Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives
Minutes and slides from Wednesday's quarterly review of the Foundation's Core features team (focusing on the work on Flow) are now available at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Core_features/July_2014 . On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks, to increase accountability and create more opportunities for course corrections and resourcing adjustments as necessary, Sue's asked me and Howie Fung to set up a quarterly project evaluation process, starting with our highest priority initiatives. These are, according to Sue's narrowing focus recommendations which were approved by the Board [1]: - Visual Editor - Mobile (mobile contributions + Wikipedia Zero) - Editor Engagement (also known as the E2 and E3 teams) - Funds Dissemination Committe and expanded grant-making capacity I'm proposing the following initial schedule: January: - Editor Engagement Experiments February: - Visual Editor - Mobile (Contribs + Zero) March: - Editor Engagement Features (Echo, Flow projects) - Funds Dissemination Committee We’ll try doing this on the same day or adjacent to the monthly metrics meetings [2], since the team(s) will give a presentation on their recent progress, which will help set some context that would otherwise need to be covered in the quarterly review itself. This will also create open opportunities for feedback and questions. My goal is to do this in a manner where even though the quarterly review meetings themselves are internal, the outcomes are captured as meeting minutes and shared publicly, which is why I'm starting this discussion on a public list as well. I've created a wiki page here which we can use to discuss the concept further: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews The internal review will, at minimum, include: Sue Gardner myself Howie Fung Team members and relevant director(s) Designated minute-taker So for example, for Visual Editor, the review team would be the Visual Editor / Parsoid teams, Sue, me, Howie, Terry, and a minute-taker. I imagine the structure of the review roughly as follows, with a duration of about 2 1/2 hours divided into 25-30 minute blocks: - Brief team intro and recap of team's activities through the quarter, compared with goals - Drill into goals and targets: Did we achieve what we said we would? - Review of challenges, blockers and successes - Discussion of proposed changes (e.g. resourcing, targets) and other action items - Buffer time, debriefing Once again, the primary purpose of these reviews is to create improved structures for internal accountability, escalation points in cases where serious changes are necessary, and transparency to the world. In addition to these priority initiatives, my recommendation would be to conduct quarterly reviews for any activity that requires more than a set amount of resources (people/dollars). These additional reviews may however be conducted in a more lightweight manner and internally to the departments. We’re slowly getting into that habit in engineering. As we pilot this process, the format of the high priority reviews can help inform and support reviews across the organization. Feedback and questions are appreciated. All best, Erik [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vote:Narrowing_Focus [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer
I have made a suggestion to the WMF Board. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard#Suggestion_for_the_Board:_Technology_Committee In the near future, I plan to look at the policies surrounding office actions as they apply to product decisions made by local communities, and will likely make a request to the Board that they review those policies as a separate matter. Cheers, Pine On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Pharos pharosofalexand...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Gergo Tisza gti...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:58 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: That doesn't, however, help the concern that millions of users are pulling up the images without immediately seeing the license requirements and author information. To the contrary, Media Viewer displays the license, author and source as an always visible part of the image. On a typical file page, you have to scroll down to find any of this information; most users won't do that, if what they are looking for is the image, and that is available without scrolling. (It is well known in web usability http://www.nngroup.com/articles/scrolling-and-attention/ that relatively little attention is given to things above the fold; one of the main benefits of Media Viewer is that it brings the most important things above it.) Also, many people might not use file pages simply because they are so slow. A famous experiment by Google http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2009/06/speed-matters.html showed that lowering loading speed by 200 ms resulted in 0.3% less interactions (on the English Wikipedia's scale, that would be about 20,000 thumbnail clicks a day). MediaViewer improves image loading time by a full second for the median user. George has made a useful contribution here, in that his points appear to be actually testable. Could the WMF or someone else look into user-testing how the MediaViewer (and variations on it) affects the average reader's perception and consciousness of the licensing information? Thanks, Pharos ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal: List administration policy
