Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Mark]

On 8/2/12 7:51 AM, Samuel Klein wrote:

And I would love to see
the foundation practice delegating some of this bureaucracy and
responsibility to non-staff groups.  We have no shortage of energy, talent,
and experience there in the community.

In addition, there's a fairly well-organized set of advocacy groups in 
related areas (Creative Commons, FSF, EFF), who perhaps some of the work 
could be delegated to? There would still be a need for a process to 
decide when Wikimedia should do things such as agreeing to sign on to an 
EFF amicus brief. But imo it makes sense to leave most of the legwork to 
advocacy organizations who focus on it.


-Mark


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[David Gerard]

On 2 August 2012 05:13, MZMcBride  wrote:

> This appears to be an unprecedented power-grab by the office of the General
> Counsel.


Um ... that's a bizarre perception.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] CC 4.0 draft 2 up

[David Gerard]

https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/33632

Speak now for changes to get into the final version ...


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[MZMcBride]

David Gerard wrote:
> On 2 August 2012 05:13, MZMcBride  wrote:
>> This appears to be an unprecedented power-grab by the office of the General
>> Counsel.
> 
> Um ... that's a bizarre perception.

Is it?

I read through the page at Meta-Wiki and couldn't help but notice that every
involvement required the approval of the General Counsel. I read the linked
Board resolution 
()
and looked around wikimediafoundation.org and Meta-Wiki trying to find a
resolution or vote that directed the General Counsel to develop this kind of
policy, but didn't find anything.

Philippe seemed to suggest that there's a distinction between outside groups
approaching the Wikimedia Foundation for support and the community making
its own requests. The distinction seems incredibly murky and doesn't seem
likely to become clearer over time.

What type of action was the SOPA blackout in January?

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia engineering July 2012 report

[Guillaume Paumier]

Hi,

The report covering Wikimedia engineering activities in July 2012 is
now available.

Wiki version: 
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_engineering_report/2012/July
Blog version: 
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/08/02/engineering-july-2012-report/

-- 
Guillaume Paumier
Technical Communications Manager — Wikimedia Foundation
https://donate.wikimedia.org

___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] 2012-13 Annual Plan of the Wikimedia Foundation

[Tilman Bayer]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Risker  wrote:

> I'm more curious about where the 9.9 million in revenue will come from in
> Q4, to be honest.  (P.64 of the plan) Absent that, I'm not seeing how all
> those new positions (particularly the 30 in Engineering) will be paid for.
>
Note that this question has now been answered at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_budget#April-June_2013_revenue


>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 28 July 2012 22:32, Béria Lima  wrote:
>
> > 46 millions?? That is a joke right? Please someone tell me that this is a
> > joke.
> > _
> > *Béria Lima*
> >
> > *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
> > livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a
> > construir esse sonho. *
> >
> >
> > On 28 July 2012 00:58, Tilman Bayer  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > the Wikimedia Foundation's 2012-13 Annual Plan has just been published
> at
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/File:2012-13_Wikimedia_Foundation_Plan_FINAL_FOR_WEBSITE.pdf
> > >
> > > accompanied by a Q&A:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2012-2013_Annual_Plan_Questions_and_Answers
> > >
> > > The plan was approved by the Board of Trustees at its meeting in
> > > Washington, DC, at Wikimania, and previously outlined to the
> > > Foundation staff and interested community members at the monthly staff
> > > meeting on July 5, 2012. We were planning to publish the video
> > > recording of that meeting at this point, but encountered technical
> > > difficulties; the video will hopefully become available soon.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tilman Bayer
> > > Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > IRC (Freenode): HaeB
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> > > directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> > > community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > ___
> > > WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> > > wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>



-- 
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] WCA questionnaire

[Ziko van Dijk]

Hello,

Please be invited to a questionnaire about the new Wikimedia Chapters
Association. We would like to know what people from the Wikimedia
movement think about its tasks and about some other issues.

We don't know how long the discussions will take, and they won't be
exhaustive and shouldn't prevent us from other proceedings. But it
might be a useful way to find out more about the opinions within the
Wikimedia movement.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Questionnaire_2012-08

Kind regards


Ziko van Dijk
Deputy Chair of the WCA Council

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Washington diary

[Ziko van Dijk]

Hello,

Please allow me to send a link to my 'Washington diary' about
Wikimania in Washington; it is mostly about the proceedings of the
Wikimedia Chapters Association.

