Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

MZMcBride skrev 2013-04-29 07:13: I took a look at the current FDC members list[1] and the decision-making information[2] but I'm still a bit unclear how decisions like this[3] are made. Is there a vote on each individual request (and subsequent recommendation)? If so, is that vote public? Or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 Apr 2013, at 07:52, Tilman Bayer wrote: > I'm not familiar with the case, but reading that page, it seems that > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:WM_HK/Education_Toolkits_For_Liberal_Studies/Report#Remaining_funds > might also have played a role for the FDC's recommendation? Ind

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Personally I think that these two points are relevant like weaknesses of the FDC. I would read three main important weaknesses: a) if there is a conflictual position inside the members of the FDC and a big difference of opinions probably there are no specific criteria to evaluate the projects

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Hi David, I changed the topic to not flood Deryck parting email. Though the topics are related, I'd rather not flood his thread. Yes, the process is flawed, and everyone recognise it, even FDC staff and FDC members in their comments do. Yes, the process is a heavy burden to all the organisations

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Hi Christophe, > From: christophe.hen...@gmail.com > Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:07:45 +0200 > To: dger...@gmail.com > CC: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to > everyone > As I said in my previous email: > * Most of the cha

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The case for supporting open source machine translation

Le 2013-04-26 17:00, Gerard Meijssen a écrit : Hoi, When we invest in MT it is to convey knowledge, information and primarily Wikipedia articles. They do not have the same problems poetry has. With explanatory articles on a subject there is a web of associated concepts. These concepts are like

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

The beauty of the process, is in my mind, that is set up so that each member can have their personal preferences on criteria to be used. This ensues that as many perspectives as possible is up on the table during the deliberation, and certainly not only what is in the staff assessment. And cul

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 April 2013 10:21, Abbas Mahmood wrote: > Hi Christophe, > >> From: christophe.hen...@gmail.com >> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:07:45 +0200 >> To: dger...@gmail.com >> CC: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark >> to everyon

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Deryck Chan, 29/04/2013 00:52: [...] At this point, I believe it's an appropriate time for me to announce my resignation and retirement from all my official Wikimedia roles - as Administrative Assistant and WCA Council Member of WMHK. [...] Thanks Deryck for your commitment. I'm very sorry that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The case for supporting open source machine translation

Le 2013-04-26 19:57, Samuel Klein a écrit : On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: * Erik Moeller wrote: Are there open source MT efforts that are close enough to merit scrutiny? Wiktionary. If you want to help free software efforts in the area of machine translation, then

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The case for supporting open source machine translation

Le 2013-04-26 20:27, Milos Rancic a écrit : On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: Yes. Finding a way to capture and integrate the work OmegaWiki has done into a new Wikidata-powered Wiktionary would be a useful start. And we've already sort of claimed the space (though we are n

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal to use the internal wiki more

Oliver Keyes, 29/04/2013 05:24: "No reason to" is not a reason not to, so your "yes" means "no" given my question. (And also by analogy, because most people in officewiki won't have a use case for that stuff either.) When the information contains personal data, it is totally a reason

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 April 2013 09:33, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > It's very clear (to me) that the WMF grants system is not designed to make > Wikimedia entities grow, but only to reinforce those which are already > strong enough, keeping them at the same level they're at. It's not clear this was a design

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal to use the internal wiki more

Based on just flicking though the conversation, The main issue here is historical content that is mostly in the way of the re-purposing? Why not just close down internal.wiki and start a Internal.wiki 2.0 with a more defined scope that suits the purpose? __

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Le Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:25:16 +0200, Anders Wennersten a écrit: MZMcBride skrev 2013-04-29 07:13: I took a look at the current FDC members list[1] and the decision-making information[2] but I'm still a bit unclear how decisions like this[3] are made. Is there a vote on each individual requ

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 6:16 AM, David Gerard wrote: > On 29 April 2013 09:33, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > >> It's very clear (to me) that the WMF grants system is not designed to make >> Wikimedia entities grow, but only to reinforce those which are already >> strong enough, keeping them at th