On 12/07/2014, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: ... the door completely with their backdoor continued accusations which are made without a shred of proof. Referring to Richard's post, the general list guidelines apply[1] and there is an explanation of the admin role[2]. However neither of these documents sets a policy for whether administrators on this list have a duty to reply to emails from a participant when they ask why they have been moderated or blocked, nor whether they have to give an explanation when action is taken so that the person being moderated or blocked can have the opportunity to understand the issue, change their behaviour and have a path to get unblocked or unmoderated. As with Russavia's case above, there may be people who are thought to be problematic due to a history on Wikimedia projects, perhaps they will always be unwelcome on this list, however the vast majority of bans or moderated accounts ought to be based solely on evidence of posts to this list. However, there is no downside to letting people ask the question why was I moderated? or go on to appeal moderation or a ban if they wish, preferably as a public process so that others affected are free to comment with evidence. It may be beneficial to consider adding a project whereby moderation or banning can be requested publicly, rather than by closed emails. I still hold the view that a policy beyond the standard general nuts-and-bolts guidelines which ensures a greater level of transparency compared to the de facto closeted and apparently sometimes silent process we have settled for, would be of benefit to all contributors of this list. Links 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Administration Fae -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decision on FDC member appointments
welcome on board :) I'm glad to see that all nominated members are heavily engaged and experienced. I would like to second Patricio's appreciation of stepping down members, who helped shape the FDC as it is now, dedicated hundreds of hours of time to the process, and made it possible. best, dariusz pundit On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Patricio Lorente patricio.lore...@gmail.com wrote: Dear friends: We are pleased to inform you that the WMF Board of Trustees has come to a decision about which four candidates to appoint to the FDC. It wasn't easy; as is evident from the nominations, the caliber of the candidates was very high. The resolution is now published in https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Funds_Dissemination_Committee_Membership_2014 We have selected four appointees as follows: 1)Anne Clin (Risker) 2)Matanya Moses (matanya) 3)Dumisani Ndubane (Thuvack) 4)Osmar Valdebenito (B1mbo) On behalf of the Board, we want to thank Anders, Arjuna, Mike and Yuri for their service to the inaugural FDC. We deeply appreciate the two years they have served the committee and all the work they have done during four rounds of FDC recommendations. They have helped to shape the FDC itself, made critical decisions about how to strategically direct movement funds, and helped to shape the future of the movement. We hope they will continue to remain engaged in the FDC process and the movement in different ways in the years ahead. We also want to thank all the candidates, and encourage them to consider re-applying for the committee next year, when five new members will be elected to serve on the committee. Best, Bishakha and Patricio -- Patricio Lorente Blog: http://www.patriciolorente.com.ar Identi.ca // Twitter: @patriciolorente ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- __ dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak profesor zarządzania kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego i centrum badawczego CROW Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Nauk ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Android Nearby Feature (was: Re: Community RfCs about MediaViewer)
Until then... http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikishootme/ On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 11 July 2014 22:34, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: The new Android app isn't simply an upgrade of the last version, it's a complete re-write in native code This technical nicety is of no interest to most users, whose app was updated. In determining the feature set, the team looked at core functionality they really wanted to deliver in the first release, and iterated on that based on user feedback during the beta. I didn't participate in this round of the beta, because there was no suggestion in anything that I read that significant - significantly useful - existing functionality would be removed. (Indeed, the removal wasn't mentioned when the revamped app was announced by your WMF colleagues.) I did tough, spend some time testing the nearby feature in v1's beta And a more understandable view of the current sprint in Trello: https://trello.com/b/5DhKhjmW/mobile-app-sprint-35-article-usability-enhancements I can't find the string near on that page. The nearby feature in the old app also relied on third party infrastructure, which makes us a bit uncomfortable from a user privacy and principles perspective. Our plan is to build out our own OpenStreetMap infrastructure later this year which will help in further developing such geo-functionality. Is this a blocker for the return of the nearby feature to the app? In splitting this thread and describing it as off topic, you've overlooked that my comments were in the context of - and in response to - your comment about change-aversion [tending] to correlate pretty strongly with impact on existing workflows and noticeable changes to user experience and behaviour. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal: List administration policy
