Hi,
Sorry, sent too fast. ;o)
I think I need to explain the whole history of the issue.
1. On 22 February 2014, Alan started the Request for comment (RfC) on
whether we should host URAA-affected files, and restored previously
deleted ones (around 4,300 of them). [1]
2. On 28 February 2014,
Proposal: Paid volunteers should take care to identify themselves on
Wikimedia Projects and discussions related to Wikimedia Projects.
Sue Gardner's initial report by the WMF into the Belfer case makes a key
decision that there must be effective processes for escalation of employee
activities
Perhaps I'm just being obtuse, but I'm a little unclear on the definition
of a paid volunteer. Could you possibly try rephrasing it so that I'm more
clear?
pb
*Philippe Beaudette * \\ Director, Community Advocacy \\ Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc.
T: 1-415-839-6885 x6643 |
A bit of unsolicited advice from a chapter staff member and long-time
volunteer coming up. It doesn't represent my view on this proposal, but is,
as I said, simply unsolicited advice! Feel free to ignore it if you want.
Here we go...
It seems to me that the term 'paid volunteer' is an oxymoron.
On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, at 22:14, Fæ wrote:
*Definition of paid volunteer:*
Paid volunteers are employees, contractors or part time contractors of
Wikimedia organizations or other organizations having agreements or
partnerships with Wikimedia. The paid volunteer contributes to Wikimedia
projects
Hoi,
I can understand the sentiment and, it makes some sense. However, I do not
like weasel words ... paid employees.. Bah
They are not volunteering. They are on a job, have a mission. I think that
employees of any organisations may work for the benefit of bringing the sum
of all knowledge
On 4 April 2014 14:05, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
...
It seems to me that the term 'paid volunteer' is an oxymoron.
...
Yes, it is oxymoronic, many common terms are, though I am open to an
alternative form of words. I understand that volunteers who are also
employees
[x-posted]
Hello,
The Language Engineering team will be hosting the next monthly IRC office
hour on Wednesday, April 9 2014 at 1700 UTC at #wikimedia-office.
We will be discussing about our recent work and provide updates related to
changes in the translation file format (PHP to JSON) for
On 4 April 2014 14:33, Gryllida gryll...@fastmail.fm wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, at 22:14, Fæ wrote:
*Definition of paid volunteer:*
Paid volunteers are employees, contractors or part time contractors of
Wikimedia organizations or other organizations having agreements or
partnerships with
Just a quick correction, you say that Even a paid researcher on a
university project would not meet this definition, unless the project were
part funded or in partnership with Wikimedia.
This is not quite accurate: even a student on a university project would
meet this definition if his
On 04/04/2014, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Just a quick correction, you say that Even a paid researcher on a
university project would not meet this definition, unless the project were
part funded or in partnership with Wikimedia.
This is not quite accurate: even a
Yann, the nuclear industry controversy was more the issue of
control/ownership of content (which can happen on Commons, for example
the news today about attempts to restrict reuse of Barack Obama's
image). It is a tangent to this proposal. If you have other examples
and think current project
Minutes and slides from Monday's quarterly review meeting of the
Foundation's Analytics team are now available at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Analytics/March_2014
.
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi
Hi Geoff,
Your link to
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=120703,00.html
in [1], which is cited in turn at [2], is dead, and archive.org won't show
me what it used to be for some reason.
Do you please have a current link for the IRS regulations concerning
political advocacy by
James, do we need to take Geoff's time up with something so thoroughly
documented elsewhere? I'd suggest starting with this web site:
http://www.clpi.org/
Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:17 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Geoff,
Your link to
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:17 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Geoff,
Your link to
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=120703,00.html
in [1], which is cited in turn at [2], is dead, and archive.org won't show
me what it used to be for some reason.
Just on a
Thanks, Tillman, I still get the error below and a timeout from archive.org,
so a Wikimedia annotated copy would really help.
I am specifically interested in which items in
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-March/000420.html
are precluded.
We have redesigned the
17 matches
Mail list logo
