Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Though my intent was neither ironic nor cynical, Jane is right -- my email last night was probably not as clear as it could have been. As I see it, senior leadership (the board and the executive director) have a special responsibility to help us all keep track of the bigger picture. But senior

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Lila, Tony is the one who does interviews for the Signpost (I'm neither good at interviewing, nor have the right equipment), and he requested an interview with you last Wednesday, via Katherine Maher. We had a confirmation from Juliet on Friday that the request had been received, but nothing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 2016-02-21 14:03, Dan Andreescu wrote: Allow me to give one specific limited example that touches on some of the themes you raised here, Yaroslav. My main point is that from the outside, correlation of what happened during Sue's and Lila's leadership might seem to imply causation,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

> > Again, I do not know who is right and who is wrong here, we have excellent > examples of WMF staff work all the time through (let me name Maggie Dennis > as an example of someone who is doing excellent work as both WMF staffer > and a project volunteer, and there are more examples), but things

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 2016-02-21 09:52, Jane Darnell wrote: Risker thanks for this. I would add that the biggest problem for outsiders is trying to sift through the emails in this thread, looking for valid concerns and first-hand accounts among the cynical and/or ironic comments only understandable to a few

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

As I see it, there are 2 large issues here. The staff morale and distrust being the first. The exodus of a good chunk of staff was expected at the beginning - Erik and a few others were too much a part of Sue's leadership and it seemed natural. New leadership would entail, a new leadership style,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Risker thanks for this. I would add that the biggest problem for outsiders is trying to sift through the emails in this thread, looking for valid concerns and first-hand accounts among the cynical and/or ironic comments only understandable to a few players. As more and more of our international

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Pete, I proposed an interview to Andreas this morning in a private email, actually. Also, I want to explain myself as a human being, not only as an ED. Without filters. L On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: > An unusually immediate comment from

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

An unusually immediate comment from Wikimedia leadership following Andreas' admittedly speculative comments. It's not about the relevance to the movement. It's not about the relevance to the organization. It's about an individual's role. This just got fascinating (and a little more depressing).

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Andreas, I am happy to talk to Signpost on-record about anything that has been happening under my watch to minimize misinterpretations of second-hand reports or further conjectures. Lila On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:56

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > Lila should have taken the community along with her as the Knowledge Engine > project was evolving. I don't know what was behind her reticence. I presume > an element was unwillingness to announce a thing while the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 21 February 2016 at 00:43, SarahSV wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:43 AM, SarahSV wrote: > > > This isn't about how much people know. It's obvious that the KE

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:43 AM, SarahSV wrote: > > This isn't about how much people know. It's obvious that the KE was just > a > > flashpoint. It's about how to move forward without further

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:43 AM, SarahSV wrote: > This isn't about how much people know. It's obvious that the KE was just a > flashpoint. It's about how to move forward without further casualties. I > don't believe that that isn't possible. From the point of person who

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Okay, this is stepping over several lines. Can we stick to basic human decency if nothing else? :( No one is helped by making vicious personal attacks over assumed interpretations. Let's try to represent the movement's values (including civility, and, if not the assumption of good faith, then at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Asaf Bartov wrote: > Despite everything, Anders, it is inappropriate for staff to publicly > prosecute Lila. The board is aware of the many issues, quite a few not yet > public on any forum. And it is for the board to solve. > > Asaf, I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Despite everything, Anders, it is inappropriate for staff to publicly prosecute Lila. The board is aware of the many issues, quite a few not yet public on any forum. And it is for the board to solve. A. On Feb 20, 2016 8:20 PM, "Anders Wennersten" wrote: > Reading

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Reading an following this thread makes me feel profoundly sad. And the symptoms indicates for me that there is indeed something "rotten" going on. I feel deep sympathy for staff whose pain is seems to go very deep, and I would really want to help out to to ease the problems if it was in my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Just staff and former staff? Huh. You must be reading wikimedia-that-doesn't-include-liam-fae-former-board-members-or-almost-anyone-else-l. What's it like there? To Risker's point; "don't beat up on people who have less information than you" is a good principle. But so is "don't call people

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 2016-02-20 10:36 PM, Lila Tretikov wrote: Information asymmetry is a big issue. For example, in my role there is a lot I cannot say, I have responsibilities to protect people in the organization both current and former. So, for example, if someone is fired, even for cause, I would not say

