Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Wikipedia

[Leinonen Teemu]

Thanks Anne,

I have followed the Kiwix and now checked the WikiFundi’s status, too. Thanks 
for the links.

My point is that words matters and for instance, I find the concept “New 
Readers” problematic in the case of us reaching “Global South” (often offline).

-Teemu

Lähetetty iPhonesta

> Anne Gomez  kirjoitti 21.7.2018 kello 0.00:
> 
> Hi Teemu,
> 
> I agree that there is a lot we can, and should, do for people who are not
> online... I'm really excited about this partnership with Kiwix because they
> are the base of a lot of different initiatives in the offline space.
> 
> Are you aware of WikiFundi[1]? It is a project, built on Kiwix, that is
> taking steps towards offline editing. Offline editing is a really complex
> problem from a technical and user experience perspective. The WikiFundi
> team has been working on the product for a couple of years now, with
> support from WMF and the Orange Foundation.
> 
> In January, the Foundation funded a project grant[2] to support WikiFundi
> developing their user experience and effectiveness.
> 
> Cheers,
> Anne
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.wikifundi.org/
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/WikiInAfrica/WikiFundi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Leinonen Teemu 
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Offline is important but when doing these things we should same time
>> remember our vision statement’s part saying “*every single human being* can
>> freely *share* in the sum of all knowledge”.
>> 
>> We should never consider the people in the “offline world” being only
>> readers, users or consumers of the content, but people who naturally have a
>> lot of knowledge to share for the rest of the world.
>> 
>> With the offline distribution, let’s keep working on to have more
>> languages and active communities in the Wikimedia. Let’s have the
>> edit-button when ever possible.
>> 
>> -Teemu
>> 
>>> James Heilman  kirjoitti 20.7.2018 kello 12.54:
>>> 
>>> Agree amazing news. Offline is key for much of the world.
>>> 
>>> We are developing and distributing "Internet-in-a-Boxes" to help
>> compensate
>>> somewhat for the pull back from zero rating.
>>> 
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Internet-in-a-Box
>>> 
>>> James
>>> 
 On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 4:27 AM Lucas Teles 
>> wrote:
 
 Those are excellent news!
 
 I wonder if there are any plans on working on less rich countries. They
 usually have less internet access and would benefit from that.
 
 Wikipedia Zero has just expired in Angola and I can’t imagine a best
>> way to
 replace that source of knowledge withou having to deal with the negative
 side of it.
 
 Concerning the many users from Angola that reached out to me complaining
 about the end of Wikipedia Zero in Angola, giving them access to Kiwix
>> will
 be of enormous help.
 
 Teles
 
 Em qui, 19 de jul de 2018 às 19:16, Samantha Lien 
 escreveu:
 
> This press release is also available on the Wikimedia blog here:
> 
 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/07/18/wikimedia-
>> foundation-and-kiwix-partner-to-grow-offline-access-to-wikipedia/Wikimedia
> Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Wikipedia
> *The Wikimedia Foundation and Switzerland-based Kiwix announce a global
> collaboration to increase offline access to Wikipedia and the Wikimedia
> projects.*
> 
> Lausanne, Switzerland, and San Francisco, USA, 18 July 2018 – The
> Wikimedia Foundation has announced a partnership with Kiwix, the free
>> and
> open-source software solution that enables offline access to
>> educational
> content, to expand and improve access to Wikipedia and other Wikimedia
> projects globally. This partnership will include a $275,000
>> contribution
 to
> Kiwix to further enhance offline access to Wikipedia in parts of the
 world
> where consistent, affordable internet connectivity presents a
>> significant
> barrier to accessing Wikipedia.
> 
> “Our hope is that one day everyone will have access to the internet,
>> and
> eliminate the need for other offline methods of access to information.”
> said Kiwix CEO Stephane Coillet-Matillon. “But we know that there are
 still
> serious gaps in internet access globally that require solutions today.
> Kiwix is a tool to start fixing things right now.”
> The Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix have had a long-standing
>> collaborative
> relationship to expand access to Wikipedia around the world. This
 includes
> recent support to Kiwix and WikiProject Medicine to improve the
> availability of offline Wikipedia medical content [1], as well as
> improvements to the Kiwix desktop experience.
> 
> Through this partnership, the two organizations will collaborate to
 create
> a long-term strategy for third party reuse of Kiwix’s free access
 platform,
> fix longstanding code debt, improve Ki

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Mario Gómez]

I see.

Yes. Part of the LGBTQ collective considers surrogacy to be related to
their rights. I completely acknowledge that.

Best,

Mario


On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 4:01 AM, Gregory Varnum 
wrote:

