Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
+1 Nathan. Aubrey On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:31 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: You know what, I think this outcome is not just disappointing, it's positively astounding. I have a lot that I could say about it, but I can't imagine what the point of saying it could possibly be. Chalk one up for the trolls. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)
I totally agree with MZMcBride and Erik. It also depends and what the money go for. If somebody is paid to bend the rules or use their privileged role, it is an obvious problem. If somebody is paid a compensation for the costs incurred in collecting materials (as sometimes is the case with scanners, photos, etc.), it obviously isn't. And the area between is grey and undefined. As you possibly know, I believe that outright forbidding all paid editing results in a situation when people still do it, but in secrecy. This is not good for us, as it increases the amount of work needed to eradicate such edits. I think that we should allow paid edits under certain conditions (although obviously not allow paid advocacy), when all encyclopedic standards are fulfilled, but require full transparency and disclosure, to allow better tracking and evaluation of such edits. I also believe that transparency and disclosure of even potential COI is crucial (and unfortunately impossible under current rules). best, dariusz pundit On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:22 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: (Responding just on the general issue, not on the specific case.) Paid editing is not the same as paid advocacy (editing). This is a very important point. I agree it's an important distinction. I personally think it could be worthwhile to think about a separate non-profit organization which receives payments and manages contracts to systematically expand Wikipedia coverage, with payment entirely or largely decoupled from specific articles (at most coupled to specific domains) and the organization's policies being developed transparently in partnership with the community. I suspect such an org could receive significant grants and public support in its own right. Supporting free content isn't evil - there's stuff like http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1699256938/the-vanamo-online-game-museum which is totally awesome. It's COI and disclosure issues that raise red flags, and more significant violations of policies that sometimes go along with that. It's been suggested many times through the years that WMF should directly pay editors in some way. I don't think that's a good idea, though I would like to see more grants in support of expenses related to article writing (there are quite a few programs around that already, many of them chapter-run). *dims lights, stirs logs in fireplace* Back in the early years, I had a little statement on my userpage encouraging people to donate money to me if they liked my work and wanted me to do more on Wikipedia. (Nobody took me up on it, of course. Cheap bastards.) This was at a time when a lot of us online community nerds were thinking about donation-based funding models for communities. PayPal was just becoming a really big deal back then, because it suddenly made these early community funding experiments possible. Blender, Penny Arcade, Kuro5hin and others were among the true pioneers of what's now called crowdfunding. Axel Boldt deserves credit for this experiment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiMoney . I still have a WikiMoney bank balance of ψ18. Maybe I can convert it to a cryptocurrency one day. :) I'd love to see more experiments that are conducted in full awareness of the ethical issues involved, both with funding models for free content, and with other incentive structures. WikiMoney was actually quite popular for a short while, considering how much of a pain it was to actually administer! Erik -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- __ dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak profesor zarządzania kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego i centrum badawczego CROW Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
Hoi, It is extremely sad to lose one of our best and brightest. Was there no other way ?? Was this even considered ?? Thanks, Gerard On 9 January 2014 09:16, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com wrote: +1 Nathan. Aubrey On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:31 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: You know what, I think this outcome is not just disappointing, it's positively astounding. I have a lot that I could say about it, but I can't imagine what the point of saying it could possibly be. Chalk one up for the trolls. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)
2014/1/9 Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl: I totally agree with MZMcBride and Erik. It also depends and what the money go for. If somebody is paid to bend the rules or use their privileged role, it is an obvious problem. If somebody is paid a compensation for the costs incurred in collecting materials (as sometimes is the case with scanners, photos, etc.), it obviously isn't. And the area between is grey and undefined. As you possibly know, I believe that outright forbidding all paid editing results in a situation when people still do it, but in secrecy. This is not good for us, as it increases the amount of work needed to eradicate such edits. I think that we should allow paid edits under certain conditions (although obviously not allow paid advocacy), when all encyclopedic standards are fulfilled, but require full transparency and disclosure, to allow better tracking and evaluation of such edits. I also believe that transparency and disclosure of even potential COI is crucial (and unfortunately impossible under current rules). Yes, but the question is how to enable such a system. If the rules for paid editors were to be very strict - many paid editors would have still decide to do it in secrecy anyway, as it would have been simply easier for them. It might be like with infamous registered lobbyst system in Polish Parliament. Since registered lobbyst system was enabled 12 years ago in Polish Parliament only 6 people decided to register, while all other lobbysts still act in secrecy :-) System in German Wikipedia registers institutional/corporal editors - who for sure join the Wikipedia in order to support interest of their institutions/corporations. One can still do it following the Wikipedia rules - for example remove unsourced bias, keep pages updated, fix basic facts, such as the name of CEO etc. And - in the same time one can still have accounts for doing evil things - sockpuppeting in disucssions and votes, forcing obvious bias etc... -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)
