
> this forum, with an express note that you have nothing new to bring? ;)
>
> Not to be too critical; but do you imagine that these issues aren't being
> discussed on the various projects - hopefully with incremental improvement
> each time. Or that individuals here are not aware of them?
>
> More than anything though, I'm sure you're an experienced internet chap -
> what did you expect to recieve in stirring up two relatively ingrained
> "sides"? It wasn't very deft, I have to observe :)
>
> One thing it might be important to communicate is that whilst this list is
> useful for global discussion, it's not a venue that any agreement or
> consensus is reached. So these discussions are really best conducted
> on-wiki. I'm not sure if you've actually attempted to open such topics on
> any of the projects, but the discussion you appear to be looking for can
> really only happen there (rather than here, or IRC, for example).
>
> Regards,
> Tom
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.o

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Pete Forsyth]

Dear Lila,

I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the Wikimedia
community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of tactics
you will employ in seeking those outcomes.

Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody with
a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to establish
yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?

I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've never
seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't imagine
what more effective path he could have chosen.

I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still getting
to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder what
others think of it. Does anybody know if the following quote is accurate?
And regardless of whether it's accurate or not -- the events of the last
week have certainly made it seem plausible, haven't they?

Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be introduced
to the Wikimedia community and the world?


   - * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
   never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that
   he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
   investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I
   personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
   Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014


http://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Directory%3AGregory_J._Kohs&diff=463158&oldid=462896#Cheers

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> This is a personal note to clarify a some questions that recently came up,
> specifically in the context of my role as the incoming ED.
>
>
> My partner Wil and I are partners in our private lives. We have always both
> been extremely independent, and we respect that in each other. That said we
> have different roles: I am the Executive Director with responsibilities
> towards the Foundation and the movement, and he is an independent community
> member with his own voice.
>
> I make my decisions using my own professional judgement in conjunction with
> input from the community and staff. I don’t consult Wil on these matters,
> ask him to do anything on my behalf or monitor his engagements with the
> community. When I speak here, it is in my capacity as an ED.
>
> Wil, on the other hand, has a very strong personal interest in the
> community and agreat deal of curiosity about how the Wikimedia
> projectswork. It is very important to him that he remains an
> independent individual
> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
> employees.
>
> I hope this addresses some of the questions and draws distinction between
> my role as ED and Wil’s participation as an independent member. If you have
> any questions for Wil you can reach him directly. If you have any questions
> for me or the WMF, you can get a hold of me by email or on my talk page.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lila
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Fæ]

On 28 May 2014 22:57, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
...
> Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be introduced
> to the Wikimedia community and the world?
>
>- * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
>never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that
>he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
>investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I
>personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
>Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014

Thanks for highlighting this Pete, I had no idea that Wil wrote this
(unless someone is spoofing him).

Lila, you need to explain what game is being played here. Perhaps you
intend to shock the established community? You succeeded.

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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
call on what he puts on his own site.

Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
that's all just my opinion.

I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
to the list this time. :)

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
> Dear Lila,
>
> I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the Wikimedia
> community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of tactics
> you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
>
> Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody with
> a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
> disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
> legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to establish
> yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?
>
> I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've never
> seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
> frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't imagine
> what more effective path he could have chosen.
>
> I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still getting
> to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder what
> others think of it. Does anybody know if the following quote is accurate?
> And regardless of whether it's accurate or not -- the events of the last
> week have certainly made it seem plausible, haven't they?
>
> Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be introduced
> to the Wikimedia community and the world?
>
>
>- * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
>never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that
>he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
>investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I
>personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
>Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014
>
>
> http://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Directory%3AGregory_J._Kohs&diff=463158&oldid=462896#Cheers
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This is a personal note to clarify a some questions that recently came up,
>> specifically in the context of my role as the incoming ED.
>>
>>
>> My partner Wil and I are partners in our private lives. We have always both
>> been extremely independent, and we respect that in each other. That said we
>> have different roles: I am the Executive Director with responsibilities
>> towards the Foundation and the movement, and he is an independent community
>> member with his own voice.
>>
>> I make my decisions using my own professional judgement in conjunction with
>> input from the community and staff. I don’t consult Wil on these matters,
>> ask him to do anything on my behalf or monitor his engagements with the
>> community. When I speak here, it is in my capacity as an ED.
>>
>> Wil, on the other hand, has a very strong personal interest in the
>> community and agreat deal of curiosity about how the Wikimedia
>> projectswork. It is very important to him that he remains an
>> independent individual
>> able to speak with his own voice and ask his own questions. He does not
>> take direction from me. He will not work for the WMF or engage with the WMF
>> employees.
>>
>> I hope this addresses some of the questions and draws distinction between
>> my role as ED and Wil’s participation as an independent member. If you have
>> any questions for Wil you can reach him directly. If you have any questions
>> for me or the WMF, you can get a hold of me by email or on my talk page.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lila
>> __

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The first three weeks.

[Lila Tretikov]

Thank you, Risker -- we do have lots of work to do :)


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Risker  wrote:

> It is great to hear how you are working to learn about the vast Wikimedia
> community, its projects, its priorities and its challenges, Lila.
>
> I'm thinking there's something else that all of us should help you
> celebrate as well:  after only a few weeks on the job, being named to the
> Forbes list of the 100 most powerful women:
> http://www.forbes.com/profile/lila-tretikov/
>
> That's a great start.
>
>
> Risker
>
>
> On 28 May 2014 08:58, Anna Torres  wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Great to hearing your experience. As being a new ED too (3 months now) I
> > can indentify myself with your experience: the first month is about
> > listening and getting to know :)
> >
> > All the best for what is to come! Hope to meeting you asap!
> >
> > Hugs from Argentina.
> >
> >
> > 2014-05-28 2:48 GMT-03:00 Nurunnaby Chowdhury :
> >
> > > +1
> > > Thank you for this write-up. Happy to read..:)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:24 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Lila Tretikov wrote:
> > > > >I wanted to give you an update on my first three weeks of Wikimedia
> > > > >immersion -- this will also go on the blog.  As you probably
> noticed,
> > my
> > > > >leadership approach is rooted in observation and focused discussions
> > --
> > > > >this means I watch and listen more than I talk. But I expect that
> you
> > > are
> > > > >probably curious about what I have observed and learned so far, and
> to
> > > > >know a little more about who I am.
> > > > >
> > > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for this write-up. It was nice to read. :-)
> > > >
> > > > >Your recommendations on areas you see as priorities for development
> > > > >(while keeping in mind that not everything can be a priority at
> > > > >once!); [...]
> > > >
> > > > I think this continues to be a huge pain point. Developer resources
> are
> > > > scarce and expensive and there's often a feeling that the latest
> > > Wikimedia
> > > > Foundation initiatives trump all other worthwhile projects. I think
> we
> > > > need to find a better way to more fairly allocate resources.
> > > >
> > > > As a concrete example, there continue to be dozens of Wikimedia
> > > Foundation
> > > > developers and other staff specifically focused on the English
> > Wikipedia
> > > > and sometimes Wikimedia Commons, while the other sister projects such
> > as
> > > > Wiktionary, Wikibooks, and Wikisource continue to receive almost no
> > > direct
> > > > attention. (Over the past few years, even the term "sister projects"
> > has
> > > > become mildly insulting. These projects are more accurately the
> > > red-headed
> > > > stepchild projects.) This won't happen quickly, but we must make it a
> > > goal
> > > > to do better in this area.
> > > >
> > > > MZMcBride
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive*
> > > Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia<
> > > http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:nhasive>
> > > Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia
> > > Foundation
> > > Social Media Interaction Expert | The Daily
> > > Prothom-Alo
> > > Bangladesh Ambassador | Open Knowledge Foundation Network
> > > 
> > > Treasurer | Bangladesh Open Source Network (BdOSN) <
> http://www.bdosn.org
> > >
> > > Task Force Member | Mozilla Bangladesh 
> > > fb.com/nhasive | @nhasive  | Skype:
> > > nhasive
> > > | www.nhasive.com
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Anna Torres Adell
> > Directora Ejecutiva
> > *A.C Wikimedia Argentina*
> >
> > *Imprime este correo solo si es realmente necesario*
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org<
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikim

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Fæ]

Wil, you are supporting a man that thought it was a hilarious joke to
call me a faggot. Not something that I am prepared to overlook, ever.