Kind regards
Ziko

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ziko/Washington_diary

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] IRC office hours with the Wikimedia Fellows

[Tanvir Rahman]

Reminder: this office hours begin in 30 minutes. :-)
Join #wikimedia-office from your IRC client or
Webchat: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#wikimedia-office

> -- Forwarded message --
> From: "Siko Bouterse" 
> Date: Jul 31, 2012 3:36 AM
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] IRC office hours with the Wikimedia Fellows
> To: 
>
> Hi all,
> The Wikimedia Fellows program will be holding IRC office hours in
> #wikimedia-office this Thursday, August 2, 2012 at 21:00 UTC.  Fellows
> Tanvir Rahman, Peter Coombe, Jon Harald Søby, Steven Zhang, Sarah Stierch
> and Jonathan Morgan will be there to discuss their current fellowship
> projects (exact topics TBD based on who shows up with
> questions/comments/feedback), and I'll take any questions on the
> fellowships program that you may have.[1][2]  As always, links to time
> conversion and other office hour info is on Meta.[3]  Hope to see you there!
> Best wishes,
> Siko
>
> 1. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fellowship_News/Current, and this should
> be even more current by Thursday :-)
> 2. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships
> 3. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours
>
> --
> Siko Bouterse
> Head of Community Fellowships
> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
>
> sboute...@wikimedia.org
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

-- 
Tanvir Rahman
Community Fellow
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] IRC office hours with the Wikimedia Fellows

[Tanvir Rahman]

For those who missed our first office hour, logs are now available at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2012-08-02

Hope to see you all next time.

Cheerio,
Tanvir

-- 
Tanvir Rahman
Community Fellow
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> What type of action was the SOPA blackout in January?
>

You mean, given the $500,000 Google donation Wikimedia received in November
2011, one month after the Italian Wikipedia's blackout, and two months
before the English Wikipedia's SOPA blackout, and round about the time
Wikimedia first made public statements denouncing SOPA?

Good question.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Brandon Harris]

This is inserting a conspiracy theory where one does not exist.  

The English Wikipedia community voted on the blackout and directed it 
into existence, not the Foundation. We merely facilitated.


On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> 
>> What type of action was the SOPA blackout in January?
>> 
> 
> You mean, given the $500,000 Google donation Wikimedia received in November
> 2011, one month after the Italian Wikipedia's blackout, and two months
> before the English Wikipedia's SOPA blackout, and round about the time
> Wikimedia first made public statements denouncing SOPA?
> 
> Good question.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

---
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:45 AM, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 2 August 2012 05:13, MZMcBride  wrote:
>
> > This appears to be an unprecedented power-grab by the office of the
> General
> > Counsel.
>
>
> Um ... that's a bizarre perception.



Well, just look at the number of scenarios where the democratically elected
board is entirely out of the loop, or at best (possibly) consulted.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal_and_Community_Advocacy/Foundation_Policy_and_Political_Affiliations_Guideline
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[MZMcBride]

Brandon Harris wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
>>> What type of action was the SOPA blackout in January?
>>
>> You mean, given the $500,000 Google donation Wikimedia received in November
>> 2011, one month after the Italian Wikipedia's blackout, and two months
>> before the English Wikipedia's SOPA blackout, and round about the time
>> Wikimedia first made public statements denouncing SOPA?
>> 
>> Good question.
> 
> This is inserting a conspiracy theory where one does not exist.
> 
> The English Wikipedia community voted on the blackout and directed it into
> existence, not the Foundation. We merely facilitated.

To be clear, my question isn't about Google or donations or anything like
that. My question, more directly, is: if the SOPA action from January 2012
were held in August 2012 (following the implementation of this new statement
from the General Counsel's office), would it be considered a "community
initiative" or not?

Given that this statement was written as a response to the January 2012 SOPA
blackout, it seems like a reasonable question. Philippe and others have
indicated that such actions would _not_ fall under this new doctrine. Is
this correct?

