Craig,
You are right that the harassment issue needs more than gestures or
unenforceable guidelines, and Community Engagement is working with
community members on new ideas and approaches. The Friendly Spaces
expectations are a beginning, not an end point; they are a first step to
get the
Thanks Katherine!
Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
Hi Pine,
Thanks for your questions regarding the Communications QR slides. Answers
in-line below.
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
I appreciate the combined QRs. Questions and comments:
1. Will the friendly-space expectations (policy?) for grants spaces on
Indeed, as Kirill says, the grants process is owned by the WMF (albeit one
hosted on Meta), not by the community, so I'm not sure why the Meta
community needs to get involved. It actually seems to me that the
foundation wiki would be a better home for processes like this so that
community
I agree that if the grants discussions were on Foundation wiki that WMF
staff would have more leeway to make decisions without going through the
Board or community. It seems to me that Meta is a community project wiki
that is governed by community leadership and community content moderation,
and
Pine,
As you insist on such formality, can you imagine that it is a huge
turn-off for others? The thing that troubles ME most, is that a friendly
space policy is something that is so obvious in so many ways, that I
cannot fathom what the objection could be and therefore what the added
value is of
Hi Gerard,
The process for starting an RfC is relatively easy, and I'm generally
willing to be the initiator of one. Likewise, board resolutions happen
freqently, can be straightforward, and could take place to support a
friendly space policy.
If there isn't an RfC or board resolution or some
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
2. CA says that there are ...a (legal-approved) list of... event banned
users, a protocol for appearance (or threat of it) at events by banned
users and that it will Supply to Conference Coordinators for events
beginning in Q1
Hmm. It seems to me that having WMF create a policy for conduct that it
imposes on non-WMF wikis would effectively be an office action
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Office_actions, and the policy for office
actions doesn't seem to contemplate them being expanded in to general
moderation of
How can you experiment and explore while going through processes like that? The
policy already applied for the IdeaLab areas during inspire (including letting
the community know beforehand). I think process for processes sake, especially
on meta, does more harm then good.
Sent from my iPhone
As well-intentioned as that policy was, I can't find that there was ever an
authority (the Board or the community) who ratified the policy. It's well
intentioned and it seems to me that it might very well pass an RfC. The
Board or the community might agree to expand it to cover all grants name
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Will the friendly-space expectations (policy?) for grants spaces on
Meta be proposed as an RfC on Meta? The documentation on the rollout plan
doesn't mention and RfC. My understanding is that the right way to
implement a
On 19 July 2015 at 15:42, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
11. I like the overall QR format, the notes on Meta, and their
consolidation in to the format presented here. This makes it relatively
easy to understand what's happening inside of WMF. The evolution of the QR
process is very nice to
I appreciate the combined QRs. Questions and comments:
1. Will the friendly-space expectations (policy?) for grants spaces on
Meta be proposed as an RfC on Meta? The documentation on the rollout plan
doesn't mention and RfC. My understanding is that the right way to
implement a policy change like
Hello all - just a small correction. Advancement is actually Fundraising +
Partnerships, which presented alongside Fundraising Tech.
Thanks,
Anne
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
the Wikimedia Foundation's quarterly reviews of teams' work in
Hi all,
the Wikimedia Foundation's quarterly reviews of teams' work in the
past quarter (April-June 2015) took place last week. Minutes and
slides for those meetings are now available:
Community Engagement, Advancement (Fundraising and Fundraising Tech):
16 matches
Mail list logo