> I think you misunderstood my point there. ;)
>
> I was speaking to your comment that it was incorrectly labeled a LGBTQ
> issue because of adoption. I did not mean to suggest no one is against
> surrogacy or that they are not promoting adoption as an alternative. I was
> indicating that to my knowledge those organizations are not telling
> non-LGBTQ people that the laws are not of interest to them because they can
> adopt. Looking at their sites, they seem to want all people (LGBTQ and
> non-LGBTQ) to see it as related to their lives and rights.
>
> Again, I am not commenting here on if organizations should engage, just
> pointing out that regardless of someone’s stance on the issue or this
> action, the issue remains one of relevance to LGBTQ rights (and others) and
> WMIL labeling it as a LGBTQ rights issue was accurate. :)
>
> -greg
>
> ___
> Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later.
>
> > On Jul 21, 2018, at 3:25 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:56 AM, Gregory Varnum <
> gregory.var...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> As far as it being an alternative, that is usually true, but it is also
> >> true for non-LGBTQ families and I am not aware of viable political
> >> movements successfully suggesting non-LGBTQ families should not worry
> about
> >> surrogacy laws as adoptions are an alternative option for them.
> >>
> >>
> > Well, so you just met someone who suggests exactly that for non-LGBTQ
> > families and who actively participates in campaigns against legalization
> of
> > surrogacy in his country.
> >
> > This is actually a position held by many organizations, just to name a
> few:
> > the "National Network Against Wombs for Rent" and the  "We are not Pots"
> > campaign in Spain or the "Mexican Feminists Against Wombs for Rent" in
> > Mexico.
> >
> > These positions are also held by some feminist authors such as Kajsa Ekis
> > Ekman, Sylviane Agacinski or Silvia Federici.
> >
> > My point is not trying to convince you of my position. I do not think
> this
> > is the right forum to debate politics beyond WMF mission. My point is
> that
> > if the WMF or its affiliates take such positions beyond its mission, it
> > will be extremely damaging to the community, since this is just
> alienating
> > to all members of the community whose political positions do not match
> > exactly WMF's framework (heavily influenced by US narrow ideological
> > spectrum).
> >
> > I'm not asking for the WMF or its affiliates to be against surrogacy,
> just
> > the same way I don't ask for them to condemn apartheid policies against
> > Muslims in Israel or the genocide in Gaza. I'm just asking the WMF and
> its
> > affiliates to acknowledge that we are a global and diverse community
> united
> > for a mission, and that entering into political advocacy beyond its
> mission
> > is detrimental to this global perspective and diversity.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Mario
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Fæ]

In Wikipedian fashion, let us stick to the published statement by
Wikimedia Israel without making unnecessary inferences. WMIL made a
positive statement to support equality, and we know that equality is
repeated in the Wikimedia Values and echoed in the developing future
strategy.[1][2]

The statement "Equality to every woman and man, regardless of gender,
sexual preference, religion, origin, or disability is a central value
in the international Wikimedia Movement" is not unreasonable. It is
hard to imagine that anyone disagreeing with this principle would be
able to personally support the current Wikimedia Values. It is also
correct to say that affiliates like the WMIL chapter add value to the
robustness and diversity of the global Wikimedia community by not
simply cloning the WMF values and strategy, but as part of their
reason to exist ensure that their programmes and strategies more
directly reflect the needs of their own members and community.

If anyone wants to work on this in detail, especially if they believe
that we can create and maintain an "inclusive culture"[1] and deliver
on "cultivate an environment where anyone can contribute safely, free
of harassment and prejudice"[2] while avoiding making positive
statements about equality, and choosing to stay silent about groups
including LGBT+ groups that suffer prejudice and discrimination by
their state because some may see that as unnecessarily political, then
I encourage them to talk this through by using logical and civil
discourse either during the current WMF driven strategy development
process or in consultation with local affiliate organizations.[3]
Though Wikimedia projects are not a free soapbox, our values guarantee
that critical voices are not silenced and rational on-topic discussion
is always welcome.

1. 
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values#We_welcome_and_cherish_our_differences
2. 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction#Our_strategic_direction:_Service_and_Equity
3. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy

Cheers,
Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 09:46, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>
> I see.
>
> Yes. Part of the LGBTQ collective considers surrogacy to be related to
> their rights. I completely acknowledge that.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 4:01 AM, Gregory Varnum 
> wrote:
>
> > I think you misunderstood my point there. ;)
> >
> > I was speaking to your comment that it was incorrectly labeled a LGBTQ
> > issue because of adoption. I did not mean to suggest no one is against
> > surrogacy or that they are not promoting adoption as an alternative. I was
> > indicating that to my knowledge those organizations are not telling
> > non-LGBTQ people that the laws are not of interest to them because they can
> > adopt. Looking at their sites, they seem to want all people (LGBTQ and
> > non-LGBTQ) to see it as related to their lives and rights.
> >
> > Again, I am not commenting here on if organizations should engage, just
> > pointing out that regardless of someone’s stance on the issue or this
> > action, the issue remains one of relevance to LGBTQ rights (and others) and
> > WMIL labeling it as a LGBTQ rights issue was accurate. :)
> >
> > -greg
> >
> > ___
> > Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later.
> >
> > > On Jul 21, 2018, at 3:25 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:56 AM, Gregory Varnum <
> > gregory.var...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> As far as it being an alternative, that is usually true, but it is also
> > >> true for non-LGBTQ families and I am not aware of viable political
> > >> movements successfully suggesting non-LGBTQ families should not worry
> > about
> > >> surrogacy laws as adoptions are an alternative option for them.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Well, so you just met someone who suggests exactly that for non-LGBTQ
> > > families and who actively participates in campaigns against legalization
> > of
> > > surrogacy in his country.
> > >
> > > This is actually a position held by many organizations, just to name a
> > few:
> > > the "National Network Against Wombs for Rent" and the  "We are not Pots"
> > > campaign in Spain or the "Mexican Feminists Against Wombs for Rent" in
> > > Mexico.
> > >
> > > These positions are also held by some feminist authors such as Kajsa Ekis
> > > Ekman, Sylviane Agacinski or Silvia Federici.
> > >
> > > My point is not trying to convince you of my position. I do not think
> > this
> > > is the right forum to debate politics beyond WMF mission. My point is
> > that
> > > if the WMF or its affiliates take such positions beyond its mission, it
> > > will be extremely damaging to the community, since this is just
> > alienating
> > > to all members of the community whose political positions do not match
> > > exactly WMF's framework (heavi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Mario Gómez]

Hi Fæ,

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> In Wikipedian fashion, let us stick to the published statement by
> Wikimedia Israel without making unnecessary inferences.


That is what I do as a Wikipedia editor. But I don't find it reasonable
when it comes to WMF and affiliates activities. This would effectively mean
"stick to what WMF and affiliate says and don't complain".