I now have serious reservations about Lila's good judgement in failing
to ensure you were appropriately advised, considering her critical
role in the Wikimedia movement.

Fae

On 28 May 2014 23:18, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
> call on what he puts on his own site.
>
> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
> that's all just my opinion.
>
> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
> to the list this time. :)
>
> ,Wil

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

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 strategic plan

[Kevin Gorman]

I don't think that it's meant to imply that the entire next strategic plan
will focus on agility, only that one of our strategic priorities is likely
to be building a greater capacity to rapidly react to unexpected
developments than we've had in the past. So - reacting quickly and
accurately when necessary as a priority, but certainly not the whole plan.
 (I can't speak for WMF, but I'd be pretty surprised if they intended their
whole plan to focus on agility.)

Best,
Kevin Gorman


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:45 AM, rupert THURNER
wrote:

> Am 28.05.2014 09:31 schrieb "ENWP Pine" :
> >
> > Hi, can someone with knowledge of WMF's thinking expand on this statement
> from Lila?
> >
> > "Starting the process for our next strategic planning exercise, which
> will be different from last time, and focused on improving our ability to
> react quickly and adjust as necessary to opportunities and challenges."
> >
> > Is this implying that the entire strategic plan will focus on agility, or
> that agility will be a priority in the next strategic plan?
>
> _that_ is a real pleasure to hear ... and if the basic principles are set
> and with them it is assured no quick jumping left, jumping right happens
> before things get a chance to properly mature it would be even more
> pleasure.
>
> Rupert
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Jasper Deng]

Wil, we talked about this on IRC, so I won't repeat what I said. But what I
did *not* say is that the foundation tends to let the community do what it
wants, and it would be against that long-standing tradition for staff to
try to force a change in the community.

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
> call on what he puts on his own site.
>
> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
> that's all just my opinion.
>
> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
> to the list this time. :)
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
> > Dear Lila,
> >
> > I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the
> Wikimedia
> > community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of tactics
> > you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
> >
> > Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody
> with
> > a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
> > disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
> > legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to establish
> > yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?
> >
> > I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've
> never
> > seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
> > frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't imagine
> > what more effective path he could have chosen.
> >
> > I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still
> getting
> > to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder
> what
> > others think of it. Does anybody know if the following quote is accurate?
> > And regardless of whether it's accurate or not -- the events of the last
> > week have certainly made it seem plausible, haven't they?
> >
> > Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be
> introduced
> > to the Wikimedia community and the world?
> >
> >
> >- * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
> >never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware
> that
> >he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
> >investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I
> >personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
> >Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014
> >
> >
> >
> http://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Directory%3AGregory_J._Kohs&diff=463158&oldid=462896#Cheers
> >
> > -Pete
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Lila Tretikov 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> This is a personal note to clarify a some questions that recently came
> up,
> >> specifically in the context of my role as the incoming ED.
> >>
> >>
> >> My partner Wil and I are partners in our private lives. We have always
> both
> >> been extremely independent, and we respect that in each other. That
> said we
> >> have different roles: I am the Executive Director with responsibilities
> >> towards the Foundation and the movement, and he is an independent
> community
> >> member with his own voice.
> >>
> >> I make my decisions using my own professional judgement in conjunction
> with
> >> input from the community and staff. I don’t consult Wil on these
> matters,
> >> ask him to do anything on my behalf or monitor his engagements with the
> >> community. When I speak here, it is in my capacity as an ED.
> >>
> >> Wil, on the other hand, has a very strong personal interest in the
> >> community and agreat deal of curiosity about how the Wikimedia
> >> projectswork. It is very important to him that he remains an
> >> independent individual
> >> able to speak 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Thyge]

Please raise and discuss questions about policy on meta. This is not the
place.

Regards,
Thyge


2014-05-28 23:54 GMT+02:00 Wil Sinclair :

> Sorry, the n00b has to step in with a couple of clarifications. :) I
> was asking about 2 separate issues, so no conflation there.
>
> Also I asked very carefully for *all* sides of the issues: "Now, I'll
> just sit back and hear all sides of the story."
>
> All right, back on topic! :)
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Thomas Morton
>  wrote:
> >>
> >> Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be
> >> changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the
> >> content on Commons. I'd also like to hear about specific examples of
> >> content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their
> >> children. Note that this is not a repeat of the discussion to
> >> understand what policies are in place, as I have already opened a
> >> specific thread for that.
> >>
> >
> > You seem to have conflated two items here... one is the idea of child
> > protection, and the other is of objectionable items on commons. I don't
> > think that in any way works.
> >
> > Our child protection policies are about protecting children when they
> > interact online. This is a perennial problem for any internet site, as I
> am
> > sure you know. We do have some policies that help a lot (for example,
> > admins always err on the side of caution and delete personal details that
> > underage editors post). We have avenues to report potential issues such
> as
> > grooming.
> >
> > Could more be done? Yes, I've thought so; for example publicising the
> > problem more.
> >
> > But is WP worse that other communities (note; not site) of similar size?
> > Probably not. At least not in my experience (which, of course, is pretty
> > extensive given my former job).
> >
> > Child protection from porn, etc.? I think it's well established that kids
> > can come across porn anywhere (apparently, Facebook, if my cousins'
> > activity on there are anything to go by :S). And frankly, it's never
> struck
> > me as an issue under the umbrella of "xhild protection".
> >
> > How far does policing it become our job and not that of a parent? It's a
> > difficult decision... especially when browser-based content filters are
> > prevelant and easy to set up.
> >
> > I've always said; we should educate our users about how to install and
> use
> > content filters, as this will benefit them outside WP too!
> >
> > So then, on the flip side of your comment here you have the global issue
> of
> > objectionable images.
> >
> > This is a much broader issue that the narrow one you're focusing on here.
> > For example, one of the main (and by main I mean constant and persistent,
> > beyond any complaints of porn!) complaints we see relate to images of the
> > prophet mohammed.
> >
> > How do you, then, feel about Commons hosting images like that?
> >
> > One of the tenets of the projects are that they are not censored, which I
> > think is a good thing. However, we've not yet struck a balance between
> > displaying everything and filtering things an individual doesn't want to
> > see.
> >
> > I like the Mohammed example because it emphasises the problem where those
> > of us who are not Muslim find a subset of images perfectly okay, but a
> > Muslim might not.
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Since I don't have enough experience with the community and WP yet to
> >> discuss controversial topics myself, I will not chime in unless the
> >> thread has very obviously gone off topic. Just to pick an arbitrary
> >> about of time that is more than the few months that others have
> >> mentioned here, let's say that you can only participate in this
> >> discussion if you have at least one year of experience as an active
> >> contributor.
> >>
> >
> > I'm not sure what purpose it serves to bring up controversial topics, in
> > this forum, with an express note that you have nothing new to bring? ;)
> >
> > Not to be too critical; but do you imagine that these issues aren't being
> > discussed on the various projects - hopefully with incremental
> improvement
> > each time. Or that individuals here are not aware of them?
> >
> > More than anything though, I'm sure you're an experienced internet chap -
> > what did you expect to recieve in stirring up two relatively ingrained
> > "sides"? It wasn't very deft, I have to observe :)
> >
> > One thing it might be important to communicate is that whilst this list
> is
> > useful for global discussion, it's not a venue that any agreement or
> > consensus is reached. So these discussions are really best conducted
> > on-wiki. I'm not sure if you've actually attempted to open such topics on
> > any of the projects, but the discussion you appear to be looking for can
> > really only happen there (rather than here, or IRC, for example).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tom
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

I thought she did explain it. I act on my own behalf. I'm not
introducing Lila to anyone for any purpose. Man, I am getting tired of
writing that, and I can imagine that you're tired of reading it. We've
both already answered this question.

