[Wikimedia-l] Board transparency (thread fork)

[Pine W]

Hi Bishakha,

Pardon my forking the thread here.

I have previously asked about having more transparency and openness for WMF
Board meetings. From my skimming of Board minutes, it's difficult to
perceive what level of diligence is being done by the Board. I realize that
corporate notetaking practices sometimes suggest summarizing discussions in
meeting minutes as "discussion about X" rather than listing detailed
questions. I would encourage more detail and transparency about Board
deliberations, along the lines of what is being done for departmental
quarterly reviews (which I greatly appreciate).

James' and others' points about the WMF Board's role being about high-level
strategic direction are well taken. I realize that the Board has limited
capacity to manage the organization, as do all the levels of management in
the organization. Even at the strategic level, I would hope to see more
Board transparency about deliberations for major decisions, which would in
turn give everyone in this quasi-democratic movement more visibility into
the Board's thinking and more confidence (I hope) that the Board is
providing sound leadership on behalf of the community.

How to reconcile the need for more transparency with the need to have frank
discussions is a difficult question. I would suggest that the Board take a
look at our laws in Washington State regarding open meetings for
governmental organizations, and the exceptions to open meetings laws.
Overall, I think we do pretty well here at having civil, frank discussions
in public most of the time. I have a lot of faith in the goodness of
democratic processes, and I believe that a quasi-democratic system is the
only viable way for a crowdsourced project like Wikipedia to succeed and to
thrive.

I suggest that WMF Board transparency, roles and composition would be good
subjects for discussion at the upcoming Wikimedia Conference. I hope that
current serving Board members would be willing to have that discussion
there in person. I'm sure that at least a few other attendees would be
interested in participating, and it might be possible to arrange remote
participation as well via live IRC interactions similar to what is done for
WMF metrics meetings.

Thank you very much,

Pine



On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Bishakha Datta 
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
> statement:
>
> "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
> participate in."
>
> ...WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that
> I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and
> I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
> This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
>
> Dear Pine,

As a recently-retired board member, I want to briefly chime in here.
Apologies for dragging this thread off-course from the announcement.

There seems to be an assumption that board members don't ask good questions
unless they are 'activists' - that is simply not true of any board I'm on,
and most certainly not of the WMF board. To combine this with James' email
replying to yours, 'providing oversight', 'strategic direction' and 'doing
due diligence' often means asking the right questions, including 'tough'
questions - at board meetings or via email, but not publicly.

Over the last five years, we've seen greater and greater clarity in
separating board and staff roles at the WMF - that's a good thing that most
organizations need to do as they mature, and helps both the board and the
staff do what they should be doing, instead of getting their roles mixed
up.

Best
Bishakha
Pine

*This is an Encyclopedia* 






*One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep rock of
our past, in which we must delve The well of our future,The clear water we
must leave untainted for those who come after us,The fertile earth, in
which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands,And the broad
fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how much we do not
know.*

*—Catherine Munro*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Bishakha Datta]

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
> statement:
>
> "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
> participate in."
>
> ...WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that
> I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and
> I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
> This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
>
> Dear Pine,

As a recently-retired board member, I want to briefly chime in here.
Apologies for dragging this thread off-course from the announcement.

There seems to be an assumption that board members don't ask good questions
unless they are 'activists' - that is simply not true of any board I'm on,
and most certainly not of the WMF board. To combine this with James' email
replying to yours, 'providing oversight', 'strategic direction' and 'doing
due diligence' often means asking the right questions, including 'tough'
questions - at board meetings or via email, but not publicly.

Over the last five years, we've seen greater and greater clarity in
separating board and staff roles at the WMF - that's a good thing that most
organizations need to do as they mature, and helps both the board and the
staff do what they should be doing, instead of getting their roles mixed
up.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Pine W]

Hmm. It's more like we have little evidence that the former is happening,
perhaps because of the latter. Anyway, yes, I think I've made my point and
will let this thread get back on its main track.

Pine
On Mar 13, 2015 5:43 PM, "Oliver Keyes"  wrote:

