Hi Fae,
I’m subscribed to this mailing list using a Yahoo! e-mail address, and the
problem also happens in reverse: some e-mails end up in my spam folder. The
problem is so bad that I’m contemplating switching my subscription to a
different e-mail address, but hopefully I won’t need to do that
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 2:00 PM, John Mark Vandenberg
wrote:
> fwiw, A few days ago Jimmy disclosed that "James voted in favor of Arnnon".
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=700325768
>
It's known that the decision was unanimous among the 10 (then-)Trustees:
https://wikimedia
On 22 January 2016 at 22:00, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> fwiw, A few days ago Jimmy disclosed that "James voted in favor of Arnnon".
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=700325768
I'm not sure I'd call it a disclosure since it had already been made public
11 days earlier:
htt
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
>..
> The identified mistakes/shortcomings of the whole process:
>
> 1. In the background check performed by the HR and the legal department we
> have not had a specific PR check as an immanent part. While it sounds like
> common sense (d
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Nathan wrote:
> I think this is almost exactly wrong. The lesson here should not be that
>> the Board failed to take public relations into consideration when co-opting
>> a new member. The message is that the examination of candidates failed to
>> turn up really q
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak
wrote:
>
> The identified mistakes/shortcomings of the whole process:
>
> 1. In the background check performed by the HR and the legal department we
> have not had a specific PR check as an immanent part. While it sounds like
> common sense (doh
Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
> […]
> The identified mistakes/shortcomings of the whole process:
> 1. In the background check performed by the HR and the legal department we
> have not had a specific PR check as an immanent part. While it sounds like
> common sense (doh! I know, although many orga
> How are we going to address this in the future? We will basically start
> asking that.
If the Board of Trustees was entirely elected by the community would
solve the background check problem, even if those elections remain
technically just nominations which the sitting board can approve or
rejec
So, Fae, it's not someone's obligation to inform about his past, but
its the obligation of the other to examine?
Ziko
2016-01-22 21:00 GMT+01:00 Fæ :
> On 22 January 2016 at 18:46, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
>> Hello Fae,
>>
>> To be very clear, is it that you reproach A.G. that he did not disclose
>>
Hi,
Thanks Fae, I agree 100% with that.
The biggest mistake is not from A.G., but from the board as you mention.
So A. G. resigning won't solve the issue. We need a complete review of
the board governance and appointment process.
Regards,
Yann
2016-01-22 21:00 GMT+01:00 Fæ :
> On 22 January 201
On 22 January 2016 at 18:46, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> Hello Fae,
>
> To be very clear, is it that you reproach A.G. that he did not disclose
> relevant questionable behavior, prior to running as a candidate?
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
TL;DR
No, I don't reproach Geshuri personally, everyone makes mista
I did not know this list had an approval step when subscribing :) Sorry
about that.
Le 22/01/16 19:03, Austin Hair a écrit :
And just so everyone's clear, Florence's new subscription has already been
whitelisted.
Austin
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Fæ wrote:
Sorry you've had to change
Update: the office hour will be at 11 AM Pacific / 2 PM Eastern / 7 PM UTC
on Monday, January 25. We'll meet in #wikimedia-office.
Hope to see you then,
Pine
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Pine W wrote:
> Cross-posting.
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Pine W
> Date: Tu
On 22 January 2016 at 18:39, Cristian Consonni wrote:
> However I would like to know if you are tackling the main issue at
> hand, i.e. whether Arnnon Geshuri should remain a trustee or not.
If he's reading or aware of this discussion (I've seen no indication
of either, either way), I wonder why
Hello Fae,
To be very clear, is it that you reproach A.G. that he did not disclose
relevant questionable behavior, prior to running as a candidate?
Kind regards
Ziko
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_l
Dariusz, thank you for this explanation. This is the kind of thing it is
very helpful to hear about; it's a good example of how to be transparent
about ongoing learning processes. I'm sure I'm not the only one who
appreciates this bit of insight into how the board is proceeding.
-Pete
[[User:Petef
Hi Dariusz,
2016-01-22 19:21 GMT+01:00 Dariusz Jemielniak :
> we've been working on it, discussing, and introducing improvements. I
> guess that replying here quicker, rather than preparing an elaborate
> document may be more sensible, since you're asking, and we may be perceived
> as entirely ina
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Florence Devouard
wrote:
>
>>>
> Misinterpretation on my part for what you wrote here :
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-January/080945.html
>
>
> After reading it again, it actually referred to public statements rather
> than private ones.
Hi Sarah,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:59 PM, SarahSV wrote:
>
> You wrote to this list on 12 January that you were investigating with the
> Board Governance Committee what happened regarding the appointments process
> in this case – whether everyone was fully informed, and so on.
>
> Can you let
And just so everyone's clear, Florence's new subscription has already been
whitelisted.