Everything I said about Greg there is true in *my* opinion, and I
think this is probably the most clear-cut attempt at guilt by
association I've ever witnessed online. But whatever- I said, you
spread it. Thanks for getting my perspective out there.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Fæ  wrote:
> On 28 May 2014 22:57, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
> ...
>> Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be introduced
>> to the Wikimedia community and the world?
>>
>>- * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
>>never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that
>>he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
>>investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I
>>personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
>>Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014
>
> Thanks for highlighting this Pete, I had no idea that Wil wrote this
> (unless someone is spoofing him).
>
> Lila, you need to explain what game is being played here. Perhaps you
> intend to shock the established community? You succeeded.
>
> 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

I didn't know that he called you a "faggot." Could you please show me where?

I mentioned I didn't agree with him on everything. I certainly would
*never* agree that a slur like that is justified, if he did make it.
In any case, the quote stands. Maybe we should start a separate thread
on the quote itself?

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Fæ  wrote:
> Wil, you are supporting a man that thought it was a hilarious joke to
> call me a faggot. Not something that I am prepared to overlook, ever.
>
> I now have serious reservations about Lila's good judgement in failing
> to ensure you were appropriately advised, considering her critical
> role in the Wikimedia movement.
>
> Fae
>
> On 28 May 2014 23:18, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
>> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
>> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
>> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
>> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
>> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
>> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
>> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
>> call on what he puts on his own site.
>>
>> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
>> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
>> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
>> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
>> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
>> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
>> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
>> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
>> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
>> that's all just my opinion.
>>
>> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
>> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
>> to the list this time. :)
>>
>> ,Wil
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Martijn Hoekstra]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Martijn asked me which things I thought that some people on this list
> don't want anyone to discuss, so here are the two examples that I'm
> most interested in:
>
> Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be
> changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the
> content on Commons.


There is content on Wikipedia and on Commons, and probably on other
projects as well, that most probably doesn't find suitable for children.
What makes the matter worse is that some searches that one doesn't expect
to bring up sexually explicit content do in fact bring it up, i.e. the
famous toothbrush image. There are a couple of separate questions.

* Is the presence of sexually explicit material on commons a problem? Why?
* Is the abundance of sexually explicit material on commons a problem? Why?
* Is the unexpectedly turning up of the sexually explicit material on
commons a problem? Why?

Most agree that the presence of sexually explicit material on commons in
itself is not a problem in itself, and if it is, hosting some educational
material on sexually explicit subjects is more important than shielding
children from accessing the material.

The abundance of sexually explicit material on commons is odd, and probably
worthless. We frankly don't need any more low quality pictures and videos
of penises, masturbation, and other sexual acts that we already have lots
of. Does it really hurt us to have so much of it though? As long as it
doesn't get in the way, I'd say no. I'm not a commons person, and I know
that loads of low quality redundant sexually explicit images have already
been deleted - because it does get in the way. Should more be deleted?
Likely. Should all of it be deleted? No. So what should we do? On each
upload ask if it is a low quality sexually explicit image that doesn't
really add anything to the content that's already there? That makes for an
odd upload form. Ask those uploading not to upload more? I do believe we're
already doing that, to little effect. (correct me if I'm wrong, if we're
not, we probably should) But again, it's not it's presence that's a
problem, it's its in-the-wayness.

It has been argued, and I agree with that, that there are two categories of
people finding sexually explicit material in commons. Those explicitly
trying to find it, and those that come across it by accident. This goes for
all age groups. I think it's fairly reasonable to say that those looking
for it will find it no matter what, and that shouldn't be the focus of
improvement. What should be a focus, is improving the search functionality
so that the accidental doesn't happen, or at least doesn't happen so
ridiculously often as it does now: that is what I mean with it being in the
way, as demonstrated by the famous toothbrush search result. Categorization
and tagging could play a large role in this, as well as (recently
implemented) improvements in the search back-end. It's something that has
recently been brought up on this list. I'm horrible with the archives, but
I'm sure someone else will be able to point to the relevant discussion, and
what, if anything, has been undertaken on commons to act on this, or what
blockers we still have.

Now I've focused only on sexually explicit content, because that's whats
mostly what bothers people. Obviously, there is lots of other material I
wouldn't like to expose children to. There has been a recent discussion
about (valuable, suitable, and greatly disturbing) video material of WWII
concentration camps being on the front page of commons. There is also a lot
of images of medical issues that aren't the nicest to look at to put it
mildly, and there is a lot of material on the atrocities of war as well.
The first and third arguments go for this as well.

These problems are discussed frequently and have been quite recently. We
haven't found and implemented a solution though. What I can say is that the
'objectional images on commons' subject is a frequent subject for this
mailinglist. It's not that we don't want anyone to discuss it, but more
that we discuss it all the time, would love to fix it, and haven't been
able yet. Which makes many a little annoyed with someone from the outside
coming in with an 'hey, hey, what about all the dick pics on commons? Did
you know about those?'. We know, we're all annoyed with it, not only
because it makes us a just target of ridicule, but more importantly because
we've went over it again and again, quite often and quite recently, and we
haven't got an answer yet. The community has discussed the fairly obvious
option - an image filter - at great length, and didn't find that an
acceptable solution.



> I'd also like to hear about specific examples of
> content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their
> children.


lots and lots and lots. It's not hard to find. I've already touched on some
subjects above, it should be easy to find.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Fæ]

Wil, ask Kohs to repeat his filth. I'm not going to do it for him.

Fae

On 28 May 2014 23:37, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> I didn't know that he called you a "faggot." Could you please show me where?
>
> I mentioned I didn't agree with him on everything. I certainly would
> *never* agree that a slur like that is justified, if he did make it.
> In any case, the quote stands. Maybe we should start a separate thread
> on the quote itself?
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>> Wil, you are supporting a man that thought it was a hilarious joke to
>> call me a faggot. Not something that I am prepared to overlook, ever.
>>
>> I now have serious reservations about Lila's good judgement in failing
>> to ensure you were appropriately advised, considering her critical
>> role in the Wikimedia movement.
>>
>> Fae
>>
>> On 28 May 2014 23:18, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>>> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
>>> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
>>> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
>>> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
>>> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
>>> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
>>> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
>>> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
>>> call on what he puts on his own site.
>>>
>>> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
>>> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
>>> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
>>> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
>>> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
>>> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
>>> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
>>> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
>>> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
>>> that's all just my opinion.
>>>
>>> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
>>> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
>>> to the list this time. :)
>>>
>>> ,Wil
>>
>> --
>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> 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
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 



-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Russavia]

Wil,

Have you been introduced to Jimmy Wales yet?

I'd be most interested for you to take your quote about Greg Kohs to
Jimmy on his talk page
(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&action=edit§ion=new)
and ask him if he would agree with you.

Also, please note that here on wikimedia-l you are reaching only a
small audience, you will likely get a wider audience at Jimmy's talk
page, and therefore a wider variety of opinion.

We'd then be most interested in hearing about your findings.