> So we've now moved from "the board doesn't ask hard enough questions!"
> to "the board doesn't tell us enough"? Those are distinct concerns. If
> you have them, I'd suggest spinning off a thread so we can keep this
> one to what it's meant to be discussing.
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> > Pardon the mobile device mistype. A *move* toward more openness.
> >
> > Pine
> > On Mar 13, 2015 12:49 PM, "Pine W"  wrote:
> >
> >> Oliver,
> >>
> >> I have thought about running more than once (:
> >>
> >> Perhaps I am reading more into that comment than was intended.
> >>
> >> James,
> >>
> >> I have mixed feelings about having discussions behind closed doors.
> >> Sometimes it's convenient or emotionally easier to do so, but I worry
> about
> >> losing our value of openness in the process. The majority of my
> evaluation
> >> is based on what I've seen in writing from board minutes, which seem
> pretty
> >> sparse on Q&A with the ED and staff. By contrast, I'm accustomed to our
> >> generally open meetings of government entities here in Washington State
> >> where we have some pretty expansive open records and open meetings laws,
> >> and these seem to viewed in a positive light by the public which wants
> to
> >> understand the positions of its elected officials. A mice toward more
> >> openness about board discussions might ease some of my concerns.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Pine
> >> On Mar 13, 2015 12:32 PM, "Oliver Keyes"  wrote:
> >>
> >>> (Personal capacity)
> >>>
> >>> Pine: I think you're reading far more into Phoebe's comment than it
> >>> actually contained. What she said was "I trust our legal team to make
> >>> decisions about what legal actions to participate in." In other words,
> >>> to make evaluations about the probability of success, the necessity of
> >>> the thing that's being (defended|challenged) to the legal framework
> >>> that lets the projects exist, and act on that basis.
> >>>
> >>> Unless I missed an election and the board now contains the equivalent
> >>> expertise in internet law and the intricacies of our governing
> >>> frameworks to an entire legal department, it seems entirely
> >>> appropriate that these kinds of evaluations be left to the, you know,
> >>> lawyers. I agree that boards should ask tough questions, but I've
> >>> never been in a WMF board meeting and, to my knowledge, neither have
> >>> you. There's a wide range of options between "directly making
> >>> decisions about legal questions" and "not asking questions"; it's not
> >>> as binary as you seem to believe. This applies to the VE as much as it
> >>> does anything else. If you think the WMF needs a more activist board -
> >>> which seems to mean "a board that makes individual, specific product
> >>> decisions and assumes legal expertise", I encourage you to run in the
> >>> next election and we'll see what the movement as a whole thinks of
> >>> that position.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> >>> > I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by
> this
> >>> > statement:
> >>> >
> >>> > "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
> >>> > participate in."
> >>> >
> >>> > In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
> >>> > long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
> >>> > deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
> >>> > possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
> >>> > questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we
> might
> >>> all
> >>> > have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
> >>> > dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project
> >>> selection
> >>> > and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance
> >>> that
> >>> > I read about boards in general says that good boards do due
> diligance,
> >>> and
> >>> > I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough
> questions.
> >>> > This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful
> atmosphere.
> >>> >
> >>> > Thank you,
> >>> >
> >>> > Pine
> >>> > ___
> >>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >>> > 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
> >>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >>> <
> h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Oliver Keyes]

So we've now moved from "the board doesn't ask hard enough questions!"
to "the board doesn't tell us enough"? Those are distinct concerns. If
you have them, I'd suggest spinning off a thread so we can keep this
one to what it's meant to be discussing.

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> Pardon the mobile device mistype. A *move* toward more openness.
>
> Pine
> On Mar 13, 2015 12:49 PM, "Pine W"  wrote:
>
>> Oliver,
>>
>> I have thought about running more than once (:
>>
>> Perhaps I am reading more into that comment than was intended.
>>
>> James,
>>
>> I have mixed feelings about having discussions behind closed doors.
>> Sometimes it's convenient or emotionally easier to do so, but I worry about
>> losing our value of openness in the process. The majority of my evaluation
>> is based on what I've seen in writing from board minutes, which seem pretty
>> sparse on Q&A with the ED and staff. By contrast, I'm accustomed to our
>> generally open meetings of government entities here in Washington State
>> where we have some pretty expansive open records and open meetings laws,
>> and these seem to viewed in a positive light by the public which wants to
>> understand the positions of its elected officials. A mice toward more
>> openness about board discussions might ease some of my concerns.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pine
>> On Mar 13, 2015 12:32 PM, "Oliver Keyes"  wrote:
>>
>>> (Personal capacity)
>>>
>>> Pine: I think you're reading far more into Phoebe's comment than it
>>> actually contained. What she said was "I trust our legal team to make
>>> decisions about what legal actions to participate in." In other words,
>>> to make evaluations about the probability of success, the necessity of
>>> the thing that's being (defended|challenged) to the legal framework
>>> that lets the projects exist, and act on that basis.
>>>
>>> Unless I missed an election and the board now contains the equivalent
>>> expertise in internet law and the intricacies of our governing
>>> frameworks to an entire legal department, it seems entirely
>>> appropriate that these kinds of evaluations be left to the, you know,
>>> lawyers. I agree that boards should ask tough questions, but I've
>>> never been in a WMF board meeting and, to my knowledge, neither have
>>> you. There's a wide range of options between "directly making
>>> decisions about legal questions" and "not asking questions"; it's not
>>> as binary as you seem to believe. This applies to the VE as much as it
>>> does anything else. If you think the WMF needs a more activist board -
>>> which seems to mean "a board that makes individual, specific product
>>> decisions and assumes legal expertise", I encourage you to run in the
>>> next election and we'll see what the movement as a whole thinks of
>>> that position.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>>> > I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
>>> > statement:
>>> >
>>> > "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
>>> > participate in."
>>> >
>>> > In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
>>> > long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
>>> > deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
>>> > possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
>>> > questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might
>>> all
>>> > have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
>>> > dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project
>>> selection
>>> > and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance
>>> that
>>> > I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance,
>>> and
>>> > I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
>>> > This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
>>> >
>>> > Thank you,
>>> >
>>> > Pine
>>> > ___
>>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>> > 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
>>> 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
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SUL finalization update (no, for real this time)

