Re: [Foundation-l] RESCHEDULED: Mailing lists server migration today
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: I advise you delay it again - we need the mailing lists at the moment to coordinate the blackout. Mark's email is 5 days old, so I suppose this has already happened, hasn't it? Cheers, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] English Wikipedia to go dark January 18 in opposition to SOPA/PIPA
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for this announcement Jay, and everyone involved in the planning of this unprecedented action. For what it's worth, I want to particularly thank the Italian Community, for showing us with their own blackout what power Wikipedia can unleash to fight for freedom. Cheers, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] There is a deadline
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 4:43 PM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all; I have written an essay (my first one)[1] about the idea There is a deadline. It is opposite to the old essay (from 2006) which holds that there is no deadline. I hope my redaction is good enough to explain my opinion about this topic. Please, if you find errors, fix them, I'm not very fluent in English. Thanks. Nice, thanks for it and kuddos for spotting this contradiction with WP:DEADLINE :). I added the collapse of the Köln Archiv to show that it's not just war, revolution or natural catastrophe... Cheers, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] a funny story about wikipedia's strange power
2011/8/24 Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com: Stop this thread at once! It's gotten entirely too silly! Maybe, but it does not walk. So that bars it from any kind of claim on tax return from the [[Ministry of Silly Walks]]. Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: See now, this is the kind of thinking that raises a lot of questions about chapters receiving the very large amounts of money that many got the last time around. In the real world, charities determine what their objectives are for the year, cost them out, and then fundraise with that specific dollar objective in mind. In the real world, charities also make sure that their target is not completely out of proportion with the fundraising potential they have in a given geography. What's the point of thinking up fantastic programmes for a budget of a million dollars if you know that the maximum your country will ever give to your cause is 20 000 dollars. So I find the exercise to be interesting. What, pray tell, will the Swiss chapter do with the equivalent of half a million US dollars? And was that target established by any particular research, or was it some figures worked out on the back of an envelope? It's certainly not the way that any other charity I know of develops its targets. Now, last year was the first time this process was tried, so nobody was really quite sure how to manage things; however, with the 2010 fundraiser under our belts, not much has happened at the chapter end to examine the models being used. Indeed, many chapters still haven't worked out what to do with last year's windfall, let alone done any advance planning for next year. It's my contention that a very significant percentage of last year's donors in particular believed that they were donating to the Wikimedia Foundation's local office, not to local independent groups, many of which are quite adamant that they are *not* the WMF. Did anyone run a fundraising campaign last year where donors had the choice of whether to donate to a local organization versus the global one? (Donate here to support Wikimedia Chapter activities in XXX country - tax receipt issued vs Donate here to support Wikimedia activities around the world - no tax receipt available) Did local messages clearly delineate how the funds would be distributed, or what the chapter's objectives and activities were? In other words, were donors fully informed about what their donation would be used for? I suppose your statement is backed up by some research? As in, you have data to support the fact that a significant percentage of last year's donor believed they were donating to the Wikimedia Foundation's local office? As a matter of fact, I suppose you can also back up the fact that donors even understand what the Foundation (or the chapters for that matter) are and what they do? I'd be happy to see this data, it's cruelly missing. I see last year's fundraiser as an experiment. In some ways, it was amazingly successful - more funds were raised, in total, than ever before. But in other ways it was not - most of the chapters raised far more money than they were in a position to deal with, and the lack of advance planning in this area has raised a lot of questions within the Wikimedia community, and could easily lead to concerns from outside agencies and individuals as well. The hypothetical that we were losing donors because in many countries tax receipts could not be issued has turned out to be false - because many chapters that received a percentage of local donations were still not able to issue tax receipts last year. Realistically, given the basic chapter agreement, there are many that will never be able to obtain the local equivalent of charitable organization status. Did it ever come to you that the reason why chapters raised far more money than they were in a position to deal with, might be: 1) the fact that more and more people want to support the projects altogether (this is gonna stop at some point, the world is finite) 2) the fact that having a local chapter may have had something to do with the far more? I don't have data to back up my statement, so it's just a hypothesis, please take it as such. This isn't a swipe at chapters at all - without exception, the chapters are enthusiastic local drivers of the Wikimedia vision, regardless of their size or location. I have the sense that several chapters have found themselves overwhelmed by the volume of donations they've received, and are genuinely trying to be good stewards of those funds, but the structures simply aren't in place for them to do so. I'd like to see some very serious effort on the part of the WMF to help chapters develop these structures, both for existing chapters, and for the Global South chapters that are currently in early development. And there, I can only agree. Only, this is not exactly the direction we seem to be taking :) Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto -
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: If the question is one of minimum standards of accountability the WMF's first obligation would be to publish the standards which it requires, presumably consistent with IFRS. Chapters incorporated within particular jurisdictions will be subject to the financial reporting laws of their respective jurisdictions. These are more important than the FUD and distrust at the heart of recent proposals. There is no doubt that a small band of individuals unaccustomed to large infusions of cash will have challenges to face, but in these cases the WMF would do better to help these chapters find competent help in their own countries than to play the role of a distrustful parent. +1 I'm still baffled at the Wikimedia Foundation wanting to go against what other international organisations are doing, ie. they fundraise locally. (Take a look at the international pages of oxfam, wwf, médecins sans frontières, etc.). Who are we to know better than these people who've been around for like... ever? Surely there is a reason for them doing this the way they do? If it were only the chapters themselves at stake (as is the case when they raise funds independently), then they could get money first and organization second. But the WMF shares in the risk, and is offering organizational support to chapters, so cart before horse does not make sense. There's a difference between organizational support and organizational takeover. One possible solution might be to not allow chapters to participate in the global fundraiser unless they already have a suitable organization in place, but that could make it more difficult for the WMF to take a piece of the chapter's action. Which brings up the question: how do chapters ever get to the point of being organisationally ready if they never take a crack at doing fundraising on their own? Pleasing donors near you brings on an incomparable motivation to do great things and adapt our mission to what is expected and needed in a given region. Pleasing the Wikimedia Foundation somehow does not, seem to me to have the same potential. You know, the very old parable of giving a fish and teaching to fish... Best, Delphine ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi Jimmy, There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a different take on this, so I'll keep it general - keeping in mind there are many other aspects to be considered, such as transparancy. However, imho fundraising through chapters should remain the best way). Lodewijk, I don't think the chapters are barred from all fundraising... At most, they are at risk of not being able to participate in the global WMF fundraiser. They can still raise funds on their own through other methods. Maybe such other methods are more time consuming, difficult and less lucrative... But there are innovative substitutes for the WMF annual fundraiser, I'm sure. Yes, there are. But no, there aren't. For anyone who's been involved in grants proposals, the Wikimedia Foundation included, it is clear that grants are often restricted, or come with strings attached, and that you end up building an ugly statue in front of your local swimming pool to please a very generous but extremely demanding big donor. Not that these ways shouldn't be explored, but I find the idea that community donations (or to put it more broadly: individual donations) are much more powerful to bring forward what we're doing than mega grants that will ever only tackle one side of the mission. Grants monitored by the Wikimedia Foundation will, yes, go towards the mission as a whole, but what about local specificities? Will they be considered part of the mission? Wait and see... In any case, the barriers to participation relate to the organizational capacity of the chapters and the associated risks. A chapter that has financial controls and active leadership should be able to meet the WMFs requirements (with the exception of tax deduction eligibility, based on jurisdiction); a chapter that does not puts both their funds and their public reputation at risk. As the host of the fundraiser and the mark owner, the WMF shares in that risk - and it is both reasonable and necessary that the Foundation adhere to and require minimum standards of accountability in order to mitigate the risk of fraud, waste and abuse. If it were only the chapters themselves at stake (as is the case when they raise funds independently), then they could get money first and organization second. But the WMF shares in the risk, and is offering organizational support to chapters, so cart before horse does not make sense. Seriously, one does not go without the other. You can't really organize to do something if you don't ever do it. Learning by doing is the best school, and while we can't let people fail, surely we can help chapters succeed, and not by assuming that they're unable to start with, on the contrary. Cheers, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 2:29 AM, CasteloBranco michelcastelobra...