Cheers,

Russavia

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Yes, we did talk on IRC. But what are you referring to? I wasn't
referring to you anywhere. I don't even remember talking about WMF's
role in the community. I guess if you have a log of that part of the
conversation, you should post it now. I may have a log in my own
client, if you don't mind my posting it.

I think it's becoming abundantly clear why I think it's best if I
don't interact with WMF employees in private.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Jasper Deng  wrote:
> Wil, we talked about this on IRC, so I won't repeat what I said. But what I
> did *not* say is that the foundation tends to let the community do what it
> wants, and it would be against that long-standing tradition for staff to
> try to force a change in the community.
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
>> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
>> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
>> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
>> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
>> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
>> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
>> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
>> call on what he puts on his own site.
>>
>> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
>> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
>> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
>> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
>> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
>> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
>> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
>> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
>> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
>> that's all just my opinion.
>>
>> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
>> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
>> to the list this time. :)
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth 
>> wrote:
>> > Dear Lila,
>> >
>> > I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the
>> Wikimedia
>> > community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of tactics
>> > you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
>> >
>> > Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody
>> with
>> > a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
>> > disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
>> > legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to establish
>> > yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?
>> >
>> > I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've
>> never
>> > seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
>> > frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't imagine
>> > what more effective path he could have chosen.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still
>> getting
>> > to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder
>> what
>> > others think of it. Does anybody know if the following quote is accurate?
>> > And regardless of whether it's accurate or not -- the events of the last
>> > week have certainly made it seem plausible, haven't they?
>> >
>> > Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be
>> introduced
>> > to the Wikimedia community and the world?
>> >
>> >
>> >- * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
>> >never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware
>> that
>> >he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
>> >investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I
>> >personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
>> >Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> http://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Directory%3AGregory_J._Kohs&diff=463158&oldid=462896#Cheers
>> >
>> > -Pete
>> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Lila Tretikov 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> This is a personal note to clarify a some questions that recently came
>> up,
>> >> specifically in the context of my role as the incoming ED.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> My partner Wil and I are partners in our private lives. We have always
>> both
>> >> been extremely independent, and we respect that in each other. That
>> said we
>> >> have different roles: I am the Executive Director with responsibilities
>> >> towards the Foundation and the movement, and he is an independent
>> community
>> >> member 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Jasper Deng]

I mean, you referred to Lila as a potential source of change in the
community's problems in your email right before mine on this thread. If you
meant the community of the wikis, I'm just saying that it wouldn't really
be kosher according to our current practices.


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Yes, we did talk on IRC. But what are you referring to? I wasn't
> referring to you anywhere. I don't even remember talking about WMF's
> role in the community. I guess if you have a log of that part of the
> conversation, you should post it now. I may have a log in my own
> client, if you don't mind my posting it.
>
> I think it's becoming abundantly clear why I think it's best if I
> don't interact with WMF employees in private.
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Jasper Deng 
> wrote:
> > Wil, we talked about this on IRC, so I won't repeat what I said. But
> what I
> > did *not* say is that the foundation tends to let the community do what
> it
> > wants, and it would be against that long-standing tradition for staff to
> > try to force a change in the community.
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
> >> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
> >> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
> >> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
> >> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
> >> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
> >> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
> >> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
> >> call on what he puts on his own site.
> >>
> >> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
> >> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
> >> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
> >> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
> >> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
> >> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
> >> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
> >> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
> >> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
> >> that's all just my opinion.
> >>
> >> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
> >> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
> >> to the list this time. :)
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> >> wrote:
> >> > Dear Lila,
> >> >
> >> > I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the
> >> Wikimedia
> >> > community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of
> tactics
> >> > you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
> >> >
> >> > Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody
> >> with
> >> > a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
> >> > disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
> >> > legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to
> establish
> >> > yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?
> >> >
> >> > I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've
> >> never
> >> > seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
> >> > frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't
> imagine
> >> > what more effective path he could have chosen.
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still
> >> getting
> >> > to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder
> >> what
> >> > others think of it. Does anybody know if the following quote is
> accurate?
> >> > And regardless of whether it's accurate or not -- the events of the
> last
> >> > week have certainly made it seem plausible, haven't they?
> >> >
> >> > Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be
> >> introduced
> >> > to the Wikimedia community and the world?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >- * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
> >> >never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well
> aware
> >> that
> >> >he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
> >> >investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word,
> and I
> >> >personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
> >> >Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> http://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Directory%3AGregory_J._Kohs&diff=463158&oldid=462896#Cheers
> >> >
> >> > -Pete
> >> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Lila Tretikov 
> >> w

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Pete Forsyth]

All:

I don't know the first thing about the alleged safety concerns discussed on
IRC, but the following quote is troubling to me:

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> She replied "a WMF employee emailed me that there are safety
> concerns,


It seems that Wil has chosen to repeat something that was said privately,
about personal safety, in a public forum. It seems likely to me that this
kind of choice would tend to *increase* potential danger, not decrease it.

I'd like to suggest that Wil's access to this email list be blocked, at
least as a temporary measure. I think his behavior here has been reckless
in a number of ways. This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do think
we need to protect this list from further flooding.

I don't know much about the precedents for list access removal, but I
suspect that consensus among active Wikimedians would be pretty strong at
this point. Can anybody comment on what would be necessary to make this
happen?

Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Greg, would you like to repeat your filth? He may need someone to post
it in surrogate, since I believe he said he's banned here.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Fæ  wrote:
> Wil, ask Kohs to repeat his filth. I'm not going to do it for him.
>
> Fae
>
> On 28 May 2014 23:37, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>> I didn't know that he called you a "faggot." Could you please show me where?
>>
>> I mentioned I didn't agree with him on everything. I certainly would
>> *never* agree that a slur like that is justified, if he did make it.
>> In any case, the quote stands. Maybe we should start a separate thread
>> on the quote itself?
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>>> Wil, you are supporting a man that thought it was a hilarious joke to
>>> call me a faggot. Not something that I am prepared to overlook, ever.
>>>
>>> I now have serious reservations about Lila's good judgement in failing
>>> to ensure you were appropriately advised, considering her critical
>>> role in the Wikimedia movement.
>>>
>>> Fae
>>>
>>> On 28 May 2014 23:18, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
 First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
 uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
 the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
 petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
 doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
 personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
 Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
 I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
 call on what he puts on his own site.

 Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
 but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
 leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
 point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
 charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
 it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
 here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
 problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
 going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
 that's all just my opinion.

 I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
 so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
 to the list this time. :)

 ,Wil
>>>
>>> --
>>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>> 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
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
>> 
>
>
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

You *can't* be serious. Now I'm *really* starting to get the idea that
you guys just want to shut me up. And you're using the fact that I'm
actually being very open about something to justify it. This is
extremely worrying if everyone else on this list agrees with you.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
> l:
>
> I don't know the first thing about the alleged safety concerns discussed on
> IRC, but the following quote is troubling to me:
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> She replied "a WMF employee emailed me that there are safety
>> concerns,
>
>
> It seems that Wil has chosen to repeat something that was said privately,
> about personal safety, in a public forum. It seems likely to me that this
> kind of choice would tend to *increase* potential danger, not decrease it.
>
> I'd like to suggest that Wil's access to this email list be blocked, at
> least as a temporary measure. I think his behavior here has been reckless
> in a number of ways. This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do think
> we need to protect this list from further flooding.
>
> I don't know much about the precedents for list access removal, but I
> suspect that consensus among active Wikimedians would be pretty strong at
> this point. Can anybody comment on what would be necessary to make this
> happen?
>
> Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Someone already mentioned me on his talk page, and I responded. Please
do paste that quote there if you think he'd be interested in it. I
know he and Greg have disagreed in the past; he may offer me a
different perspective on the matter. I'm interested in everyone's
perspective.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Russavia  wrote:
> Wil,
>
> Have you been introduced to Jimmy Wales yet?
>
> I'd be most interested for you to take your quote about Greg Kohs to
> Jimmy on his talk page
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&action=edit§ion=new)
> and ask him if he would agree with you.
>
> Also, please note that here on wikimedia-l you are reaching only a
> small audience, you will likely get a wider audience at Jimmy's talk
> page, and therefore a wider variety of opinion.
>
> We'd then be most interested in hearing about your findings.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Russavia
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Kevin Gorman]

... I wish I kept more up to date on this set of threads and had stepped in
to say something sooner.  I'm going to go ahead and say that I agree with
Pete that at this juncture the most beneficial course of action would
probably be for Wil to back this set of discussions for at least a few
days, if necessary even by putting Wil on temporary moderation as bizarre
as that sounds.  Wil: I'm going to type a private email after I send this
to you, and I promise the last thing I desire is to shut you up - you're
just currently running through a minefield with no map, and it would be
much better if you had a map before continuing.