[Pine W]

Excellent, thank you Keegan and all who have worked on this.

Pine
On Mar 13, 2015 1:07 PM, "Keegan Peterzell" 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Single-user login[1] finalization will be taking place next month.[2] I
> know this has been said before over the past two years, but it is actually
> going to take place after nearly a decade of waiting :)
>
> I just posted an important announcement about the renaming process itself
> on Meta.[3] If you're interested, please take some time to read it over and
> help translate if possible. A one sentence message about this has been sent
> to village pumps as well, where available.
>
> All accounts that will be affected by this will be contacted on their talk
> page within the next couple of days.[4] All local wikis also have a
> publicly listed database of users who will be renamed, available at
> Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed.[4]
>
> Thanks for your time, please help spread the word to your other mailing
> lists and/or communities.
>
> 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Unified_login
> 2.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement
> 3.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Schema_announcement
> 4.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Personal_announcement
> 5. for example,
> https://vo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patikos:UsersWhoWillBeRenamedHmm
>
> --
> Keegan Peterzell
> Community Liaison, Product
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SUL finalization update (no, for real this time)

[Keegan Peterzell]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Risker  wrote:

>
> Thanks very much for keeping us up to date, Keegan.  When I look at
> the Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed on enwiki, I note a large number of
> accounts whose registration date is listed as today, even though I realise
> that's not possible. It might be helpful to include an explanation of that
> apparent anomaly in the announcement and/or the schema.  (I'm assuming it
> has something to do with the accounts being very old, but it sure looks
> weird.)
>
> Risker/Anne


Hey Risker,

Those accounts are ones older than our registration tables. The date listed
in that special page will be changed once we agree on the format:

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91839

This should be fixed before any major explanation or reworded is needed, I
didn't want to let that hold this up even more :)


-- 
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Product
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SUL finalization update (no, for real this time)

[Keegan Peterzell]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Keegan Peterzell 
wrote:

>
> 5. for example,
> https://vo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patikos:UsersWhoWillBeRenamedHmm
>
>
That should be https://vo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patikos:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed

It does make you go "hmm" though.


-- 
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Product
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SUL finalization update (no, for real this time)

[Samuel Klein]

Keegan: thank you, great news.SJ

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Keegan Peterzell 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Single-user login[1] finalization will be taking place next month.[2] I
> know this has been said before over the past two years, but it is actually
> going to take place after nearly a decade of waiting :)
>
> I just posted an important announcement about the renaming process itself
> on Meta.[3] If you're interested, please take some time to read it over and
> help translate if possible. A one sentence message about this has been sent
> to village pumps as well, where available.
>
> All accounts that will be affected by this will be contacted on their talk
> page within the next couple of days.[4] All local wikis also have a
> publicly listed database of users who will be renamed, available at
> Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed.[4]
>
> Thanks for your time, please help spread the word to your other mailing
> lists and/or communities.
>
> 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Unified_login
> 2.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement
> 3.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Schema_announcement
> 4.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Personal_announcement
> 5. for example,
> https://vo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patikos:UsersWhoWillBeRenamedHmm
>
> --
> Keegan Peterzell
> Community Liaison, Product
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Samuel Klein  @metasj   w:user:sj  +1 617 529 4266
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] SUL finalization update (no, for real this time)

[Risker]