@gmail.com wrote: The letter was written collaboratively and announced in IRC, village pump, mailing list, facebook, twitter, ... so i think it does represent the views of all Brazilians who are interested on it. We do know a legal structure is now essential, and we are developing the legal structure (rewriting the bylaws, contacting lawyers and accountants, and so on). So, we agree on this, Ray: our higher priority is to develop a legal entity, for now. During the first months, it would be great to get some help from the WMF Office. That's why we are offering our support, and suggesting ways on how to better work together. The chair on the board is this, a suggestion. We can discuss another ways to do it, and your opinion is welcome. I think this is a great initiative. Good job in getting the community(ies) together on this! Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote: It would be, if that's what it were about. But I can say with confidence that at the board meeting, no one spoke about any ideas even remotely similar to this, and I can't think of a single board member who disagrees one bit with the idea that chapters should be directed or controlled in a top-down fashion as franchises or anything similar. OK, I've read this sentence five times now, and this is what I read: Board members agree that chapters should be directed or controlled in a top-down fashion as franchises I think there is a double negative here that is saying the opposite of what you meant to say. Should not the sentence be: I can't think of a single board member who *agrees* one bit with the idea that chapters should be directed or controlled in a top-down fashion as franchises or anything similar? Or has my English played a trick on me? Thanks, Delphine ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 3:43 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote: Redefining the chapters who participated in a joint fundraiser with WMF as WMF's payment processors is straight-up insulting. Just on this particular point. I thought the same, but after a round of explanations, I now understand the term better. Payment processors does not apply to _just_ the chapters, it applies to the Foundation as well. The definition behind this is _anyone_ who actually processes donations directly and has the administration to back it up. Cheers, Delphine Wikimedia Deutschland ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote: Well, let's be clear here: in what sense are the chapters participating in the fundraiser, rather than merely being its beneficiaries? The underlying fundraising work -- the actual solicitation of donations, in other words -- is performed by WMF staff directly. The chapters do provide some level of administrative and accounting support, obviously; but that could just as easily be done by the WMF as well, and likely at lower cost. Wow, this is a gross misrepresentation of the reality. While Foundation staff has provided an invaluable support to make the fundraiser a success, it probably wouldn't have been such a success hadn't there been dozens of volunteers, among which _many_ chapter board members and simple members who spent uncounted hours of localizing and adapting messages, providing stories, refining landing pages, answering donors questions etc. You may want to look at the fundraising pages on meta to see the level of involvement of the community as a whole in making it a success, and even that does not give a real idea of how much chapters' communities have participated (much happens on their chapters' mailing lists for example). Cheers, Delphine ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not suggesting that the success of the fundraiser isn't due in large part to broad community involvement; my assertion is that this community involvement would take place whether or not a formal chapter was involved. I would assume that the volunteers who contributed to the effort presumably did so because they believed in the goals of the project and the need to raise funds to support them, not because their particular chapter stood to collect a large sum of money in the process? I think it differs depending on the chapter, the culture et al. Of course I assume as you do that all people involved in the effort do believe in the goal of the Wikimedia projects. But having talked about this with many chapter volunteers, they have also done it because as chapter volunteers, they feel even more responsible to make sure the donors were addressed in the right way. Pleasing a thousand donors (or 10 000) is a whole different ball game in terms of incentive as pleasing one big donor. My observation in how chapters have developped across the board is that you can grossly find two different kind of chapters: * those for whom fundransing and all the administration that goes with it is a hassle they don't want to get up entangled with * those for whom fundraising directly is a way to refine their local messaging (and hence activities that ensue), a motivation to do better (get organized and more professional, in all areas of a chapter's activities), take on responsibility and accountability (handling donors is difficult, but extremely rewarding as they come back the year after). Having followed closely the development of Wikimedia Germany for the past 5 years, I know for a fact that handling fundraising is a big part of the succesful growth of that chapter. Whatever path the chapters want to take (fundraising or no fundraising) is fine with me, for the record. I am convinced that doing your own fundraising is an essential part of organisational growth. Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: Yes. I would agree that image is the other side of the line and into pornography. Tom Morton On 16 May 2011, at 23:22, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote: I feel like this image from the same author: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Futanari.png might be crossing the lines. Given Niabot's user page loudly railing against Commons being censored, I'd say the issue is less art and more lets see who we can shock and/or piss off. Allow me to disagree. While it would be hard for me to actually see this Futunari image get to the front page (I'm prudish that way), I actually learned something from it (had no clue what Futunari was all about, now I know). Which is far from being the case with that On the edge - free world version image, which brought me absolutely nothing except a rather puzzled wtf? Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Bring your kids to Wikimania?
Hello all, As part of the community grows older (yes, we do), I suppose that many more of us have kids. And maybe you were thinking... what i I bring my family to Wikimania? and thought na, too complicated. Well, the Haifa organizing team has been looking into babysitting/child care solutions, and we have a potential solution for those of you who would like to bring their kids to Haifa. This said, we'd need to know whether or not you actually intend to bring your kids. I'm bringing mine, they're a lot of fun, and would love to have playmates to have fun with. So if you were asking yourself whether this could be an option, I would love to know whether or not it's something you've considered and if you've toyed with the idea, think again, as we may have the perfect solution for you to attend the conference and still make this a family holiday. If you're interested in taking part in a babysitting solution, or still have questions about whether or not it makes sense to bring your kids, please send me an email at delphine [at] notafish (punto) org, and we can discuss our options. Best, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Winner of the Wiki Loves Monuments Logo Contest
Hello all, The contest has now come to an end, with more than 30 logos in competitions, and many votes to choose the logo. The winner of the competition is: Piece of puzzle monument 2 by User:Lusitana Which can be seen here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LUSITANA_WLM_2011_d.svg There were lots of good logos, and some came close second, notably: YATL – Yet another tower logo http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki_loves_monuments_logo_contest_elya.svg Somewhat hand drawn heartish - Compact http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sertion_-_WikiLoves_Monuments_-_Compact.svg All vote results can be found on this page: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Logo_contest/Submissions I want to thank everyone who participated, both in designing great logos, and in voting for choosing the best logo. There were tons of ideas in there, and some I am sure can be used again throughout the Wiki Loves Monuments competition. Cheers, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] [Wiki Loves Monuments] Logo Contest open on Commons!
[xpost foundation-l/commons-l] Hello all, You might have heard of Wiki Loves Monuments, an event destined to populate Wikimedia Commons with photos of listed monuments across the world. The 2011 edition is centered on Europe, but this is a movement wide/worldwide event, and we'd like to have a logo that fits both the ambitions of the project and reflect how fun it may be to participate. Therefore, a logo contest has been opened to get a great logo for Wiki Loves Monuments. The contest opens NOW, and logos can be submitted until the 17th of April 23.59 UTC. Voting will start on the 18th of April at 0:00 UTC. (we'll ping you again when it's time). Please distribute widely in your language communities and let your creativity loose! The contest page with rules and how to submit your logo can be found here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Logo_contest Submissions are here for your perusal: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Logo_contest/Submissions Cheers, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is Google allowing users to block Wikipedia?
