Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Agreed. Your message is a great improvement. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Kolbe Sent: Friday, 25 August 2017 9:15 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

I haven't taken part in discussions about the endowment for several years, not least because the argument appears to have been won and an endowment is being established. But if things have changed so much that people are arguing that there is a choice between long-term stability and short-term

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

While I would (and have) strongly opposed both threats and actual contacting of employerst of volunteers, I think the situation here is somewhat different. Firstly WMF employees are not subject to community sanction insofar as their paid roles go. Secondly it is perfectlying normal to have an

[Wikimedia-l] HEADS UP: Wikimedia Developer Summit 2018: Technology for the Movement Strategy

Hi everyone, I wanted to give you all a heads up about the upcoming Dev Summit. This year the Summit will be held in San Francisco on January 22nd and 23rd, 2018. We are still finalizing the details and will be sending out the call for participation soon. But meantime, we wanted to share a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

Andrew Thank you for your suggestion, but I think that a discussion about the Foundations policy on news across its various projects is more suitable to this list than to one of the Wikipedias. Your comments on the English-language Wikipedia policy on news are helpful. Do you see the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Dear Wikimedia-l, Rogol has been placed under moderation, but at this point no decision has been made to ban him from the list. As long as his messages are reasonable, respectful and on point, his messages will go through. We agreed that it is important to allow a diversity of voices to be heard,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

Then perhaps the blog posts were over-enthusiastic. There is a current discussion on this topic at the English-language Wikipedia, but not at the link Andrew gave: it is at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Hello Shani, I lurk here, but don't really post. I am a regular poster at Wikipediocracy where I saw a discussion of this thread. I'll make one specific comment and one general comment. When I read the RfC and I got to proposal #4, I thought that it might just as well have been written

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

Jimbo I understand you to say that the WMF could have afforded to spend $5M on direct support of volunteer contributors had it chosen to, without prejudice to the decision to place $5M into the Endowment. I seem to recall that you stated on Wikipedia that "I support expansion of the scholarship

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

On 8/21/17 6:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors wrote: > I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of > endowment, The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort -- one > of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the benefit > of the projects today,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Hi all, happy Friday. I'm a member of the foundation's online fundraising team and wanted to add a few points and answers to this good discussion. I'll use bullet-points to separate each topic: - For clarification, this was a 1-hour test that ran from 15 to 16 UTC on Wednesday. We haven't

Re: [Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

As far as I can tell, the Foundation does not have "policy on news across its various projects". So the answer to your original question: > > Has the Foundation made a conscious decision to promote Wikipedia as a > > > source of news, and if so, what were the results of its discussions > with >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

I'd like to second what Rob has expressed here. This list already suffers a very poor reputation within our community, even as it is positioned as an important part of our communications ecosystem. Allowing participants to intimidate others and exact "in real life" consequences should be dealt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Thank you, Shani. My new favorite word is "automagically". And thank you all for working on new ideas for list moderation. /a On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Shani Evenstein wrote: > Dear Wikimedia-l, > > Rogol has been placed under moderation, but at this point no

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

We should not sink to "alternative facts" Not even to the American public, who seem to be accustomed to them. We should provide a better example. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Sam Wilson Sent: Thursday,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

I am grateful that the moderators have taken some action, but I am disappointed that contacting a person's employer is not yet seen as an uncrossable line here. Out of respect to your call for civility I will refrain from directly responding to the person in question despite his allegations

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Dear all, I should have mentioned that we are working on a formal response regarding the request to ban subscribers from the list.This is an issue that has been raised during this discussion and we are carefully considering our thoughts on the matter, as we did for the 4 points that we already

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Hello, Just a general remark. It is actually possible to create a huge website with a lot of content, even if you are commercial. Wikia (or "Fandom powered by Wikia) is an example, Baidu Baike another one. Maybe its not exactly the same (sort of) people who contribute. But I find it highly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

Interesting and well-considered perspective, Rob. I appreciate your voice in this discussion. Beyond this specific incident, which remains important, I agree, would any of the three policies proposed address this issue? Is there a policy amendment that you would like to see? Thank you for your

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

Sam, On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Sam Wilson wrote: > Peter, > > Fair enough, I agree that the idea that Wikimedia would have been a > success if it'd be made commercial is crazy. You say that now, but originally, Wikipedia was registered as a dotcom, with the