The line between what constitutes a community initiative and what's
considered a request from an outside group still isn't clear to me,
especially when I consider the Wikimedia Foundation to view the entire
Wikimedia editing community as an outside group some days.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:52 AM, Brandon Harris wrote:

>
> This is inserting a conspiracy theory where one does not exist.
>
> The English Wikipedia community voted on the blackout and directed
> it into existence, not the Foundation. We merely facilitated.
>


Yeah, and I remember how users were directed (by WMF staff, wasn't it?) to
stop marking votes by single-purpose accounts and IPs, as is common in
every other minor community discussion in the English Wikipedia. SPA and IP
votes are routinely discounted in garden-variety AfDs. But they counted in
the blackout vote.

It's a fact, and quite unprecedented. Why?

And the timeline of the Italian blackout in October, the
half-a-million-dollar Google donation in November, the first Wikimedia
endorsement of the Google position, also in November, and the subsequent
SOPA blackout in January, are what they are.

Politicians may protest, "Oh, my lobbying for Mr Rich had nothing to do
with the $500,000 they gave me at about the time I started lobbying for
them". But people generally aren't stupid.

For the record, I did not endorse the SOPA blackout, and I deeply resent my
work in Wikipedia being leveraged to that political end.

And I deeply resent Jimbo's statements to the BBC today*, about how "We
gave you Wikipedia and we didn't have to, and so you might want to listen
to what we have to tell you".

A gift is either made altruistically, without strings attached, or it
isn't. To claim selfless, altruistic purpose and then demand consideration
in return for what has been given is disgusting.


* http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19104494






>
>
> On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> >
> >> What type of action was the SOPA blackout in January?
> >>
> >
> > You mean, given the $500,000 Google donation Wikimedia received in
> November
> > 2011, one month after the Italian Wikipedia's blackout, and two months
> > before the English Wikipedia's SOPA blackout, and round about the time
> > Wikimedia first made public statements denouncing SOPA?
> >
> > Good question.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
> ---
> Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[FT2]

There's a fallacy going on here - ie a term with two subtly different
meanings.

The community - who are the ones ultimately "making the gift" do so
altruistically, in the sense of not seeking *compensation*, but that's not
the same as not expecting *consideration*. We do expect consideration.
Attribution (CC-by-SA/GFDL) is one form of consideration. The offer of this
knowledge by editors has quite specific terms that we expect to be met in
return by the world at large, which is the meaning of consideration.

The offer of that knowledge, and its gifting, also doesn't imply *
indifference*. This is more subtle, and arises because we aren't donating
our time and effort into a void. We are donating as a result of, and often
to benefit, things we believe in, such as helping others or free
knowledge.  There is an implied expectation (by some, perhaps not by
others) that it will be treated with respect and used to further humanity.

This kind of expectation isn't contractual, but it's there anyway. It's the
same kind of expectation that says you would probably be upset , if you
spend a week trying to find something as a special gift for me, and I
respond by flushing it down the toilet and saying "well you gave it to me
so why are you upset what I do with my property?" It might be legally true,
perhaps technically true, but it's certainly not socially and perhaps not
morally true.

We donate time, effort and sometimes money, and we are not indifferent to
whether those are supporting things we believe in. We donate for free
knowledge and humanity, and do so because we care about free knowledge and
humanity. Sometimes we say *"Look, we care about these things enough that
we put this effort in, you care enough to support and appreciate us putting
this effort in, so please listen when we say that something is harming the
ecosystem within which that effort is placed"*. That is completely ethical
and appropriate; no less than a wildlife volunteer who cares for dolphins
pointing out things that harm dolphins or any other ecosystem that one
might care for and try to support by nurturing it over time. Very few
people throw sustained effort or money into a vacuum without any care
whether it grows or dies.


FT2


On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> For the record, I did not endorse the SOPA blackout, and I deeply resent my
> work in Wikipedia being leveraged to that political end.
>
> And I deeply resent Jimbo's statements to the BBC today*, about how "We
> gave you Wikipedia and we didn't have to, and so you might want to listen
> to what we have to tell you".
>
> A gift is either made altruistically, without strings attached, or it
> isn't. To claim selfless, altruistic purpose and then demand consideration
> in return for what has been given is disgusting.
>
>
> * http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19104494
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Birgitte_sb]

Seriously stop hijacking this thread. Let MZMcBride have a chance at some 
discussion on his question.

This below is just not cool. Have some respect for MZMcBride. He didn't write 
out his thoughts or concerns with idea that the first reply would turn it all 
into snip fodder. That seems beyond demoralizing to me.