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: It seems to be a personalized search feature, not directly related to Wikipedia visibility in search results. Two things: 1) before you actually come to this feature, you'd have to go to the Wikipedia page, and then back to Google. It does not appear by default. 2) I can see how it could be harmful in that someone blocks a page they don't like on Wikipedia and end up blocking Wikipedia altogether. It then all depends on how easy it is to unblock Wikipedia. (this is true of Wikipedia, but also any other website, actually, just, as Bence pointed out, the potential for blocking is multiplied by the number of times Wikipedia appears as first choice in your search. One thing that might be worth telling Google would be to have some kind of warning when one searches from something else entirely, that would say results are also present in one of the sites you blocked or something like that, so that the hurdle of looking into your preferences is not barring people from even thinking about unblocking the websites they've blocked because of one page. Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Storyteller job opening
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 3:39 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Andrew Gray wrote: (The actual job description did make my eyes roll a bit, though. Storyteller, oh dear.) Thank you very much for this post, Andrew. This post clarified the job role in a very nice, clear way and I really appreciate you taking the time to write it. I'd also like to apologize to the list (or to any members of it) for being excessively rude or stupid this afternoon. Some of the, er... cutesy wording in the job opening left me with the wrong impression about this role and its purpose. That is (as is Andrew's eyes rolling), an extremely interesting observation. So I looked at the other job openings to get an idea of the tone employed. Just for the fun of comparing, you might want to look at this job description: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Job_openings/Fundraiser_Data_Analyst Which tone really is _very different_ from the Storyteller. Without any pretence at thorough analysis, I guess job openings (should) reflect both the person who puts them up _and_ the person you want to have. For something like statistical analysis, you probably are looking for someone with less of a dreaming mind than for storytelling. I guess what's interesting here is that you don't catch flies with vinegar (is that an English expression?). So obviously, the tone employed and the words chosen will try and catch the attention of a particular type of person, with a particular mindset. Birgitte pointed out in this thread that some people should feel repelled by a job offer if it's not for them, and I agree with that. It does make a good job offer to be able to talk to the people you are targeting rather than those who are not fit for the job. While I find the cutesy a bit too emphatic and to say the truth, too American [1], I can understand where this is coming from and I do believe that it will draw the right kind of people to the job. It's all about how you speak. If you are looking for someone who thinks square, you probably want to have a job offer that is square, while if you're looking for someone who needs to let their creativity and words loose, you probably want to have a job offer that does exactly that. It's all a matter of communication, really. As a very good example, Andrew was able to rephrase the job offer so that it actually makes sense to those of us who need facts and rational explanations. Achieving that is a rare talent, actually :) Delphine [1] please forgive my generalisation here, words like impressive and exudes enthusiasm are just not words you'd find in a job opening even in the coolest, craziest, bestestestest company in France, for example, no matter how creative the job opening may be. Let's say that I am not convinced that this (over)use of words works efficiently in a truly international environment. -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] The matrix, reloaded (movement roles, or who does what in Wikimedia?)
Hi all,
The Movement Roles Project (which you've probably heard about but are
not really sure what it is about [1]) continues to go forward. After
an in-person meeting two or so weeks ago, which produced a whole lot
of (interesting) notes [2], we're breaking down the main outcomes of
the meeting for you (yes, you, and you, and you over there) to
comment, twist, change, add to, substract from, develop and {{insert
new collaboration-related word here}}.
The first part of those notes put up for scrutiny is known as the
roles matrix.
To make a long story short, this matrix was put together after a
brainstorming session at our last meeting to try and define what roles
and responsibilities exist on the organisational level in Wikimedia,
and who fulfills those roles.
It sounds daunting, but really, it is a lot more fun that one may think.
So. The roles matrix is here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/Roles_Matrix
for your perusal.
If you're interested in some background about the matrix, read the
whole page. It's not too long.
If you're not, please just hack away in the matrix here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/Roles_Matrix#The_Roles_Matrix:_Reloaded
or share your ideas on the talk page here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_roles_project/Roles_Matrix
Bottom line is: we need you.
Really, we do.
We need you to bring new perspectives, fresh ideas, insight and
hindsight, crazy and thoughtful proposals, and most of all,
constructive criticism.
So please, follow the links and tell us a piece of your mind.
Thanks,
Best,
Delphine
[1] If I had to summarize it, I'd probably start by calling it the
organisational development project. The next level of summarizing
would be Trying to put together a comprehensive charter which
captures the roles and responsibilities of different people and
organisations in the Wikimedia movement, as well as defines a frame
for their interactions. For the next level, you might want to read
the meta page about it here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/Proposal
[2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_project/2011-01-29
--
@notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org
Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] CC open attribute released
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:33 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: this is just awesome: http://openattribute.com/ Born at the Drumbeat festival, just released! See the backstory: http://mollykleinman.com/2011/02/07/announcing-open-attribute/ This is really great but...as I said in my comment, there does not see to be any plan for an IE extension, which I find is a shame. We can say what we want about IE, but my guess is that people who use IE are probably the least educated to make proper attribution, leaving them out would be well, too bad. :( Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] January 15 retro?
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: Please tell that exist a video of wikipedians singing this song!! XD Yep http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDT4s6yLwvg :D This was hilarious. Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] January 15 retro?
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 1:59 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Steven Walling wrote: The other Wikipedias weren't started on that date, so they have nothing to celebrate or commemorate. The anniversary is not just about English Wikipedia. If this was just English Wikipedia's celebration, there certainly wouldn't be more than 100 events organized in dozens of countries and on every continent except Antarctica. That's incredibly poor logic. Only the English Wikipedia is going to be ten years old on January 15, 2011. If people around the world want to throw parties for the English Wikipedia's tenth anniversary, they're of course free to. But that doesn't change the facts, even if people will be partying in six of seven continents. Don't be silly. If we're gonna go the silly route, I'm happy to say that as a French living in Germany, I couldn't care less what dates the French and German Wikipedia were actually online. What's fun here is that there was a time when there wasn't Wikipedia, and there was a time when suddenly there was Wikipedia. So yep, I'd say go for retro and agree with Steven, should be retro and not Wikipedia 10 mark (people will have thought we have changed our logo). Or some kind of wikidoodle thing that someone comes up with quick (I hope Google is making their own Doodle for us ;)), but that should be on ALL Wikipedias, not just on the English one. It only makes sense if it's everywhere and has wordlwide impact. And I go with Lodewijk. Man, if there are ways of partying twice, let's go for it! Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2011 Registration Now Open
I just want to send here, along with best new year wishes, an enormous
thanks to the Haifa team. I believe they have beaten all previous
Wikimanias in opening the registration website so early.
Hat down.
Cheers,
Delphine
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Asaf Bartov asaf.bar...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, everyone.
We are pleased to announce that the registration period and the scholarship
application period for Wikimania 2011, which will be held in Haifa, Israel,
on August 4th to 7th, 2011, have *just begun!*
== Registration ==
Those who register early will enjoy considerable discounts in both
registration and accommodation fees, so be sure to register as early as
possible.
* Full information about registration, including fees and registration
periods: http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Registration
* Our registration website: http://wmreg.wikimedia.org.il/
== Scholarship application ==
If you require a scholarship to attend Wikimania 2011, you can apply for one
until the end of January 2011. This year, there will be partial scholarships
to cover travel costs up to USD 300, in addition to full scholarships.
* Full information about scholarships:
http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships
* Our scholarship application website: http://wmschols.wikimedia.org.il/
== Call for Papers ==
The Call for Papers for the conference has been available for a while now.
You are welcome to submit workshop, seminar, tutorial, panel, and
presentation proposals.
