Hoi,
Research on the acquisition of new volunteers shows that most new people
drop out because of perceived hostility. This excercise of formulating a
strategy for 2030 aims to address this among other objectives. It follows
that when new volunteers that stick is an important objective, the status
Hoi,
When you are not answerable for the mails you send, I might agree. I do not
put words in your mouth, you were quite capable of doing that yourself.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 at 22:02, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Gerard,
> My notion of community depends on context. The context
On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 00:22, Todd Allen wrote:
> When the FRAMBAN occurred, nearly 10% of the English Wikipedia
> functionaries resigned. Many have returned, but that's only because WMF
> backed off. We lost many of our best to that, and if WMF hadn't swiftly
> backed down, they would have
On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 00:01, Todd Allen wrote:
> And if they're between five and ten thousand, why would they, consisting of
> thousands, be outweighed by "working groups" consisting of little more than
> a dozen people?
>
Let's be factual. There are 9 WGs
Every participant in an iterative multi-party process likes to be the
last. In a certain sense the larger community will be the last. They can
opt to abandon the movement. But for those volunteers who will be loyal to
the movement, it is the far-away Board has the last look and final say-so.
Then, let me rephrase, I guess. Why's it seem those people are being
ignored?
When the FRAMBAN occurred, nearly 10% of the English Wikipedia
functionaries resigned. Many have returned, but that's only because WMF
backed off. We lost many of our best to that, and if WMF hadn't swiftly
backed down,
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 6:00 PM Todd Allen
mailto:toddmal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Then, why'd we hear something so dismissive as this?
My intent was not dismissive, but factual (I basically made a point that a
majority of our communities is not interested in administration, organization,
Then, why'd we hear something so dismissive as this?
" However, among those who are interested in organizational discussions
(I'd call them "activists", I'm unsure how many there are, probably between
5 and 10 thousand, give or take) some will definitely be unhappy about the
recommendations. Some
Well, "the intention of building an encyclopedia based on a neutral point of
view achieved by verifiable information attributed to reliable independent
sources and disseminated under a free licence" is close to many of us (me
including). I think it is quite unlikely that recommendations
" Only some of the board members are elected by the community." - and the
others are appointed by those who are elected by the community.
OK, it's not entirely direct democracy, but still democracy.
Paulo
Gerard Meijssen escreveu no dia sábado,
24/08/2019 à(s) 19:10:
> Hoi,
> Your notion of
We are not "working for WMF for free". We are actually not working for WMF
at all. This is a completely false premise for any discussion.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 10:39 PM Jeff Hawke wrote:
> Gerard
>
> A good point. The "community" in one sense is simply the collection of all
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 4:39 PM Jeff Hawke
mailto:geoffey.ha...@gmail.com>> wrote:
the various projects. I think my question could best have been phrased in
terms of the first meaning -- that is, does the WMF Board expect that after
these recommendations are enacted, and, as we may reasonably
Nicole,
You say that the harmonisation sprint will take place in Tunis. Why was it
decided to hold the sprint in a country in which ihomosexuality is
illegal, as are sexual relations outside marriage. Is this going to be a
safe space for such community members?
Jeff
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at
Gerard
A good point. The "community" in one sense is simply the collection of all
those people who happen over any given time period to be working for the
WMF for free. In another sense, it is the structures and cultures found on
the various projects. I think my question could best have been
Gerard,
My notion of community depends on context. The context of this thread was not
defined by me, so why do you not address your question to the person who
brought it up? (Benjamin)
Please refrain from telling me what I accept or do not accept, I am aware of my
own thoughts and opinions
Hoi,
Your notion of community is what I question. It is in your refusal of
accepting that English Wikipedia is not a safe place, in your notion that
the WMF failed, you fail to accept that it is the WMF that is the arbiter
of last resort. You also fail to appreciate that the Wikimedia Foundation
Hello,
the "Recommendations" are a problem because we are so late in the strategy
process. They are supposed to give the community a chance for community
input. If the quality of the "Recommendations" is so poor, then the chance
for the community to give substantial input is very limited.
In this
Gerard,
It is not clear who you are addressing here, but I am going to assume it is
Benjamin, who made the original claim. It is a fair question, and some
clarification would be welcome.
English Wikipedia may have failed to provide a safe environment, but the WMF
has failed possibly even more
Hoi,
May I ask what you mean with "the" community? If anything the Wikimedia
community exists in some 300 parts and every parts has as many distinct
opinions. There are essential conflicts of interest, by some there is a
sense of entitlement, either based on possession or based on promises made.
Benjamin,
Has the board or any member of the board made any statement suggesting that the
board might overrule the community in this matter?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Benjamin Ikuta
Sent: 24 August
" I hope the wider community will engage with and provide feedback to the
core group" - At the meta pages everybody can see the community is engaging
very actively, it's WG and core group engagement there which is very low or
null. And we are already only some 3 weeks before the window for
On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 at 11:18, Benjamin Ikuta
wrote:
> It's obvious that you, for one, stand with the community.
>
Benjamin, this is not a clash between two opposing forces, albeit some
combative elements try to "divide and conquer", and turn the community into
two opposing camps.
The
Sorry, by "you" I meant the board.
It's obvious that you, for one, stand with the community.
> On Aug 24, 2019, at 1:29 AM, James Heilman wrote:
>
> @ Benjamin I have never said that I would "consider overriding the
> community in such a massive way". What I have said is that I hope the
@ Benjamin I have never said that I would "consider overriding the
community in such a massive way". What I have said is that I hope the wider
community will engage with and provide feedback to the core group who is
working on developing the strategy. Much of the draft is really good, some
24 matches
Mail list logo