Austin
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Fæ wrote:
> Sorry you've had to change email Florence.
>
> (Tangent) Could those who use *Yahoo email addresses* ask their
> friends to check if their emails regularly
Sorry you've had to change email Florence.
(Tangent) Could those who use *Yahoo email addresses* ask their
friends to check if their emails regularly end up in spam boxes? I
have found several Yahoo users who write to this list getting marked
as potential trojans by Google and I only find their em
Le 21/01/16 20:05, Dariusz Jemielniak a écrit :
hi Florence,
Then I was astonished when I discovered that Dariusz, who has been a board
member for over 6 months, was not aware of the existence of the Conflict of
Interest Policy, which include a pledge of commitment and an obligation to
disclos
Le 21/01/16 20:05, Dariusz Jemielniak a écrit :
hi Florence,
Then I was astonished when I discovered that Dariusz, who has been a board
member for over 6 months, was not aware of the existence of the Conflict of
Interest Policy, which include a pledge of commitment and an obligation to
disclos
On 2016-01-21 7:08 AM, Florence Devouard wrote:
Either the board is completely paralyzed and no more able to make any
decision as to what they should do. Or the board has decided not to
provide any feedback, which I consider completely disrespectful to the
community and unhealthy generally.
I
Florence Devouard wrote:
>I hesitate between two interpretations. Either the board is completely
>paralyzed and no more able to make any decision as to what they should
>do. Or the board has decided not to provide any feedback, which I
>consider completely disrespectful to the community and unhealt
Anyway, it's gorgeous. Well done all.
Anthony Cole
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Yury Bulka wrote:
>
> Anna Torres writes:
>
> > Hi!!
> >
> > We are looking at it and we are trying to fix it :) Thanks to all!
> Thank you, glad to hear:)
>
> Best,
> Yury.
>
> >
> > 2016-01-22 9:01 GMT-03:00
We are not "seeing movement" by a vague statement of "we're working on it".
In the case of James Heilman, they said essentially the same thing. What
resulted was a vague statement that used a lot of words to say nothing at
all. There needs to be full disclosure and specifics, not a lot of waffle.
Anna Torres writes:
> Hi!!
>
> We are looking at it and we are trying to fix it :) Thanks to all!
Thank you, glad to hear:)
Best,
Yury.
>
> 2016-01-22 9:01 GMT-03:00 Yury Bulka :
>
>> Oops. That is a problem and needs to be fixed, otherwise the video
>> should be deleted from Commons and relic
Hi!!
We are looking at it and we are trying to fix it :) Thanks to all!
Hugs
2016-01-22 9:01 GMT-03:00 Yury Bulka :
> Oops. That is a problem and needs to be fixed, otherwise the video
> should be deleted from Commons and relicensed as cc by-sa-nc. In the
> current state the video is doubtfully
Oops. That is a problem and needs to be fixed, otherwise the video
should be deleted from Commons and relicensed as cc by-sa-nc. In the
current state the video is doubtfully a cc by-sa work.
At 09:15 there is a list of four items licensed under the noncommercial
license, which is obviously incompa
First of all, I also think that we cannot expect us to fulfill our mission
by having all the world visiting our sites. A good percentage of that
mission probably needs to be fulfilled elsewhere thanks to our free
licenses and APIs.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Magnus Manske wrote:
> We pref
Oops. Thanks Lydia.
On 22 Jan 2016 3:30 pm, "Lydia Pintscher"
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 3:00 AM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> > Lydia, could you please link to a log of that discussion?
>
> I already did ;-) But here it is again:
> http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-office/2016012
Amir,
We feature community member profiles in Tamil Wikipedia homepage and
Wikimedia India chapter archives. It gives a brief intro about their
background and links to their significant Wikimedia related contributions.
Tamil Wikipedia archive - https://ta.wikipedia.org/s/7pi
Wikimedia India acrh
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Jens Best wrote:
> I'm not sure where you get your impressions, Magnus. But when I discuss
> ideas for a better implementation of Wikidata into Wikipedia to improve
> automatisation of repetitive editing procedures, including the
> implementation of the possible us
Ah, I see. I am the problem. Glad we cleared that up.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 6:56 AM Isarra Yos wrote:
> You just don't get it, do you? Even from the start this was all about
> social issues with rollouts, and still you are contributing to the very
> same social problems you so blindly condemne
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:54 PM Jens Best wrote:
> I'm not sure where you get your impressions, Magnus. But when I discuss
> ideas for a better implementation of Wikidata into Wikipedia to improve
> automatisation of repetitive editing procedures, including the
> implementation of the possible u
This:
On 20/01/16 10:41, Jane Darnell wrote:
Moving forward, more attention must be paid to documenting existing reader
and editor workflows, gnarly as this may sound to achieve. Once done
however, optimization of such workflows should be much, much easier. After
viewing that video from Mexico W
37 matches
Mail list logo