* The Call for Papers:
http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Papers
== Translators required ==
You are welcome to help translate as much of our conference wiki into as
many languages as possible, using the regular {{Other languages}} and
{{Translation}} templates.
If you are interested in translating the registration website into
additional languages, please contact us at wikimania
-registrat...@wikimedia.org.
== Got any questions? ==
You can contact us in any of the ways listed on
http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Contact.
If you have questions that might interest others, please post them on
http://wikimania2011.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania:Information_Desk.
Please bear with us if the registration or scholarship application websites
are momentarily unavailable due to maintenance.
Wishing you all a happy 2011 and looking forward to hosting you in Haifa,
Asaf Bartov
on behalf of the entire Wikimania 2011 local team
--
Asaf Bartov asaf.bar...@gmail.com
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
@notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org
Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Executive Director?
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 9 December 2010 18:54, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com wrote: While I understand the challenges in communicating effectively with a variety of audiences, I think the point that's been raised is that for a project that is all about trying to describe things as accurately as possible, much of the community feels that in order to maintain a basic level of accuracy, it's worth it to forgo whatever additional money we might raise by giving it up. To phrase it differently, this is not a messaging decision that should be left to the outcome of AB testing. That's an argument to which I'm sympathetic. That certainly describes my position very well. Thank you. And mine. My thanks too. To even imply that Wikipedia has an executive director is not only a falsehood, but also somehow undermines all the efforts the Wikimedia community has put in over the years to differentiate Wikimedia from Wikipedia, and more importantly, to make sure that it was clear that Wikimedia organisations (chapters and Foundation alike) have no power over editorial content. Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Executive Director?
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 1:16 AM, Zack Exley zex...@wikimedia.org wrote: OK, everyone -- I learned my lesson! Thanks for teaching it. They say you are not really part of the tech team until you have broken the site. I guess you are not really part of the Wikimedia community until you've got a whole thread on some Wikimedia mailing list criticizing your actions... ;) So...welcome to the Wikimedia community Zack! ;-) I was looking at it from the perspective of the reader who has never heard the word Wikimedia. There are millions and millions of them. Luckily they simply think we are misspelling Wikipedia, and are donating anyways. We will continue to answer their emails alerting us to our error with patient explanations. Thank you and the fundraising team for a quick reaction and thorough explanations. Best, Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] funraising thru celebrity endorsements?
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 11:27 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 24 November 2010 10:24, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: Fine grained control over which banners appear on which pages would also result in the community being extremely worried that WMF is gearing up to run ads on content pages. If the community has that level of assumption of bad faith, then everyone's already lost. What are you basing your statement on? Your assertion needs a lot more detail. +1 Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Looking for stories of readers affected by Wikipedia
Hello, Megan might want to contact Valérie75 http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Val%C3%A9rie75, who ended up writing books about the topics she contributed to on Wikipédia. The books are not under a free license (I don't think), but have received good press in their domain (ornitohology, history of naturalism and such). Her mini bio does mention Wikipedia, and my take is that Wikipédia (and the amazing contribution she made to it) was a breakthrough in her career as an author. She has more than 5 edits on fr wp. Not sure if you're looking for that kind of stories, but it's a nice editor/volunteer/amateur becomes professional story. http://valerie-chansigaud.fr/index.php/accueil/mini-bio Cheers, Delphine On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks, Megan Hernandez on the staff is looking out for me, for stories of readers whose lives have been impacted by Wikipedia or the other projects. (Donors often send us stories like that, and I am often looking for stories to tell people about the projects. So I've asked her to send good ones to me.) I was writing her a set of criteria for the kinds of stories I want, and it occurred to me that you might yourselves have some good stories of exactly this kind. So I am sending along the criteria here too :-) If you have stories that fit many/all of these criteria, please send them to me, onlist or off. And please forgive my cross-posting to several lists at once. Thanks, Sue * Ideally, they'd be along the theme of how Wikipedia made my life better. This might be an anecdote, or bigger-picture (ie, 'how Wikipedia makes my life better every day'). * Ideally, they would be stories of people who pre-exposure-to-Wikipedia would have had circumscribed access to information. Because they grew up in a small town with no library, because their school didn't stock certain kinds of books, because materials in their language are of limited availability, because their government limits access to certain types of information -- in general, because their economic/political/socio-cultural circumstances somehow impede(d) easy access to information. * Ideally, the information that Wikipedia gives them is important, and directly, immediately useful. Like, it helped them better understand a health issue they were having, or it equipped them to do some important task better; it helped them understand a new situation or some aspect of themselves, or enabled them to solve an important problem. Maybe it helped them get a job they otherwise couldn't have gotten, or enabled them to avoid some specific danger or risk. * And/or, the information fed a general curiosity and desire to understand the world better. It got them interested in going to college which nobody in their family had done before, it helped them develop a more thoughtful position on a public policy issue, it stimulated them to travel or read more widely, or to question assumptions they had been making. * Ideally, their lives are better today because of the information they are exposed to via Wikipedia. Maybe this would be better in some really specific way -- like, Three months later I persuaded my doctor to let me try the new treatment, and it worked. Or, it might be much more general. * It is fine if the information they found on Wikipedia might otherwise have been kept from them, either deliberately or through lack of easy opportunity. It is fine if the information is considered risky or controversial in some way. -- Sue Gardner Executive Director Wikimedia Foundation 415 839 6885 office 415 816 9967 cell Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Foundation switching to Google Apps?
