Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF political activism

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 07:27, Yair Rand  wrote:

> Also importantly, the Foundation's Policy and Political Association
> Guideline, which was written by WMF Legal in the aftermath of SOPA

Link, please.

-- 
Andy Mabbett@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
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] WMF political activism

[Asaf Bartov]

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 10:54 AM Mario Gómez  wrote:

> As far as I know, criticism of political lobbying by the WMF is generally
> frowned upon here. Including aspersion casting against critics.
>

Um, what?  As a (volunteer) list administrator of this mailing list, and
indeed a (paid) Foundation staff member, I can assure you that you are
welcome to criticize any aspect of the Foundation's work here, within usual
bounds of civility (no ad hominem attacks, obscenities, etc.).

While I wish we had substantive discussions here more often than we do, it
is still an appropriate venue for discussions between the Foundation and
the communities.  Unlike more popular alternatives, this mailing list is
public, tolerant of pseudonyms, and has an immutable public archive.

   Asaf
___
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] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

[Rebecca O'Neill]

Well said. Everything is political, and when the movement choses not to
speak out or state an opinion on something, then we are giving our support
to the status quo.

Believing yourself to be apolitical is as much a fantasy as being
completely objective, it is inherently impossible.

Rebecca

On Sat, 25 Apr 2020, 16:50 John Erling Blad,  wrote:

> It is said quite often that the Wikimedia-movement is apolitical. In
> strongly believe the movement with its goal has never been, and never will
> be apolitical. When we say that knowledge should be free and fully
> available for everyone, then we make a political statement. It may not
> align with you favorite love/hate political party, but it is still a very
> strong political statement.
>
> So please, don't claim the movement to be apolitical. We may not align with
> any specific political party in any specific country, but we are still not
> apolitical.
>
> /jeblad
> ___
> 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] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

[Camelia Boban]

Absolutely agree with both. Everything we do in the wiki movement (as
everything we do in our whole life) has (also) a political meaning.
As we have certain goals and we take certain positions.

Camelia

--
*Camelia Boban*

*| Java EE Developer |*



*Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation*
Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
*Interwiki Women
 | **Wiki
Loves Sport  | Wiki Loves
Fashion *
WMIT  - WMSE
 - WMAR
 - WMCH
 Member

M. +39 3383385545
camelia.bo...@gmail.com
*Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
 *|* *LinkedIn
*
*Wikipedia  **| **WikiDonne
UG * | *WikiDonne Project
 *












Il giorno sab 25 apr 2020 alle ore 18:12 Rebecca O'Neill <
rebeccanin...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Well said. Everything is political, and when the movement choses not to
> speak out or state an opinion on something, then we are giving our support
> to the status quo.
>
> Believing yourself to be apolitical is as much a fantasy as being
> completely objective, it is inherently impossible.
>
> Rebecca
>
> On Sat, 25 Apr 2020, 16:50 John Erling Blad,  wrote:
>
> > It is said quite often that the Wikimedia-movement is apolitical. In
> > strongly believe the movement with its goal has never been, and never
> will
> > be apolitical. When we say that knowledge should be free and fully
> > available for everyone, then we make a political statement. It may not
> > align with you favorite love/hate political party, but it is still a very
> > strong political statement.
> >
> > So please, don't claim the movement to be apolitical. We may not align
> with
> > any specific political party in any specific country, but we are still
> not
> > apolitical.
> >
> > /jeblad
> > ___
> > 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, 

[Wikimedia-l] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

[John Erling Blad]

It is said quite often that the Wikimedia-movement is apolitical. In
strongly believe the movement with its goal has never been, and never will
be apolitical. When we say that knowledge should be free and fully
available for everyone, then we make a political statement. It may not
align with you favorite love/hate political party, but it is still a very
strong political statement.

So please, don't claim the movement to be apolitical. We may not align with
any specific political party in any specific country, but we are still not
apolitical.

/jeblad
___
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] WMF political activism

[John Erling Blad]

Can everyone please calm down.
This is (nearly) only hyperbole.

Thank you.

/jeblad

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 8:51 AM Fæ  wrote:

> OPEN LETTER
>
> Dear Katherine Maher,
>
> The WMF home website landing page (https://wikimediafoundation.org)
> yesterday featured a full-page banner directing all visitors globally
> to https://www.earthdaylive2020.org. This is a site used for Americal
> political lobbying, refer to the email discussion attached.
>
> Could you, or the responsible member of your management team, please
> explain exactly how this happened?
>
> There is zero doubt that this was a serious operational error, misuse
> of WMF development time and a misuse of the Wikimedia brand. It is
> certain that you will agree that the buck stops with the CEO. The
> decision to use the Foundation's website for American lobbying is in
> conflict with your not for profit status and is in conflict with the
> charitable status promoted to donors worldwide.
>
> If the management team and yourself are going to continuing political
> lobbying and using WMF resources to raise funds for Americal political
> organizations which have no agreed relevance to the mission of the
> Foundation, there must be a published transparent governance review by
> the WMF board of trustees to examine and agree on this significant
> operational change to the public Foundation strategy and the terms for
> the CEO.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> Link to Phabricator task to implement the banner:
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T250508
> CC: María Sefidari as WMF Chair.
>
> Fae
>
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 05:50, K. Peachey  wrote:
> >
> > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T250508
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 09:53, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > It seems that they just gave a link to that website, which...eh...
> > > When I opened it, I heard one sentence of the stream before I stopped
> it
> > > and read the rest of the webpage: "and then we give thanks to spirit,
> for
> > > the air we breathe, for the earth..." After reading the rest of the
> > > webpage, I un-paused it, and am currently listening to a bit of
> propaganda
> > > promoting unions and more extensive labor laws.
> > >
> > > The linked website is explicitly political, explicitly  on the American
> > > left, and explicitly in favor of certain highly contentious American
> > > political proposals. I would like to hear the reasoning for why that
> link
> > > has been shown, and it seems to me simply unjustifiable. The WMF is the
> > > host of a series of community-built projects, not a political activism
> > > organization.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Vermont
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 5:12 PM Ziko van Dijk 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > > I can confirm that I see the same also here in the Netherlands.
> Which is
> > > > strange, there are no general elections here before 2021...
> > > > An explanation about this link would be interesting.
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Ziko
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am Mi., 22. Apr. 2020 um 22:50 Uhr schrieb Yair Rand <
> yyairr...@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > >
> > > > > The WMF corporate site (wikimediafoundation.org) currently has a
> > > > > full-page ad with the text "We are watching Earth Day Live today.
> Will
> > > > > you?". This links to an external site with the text "Click here to
> sign
> > > > on
> > > > > to the US Youth Climate Strike Coalition Earth Day Demands - From
> > > > congress
> > > > > and the next president, we demand a People’s Bailout, a Green New
> Deal,
> > > > and
> > > > > Land Back for Indigenous Peoples", and prompting readers to
> "Pledge to
> > > > vote
> > > > > for our future" and to subscribe to "US Climate Strike".
> > > > >
> > > > > Everyone here already knows how unacceptable this is, and why, so
> I don't
> > > > > think this requires any further explanation. The WMF should
> immediately
> > > > > take this down, and make certain that this kind of thing can't
> happen
> > > > > again. They've failed yet again at preventing inappropriate
> > > > > political activism in WMF's communications, and must take serious
> action
> > > > to
> > > > > fix this constant stream of terrible failures.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Yair Rand
> --
> 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,
> 
___
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF political activism

[James Salsman]

> the Foundation's Policy and Political Association Guideline, which
> was written by WMF Legal in the aftermath of SOPA to iron
> out clear boundaries on activism, explicitly rules out any political
> activism relating to environmental issues, stating:
>> Policy and political associations should protect and advance Wikimedia’s
>> mission “to empower and engage people around the world to collect and
>> develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain,
>> and to disseminate it effectively and globally.” Accordingly, we will not
>> support causes unrelated to or inconsistent with that mission. For example,
>> no support should be given to: environmental issues; [...]"

That can't be right, because there was a project to try to procure green
power when it was available, going back to at least 2009 if I remember
it's still ongoing but really hasn't made much progress because the
datacenters don't want to by renewables. They are less expensive to
produce than fossil fuel power, but tariffs still allow electric companies to
charge more for them, in order to speed their transition, supposedly.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sustainability_Initiative

Also, it should go without saying that people are less likely to be engaged
in producing free educational content when they are battling increasing
fires, extreme weather events, and floods from encroaching sea levels. I
guess whomever wrote "Accordingly" in that Guideline didn't think of that.

___
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] US passport issuance and immigration suspended

[Bill Takatoshi]

I have been waiting for more than three years for the WMF to settle
the question (below) of whether our long-term editor community
supports political activism, and if so, what sort, by surveying the
opinions of established editors. I was promised that the WMF would
include such questions in their regular annual surveys, but those have
apparently been discontinued entirely. Why?

I agree with and commend the Foundation for strongly supporting the
Earth Day Live event along with KDE and Imgur. Climate action and
campaign finance reform is certainly not opposed by any more than a
tiny, sub-5% fraction of the long-term editor base, and I question
whether the vocal minority on this list opposed to the WMF taking such
a firm position actually want more fossil fuel production and more
political financial corruption, or if the outrage stems instead
because political parties have also taken stands on those issues? Are
we going to allow the platforms of the political parties govern what
we consider acceptable from the Foundation?

In any case, do we all agree that the ability to travel
internationally is still fundamentally essential to the continued
operation of the Foundation and its servers, personnel, hiring, and
ability to protect its employees and editors from government abuses?