Kevin Gorman



On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> You *can't* be serious. Now I'm *really* starting to get the idea that
> you guys just want to shut me up. And you're using the fact that I'm
> actually being very open about something to justify it. This is
> extremely worrying if everyone else on this list agrees with you.
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
> > l:
> >
> > I don't know the first thing about the alleged safety concerns discussed
> on
> > IRC, but the following quote is troubling to me:
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> She replied "a WMF employee emailed me that there are safety
> >> concerns,
> >
> >
> > It seems that Wil has chosen to repeat something that was said privately,
> > about personal safety, in a public forum. It seems likely to me that this
> > kind of choice would tend to *increase* potential danger, not decrease
> it.
> >
> > I'd like to suggest that Wil's access to this email list be blocked, at
> > least as a temporary measure. I think his behavior here has been reckless
> > in a number of ways. This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do
> think
> > we need to protect this list from further flooding.
> >
> > I don't know much about the precedents for list access removal, but I
> > suspect that consensus among active Wikimedians would be pretty strong at
> > this point. Can anybody comment on what would be necessary to make this
> > happen?
> >
> > Pete
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Erik Moeller]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do think
> we need to protect this list from further flooding.

As a reminder, this list has an official "soft limit" of 30 posts per
individual/month, as stated on
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l . It's encouraged for
participants to stay below this limit in order for the conversation(s)
not to be dominated by a single participant. In a listserv context,
this is especially important, because it's a "push" medium that gets
delivered directly to people's inboxes (contrary to a web forum), in
some cases without filters.

By my count, Wil has posted to this list >50 times this month, which
is a bit excessive.

Wil: I would encourage you to respect the norms of this list and
refrain from excessive posting. I don't see an issue with any of the
_topics_ you're wanting to talk about, just the volume/frequency at
which you've been doing it.

Cheers,

Erik

-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

I didn't really mention anything specifically, except a leader who
could "change the concerning aspects of the WP community." It has been
WMF's stated goal to change things like the participation of women on
WP for years. I suppose it would be most accurate to say that I meant
the things that the WMF has been very publicly trying to change about
the community and WP for years now. I believe these goals are shared
by Lila, but we haven't really discussed them.

You know, that's strange. Everything you guys are adding to this
thread could be used to discredit me in the eyes of various parts of
the community. I really hope that isn't the case, but it wouldn't
change my behavior if it were. I encourage everyone to read these
threads and make up their minds for themselves. Keep in mind that some
of the characterizations of what people have said haven't been
substantiated yet. Maybe some more evidence will come to light on this
thread.

Thanks.
,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Jasper Deng  wrote:
> I mean, you referred to Lila as a potential source of change in the
> community's problems in your email right before mine on this thread. If you
> meant the community of the wikis, I'm just saying that it wouldn't really
> be kosher according to our current practices.
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> Yes, we did talk on IRC. But what are you referring to? I wasn't
>> referring to you anywhere. I don't even remember talking about WMF's
>> role in the community. I guess if you have a log of that part of the
>> conversation, you should post it now. I may have a log in my own
>> client, if you don't mind my posting it.
>>
>> I think it's becoming abundantly clear why I think it's best if I
>> don't interact with WMF employees in private.
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Jasper Deng 
>> wrote:
>> > Wil, we talked about this on IRC, so I won't repeat what I said. But
>> what I
>> > did *not* say is that the foundation tends to let the community do what
>> it
>> > wants, and it would be against that long-standing tradition for staff to
>> > try to force a change in the community.
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>> >
>> >> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
>> >> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
>> >> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
>> >> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
>> >> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
>> >> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
>> >> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
>> >> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
>> >> call on what he puts on his own site.
>> >>
>> >> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
>> >> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
>> >> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
>> >> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
>> >> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
>> >> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
>> >> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
>> >> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
>> >> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
>> >> that's all just my opinion.
>> >>
>> >> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
>> >> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
>> >> to the list this time. :)
>> >>
>> >> ,Wil
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Dear Lila,
>> >> >
>> >> > I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the
>> >> Wikimedia
>> >> > community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of
>> tactics
>> >> > you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
>> >> >
>> >> > Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody
>> >> with
>> >> > a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
>> >> > disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
>> >> > legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to
>> establish
>> >> > yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?
>> >> >
>> >> > I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've
>> >> never
>> >> > seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
>> >> > frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't
>> imagine
>> >> > what more effective path he could have chosen.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still
>> >> getting
>> >> > to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder
>> >> what
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Kevin Gorman]

Wil: nothing anyone is saying here is aimed at discrediting you, you've
just jumped in to a field of landmines without a map, and we'd rather not
have you blow your legs off.  I'll have a private email incoming to you as
fast as I can type it but given that the deputy director of the WMF and
several respected Wikimedians have said things may be better if you back
off a bit, it would probably good to extend us the trust necessary to give
you a map of the field of landmines you've jumped in to.

---
Kevin Gorman


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> I didn't really mention anything specifically, except a leader who
> could "change the concerning aspects of the WP community." It has been
> WMF's stated goal to change things like the participation of women on
> WP for years. I suppose it would be most accurate to say that I meant
> the things that the WMF has been very publicly trying to change about
> the community and WP for years now. I believe these goals are shared
> by Lila, but we haven't really discussed them.
>
> You know, that's strange. Everything you guys are adding to this
> thread could be used to discredit me in the eyes of various parts of
> the community. I really hope that isn't the case, but it wouldn't
> change my behavior if it were. I encourage everyone to read these
> threads and make up their minds for themselves. Keep in mind that some
> of the characterizations of what people have said haven't been
> substantiated yet. Maybe some more evidence will come to light on this
> thread.
>
> Thanks.
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Jasper Deng 
> wrote:
> > I mean, you referred to Lila as a potential source of change in the
> > community's problems in your email right before mine on this thread. If
> you
> > meant the community of the wikis, I'm just saying that it wouldn't really
> > be kosher according to our current practices.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, we did talk on IRC. But what are you referring to? I wasn't
> >> referring to you anywhere. I don't even remember talking about WMF's
> >> role in the community. I guess if you have a log of that part of the
> >> conversation, you should post it now. I may have a log in my own
> >> client, if you don't mind my posting it.
> >>
> >> I think it's becoming abundantly clear why I think it's best if I
> >> don't interact with WMF employees in private.
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Jasper Deng  >
> >> wrote:
> >> > Wil, we talked about this on IRC, so I won't repeat what I said. But
> >> what I
> >> > did *not* say is that the foundation tends to let the community do
> what
> >> it
> >> > wants, and it would be against that long-standing tradition for staff
> to
> >> > try to force a change in the community.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
> >> >> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
> >> >> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
> >> >> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point.
> That
> >> >> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
> >> >> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
> >> >> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
> >> >> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
> >> >> call on what he puts on his own site.
> >> >>
> >> >> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
> >> >> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
> >> >> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
> >> >> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
> >> >> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
> >> >> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
> >> >> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
> >> >> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
> >> >> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
> >> >> that's all just my opinion.
> >> >>
> >> >> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about
> me
> >> >> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
> >> >> to the list this time. :)
> >> >>
> >> >> ,Wil
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth  >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Dear Lila,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the
> >> >> Wikimedia
> >> >> > community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of
> >> tactics
> >> >> > you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for
> somebody
> >> >> with
> >> >> > a close connection to you to influe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

If this list chooses to block me for any amount of time, it might as
well be forever. I'm responding to other people's mails here; I'd
prefer to mail less as well.