> WMIL made a
> positive statement to support equality, and we know that equality is
> repeated in the Wikimedia Values and echoed in the developing future
> strategy
>

It is probable obvious from my previous emails, but I don't agree with this
framing of the issue. Taking surrogacy as simple issue of equality is
missing most of the debate about it.

My fellow colleages against surrogacy include a majority of women
(including L*BT) and a quite a few men too (including *GBT). I assure you
that for us, surrogacy is a form of exploitation of women, primarily women
of lower social classes and specially from less-developed countries.
Following the the trend of simplifying things to fit the Wikimedia Values,
I would say that, in order to promote equality, we should support all women
rights. And in doing so, in case of conflict, we should prioritize the
right to live, and live free of violence and exploitation. Hence, the WMF
should be clearly positioned against surrogacy regardless of who the
intended parents are. But no, I'm not proposing this, because of the
reasons in my previous emails.

And yes, just in case you were wondering, I strongly support the movement
for LGBT rights, but I don't think this is a simple case of LGBT _rights_
and it also involves women rights, which are largely ignored.

Best,

Mario
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Fæ]

I understood the point you were making.

However if we agree on full equality, then please recognise that when
a state allows surrogacy for heterosexual couples but makes it
unlawful for same sex couples, this is anti-LGBT discrimination.

If you want to complain about surrogacy in Israel because you believe
all surrogacy exploits women, perhaps you would benefit from
contacting lobby groups in Israel who aim to make all surrogacy
illegal. There are plenty of statements on record from women who
happily volunteer to be surrogates and the law in Israel is well
defined, has been around for two decades, ensures that the surrogate
mother fully understands what they are doing, and the assessment board
always includes a professional social worker.[1]

However when you choose to derail a discussion that is no more and no
less than same sex couples being treated equally and being given equal
access for parental rights and medical support, then your actions will
be read as supporting the use of the law as a weapon for anti-LGBT
discrimination. Saying you support LGBT rights, or that you are LGBT+
yourself, does not change the way your words affect the rest of us.

Links
1. 
https://www.health.gov.il/English/Topics/fertility/Surrogacy/Pages/default.aspx

Thanks,
Fae
--
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 11:18, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>
> Hi Fæ,
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > In Wikipedian fashion, let us stick to the published statement by
> > Wikimedia Israel without making unnecessary inferences.
>
>
> That is what I do as a Wikipedia editor. But I don't find it reasonable
> when it comes to WMF and affiliates activities. This would effectively mean
> "stick to what WMF and affiliate says and don't complain".
>
>
> > WMIL made a
> > positive statement to support equality, and we know that equality is
> > repeated in the Wikimedia Values and echoed in the developing future
> > strategy
> >
>
> It is probable obvious from my previous emails, but I don't agree with this
> framing of the issue. Taking surrogacy as simple issue of equality is
> missing most of the debate about it.
>
> My fellow colleages against surrogacy include a majority of women
> (including L*BT) and a quite a few men too (including *GBT). I assure you
> that for us, surrogacy is a form of exploitation of women, primarily women
> of lower social classes and specially from less-developed countries.
> Following the the trend of simplifying things to fit the Wikimedia Values,
> I would say that, in order to promote equality, we should support all women
> rights. And in doing so, in case of conflict, we should prioritize the
> right to live, and live free of violence and exploitation. Hence, the WMF
> should be clearly positioned against surrogacy regardless of who the
> intended parents are. But no, I'm not proposing this, because of the
> reasons in my previous emails.
>
> And yes, just in case you were wondering, I strongly support the movement
> for LGBT rights, but I don't think this is a simple case of LGBT _rights_
> and it also involves women rights, which are largely ignored.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Mario Gómez]

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> However when you choose to derail a discussion that is no more and no
> less than same sex couples being treated equally and being given equal
> access for parental rights and medical support, then your actions will
> be read as supporting the use of the law as a weapon for anti-LGBT
> discrimination. Saying you support LGBT rights, or that you are LGBT+
> yourself, does not change the way your words affect the rest of us.
>

Yes, it is not the first point that I read this "you look anti-LGBT". It
will probably be the case for some people. I could say that proponents of
these positions _look like_ rich white people, predominantly male, who are
classist and anti-women right. Is that characterization fair? I don't think
so, but it might look like it for some people.

I don't think this kind of dispute can be resolved within the Wikimedia
community. Doing so would push people on the "losing" position to just
leave the community and let it be as ideologically homogeneous as the WMF
and the winning side of the community wants it to be. I find increasingly
worrying that this seems the path we're following very happily.

Best,

Mario
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Fæ]

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 13:12, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > However when you choose to derail a discussion that is no more and no
> > less than same sex couples being treated equally and being given equal
> > access for parental rights and medical support, then your actions will
> > be read as supporting the use of the law as a weapon for anti-LGBT
> > discrimination. Saying you support LGBT rights, or that you are LGBT+
> > yourself, does not change the way your words affect the rest of us.
> >
>
> Yes, it is not the first point that I read this "you look anti-LGBT". It
> will probably be the case for some people. I could say that proponents of
> these positions _look like_ rich white people, predominantly male, who are
> classist and anti-women right. Is that characterization fair? I don't think
> so, but it might look like it for some people.

No it is not "fair", it is a way of dismissing equality for LGBT+
people by parodying and stereotyping all of us with views in this area
as rich white men. That is wrapping distasteful bigoted views in soft
words.

By saying these offensive things you have made this discussion a lot
easier, as your complaint is based on prejudice and assumptions rather
than facts, evidence or logic. Thanks for making that clear.

Again I recommend you take your lobbying to another place where others
can keep asking you for evidence, reliable sources and the format may
help you stick to rational discussion.