US State Department Halts Passport Issuing Amid Coronavirus Pandemic
 
https://www.reddit.com/r/MarchAgainstNazis/comments/g7yrb7/us_state_department_halts_passport_issuing_amid/

Stephen Miller indicates immigration pause will be long term: report
 
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/494572-stephen-miller-indicates-immigration-pause-will-be-long-term-report

That is what we should be running banners and threatening blackouts about.

-Will

> >>> The people who are loudest in their demands for consensus
> >>> do not represent the Wikimedia movement.
> >>
> >> The voices loudest for the WMF doing something against the
> >> Trump administration are not representative of the Wikimedia
> >> movement either
> >
> > Is the Community Process Steering Committee currently
> > prepared to "engage more 'quiet' members of our community"
> > with a statistically robust snap survey to resolve this question?
>
> Anyone can go to Recent Changes and send a SurveyMonkey link to the
> most recent few hundred editors with contributions at least a year
> old, to get an accurate answer.
>
> Will a respected member of the community please do this? I would like
> to know what the actual editing community thinks of the travel ban and
> their idea of an appropriate response. I don't want to see community
> governance by opt-in participation in obscure RFCs.
>
> I would offer to do this myself, but I value keeping my real name
> unassociated with my enwiki userid.
>
> -Will

___
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 Meet

[Tito Dutta]

Hello,
That's super great news. I definitely want to try it. Thanks a lot for
working on this.

Thanks
Tito Dutta
Note: If I don't reply to your email in 2 days, please feel free to remind
me over email or phone call.


On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 01:57, Amir Sarabadani  wrote:

> Hey,
> "Wikimedia Meet" [0] (https://meet.wmcloud.org), is a project in Wikimedia
> CloudVPS for Wikimedians to meet virtually instead of using commercial
> services like Zoom which might have security and privacy implications
> [1][2]. Currently it's a jitsi (jitsi.org) installation.
>
> If you want to just use/test it, let me know and I create you a user and
> password. You can share the username and password with anyone you want to
> meet but please do not post it publicly. In your email you can also give me
> your desired user and password. **Do not reuse any password**. You can also
> contact any of the ticketmasters instead of me:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet#List_of_ticketmasters
>
> In order to make this project more robust, I'm looking for Ticketmasters
> too, Ticketmasters create accounts for others (It doesn't require any
> technical knowledge, you fill a form in web for others)
>
> If you want to help maintaining it (which would be greatly appreciated) let
> me know and I give you the needed access. I put the technical documentation
> in mediawiki.org [3]. There are several bits you can help with, like
> puppetizing it, scalability, observability, improving authentication,
> trying to see if BBB can be used as well, and so much more. You can find
> the tickets in the phabricator board and assign a ticket to yourself if you
> feel like helping out.
>
> [0] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet
> [1] https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2020/03/27/zoom/
> [2]
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/02/zoom-technology-security-coronavirus-video-conferencing
> [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet
>
> Hope that would be useful for our users :)
> Best
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> 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] WMF political activism

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sat, 25 Apr 2020 at 16:44, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 07:27, Yair Rand  wrote:
>
> > Also importantly, the Foundation's Policy and Political Association
> > Guideline, which was written by WMF Legal in the aftermath of SOPA
>
> Link, please.

A link has been provided, off-list:


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal/Foundation_Policy_and_Political_Association_Guideline#Limited_Trademark_Endorsement

The top of that page has an FAQ, which includes:

   Is this guideline binding?

   No. Though we intend for this guideline to be our normal operating
   procedure, the Wikimedia Foundation reserves the right to take the
   best action as circumstances require. This guideline is not a contract
   or binding policy.

and the foot of the page has:

   WMF reserves the right to deviate from this policy depending on the
circumstances.
   The General Counsel must approve any such deviation.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
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 Meet

[Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l]

 I told so many times WMF should support infrastructure for the volunteers, so 
thank you very much for this step in that direction.
A.M.

Il domenica 26 aprile 2020, 01:08:01 CEST, Tito Dutta  
ha scritto:  
 
 Hello,
That's super great news. I definitely want to try it. Thanks a lot for
working on this.

Thanks
Tito Dutta
Note: If I don't reply to your email in 2 days, please feel free to remind
me over email or phone call.


