Dear all,
Many thanks for bringing the discussion on New Models of Affiliations this
far.
Building on earlier Movement Roles discussions from last year and on the
New Models working group's discussions earlier this month [1], here are a
set of draft principles and parameters for the four
that are slowly being discussed on the talk page.
A small informal working group is aiming to move this discussion forward in
the next 15 days. We are:
Bence Damakos - ChapCom
Bishakha Datta - WMF Board
Joan Goma - Amical
Sam Klein - WMF Board
Delphine Menard - WM DE, ChapCom
Achal Prabhala
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote:
Serious that you can't see the good side in ask the chapters, Bishakha?
Awaiting your and others' thoughts on
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_affiliation_models#Questions
Cheers
Bishakha
Dear all,
I went through the lists and collated a bunch of questions that have been
asked (without identifying who has asked these).
I have put them on the talk page of the MR letter, so that we can
systematically start considering and addressing them. This is the link:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nlwrote:
2012/2/14 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org:
It is clear to me that there is a close link between the
fundraising/dissemination discussion and the increased options of
organising ourselves. I am also
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Mathias Damour
mathias.dam...@laposte.netwrote:
I hope that these models won't be used to softly downgrade (or threaten to
downgrade) chapters that would be said not having their bylaws and mission
aligned with Wikimedia's.
I see new 'models' as a positive
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.comwrote:
One benefit I can identify from this decision is that we could push
forward that
* partner organizations are ONLY recognized by Wikimedia Foundation
* whilst chapters could finally push forward the idea that a new
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 09:25:03PM +0530, Achal Prabhala wrote:
On Tuesday 06 December 2011 08:27 PM, Kim Bruning wrote:
I do not believe that the Indian internet community shares Kapil
Sibal's position. Though
ones, surely much more experienced in india than we are?
rupert
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:08, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com
wrote:
Dear Hari, Tinu, and Theo,
Thank you for your heartfelt emails; all of them made me think, and want
to
take this conversation forward.
One
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:
Dear Bishakha,
I apologize for intruding in this discussion again as someone who has
little knowledge about India and the local situation.
Your reply made me happy - it broadened the conversation beyond borders,
it
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Arjuna Rao Chavala arjunar...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi all,
This thread has brought up several points of interest to Wikimedia India.
First let me take this opportunity to thank the Foundation Grants team for
all the help for our bootstrapping work, be it Legal
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote:
The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another
non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to
execute specific (and large-scale) programmes. As of now, the WIPT
This thread started out with questions about the legal and practical
differences between chapter and trust, but has veered much more into the
terrain of funding and money.
In addition, there have been numerous emails on bank accounts, grants,
fellowships and what not.
I'm glad we're talking
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you elaborate on the legal and practical differences between the new
India Trust and the India Chapter?
Dear Liam,
Since I run a non-profit in India in my other life, I'll pitch in on one
part of this: the legal
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.comwrote:
The problem is that what is usually called the Board on this list is
not a single entity. It is actually a group of persons.
And right now, the situation is that there is no real agreement within
the Board about
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
If you are right that the board is split on this (and I expect you
are), then what seems to be happening is that they can't make a
decision so they are telling the staff to make it for them. That is
really not the
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Hiya Bishakha
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
I have said, it is a matter of perspective how you view them. But if we go
by the assumption that editorial judgement is a separate thing,
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote:
If you want to make a valid counterargument, say that you are worried that
some censorious
ISPs and countries might use our category definitions as a starting point
for a bolt-on
censorship system that restricts access
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
Up to now, all females from US (four of them) are in favor of filter
(though, Sarah just tactically) and the only one not from US
(Brazil/Portugal) is against.
Hope we're not going to call this a poll. :)
Cheers
Bishakha
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:
(not responding to anyone in particular) I'm one of the people who tried to
participate in the discussion without taking a strong standpoint
(intentionally - because I'm quite nuanced on the issue, and open for good
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:
Hoping for a constructive discussion and more data on what our 'readers'
actually want and/or need...
Also, while we don't have reader data, we do have more than 20,000 answers
to the referendum or survey or whatever
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 16:24, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
Milos, I believe this is exactly the kind of post that Sue was talking
about
in her blog. It is aggressive, it is alienating, and it is intimidating
to
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Bishakha, call it editorial-content, call it censorship or any other
euphemism - at the heart of it, it is deciding what someone gets to see and
what not.
Theo: they are different things, and given the premium on accuracy
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 6:45 AM, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to ask you something else. It's been suggested several times at
various places that the present resolution is justified as a
compromise to prevent a considerably more repressive form of
censorship.
This implies
I posted this on the India list (many people are not subscribed to
foundation-l) - forwarding this question which just popped up.
Bishakha
-- Forwarded message --
From: Vickram Crishna vvcris...@radiophony.com
Date: Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimediaindia-l]
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Alec Conroy alecmcon...@gmail.com wrote:
But going forward, the idea that a stranger can ride into town and
instantly lead a global movement-- that's not gonna be sustainable, I
don't think.
This central thought resonated so strongly with me that I had to
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:48 AM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
I am glad to announce that Language committee is stronger for three
new members. By the time of getting their applications, the list is:
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote:
As I read the roster of the people who may attend, I am amazed at their
qualifications. All people are involved in their
Wikipediashttp://wikipedia.org/in the
Incubator
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote:
To top it off, Hindi has a form for inanimate objects.
Some Indian languages have genders for nouns, others don't. Hindi is one of
those that has two genders: feminine and masculine nouns [1], including for
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:21 PM, whothis whoth...@gmail.com wrote:
I assume you probably
had some say in selecting the current Board Member from India since you
announced his appointment
Even though this is tangential to the main discussion, let me explain the
process through which I was
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:06 AM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote:
A translation can be found here:
http://it.wikinews.org/wiki/Intervista_a_Umberto_Eco/Traduzione
It's a lovely interview, Ilario. Congratulations :-)
It's very interesting - and very useful. Just forwarded it to
.
Greetings warmly from Wikiquote,
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks, Michael and Ting.
Look forward to this new adventure, to becoming part of the community -
and to meeting up soon.
Yes, I did wonder whether you'll had noticed the POV
and looking forward to meet you soon in person.
Ting
Michael Snow wrote:
As many of you know, we have had one vacant seat left on the Wikimedia
Foundation Board of Trustees for the board to appoint. We have now
filled that seat by appointing Bishakha Datta, a journalist, filmmaker
33 matches
Mail list logo