On 13 March 2015 at 16:07, Keegan Peterzell 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Single-user login[1] finalization will be taking place next month.[2] I
> know this has been said before over the past two years, but it is actually
> going to take place after nearly a decade of waiting :)
>
> I just posted an important announcement about the renaming process itself
> on Meta.[3] If you're interested, please take some time to read it over and
> help translate if possible. A one sentence message about this has been sent
> to village pumps as well, where available.
>
> All accounts that will be affected by this will be contacted on their talk
> page within the next couple of days.[4] All local wikis also have a
> publicly listed database of users who will be renamed, available at
> Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed.[4]
>
> Thanks for your time, please help spread the word to your other mailing
> lists and/or communities.
>
> 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Unified_login
> 2.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement
> 3.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Schema_announcement
> 4.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Personal_announcement
> 5. for example,
> https://vo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patikos:UsersWhoWillBeRenamedHmm
>
>
Thanks very much for keeping us up to date, Keegan.  When I look at
the Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed on enwiki, I note a large number of
accounts whose registration date is listed as today, even though I realise
that's not possible. It might be helpful to include an explanation of that
apparent anomaly in the announcement and/or the schema.  (I'm assuming it
has something to do with the accounts being very old, but it sure looks
weird.)

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

[Wikimedia-l] SUL finalization update (no, for real this time)

[Keegan Peterzell]

Hi all,

Single-user login[1] finalization will be taking place next month.[2] I
know this has been said before over the past two years, but it is actually
going to take place after nearly a decade of waiting :)

I just posted an important announcement about the renaming process itself
on Meta.[3] If you're interested, please take some time to read it over and
help translate if possible. A one sentence message about this has been sent
to village pumps as well, where available.

All accounts that will be affected by this will be contacted on their talk
page within the next couple of days.[4] All local wikis also have a
publicly listed database of users who will be renamed, available at
Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed.[4]

Thanks for your time, please help spread the word to your other mailing
lists and/or communities.

1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Unified_login
2.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement
3.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Schema_announcement
4.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement/Personal_announcement
5. for example,
https://vo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patikos:UsersWhoWillBeRenamedHmm

-- 
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Product
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Pine W]

Pardon the mobile device mistype. A *move* toward more openness.

Pine
On Mar 13, 2015 12:49 PM, "Pine W"  wrote:

> Oliver,
>
> I have thought about running more than once (:
>
> Perhaps I am reading more into that comment than was intended.
>
> James,
>
> I have mixed feelings about having discussions behind closed doors.
> Sometimes it's convenient or emotionally easier to do so, but I worry about
> losing our value of openness in the process. The majority of my evaluation
> is based on what I've seen in writing from board minutes, which seem pretty
> sparse on Q&A with the ED and staff. By contrast, I'm accustomed to our
> generally open meetings of government entities here in Washington State
> where we have some pretty expansive open records and open meetings laws,
> and these seem to viewed in a positive light by the public which wants to
> understand the positions of its elected officials. A mice toward more
> openness about board discussions might ease some of my concerns.
>
> Thanks,
> Pine
> On Mar 13, 2015 12:32 PM, "Oliver Keyes"  wrote:
>
>> (Personal capacity)
>>
>> Pine: I think you're reading far more into Phoebe's comment than it
>> actually contained. What she said was "I trust our legal team to make
>> decisions about what legal actions to participate in." In other words,
>> to make evaluations about the probability of success, the necessity of
>> the thing that's being (defended|challenged) to the legal framework
>> that lets the projects exist, and act on that basis.
>>
>> Unless I missed an election and the board now contains the equivalent
>> expertise in internet law and the intricacies of our governing
>> frameworks to an entire legal department, it seems entirely
>> appropriate that these kinds of evaluations be left to the, you know,
>> lawyers. I agree that boards should ask tough questions, but I've
>> never been in a WMF board meeting and, to my knowledge, neither have
>> you. There's a wide range of options between "directly making
>> decisions about legal questions" and "not asking questions"; it's not
>> as binary as you seem to believe. This applies to the VE as much as it
>> does anything else. If you think the WMF needs a more activist board -
>> which seems to mean "a board that makes individual, specific product
>> decisions and assumes legal expertise", I encourage you to run in the
>> next election and we'll see what the movement as a whole thinks of
>> that position.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>> > I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
>> > statement:
>> >
>> > "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
>> > participate in."
>> >
>> > In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
>> > long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
>> > deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
>> > possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
>> > questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might
>> all
>> > have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
>> > dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project
>> selection
>> > and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance
>> that
>> > I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance,
>> and
>> > I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
>> > This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
>> >
>> > Thank you,
>> >
>> > Pine
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > 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
>> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Pine W]

Oliver,

I have thought about running more than once (:

Perhaps I am reading more into that comment than was intended.