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

David Gerard, 29/04/2013 11:16: On 29 April 2013 09:33, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: It's very clear (to me) that the WMF grants system is not designed to make Wikimedia entities grow, but only to reinforce those which are already strong enough, keeping them at the same level they're at. It's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

I'd like to come back to this - if the entity was told they were eligible (which certainly looks to be the case from the public documents), when was it discovered they were not? Obviously, putting together an FDC application is a tremendous amount of work for a chapter, and if the effort was futil

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Re: Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

-- Forwarded message -- From: "Deryck Chan" Date: 29 Apr 2013 12:42 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone To: Cc: "Wikimedia Mailing List" See the footnotes on the FDC decision page. Both WMHK and WMCZ were declared eligible at the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Re: Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Deryck please could you confirm what happened with regards to the unused funds - did WMHK request a reallocation? Sent from my iPhone --- Thehelpfulone https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone On 29 Apr 2013, at 12:43, Deryck Chan wrote: > -- Forwarded message -- > F

[Wikimedia-l] Inequitable power dynamics of global knowledge production and exchange must be confronted head on

Please, see http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2013/04/29/redrawing-the-map-from-access-to-participation/ Worth thinking on the impact this can also have on Wikimedia projects when it comes to the actual knowledge divide, mainly like Wikip

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

hi, I whole-heartily agree with many of Christophe's comments. Whenever possible, GAC should take precedent before the FDC in my opinion. The FDC should typically involve those entities, which have grown significantly (often also through part-time staff hired for specific projects well before). I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Dear Deryck, I am also sorry to read this. Thank you for sharing your reflections, they are always welcome. The FDC is an experiment in peer review, one that I think holds promise. It was designed in part to avoid 'mainstream charity bureaucracy'. But this is its first year, and there will be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Re: Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Thehelpfulone wrote: > Deryck please could you confirm what happened with regards to the unused > funds - did WMHK request a reallocation? It seem that instead of "unused funds", your question should be reworded to "unaccounted funds" or "funds not used for the s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 April 2013 12:32, Craig Franklin wrote: > I'd like to come back to this - if the entity was told they were eligible > (which certainly looks to be the case from the public documents), when was > it discovered they were not? When the FDC recommendations were published. (see my reply to THO

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Re: Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

We have replied multiple times that we want the remaining funds from the 2010-11 grants to be considered in conjunction with the FDC proposal. (ie. the FDC proposal is the reallocation request.) This is because it is logistically impractical for us to return any funds to WMF before the end of Wikim

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

I think that we agree about the problem not about the solution. Anyway what it should be clear is that I have never spoken about an "algorithm" but about a matrix of parameters to evaluate a project. These parameters have been enumerated *but* after the evaluation of the project. This has genera

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 April 2013 16:47, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > Unfortunately I know that any project is specific and peculiar but the > *personal* feeling doesn't help because it means that another FDC will > evaluate it differently. And this is *precisely* what was predicted when the centralisation of funds

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

well, the fundamental question regarding the "centralisation of funds" is whether we agree that some chapters have higher impact ability (in terms of effectiveness, results, etc.) and should be prioritized in terms of funding access, or whether any decisions about funds distribution based on projec

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

2013/4/29 Dariusz Jemielniak : > My perception of this round of the FDC is mainly that it is very clear that > there needs to be much more and clearer information about GAC and about > what kinds of projects and chapters are better suited for the FDC. > Actually the information how GAC works is I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Deryck, it makes me sad to read your leaving message, as I have got to know you as a very constructive and engaged person, and I think your input and contributions are very valuable to the movement. It seems to me that we all kind of agree there's a gap between GAC and FDC funding when it co

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Deryck Chan wrote: > Dear trusty Wikimedians, > > The FDC decisions are out on Sunday. Despite my desperate attempts to > assist WMHK's board to keep up with deadlines and comply with seemingly > endless requests from WMF grantmaking and FDC support staff, we recei

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

> > P. S. again, internal-l discussions that should be public. Damn. > Agreed, I am not on Internal either… Jan-Bart > [1] http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/wmconf2013-fdc-process > > Tom > > -- > Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom) > "A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 4/29/13 12:59 PM, Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote: P. S. again, internal-l discussions that should be public. Damn. Agreed, I am not on Internal either... Jan-Bart Yes, there is a good number of people (including me) who are not on that list anymore. I'm really unclear, at this point in the mov