Tomasz, As has been said elsewhere, No registration required, we respect your privacy, and no paid editing are fundamentally incompatible. The only way that it would be possible for a system as you describe to exist, the following would need to be true : 1) No more IP editing -- most COI editing exists using IPs 2) No more anonymous editing -- having real names being used for account names would indeed go towards putting a halt to undeclared editing 3) Compulsory to declare any COI -- this is currently the case on some projects, but the conditions are such that this is not always followed The very business model that Wikipedia follows makes it impossible to enable any system where COI editing can either be eliminated or can exist without issue. Until that model changes, this will always be an issue. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
Hello, I would like to speak on this list about the basic income. For a TL;DR about the concept, the idea of an (unconditionnal) basic income is to give each citizen of a country a sum of money in order to fullfill their basic needs: lodging, eat, be healthy. To give an idea of the amount, one hears often 800-1000 € in France and I heard 2500 CHF in Switzerland. If people want to earn more, their work income will be in addition of this basic income. You can read more on the Wikipedia articles ([1] and other languages). Be aware, this idea is as strange as Wikipedia when one discovers it. As a Wikipmedian, I dream of such a basic income: it would empower the people to edit the Wikimedia projects by giving them libre time (libre as free speech). I don’t think Wikimedia itself should support this to avoid being involved in politics, but probably many Wikipmedians could be interested in this idea. For the European citizens, there is currently an official call (an ECI [2]) to support this idea at the European level, see [3] ; this call ends in one week (yes, the 200,000 signatures is a bit far of the million signatures needed). In Switzerland, a popular legislative initiative collected more than the 100,000 needed signatures in September 2013, and this will lead to a nationwide referendum about the basic income there. Any thoughts about that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Citizens'_Initiative [3] http://sign.basicincome2013.eu/ ~ Seb35 [^_^] ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
On Wed, 8 Jan 2014 16:07:47 -0800 Frank Schulenburg fschulenb...@wikimedia.org wrote: Dear all, I'm writing to let you know that Sarah Stierch is no longer an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation. I'm sorry to hear that. Good luck to Sarah on her future endeavours and I hope she will remain part of the Wikimedia community. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ First stop for Perl beginners - http://perl-begin.org/ When Chuck Norris uses Gentoo, “emerge kde” finishes in under a minute. A computer cannot afford to keep Chuck waiting for too long. — http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Chuck-Norris/ Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
On 9 January 2014 00:07, Frank Schulenburg fschulenb...@wikimedia.org wrote: ... The Wikimedia Foundation has recently learned that Sarah has been editing Wikipedia on behalf of paying clients, as recently as a few weeks ago. She did that even though it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many in the editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation. Hi Frank, I have no idea how to interpret paid editing is... *frowned upon*... by the Wikimedia Foundation. Could you please provide a link or a reference for a n approved WMF policy or resolution that makes it clear to employees or contractors of the WMF that they may have their contracts terminated if they take part in paid editing? Can you also make it clear whether all WMF board members, employees and contractors of the WMF are retrospectively required to now publicly declare all past paid editing? I am sure that many of us active in the Wikimedia movement would like toreview a compiled list of open declarations for WMF employees and trustees. In the UK management or board members may have many varied personal opinions and frown upon as much as they like, however to terminate employment and to ensure that resignations are not later subject to claims of constructive dismissal, there must be relevant policies of the organization making it clear what behaviours are acceptable or not. Employment law in the USA is no doubt different, however I find it hard to believe there are not similar requirements on employers. Depending on your answer to this question, I think it sensible for all chapters to review whether similar policies should apply to their employees and contractors and whether their board members should also be required to make public declarations of any past or current paid editing. Thanks, Fae -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
* Frank Schulenburg wrote: And so I ask you to respect Sarah's privacy at what is surely a difficult time for her, ... An extremely visible public announcement that the Wikimedia Foundation has fired her within two days of an allegation of misconduct -- that is how you are making it sound -- is not quite respecting her privacy. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