James,

I have mixed feelings about having discussions behind closed doors.
Sometimes it's convenient or emotionally easier to do so, but I worry about
losing our value of openness in the process. The majority of my evaluation
is based on what I've seen in writing from board minutes, which seem pretty
sparse on Q&A with the ED and staff. By contrast, I'm accustomed to our
generally open meetings of government entities here in Washington State
where we have some pretty expansive open records and open meetings laws,
and these seem to viewed in a positive light by the public which wants to
understand the positions of its elected officials. A mice toward more
openness about board discussions might ease some of my concerns.

Thanks,
Pine
On Mar 13, 2015 12:32 PM, "Oliver Keyes"  wrote:

> (Personal capacity)
>
> Pine: I think you're reading far more into Phoebe's comment than it
> actually contained. What she said was "I trust our legal team to make
> decisions about what legal actions to participate in." In other words,
> to make evaluations about the probability of success, the necessity of
> the thing that's being (defended|challenged) to the legal framework
> that lets the projects exist, and act on that basis.
>
> Unless I missed an election and the board now contains the equivalent
> expertise in internet law and the intricacies of our governing
> frameworks to an entire legal department, it seems entirely
> appropriate that these kinds of evaluations be left to the, you know,
> lawyers. I agree that boards should ask tough questions, but I've
> never been in a WMF board meeting and, to my knowledge, neither have
> you. There's a wide range of options between "directly making
> decisions about legal questions" and "not asking questions"; it's not
> as binary as you seem to believe. This applies to the VE as much as it
> does anything else. If you think the WMF needs a more activist board -
> which seems to mean "a board that makes individual, specific product
> decisions and assumes legal expertise", I encourage you to run in the
> next election and we'll see what the movement as a whole thinks of
> that position.
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> > I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
> > statement:
> >
> > "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
> > participate in."
> >
> > In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
> > long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
> > deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
> > possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
> > questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might
> all
> > have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
> > dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project selection
> > and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance
> that
> > I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance,
> and
> > I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
> > This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Pine
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[David Gerard]

On 13 March 2015 at 19:04, Pine W  wrote:

> In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
> long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
> deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
> possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
> questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might all
> have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
> dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project selection
> and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that
> I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and
> I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
> This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.


I think you're completely incorrect here. Professional charities
desperately need the separation, and being on the board of a
professional-level nonprofit board is enough work. This sort of
detailed overview of every initiative is precisely what a board needs
to evolve the charity to *get away from*.


- d.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Oliver Keyes]

(Personal capacity)

Pine: I think you're reading far more into Phoebe's comment than it
actually contained. What she said was "I trust our legal team to make
decisions about what legal actions to participate in." In other words,
to make evaluations about the probability of success, the necessity of
the thing that's being (defended|challenged) to the legal framework
that lets the projects exist, and act on that basis.

Unless I missed an election and the board now contains the equivalent
expertise in internet law and the intricacies of our governing
frameworks to an entire legal department, it seems entirely
appropriate that these kinds of evaluations be left to the, you know,
lawyers. I agree that boards should ask tough questions, but I've
never been in a WMF board meeting and, to my knowledge, neither have
you. There's a wide range of options between "directly making
decisions about legal questions" and "not asking questions"; it's not
as binary as you seem to believe. This applies to the VE as much as it
does anything else. If you think the WMF needs a more activist board -
which seems to mean "a board that makes individual, specific product
decisions and assumes legal expertise", I encourage you to run in the
next election and we'll see what the movement as a whole thinks of
that position.

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
> statement:
>
> "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
> participate in."
>
> In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
> long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
> deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
> possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
> questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might all
> have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
> dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project selection
> and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that
> I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and
> I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
> This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Cristian Consonni]

2015-03-13 10:36 GMT+01:00 Edward Saperia :
>> Education is apolitical.
>
> I beg to differ.

Me too.

«Growing up, you know, I slowly had this process realizing that all
the things around me that people had told me were just the natural way
of things were, or the way things would be, weren't natural at all.
There were things that could be changed.

And there were things, more importantly, were WRONG and should change.
And once I realized that, there was really kind of no going back

[...]

once I questioned the school I was in, I questioned the society that
built the school, I questioned the businesses that the schools were
training people for, I questioned the government that set up this
whole structure.»
(Aaron Swartz, from the documentary :"The Intenet's Own Boy")[*]

I can hardly thing of anything less apolitical as giving the access to
every human being to the sum of all knowledge, let alone education.