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Hello, If those three seats are to be elected by the community, then voting should be restricted actually to the power editors. I could imagine that one of those three seats - or, instead, a fourth one - is elected by the staff, maybe plus the members of the Advisory board. E.g. Greenpeace Germany

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 April 2013 21:01, Sarah Stierch wrote: > Yes, there is a good number of people (including me) who are not on that > list anymore. I'm really unclear, at this point in the movement, as to why > it needs to remain closed. Critical conversations take place here, there, > and else where - so it

[Wikimedia-l] movement partners

Hi all, Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium meeting: what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partners Is recognition of movement partners something that AffComm will be tak

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Hello Everyone I was an observer on the first round of the FDC, Patricio was the observer of the recent round of FDC requests so he will probably be able to tell you more on the specific details. But in general I have been (and still am) extremely impressed with the level of scrutiny AND the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] movement partners

On 4/29/13 1:03 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: Hi all, Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium meeting: what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partners Is recognition of movement p

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Hey So while I really regret your decision and hope that you will reconsider I would like to ask you something. > > Or, ironically, putting together a reallocation grant. Here's another > hen-and-egg problem for you all. We saw little value in settling the > remaining funds from the 2010-11 gra

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Hi Markus, I am not sure but I have the feeling that WMHK is free to apply for a Grant once they are in compliance with the terms of the earlier grant? But I am out of my depth here, probably someone like Asaf could inform us better… And I was happy that the chapters are setting up peer review

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 April 2013 17:53, David Gerard wrote: > On 29 April 2013 16:47, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > >> Unfortunately I know that any project is specific and peculiar but the >> *personal* feeling doesn't help because it means that another FDC will >> evaluate it differently. > > > And this is *precise

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On 29 April 2013 21:10, Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote: > Hey > > So while I really regret your decision and hope that you will reconsider I > would like to ask you something. > > > > > Or, ironically, putting together a reallocation grant. Here's another > > hen-and-egg problem for you all. We saw lit

[Wikimedia-l] [Fundraising 2013] Wikimedia France stepping back from payment processing

Hi everyone, A quick email to announce and explain current WMFr payment processor status. As some of you know, French regulations makes it hard to transfer ver 50% of the fund raised locally to an international organisation. Until know, WMFr budget was always somewhat equal to 50% of the money r

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

This situation is regrettable. My impression is that the FDC ombudsperson should review the handling of WMHK's grant application, including the earlier investigations and communications regarding the determination of whether or not WMHK should have been disqualified from this FDC round. The ombu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] movement partners

Hello, I am not quite sure what will be the future of the "Movement partners". I can imagine that a museum (for example) can be a partner in an initiative set up by the WMF, a chapter or a thorg. WMNL and Teylers Museum together started the "Teylers Challenge", a edit competition. The museum could

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

I hope a few remarks are valid. As a chapter volunteer responsible for leading the local application during round 2, I recognize much of the frustration from WMKH. The process is not on its right track, as things are. The WMF is understandably under legitimate scrutiny over the use of donations a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

The WMF is not the only source of fundraising for Wikimedia chapters or other movement partners. Many chapters have successfully partnered with other organizations to accomplish great things in outreach and programming. Every chapter has the opportunity to raise money to achieve meaningful results

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Itzik Edri wrote: > I agree. We should limit it to only community members, or to give equal > right to everyone. > > Asaf, you right, but we are talking also about the FDC elections. a > processes where we are not granting chapters and others organizations the > r

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Asaf Bartov wrote: > On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Itzik Edri wrote: > > > I agree. We should limit it to only community members, or to give equal > > right to everyone. > > > > Asaf, you right, but we are talking also about the FDC elections. a > > processes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

