Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

Tim Starling wrote: >Board members have a duty to act in the interests of the WMF as a >whole, but it does not follow that denying anonymity to whistleblowers >is in the best interests of the WMF. In fact, I think this Lila/KF/KE >case demonstrates the opposite. > >I would encourage the Board to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

On 03/05/16 08:27, James Heilman wrote: > As for my willingness to share all communications with the entire board, I > believe I managed to communicate all relevant details without violating the > explicit confidence requested of me by staff members. (Note that in later > conversations I was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

I think it is rather a subject that there are chapters which are "zombies" - I mean having no or very little activity. On the other hand we have a number of quite active usergroups which cannot vote. By the way, the overal number of non-voting chapters can be a good measure of the number of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Guerrilla skepticism on Wikipedia

Clearly the little yellow pixies told them so, hence my wikicomments Cheers, P -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Lilburne Sent: Tuesday, 03 May 2016 9:16 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Guerrilla

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Indonesia's New Board of Executive (and Board of Trustees)

Thank you Asaf and Hasive. Regards, 2016-04-27 15:50 GMT+07:00 Asaf Bartov : > Congratulations, WMID! Thank you to the departing board members for their > years of service. > > WMF is looking forward to working more closely with WMID, as we began > discussing at the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

On 3 May 2016 at 17:34, Gnangarra wrote: > We should be careful in not shaming communities to vote poorly to save > face, or even vote for people they dont want as some may truly feel that > the candidates who have nominated wont be a good representative of the > community.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Indeed only two or three candidates were present in Berlin (unfortunately we were not allowed to join, not even at our own expense). It would become quite problematic if 40 organisations would all want to chat for an hour - but at the same time, I do believe in being approachable. I'm more than

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Dear Sam, dear all, It was mainly my idea that we decided to talk to all candidates. I was under impression that we would have the opportunity to talk with all candidates in Berlin. I did get the reasoning that it would be too expensive to do it (in fact, all you have to do to get to WMCON is to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Agree wholeheartedly. Don't need details but a summary list of chapters and the record of who voted would be very welcome. I was dismayed that this information was private. It seems like transparency of basic information like this should be the goal here. I don't think detailed information is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

We should be careful in not shaming communities to vote poorly to save face, or even vote for people they dont want as some may truly feel that the candidates who have nominated wont be a good representative of the community. The individual votes are visable to every affiliate who has access to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Consistent with our commitment to openness, WMUK published our vote on our website last Friday, the day it was agreed by the board. It's at https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Minutes_2016-04-29 for anyone who may be interested. Best regards Michael Wikimedia_UK_logo_40px.png Michael Maggs

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

In fact, for those who have access to it, there is a list of statements at the bottom of that page, listing statements from each chapthorg on their method and time of voting: https://chapters.wikimedia.ch/Appointment_process/2016/Voting#Statements For example, our entry says: "NYC: Decided by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Yes, for clarity, this is what I meant - a public list of who has voted so far (or who hasn't - it's much the same thing, as the overall electorate is known), but not a list of the votes. I'm quite happy with confidential voting - either fully secret or, as Itzik says, just confidential until the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Agree Sam additionally it'd be even more grueling for some candidates who would be expected to field these calls at 2-3 in the morning and then be compared to someone who was fortunate enough to have their chat at 2-3 in the afternoon.. As for publishing a list of who voted I see no issue with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:52 AM, attolippip wrote: > > JFYI, Wikimedia Ukraine has not voted yet, as we wanted to talk to the > candidates via skype/hangouts before making the final decision [1] [2] [3] > [4] [5] [6] > And during Wikimedia Conference we had a chance to talk

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Hello, Actually I favor very much the idea that, after the election, there is a public list of the chapters that did cast the vote. (Not necessarily, which chapter supported which candidate, but that is another discussion. In 2012, the list of candidates was not published at all, by the way.) I