> I don't think this kind of dispute can be resolved within the Wikimedia
> community. Doing so would push people on the "losing" position to just
> leave the community and let it be as ideologically homogeneous as the WMF
> and the winning side of the community wants it to be. I find increasingly
> worrying that this seems the path we're following very happily.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Mario Gómez]

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 13:12, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>
>
> No it is not "fair", it is a way of dismissing equality for LGBT+
> people by parodying and stereotyping all of us with views in this area
> as rich white men. That is wrapping distasteful bigoted views in soft
> words.
>
>
Of course it is not fair. I agree, that's what I said. My point is that it
is as unfair as stereotyping anti-surrogacy movement as anti-LGBT.

Best,

Mario
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Fæ]

Let's be clear.

The anti-surrogacy movement may not be anti-LGBT, I basically said
that in my previous email. If you want to lobby against surrogacy,
there is no problem with doing so in the right forum, and as all legal
surrogacies over the last 22 years in Israel have been *100% for
heterosexual couples* as enshrined in the wording of the 1996 act, you
should be lobbying against that existing act, which by definition has
involved not one single same sex couple, so the only legal surrogacy
cases you can possibly discuss and lobby against have nothing to do
with LGBT+ parental rights or access.

Your actions hijacking a statement by WMIL for LGBT+ equality, are
anti-LGBT+ as was your nasty stereotype of those that dare to speak
openly about LGBT+ equality as being right-wing supporting rich white
men.

This same stereotype has been used against LGBT+ rights discussion my
entire life, long before #fakenews was invented. It is untrue,
insidious, offensive, closes down civil discussion and deliberately
marginalising. I have no doubt that your purpose in being here is not
to help our open knowledge movement but to use any convenient soapbox
to be offensive and disruptive.

Fae

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 13:29, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 13:12, Mario Gómez  wrote:
> >
> >
> > No it is not "fair", it is a way of dismissing equality for LGBT+
> > people by parodying and stereotyping all of us with views in this area
> > as rich white men. That is wrapping distasteful bigoted views in soft
> > words.
> >
> >
> Of course it is not fair. I agree, that's what I said. My point is that it
> is as unfair as stereotyping anti-surrogacy movement as anti-LGBT.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Mario Gómez]

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Fæ  wrote:

>
> The anti-surrogacy movement may not be anti-LGBT, I basically said
> that in my previous email. If you want to lobby against surrogacy,
> there is no problem with doing so in the right forum, and as all legal
> surrogacies over the last 22 years in Israel have been *100% for
> heterosexual couples* as enshrined in the wording of the 1996 act, you
> should be lobbying against that existing act, which by definition has
> involved not one single same sex couple, so the only legal surrogacy
> cases you can possibly discuss and lobby against have nothing to do
> with LGBT+ parental rights or access.
>

As I said, I'm opposed to surrogacy regardless of gender of intended
parents. I'm against legalization of surrogacy, as well as any law
expanding it. This is consequential with the position of considering
surrogacy as exploitation. I understand you do not share this position, but
for those of us who do, what you call non-discrimination, is simply
expanding the population who can exercise a form of human exploitation.

I don't ask you to share my views on surrogacy, and I don't want WMF to
take sides with mine either. I think I have been clear about this from the
start. It was never my intention to speak up against surrogacy in any
Wikimedia venue. But I was not the one who officially brought up the topic,
so I think it is completely reasonable to debate political matters that are
brought up by WMF or its affiliates.


>
> Your actions hijacking a statement by WMIL for LGBT+ equality, are
> anti-LGBT+ as was your nasty stereotype of those that dare to speak
> openly about LGBT+ equality as being right-wing supporting rich white
> men.
>

> This same stereotype has been used against LGBT+ rights discussion my
> entire life, long before #fakenews was invented. It is untrue,
> insidious, offensive, closes down civil discussion and deliberately
> marginalising. I have no doubt that your purpose in being here is not
> to help our open knowledge movement but to use any convenient soapbox
> to be offensive and disruptive.
>


I'm really sorry I offended you with this example. I'm completely aware
that this stereotype is used that way, and that's why I compare it to an
equally insidious stereotype that is used against some people defending
women rights. In retrospective, it was not a good way to make my point,
since by no means I want to imply what you interpreted from my words.

Best,

Mario
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Mario Gómez]

I don't want to engage in endless political flamewars, so this is my last
email on this list discussing the political substance of surrogacy, I
could, and I could do it with reliable sources, which were not asked in the
first place to justify WMIL statement.

But I don't meant to lobby here, because that's exactly what I'm opposing:
using the WMF and affiliates to lobby for political positions beyond its
mission.



On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Mario Gómez  wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>>
>> The anti-surrogacy movement may not be anti-LGBT, I basically said
>> that in my previous email. If you want to lobby against surrogacy,
>> there is no problem with doing so in the right forum, and as all legal
>> surrogacies over the last 22 years in Israel have been *100% for
>> heterosexual couples* as enshrined in the wording of the 1996 act, you
>> should be lobbying against that existing act, which by definition has
>> involved not one single same sex couple, so the only legal surrogacy
>> cases you can possibly discuss and lobby against have nothing to do
>> with LGBT+ parental rights or access.
>>
>
> As I said, I'm opposed to surrogacy regardless of gender of intended
> parents. I'm against legalization of surrogacy, as well as any law
> expanding it. This is consequential with the position of considering
> surrogacy as exploitation. I understand you do not share this position, but
> for those of us who do, what you call non-discrimination, is simply
> expanding the population who can exercise a form of human exploitation.
>
> I don't ask you to share my views on surrogacy, and I don't want WMF to
> take sides with mine either. I think I have been clear about this from the
> start. It was never my intention to speak up against surrogacy in any
> Wikimedia venue. But I was not the one who officially brought up the topic,
> so I think it is completely reasonable to debate political matters that are
> brought up by WMF or its affiliates.
>
>
>>
>> Your actions hijacking a statement by WMIL for LGBT+ equality, are
>> anti-LGBT+ as was your nasty stereotype of those that dare to speak
>> openly about LGBT+ equality as being right-wing supporting rich white
>> men.
>>
>
>> This same stereotype has been used against LGBT+ rights discussion my
>> entire life, long before #fakenews was invented. It is untrue,
>> insidious, offensive, closes down civil discussion and deliberately
>> marginalising. I have no doubt that your purpose in being here is not
>> to help our open knowledge movement but to use any convenient soapbox
>> to be offensive and disruptive.
>>
>
>
> I'm really sorry I offended you with this example. I'm completely aware
> that this stereotype is used that way, and that's why I compare it to an
> equally insidious stereotype that is used against some people defending
> women rights. In retrospective, it was not a good way to make my point,
> since by no means I want to imply what you interpreted from my words.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikipedia volunteers and free knowledge leaders gather in Cape Town for the first annual “Wikimania” conference in sub-saharan Africa