On 29 April 2013 18:48, Asaf Bartov wrote: > On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Itzik Edri wrote: > > > I agree. We should limit it to only community members, or to give equal > > right to everyone. > > > > Asaf, you right, but we are talking also about the FDC elections. a > > processes where we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Le 4/30/13 12:04 AM, Nathan a écrit : The WMF is not the only source of fundraising for Wikimedia chapters or other movement partners. Many chapters have successfully partnered with other organizations to accomplish great things in outreach and programming. Every chapter has the opportunity to ra

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Florence - my comments followed Erlend's in the thread, where he suggested sending resources around the world without regard to which chapters were the most developed. Outside of the paragraph where I referred to WMKH specifically, my comments were not directed at it. In any case, it's fictional f

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

Dear Nathan, I did not suggest what you say I suggested. My proposal was not to "send funds" away to weak chapters. The WMHK case illustrates exactly the point I wanted to make. The WMF has made reaching out to the world's largest language community (China), in the hands of the reporting and planni

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Nathan wrote: > Florence - my comments followed Erlend's in the thread, where he > suggested sending resources around the world without regard to which > chapters were the most developed. Outside of the paragraph where I > referred to WMKH specifically, my comments

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Erlend Bjørtvedt wrote: > Dear Nathan, > I did not suggest what you say I suggested. My proposal was not to "send > funds" away to weak chapters. > The WMHK case illustrates exactly the point I wanted to make. The WMF has > made reaching out to the world's largest

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Erlend Bjørtvedt wrote: > To clarify, my message is that the WMF should rather open an OFFICE in Hong > Kong, to serve the 1.3 billion chinese-speaking, and other south-east > Asians aswell from there. India, anyone? _

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

But if you do not help the Wikimedia Movement in California, then why are you all posted there? ;-) Erlend, WMNO 2013/4/30 phoebe ayers > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Erlend Bjørtvedt >wrote: > > > Dear Nathan, > > I did not suggest what you say I suggested. My proposal was not to "send >

[Wikimedia-l] Single User Login finalisation: some accounts will be renamed

All, The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users (like cross-wiki notifications). These changes will mean users have the same account name everywhere, will let us give you new features th

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Single User Login finalisation: some accounts will be renamed

Hi James, thanks for the links. Keeping in mind that there will be users that unexpectedly find their much loved account name changed the next time they try to log in, and this may be central to their established online wiki identity, is there a community discussion that we can point to where this

[Wikimedia-l] Comments on compliance and the FDC Round 2 decisions

Hello, everyone. 0. Meta 0.1. I do not respect the choice by Deryck -- an experienced Wikimedian -- to voice his (understandable) frustration in a letter full of wikidrama, and to follow it with a direct accusation of our team of "foul play"[0]. I think this should not go uncommented on. All of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Single User Login finalisation: some accounts will be renamed

Fae, Though I understand the concern that users will have, the need to rename a relatively-small number of accounts is a technical requirement that has been built into our system since SUL was designed c. 2005; it was switched on in early 2008. This has (sadly) been on the back-burner for too many

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Single User Login finalisation: some accounts will be renamed

Thanks James, personally I'm comforted by your prompt reply. My intuition is that this would be unlikely to affect any accounts with more than 5,000 edits, possibly fewer. I have no doubt that you intend to take special care to help users with significant contributions, such as those with a well e

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Single User Login finalisation: some accounts will be renamed

On 29 April 2013 20:59, Fae wrote: > Thanks James, personally I'm comforted by your prompt reply. Happy to help. :-) > My intuition is that this would be unlikely to affect any accounts > with more than 5,000 edits, possibly fewer. I have no doubt that you > intend to take special care to help u

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comments on compliance and the FDC Round 2 decisions

Asaf, Thank you for sharing your perspective. This situation is complicated. I think it should be reviewed by an uninvolved third party, probably the FDC ombudsperson. I think it would take significant time and a lot of emails in this thread to accomplish what a review by the ombudsperson coul

Re: [Wikimedia-l] movement partners

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:33 AM, phoebe ayers wrote: > Hi all, > > Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium meeting: > what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation? > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partners > > I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:12 AM, Florence Devouard wrote: > What happens to the idea according to which the funds belong to the > Wikimedia mouvement rather than to Wikimedia Foundation ? I think this exact point is often overlooked. I actually have a fairly trivial way to look at the whole thin