I know I am as guilty of a tangent as anyone, but can't we all, at the very 
least, agree to let one another's sincere *questions* stand without being 
twisted beyond all recognition. We need to insist on there being some lines in 
respect for the other person's voice, or else we are all better off to just 
write a blogs. The only point to joining a mailing list is so you might hear 
what others wish to say. As a sort of pact. This mailing list, I like it as a 
mailing list; I think it sucks as a blog.

Birgitte SB

On Aug 2, 2012, at 7:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> 
>> What type of action was the SOPA blackout in January?
>> 
> 
> You mean, given the $500,000 Google donation Wikimedia received in November
> 2011, one month after the Italian Wikipedia's blackout, and two months
> before the English Wikipedia's SOPA blackout, and round about the time
> Wikimedia first made public statements denouncing SOPA?
> 
> Good question.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Risker]

On 2 August 2012 21:07, MZMcBride  wrote:

> Brandon Harris wrote:
> > On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> >>> What type of action was the SOPA blackout in January?
> >>
> >> You mean, given the $500,000 Google donation Wikimedia received in
> November
> >> 2011, one month after the Italian Wikipedia's blackout, and two months
> >> before the English Wikipedia's SOPA blackout, and round about the time
> >> Wikimedia first made public statements denouncing SOPA?
> >>
> >> Good question.
> >
> > This is inserting a conspiracy theory where one does not exist.
> >
> > The English Wikipedia community voted on the blackout and directed it
> into
> > existence, not the Foundation. We merely facilitated.
>
> To be clear, my question isn't about Google or donations or anything like
> that. My question, more directly, is: if the SOPA action from January 2012
> were held in August 2012 (following the implementation of this new
> statement
> from the General Counsel's office), would it be considered a "community
> initiative" or not?
>
> Given that this statement was written as a response to the January 2012
> SOPA
> blackout, it seems like a reasonable question. Philippe and others have
> indicated that such actions would _not_ fall under this new doctrine. Is
> this correct?
>

My sense is that the statement is written as a response to the overtures
that have been made to the WMF since the January 2012 SOPA blackout. Like
many people outside of the WMF umbrella (and quite a few inside it, as
well, based on comments we see regularly), it seems that many of these
advocacy groups believe that WMF=Wikipedia.  Those of us "in the know"
understand that there's an awful lot more that is involved, and that there
are widely divergent opinions on many issues between projects and within
the broader community.

It's easy to forget (in fact, most people have forgotten) that the English
Wikipedia community had been discussing some form of action in relation to
SOPA for almost two months before the blackout. The Italian Wikipedia
blackout in late 2011 demonstrated some significant fault lines if a large
project suddenly closes up shop; because of this, I think the WMF
justifiably had an interest in ensuring that if the English Wikipedia
community followed suit, it was done in a controlled way that would not
cause short-term or long-term harm to the actual project. I'm not talking
"reputational harm", but damage to the hardware, software, and data that
are integral to the project.



>
> The line between what constitutes a community initiative and what's
> considered a request from an outside group still isn't clear to me,
> especially when I consider the Wikimedia Foundation to view the entire
> Wikimedia editing community as an outside group some days.
>
>
Ah, interesting point.  My read of this was that the guideline would
consider an initiative requested by a non-WMF community or organization to
be an "outside group", whereas an initiative from one or more WMF
communities, or from the broader general WMF community, would not fall
under these guidelines.  The recent request for comment with respect to the
Internet Defense League[1] would be an example of an initiate that would
fall within this guideline, I think.

I think your questions illustrate the need for improving some of the prose
within the guideline so that these issues are clear to future readers, both
inside and outside of our broader community.  It's quite possible that my
own interpretation is off the mark as well.

Risker/Anne


[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Internet_Defense_League
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

[Samuel Klein]

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Risker  wrote:

>
>
> > The line between what constitutes a community initiative and what's
> > considered a request from an outside group still isn't clear to me
>
> Ah, interesting point.  My read of this was that the guideline would
> consider an initiative requested by a non-WMF community or organization to
> be an "outside group", whereas an initiative from one or more WMF
> communities, or from the broader general WMF community, would not fall
> under these guidelines.  The recent request for comment with respect to the
> Internet Defense League[1] would be an example of an initiate that would
> fall within this guideline, I think.
>

That is my reading of it as well.

Are there guidelines or discussions on it:wp or en:wp about how to handling
future community initiatives?

SJ
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l