On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 01:57, Amir Sarabadani  wrote:

> Hey,
> "Wikimedia Meet" [0] (https://meet.wmcloud.org), is a project in Wikimedia
> CloudVPS for Wikimedians to meet virtually instead of using commercial
> services like Zoom which might have security and privacy implications
> [1][2]. Currently it's a jitsi (jitsi.org) installation.
>
> If you want to just use/test it, let me know and I create you a user and
> password. You can share the username and password with anyone you want to
> meet but please do not post it publicly. In your email you can also give me
> your desired user and password. **Do not reuse any password**. You can also
> contact any of the ticketmasters instead of me:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet#List_of_ticketmasters
>
> In order to make this project more robust, I'm looking for Ticketmasters
> too, Ticketmasters create accounts for others (It doesn't require any
> technical knowledge, you fill a form in web for others)
>
> If you want to help maintaining it (which would be greatly appreciated) let
> me know and I give you the needed access. I put the technical documentation
> in mediawiki.org [3]. There are several bits you can help with, like
> puppetizing it, scalability, observability, improving authentication,
> trying to see if BBB can be used as well, and so much more. You can find
> the tickets in the phabricator board and assign a ticket to yourself if you
> feel like helping out.
>
> [0] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet
> [1] https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2020/03/27/zoom/
> [2]
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/02/zoom-technology-security-coronavirus-video-conferencing
> [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet
>
> Hope that would be useful for our users :)
> Best
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> 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, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Meet

[Amir Sarabadani]

Hey,
"Wikimedia Meet" [0] (https://meet.wmcloud.org), is a project in Wikimedia
CloudVPS for Wikimedians to meet virtually instead of using commercial
services like Zoom which might have security and privacy implications
[1][2]. Currently it's a jitsi (jitsi.org) installation.

If you want to just use/test it, let me know and I create you a user and
password. You can share the username and password with anyone you want to
meet but please do not post it publicly. In your email you can also give me
your desired user and password. **Do not reuse any password**. You can also
contact any of the ticketmasters instead of me:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet#List_of_ticketmasters

In order to make this project more robust, I'm looking for Ticketmasters
too, Ticketmasters create accounts for others (It doesn't require any
technical knowledge, you fill a form in web for others)

If you want to help maintaining it (which would be greatly appreciated) let
me know and I give you the needed access. I put the technical documentation
in mediawiki.org [3]. There are several bits you can help with, like
puppetizing it, scalability, observability, improving authentication,
trying to see if BBB can be used as well, and so much more. You can find
the tickets in the phabricator board and assign a ticket to yourself if you
feel like helping out.

[0] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet
[1] https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2020/03/27/zoom/
[2]
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/02/zoom-technology-security-coronavirus-video-conferencing
[3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet

Hope that would be useful for our users :)
Best
-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
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] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

[Tito Dutta]

Greetings,
It is asked: "are we apolitical?" A spin-off question: "are we unbiased?"
On Wikipedia, we (are to) provide and serve knowledge/information, not any
particular view(s)

Thanks
Tito Dutta



On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 00:34, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Agreed. There is no way to get around the fact that some people oppose our
> message of free access to our projects for everyone, and the actions we
> make in favor of that goal are often political.
>
> However, there is a very large gap between publicly supporting such
> policies as a less regulated internet, copyright advocacy, etc., and Earth
> Day Live's endorsed viewpoint.
>
> If they were solely about Earth Day, we'd have no issues, as the few people
> who oppose Earth Day are probably living in the mountains somewhere with a
> half dozen solar panels and tinfoil hats to protect themselves from the
> flying saucers surveying the flat earth.
>
> The problem I have with Earth Day Live is that, were the Wikimedia
> Foundation to publicly endorse those views, it would inherently be
> isolating of people who do not share them. For example, there were many
> people on the endorsed streams advocating for all industries to have unions
> and a universal $15 minimum wage. Ignoring the fact that it's specifically
> American and was shown to everyone globally, I do not support either of
> those policies for various reasons (primarily that much of my work is done
> for under $15/hr, and I would likely lose some of those jobs), and should
> not be forced at odds with the WMF's party line.
>
> If the Foundation begins publicly endorsing certain policies or viewpoints
> that are not directly a part of the mission which we all agree with and
> work towards, people who disagree with those viewpoints would be forced
> into opposition of the foundation intended to represent the work they
> volunteer for Wikimedia projects. Our intention is to deliver unbiased
> information to people, and if the Foundation has a declared political
> stance other than our mission statement, it also opens the Foundation to
> legitimate criticism on claims of bias.
>
> There is also the argument of timelessness. Two hundred years ago there was
> a very different political landscape with very different arguments taking
> place. Two hundred years from now, provided humanity still exists, would
> likely be very different than today. Assuming that the WMF and Wikipedia
> will still be around, is it better to attempt to remain out of political
> advocacy (with the exception of our mission), or to take distinct political
> stances whenever the political field shifts? I fall in the former category.
>
> Best regards,
> Chris Gates
> (User:Vermont)
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 12:45 PM Camelia Boban 
> wrote:
>
> > Absolutely agree with both. Everything we do in the wiki movement (as
> > everything we do in our whole life) has (also) a political meaning.
> > As we have certain goals and we take certain positions.
> >
> > Camelia
> >
> > --
> > *Camelia Boban*
> >
> > *| Java EE Developer |*
> >
> >
> >
> > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation*
> > Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> > *Interwiki Women
> >  | **Wiki
> > Loves Sport  | Wiki
> > Loves
> > Fashion *
> > WMIT  - WMSE
> >  - WMAR
> >  - WMCH
> >  Member
> >
> > M. +39 3383385545
> > camelia.bo...@gmail.com
> > *Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
> >  *|* *LinkedIn
> > *
> > *Wikipedia  **|
> > **WikiDonne
> > UG * | *WikiDonne Project
> >  *
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giorno sab 25 apr 2020 alle ore 18:12 Rebecca O'Neill <
> > rebeccanin...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> > > Well said. Everything is political, and when the movement choses not to
> > > speak out or state an opinion on something, then we are giving our
> > support
> > > to the status quo.
> > >
> > > Believing yourself to be apolitical is as much a fantasy as being
> > > completely objective, it is inherently impossible.
> > >
> > > Rebecca
> > >
> > > On Sat, 25 Apr 2020, 16:50 John Erling Blad,  wrote:
> > >
> > > > It is said quite often that the Wikimedia-movement is apolitical. In
> > > > strongly believe the movement with its goal has never been, and never
> > > will
> > > > be apolitical. When we say that knowledge should be free and fully
> > > > available for 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Meet