In any case, you'll be blocking someone for asking relevant questions
and replying to relevant concerns. I think that is pretty
self-evident. If I do get blocked on this list, I will be taking my
discussion to Wikipediocracy where I have never been so much as
encouraged to be quiet beyond the matter I mentioned before, and
anyone who is interested in it is welcome to join me there.

This is getting *really* scary. Think about what you do in full sight
of the entire community before you act, please.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
> ... I wish I kept more up to date on this set of threads and had stepped in
> to say something sooner.  I'm going to go ahead and say that I agree with
> Pete that at this juncture the most beneficial course of action would
> probably be for Wil to back this set of discussions for at least a few
> days, if necessary even by putting Wil on temporary moderation as bizarre
> as that sounds.  Wil: I'm going to type a private email after I send this
> to you, and I promise the last thing I desire is to shut you up - you're
> just currently running through a minefield with no map, and it would be
> much better if you had a map before continuing.
> 
> Kevin Gorman
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> You *can't* be serious. Now I'm *really* starting to get the idea that
>> you guys just want to shut me up. And you're using the fact that I'm
>> actually being very open about something to justify it. This is
>> extremely worrying if everyone else on this list agrees with you.
>>
>> ,Wil
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Pete Forsyth 
>> wrote:
>> > l:
>> >
>> > I don't know the first thing about the alleged safety concerns discussed
>> on
>> > IRC, but the following quote is troubling to me:
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>> >
>> >> She replied "a WMF employee emailed me that there are safety
>> >> concerns,
>> >
>> >
>> > It seems that Wil has chosen to repeat something that was said privately,
>> > about personal safety, in a public forum. It seems likely to me that this
>> > kind of choice would tend to *increase* potential danger, not decrease
>> it.
>> >
>> > I'd like to suggest that Wil's access to this email list be blocked, at
>> > least as a temporary measure. I think his behavior here has been reckless
>> > in a number of ways. This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do
>> think
>> > we need to protect this list from further flooding.
>> >
>> > I don't know much about the precedents for list access removal, but I
>> > suspect that consensus among active Wikimedians would be pretty strong at
>> > this point. Can anybody comment on what would be necessary to make this
>> > happen?
>> >
>> > Pete
>> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Leigh Thelmadatter]

Ive been watching this conversation and I have to agree with Will here. These 
calls for banning/restriction of access to the list and admission that 
Wikipedia is full of "landmines" is troubling.  If we have such grave problems, 
we should be confronting them. If Will is just stirring the pot, ignore him and 
it will go away.



> From: w...@wllm.com
> Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 16:10:49 -0700
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.
> 
> If this list chooses to block me for any amount of time, it might as
> well be forever. I'm responding to other people's mails here; I'd
> prefer to mail less as well.
> 
> In any case, you'll be blocking someone for asking relevant questions
> and replying to relevant concerns. I think that is pretty
> self-evident. If I do get blocked on this list, I will be taking my
> discussion to Wikipediocracy where I have never been so much as
> encouraged to be quiet beyond the matter I mentioned before, and
> anyone who is interested in it is welcome to join me there.
> 
> This is getting *really* scary. Think about what you do in full sight
> of the entire community before you act, please.
> 
> ,Wil
> 
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
> > ... I wish I kept more up to date on this set of threads and had stepped in
> > to say something sooner.  I'm going to go ahead and say that I agree with
> > Pete that at this juncture the most beneficial course of action would
> > probably be for Wil to back this set of discussions for at least a few
> > days, if necessary even by putting Wil on temporary moderation as bizarre
> > as that sounds.  Wil: I'm going to type a private email after I send this
> > to you, and I promise the last thing I desire is to shut you up - you're
> > just currently running through a minefield with no map, and it would be
> > much better if you had a map before continuing.
> > 
> > Kevin Gorman
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> You *can't* be serious. Now I'm *really* starting to get the idea that
> >> you guys just want to shut me up. And you're using the fact that I'm
> >> actually being very open about something to justify it. This is
> >> extremely worrying if everyone else on this list agrees with you.
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> >> wrote:
> >> > l:
> >> >
> >> > I don't know the first thing about the alleged safety concerns discussed
> >> on
> >> > IRC, but the following quote is troubling to me:
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> She replied "a WMF employee emailed me that there are safety
> >> >> concerns,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > It seems that Wil has chosen to repeat something that was said privately,
> >> > about personal safety, in a public forum. It seems likely to me that this
> >> > kind of choice would tend to *increase* potential danger, not decrease
> >> it.
> >> >
> >> > I'd like to suggest that Wil's access to this email list be blocked, at
> >> > least as a temporary measure. I think his behavior here has been reckless
> >> > in a number of ways. This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do
> >> think
> >> > we need to protect this list from further flooding.
> >> >
> >> > I don't know much about the precedents for list access removal, but I
> >> > suspect that consensus among active Wikimedians would be pretty strong at
> >> > this point. Can anybody comment on what would be necessary to make this
> >> > happen?
> >> >
> >> > Pete
> >> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> 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
> > 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Hi Erik, just for guidance here- should I not publicly respond to
those who have publicly address me or talked about my actions or words
directly?

You guys are moving in a *very* sketchy direction here. These mails
are archived; it will be quite clear what everyone said before I was
blocked if you decide to go that route. You are talking about very
obviously censoring a person who has been saying inconvenient things
in a high-profile manner. Is this the kind of Free Speech Wikipedia
supposedly stands for?

Seriously. I really want to know.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
>> This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do think
>> we need to protect this list from further flooding.
>
> As a reminder, this list has an official "soft limit" of 30 posts per
> individual/month, as stated on
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l . It's encouraged for
> participants to stay below this limit in order for the conversation(s)
> not to be dominated by a single participant. In a listserv context,
> this is especially important, because it's a "push" medium that gets
> delivered directly to people's inboxes (contrary to a web forum), in
> some cases without filters.
>
> By my count, Wil has posted to this list >50 times this month, which
> is a bit excessive.
>
> Wil: I would encourage you to respect the norms of this list and
> refrain from excessive posting. I don't see an issue with any of the
> _topics_ you're wanting to talk about, just the volume/frequency at
> which you've been doing it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Erik
>
> --
> Erik Möller
> VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Milos Rancic]

It turns out that Lila is actually a perfect ED. Someone capable to handle
and love a person like Wil is -- should be quite competent in handling the
rest of the community :D
 On May 29, 2014 1:21 AM, "Wil Sinclair"  wrote:

> Hi Erik, just for guidance here- should I not publicly respond to
> those who have publicly address me or talked about my actions or words
> directly?
>
> You guys are moving in a *very* sketchy direction here. These mails
> are archived; it will be quite clear what everyone said before I was
> blocked if you decide to go that route. You are talking about very
> obviously censoring a person who has been saying inconvenient things
> in a high-profile manner. Is this the kind of Free Speech Wikipedia
> supposedly stands for?
>
> Seriously. I really want to know.
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
> >
> >> This is no judgment on him as a person, but I do think
> >> we need to protect this list from further flooding.
> >
> > As a reminder, this list has an official "soft limit" of 30 posts per
> > individual/month, as stated on
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l . It's encouraged for
> > participants to stay below this limit in order for the conversation(s)
> > not to be dominated by a single participant. In a listserv context,
> > this is especially important, because it's a "push" medium that gets
> > delivered directly to people's inboxes (contrary to a web forum), in
> > some cases without filters.
> >
> > By my count, Wil has posted to this list >50 times this month, which
> > is a bit excessive.
> >
> > Wil: I would encourage you to respect the norms of this list and
> > refrain from excessive posting. I don't see an issue with any of the
> > _topics_ you're wanting to talk about, just the volume/frequency at
> > which you've been doing it.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Erik
> >
> > --
> > Erik Möller
> > VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Blocking Wil from this List

[Wil Sinclair]

I'm starting a thread with the correct title, so that everyone knows
that we're discussing whether I should be banned and for what reasons.