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Risker, Information asymmetry is a big issue. For example, in my role there is a lot I cannot say, I have responsibilities to protect people in the organization both current and former. So, for example, if someone is fired, even for cause, I would not say anything about this person that may

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

This is a difficult time for everyone. Staff, particularly staff who work out of the San Francisco office, have seen and been through things that are not well known or understood outside of that small group; even "highly involved" volunteers aren't entirely in the loop. Former staff continue to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Ah, Brandon. Thanks for writing me off as "the folks at Wikipediocracy." I'm also the folks at en.Wikipedia and the folks on the board of WikiProject Med Foundation. And I give a shit about Wikipedia. This push for the removal of the ED is coming from staff. And failed staff. If you want support

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Danny, don't kid yourself! The folks at Wikipediocracy know everything about everything that's happened at the Foundation and about everything that will EVER happen. They've never been wrong, ever! I don't understand why we're still talking about this! > On Feb 20, 2016, at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

You know, it's possible that the people who work for the Foundation might understand the situation in a more nuanced way than you do. I know it doesn't seem likely, but dare to dream. On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > Thanks James. > > I'm not on staff,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Thanks James. I'm not on staff, nor am I part of the inner circle of volunteers in constant touch with staff or the board. From the perspective of the wider community, though, this all looks very dodgy. Lila's arrival marked for us a revolution in the relationship. There is probably nothing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Feb 20, 2016 3:18 PM, "Anthony Cole" wrote: > > I know. I suppose I should be clearer: it is my contention that it is largely the people advocating for and implementing the improvements you cite that we are losing due to the management crisis. -- brion > > Anthony Cole

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

In fact the rabbit whole goes far far deeper down the rabbit hole :P Seddon On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Joseph Seddon wrote: > SarahSV, the rabbit whole goes far far beyond "mistaken ideas about the > Knowledge Engine". > > Seddon > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:36

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

SarahSV, the rabbit whole goes far far beyond "mistaken ideas about the Knowledge Engine". Seddon On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:36 AM, SarahSV wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:16 PM, James Alexander > wrote: > It is probably best for me not to get

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:16 PM, James Alexander wrote: It is probably best for me not to get into a long count/counterpoint here but I couldn't avoid not responding at all. James, several staffers have talked about feeling unappreciated and demoralized.​ ​But that's how

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Thanks Denny for contributing here; very much appreciated. Milos: > After you reset the culture of denial, you should now start thinking > how to boot the system again. Forget everything previous, forget the > common excuses for avoiding responsibility. This is fair advice. The Board is looked

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

It is probably best for me not to get into a long count/counterpoint here but I couldn't avoid not responding at all. As Ori hinted at I hope that everyone can reflect on the idea of causation vs correlation . The fact that good

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > It is important to do things in good timing, but it is even more important > to do things right (not just in decision-making - remember the VIsual > Editor?), not get easily swayed or lead by a crowd, think

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I know. Anthony Cole On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:17 AM, Brion Vibber wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > > > * The Community Resources Team is in place - it surveyed the community > and > > discussed with them their

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > * The Community Resources Team is in place - it surveyed the community and > discussed with them their technical priorities, and tailored their Idea Lab > Campaign accordingly. > FYI, the head of that team is one of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

James, regarding "Long term strategy should not be determined by the ED and a couple of board members", why do you say, "a couple of board members"? There are ten board members. Are you saying a couple of them have inordinate influence? Yes, the board and ED should heed input from the volunteers

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Amir E. Aharoni < amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote: > Delphine, this was possibly the strongest email of the last four months or > so of this mind-numbing nonsense. > > The Board. I never really understood it. I did feel that it's supposed to > lead the editors

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Delphine, this was possibly the strongest email of the last four months or so of this mind-numbing nonsense. The Board. I never really understood it. I did feel that it's supposed to lead the editors and the staff in _some_ way, but, being both a staff member and a volunteer editor, I never felt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hello Denny, I am not sure I can find any explanation "why" the board acts as it does in your email, to be honest. Which reinforces my long-time observation that the board is dysfunctional, as it has been for years now. One thing I do read between the lines though, is some kind of "fear" of doing

[Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I agree having all board members engage with the community in their own voice is likely the best way forwards. All of us will take your statements as representing whatever fraction of the board you are unless you state otherwise. There is nothing wrong with a board that disagrees with each other,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

+1 Get on with positive action! Less chest beating, poetry, misdirection and encrypted messaging please. Fae On 20 Feb 2016 11:37, "Milos Rancic" wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Denny Vrandecic > wrote: > > Whereas I do not agree with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I like this email of Chris and what seems to me strange is that there is an evident lack of control of the board. I have read the emails of resignation without being shocked. They were expected. It's sufficient to use Mr.google and to reach Glassdoor to read the anonymous comments of former

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT (Olatunde Isaa)

+0100 From: Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT Message-ID: <CADut_2+aCvreKL=xdcuse6tjopu8edmhvasx-berxwg-t4l...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/pla

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Denny Vrandecic wrote: > Whereas I do not agree with everything you say (but I think those are > discussions for another time), I wholeheartedly agree with your insight > that the Board as a whole is dumber than its member on average.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 19 Feb 2016 23:49, "Denny Vrandecic" wrote > # The alternative is to allow every member of the Board to engage > individually as they like. This will mean that there are much more > individual conversations going on, things can be better explained. But this > also means that the individual

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Dear Ido, Thank you for your e-mail. I am also grateful to many other people who have contributed to give us a better understanding of the past and the present (it is a lot of work). I would like to read your opinion about two things that I find astonishing and urging for a remedy: * How it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Thanks, Denny Vrandecic (and to Dariusz Jemielniak as well) for expressing some individual views as members of the BoT. Denny: A firm choice between the two communication strategies needs not be made. Both could be proper solutions depending on the situation. But don't you honestly think, that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Delphine, thank you. Whereas I do not agree with everything you say (but I think those are discussions for another time), I wholeheartedly agree with your insight that the Board as a whole is dumber than its member on average. Thank you for putting this down to words. I would even say, dumber

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

This marvellous thread goes a long way to prove that we are in possession of a very able, considerate, and polite WMF-oriented community in addition to the "silent" community that goes on editing our sites. But it also makes me wonder whether the BoT as a body maintains its silence about the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 2016-02-19 23:24, Delphine Ménard wrote: Here you go SJ, On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Sam Klein wrote: Delphine writes: We freaking built an encyclopedia, of course we can take care of it without having to fear everyone and their brother! And while an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Here you go SJ, On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Sam Klein wrote: > Delphine writes: >> >> We freaking built an encyclopedia, of course we can take care of it > without >> having to fear everyone and their brother! And while an organisation is > not >> a wiki, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Dear friends, Dear friends of open and free knowledge, Let us raise the bar, To the level of positive and constructive, Don't bite the newcomers, Assume good faith. Keep a good balance, Between work and life, Don't do overtime without prior authorization, Enjoy your weekend. Meet friends and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Dear Siko, I was trying to phrase something like this, but you beat me to it. This discussion gives me hope. Siko writes: > Ido, Ori, Sydney, Shani, Ben, Delphine, Gayle, thank you for your boldness > and wisdom in this thread. I know how rarely some of us speak on this list, > and I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Ido, Ori, Sydney, Shani, Ben, Delphine, Gayle, thank you for your boldness and wisdom in this thread. I know how rarely some of us speak on this list, and I appreciate you raising your voices here, now. I need to believe that the power of the collective leadership that so many volunteers and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Thank you Delphine for a fascinating analysis of of the recent history and current state of the situation. *Michal Lester,* *Executive DirectorWikimedia Israel* *http://www.wikimedia.org.il * *972-50-8996046 ; 972-77-751-6032 *

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I know, Dan, and your commitment and willingness to look at what is amazing and holding WMF together, your personal decision to seek ways out of a victim mentality and looking forward, is also absolutely critical right now. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

> > People will leave despite how much they love a place, its mission, and its > volunteers at the point it becomes too painful for them to stay. And no one > can make that decision for them. While the support of one's colleagues goes > a very long way, it is necessary but not sufficient. I have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Delphine, you're a bad ass. /a On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak < djemieln...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi Delphine, > > many thanks for your insight, and I definitely understand why you're > pointing out the problematic areas, as well as I share some of your > specific