[Samantha Lien]

This press release is also available on the Wikimedia blog here:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/07/20/wikimania-2018/

*Wikipedia volunteers and free knowledge leaders gather in Cape Town for
the first annual “Wikimania” conference in sub-saharan Africa*

*First ever Wikimania in sub-Saharan Africa will be held in Cape Town,
bringing together more than 700 people to discuss how to improve the
diversity of knowledge represented on Wikipedia and Wikimedia sites.*

*Key participants include Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Katherine
Maher, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, as well as notable thought leaders
from across Africa and the world.*

*(Cape Town, South Africa) 20 July 2018* — More than 700 attendees from
nearly 80 countries gathered today for the start of Wikimania 2018—the
annual conference celebrating Wikipedia and the Wikimedia projects, the
Wikimedia free knowledge movement, and the community of volunteers who make
them possible. This marks the 14th annual Wikimania, which takes place
18–22 July at the Southern Sun Cape Sun Hotel in Cape Town, where
volunteers will come together to discuss and share ideas around the future
of Wikipedia and free knowledge globally.

The event kicked off with an opening ceremony featuring a special
presentation by a group of local Sinenjongo high school students welcoming
conference attendees to Cape Town. It continued with remarks by Douglas
Scott, President of Wikimedia ZA, the local South African Wikimedia
affiliate and lead local organizer of this year’s conference who introduced
this year’s conference theme: Bridging knowledge gaps, the ubuntu way
forward, which aims to address gaps in knowledge, particularly those about
African people, cultures, and languages, on Wikipedia and the Wikimedia
projects. As part of this week’s centennial celebration to commemorate the
birth of Nelson Mandela, Scott announced a partnership with the Nelson
Mandela Foundation to make the inspirational writings of the former South
African President’s 1962 diary available to the world on Wikimedia Commons
and Wikisource.

Throughout this year’s Wikimania, attendees will explore sessions related
to development of Wikimedia projects in Africa, global collaborations to
support the advancement of free knowledge, and opportunities to partner
with galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAMs). Wikimania 2018 is
co-organized by the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia ZA.

Wikimania 2018 will also bring together a diverse mix of attendees,
including seasoned volunteer editors; researchers and data scientists;
members from the medical community; librarians; and other free knowledge
leaders. Confirmed keynote speakers include internet geographist Dr. Martin
Dittus, who will be speaking on economic development, labour, power,
participation, and representation, Joy Buolamwini, a noted artificial
intelligence expert fighting to remove bias in machine learning, and
Professor Sean Jacobs, an esteemed data scientist in digital culture and
digital geography, alongside Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director,
Katherine Maher, and Wikipedia founder, Jimmy Wales. All plenary sessions
will be live streamed and available for public viewing online. More
information and links to livestream session are available here. [1]

“Wikipedia today is already fascinating and expansive. But it does not
begin to represent the entirety of the world we live in — so much of the
rich history, diversity of language, culture, and peoples of Africa is
missing from the site,” said Katherine Maher, Executive Director of the
Wikimedia Foundation. “We are honored to be hosted by Cape Town for this
year’s Wikimania, the first ever in sub-saharan Africa, and look forward to
speaking with our global communities, South Africans, and more about how we
can begin to hear the critical perspectives that are missing from Wikipedia
today.”

As part of the Wikimania press conference held on Friday, Katherine was
joined by Banks Baker,  Head of Global Product Partnerships – Search
Content at Google, to announce the outcome of a recent collaboration
between the Wikimedia Foundation and Google to expand and improve the
representation of knowledge in Indic languages on Wikipedia, called Project
Tiger. Through the project, both organizations, working in close
collaboration with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia
India chapter (WMIN) and local volunteers, hosted a pilot program to
increase locally relevant content available in 12 Indic languages on
Wikipedia.

Google provided Chromebooks and internet access to support volunteer
editors with content creation as well as insights into popular search
topics on Google that lack information in Indian languages online. Through
a three month writing competition, volunteers created nearly 4,500 new
Wikipedia articles across 12 languages, nearly double the initial
benchmarks for the project. Based on this initial success of the pilot
program, Google and the Wikimedia Foundation wi

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation announces Tanya Capuano as new Trustee, alongside leadership appointments at 14th annual Wikimania

[Samantha Lien]

This press release is also available online at the Wikimedia blog:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/07/20/wikimedia-foundation-announces-tanya-capuano-as-new-trustee-alongside-leadership-appointments-at-14th-annual-wikimania/

*Wikimedia Foundation announces Tanya Capuano as new Trustee, alongside
leadership appointments at 14th annual Wikimania*

*Tanya Capuano brings deep expertise in technology, organizational
strategy, and financial planning and analysis to the Wikimedia Foundation
Board of Trustees*

(San Francisco, California and Cape Town, South Africa) — 20 July 2018 This
week, the Wikimedia Foundation announced a new member and leadership
appointments to its Board of Trustees. Tanya Pine Capuano, recently Chief
Financial Officer of the digital marketing company G5 in Bend, Oregon, will
be the newest member of the Board of Trustees. The Board also appointed
María Sefidari as Chair, and Christophe Henner as Vice Chair to lead the
Board of Trustees. The announcement was made at the 2018 Wikimania
conference, the annual celebration of Wikipedia, free knowledge, and the
global Wikimedia community, held this year in Cape Town, South Africa.