[Amir Sarabadani]

I proofread the email several times and still managed to miss an important
point:

This installation is not large and currently, it wouldn't be able to handle
100 people. It worked fine with 10 people in a meeting but not much more
than that. So please be mindful in using this resource.

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 10:26 PM Amir Sarabadani 
wrote:

> Hey,
> "Wikimedia Meet" [0] (https://meet.wmcloud.org), is a project in
> Wikimedia CloudVPS for Wikimedians to meet virtually instead of using
> commercial services like Zoom which might have security and privacy
> implications [1][2]. Currently it's a jitsi (jitsi.org) installation.
>
> If you want to just use/test it, let me know and I create you a user and
> password. You can share the username and password with anyone you want to
> meet but please do not post it publicly. In your email you can also give me
> your desired user and password. **Do not reuse any password**. You can also
> contact any of the ticketmasters instead of me:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet#List_of_ticketmasters
>
> In order to make this project more robust, I'm looking for Ticketmasters
> too, Ticketmasters create accounts for others (It doesn't require any
> technical knowledge, you fill a form in web for others)
>
> If you want to help maintaining it (which would be greatly appreciated)
> let me know and I give you the needed access. I put the technical
> documentation in mediawiki.org [3]. There are several bits you can help
> with, like puppetizing it, scalability, observability, improving
> authentication, trying to see if BBB can be used as well, and so much more.
> You can find the tickets in the phabricator board and assign a ticket to
> yourself if you feel like helping out.
>
> [0] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet
> [1] https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2020/03/27/zoom/
> [2]
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/02/zoom-technology-security-coronavirus-video-conferencing
> [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Meet
>
> Hope that would be useful for our users :)
> Best
> --
> Amir (he/him)
>
>

-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
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] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

[Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l]

Agreed. There is no way to get around the fact that some people oppose our
message of free access to our projects for everyone, and the actions we
make in favor of that goal are often political.

However, there is a very large gap between publicly supporting such
policies as a less regulated internet, copyright advocacy, etc., and Earth
Day Live's endorsed viewpoint.

If they were solely about Earth Day, we'd have no issues, as the few people
who oppose Earth Day are probably living in the mountains somewhere with a
half dozen solar panels and tinfoil hats to protect themselves from the
flying saucers surveying the flat earth.

The problem I have with Earth Day Live is that, were the Wikimedia
Foundation to publicly endorse those views, it would inherently be
isolating of people who do not share them. For example, there were many
people on the endorsed streams advocating for all industries to have unions
and a universal $15 minimum wage. Ignoring the fact that it's specifically
American and was shown to everyone globally, I do not support either of
those policies for various reasons (primarily that much of my work is done
for under $15/hr, and I would likely lose some of those jobs), and should
not be forced at odds with the WMF's party line.

If the Foundation begins publicly endorsing certain policies or viewpoints
that are not directly a part of the mission which we all agree with and
work towards, people who disagree with those viewpoints would be forced
into opposition of the foundation intended to represent the work they
volunteer for Wikimedia projects. Our intention is to deliver unbiased
information to people, and if the Foundation has a declared political
stance other than our mission statement, it also opens the Foundation to
legitimate criticism on claims of bias.

There is also the argument of timelessness. Two hundred years ago there was
a very different political landscape with very different arguments taking
place. Two hundred years from now, provided humanity still exists, would
likely be very different than today. Assuming that the WMF and Wikipedia
will still be around, is it better to attempt to remain out of political
advocacy (with the exception of our mission), or to take distinct political
stances whenever the political field shifts? I fall in the former category.