C

[*] (min 01:59 --> 02:14 and 12:14 --> 12:24)

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[James Alexander]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Pine W  wrote:

> I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
> statement:
>
> "I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
> participate in."
>
> In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
> long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
> deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
> possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
> questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might all
> have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
> dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project selection
> and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that
> I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and
> I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
> This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Pine
>
>
I think I would disagree Pine. Our board will always have a bit of an odd
place because of our movement (this is not a bad thing) and will therefore
be more hands on, however, a good board needs to be about oversight and
strategic direction. They are NOT, very explicitly NOT about day to day
management and they can not be because if they are they are unable to focus
on the strategic direction part that is their primary responsibility. This
includes the fact that while they should be consulted and notified about
major decisions and actions (just like they were here, and if they had said
that this was a bad mood I imagine that the staff would have reconsidered
:) ). They should not be having votes or making resolutions about staff
decisions like that, that is not the boards role. It is also not their role
to challenge the staff in public, so therefore the fact that you see them
saying they trust the staff to do X or Y does not actually mean that they
are not challenging them behind the scenes and giving them a hard
time/making them adjust things.

Also, the only individual employee in the entire organization they oversee
is the CEO/ED and it is through him or her that they do their work. If they
think the organization is going in the wrong direction and needs correction
then they should certainly take action (since they are ultimately
responsible) but they work with the ED or they get rid of them if the ED
isn't working with them.  This is an important separation between the staff
and the board and further encourages their distinct roles.

Now this IS a bit different for very small organizations (including many of
our chapters for example) but the foundation has been large enough to need
the separation for quite some time now (this isn't a "new" thing because of
our recent growth, I would say that WMDE and probably a couple of the other
chapters are also at this level). I DO think we have an activist board,
that's a good thing (not a bad thing) but I'm not sure you'd generally SEE
when they decide to be activists and that is ALSO a good thing, not a bad
thing. The board and staff disagreeing publicly and trying to hash out
their differences causes enormous rifts within the organization and the
community that are even harder to heal then the current ones between the
foundation and the community (which we most definitely need to heal).

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Pine W]

I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
statement:

"I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
participate in."

In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might all
have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project selection
and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that
I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and
I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.

Thank you,

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Steven Walling]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 7:00 AM Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> Steven Walling has written an interesting answer on Quora about one aspect
> of the New York Times op-ed, i.e. the threat NSA surveillance supposedly
> poses to Wikipedians living under oppressive regimes:
>
> https://www.quora.com/Would-stopping-NSA-surveillance-
> really-make-Wikipedia-editors-living-under-repressive-
> governments-safer/answer/Steven-Walling


Chiming in since this is my answer... Keep in mind questions on Quora are
pretty tightly scoped, i.e. this isn't necessarily an indictment of the
rationale for suing NSA overall. It's an answer to a specific aspect of the
arguments. If we want to argue about whether NSA dragnet surveillance is
overall a threat to Wikipedia as an educational project, there's a whole
other set of arguments that I think potentially support this action,
including the fact that a complete lack of privacy has a chilling effect on
editing regardless of what country you reside in, and that we promise
readers that their reading activity isn't tracked.**

The big tradeoff for me as a Wikipedian is whether this suit takes time,
attention, and funds away from tackling core challenges like the decline in
readership, editor recruitment/retention, and modernizing our software
platform. I think the fact that this is being led by ACLU, and that the
main cost to WMF seems to be in some time/attention of legal, comms, etc.
makes me feel a bit more comfortable. I do worry about dragging away Lila's
attention from these deep intractable problems with the ecosystem, but I'm
not really comfortable standing up to say this whole endeavor is a waste of
time or a bad use of the brand. We also don't really know how this is
dominating her or any other staffer's time, because we're not their bosses.
(Thankfully for them.)

** If anyone here wants to add their 2 cents, please do. There's also a
question at
https://www.quora.com/Wikimedia-Lawsuit-Against-the-NSA-2015/How-do-Wikipedia-editors-feel-about-the-lawsuit-against-NSA
which is relevant.


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Thyge]

No more, please. If needed, start a thread to discuss the scope of
wikimedia-l.

Regards,
Thyge

2015-03-13 16:57 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett :

> On 13 March 2015 at 14:32, Strainu  wrote:
>
> > I'll hold you to this PoV next time I'll feel the need to
> > constantly remember other people about my initiatives.
>
> "constantly"?
>
> How many times has Fae made such posts in, say, the last three months?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Andy Mabbett]

On 13 March 2015 at 14:32, Strainu  wrote:

> I'll hold you to this PoV next time I'll feel the need to
> constantly remember other people about my initiatives.

"constantly"?

How many times has Fae made such posts in, say, the last three months?