Le 09/01/2014 10:59, Seb35 a écrit : For a TL;DR about the concept, the idea of an (unconditionnal) basic income is to give each citizen of a country a sum of money in order to fullfill their basic needs: lodging, eat, be healthy. To give an idea of the amount, one hears often 800-1000 € in France and I heard 2500 CHF in Switzerland. If people want to earn more, their work income will be in addition of this basic income. You can read more on the Wikipedia articles ([1] and other languages). Be aware, this idea is as strange as Wikipedia when one discovers it. As a Wikipmedian, I dream of such a basic income: it would empower the people to edit the Wikimedia projects by giving them libre time (libre as free speech). I don’t think Wikimedia itself should support this to avoid being involved in politics, but probably many Wikipmedians could be interested in this idea. For the European citizens, there is currently an official call (an ECI [2]) to support this idea at the European level, see [3] ; this call ends in one week (yes, the 200,000 signatures is a bit far of the million signatures needed). In Switzerland, a popular legislative initiative collected more than the 100,000 needed signatures in September 2013, and this will lead to a nationwide referendum about the basic income there. I personally support the vision of the basic income. Such a move would be extremely encouraging for our projects, for our societies. Thank you Seb35 for advertising this European call. Emmanuel -- Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline more * Web: http://www.kiwix.org * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
Interesting! As a member of the Green Party this is something I've read a little bit about, but it's mostly spoken of in the context of its effects on the welfare state. The idea that it might increase the level of cognitive surplus available to open source and collaborative projects, and so these projects might have a political interest in encouraging a basic income, is quite novel to me. FWIW, I think this Financial Times piece by economist Tim Harford offers a nicely readable summary of some of the thinking on the subject http://timharford.com/2013/11/a-universal-income-is-not-such-a-silly-idea/ On 9 Jan 2014, at 09:59, Seb35 seb35wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I would like to speak on this list about the basic income. For a TL;DR about the concept, the idea of an (unconditionnal) basic income is to give each citizen of a country a sum of money in order to fullfill their basic needs: lodging, eat, be healthy. To give an idea of the amount, one hears often 800-1000 € in France and I heard 2500 CHF in Switzerland. If people want to earn more, their work income will be in addition of this basic income. You can read more on the Wikipedia articles ([1] and other languages). Be aware, this idea is as strange as Wikipedia when one discovers it. As a Wikipmedian, I dream of such a basic income: it would empower the people to edit the Wikimedia projects by giving them libre time (libre as free speech). I don’t think Wikimedia itself should support this to avoid being involved in politics, but probably many Wikipmedians could be interested in this idea. For the European citizens, there is currently an official call (an ECI [2]) to support this idea at the European level, see [3] ; this call ends in one week (yes, the 200,000 signatures is a bit far of the million signatures needed). In Switzerland, a popular legislative initiative collected more than the 100,000 needed signatures in September 2013, and this will lead to a nationwide referendum about the basic income there. Any thoughts about that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Citizens'_Initiative [3] http://sign.basicincome2013.eu/ ~ Seb35 [^_^] ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
The WMF has recently clarified that they frown upon paid editing. Presumably offering basic wage for people to edit Wikipedia is still paid editing? -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
Le 09/01/2014 13:36, Fæ a écrit : The WMF has recently clarified that they frown upon paid editing. Presumably offering basic wage for people to edit Wikipedia is still paid editing? The answer is no, because the basic income is *unconditional*. This is an income, not at wage. Definition from Wikipedia: A basic income (also called basic income guarantee, unconditional basic income, universal basic income, universal demogrant,[1] or citizen’s income) is a proposed system[2] of social security in which citizens or residents of a country regularly receive a sum of money unconditionally, either from a government or some other institution able to ensure an equitable distribution of common wealth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income Emmanuel -- Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline more * Web: http://www.kiwix.org * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: The WMF has recently clarified that they frown upon paid editing. Presumably offering basic wage for people to edit Wikipedia is still paid editing? The answer is no, because the basic income is *unconditional*. This is an income, not at wage. That was probably sarcasm ;-) Aubrey ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
In Switzerland the national referendum has not approved it. There was the idea to have a minimum guaranteed salary for all citizens and the 1:12 (a manager could not receive a salary which is more than 12 times than that of an employee of the same company) but both of them have not been approved by the population. Switzerland is a very strange country... but what the population decides it's mandatory. Regards On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Seb35 seb35wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I would like to speak on this list about the basic income. For a TL;DR about the concept, the idea of an (unconditionnal) basic income is to give each citizen of a country a sum of money in order to fullfill their basic needs: lodging, eat, be healthy. To give an idea of the amount, one hears often 800-1000 € in France and I heard 2500 CHF in Switzerland. If people want to earn more, their work income will be in addition of this basic income. You can read more on the Wikipedia articles ([1] and other languages). Be aware, this