Best regards,
Chris Gates
(User:Vermont)

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 12:45 PM Camelia Boban 
wrote:

> Absolutely agree with both. Everything we do in the wiki movement (as
> everything we do in our whole life) has (also) a political meaning.
> As we have certain goals and we take certain positions.
>
> Camelia
>
> --
> *Camelia Boban*
>
> *| Java EE Developer |*
>
>
>
> *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation*
> Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> *Interwiki Women
>  | **Wiki
> Loves Sport  | Wiki
> Loves
> Fashion *
> WMIT  - WMSE
>  - WMAR
>  - WMCH
>  Member
>
> M. +39 3383385545
> camelia.bo...@gmail.com
> *Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
>  *|* *LinkedIn
> *
> *Wikipedia  **|
> **WikiDonne
> UG * | *WikiDonne Project
>  *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Il giorno sab 25 apr 2020 alle ore 18:12 Rebecca O'Neill <
> rebeccanin...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
> > Well said. Everything is political, and when the movement choses not to
> > speak out or state an opinion on something, then we are giving our
> support
> > to the status quo.
> >
> > Believing yourself to be apolitical is as much a fantasy as being
> > completely objective, it is inherently impossible.
> >
> > Rebecca
> >
> > On Sat, 25 Apr 2020, 16:50 John Erling Blad,  wrote:
> >
> > > It is said quite often that the Wikimedia-movement is apolitical. In
> > > strongly believe the movement with its goal has never been, and never
> > will
> > > be apolitical. When we say that knowledge should be free and fully
> > > available for everyone, then we make a political statement. It may not
> > > align with you favorite love/hate political party, but it is still a
> very
> > > strong political statement.
> > >
> > > So please, don't claim the movement to be apolitical. We may not align
> > with
> > > any specific political party in any specific country, but we are still
> > not
> > > apolitical.
> > >
> > > /jeblad
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

[Eduardo Testart]

Hi,

There isn't such a thing as just one politics, therefore, the subject line
question is really broad.

We are not apolitical about free knowledge, no doubt about that. On the
other hand, we as a movement can be or become apolitical in other political
fields. All this discussion, in my opinion, has to be addressed from the
correct political field that we are standing (or not). Which is the
political field of the question proposed then? (this is just a rhetorical
question.)

In the free knowledge political field, I repeat, we are not apolitical from
the moment we advocate for free knowledge, free content, free licenses,
free software, etc. I also do not wish that we ever become apolitical about
that, even if mistakes are made in the way.


Cheers,

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 7:44 PM Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Greetings,
> It is asked: "are we apolitical?" A spin-off question: "are we unbiased?"
> On Wikipedia, we (are to) provide and serve knowledge/information, not any
> particular view(s)
>
> Thanks
> Tito Dutta
>
>
>
> On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 00:34, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > Agreed. There is no way to get around the fact that some people oppose
> our
> > message of free access to our projects for everyone, and the actions we
> > make in favor of that goal are often political.
> >
> > However, there is a very large gap between publicly supporting such
> > policies as a less regulated internet, copyright advocacy, etc., and
> Earth
> > Day Live's endorsed viewpoint.
> >
> > If they were solely about Earth Day, we'd have no issues, as the few
> people
> > who oppose Earth Day are probably living in the mountains somewhere with
> a
> > half dozen solar panels and tinfoil hats to protect themselves from the
> > flying saucers surveying the flat earth.
> >
> > The problem I have with Earth Day Live is that, were the Wikimedia
> > Foundation to publicly endorse those views, it would inherently be
> > isolating of people who do not share them. For example, there were many
> > people on the endorsed streams advocating for all industries to have
> unions
> > and a universal $15 minimum wage. Ignoring the fact that it's
> specifically
> > American and was shown to everyone globally, I do not support either of
> > those policies for various reasons (primarily that much of my work is
> done
> > for under $15/hr, and I would likely lose some of those jobs), and should
> > not be forced at odds with the WMF's party line.
> >
> > If the Foundation begins publicly endorsing certain policies or
> viewpoints
> > that are not directly a part of the mission which we all agree with and
> > work towards, people who disagree with those viewpoints would be forced
> > into opposition of the foundation intended to represent the work they
> > volunteer for Wikimedia projects. Our intention is to deliver unbiased
> > information to people, and if the Foundation has a declared political
> > stance other than our mission statement, it also opens the Foundation to
> > legitimate criticism on claims of bias.
> >
> > There is also the argument of timelessness. Two hundred years ago there
> was
> > a very different political landscape with very different arguments taking
> > place. Two hundred years from now, provided humanity still exists, would
> > likely be very different than today. Assuming that the WMF and Wikipedia
> > will still be around, is it better to attempt to remain out of political
> > advocacy (with the exception of our mission), or to take distinct
> political
> > stances whenever the political field shifts? I fall in the former
> category.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Chris Gates
> > (User:Vermont)
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 12:45 PM Camelia Boban 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Absolutely agree with both. Everything we do in the wiki movement (as
> > > everything we do in our whole life) has (also) a political meaning.
> > > As we have certain goals and we take certain positions.
> > >
> > > Camelia
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Camelia Boban*
> > >
> > > *| Java EE Developer |*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation*
> > > Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> > > *Interwiki Women
> > >  |
> **Wiki
> > > Loves Sport  | Wiki
> > > Loves
> > > Fashion *
> > > WMIT  - WMSE
> > >  - WMAR
> > >  - WMCH
> > >  Member
> > >
> > > M. +39 3383385545
> > > camelia.bo...@gmail.com
> > > *Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
> > >  *|* *LinkedIn
> > > *
> > > *Wikipedia 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