,Wil

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Bence Damokos]

I do agree that with all good faith being assumed, Wil's style of
interaction is a bit new and the novelty is starting to wear off a bit. Wil
is of course his own individual and beyond respecting the soft posting
limits as part of this list's etiquette I do not think anyone is trying to
stifle or silence him against his interests.

People commenting on this list have been offering him the courtesy for him
to calm down with the constant posting for a bit of a breather, but he is
of course free to continue. As a person who has been following WMF's
actions and governance for a few years now, I think it might be best for
the organisation, Wil and Lila if Will let this thread die a natural death
now -- he's already started a few others that can take things forward in a
more constructive manner and that do not need his involvement. I am sure he
will be able to contribute to more debates once the posting limits reset,
and he and everyone else had some time to think and recharge by doing
something else in the meantime.

In any case, Wil seems like a very interesting person and I hope I get to
meet him at Wikimania, still, I have to join the list of people who think
it would be in his best interests if he posted less and with more political
tact to this list considering that his actions and style reflect on his
partner.

Best regards,
Bence

P.S. I have used third person, impersonal pronouns so Wil is not compelled
to feel a need to reply. It was not meant in disrespect as if he was not
reading this.



[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l - at 30 posts/month as a
"soft limit". Wil is around the limit right now -
http://www.infodisiac.com/Wikipedia/ScanMail/Wikimedia-l.html


On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Greg, would you like to repeat your filth? He may need someone to post
> it in surrogate, since I believe he said he's banned here.
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Fæ  wrote:
> > Wil, ask Kohs to repeat his filth. I'm not going to do it for him.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > On 28 May 2014 23:37, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >> I didn't know that he called you a "faggot." Could you please show me
> where?
> >>
> >> I mentioned I didn't agree with him on everything. I certainly would
> >> *never* agree that a slur like that is justified, if he did make it.
> >> In any case, the quote stands. Maybe we should start a separate thread
> >> on the quote itself?
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Fæ  wrote:
> >>> Wil, you are supporting a man that thought it was a hilarious joke to
> >>> call me a faggot. Not something that I am prepared to overlook, ever.
> >>>
> >>> I now have serious reservations about Lila's good judgement in failing
> >>> to ensure you were appropriately advised, considering her critical
> >>> role in the Wikimedia movement.
> >>>
> >>> Fae
> >>>
> >>> On 28 May 2014 23:18, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>  First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
>  uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
>  the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
>  petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
>  doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
>  personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
>  Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
>  I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
>  call on what he puts on his own site.
> 
>  Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
>  but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
>  leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
>  point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
>  charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
>  it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
>  here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
>  problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
>  going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
>  that's all just my opinion.
> 
>  I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
>  so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
>  to the list this time. :)
> 
>  ,Wil
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing li

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Blocking Wil from this List

[Thomas Morton]

Wil I ask this as a serious, non-snarky question; have you stepped back for
a second and thought about your actions here.

Some responses have been a bit tough. But I don't think you've handled
yourself at all well.

Imagine, for example, I came into your place of work and started asking
questions. Questions which at best are naive or worst leading. What if I
immediately plunged into one of the most controversial topics of
discussion, in a somewhat aloof tone, and revealed that I'd been talking to
a news outlet who'd just run an in depth expose on your bosses sex life.
What if my comments exposed that my research consisted entirely of what I
had been fed from that outlet.

What I'm saying is; this is a community which is established and often
thoughful. For a web community it is quite welcoming to thoughtful new
contributions. But unlike many web communities it's tolerance for bullshit
is extremely low.

We respond positively to things like reasoned arguments, or great
contributions. We respond badly to oddly crafted explorations. Your opening
email reads, and believe me we have years of them for training, like the
typical flamebait.

Remember as a community we face constant disruption and vandalism: and so
our tools to deal with that, and move back onto content, are abrupt and
harsh.

As a regular and vocal critic myself, I think you've crossed the line in
these threads into disruption.

If you want to understand WM culture then the one and only way to do so is
to become a member of the community. It's not simple or easy, it takes work
to produce quality contributions.

Looking from the outside will only get you so far. I hope you'll delve in
and find not only the bad, but the excellent as well.

Take that as you will. I hope it's useful.

Unfortunately your comments about Kohs mean I find your judgement extremely
lacking. I hope you'll be able to regain the respect youve so quickly lost
here.

Tom
On 29 May 2014 00:25, "Wil Sinclair"  wrote:

> I'm starting a thread with the correct title, so that everyone knows
> that we're discussing whether I should be banned and for what reasons.
>
> ,Wil
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Erik Moeller]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> Hi Erik, just for guidance here- should I not publicly respond to
> those who have publicly address me or talked about my actions or words
> directly?

Hey Wil,

Pick your battles, help keep the conversation manageable, exercise
restraint, take social cues, assume good faith, forgive and forget.
The 30 posts/month guideline is in place to help with that -- forcing
yourself to simply slow down (not shut up) is a good way to exercise
the aforementioned habits, which are good habits for any large group
conversation in my experience.

Warm regards,

Erik
-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 strategic plan

[phoebe ayers]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:31 AM, ENWP Pine  wrote:

> Hi, can someone with knowledge of WMF's thinking expand on this statement
> from Lila?
>
> "Starting the process for our next strategic planning exercise, which will
> be different from last time, and focused on improving our ability to react
> quickly and adjust as necessary to opportunities and challenges."
>
> Is this implying that the entire strategic plan will focus on agility, or
> that agility will be a priority in the next strategic plan?
>
> Also, how was this decision reached?


This is a large topic. But quickly: I think the idea is that the next
strategic plan, rather than being a document that tries to cover every
possibility for what might happen, would be more useful if it recognized
that things do and will change -- technologies, community dynamics, etc. --
and recognized that the organization and movement will need to adapt to
those changes. (Think about how much has changed since 2009, when we
started working on that plan.) So I guess I would call agility more of a
design principle.

But I don't want to either speak for Lila or for the WMF, because we simply
haven't had those conversations yet with her, nor have we had them in the
community. As noted in the last set of board minutes:
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-01-31#Strategy_discussion--
the board has mainly agreed that we are flexible with regard to the
final shape of the plan, and will work with Lila on the process going
forward.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On May 29, 2014 5:33 AM, "Thyge"  wrote:
>
> Please raise and discuss questions about policy on meta. This is not the
> place.
>
> Regards,
> Thyge
>

Wil, I suggest that you do go to http://meta.wikimedia.org and find pages
about these issues. *Read the archives of the talk pages*. And start new
discussions on those talk pages. Assume the 'meta' project has a discussion
page for every issue you can think of. If you cant find something on meta,
ask someone who is active on meta (check recent changes)

Also read the archives of wikimedia-l for at least 2013 and 2014, to get a
feel for this list, and to be aware of where we are 'at' on issues which
are discussed every year. Then you can start new threads which pick up from
where we left of last time.