idea is as strange as Wikipedia when one discovers it. As a Wikipmedian, I dream of such a basic income: it would empower the people to edit the Wikimedia projects by giving them libre time (libre as free speech). I don’t think Wikimedia itself should support this to avoid being involved in politics, but probably many Wikipmedians could be interested in this idea. For the European citizens, there is currently an official call (an ECI [2]) to support this idea at the European level, see [3] ; this call ends in one week (yes, the 200,000 signatures is a bit far of the million signatures needed). In Switzerland, a popular legislative initiative collected more than the 100,000 needed signatures in September 2013, and this will lead to a nationwide referendum about the basic income there. Any thoughts about that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Citizens'_Initiative [3] http://sign.basicincome2013.eu/ ~ Seb35 [^_^] ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
Thanks. I don't see how this relates to Wikimedia projects, by definition it is not. On 9 January 2014 12:40, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: Le 09/01/2014 13:36, Fæ a écrit : The WMF has recently clarified that they frown upon paid editing. Presumably offering basic wage for people to edit Wikipedia is still paid editing? The answer is no, because the basic income is *unconditional*. This is an income, not at wage. Definition from Wikipedia: A basic income (also called basic income guarantee, unconditional basic income, universal basic income, universal demogrant,[1] or citizen’s income) is a proposed system[2] of social security in which citizens or residents of a country regularly receive a sum of money unconditionally, either from a government or some other institution able to ensure an equitable distribution of common wealth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income Emmanuel -- Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline more * Web: http://www.kiwix.org * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
If a basic income is implemented somewhere in the world, people will have more time for themselves in mean (probably more partial-time work), so they will have more time to edit the Wikimedia projects, among other possible activities. ~S Le Thu, 09 Jan 2014 13:55:39 +0100, Fæ fae...@gmail.com a écrit: Thanks. I don't see how this relates to Wikimedia projects, by definition it is not. On 9 January 2014 12:40, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: Le 09/01/2014 13:36, Fæ a écrit : The WMF has recently clarified that they frown upon paid editing. Presumably offering basic wage for people to edit Wikipedia is still paid editing? The answer is no, because the basic income is *unconditional*. This is an income, not at wage. Definition from Wikipedia: A basic income (also called basic income guarantee, unconditional basic income, universal basic income, universal demogrant,[1] or citizen’s income) is a proposed system[2] of social security in which citizens or residents of a country regularly receive a sum of money unconditionally, either from a government or some other institution able to ensure an equitable distribution of common wealth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income Emmanuel -- Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline more * Web: http://www.kiwix.org * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
On 9 January 2014 13:13, Seb35 seb35wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: If a basic income is implemented somewhere in the world, people will have more time for themselves in mean (probably more partial-time work), so they will have more time to edit the Wikimedia projects, among other possible activities. ~S True. It is true that countries with older populations have more retired people, who might edit our projects, countries which have economic instability and suffering collapsing industry may have many more unemployed people, who might edit our projects, and countries with high levels of disability from childhood diseases may have more people who cannot work but might edit our projects. Whether these are things to encourage or not is a bit off topic for this list. Fae -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
I know this initiative and it is also requested by M5S in Italy. The problem is connected with the funds to finance this initiative. The base is that a minimum income (and not guaranteed minimum salary) is considered as a good way to assure also the reactivation of the internal market, but no one is giving sufficient support to the proposal saying how finance it. In Switzerland recently has failed the referendum on the guaranteed minimum salary and the initiative 1:12, now there is the project of the basic income (valid for all citizens) but without a good picture of the financial basis to assure it, it may be an utopia (this is also what is happening in Italy). Regards On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Seb35 seb35wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: If a basic income is implemented somewhere in the world, people will have more time for themselves in mean (probably more partial-time work), so they will have more time to edit the Wikimedia projects, among other possible activities. ~S Le Thu, 09 Jan 2014 13:55:39 +0100, Fæ fae...