The Wikimedia Foundation’s Board of Trustees oversees the Wikimedia
Foundation and its work, and serves as the organization’s ultimate
corporate authority. As an incoming Trustee, Tanya will serve a three year
term effective immediately.
Tanya replaces the role formerly held by Kelly Battles whose term on the
Board concludes this month along with longtime member Alice Wiegand. The
Board thanks its outgoing Trustees for their service to the Board and the
Wikimedia movement and mission.

Tanya has wide-ranging experience including strategy, mergers and
acquisitions, and financial planning and analysis in technology from her
roles at Intuit, Hewlett-Packard and G5. She has also served on several
nonprofit Boards supporting education including Education Pioneers, Los
Altos Educational Foundation, and “I Have a Dream” Foundation’s San
Francisco chapter, which she also co-founded.

In addition to her deep commitment to education, especially expanding
access to higher education, Tanya brings with her a passion for Wikimedia’s
values and vision.
Tanya joins Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, Board Chair María Sefidari, Vice
Chair Christophe Henner, and Board members Esra’a Al Shafei, Raju
Narisetti, Dr. James Heilman, Dr. Dariusz Jemielniak, and Nataliia Tymkiv.

Newly appointed Board Chair, María Sefidari, succeeds Christopher Henner,
who will serve as Vice Chair, the role María previously held. María is a
professor in the Digital Communications, Culture and Citizenship Master’s
degree program of Rey Juan Carlos University at the MediaLab-Prado. Born in
Madrid, Spain, where she still lives today, María served on the Wikimedia
Foundation Board from 2013 to 2015 and re-joined the Board in 2016.

“The Wikimedia movement has been an important part of my life for over a
decade and it is a great honor to be able to serve it as Chair of the
Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees,” María said. “The Wikimedia 2030
movement strategy we are in the midst of developing is the most significant
and expansive discussion about our long-term future we have undertaken
since our founding. We have much to accomplish in the upcoming year to be
ready to implement our new strategy, and I am thrilled to able to
contribute as Board Chair.”

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

* María Sefidari, Board Chair
* Christophe Henner, Vice Chair
* Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wikipedia
* Dr. Dariusz Jemielniak
* Esra’a Al Shafei
* Dr. James Heilman
* Nataliia Tymkiv
* Raju Narisetti
* Tanya Capuano

About Tanya Capuano

Tanya Pine Capuano most recently was the chief financial officer (CFO) of
the digital marketing company G5 in Bend, Oregon.

Originally from San Jose, California, she has wide-ranging experience
including strategy and financial planning and analysis in technology. In
addition to her recent role at G5, she previously held leadership positions
at Intuit, Hewlett-Packard and APM Management Consultants/CSC Healthcare.
She has also supported numerous education initiatives throughout her
career; including serving on the Boards of Education Pioneers, Los Altos
Educational Foundation, and “I Have a Dream” Foundation San Francisco, an
organization whose San Francisco chapter she co-founded.

She is very involved with Stanford University alumni life, having earned a
bachelor’s in economics, a master’s in education, and a Master of Business
Administration from the university. After graduating, she worked as the
university’s Director of Alumni Relations for the Graduate School of
Education and Development Director for the Initiative on Improving K-12
Education. She has also served on the board of the Stanford University
Graduate School of Business Alumni Association.

Tanya lives in the San Francisco Bay Area with her husband and two
teenagers. They enjoy traveling as a family and experiencing the great
o

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

[Kaarel Vaidla]

 Dear Micru,

Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding the current composition of
the Working Groups. It is valuable feedback and relates to some of the
offline conversations we have been having within the Core Team and with
different stakeholders. The points you bring out resonate well with the
current status of the process.

>It saddens me that in the selection of candidates our digital projects are
not directly represented. Where is the representation of volunteers from
our digital communities like Commons, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wiktionary...?
It is not the same to have members that work in those communities, that to
have members chosen by those communities.
>I acknowledge that it is difficult to bridge the gap between digital
communities and real-life ones, but if some effort is not made the only
possible outcome is even more alienation. I hope that the Working Groups do
not repeat the errors of WMFR outlined in the governance review by having
discussions away from the volunteer community.

The messages about our application process that we ran in June were not
distributed directly to the broad variety of project communities. Our focus
was indeed on the organized part of the movement, and then to work with the
Working Groups on getting the message to the project communities and to
those who would be interested in such discussions and enrich them. We would
like to be especially careful to not create too much noise for people not
interested in or fatigued by the strategy process. If you have ideas, I
would be really interested in hearing them.

The Working Groups will also be tasked with developing a variety of
engagement approaches and opportunities to ensure an inclusive and
collective process.

>You say that "the Working Groups don't yet have the level of diversity
that represents the movement", but you don't mention *which* diversity
aspect is lacking. Is diversity only considered as region, gender, race,
organization, "new voices"? Or can we have a more inclusive definition of
diversity by considering also "diversity of thought"? How can we get to
know what the participants think of their assigned area?

With regards to Diversity, the parameters for the diversity considerations
are outlined here, and do include voices that are not yet included in
strategic discussions.

We are seeking a large spectrum of diversity, including volunteer project
communities. Diversification of the membership of the Working Groups helps
us to prevent recreating the existing biases with our strategic process.

We will be having discussions with the Working Group members and the
Steering Committee to map the existing gaps and proactively work on filling
these gaps. As the names and background of the Working Group members is
also published on meta, it is also possible for everyone to share your
thoughts regarding the existing gaps, just like you have done in your
letter.