[Gnangarra]

Kaya

From my perspective we have always been political, from the moment we
started with the concept of Free Knowledge,  Eduardo listed many of the
aspects that go with it.  We are doing so much more we  want
anyone/everyone to contribute regardless of social standing, we spend
millions on addressing bias against women, we have and openly support an
active LGBTI+ community, we make the projects accessible in many
languages.  As for Earth day we cant deny our support of it just look at
how we dedicated a whole Wikimania around the concepts.  Even our pillar of
Neutral POV is political we dont spin we tell it as it was from every
perspective. We've taken many stands  in regards to censorship. and
copyright we even once went dark to send a message, Earth day was not a
shift in our ideals.

Boodar-wun

On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 09:13, Eduardo Testart  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> There isn't such a thing as just one politics, therefore, the subject line
> question is really broad.
>
> We are not apolitical about free knowledge, no doubt about that. On the
> other hand, we as a movement can be or become apolitical in other political
> fields. All this discussion, in my opinion, has to be addressed from the
> correct political field that we are standing (or not). Which is the
> political field of the question proposed then? (this is just a rhetorical
> question.)
>
> In the free knowledge political field, I repeat, we are not apolitical from
> the moment we advocate for free knowledge, free content, free licenses,
> free software, etc. I also do not wish that we ever become apolitical about
> that, even if mistakes are made in the way.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 7:44 PM Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> > It is asked: "are we apolitical?" A spin-off question: "are we unbiased?"
> > On Wikipedia, we (are to) provide and serve knowledge/information, not
> any
> > particular view(s)
> >
> > Thanks
> > Tito Dutta
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 00:34, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Agreed. There is no way to get around the fact that some people oppose
> > our
> > > message of free access to our projects for everyone, and the actions we
> > > make in favor of that goal are often political.
> > >
> > > However, there is a very large gap between publicly supporting such
> > > policies as a less regulated internet, copyright advocacy, etc., and
> > Earth
> > > Day Live's endorsed viewpoint.
> > >
> > > If they were solely about Earth Day, we'd have no issues, as the few
> > people
> > > who oppose Earth Day are probably living in the mountains somewhere
> with
> > a
> > > half dozen solar panels and tinfoil hats to protect themselves from the
> > > flying saucers surveying the flat earth.
> > >
> > > The problem I have with Earth Day Live is that, were the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation to publicly endorse those views, it would inherently be
> > > isolating of people who do not share them. For example, there were many
> > > people on the endorsed streams advocating for all industries to have
> > unions
> > > and a universal $15 minimum wage. Ignoring the fact that it's
> > specifically
> > > American and was shown to everyone globally, I do not support either of
> > > those policies for various reasons (primarily that much of my work is
> > done
> > > for under $15/hr, and I would likely lose some of those jobs), and
> should
> > > not be forced at odds with the WMF's party line.
> > >
> > > If the Foundation begins publicly endorsing certain policies or
> > viewpoints
> > > that are not directly a part of the mission which we all agree with and
> > > work towards, people who disagree with those viewpoints would be forced
> > > into opposition of the foundation intended to represent the work they
> > > volunteer for Wikimedia projects. Our intention is to deliver unbiased
> > > information to people, and if the Foundation has a declared political
> > > stance other than our mission statement, it also opens the Foundation
> to
> > > legitimate criticism on claims of bias.
> > >
> > > There is also the argument of timelessness. Two hundred years ago there
> > was
> > > a very different political landscape with very different arguments
> taking
> > > place. Two hundred years from now, provided humanity still exists,
> would
> > > likely be very different than today. Assuming that the WMF and
> Wikipedia
> > > will still be around, is it better to attempt to remain out of
> political
> > > advocacy (with the exception of our mission), or to take distinct
> > political
> > > stances whenever the political field shifts? I fall in the former
> > category.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Chris Gates
> > > (User:Vermont)
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 12:45 PM Camelia Boban <
> camelia.bo...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Absolutely agree with both. Everything we do in the wiki movement (as
> > > > everything we do in our whole life) has (also) a political 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF political activism

[Fæ]

Thanks to Greg for the quick official response from the WMF which
includes the active recognition and acceptance of the problem.