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:35 AM, Zugravu Gheorghe zugravu.gheor...@gmail.com wrote: On 27.10.2010 01:15, Jon Davis wrote: On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 15:02, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.comwrote: Erik Moeller, 26/10/2010 23:01: We've recommended Thunderbird in the past (with some folks sticking with GMail, yours truly included), but unfortunately it doesn't meet all our needs. Why? All things considered, I like Thunderbird, but it has two main issues for us. #1 - No integrated centralized calendar. What about the Sunbird/Lightning extension for the Thunderbird. I think that the number of manipulation to setup them will be the same with the amount of setup for Google Calendar. It just _does not_ work. I use Gmail only for lists, Thunderbird for every other email. But calendaring in TB is just buggy as hell. And I've been trying for years, being the Mozilla fan that I am. It never really gets better :( So google calendar it is. And as a small comment: Thunderbird is free (as in freedom) application and allows to do whatever manipulation with the code (and there are a bunch of thunderbird customization already available there) - thus if there is a need this need can solved by the community. - And Wikimedia could make a call for improvements in the code of TB, which I believe would have be taken into consideration by the developers. And more people could have used the results of that - thus generating a better and smoother application (as in the wikipedia articles). +1. I really think Wikimedia should poke the Mozilla Foundation on that ;). Delphine (prêchant pour sa paroisse) -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] chapter board seats (was: Gre...)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:26 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: What about situations where a dozen or so people get together and decide to do the chapter thing for a geographic region/country, without actively seeking input from the majority of Wikimedians from their region? Once the name is incorporated, it's something of a done deal, whether or not the Board grants them chapter-hood. Well, not entirely. As I understand it, if a group got together and started using the Wikimedia name without permission it would be a trademark violation (see http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy). I know these questions has been debated over many years; someone from the chapcom etc should jump in for a longer answer. There really isn't much of a longer answer. Le me, however, try some context and an example. Wikimedia has limited ressources, which it tries to invest in the best possible places, with the goal to support free culture, content, education etc. It so happens that Wikimedia is also hosting one of the most visited website in the world, which brings us in the spotlight. That means that there are people who are attracted to the name because they want some of the light. This might include people who decide to start an organisation called Wikimedia something, which has no purpose close to ours, or which, as you put it, does not represent Wikimedians at large but rather a small group of people defending their own interests. We then have the following potential solutions: - These people apply for chapter status, and fail to deliver the prerequisites for being one, and are denied it. This might lead to us asking them to drop the name, which they might do or not do, in which case we might consider legal action in a given geography to recover the name for other people. - These people don't even ask for chapter status and are just a thorn in our side or in the side of local Wikimedians who would like to found their own chapters. Same as above applies (we ask nicely, and we might go to court). What I'm trying to show here, is that we cannot be everywhere (there's much of cannot as in not able to because it's just too much trouble), so yes, there might be misuse of the name and/or the chapter thing. However, the trademarks are registered, so if we really have a case, we should be able to go and get our name back. Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Foundation-l word cloud
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 12:10 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 4 October 2010 10:51, K. Peachey p858sn...@yahoo.com.au wrote: Although I don't have a issue with it, but you may wish to double check the licensing you have attached to those uploads, since from understanding is that copyright and ownership does apply to emails. Not even within Commons level of copyright paranoia is a word count chart encumbered. Like! Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Differences between projects with common versus highly diverse cultural backgrounds (was Re: Pending Changes)
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 6:49 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 29 September 2010 23:32, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote: Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote: German Wikipedia has had pending changes implemented *globally*, in all articles, for several years now. Unlike en:WP, where numbers of active editors have dropped significantly since 2007, numbers of active editors in de:WP have remained stable: http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaDE.htm http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm The stats on that page are pretty confusing, Andreas. Could you say here what the relative figures are? According to the tables, the number of en:WP editors with 100 edits/month stood at 5,151 in April 2007, and was down to 3,868 in August 2010. de:WP had 1,027 in April 2007, and 1,075 in August 2010. You raise an interesting point, Andreas. I am not persuaded that pending changes/flagged revisions have anything to do with the editor retention rate at the de:WP. However, I think you may be right that the considerably more homogeneous editor population, as well as the commonality in cultural background, was instrumental in the ability of the project to jointly make such a cultural shift. Indeed, the number of de:WP editors with 100 edits/month has remained very stable since January 2006. (The number of en:WP editors was essentially the same in January 2006 as at present, but hit its peak in April 2007. Let's not cherry pick the data too much, okay?) As an aside for those interested in the historical perspective, the massive increase in the number of editors on en:WP coincides with a massive influx of vandalism, and over a thousand editors did almost nothing *but* revert or otherwise address vandalism. As better and more effective tools have been developed to address that problem - Huggle, Twinkle, Friendly, the edit filters, reverting bots, semi-protection, etc - the number of editors needed to manage vandalism has diminished dramatically. In other words, that 1300-editor difference may largely be accounted for because those whose only skill was vandal-fighting have moved on. That's not to say there is no vandalism on en:WP today; there's still plenty of it. Observing from afar, it has often struck me that when almost all members of an editorial community come from a common cultural background and geographic area, there is a synergy that isn't found on projects where the community is much more diverse. This is best illustrated in the large scale on German Wikipedia, and some other European projects, where the community is visibly more cohesive. In the smaller scale, certain projects with shared cultural/geographic background on English Wikipedia, such as Wikiproject Australia, are more accomplished at developing and meeting shared objectives. These groups, whether large projects or small pockets within a larger project, seem to operate in accordance with their local cultural norms; in other words, they don't have to find common cultural ground before they can move on to a discussion of a proposal. It's my belief that the common cultural background of the de:WP editorial community has been one of the keystones of its success in being able to implement large-scale and project-wide changes, flagged revisions being the most obvious. That common cultural background or focal geographic area simply does not exist for the English Wikipedia; we're probably one of the few projects where the same expression can be viewed as friendly, somewhat rude and downright offensive at the same time, depending on whether the reader is Australian, British or American (not to mention those who have learned English as a second language, which also makes up a significant part of our editorship). Each project also has its own culture, but I confess that most of my knowledge of the culture of other projects is anecdotal rather than observational, so I won't venture to try to compare them. When faced with dramatic increases in vandalism, en:WP created tools that are largely developed by individuals and utilized by other individuals (with the exception of semi-protection); de:WP developed a single unified community response. The remarkably high quality of the tools used on en:WP means that any new systemic tool has to meet a very high threshold for it to be considered acceptable for wide-scale use. Perhaps that is the key difference between these two community types: one places more emphasis on making cohesive group decisions, while the other more strongly encourages a range of solutions. I don't have any answers, just observations. I find your analyse extremely interesting, I do believe indeed that culture plays a role in how people approach their wikipedia-editing and how harmoniously this actually works. However, I would not discount the sheer numbers. The number of active editors is about 3,5 times higher in the
Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial Content Study Update
Robert, For what it's worth and for the record, I want to thank you for sharing your thoughts and findings about this process on this list, it's a fantastic positive and constructive example of transparency as I understand and value it. Bon courage, Cheers, Delphine On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 4:05 PM, R M Harris rmhar...@sympatico.ca wrote: Robert Harris here again, the consultant looking at the issues surrounding controversial content on Wikimedia projects. I wanted first of all to thank all of you who have taken the trouble to once again weigh in on a subject I know has been debated many times within the Wikimedia community. It has been very valuable for me, a newcomer to these questions, to witness the debate first-hand for several reasons. The first is to remind me of the thinking behind various positions, rather than simply to be presented with the results of those positions. And the second is as a reminder to myself to remember my self-imposed rule of do no harm” and to reflect on how easy it is to break that rule, even if unintentionally. So far, the immediate result for me of the dialogue has been to recognize that the question of whether there is any problem to solve at all is a real question that will need a detailed and serious response, as well as a recognition that the possibility of unintended consequence in these matters is high, so caution and modesty is a virtue. Having said that, I will note that I'm convinced that if there are problems to be solved around questions of controversial content, the solutions can probably best be found at the level of practical application. (and I’ll note that several of you have expressed qualified confidence that a solution on that level may be findable). That's not to say that the intellectual and philosophical debate around these issues is not valuable -- it is essential, in my opinion. It's just to note that not only is the devil in the details as a few of you have noted, but that the angel may be in the details as well -- that is -- perhaps -- questions insoluble on the theoretical level may find more areas of agreement on a practical level. I'm not sure of that, but I'm presenting it as a working hypothesis at this point. My intended course of action over the next month or so is the following. I'm planning to actually write the study on a wiki, where my thinking as it develops, plus comments, suggestions, and re-workings will be available for all to see. I was planning to begin that perhaps early in September. (A presentation to the Foundation Board is tentatively scheduled for early October). Between now and then, I would like to continue the kind of feedback I've been getting, all of it so valuable for me. I have posted another set of questions about controversy in text articles on the Meta page devoted to the study, (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content) because my ambit does not just include images, and text and image, in my opinion, are quite different forms of content. As well, I will start to post research I've been collecting for information and comment. I have some interesting notes about the experience of public libraries in these matters (who have been struggling with many of these same questions since the time television, not the Internet, was the world’s new communications medium), as well as information on the policies of other big-tent sites (Google Images, Flickr, YouTube, eBay,etc.) on these same issues. I haven't finished collecting all the info I need on the latter, but will say that the policies on these sites are extremely complex (although not always presented as such) and subject within their communities to many of the same controversies that have arisen in ours. We are not them, by any means, but it is interesting to observe how they have struggled with many of the same issues with which we are struggling. The time is soon coming when I will lose the luxury of mere observation and research, and will have to face the moment where I will enter the arena myself as a participant in these questions. I’m looking forward to that moment, with the understanding that you will be watching what I do with care, concern, and attention. Robert Harris ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Cultural awareness and sensitivity
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote: reaction to what to me was actually a rather funny comment. However, Mariano's following reaction as well as Yaroslav's came across to me as unecessarily aggressive and actually shocked me in what I perceived as a lack of consideration and altogether rather nasty answers. Strange. It was very strange for me to read that Yaroslav (while I know only one Yaroslav here on the list - it's Yaroslav Blanter) was... OMG... unecessarily aggressive. Moreover I was 'actually shocked' as to my experience Yaroslav is not too kind or better to say warm in tone sometimes (!), but I never saw him unecessarily aggressive. So I spent some slice of night (it's 3:30AM here in Kyiv now) to run some investigation. As to the best of my understanding (and if I'm not mistaken) that was another person (should I point exactly?) which has not much in common with Yaroslav: he is from Russia as well and he is admin in ru:WP also. Thanks Pavlo. Actually I do not think I posted anything in this thread at all, and I overlooked Delphinbe's post as well. This must be a misunderstanding somehow. Sorry for taking so long to answer this and offer my apologies. It was Victor's post which shocked me, not Yaroslav. So much for writing late at night. And thank you Pavlo for pointing my mistake out. Best, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Amidst all the chaos...