I don't really have anything to add, but I think Fae makes some good points here. On 12/07/14 08:04, Fæ wrote: On 12/07/2014, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: ... the door completely with their backdoor continued accusations which are made without a shred of proof. Referring to Richard's post, the general list guidelines apply[1] and there is an explanation of the admin role[2]. However neither of these documents sets a policy for whether administrators on this list have a duty to reply to emails from a participant when they ask why they have been moderated or blocked, nor whether they have to give an explanation when action is taken so that the person being moderated or blocked can have the opportunity to understand the issue, change their behaviour and have a path to get unblocked or unmoderated. As with Russavia's case above, there may be people who are thought to be problematic due to a history on Wikimedia projects, perhaps they will always be unwelcome on this list, however the vast majority of bans or moderated accounts ought to be based solely on evidence of posts to this list. However, there is no downside to letting people ask the question why was I moderated? or go on to appeal moderation or a ban if they wish, preferably as a public process so that others affected are free to comment with evidence. It may be beneficial to consider adding a project whereby moderation or banning can be requested publicly, rather than by closed emails. I still hold the view that a policy beyond the standard general nuts-and-bolts guidelines which ensures a greater level of transparency compared to the de facto closeted and apparently sometimes silent process we have settled for, would be of benefit to all contributors of this list. Links 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Administration Fae I guess the way I see it, there will always be exceptions, but anyone worth letting (back) on the list in the first place probably deserves at least some sort of transparency. The overhead required to actually do that could prove problematic, though. I don't know. -I ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal: List administration policy
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014, Richard Ames rich...@ames.id.au wrote: I think it is very difficult to have hard 'rules'. The guidelines have been published and are referred to in the footer of each messages sent from this list. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Ya, those are far from established or instructive in cases of moderator involvement. I started those[1], and even I don't agree with the current draft. They weren't written for Foundation-l/Wikimedia-l necessarily, originally proposed on a private, now defunct list and edited by a small minority from there. To the best of my recollection, there was no vetting by a larger community at the time. That page had a dedicated section about moderation[2], and suggested practices that were removed all together - with guidelines to warn before any moderator action, along with a recourse in case of disputes. A somewhat similar approach as admin actions. I suppose they could still be used as a starting point, if there is a need to have these written down. -Theo [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mailing_lists/Guidelinesaction=history [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mailing_lists/Guidelinesoldid=3544960 Regards, Richard. On 11/07/14 20:28, Fæ wrote: Hi, I would like to propose that this list have a published process for post moderation, banning and appeals. Perhaps a page on meta would be a good way to propose and discuss a policy? I would be happy to kick off a draft. This list has a defined scope at https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l which explains who the 3 list admins are, but no more than that. There is no system of appeals, no expected time limits on bans or moderation, nor an explanation of the 30 posts per month behavioural norm that sometimes applies to this list. Neither is there any explanation of what is expected of list admins, such as whether there is an obligation to explain to someone who finds themselves subject to moderation or a ban, as to why this has happened and what they ought to do in order to become un-banned or un-moderated. I believe this would help list users better understand what is expected of them when they post here and it may give an opportunity to review the transparency of list administration, such as the option of publishing a list of active moderated accounts and possibly a list of indefinitely banned accounts where these were for behaviour on the list (as opposed to content-free spamming etc.) I see no down side to explaining policy as openly as possible. Thoughts? Fae ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Android Nearby Feature (was: Re: Community RfCs about MediaViewer)