>Also with so many "exceptional applications" that you said you have
received, it is unclear to me why volunteers represent only 30% of the
total (40% staff members, 30% board members). Isn't the wikimedia movement
a volunteer-based movement? If so, why to give so much weight to staff
members?

In the first round of applications, 36% were from volunteers. As we accept
further applications, and select additional Working Group members, we
expect the overall ratio of volunteers will increase and these proportions
will change

Thank you for your kind attention and time in bringing these issues up in a
more public manner and look forward to hearing from you and maybe other
interested members of our communities in resolving the issues related to
the diversity of the Working Groups and inclusion of diverse voices in the
strategy process.

Have a great weekend!
Kaarel

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 3:49 PM David Cuenca Tudela 
wrote:

>  Dear Kaarel & Nicole,
>
> It saddens me that in the selection of candidates our digital projects are
> not directly represented.
> Where is the representation of volunteers from our digital communities like
> Commons, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wiktionary...? It is not the same to have
> members that work in those communities, that to have members chosen by
> those communities.
> I acknowledge that it is difficult to bridge the gap between digital
> communities and real-life ones, but if some effort is not made the only
> possible outcome is even more alienation. I hope that the Working Groups do
> not repeat the errors of WMFR outlined in the governance review by having
> discussions away from the volunteer community.
>
> You say that "the Working Groups don't yet have the level of diversity that
> represents the movement", but you don't mention *which* diversity aspect is
> lacking. Is diversity only considered as region, gender, race,
> organization, "new voices"? Or can we have a more inclusive definition of
> diversity by considering also "diversity of thought"? How can we get to
> know what the participants think of their assigne

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

[Chris Keating]

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:23 AM Shlomi Fish  wrote:
>
> Hi Itzik,
>
>
> I do not oppose the LGBT movement, but please explain how an official support
> of that falls under the global Wikimedia project's mission, and does not
> dilute our policy of avoiding having a stance on issues that are unrelated to
> it?

I mean... yeah.

As an LGBT Wikimedian I entirely support changing this law, and I can
completely understand staff members wanting to take part in the
demonstrations, and the organisation wanting to support them in doing
that.

But I really don't see why Wikimedia Israel should formally involve
itself in a general social-policy issue that's nothing specifically to
do with our mission. We need to be careful not to try to be a
general-purpose progressive movement.

Regards,

Chris

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

[Yaroslav Blanter]

Dear Kaarel,

with all respect, it would be great if you could name the issues first
before soliciting further feedback.

In my particular case, well, I have seen a message on this list which I
interpreted as a call for help. I have generally many things which interest
me, but I though that if WMF needs help, I could help, so I applied. I am a
volunteer.

Two days ago, I got a impersonalized mail saying that my application was
not accepted. Fine with me, I am sure there are people with tons of more
experience than me, and I have a lot of work on the projects. I was not
planning to react on this in any way.

But now you are saying you do not have enough volunteers and ask (us?
whom?) to encourage more people to apply?

So that they could get back impersonalized rejection messages?

I am not sure how specifically you want to solicit more applications but if
you want to get any help from the community you probably need to be very
specific on what exactly roles you need to ensure the diversity, and
specifically address people in these roles. Unless this has been done, I
will discourage everybody to apply.

Cheers
Yaroslav



On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Kaarel Vaidla 
wrote:

>  Dear Micru,
>
> Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding the current composition of
> the Working Groups. It is valuable feedback and relates to some of the
> offline conversations we have been having within the Core Team and with
> different stakeholders. The points you bring out resonate well with the
> current status of the process.
>
> >It saddens me that in the selection of candidates our digital projects are
> not directly represented. Where is the representation of volunteers from
> our digital communities like Commons, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wiktionary...?
> It is not the same to have members that work in those communities, that to
> have members chosen by those communities.
> >I acknowledge that it is difficult to bridge the gap between digital
> communities and real-life ones, but if some effort is not made the only
> possible outcome is even more alienation. I hope that the Working Groups do
> not repeat the errors of WMFR outlined in the governance review by having
> discussions away from the volunteer community.
>
> The messages about our application process that we ran in June were not
> distributed directly to the broad variety of project communities. Our focus
> was indeed on the organized part of the movement, and then to work with the
> Working Groups on getting the message to the project communities and to
> those who would be interested in such discussions and enrich them. We would
> like to be especially careful to not create too much noise for people not
> interested in or fatigued by the strategy process. If you have ideas, I
> would be really interested in hearing them.
>
> The Working Groups will also be tasked with developing a variety of
> engagement approaches and opportunities to ensure an inclusive and
> collective process.
>
> >You say that "the Working Groups don't yet have the level of diversity
> that represents the movement", but you don't mention *which* diversity
> aspect is lacking. Is diversity only considered as region, gender, race,
> organization, "new voices"? Or can we have a more inclusive definition of
> diversity by considering also "diversity of thought"? How can we get to
> know what the participants think of their assigned area?
>
> With regards to Diversity, the parameters for the diversity considerations
> are outlined here, and do include voices that are not yet included in
> strategic discussions.
>
> We are seeking a large spectrum of diversity, including volunteer project
> communities. Diversification of the membership of the Working Groups helps
> us to prevent recreating the existing biases with our strategic process.
>
> We will be having discussions with the Working Group members and the
> Steering Committee to map the existing gaps and proactively work on filling
> these gaps. As the names and background of the Working Group members is
> also published on meta, it is also possible for everyone to share your
> thoughts regarding the existing gaps, just like you have done in your
> letter.
>
> >Also with so many "exceptional applications" that you said you have
> received, it is unclear to me why volunteers represent only 30% of the
> total (40% staff members, 30% board members). Isn't the wikimedia movement
> a volunteer-based movement? If so, why to give so much weight to staff
> members?
>
> In the first round of applications, 36% were from volunteers. As we accept
> further applications, and select additional Working Group members, we
> expect the overall ratio of volunteers will increase and these proportions
> will change
>
> Thank you for your kind attention and time in bringing these issues up in a
> more public manner and look forward to hearing from you and maybe other
> interested members of our communities in resolving the issues related to
> the diversity 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

​Dear Kaarel,

​I am especially concerned that with the Portuguese language being the most
spoken language in the Southern Hemisphere, ranking 5th/6th globally, among
the dozens of members of the Strategy Working Groups that appear there,
there is not a single native speaker of Portuguese. And, as far as I know,
it was not for lack of applications.

