[Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage: Chance, bore, or hazard

2013-01-13 Thread Craig Franklin
Ziko,

Thanks for these thoughtful posts, it's always good to consider the long
term and what we might learn from our experience on other projects.  Of
course, it's up to the Wikivoyagers themselves to decide how they want to
run their project, but a bit of advice and insight never hurts!

The Australian businessman Kerry Packer once quipped that before Parliament
made a law, they should be required to first repeal one.  While we cannot
make this a requirement on Wikimedia projects, it's a good rule of thumb to
live by.  On English Wikipedia, we have a dense tangle of rules, policies
and essays that has raised the bar for entry to new users.  This tangle has
developed over the years as a result of kneejerk reactions to things like
the Siegenthaler incident and the Essjay controversy.  With a relatively
clean slate upon which to write, the Wikivoyagers can consider the
structure of their project in a holistic way, being proactive in thinking
about how they will manage such incidents before they actually arise, and
avoid choking their project up with hundreds of rules created as a reaction
to unfortunate incidents that could have been avoided by deciding on a
simple set of rules to start with, and then consistently enforcing them.

Not being a travel writer, I don't have the foggiest on where the lines
should be drawn, that should be left to the experts on the projects (with
input and assistance from the WMF legal department, ideally).  But it
sounds like they're already off to a good start if the project still a
rather limited set of rules, and wishes to remain so.

Kind Regards,
Craig Franklin
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Aaron Swartz is dead

2013-01-13 Thread Andy Mabbett
Splendidly done. I'm mobile all day; could someone add a link to that, from
the relevant section of [[WP: RIP]], please?
On Jan 13, 2013 6:45 AM, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 The blog post it out now:

 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/12/remembering-aaron-swartz-1986-2013/

 On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote:
   Official statement from the family:
  
   http://soupsoup.tumblr.com/**post/40373383323/official-**
   statement-from-the-family-and-**partner-of
 
 http://soupsoup.tumblr.com/post/40373383323/official-statement-from-the-family-and-partner-of
  
  
   I hope someone will perhaps write a blog post for the Wikimedia blog
  about
   his impact on the Wikimedia and free knowledge movement. This could
 be a
   community project.
  
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Blog
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Blog
  
   -Sarah
  
 
  I do not know about a blog post, but a few San Francisco Wikimedians
  (myself included) are exploring the possibility of holding a quiet,
  respectful open house next week in honor of Aaron, hosted at the
  Foundation.
 
  I should emphasize that we haven't decided yet, since if Creative
 Commons
  or the EFF are holding events of any kind, we will likely defer to
  supporting that, rather than holding anything separately. I will keep
 folks
  posted.
 
 
  Hi all - sharing with you in this real sense of loss and sadness. It's
 hard
  to believe it was just a year ago that the energy around SOPA was
  everywhere in the Wikimedia movement, and I think it's safe to say that
  Aaron was so much the nucleus of that energy.
 
  Re a blog post - yes, we're working on something now for the Wikimedia
  blog, but what I think we'd really like to do is point to a community
  memorial on Wikipedia or meta or wherever, where our community might be
  recording their thoughts on Aaron. I suspect we would also point to the
  memorial referenced by his family.
 
  Has anyone seen such an on-wiki memorial? Might someone be able to
  propose/create such a page if it doesn't already exist? There are so many
  voices in our community who have something to say about Aaron, it would
 be
  great to share that.
 
  jay
 
 
  --
  Jay Walsh
  Senior Director, Communications
  WikimediaFoundation.org
  blog.wikimedia.org
  +1 (415) 839 6885 x 6609, @jansonw
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



 --
 Tilman Bayer
 Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
 Wikimedia Foundation

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Aaron Swartz is dead

2013-01-13 Thread Everton Zanella Alvarenga
Congrats for the blog post about Aaron. I asked some friends to create
a homage for him and I will translate for Portuguese.

From another mailing list, a petition was create on Avaaz, an
organization Aaron work to also. See bellow.