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

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Kim Bruning]

I think that making us not-a-source-of-referred-traffic might
be a  good thing.  (It disincentivises those
who should be disincentivised, while not harming
anyone else)

sincerely,
Kim Bruning

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 09:21:57AM -0700, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> There's a relevant research project outlined on Meta, about HTTPS:
> 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikimedia_referrer_policy
> 
> Here's the "nutshell" description:
> 
> "Since we started switching to HTTPS and an increasing portion of inbound
> traffic happens over SSL, Wikimedia sites stopped advertising themselves as
> sources of referred traffic to external sites. While this is a literal
> implication of HTTPS, it means that Wikimedia's impact on traffic directed
> to other sites is becoming largely invisible: *is Wikimedia turning into a
> large source of dark traffic?* I review a use case (traffic directed to
> CrossRef) and discuss how other top web properties deal with this issue by
> adopting a so-called "Referrer Policy"."
> 
> I don't know anything about this beyond what I've read on Meta, but I think
> it offers some useful background for this discussion.
> 
> Pete
> --
> Pete Forsyth
> [[User:Peteforsyth]] on English Wikipedia, Wikisource, Commons, etc.
> 
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Andrew Lih  wrote:
> 
> > Probably a good time for everyone to know about EFF's HTTPS Everywhere:
> >
> > HTTPS Everywhere is a Firefox, Chrome, and Opera extension that encrypts
> > your communications with many major websites, making your browsing more
> > secure. Encrypt the web: Install HTTPS Everywhere today.
> >
> > https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Johan J??nsson 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 2015-03-10 13:26 GMT+01:00 Comet styles :
> > >
> > > > for an organization taking on the NSA  for "spying"..why are we using
> > > > https? doesn't that show that we are already scared of them and
> > > > running with our tail between our legs?
> > > >
> > >
> > > (For non-technical readers: the HTTP protocol is the normal way to send
> > > around information on the web. HTTPS is the secure way of sending said
> > > information, adding encryption among other things, to avoid
> > eavesdropping.)
> > >
> > > HTTP traffic can easily be tracked by people sharing the same network, by
> > > your Internet service provider and so on. If one cares about privacy,
> > HTTPS
> > > is always important. It's worth noting that the NSA is not the only
> > > government agency in the world. I'd be even more worried about a number
> > of
> > > countries where there would be little chance to fight the intruding party
> > > in the courtroom.
> > >
> > > Side note: you could probably track most HTTPS traffic to Wikipedia as
> > > well, even if you're not the NSA. Normally you would see that the user
> > has
> > > accessed Wikipedia, but not which article. A way around that would be to
> > > let a spider (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_crawler) track the byte
> > > size of Wikipedia articles, which should be individual enough as soon as
> > > images are involved and compare it to the size of the page the user just
> > > accessed. If two articles happen to be of exactly the same size, compare
> > > with incoming and outgoing wiki links and see if the user accessed any
> > page
> > > linking to or linked from one the articles to determine which one. But it
> > > would at least take some sort of effort, and wouldn't be perfect.
> > >
> > > //Johan J??nsson
> > > --
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > 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
> > 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
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

-- 
[Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment]
gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key  FEF9DD72
5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A  01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Strainu]

I think we can agree to disagree - I don't want to clutter other
people's inboxes even more.

Still, I'll hold you to this PoV next time I'll feel the need to
constantly remember other people about my initiatives.

Best regards,
  Strainu

2015-03-13 15:30 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 13 March 2015 at 11:36, Strainu  wrote:
>
>>> I'm sure Fae will appreciate your apology.
>>
>> There is nothing to apologize for. There is a place for such
>> announcements, and wikimedia-l is not that.
>
> ORly?
>
> From:
>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
> 
>
> Wikimedia-l
>
> Wikimedia Mailing List
>
> Discussion list for the Wikimedia community and the larger network of
> organizations (Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations,
> affiliates, partners) supporting its work.
>
> This mailing list can, for example, be used for:
>
> The initial planning phase of potential new Wikimedia projects and initiatives
> [...]
> Other Wikimedia-related issues
>
> 
>
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Andreas Kolbe]

Steven Walling has written an interesting answer on Quora about one aspect
of the New York Times op-ed, i.e. the threat NSA surveillance supposedly
poses to Wikipedians living under oppressive regimes:

https://www.quora.com/Would-stopping-NSA-surveillance-really-make-Wikipedia-editors-living-under-repressive-governments-safer/answer/Steven-Walling
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:03 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> How does the Wikimedia Foundation intend to protect the rights of
> users around the world when it will have a nearly impossible time of
> protecting Americans, much less non-Americans? U.S. courts and the U.S.
> Congress have made it very clear that spying on non-Americans is completely
> acceptable, so when I read that the aim is to protect users worldwide, I'm
> pretty skeptical.



A good point.

Again, in the case of Kazakhstan, that regime – which by general agreement
is orders of magnitude more abusive than the US government – reportedly
received nothing but praise from the Wikimedia Foundation.[1] This would
have been worrying coming from anyone else, but was all the more so coming
from Jimmy Wales.