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

For our multicultural context... that's a compliment of high order. On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Anna Stillwell wrote: > Delphine, you're a bad ass. > /a > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak < > djemieln...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > >> Hi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Delphine, many thanks for your insight, and I definitely understand why you're pointing out the problematic areas, as well as I share some of your specific concerns. I'm going to fall silent on the list for a while, as I really don't want to sound as the "nothing to watch, move on" guy, and I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I believe that Dariusz' comment was somewhat blown out of proportions (due in part to difficulties in communication inherent to our multicultural movement). I also think that some of the statements he made were too "blanket" to let go, so I understand the frustration. This said, Ori, I want to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Ori, Your email was spot on. And it is so refreshing to hear someone speak the truth about who we are as staff. In my time running Org Dev, I saw incredible talent here at the Foundation, across departments, including members of the C-team. And as the situation has become progressively more

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

בתאריך 19 בפבר׳ 2016 09:31,‏ "Ben Creasy" כתב: > > OK, in terms of problems, staff are saying that it's Lila. Do you want them to > be more specific in a public mailing list about how and where she has > disappointed them? That seems like an awkward situation for Lila. ...

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Thank you so much for chiming in, Gayle. This means a lot. בתאריך 19 בפבר׳ 2016 10:17,‏ "Gayle Karen Young" כתב: > People will leave despite how much they love a place, its mission, and its > volunteers at the point it becomes too painful for them to stay. And no one > can

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Shani writes: > Yury, this is a very important example, but indeed off-topic. It deserves a > separate thread, but not before addressing the current main crisis, which > all others stem from. I agree. This was just a random example of a "side-effect" of the crisis. Best,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Craig, Amir, and Nat, On 2016-02-19 00:13, Craig Franklin wrote: Yaroslav, You're correct in that most volunteers don't care directly. The problem is that a lot of the BoT's recent difficulties have crossed the line from "angry encyclopedia people venting on a mailing list" to "serious

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Also, +1 to Ori. On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Gayle Karen Young wrote: > People will leave despite how much they love a place, its mission, and its > volunteers at the point it becomes too painful for them to stay. And no one > can make that decision for them. While

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

People will leave despite how much they love a place, its mission, and its volunteers at the point it becomes too painful for them to stay. And no one can make that decision for them. While the support of one's colleagues goes a very long way, it is necessary but not sufficient. I have been

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

> Dariusz Jemielniak writes: > I know of people who are overwhelmed with negativity on the list. I myself > feel it, too, although I am determined not to reduce my participation or > liaising with the communities. The negativity is not going to magically go away, especially not when

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Shani, Thanks for your post to the mailing list. I appreciate your comments directed at the BoT. Hopefully the collective voices will make an impact. Warm regards, Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Shani

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Yury, this is a very important example, but indeed off-topic. It deserves a separate thread, but not before addressing the current main crisis, which all others stem from. At this point, it is inconceivable that there is still such a "disconnect" between what WMF employees & volunteers accross

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

There are certain things that affect many volunteers directly. A slightly off-topic example: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T59608#1637250 The fact that: > "the WMF education team has no engineering resources" ...affects volunteers. Sincerely, Yury Bulka (Wikimedia Ukraine) Craig Franklin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Yaroslav, You're correct in that most volunteers don't care directly. The problem is that a lot of the BoT's recent difficulties have crossed the line from "angry encyclopedia people venting on a mailing list" to "serious and negative attention from the mainstream press". If there is too much

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I disagree Yaroslav, 1- This affects Wikipedia indirectly. When downtime goes up alongside with editing time, we will lose users. New users won't stay, etc. it damages new user retention and therefore, the viability of the project in the long term. 2- Wikipedia is up because of its editors but

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 2016-02-18 21:20, Leila Zia wrote: Hi Dariusz, I want to share with you the following relatively scattered thoughts and leave it to you to decide how to continue engaging with us. :-) I hope you find them helpful: * BoT has been too silent, given the state of matters. I'm much more