@gmail.com a écrit: Thanks. I don't see how this relates to Wikimedia projects, by definition it is not. On 9 January 2014 12:40, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.org wrote: Le 09/01/2014 13:36, Fæ a écrit : The WMF has recently clarified that they frown upon paid editing. Presumably offering basic wage for people to edit Wikipedia is still paid editing? The answer is no, because the basic income is *unconditional*. This is an income, not at wage. Definition from Wikipedia: A basic income (also called basic income guarantee, unconditional basic income, universal basic income, universal demogrant,[1] or citizen’s income) is a proposed system[2] of social security in which citizens or residents of a country regularly receive a sum of money unconditionally, either from a government or some other institution able to ensure an equitable distribution of common wealth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income Emmanuel -- Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline more * Web: http://www.kiwix.org * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Seb35 seb35wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: If a basic income is implemented somewhere in the world, people will have more time for themselves in mean (probably more partial-time work), so they will have more time to edit the Wikimedia projects, among other possible activities. ~S Even with my basic undergraduate economics knowledge I can see that the economic picture is more complicated than this. Where does the money come from? Will the resulting inflation offset most or all of the value of the basic income? Will the massive increase in government expenditure make the country less competitive? Etc. etc. And anyway as Fae said, this all seems to be fairly far afield from the topic of this list. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
Add me to the list of people who are surprised the WMF has chosen to handle this in so public and accusatory a manner. It is presumably their right to sever business relationships with employees, of course, but they generally don't do so by posting a public notice detailing the employee's alleged misconduct. On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote: * Frank Schulenburg wrote: And so I ask you to respect Sarah's privacy at what is surely a difficult time for her, ... An extremely visible public announcement that the Wikimedia Foundation has fired her within two days of an allegation of misconduct -- that is how you are making it sound -- is not quite respecting her privacy. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
Seb35, 09/01/2014 10:59: As a Wikipmedian, I dream of such a basic income: it would empower the people to edit the Wikimedia projects by giving them libre time (libre as free speech). [...] There are many political and economical variations of the proposal, but this is usually *not* the stated aim by the main proposers. As for Wikimedia projects, which from Shirky's perspective build on the cognitive surplus, we could consider the 14 millions of young NEET just in EU as a goldmine.[1] Personally, I envision public re-employment programs introducing millions of people in Wikimedia projects as civil service, something useful both for the common good and for their personal growth. I don't see why Wikimedia couldn't approach e.g. the president of the European Parliament on such topics. Nemo [1] «In 2012 7.5 million young people aged 15-24 and an additional 6.5 million young people aged 25-29 were not in employment, education or training in Europe. This corresponds to a significant increase in the rate of young people classified as NEET: in 2008, the figure stood at 11% of 15-24 year olds and 17 % of 25-29 year olds; by 2012 this had increased to 13 %and 20% respectively (Eurostat).» https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/139721.pdf Cf. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Young_people_-_education_and_employment_patterns. [2] See also point 14 in the resolution above, «Measures addressing young people in a NEET situation should be personalised and flexible and aim to achieve sustainable positive outcomes in the long term in the labour market, as well as (re)integration into education or training and civic or social life. In novative ways, peer learning and outreach activities should be used for working with young people in a NEET situation.» ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
I'd suggest that income is not a particularly significant factor in whether or not people participate in the Wikimedia movement, particularly as editors. Infrastructure including internet access, education, and availability of technology are far more significant. These are all abundantly available in Europe, where we have probably the highest concentration of editors per capita (with the possible exception of the US). In fact, I can't help wondering how a discussion of a European basic minimum income really comes across to our colleagues who live in countries where daily wages are the equivalent of the cost of a cup of coffee and a pastry in most of Europe, North America, and other wealthy countries. It's bothering me, and I live in one of those well to do countries. Risker ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
Fae, You raise very good points in your email, and I have posted this for consideration by the WMF Board of Trustees https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard#Undeclared_conflicts_of_interest If anyone wishes to support this please feel free to do so on the noticeboard. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
On 9 Jan 2014, at 14:32, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com wrote: Add me to the list of people who are surprised the WMF has chosen to handle this in so public and accusatory a manner. It is presumably their right to sever business relationships with employees, of course, but they generally don't do so by posting a public notice detailing the employee's alleged misconduct. It seems to me that this is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t” scenario. If there *hadn’t* been a note to this list then I’m sure people would have been crying out for one. Personally, I’m glad to see the transparency and frankness, but sad to see the news. :-( Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)
Thank you for highlighting something I should have clarified better in my post, MZMcBride. That sentence should have read paid advocacy editing in line with Sue's blog post that you referenced. We continue to support the important work Sarah and others have done in the GLAM sector through projects like Wikipedians in Residence. Frank On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:22 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Frank Schulenburg wrote: [...] it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many in the editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation. No. Paid editing is not the same as paid advocacy (editing). This is a very important point. Suggested reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dominic/FAQ https://blog.wikimedia.org/?p=25830 N.B. an example of paid editing that few would likely have an issue with in the first link and Sue's careful and correct wording in the second link. If we're going to have such a fine distinction, we should probably better document it to avoid misunderstandings. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] *** DATE CHANGE *** Invitation to WMF December 2013 Metrics Activities Meeting: Thursday, January 9, 19:00 UTC