-- Forwarded message --
From: Harry Halpin hhalpin AT ibiblio.org
Date: 2013/1/13
Subject: [okfn-discuss] Petition to have MIT and US Govt. issue an
apologies for prosecuting Aaron Schwartz
To: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list okfn-disc...@lists.okfn.org



I made a petition to demand an from MIT and the US Attorney of
Massachusetts apologies for their prosecution of Aaron Schwartz, a
prosecution that his parents say is partly to blame for his suicide.
The US Federal Government is also added since laws on the federal
level allow this kind of absurd prosecution. Feel free to sign:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Federal_Government_and_MIT_issue_a_formal_apologies_for_the_death_of_Aaron_Schwartz/?wgeiRd

From the official statement of Swartz's family:

Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product
of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial
overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts US
Attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death. The US
Attorney's office pursued an exceptionally harsh array of charges,
carrying potentially over 30 years in prison, to punish an alleged
crime that had no victims. Meanwhile, unlike JSTOR, MIT refused to
stand up for Aaron and its own community's most cherished principles.


On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
 Splendidly done. I'm mobile all day; could someone add a link to that, from
 the relevant section of [[WP: RIP]], please?
 On Jan 13, 2013 6:45 AM, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 The blog post it out now:

 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/12/remembering-aaron-swartz-1986-2013/

-- 
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
useful than a life spent doing nothing.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Aaron Swartz is dead

2013-01-13 Thread Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
The blog post was poignant.


-- 
--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Aaron Swartz is dead - memorials

2013-01-13 Thread ENWP Pine
Numerous Wikipedians are leaving memorials on AaronSw's user talk page on 
English Wikipedia. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AaronSw

I've also added a link to there from Aaron's entry in WP:RIP.

Pine

  
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Rationale for fundraising record?

2013-01-13 Thread MZMcBride
Zack Exley wrote:
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 1:59 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
In previous discussions, there were questions about trade-offs and I
think you mentioned that the Wikimedia community would have to make some
choices about certain implementation details (e.g., stickiness of
banners) after evaluating the cost of these features (annoyance to
readers and editors) versus their benefit (increase in donations,
decrease in fundraising banner time, etc.). I realize it's January and
that the next annual fundraiser is many months away, but do you have any
idea when this year you'll be having a discussion about these trade-offs
and where?

 
Any suggestions about how that might best be done? There are so few people
who participate on this list that I would say this isn't a good place to
measure the feelings of either WM contributions or readers.

Meta-Wiki (https://meta.wikimedia.org/).

I agree that this list is not representative of the Wikimedia community
(and no forum will ever be truly representative), but I don't think that's
important here.

There's also the problem of people not necessarily knowing what actually
annoys them or interferes with their experience the most when it's being
discussed in the abstract.

I don't follow. There are about a million test wikis available, including
test.wikipedia.org, test2.wikipedia.org, and an entire Wikimedia Labs
cluster that can be used for testing banners. You're absolutely right that
discussing banners and annoyance in the abstract would be useless, I just
have no idea why anyone ever would. There are about eleven months till the
start of the next annual fundraiser. In that time, I think it should be
possible to come up with a few demos for the community to evaluate and
assess.

And surveys of course have their problems.

I don't follow. This doesn't seem to have stopped the Wikimedia Foundation
or any other organization on Earth from (regularly) using surveys.

Moreover, what are the important questions? What do some editors find
objectionable from an aesthetic point of view? (Even though we are now
sparing logged in users completely.) What gets in the way of readers' use
of the site? Or other more nuanced questions about readers' reactions? For
example, do some choices cause readers to perceive banners as ads, cause
confusion or possibly reduce readership?

Well, are we sparing logged in users completely? Who determines that? Is
that documented anywhere?

There are many ways to annoy readers. Generally anything that invades the
content area of the site (which is physically marked on the page with
borders) is off-limits and inappropriate to me. Others may disagree,
particularly if there's enough of a financial gain. These are the types of
discussions that need to be had.

It's always possible to do a full splash-screen and it would probably
bring in a lot of money, but I don't think anyone is advocating for such
an approach. That's one end of the spectrum. The other end is having no
banners at all and relying on simple word-of-mouth. The grey areas in
between these two extremes need further thought and consideration.
Meta-Wiki is the place for this.

Any thoughts?

Your questions are a bit silly. :-)

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l