[1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-March/077053.html
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Andy Mabbett]

On 13 March 2015 at 11:36, Strainu  wrote:

>> I'm sure Fae will appreciate your apology.
>
> There is nothing to apologize for. There is a place for such
> announcements, and wikimedia-l is not that.

ORly?

From:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



Wikimedia-l

Wikimedia Mailing List

Discussion list for the Wikimedia community and the larger network of
organizations (Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations,
affiliates, partners) supporting its work.

This mailing list can, for example, be used for:

The initial planning phase of potential new Wikimedia projects and initiatives
[...]
Other Wikimedia-related issues




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

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Strainu]

2015-03-13 11:56 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 13 March 2015 at 09:06, Strainu  wrote:
>
>> Fae, you are aware that this is NOT the list for en.wp, right?
>
> Perhaps you missed the part of Fae's email which read:

I did not. The place for such announcements is the village pump of
various projects, using Global delivery. Out here this is at best
reaching a tiny minority of interested people, at worst plain old
spam.

>
> If there are other Wikipedias that may benefit from a
> similar report, please drop me a note on Commons or email me.
>
> together with the lengthy part of his email which discussed matters
> relating to Wikimedia Commons.
>
> I'm sure Fae will appreciate your apology.

There is nothing to apologize for. There is a place for such
announcements, and wikimedia-l is not that.

Strainu

>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Understanding and building digital democracy

[Stevie Benton]

Hello everyone,

Apologies for cross posting.

Wikimedia UK, along with the Open Coalition 
and Demos , are developing a project called "From
ticks to clicks - understanding and building digital democracy".

We have just made a proposal

to the Knight News Challenge and we would really appreciate your feedback
and support. If you can spare just a couple of minutes please do take a
look and let us know what you think. Comments on the site, rather than
here, are especially appreciated!

With thanks and regards,

Stevie

-- 

Stevie Benton
Head of External Relations
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173
@StevieBenton

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England
and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a
global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the
Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal
control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Fæ]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:BLP_overwrites

It was chance that the English Wikipedia was the first noticeable
target of a "revenge porn" attack. The serious concern about potential
public impact started me looking at how to build a report to help
address the problem of image overwrites not being "visible" to
biography article patrollers. I would be happy to hear of non-English
Wikipedia cases that would provide an incentive to extend the report
to other projects based on experience. The SQL underpinning the report
identifies images of living people by searching relevant categories on
the English Wikipedia for images, but several language databases could
be added in (I would need local language help in choosing similar
categories), with a constraint that it would be nice to keep the
report updates within the current 5 minute cycle.

This is a report for Commons hosted images which are used on *all*
other projects. The majority of images currently listed are used in
many languages, so if they are being overwritten with defamatory
material, the internet "footprint" can be extremely large. For a real
example, the current report highlights
 which is used
on 28 different Wikimedia projects.

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

On 13 March 2015 at 09:56, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> On 13 March 2015 at 09:06, Strainu  wrote:
>
>> Fae, you are aware that this is NOT the list for en.wp, right?
>
> Perhaps you missed the part of Fae's email which read:
>
> If there are other Wikipedias that may benefit from a
> similar report, please drop me a note on Commons or email me.
>
> together with the lengthy part of his email which discussed matters
> relating to Wikimedia Commons.
>
> I'm sure Fae will appreciate your apology.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Andy Mabbett]

On 13 March 2015 at 09:06, Strainu  wrote:

> Fae, you are aware that this is NOT the list for en.wp, right?

Perhaps you missed the part of Fae's email which read:

If there are other Wikipedias that may benefit from a
similar report, please drop me a note on Commons or email me.

together with the lengthy part of his email which discussed matters
relating to Wikimedia Commons.

I'm sure Fae will appreciate your apology.

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

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Edward Saperia]

> Education is apolitical.


I beg to differ.

Saying that Wikipedia is apolitical is like saying democracy is apolitical.
Control of information is at the heart of politics, and the knowledge that
people have access to profoundly changes the way that they interact with
society over their lifetimes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism_(negationism)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_manipulation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malala_Yousafzai
etc

*Edward Saperia*
Conference Director Wikimania 2014 
email  • facebook  •
 twitter  • 07796955572
133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people

[Strainu]

2015-03-12 20:50 GMT+02:00 Fæ :
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:BLP_overwrites
>
> A quick reminder about this report which helps vandalism patrollers
> for the English Wikipedia spot when images used in Wikipedia
> biographies are being overwritten by "newbie" accounts. I recommend
> more admins add the report to their watch-list.

Fae, you are aware that this is NOT the list for en.wp, right?

Strainu

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