REMINDER: This meeting starts in 30 minutes. On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Praveena Maharaj pmaha...@wikimedia.orgwrote: Dear all, The next WMF metrics and activities meeting will take place on Thursday, January 9, 2014 at 7:00 PM UTC (11 AM PST). Please note that on this occasion we are holding this meeting on the second Thursday of January, but we will resume holding the meetings on the first Thursday of each month thereafter. The IRC channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net and the meeting will be broadcast as a live YouTube stream. The current structure of the meeting is: * Review of key metrics including the monthly report card, but also specialized reports and analytic * Review of financials * Welcoming recent hires * Brief presentations on recent projects, with a focus on highest priority initiatives * Update and QA with the Executive Director, if available Please review https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings for further information about how to participate. We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting. Thank you, Praveena -- Praveena Maharaj Executive Assistant to the VP of Engineering and Product Development +1 (415) 839 6885 ext. 6689 www.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, but the question is how to enable such a system. If the rules for paid editors were to be very strict - many paid editors would have still decide to do it in secrecy anyway, oh, but there will ALWAYS be those lurking in the shadows. However, currently we frown upon edits which are according to the rules just as much as upon those which cross the line. I think it would be good to make and explicit, ostensive bright line, like Jimbo suggested - I just think the line should be elsewhere. Paid editing, when done according to the rules, and when subjected to transparent community control, is definitely better than a system in which paid editors are, in fact, motivated NOT TO reveal their affiliations. best, dariusz pundit ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
On 1/9/14, 6:05 AM, Jonathan Deamer wrote: The idea that it might increase the level of cognitive surplus available to open source and collaborative projects, and so these projects might have a political interest in encouraging a basic income, is quite novel to me. This is something I've been thinking about a bit. In general, merging the fruits of my labor into a project like Wikipedia is *usually* not the best choice, if I were maximizing personal advancement. If I'm going to spend, say, 30 hours writing something this month, almost any option but writing it on Wikipedia will benefit me more. Even something as simple as a collection of blog posts or a niche website, with my byline on it, at least is something that might raise my reputation and possibly be monetizable. However, contributing it to Wikipedia is often the better choice for dissemination of knowledge: more people will read it, it can be improved by others, it integrates better into a larger web of knowledge, etc. I currently contribute most of my volunteer documentary/educational/encyclopedia-style writing to Wikipedia, because I prioritize the impact of my writing above the reputation or income it gives me. But I have the luxury of doing so because I have a salaried job in academia. However it's not a guaranteed job (not tenured), so in the future that might no longer be true. I might get another one, but I might put out my shingle as an independent researcher / consultant. In that case, it would probably be the sensible choice to contribute less to Wikipedia, and more to my own projects (I have my own subject-specific encyclopedia side project), out of the need to build up an individual reputation and income. I would prefer not to have to! But the issue is that contributing to Wikipedia, even though it benefits society, does not get counted as contributing to society in the market-economics sense, because the ownership of the results diffuses to the general benefit. A basic income would remove the need for such accounting overhead, since one could just focus on how to best contribute to society, without having to worry about how to monetize and own every contribution. But absent such significant change, perhaps the Wikimedia movement could look more at how to improve at least the recognition (if not income) of significant contributors. Best, Mark ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Mark delir...@hackish.org wrote: A basic income would remove the need for such accounting overhead, since one could just focus on how to best contribute to society, without having to worry about how to monetize and own every contribution. But absent such significant change, perhaps the Wikimedia movement could look more at how to improve at least the recognition (if not income) of significant contributors. Since you mention it... :) I have a small project I'm working on to document how academics, in particular, count or recognize their Wikipedia contributions. I'm curious both about precedents -- people who have listed wikipedia editing on their C.V. or tenure packets, for instance -- and about tools that might make recognition of on-wiki work easier (for instance, things like edit counters that pull out the top contributors to an article). If anyone has any thoughts about this I'd be glad to hear them! -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