[Wikimedia-l] [ASBS] Vote of Wikimedia Deutschland

Dear fellow Wikimedians, Wikimedia Deutschland’s Board has just casted their vote for the Affiliate Selected Board Seats, and I would like to share our reasoning behind our decision. We will vote for three candidates and rank them in the following order: #1 Christophe Henner #2 Nataliia Tymkiv

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Dear Lorenzo, You can ask the chapters that voted already, if they are okay with publishing the list. I think. Personally I do not see a problem, but who knows. JFYI, Wikimedia Ukraine has not voted yet, as we wanted to talk to the candidates via skype/hangouts before making the final decision

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Il giorno mar, 03/05/2016 alle 19.09 +0700, John Mark Vandenberg ha scritto: > This is a bit odd. I vaguely remember that in previous years that > some chapters held discussions with their members online, and publicly > published the chapter decision before it was recorded on chapters > wiki. Is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Il giorno mar, 03/05/2016 alle 08.05 -0400, Lane Rasberry ha scritto: > Or - I could be wrong. Should the list of voting chapters be reported? > What is the correct interpretation of closed voting in this case? At the end of 2015, before starting the election process, there has been some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

It seems like people are talking about two separate things at the same time: - Some people are taking about publishing *the votes* (either before, or after the election has finished) - Some people are talking about publishing *the list of who has voted* right now. It is this second thing that I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

I think the proposal was to publish whether or not specific chapters have voted at all, not what their votes specifically were. J On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel < it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote: > I'm against publishing the chapters votes before the end of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel < it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote: > I'm against publishing the chapters votes before the end of the elections. > More than that - I even offered before the election started that the > chapters votes will be confidential between them and be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

I'm against publishing the chapters votes before the end of the elections. More than that - I even offered before the election started that the chapters votes will be confidential between them and be collected by the moderators. I believe that each chapter needs to vote as he think, not be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

I can appreciate chapters wanting their vote to be confidential. However, publishing who has voted seems reasonable - and in line with our other elections (where you can see who voted, but not how they voted). Since before I served on AffCom, I have heard from affiliates how important it is to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

It is possible to self disclose now - it is a wiki. The problem is that there is no table set up for anyone to do it, and then it is confusing to tell people to report in two places. We could ask now, "who wants to self-disclose?" then copy those votes into a public space. The ideal way would be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Lane Rasberry wrote: >.. > For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it > to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if > they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Or - I could be wrong. Should the list of voting chapters be reported? What is the correct interpretation of closed voting in this case? On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Lane Rasberry wrote: > Hello, > > I am unable to report which chapters voted. The voting process is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Hello, I am unable to report which chapters voted. The voting process is closed. Right now I have to recommend encouraging all chapters to vote. The election rules are decided by chapters and chapters have said closed election. I do not think this was a well-discussed rule, but whatever the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Hi Lane, While I agree that it's good for people to encourage their chapters/other organizations to vote, we would need to know whether they've voted before doing this... As far as I can see, the voting is entirely done on chapterswiki - which is fair enough, and it's reasonable to have this

[Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Hello, As of now, 13 of 42 eligible organizations have voted in the 2016 chapters' election for 2 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation seats on the board of trustees. In the last election, 1/3 of organizations did not vote. Anyone who wishes to influence the election could do so by asking sleepier chapters

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Guerrilla skepticism on Wikipedia

{{citation needed}} {{POV}} {{weasel}} {{OR}} etc... Cheers, P -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bodhisattwa Mandal Sent: Tuesday, 03 May 2016 9:27 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Guerrilla skepticism

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Denny Vrandečić > wrote: > > > The formal task force was created end of October. This task force > involved > > outside legal counsel and conducted professional fact

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of Confidence

That Dariusz is willing to engage with the community is very positive. The issues that occurred around the selecting of Arnnon are complicated and I agree with Dariusz were more systemic in nature. I do not see the movement as being well served by him stepping down. James On Tue, May 3, 2016 at

[Wikimedia-l] Guerrilla skepticism on Wikipedia

Hi, Looks like a group of ?trolls are working in a organized way and disrupting the basic policies of Wikipedia. They call themselves Guerrilla skepticism on Wikipedia.