Keep in mind wikimedia-l is mandatory reading for a lot of very busy
volunteers and NGO staff at all levels and who have varying levels of
English proficiency. wikimedia-l doubles as an business forum for our many
NGOs.

Every email to this list has an opportunity cost. It is peoples time being
consumed.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> I didn't know that he called you a "faggot." Could you please show me
> where?
>


That post was removed from view at the time (May 2012).

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3707#p3707

What Greg had said on WO was,

---o0o---

It looks like *Fae got* upset with my post to his
Talk
 page.

---o0o---

The diff Greg linked to was this one:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:F%C3%A6&diff=next&oldid=70008600

Greg apologised to Fæ for the post here:

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4888#p4888

I would like to apologize to Ashley "Fae" Van Haeften for my recent
word-play quip, "Fae got upset". I had hoped that the poke would be
received in the playful tone that it was intended, but I erred in that
supposition. I don't mean any malice or harm to Ashley. I'm simply
interested in the truth about his past and present actions on Wikipedia and
determining whether or not he enjoys (or expects) a double standard to
apply for him.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy

[Wil Sinclair]

Stepping in to add another aspect to both questions, as I think it
might focus the discussion.

Child Protection: Are children encouraged to use commons through any
programs or outreach efforts of any kind? If so, is it morally and/or
ethically justifiable to do so without protecting children in every
way possible? Can that be done without removing graphic pics from
commons?

Harassment: Has harassment been addressed in a comprehensive way on
all sites, including all of the WP site? As an example, Wikipedia has
had a problem with low and declining female participation for years,
and the WMF has often stated that it would like to address it. Are
women actively encouraged to participate on Wikipedia by the WMF or
other organizations? If we're not doing everything to protect women
and all other Wikipedians, is it morally or ethically correct to
perform outreach to potentially vulnerable groups? I'd especially like
to hear about this from a female perspective.

Thanks.
,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Martijn Hoekstra
 wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
>
>> Martijn asked me which things I thought that some people on this list
>> don't want anyone to discuss, so here are the two examples that I'm
>> most interested in:
>>
>> Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be
>> changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the
>> content on Commons.
>
>
> There is content on Wikipedia and on Commons, and probably on other
> projects as well, that most probably doesn't find suitable for children.
> What makes the matter worse is that some searches that one doesn't expect
> to bring up sexually explicit content do in fact bring it up, i.e. the
> famous toothbrush image. There are a couple of separate questions.
>
> * Is the presence of sexually explicit material on commons a problem? Why?
> * Is the abundance of sexually explicit material on commons a problem? Why?
> * Is the unexpectedly turning up of the sexually explicit material on
> commons a problem? Why?
>
> Most agree that the presence of sexually explicit material on commons in
> itself is not a problem in itself, and if it is, hosting some educational
> material on sexually explicit subjects is more important than shielding
> children from accessing the material.
>
> The abundance of sexually explicit material on commons is odd, and probably
> worthless. We frankly don't need any more low quality pictures and videos
> of penises, masturbation, and other sexual acts that we already have lots
> of. Does it really hurt us to have so much of it though? As long as it
> doesn't get in the way, I'd say no. I'm not a commons person, and I know
> that loads of low quality redundant sexually explicit images have already
> been deleted - because it does get in the way. Should more be deleted?
> Likely. Should all of it be deleted? No. So what should we do? On each
> upload ask if it is a low quality sexually explicit image that doesn't
> really add anything to the content that's already there? That makes for an
> odd upload form. Ask those uploading not to upload more? I do believe we're
> already doing that, to little effect. (correct me if I'm wrong, if we're
> not, we probably should) But again, it's not it's presence that's a
> problem, it's its in-the-wayness.
>
> It has been argued, and I agree with that, that there are two categories of
> people finding sexually explicit material in commons. Those explicitly
> trying to find it, and those that come across it by accident. This goes for
> all age groups. I think it's fairly reasonable to say that those looking
> for it will find it no matter what, and that shouldn't be the focus of
> improvement. What should be a focus, is improving the search functionality
> so that the accidental doesn't happen, or at least doesn't happen so
> ridiculously often as it does now: that is what I mean with it being in the
> way, as demonstrated by the famous toothbrush search result. Categorization
> and tagging could play a large role in this, as well as (recently
> implemented) improvements in the search back-end. It's something that has
> recently been brought up on this list. I'm horrible with the archives, but
> I'm sure someone else will be able to point to the relevant discussion, and
> what, if anything, has been undertaken on commons to act on this, or what
> blockers we still have.
>
> Now I've focused only on sexually explicit content, because that's whats
> mostly what bothers people. Obviously, there is lots of other material I
> wouldn't like to expose children to. There has been a recent discussion
> about (valuable, suitable, and greatly disturbing) video material of WWII
> concentration camps being on the front page of commons. There is also a lot
> of images of medical issues that aren't the nicest to look at to put it
> mildly, and there is a lot of material on the atrocities of war as well.
> The first and third arguments go for this as 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Samuel Klein]

Hello all,

Lila: Thank you kindly for these recent notes.  It is wonderful to
hear your thoughts on your first weeks.

Wil: Working through public, logged forums is a fine principle; one
that I try to follow myself.  It helps avoid misunderstandings.


Pete Forsyth writes:
> I'd like to suggest that Wil's access to this email list be blocked, at
> least as a temporary measure... I suspect that consensus among
> active Wikimedians would be pretty strong at this point.

Pete: That is a wholly uncalled for suggestion; reckless, if you
would. Please be kind. As you can see from the comments of others,
there is no such consensus, mainly just requests to slow down.


Erik Moeller writes:
> As a reminder, this list has an official "soft limit" of 30 posts per [month]

Wil Sinclair writes:
> just for guidance here- should I not publicly respond to those
> who have publicly address me or talked about my actions or words

I find it helpful to quote and briefly respond to many posts of
interest in a thread, in a single reply (as I did here). And I try to
make 5 edits to a project for every post, to keep a balanced
perspective...

Sam

(PS: Victor, the A. Dewey Wikireader Project always makes me smile.
Thank you for mentioning it here.  :-)

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Wil Sinclair]

Thanks for the note, Sam. Your advice to me is very wise. I've said
and seen about all that I want to, save one more post. You'll see it
in the next few minutes.

,Wil

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Lila: Thank you kindly for these recent notes.  It is wonderful to
> hear your thoughts on your first weeks.
>
> Wil: Working through public, logged forums is a fine principle; one
> that I try to follow myself.  It helps avoid misunderstandings.
>
>
> Pete Forsyth writes:
>> I'd like to suggest that Wil's access to this email list be blocked, at
>> least as a temporary measure... I suspect that consensus among
>> active Wikimedians would be pretty strong at this point.
>
> Pete: That is a wholly uncalled for suggestion; reckless, if you
> would. Please be kind. As you can see from the comments of others,
> there is no such consensus, mainly just requests to slow down.
>
>
> Erik Moeller writes:
>> As a reminder, this list has an official "soft limit" of 30 posts per [month]
>
> Wil Sinclair writes:
>> just for guidance here- should I not publicly respond to those
>> who have publicly address me or talked about my actions or words
>
> I find it helpful to quote and briefly respond to many posts of
> interest in a thread, in a single reply (as I did here). And I try to
> make 5 edits to a project for every post, to keep a balanced
> perspective...
>
> Sam
>
> (PS: Victor, the A. Dewey Wikireader Project always makes me smile.
> Thank you for mentioning it here.  :-)
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,