I like such proposals (sarcasm). where do you get the money from, what you wish to distribute? In general free money - less people will work (why to work if I still get money? - see the masses living on unemployment benefits - libre time :) ) - less people working - higher taxes - people will be :( on both ends. Higher minimum! Lower taxes! Down with the government! Yay. Printing money would lead to inflation - more money worth less. And these are the basic, most visible IRL effects. Pls forget these economical nonsenses. Cheers, Vince 2014/1/9 Risker risker...@gmail.com I'd suggest that income is not a particularly significant factor in whether or not people participate in the Wikimedia movement, particularly as editors. Infrastructure including internet access, education, and availability of technology are far more significant. These are all abundantly available in Europe, where we have probably the highest concentration of editors per capita (with the possible exception of the US). In fact, I can't help wondering how a discussion of a European basic minimum income really comes across to our colleagues who live in countries where daily wages are the equivalent of the cost of a cup of coffee and a pastry in most of Europe, North America, and other wealthy countries. It's bothering me, and I live in one of those well to do countries. Risker ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk
On 09/01/2014 02:45, MZMcBride wrote: Clarifying whether it's appropriate for anyone, Wikimedia Foundation employee or otherwise, to engage with oDesk's... other services seems like a pretty high priority. And, in general, there needs to be clarification about the distinction between paid editing versus paid advocacy editing, especially if it's going to be treated as a bright line. If there isn't already a bright line in the employment contracts then today's announcement smacks of arbitrary treatment on the part of management. A practice that most decent people would consider distasteful. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
I also support the BI idea but this is too off-topic. Please discuss this in a more appropriate place (talk pages or /r/basicincome in reddit, etc). -- Fajro ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
Le 09/01/2014 20:50, Balázs Viczián a écrit : I like such proposals (sarcasm). where do you get the money from, what you wish to distribute? In general free money - less people will work (why to work if I still get money? - see the masses living on unemployment benefits - libre time :) ) - less people working - higher taxes - people will be :( on both ends. Higher minimum! Lower taxes! Down with the government! Yay. Printing money would lead to inflation - more money worth less. And these are the basic, most visible IRL effects. Pls forget these economical nonsenses. For people urgently needing to read more about the basic income: http://www.basicincome.org/bien/aboutbasicincome.html * 5 years long experiment in Canada: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome * Experiment in Namibia: http://www.bignam.org/ Emmanuel -- Kiwix - Wikipedia Offline more * Web: http://www.kiwix.org * Twitter: https://twitter.com/KiwixOffline * more: http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Communication ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
In fact, a simple note that Sarah has left the WMF would, of course, have been enough from the WMF side. BUT, the obvious questions would then have been directed to Sarah in any possible way, most probably. And I guess, she just doesn't wish to answer those questions right now and I can fully understand that. That was probably what Frank meant by respecting her privacy and why he chose to write the letter as he did. Anyway, sorry to see you go, Sarah. :( Best regards Thomas. 2014/1/9 Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net On 9 Jan 2014, at 14:32, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com wrote: Add me to the list of people who are surprised the WMF has chosen to handle this in so public and accusatory a manner. It is presumably their right to sever business relationships with employees, of course, but they generally don't do so by posting a public notice detailing the employee's alleged misconduct. It seems to me that this is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t” scenario. If there *hadn’t* been a note to this list then I’m sure people would have been crying out for one. Personally, I’m glad to see the transparency and frankness, but sad to see the news. :-( Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] draft Data Retention Guidelines posted for discussion and commentary
Hi, all- The Foundation's legal team is happy to announce that the first draft of the new data retention guidelines are now available for your translation, review, and feedback. This draft is the result of a collaboration between many teams within the Foundation, including Analytics, Operations, Platform, Product, and Legal. The guidelines are here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data_retention_guidelines The talk page is here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Data_retention_guidelines As with the other privacy documents, this draft is just that: a draft. We want to hear from you about how we can make it better. We plan to hold the community consultation period for this draft open until 14 February 2014. Once the consultation period is over, the document will continue to be updated to reflect current retention practices. Thanks- Luis Michelle -- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810 NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Basic income Wikimedians
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Fajro fai...@gmail.com wrote: I also support the BI idea but this is too off-topic. Yes, please, people. We have raised awareness just fine, let's not discuss it here. thanks, Peter ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