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Dariusz, I want to share with you the following relatively scattered thoughts and leave it to you to decide how to continue engaging with us. :-) I hope you find them helpful: * BoT has been too silent, given the state of matters. I'm much more worried about our volunteers when I say this,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Feb 18, 2016 12:08 PM, "Dariusz Jemielniak" wrote: > > When I refer to being constructive, I speak of exactly seeking decisive > actions and moving forward, instead of gathering around a lying body and > kicking :) What is the board doing, going forward, to stem the tide of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Asaf Bartov wrote: > All this makes it a time for looking "the negative" in the eye and taking > decisive action, so that the healing can begin. It is not a time for > concentrating on the still-wonderful aspects of this movement's work.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

For a few 2015 accomplishments by the product/technical teams you can see them listed here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Wikimedia_Foundation_Product_and_Technology_Highlights On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Casey Dentinger wrote: > I would like to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Second Asaf and Sydney. Please take these concerns seriously. If you truly *respect* us and this movement, please act. On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Joseph Seddon wrote: > I must echo Ori. > > We have some brilliant, brilliant people who really are doing some >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I must echo Ori. We have some brilliant, brilliant people who really are doing some fantastic work. The trouble is that as Brandon Harris has already confirmed on the Wikipedia Weekly facebook group. People are looking to leave. Actively. On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Ori Livneh

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

I would like to second what Ori said and add: > and in technology we're years behind the curve I think this is a reductive view of the technology at WMF. It is true that many systems have been around in name for a long time, but that doesn't mean they haven't been evolving under the hood (as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Thank you, Ori. +1 to everything you said. Dariusz, I disagree with you: this *is* a time for "negativity". We have been laboring under significant dysfunction for more than a year now, and are now in crisis. We are losing precious colleagues, time, money, *even more* community trust than we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > > We need to get a grip, have more transparency, but also more bidirectional > support, and start thinking about the future (I'm not saying this to sound > as "nothing to watch, move on", but to restore some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Casey Dentinger wrote: > > and in technology we're years behind the curve > > I think this is a reductive view of the technology at WMF. It is true > that many systems have been around in name for a long time, but that > doesn't mean

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

> > This is happening in spite of -- not thanks to -- dysfunction at the top. > If you don't believe me, all you have to do is wait: an exodus of people > from Engineering won't be long now. I hope you're wrong, Ori. I hope people have the presence of mind, like you say - despite the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Indeed - thank you Ori on behalf of the entire technical organization. Dariusz - I'd ask that you consider the assumptions that you listed in your email more closely. Ori, myself and others would be very happy to work with you this. -Toby On Thursday, February 18, 2016, Moiz Syed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Wow, thank you Ori. +1 to everything you said. That line from Dariusz disappointed me to, but I just chalked it up to just another case of a board member downplaying community/staff concerns and plea for help. On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Ori Livneh wrote: > On Thu,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:47 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > There is way too much blaming/bashing/sour expectations > working both ways - we almost forget how unique we are, irrespective of > many slips and avoidable failures we make (and WMF is definitely leading > here,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

18.02.2016 7:25 AM "Liam Wyatt" napisał(a): > > > The principle of the WMF being a good role model for its affiliates - > and living up to minimum standards that it sets for those affiliates - > is one of the primary reasons that the FDC recommended the WMF submit > its next

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

oundation BoT (Cristian Consonni) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 11:15:24 +0100 From: Ilario Valdelli <valde...@gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

On 18 February 2016 at 09:04, ido ivri wrote: > If any APG-receiving affiliate conducted itself in such a non transparent, > dishonest manner and with lack of clear, timely communication with its > community and stakeholders, it would get seriously reprimanded by the >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi, 2016-02-18 11:44 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni : > Thanks Ido. > For what is worth, and in my personal capacity (I'm not affiliated with > Wikimedia Italia any more) I completely second your concern, > Discussions are ongoing from months now and BoT seems frozen in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Thanks Ido. For what is worth, and in my personal capacity (I'm not affiliated with Wikimedia Italia any more) I completely second your concern, Discussions are ongoing from months now and BoT seems frozen in silence. People really don't understand why. I would also like to thank you for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Hi Ido, your email is interesting and reveals an important issue: the governance of a no for profit organization is a little bit different from that of a "commercial" company. In my opinion there is an unclear definition of the stakeholders and the definition of the importance of these

[Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

Dear members of the WMF Board of Trustees, I’ve been following the recent events silently - from the voting out of James Heilman, to the unfortunate timing of recruiting Arnnon Geshuri and the lack of clear, timely communication around WMF strategy in in general and specifically around the