...we should not forget, that there are on Commons some of the most beautiful images I've ever seen in my entire life. Free. As in Speech. A look at the lists for the Picture of the Year should convince you of that. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2009/Galleries Cheers, Delphine PS. A smallish selection here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Notafish/Worthy_of_note_by_others -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] pediapress in English... and in hardcover?
Hi there, 2010/5/9 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Mike.lifeguard mike.lifegu...@gmail.com wrote: On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: Lost in the recent email flood: pediapress is fully working for English. http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/06/wikipedia-and-pediapress-now-allow-you-to-create-books-from-content-in-english/ Does anyone have photos of prototype hardcover books? Are the hardcover books new? IIRC, they were only paperback when this Not quite there yet. was first introduced. But I'd be surprised if they didn't have some images for promotional purposes. I don't suppose we could ask them oh-so-nicely to release them under a free license? :D Well, given that all the other ones have always been released under a free license, I don't see why not ;) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PediaPress I've asked for a pic of a hard cover. I'll upload it to commons. As promised, here is a taste of what it will look like. PediaPress is still experimenting with the whole thing and those pics are not of the best quality, but it's a start. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pediapress_couleur_inside.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tranche_pediapress_book.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pediapress_hardcover_sample.jpg Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] pediapress in English... and in hardcover?
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Mike.lifeguard mike.lifegu...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: Lost in the recent email flood: pediapress is fully working for English. http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/06/wikipedia-and-pediapress-now-allow-you-to-create-books-from-content-in-english/ Does anyone have photos of prototype hardcover books? Are the hardcover books new? IIRC, they were only paperback when this Not quite there yet. was first introduced. But I'd be surprised if they didn't have some images for promotional purposes. I don't suppose we could ask them oh-so-nicely to release them under a free license? :D Well, given that all the other ones have always been released under a free license, I don't see why not ;) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PediaPress I've asked for a pic of a hard cover. I'll upload it to commons. Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Marcus Buck m...@marcusbuck.org wrote: The Swedish Wikipedia decision is consequent and logical. Logos are copyrighted. Copyrighted material cannot be included. So no logos. It's plain and simple. The problem is not the reasonable decision of the Swedish Wikipedia, but the unreasonable decision of the Foundation to claim copyright for the logos. The foundation did that because they thought that would make it easier to defend the brand. But that's just intermingling trademarks and copyright. Trademark protection does everything we need. No need for additional copyright protection. The Coca Cola logo is PD-old (and in many jurisdictions also PD-ineligible) and they have no problem defending their brand. Why should Wikimedia logos be any different? Just release the logos under a free license and the problem will be gone. Just allow me to ask for a clarification. We're talking about article space, right? This means that Wikimedia logos are now _not used_ in the Swedish Wikipedia to illustrate articles on the Wikimedia projects, I suppose. Right? But as I understood Lennart's first email, I think that sv Wikipedia also has decided not to use the logos even on internal navigation templates and such to link/identify other Wikimedia projects, right? What about the top left corner of every page, has it also been decided that the Wikipedia logo used to identify the website should go too? Thanks for your clarification on this. Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:25 AM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/3/30 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: ... This means that Wikimedia logos are now _not used_ in the Swedish Wikipedia to illustrate articles on the Wikimedia projects, I suppose. Right? But as I understood Lennart's first email, I think that sv Wikipedia also has decided not to use the logos even on internal navigation templates and such to link/identify other Wikimedia projects, right? That is correct. e.g. http://sv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=11402949oldid=11192788 What about the top left corner of every page, has it also been decided that the Wikipedia logo used to identify the website should go too? That is the website UI, which is not content. They could say that the UI should also be completely free of copyrighted works. IMO that would be going overboard. If that is the case, while I understand and actually respect the decision not to use Wikimedia logos _to illustrate articles_ (although I don't agree with it), I find it extremely inconsequent and illogical to take away the logos that are in navigation templates and pointing to other material in other Wikimedia projects. As far as I'm concerned, these are part of the UI as much as the Wikipedia logo in the top left corner, and, more important, I find this decision actually harms our mission of distributing free content. If Wikimedia projects don't help themselves, I wonder who will. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Announcement] Extension of user experience work
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hello all, our very positive revenue perspective (we have already exceeded our fundraising targets for the fiscal year, and received the additional $2M from Google) allows us to do something we've hoped to be able to do: make our investment in user experience work permanent, as opposed to releasing most of the current user experience team and ending the project. It makes obvious sense for any major website to have a permanent team focused on user experience improvements in the broadest sense. This includes eliminating obvious barriers to entry, but beyond that, we want to improve the experience as a whole for both readers and editors. This is fantastic news indeed! I am looking forward to seeing this initiative go much further than was planned at first. Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] committee placement
I answered this email privately. Seeing it was probably meant for the chapcom. Cheers, Delphine On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:17 AM, r.dave...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi I am very interested in working as a team on your committe ,I am from england,I wondered if you could forward more detail like pay? And hours? Location? Many thanks Rebecca Davey Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boing Boing applauds stats.grok.se!
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 19:56, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Bod Notbod bodnot...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:57 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: But then, who isn't a contributor since 2004 these days? Is there something special about 2004? That's when I became a volunteer. Is that recognised as the year things reached critical mass? No. But there is something special about 2003, when I started :D In seriousness, I usually think of mid-late 2003 as our [[Eternal September]] date. What do others think? Don't know about Eternal September (I wasn't there anyway ;)), but I remember the Habemus Effect aka Popedotting as the first time we realized how really wildly popular Wikipedia was. http://midom.livejournal.com/1364.html :D Delphine PS. the folks at the Vatican found this example extremely amusing :) -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraising banners
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 09:04, Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, I can see how the Christmas giving spirit would increase the potential donations. If that is the reason why it's run in December, why don't we investigate how donations to WM could be given as a present to a friend/relative. I know a lot of charities offer gifts where what you personally receive is a certificate to give as a present to your relative, but the money is actually going to the charity for a nominated purpose. For example: http://www.oxfamunwrapped.com.au/Product.php?productid=94 Could donating to WM somehow be made into a christmas present? I believe we've previously talked about saying things like donating $30 will run your language's Wikipedia for 'x' minutes - perhaps we could turn that into a certificate kind of thing? (so long as it was made clear that this was nominal, rather than making a false promise that your donation would be spent at a precise moment in time). I think that's an excellent idea :) So do I. I think the 10th birthday is definitely something we want to include as a prominent topic in a fundraising summit to come. Planning early is indeed of the essence, especially when we want to take advantage of such events, which only happen once. As for the tax-adjustment aspect, that may be the case for the US (and granted, that's where most of the money is being raised currently), but different countries have different periods - here in Australia for example the fiscal year is July-June. It's country-dependent. From what I know, personal income tax returns in most European countries cover a Jan-Dec period. So the last few days of the year are also the last chance for donations to be included in that return. From a purely revenue-maximizing perspective, it makes sense to keep the fundraiser in November/December. I think we might also want to try and adjust in a country-specific way for some languages. I know for example the Polish have their tax return (and their biggest fundraising opportunity) around April, while for example chapters-to-be such as India also have their fiscal year running to April. We might want to try and take into account those differences to plan accordingly. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 16:47, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
Craig Newmark has around 300K google results. Jimbo is at half a
million. Craigslist is at about 65 million wikipedia is at about 300
million. For groups that almost entirely exist online that's a fair
solid way of showing which is more significant. In terms of using fame
to push us forwards about the only web company owners who might be
able to do that would be Mark Zuckerberg and google's co-founders.