You are certainly right, Michael. I suppose that WMF and Sarah communicated with each other, and Frank has carefully chosen to use these words. Kind regards Ziko Am Donnerstag, 9. Januar 2014 schrieb Michael Peel : On 9 Jan 2014, at 14:32, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.comjavascript:; wrote: Add me to the list of people who are surprised the WMF has chosen to handle this in so public and accusatory a manner. It is presumably their right to sever business relationships with employees, of course, but they generally don't do so by posting a public notice detailing the employee's alleged misconduct. It seems to me that this is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t” scenario. If there *hadn’t* been a note to this list then I’m sure people would have been crying out for one. Personally, I’m glad to see the transparency and frankness, but sad to see the news. :-( Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe -- Dr. Ziko van Dijk voorzitter / president Wikimedia Nederland Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland Postbus 167 3500 AD Utrecht http://wikimedia.nl ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch
On 9 January 2014 22:43, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote: You are certainly right, Michael. I suppose that WMF and Sarah communicated with each other, and Frank has carefully chosen to use these words. Kind regards Ziko It would not be abnormal in the US for a termination of employment to involve a final payment depending on a non-disclosure agreement. In such circumstances only the WMF would be free to comment, and Sarah may remain contractually bound to not respond to any public question for a couple of years. This may be a dark view of life, but nonetheless I have no expectation of hearing Sarah's point of view in any public forum. Fae -- fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)
I agree with you, Dariusz. We have discussed this at length in the community, and at Wikipedia Academy in Oslo in december. There is minimal support of a ban of paid editing. One thing is the fact that we have both Wikipedians in Residence and editing scholarships with GLAM institutions. It is naive to believe that cultural institutions like museums, etc, are not commercial. I am myself among those receiving USD 1.500 from the Directorate of Cultural Heritage to write about 19th century trappers' huts at Spitsbergen. Commercial? Probably not. Paid editing? Definitely. The debate among admins and at the Academy last month, revealed more or less consensus along several lines of thought. 1) A ban of paid editing is illusionary and impractible, and will just force paid editors underground 2) A ban will deprive us of invaluable expertise on a wide array of subjects that would otherwise not be covered 3) Guidelines and 5 pillars take presedence over COI anyway, judge people by what they do, and not who they are. 4) In-house employee editing is not only tolerated, but quite common at no-wiki. 5) The line runs at paid advocacy = third-party for-pay editing for a commercial customer, or for-pay POV editing. During the discussion, it appeared that a large proportion of the admins and bureaucrats who joined the discussion, had edited the articles about their employers. Most were aware of the COI potential involved, but asserted being able to write objectively even about an employer. Cheers, Erlend Bjørtvedt Norway 2014/1/9 Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, but the question is how to enable such a system. If the rules for paid editors were to be very strict - many paid editors would have still decide to do it in secrecy anyway, oh, but there will ALWAYS be those lurking in the shadows. However, currently we frown upon edits which are according to the rules just as much as upon those which cross the line. I think it would be good to make and explicit, ostensive bright line, like Jimbo suggested - I just think the line should be elsewhere. Paid editing, when done according to the rules, and when subjected to transparent community control, is definitely better than a system in which paid editors are, in fact, motivated NOT TO reveal their affiliations. best, dariusz pundit ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- *Erlend Bjørtvedt* Nestleder, Wikimedia Norge Vice chairman, Wikimedia Norway Mob: +47 - 9225 9227 http://no.wikimedia.org http://no.wikimedia.org/wiki/About_us ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] A Multimedia Vision for 2016
Happy new year, everyone! Many thanks to all of you who contributed to our multimedia programs last year! Now that we have a new multimedia team at WMF, we look forward to making some good progress together this year. To kick off the new year, here is a proposed multimedia vision for 2016, which was prepared by our multimedia and design teams, with guidance from community members: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/01/09/multimedia-vision-2016/ This possible scenario is intended for discussion purposes, to help us visualize how we could improve our user experience over the next three years. We hope that it will spark useful community feedback on some of the goals we are considering. After you’ve viewed the video, we would be grateful if you could share your feedback in this discussion: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Multimedia_Features/Vision_2016 We are looking from feedback from all users who benefit from Commons, even if their work takes place on other sites. This vision explores ways to integrate Wikimedia Commons more closely with Wikipedia and other MediaWiki projects, to help users contribute more easily to our free media repository -- wherever they are. In coming weeks, we will start more focused discussions on some key features outlined in this presentation. If you would like to join those conversations and stay informed on our work, we invite you to subscribe to our multimedia mailing list: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/multimedia We look forward to more great collaborations in the new year! All the best, Fabrice on behalf of the Multimedia team ___ Fabrice Florin Product Manager, Multimedia Wikimedia Foundation Wikipedia Profile: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF) Multimedia Project Hub: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Multimedia ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia-Mania in the New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/09/fashion/Wikipedia-Judith-Newman.html This piece by Judith Newman has some amusing snippets. :-) MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