Magnus - another great tool, thanks! I just noticed that somewhere someone made an article for something just down the street from me. I guess I should go take a picture of it now! Jane On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote: Until then... http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikishootme/ On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 11 July 2014 22:34, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: The new Android app isn't simply an upgrade of the last version, it's a complete re-write in native code This technical nicety is of no interest to most users, whose app was updated. In determining the feature set, the team looked at core functionality they really wanted to deliver in the first release, and iterated on that based on user feedback during the beta. I didn't participate in this round of the beta, because there was no suggestion in anything that I read that significant - significantly useful - existing functionality would be removed. (Indeed, the removal wasn't mentioned when the revamped app was announced by your WMF colleagues.) I did tough, spend some time testing the nearby feature in v1's beta And a more understandable view of the current sprint in Trello: https://trello.com/b/5DhKhjmW/mobile-app-sprint-35-article-usability-enhancements I can't find the string near on that page. The nearby feature in the old app also relied on third party infrastructure, which makes us a bit uncomfortable from a user privacy and principles perspective. Our plan is to build out our own OpenStreetMap infrastructure later this year which will help in further developing such geo-functionality. Is this a blocker for the return of the nearby feature to the app? In splitting this thread and describing it as off topic, you've overlooked that my comments were in the context of - and in response to - your comment about change-aversion [tending] to correlate pretty strongly with impact on existing workflows and noticeable changes to user experience and behaviour. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Android Nearby Feature (was: Re: Community RfCs about MediaViewer)
2014-07-12 13:44 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com: Until then... http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikishootme/ That would be great if there will by filtering by category. So it could be used to find nearby articles about monument without pictures - great tool for Wiki Loves Monuments.. -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Do Over
Hi all, I'd like to try participating on this list again. Now that there's much more context about me with respect to Wikimedia projects, I'd appreciate a chance to re-introduce myself: Hi, I'm Wil Sinclair. Strictly speaking, I've been a Wikipedian for 7 years, but I've been an active Wikipedian for less than 3 months. In that time I believe I've seen a lot, but I still have a lot to learn. I like to contribute to diverse articles in an effort to learn more about things that I'm unfamiliar with. My interests include electronic music production, home automation, web technologies, somewhat warped cinema, and ADHD, which is a disorder that affects me and my family profoundly. Currently I'm doing research on wild west figures such as Jesse James with the goal of contributing to relevant articles. It's a topic I didn't know much about beforehand, and I see it as an opportunity to learn. I'm also working on adding more sound samples to Commons in an effort to make share-alike music production easier. A lot of you may know me from my participation on Wikipediocracy. I'd like to clarify my position on this community. I believe that there are a lot of constructive things that are discussed there. On the other hand, some members engage in extreme snark and doxxing, which I have very vocally disapproved of from day one. I believe that the discussions there occasionally devolve to hate speech, which I find intolerable. There is a current discussion about these issues on my blog: http://wllm.com/2014/07/11/greg-kohs-and-bigotry/. I'm concerned that some members of the Wikipedia community can't discuss issues on-wiki- whether they are currently blocked or simply don't feel comfortable doing so. To address this problem, I created a site called Offwiki. We're currently talking about issues such as child protection, which is an issue that I brought up here, as well. Some Wikipedians are concerned that their on-wiki usernames may be used on offwiki.org; I am happy to create and block (if desired) such usernames on request. My personal email is w...@wllm.com. You can always rely on me to stick to my values, be outspoken, and act in good faith, although not always obviously so as my MO seems to be uncommon in this very vocal part of the Wikipedia community. I'll also be mindful of the number of posts I send to this list; many complained that I sent too many mails in a short period in the past. My apologies. I hope to get to know all of you better, and vice versa. Best. ,Wil ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Do Over