And no they wouldn't be a good idea either.
Craigslist has some PR problems at the moment what with all the scams
and the various law enforcement agencies objecting to some of their
personal ads. Associating with a project with some of the most
titanium hardened community driven altruism credentials on the web is
a valid strategy for trying to return to the image they like to
maintain.
Just so I understand your argument. Were Jimmy Wales to lend his name
and good will to support a cause {insert here name of noble cause you
believe in}, I suppose you would summarize his help as oh, he's
trying to get his company to get a better image? Wait, I'm probably
starting a troll here. Replace Jimmy Wales with whatever known
person you can think of.
Did it ever occur to you that real people _aren't_ the company they
founded/bought/are taking care of?
And whether it is Craig Newmark, the Dalai Lama, the Pope or my
neighbours, if their supporting a good cause actually works and
money comes in and awareness rises, frankly, I say go ahead and
thanks for all your help.
Geez,
Delphine
--
~notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will
get lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 23:00, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed; and arguably Craig Newmark is much, much more famous in San Francisco (where he's a local celeb) than he would be pretty much anywhere else. That might be part of the issue here. If you know who he is in the SF-tech-community-philanthropy context, it might strike you as more of a clear use of his good name to generously support a cool project. If you don't, it might look like more of a clear advertisement for Craigslist. Yes, that would be my main criticism about this all. Not that I think it's advertising, but I think Greg mentionned it earlier in the thread, rather that Craigslist has probably an audience that (apart from being centered in the US, SF etc.) has a lot in common to our contributing community. ie. people who already have desactivated the site notice long ago ;) Regardless this is basically the same debate we had over Virgin Unite -- the name of any commercial organization (and probably any other nonprofit organization, too, if we're honest with ourselves) being displayed on the site provokes intense dislike and debate among a large section of the community -- for various reasons, but mostly summarized as we don't want to use the resources of Wikipedia to advocate or advertise for another organization. Sooo true. Parochialists, are we? :D Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Assume Good Faith and Don't Bite Newbees
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 18:18, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote: What if someone registers an account 'Miscrosoft and starts vandal editing? The media reports like 'Miscosoft blocked for vandalism in Wikipedia' would be hardly better than 'Microsoft blocked on sight'. Concerning the joint accounts I thought the main problem is that someone should be held responsible for the edits. I mean if there are some illegal edits done from this account and then someone claims it is not him, it is another user who uses the same account? On ru.wp we ban the joint accounts on sight, even though the company name policy has not been really enforced. I support Liam's idea and think we might want to look at a two-tier policy: 1- have verified accounts, which are used by some companies/organisation to do encyclopedic work 2- disallow using a company's name in one's user name if they have not asked for a verification - and provided the right credentials This said, I am completely with Lodewijk on the fact that I find incredible that we push companies to actually make what is nothing else than sock puppets accounts, because we don't allow to have a company's name in the user name. I am sure this has been debated at length, but I fail to see how this can be better than being able to identify staff from a company contributing to an article. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Assume Good Faith and Don't Bite Newbees
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 18:20, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: The idea of verified accounts raises all sorts of questions and potential problems. The Wikimedia Foundation might be able to verify that users requesting a company account are connected to that company, if the account is on the English Wikipedia. But can the Foundation be sure that the existence of a company account is authorized by that company? Can they do anything at all in other languages? Should the process of verification be left to OTRS, or some other group on each wiki? If verified status is granted erroneously, and it impacts the reputation of a particular company, who is responsible? Well, obviously the verified account system should find a way to answer those questions. And I fail to see what kind of responsibility would end up on the shoulders of an administrator for blocking an account on Wikipedia. It's not like blocking a Wikipedia account actually endangered a company in any kind of way. Among other reasons, the English Wikipedia bans role accounts (including corporate accounts) because we wish people to act on their own behalf, and not claim the support or backing of a corporation. With limited capacity to verify the basis for any claimed role, we end up treating all such claims as suspect anyway. This restriction may be inconvenient in some instances, but far more trouble is prevented by maintaining the simplicity of individual to individual interaction. But as I understand it, accounts such as Delphine-ACMEcola are also blocked on sight right? Which prevents even me from making edits on behalf of a company and being really open about it. Mind you, if I was there to really make a company shinier on Wikipedia (see the recent coffee brand case recently talked about in the French Wikipedia), I would probably avoid having a corporate account at all. But for people and companies who act in good faith, I still think that role accounts should be allowed and a verify-system be put in place. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Office hours
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 04:02, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: The WMF have already offered to do it at two timeslots and if these are sufficiently different from each other then that's about all that can be done. You're never going to be able to please everyone in this issue. Agreed, but having two slots which are convenient for noone does not really help :) So I would suggest to have one slot convenient for Europeans/Africans, one slot convenient for Asia/Oceania. Any of both will be convenient for the US West Coast, which in turn should make it relatively OK for the US East Coast and South America. I think it was along those lines that Angela said to move both times later. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Report to the Board of Trustees June 2009
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 22:21, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/10 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, I think it is not reasonable to judge others by how you do things. Please remember that there are different cultures where things are done in different ways. I am sure there are things in the history of the WMUK that you do not wish onto others.. Everyone has to deal with the local environment. This is one reason why we have different chapters ... Nonsense. If British Wikimedians can afford their own food, so can Portuguese Wikimedians. They can bring a packed lunch from home if they want - they would be eating anyway. Once in a while does not harm, I have to agree with Thomas on this one. As a matter of fact, the amount is irrelevant to me, it's the whole idea of having face to face meetings 12 (twelve!) times in a year that I find incredible. In a country like Australia, or even the US where getting people together even just once might cost that kind of money, I would have found the expense justified. In a country like Portugal, I am sorry, I don't. Cultural differences may exist, but there is no chapter that I know of which does a monthly face to face meeting of their board (heck, if Wikimedia France had that kind of money, we would!). And if they do, they manage to get the funds together, as Thomas puts it, especially for the meals. If anything, this helps measure the commitment of people to making the chapter work. What happened to volunteers eating sandwiches and fruits while sitting in a café with free wifi? So yeah, I must say that I would have brought down this grant to around 1000 USD for a first face to face meeting in order to get things going, and would have only included legal fees, renting rooms and travel, for example. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Omidyar Network Commits $2 Million Grant to Wikimedia Foundation
