Hi Rupert,
You can see the full Community Resources budget, including the grants
programs here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Resources/2016-17_Annual_Plan#Budget
Note that Rapid Grants are a type of Project Grant and included in that
budget.
Please note that this budget is still un
On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 4:55 AM, Natacha Rault wrote:
> Well this is most unfortunate as we have a workshop with new contributors
> on the 19t!
> I wish I could have been informed much much earlier...
> Nattes à chat
For list archive posterity, Whatamidoing/Sherry reached out to Natacha
off-lis
Hoi,
Do you really think that democratic processes produce a best result? Do you
really think that the Wikimedia Foundation or the United States deserve
that label?
Many may request democratic processes but I prefer a greater deal of
transparency. When you talk about accountability, it is not so m
Most of dynamical system have a cyclic fashion: if google and facebook
will cannibalize content makers they'll run out of contents. In the bush
under the fallen giants a new generation of wannabe-monopolists will
eventually grow. Our ancestors were sort of rats escaping from
dinosaurs' feet.
On 18 April 2016 at 18:22, Pine W wrote:
> Just because an idea is hatched by a few people isn't a reason to dismiss
> it.
Indeed. Which is why I didn't dismiss it.
> It seems to me that any incoming ED needs to know what the plan is, if
> there is a plan
So far as splitting up the WMF into sm
Thanks, Pine. Some stand-out quotes from the article:
*85 cents of every new dollar spent in online advertising will go to Google
or Facebook, said Brian Nowak, a Morgan Stanley analyst.*
*Facebook also announced that it would open up Instant Articles — which
encourage publishers to post their
> You're suggesting that counsel spend their time writing to
> agencies ... when we know almost nothing about them.
Again, if there is another way to find out, I'd like to learn it.
>> Therefore I think it would be worth writing a letter asking that the
>> BOLT, SMISC, and CSFV be returned to ope
It's not a reason to *dismiss* it, no, but it's definitely not a
reason to entirely reorganise our plans for organisational governance
in case it turns out to get traction at *some* point. And that's what
you're talking about here; making monumental changes to the timetable,
scope and demands of a
If Jimmy was to stand for community election and not be elected it will not
decrease his ability to be an ambassador for the movement one bit. If he
stands for election and wins it will increase his legitimacy.
What I think many are requesting is democratic processes and
accountability. Our moveme
This article is interesting in light of discussions about Wikimedia
readership, audience, and fundraising, so I'm passing along the link for
anyone else who might be interested.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/business/media-websites-battle-falteringad-revenue-and-traffic.html
Sounds like Wikim
Hi Andy,
Just because an idea is hatched by a few people isn't a reason to dismiss
it. Otherwise, how would ideas get traction?
It seems to me that any incoming ED needs to know what the plan is, if
there is a plan, regarding possible forks from WMF. It's also highly
desirable that, if this is be
That didn't really identify any of the questions. You're suggesting
that counsel spend their time writing to agencies to ask about the
copyright status of programs with the intent of considering taking
them over, when we know almost nothing about them.
Since you've identified the people responsibl
Hi Joseph,
No, because board members' first duties are to WMF, not to the community or
the affiliates.
Pine
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:43 AM, Joseph Seddon
wrote:
> Does Dariusz as a community selected board member not count?
>
> Seddon
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Tanweer Morshed
> w
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Joseph Seddon
wrote:
> Does Dariusz as a community selected board member not count?
>
>
I would certainly hope that people DO approach me with ideas, and I am
definitely very open to the discussion within the community.
dj
> Where do you see legal standing being a factor...?
On further reflection, it would certainly be better to simply ask the
DARPA Crowdsourced Formal Verification (CSVF) Program Manager Daniel
Ragsdale, who has left DARPA and is now a Professor at Texas A&M
University, about the extent to which enh
On 17 April 2016 at 21:52, Pine W wrote:
> But recent discussions have included the possibility of spinning off
> components of WMF and/or a breakup of the WMF organization, partly as a way
> to mitigate the systemic risk from a dysfunctional or underperforming WMF.
> So, should we be looking for
Does Dariusz as a community selected board member not count?
Seddon
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Tanweer Morshed
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I agree with Pine on his 3rd proposal. Including a representative from the
> affiliates and another from the community into the search steering group
>
Hi everyone,
I agree with Pine on his 3rd proposal. Including a representative from the
affiliates and another from the community into the search steering group
should help including the input from wider Wikimedia community. This would
be positive both for the search process and the recruitment.
So you're suggesting we don't find an ED for the biggest org in the
movement because there's a thread on a mailing list about spinning bits of
it off?
I think hiring an ED can be done safely. Spinning elements off the WMF is
something that has already been done, repeatedly, be it duties (the FDC,
19 matches
Mail list logo