Eh, this thread is garbage and you should be put on indefinite moderation here, in my opinion. The offwiki.org thread was borderline already... now you're spamming your latest drama-fueled blog post. Enough is enough. A do over would involve you quietly and peacefully editing Commons and the English Wikipedia and other Wikimedia wikis for a year or two and getting to know and better understand the Wikimedia movement. But I don't think you're interested in that, you seem to instead be interested in needlessly creating drama. Consequently, it seems prudent to shut you down. MZMcBride ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Do Over
Drama is a two way process. It requires response to a perceived provocation. You have just provided this response. With no response, no drama. At worst just a soliloquy in the background. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of MZMcBride Sent: 13 July 2014 04:54 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Do Over Eh, this thread is garbage and you should be put on indefinite moderation here, in my opinion. The offwiki.org thread was borderline already... now you're spamming your latest drama-fueled blog post. Enough is enough. A do over would involve you quietly and peacefully editing Commons and the English Wikipedia and other Wikimedia wikis for a year or two and getting to know and better understand the Wikimedia movement. But I don't think you're interested in that, you seem to instead be interested in needlessly creating drama. Consequently, it seems prudent to shut you down. MZMcBride ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4716 / Virus Database: 3986/7842 - Release Date: 07/12/14 ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Do Over
On Jul 13, 2014 4:20 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: Hi, I'm Wil Sinclair. Strictly speaking, I've been a Wikipedian for 7 years, but I've been an active Wikipedian for less than 3 months. In that time I believe I've seen a lot, but I still have a lot to learn. Hi, Wil! Your name is a bit strange. Why not double 'l' ar the end? What does your name mean? Are you a British? And you must be a relative of Sir Clive Sinclair! Aren't you? I'd like to meet him, may you arrange that for me? Oh, I've just realized that you are a noble, like Sir Clive is! That's really cool! How often are you eating caviar? Do you own a yacht? How much did it cost? Are you traveling often across the Atlantic in your yacht or you prefer Pacific, as you are presently on the West Coast? May you share with us how those seven years of being Wikipedian passed? What's the difference between being a Wikipedian and being an active Wikipedian from your perspective? I like to contribute to diverse articles in an effort to learn more about things that I'm unfamiliar with. My interests include electronic music production, home automation, web technologies, somewhat warped cinema, and ADHD, which is a disorder that affects me and my family profoundly. Currently I'm doing research on wild west figures such as Jesse James with the goal of contributing to relevant articles. It's a topic I didn't know much about beforehand, and I see it as an opportunity to learn. Have you started writing articles on Wikipedia? If so, may you show us your contributions? Are you using proper works as sources for your contributions? I am somewhat familiar with web technologies... compiling web servers for 15 years to get better performance (and hating Java for the same period of time). What are your interests in particular? To be honest, I think that ADHD is a bullshit, used as an a bad excuse by mature people for their own unwillingness to work on themselves, as well as to rationalize their oppression of children. I'm also working on adding more sound samples to Commons in an effort to make share-alike music production easier. That's great! May you show us the examples of the sound samples you uploaded? A lot of you may know me from my participation on Wikipediocracy. I'd like to clarify my position on this community. I believe that there are a lot of constructive things that are discussed there. On the other hand, some members engage in extreme snark and doxxing, which I have very vocally disapproved of from day one. I believe that the discussions there occasionally devolve to hate speech, which I find intolerable. There is a current discussion about these issues on my blog: http://wllm.com/2014/07/11/greg-kohs-and-bigotry/. What is Wikipediocracy? Who is Greg Kohs and why is he relevant to us? I created a site called Offwiki. That's great! Off wiki activities are extremely important for our movement! It doesn't need to lead to content creation. Just socializing outside is a great thing to do! It helps us to stay connected and to overcome our conflicts. I suppose you'll create a platform for off wiki events on your site. That will be really useful, for sure! I really don't like the fact that we depend on Facebook for Wikimedia events. I hope to get to know all of you better... If you don't mind, I would talk with Wikimedia Serbia folk to call you to present your platform for off wiki activities. I am sure they are interested in sharing their events and being able to see when Wikimedia events are going to happen in CEE region, without having to consult various sites for that. So, see you soon! ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