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 21:26, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Guillaume Paumierguillom@gmail.com wrote: [snip] It is very common for members of the board of a non-profit organisation to donate money to support this organisation. It was my understanding that the appointment was of Matt Halprin, not the Omidyar Network. On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Robert Rohderaro...@gmail.com wrote: However, in this case, even if we assume the seat was outright bought for $2M, I don't think there are I'm not sure why people are behaving as though there is any ambiguity on this point. The Omidyar Network agreed to make a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation with the understood condition that their representative would receive a seat on the board. If you're going to be consistent with your first comment (above: appointment is of Matt Halprin, not ON), then the word representative is probably not the right one. (not denying any connection or anything, just pointing out semantics) Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 16:18, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/7/9 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com: The issue here is that, in the Catalan case for example, the effort is already beyond just a working group. You have a group of people who are more than mature to have their own organisation and make it succesful. What they lack is legitimity under the Wikimedia banner in order to talk to potential donors who would support their efforts if they only had the name. I think a formal Association of Catalan Wikimedians, recognised by the WMF as an affiliated organisation and with something quite similar to the chapters agreement would work well. Calling it a chapter will cause problems, since it overlaps with other chapters, but it can be much the same thing just with a different name. Yes, keeping in mind that the most important thing here is, in my opinion, close collaboration with the chapters that are touched by this organisation. In cases like this, I am not sure that the Wikimedia Foundation is the best partner. In any case, the WMFoundation definitely should not be the only partner and recognition should also come from the chapters potentially involved. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 06:54, Michael Snowwikipe...@verizon.net wrote: case.) The basic question is, what can or should we do to encourage grassroots groups that want to support our mission, but may not fit into the chapters framework? As an answer to this question, I would say yes. My nuances come later. There are various possibilities here. One example is interest groups that aren't tied to geography, the way the chapters are. I always cite the idea of an Association of Blind Wikipedians, who might wish to organize to promote work on accessibility issues. As with the Brazilian situation, informal groups could also fit local conditions better sometimes, or serve as a proto-chapter stage of development. Maybe there's a benefit in having an association with some durability and continuation, but without going to the effort of incorporation and formal agreements on trademarks and such. It could also make sense to have an organization form for a specific project and then disband after it is completed, such as with Wikimania (somebody can correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand the Gdansk team is planning something like this as distinct from Wikimedia Polska). I think it's important to keep in mind the implications of supporting Wikimedia. These implications fall, in my opinion, in two categories: - Use of the trademark - Financial flow (access to specific grants, fundraising) I see three scenarii: 1) informal national chapters or chapters to be: There are countries in the world where starting a chapter in the way it is defined today is an endeavour that makes little sense, for political, cultural, philosophical, financial or administrative reasons. Here I'll make a difference between informal local/national groups (will never be a chapter) and chapters to be (aims at becoming a chapter). For informal national groups, it is important that the Wikimedia Foundation supports grassroot initiatives that aim at supporting the Wikimedia projects. If the work stays informal, and there is no need for any kind of formality (plan wikimeets, intervene in conferences, that kind of grassroot public outreach), then the support from the Foundation could be minimal, such as maybe a letter of introduction for someone wanting to participate in a conference in a specific country. If, on the other hand, the need shows up for a formal kind of representation, there are probably many ways to explore on how a group of Wikimedians could integrate an existing structure (some other NGO with similar goals) in order to enter a formal agreement with the WMF re: trademarks and/or fundraising. I believe we could develop some kind of partnership agreeement with third party non-profits which would allow active Wikimedians who are not able or willing to form a chapter to intensify outreach in some kind of structured way, under a Wikimedia banner. For chapters to be, I think the same could happen, with the idea that the grassroot initiative wants to take some time to develop into a working national chapter. Growing initiatives with the help of an existing structure could be a good first step towards chapteriality, and it is important that the WMF follow those initiatives and help the members who wish to develop the best way of founding a chapter by developing ideas in another context. What I don't see, in either of these cases, is an informal group with the same objectives of fundraising and potentially trademark usage that stays completely informal. Of course, national legislations may vary, but in the end, in order to protect the trademark and reputation of Wikimedia, it seems to be very hard to have constantly renewed individuals being the Wikimedia flagship in one country or the other. 2) Specific events/projects I don't know about the Gdansk team and whether they have indeed decided to set up an ephemeral organisation, but I suppose it would make sense, in the case of a defined event, or project, to do something of the kind. Again, I suppose legal jurisdictions have different ways of going about this. This said, for such cases, the WMF could also enter some kind of clear agreement which allows the ephemeral group to use the trademarks and fundraise (or find sponsors as for Wikimania) for a specific project. 3) Trans-national interest groups. I remember us discussing wildly the Association of blind Wikipedians ;-). It's a good example, as is a potential Wikimedia Catalunya and this kind of transnational grassroot initiative is probably the hardest case. Of course, as Thomas Dalton said later in this thread, we can't really (and shouldn't have to) prevent a Wiki for the blind organisation to see the light of day. The question comes when this organisation starts to fundraise using the fact that they're going to help the Wikimedia projects and thus comes, to some extent, in competition with existing organisations (chapters and the Foundation). The question is really, at which point is there actual competition? I
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia and public sector involvement, connections
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 21:28, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi,Thank you for your replies. Are there any notable examples you could mention, or point me to?You might be interested in the German initiative of working with a state-funded Institute to write articles in Wikipedia about Sustainable Raw materials: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProjekt_Nachwachsende_Rohstoffe http://www.nachwachsende-rohstoffe.info/nachricht.php?id=20070626-02 And I believe Wikimedia Israel did some work on influencing the copyright law. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Israeli_new_copyright_law Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikia leasing office space to WMF
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 20:53, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: I'm glad someone is concerned about this issue. Wikia has always smacked of they wouldn't let us show ads on Wikipedia, so here is the for-profit branch of Wikipedia with ads. There are potential conflicts of interest at nearly every level of the Wikia/Wikipedia relationship. I never thought I would say what comes next. As much as I have been a fierce defender of a clear cut between Wikia and Wikimedia, I must admit that I find this solution to be one of the best things that has happened to the usability project. About space: been there, and yes, Wikia's headquarters are a street away, so really easy to plan meetings and make sure things happen in coordinated fashion between the Wikimedia office and the Usability project. About working near Wikia: Wikia, as was said elsewhere, is one of the biggest Mediawiki users out there and therefore has, in my opinion, probably the best incentive to make sure that Mediawiki develops in a way that makes sense for the users. They already have a pretty big developper team, and having them at hand will definitely broaden the usability project vision on what a wiki can/should do to be more user friendly. Who more than a commercial user of Mediawiki has an interest in its evolution _for the best_ of users? I see absolutely no conflict of interest. Where? Seriously? Wikia is renting walls, tables and chairs to the Wikimedia Foundation, that's all. And on top of that, they bring to the coffee machine talks tons of ideas and experience in the daily use of the software. And frankly, without this thread, everyone would have forgotten the move two days from now and seen nothing in it. Gee, it's time to grow up and stop seeing the cabal everywhere. Cheers, Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions (chapters)
[OT] On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 13:34, Sebastian Moleski seb...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com wrote: It is interesting how the power distance thing is playing out here. :) I'm not getting the reference. Can you help? For Germans, power distance [1] [2] is small, which means, for example, that it's easy for the employees to go to their boss and talk about things and make decisions on their own, it makes delegation easier. For the French, power distance is big, which means hierarchy is much stronger, and chain of command is more important, which makes delegation harder. Of course, there are millions of other factors coming into play at any given time. But I thought it was interesting to see yours and Florence's reaction on this. Delphine [1] http://www.geert-hofstede.com/ (scroll down the page) [2] and for a little self promotion: http://blog.notanendive.org/post/2008/07/25/Distance-to-power-somewhere-in-the-middle -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