The open letter was also published on meta at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_website#Website_full_page_banner_promoting_EarthdayLive2020.org
for anyone wishing to comment or add notes on wiki rather than using
email.

Noting "in the future we will do more thorough due diligence". It may
be of benefit for the WMF to respond on Meta with any details about
what will change to ensure preventative due diligence measures have
been put in place, such as the one suggested in this email thread of
early engagement with the community rather than a Phabricator task on
the day.

Thanks,
Fae

On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 06:18, Gregory Varnum  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am responding on behalf of the Foundation in my capacity handling movement 
> communications, including managing any campaigns on wikimediafoundation.org.
>
> As others from the Foundation have stated on this mailing list in the past, 
> from time to time the Wikimedia Foundation engages in public policy matters 
> which are aligned with the advancement of the Wikimedia mission or our values 
> as an organization.
>
> Having said that, we agree with some of the criticisms you have raised. We 
> had understood the Earth Day Live campaign to be both global and apolitical. 
> However, we agree that the final campaign was both more US-centric and more 
> political than we had understood in advance. The banner is no longer running, 
> and in the future we will do more thorough due diligence.
>
> We remain strongly committed to climate sustainability as a value of the 
> Wikimedia Foundation. We will continue to advocate on behalf of it and other 
> values that uplift and advance free knowledge globally.
>
> I hope you all had a productive and safe Earth Day, and wish you all 
> continued health and safety.
>
> Yours,
> -greg
>
> ---
> Gregory Varnum
> Communications Strategist
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> gvar...@wikimedia.org
> Pronouns: He/Him/His
>
> > On Apr 23, 2020, at 3:07 AM, RhinosF1 -  wrote:
> >
> > Should this be posted on wiki for others to sign?
> >
> > Samuel
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 07:51, Fæ  wrote:
> >
> >> OPEN LETTER
> >>
> >> Dear Katherine Maher,
> >>
> >> The WMF home website landing page (https://wikimediafoundation.org)
> >> yesterday featured a full-page banner directing all visitors globally
> >> to https://www.earthdaylive2020.org. This is a site used for Americal
> >> political lobbying, refer to the email discussion attached.
> >>
> >> Could you, or the responsible member of your management team, please
> >> explain exactly how this happened?
> >>
> >> There is zero doubt that this was a serious operational error, misuse
> >> of WMF development time and a misuse of the Wikimedia brand. It is
> >> certain that you will agree that the buck stops with the CEO. The
> >> decision to use the Foundation's website for American lobbying is in
> >> conflict with your not for profit status and is in conflict with the
> >> charitable status promoted to donors worldwide.
> >>
> >> If the management team and yourself are going to continuing political
> >> lobbying and using WMF resources to raise funds for Americal political
> >> organizations which have no agreed relevance to the mission of the
> >> Foundation, there must be a published transparent governance review by
> >> the WMF board of trustees to examine and agree on this significant
> >> operational change to the public Foundation strategy and the terms for
> >> the CEO.
> >>
> >> Thank you in advance.
> >>
> >> Link to Phabricator task to implement the banner:
> >> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T250508
> >> CC: María Sefidari as WMF Chair.
> >>
> >> Fae
> >>
> >> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 05:50, K. Peachey  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T250508
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 09:53, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l
> >>>  wrote:
> 
>  Hi,
> 
>  It seems that they just gave a link to that website, which...eh...
>  When I opened it, I heard one sentence of the stream before I stopped
> >> it
>  and read the rest of the webpage: "and then we give thanks to spirit,
> >> for
>  the air we breathe, for the earth..." After reading the rest of the
>  webpage, I un-paused it, and am currently listening to a bit of
> >> propaganda
>  promoting unions and more extensive labor laws.
> 
>  The linked website is explicitly political, explicitly  on the American
>  left, and explicitly in favor of certain highly contentious American
>  political proposals. I would like to hear the reasoning for why that
> >> link
>  has been shown, and it seems to me simply unjustifiable. The WMF is the
>  host of a series of community-built projects, not a political activism
>  organization.
> 
>  Regards,
>  Vermont
> 
>  

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF political activism

[Mario Gómez]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 8:51 AM Fæ  wrote:

>
> Could you, or the responsible member of your management team, please
> explain exactly how this happened?
>
>
As far as I know, criticism of political lobbying by the WMF is generally
frowned upon here. Including aspersion casting against critics.

I don't think these lobbying activities would get a wide community
consensus. Even the blackout for the EU produced a fair share of
controversy within some Wikimedia projects, and it was actually related to
our core mission.

Best,

Mario Gómez
___
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,