All the best,

Paulo


2018-07-21 18:13 GMT+01:00 Kaarel Vaidla :

>  Dear Micru,
>
> Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding the current composition of
> the Working Groups. It is valuable feedback and relates to some of the
> offline conversations we have been having within the Core Team and with
> different stakeholders. The points you bring out resonate well with the
> current status of the process.
>
> >It saddens me that in the selection of candidates our digital projects are
> not directly represented. Where is the representation of volunteers from
> our digital communities like Commons, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wiktionary...?
> It is not the same to have members that work in those communities, that to
> have members chosen by those communities.
> >I acknowledge that it is difficult to bridge the gap between digital
> communities and real-life ones, but if some effort is not made the only
> possible outcome is even more alienation. I hope that the Working Groups do
> not repeat the errors of WMFR outlined in the governance review by having
> discussions away from the volunteer community.
>
> The messages about our application process that we ran in June were not
> distributed directly to the broad variety of project communities. Our focus
> was indeed on the organized part of the movement, and then to work with the
> Working Groups on getting the message to the project communities and to
> those who would be interested in such discussions and enrich them. We would
> like to be especially careful to not create too much noise for people not
> interested in or fatigued by the strategy process. If you have ideas, I
> would be really interested in hearing them.
>
> The Working Groups will also be tasked with developing a variety of
> engagement approaches and opportunities to ensure an inclusive and
> collective process.
>
> >You say that "the Working Groups don't yet have the level of diversity
> that represents the movement", but you don't mention *which* diversity
> aspect is lacking. Is diversity only considered as region, gender, race,
> organization, "new voices"? Or can we have a more inclusive definition of
> diversity by considering also "diversity of thought"? How can we get to
> know what the participants think of their assigned area?
>
> With regards to Diversity, the parameters for the diversity considerations
> are outlined here, and do include voices that are not yet included in
> strategic discussions.
>
> We are seeking a large spectrum of diversity, including volunteer project
> communities. Diversification of the membership of the Working Groups helps
> us to prevent recreating the existing biases with our strategic process.
>
> We will be having discussions with the Working Group members and the
> Steering Committee to map the existing gaps and proactively work on filling
> these gaps. As the names and background of the Working Group members is
> also published on meta, it is also possible for everyone to share your
> thoughts regarding the existing gaps, just like you have done in your
> letter.
>
> >Also with so many "exceptional applications" that you said you have
> received, it is unclear to me why volunteers represent only 30% of the
> total (40% staff members, 30% board members). Isn't the wikimedia movement
> a volunteer-based movement? If so, why to give so much weight to staff
> members?
>
> In the first round of applications, 36% were from volunteers. As we accept
> further applications, and select additional Working Group members, we
> expect the overall ratio of volunteers will increase and these proportions
> will change
>
> Thank you for your kind attention and time in bringing these issues up in a
> more public manner and look forward to hearing from you and maybe other
> interested members of our communities in resolving the issues related to
> the diversity of the Working Groups and inclusion of diverse voices in the
> strategy process.
>
> Have a great weekend!
> Kaarel
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 3:49 PM David Cuenca Tudela 
> wrote:
>
> >  Dear Kaarel & Nicole,
> >
> > It saddens me that in the selection of candidates our digital projects
> are
> > not directly represented.
> > Where is the representation of volunteers from our digital communities
> like
> > Commons, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wiktionary...? It is not the same to have
> > members that work in those communities, that to have members chosen by
> > those communities.
> > I acknowledge that it is difficult to bridge the gap between digital
> > communities and real-life ones, but if some effort is not made the only
> > possible outcome is even more alienation

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Inc. working with Go Fish Digital, a company that whitewashes Wikipedia

[MZMcBride]

Hi.

Go Fish Digital is a company that whitewashes Wikipedia. From its own site:

>The primary platforms that define your online reputation include:
> [...]
> * Wikipedia
> [...]
>
> With Online Reputation Management, we work hard to make all of the
>positive information easy to find.  At the same time, we use many
>different strategies and tactics to diminish the visibility of negative
>content, or in some cases, remove it from the web altogether.  The end
>result is a positive online reputation because when people search your
>name or brand, they immediately find positive content.

Source: https://gofishdigital.com/online-reputation-management

Wikimedia Foundation Inc. has been working with this company on search
engine optimization: . I have a
few questions about this work.

How was this vendor chosen? Which other vendors were considered?

Why is this work being undertaken? At least the English Wikipedia has some
of the best search engine results placement of any site on the Web, so I'm
curious to know who's prioritizing Wikipedia's search engine optimization
and for what reason.

How is it appropriate for Wikimedia Foundation Inc. to work with a company
that is, by its own admission, whitewashing Wikipedia? Doesn't this give
Go Fish Digital a ton of legitimization by now being able to say it works
directly with Wikimedia Foundation Inc. ("with Wikipedia")?

Is it appropriate to give a company that sells whitewashing Wikipedia
services access to private user data, as was done in
 and
? The Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
legal department apparently approved this access, but I'm curious to know
why, given the company's role in selling an "Online Reputation Management"
product. This looks bad to me.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,