Re: [Wikimedia-l] Better thankspam

[Alice Wiegand]

My experiences with discourse in a non-Wikimedia context is great.  Worth a try.

Alice.

- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -
Von: "Samuel Klein" 
Gesendet: ‎15.‎01.‎2016 02:46
An: "Wikimedia Mailing List" 
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Better thankspam

On Jan 14, 2016 8:35 PM, "Luis Villa"  wrote:
>
> I agree that thankspam is somewhat irritating, but it is also a good way
to
> make people feel welcome and appreciated. An alternative is to consider
> moving wikimedia-l to a tool like discourse.org

Thanks for that idea. Discourse looks great.  Maybe worth testing out
casually for some wiki* discussions before deciding whether or not to try
replacing a particular list.

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

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board and Board-appointed seats (was: Beyond the Board)

[Milos Rancic]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:18 PM, David Goodman  wrote:
> Rather, we need working groups or committees  with authority  in a
> decentralized manner.

Agreed. Which, in turn, means that the Board should articulate which
fields of expertise they need, define the scope of such working groups
or committees, create such bodies and nurture them up to the maturity.

-- 
Milos

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Beyond the Board (was: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google)

[Milos Rancic]

Denny, Dariusz: May you take a look the talk page [1], see the flow of
concerns and ideas in relation to the proposal and comment
specifically what you think it could work and what you think it
couldn't.

Besides that, I created two subpages which deal separately with
Representation and diversity [2] and Scope [3], so we could be more
focused on those issues, as they turned out to be the most discussed
ones. (If anyone sees the need for any other discussion topic, let
them create a separate page, as well.)

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Community_Council_Compact
[2] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_Council_Compact/Representation_and_diversity
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_Council_Compact/Scope


On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Denny Vrandecic
 wrote:
> No, I think the questions of community representation on the Board and the
> creation of an independent body able to represent the communities are
> orthogonal. I do not see anyone suggesting that the Board should not have
> community representatives.
>
> But I see the need for a body representing the communities that does not
> derive its power from the Board, but from the communities directly.
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> wrote:
>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Am I the only one who would rather see an independent body represent the
>> > communities than one subordinate to the Board?
>>
>>
>> My concern is that in the long run such a body may lead to excluding
>> community representation from the Board ("since we have a community body
>> already..."). Also, I think that we're lacking a senate, not a government
>> per se.
>>
>> dj
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 



-- 
Milos

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [announcement] Ombudsman commission wider scope

[Pete Forsyth]

+1, very good news.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

p.s. As an aside, the role of an "ombudsman" has come up in two other
contexts (relating to actions of WMF personnel, rather than volunteer
functionaries) on the Transparency Gap page started a couple weeks ago:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_transparency_gap

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 7:18 PM, Philippe Beaudette 
wrote:

> This is excellent news, and has been years in the making.
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Tomasz Ganicz 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Dariusz. As not all members of the Ombudsman Commission subscribe
> > this list, I forwarded this to them :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > 2016-01-14 15:58 GMT+01:00 Dariusz Jemielniak :
> >
> > > hi,
> > >
> > > I'm writing to you to bring the news that, after a while of work and
> > > discussion, the Board has finally addressed the need to amend the scope
> > of
> > > our Ombudsman Commission, following the community consensus from a
> while
> > > back [1]
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scope_of_Ombudsman_Commission
> > > >
> > > .
> > >
> > > The resolution was approved in November [2]
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
> > > >
> > > and
> > > has been just published.
> > >
> > > As a former ombudsman, as well as an endorser of the proposal, I can
> say
> > > that while this may not be a huge thing, it still is important and
> will,
> > > hopefully, make our work easier :)
> > >
> > > best,
> > >
> > > dj
> > >
> > > The Ombudsman Commission is currently the body which investigates
> > > complaints about violations of the privacy and access to nonpublic
> > > information policies established by Wikimedia Foundation and which
> apply
> > to
> > > all Wikimedia wiki projects. The Ombudsman Commission was appointed on
> 23
> > > July 2006 by the Wikimedia Foundation Board with the generally narrow
> > scope
> > > of investigating potential privacy violations performed by users having
> > > access to the CheckUser interface (namely CheckUsers and Stewards).
> > >
> > > Over time, the Ombudsman Commission has received a growing number of
> > > requests to investigate cases which are not clearly complaints about
> > > individual CheckUser actions but may be potential or real violations of
> > the
> > > privacy policy. Following the 2006 Board Resolution's definition of the
> > > scope, the Ombudsman Commission has consistently rejected these
> requests,
> > > and the applicants remain unsatisfied as there is no other body in the
> > > Wikimedia movement tasked to resolve these problems. Therefore, the
> > members
> > > of Ombudsman Commission, with help of the WMF legal team, asked the WMF
> > > Board to redefine the scope of the Ombudsman Commission.
> > > The Board of Trustees of the Foundation has accepted the community's
> > > consensus and has authorized an expansion of the Ombudsman Commission's
> > > scope to include two more tasks:
> > > To review, upon request, local project CheckUser and Oversight policies
> > to
> > > ensure that they do not violate the respective global policies.
> > >
> > > To investigate, upon request, potential violations of the appropriate
> > > global policies by local CheckUsers and Oversighters.
> > >
> > > Investigation of potential violations of local policies which are not
> > > violations of the global polices remain the responsibility of the local
> > > project and not within the scope of the Ombudsman Commission at this
> > time.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scope_of_Ombudsman_Commission
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Philippe Beaudette
>
> phili...@beaudette.me
> 415-691-8822
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [announcement] Ombudsman commission wider scope

[Philippe Beaudette]

This is excellent news, and has been years in the making.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Tomasz Ganicz  wrote:

> Thanks Dariusz. As not all members of the Ombudsman Commission subscribe
> this list, I forwarded this to them :-)
>
>
>
> 2016-01-14 15:58 GMT+01:00 Dariusz Jemielniak :
>
> > hi,
> >
> > I'm writing to you to bring the news that, after a while of work and
> > discussion, the Board has finally addressed the need to amend the scope
> of
> > our Ombudsman Commission, following the community consensus from a while
> > back [1]
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scope_of_Ombudsman_Commission
> > >
> > .
> >
> > The resolution was approved in November [2]
> > <
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
> > >
> > and
> > has been just published.
> >
> > As a former ombudsman, as well as an endorser of the proposal, I can say
> > that while this may not be a huge thing, it still is important and will,
> > hopefully, make our work easier :)
> >
> > best,
> >
> > dj
> >
> > The Ombudsman Commission is currently the body which investigates
> > complaints about violations of the privacy and access to nonpublic
> > information policies established by Wikimedia Foundation and which apply
> to
> > all Wikimedia wiki projects. The Ombudsman Commission was appointed on 23
> > July 2006 by the Wikimedia Foundation Board with the generally narrow
> scope
> > of investigating potential privacy violations performed by users having
> > access to the CheckUser interface (namely CheckUsers and Stewards).
> >
> > Over time, the Ombudsman Commission has received a growing number of
> > requests to investigate cases which are not clearly complaints about
> > individual CheckUser actions but may be potential or real violations of
> the
> > privacy policy. Following the 2006 Board Resolution's definition of the
> > scope, the Ombudsman Commission has consistently rejected these requests,
> > and the applicants remain unsatisfied as there is no other body in the
> > Wikimedia movement tasked to resolve these problems. Therefore, the
> members
> > of Ombudsman Commission, with help of the WMF legal team, asked the WMF
> > Board to redefine the scope of the Ombudsman Commission.
> > The Board of Trustees of the Foundation has accepted the community's
> > consensus and has authorized an expansion of the Ombudsman Commission's
> > scope to include two more tasks:
> > To review, upon request, local project CheckUser and Oversight policies
> to
> > ensure that they do not violate the respective global policies.
> >
> > To investigate, upon request, potential violations of the appropriate
> > global policies by local CheckUsers and Oversighters.
> >
> > Investigation of potential violations of local policies which are not
> > violations of the global polices remain the responsibility of the local
> > project and not within the scope of the Ombudsman Commission at this
> time.
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scope_of_Ombudsman_Commission
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
>
> --
> Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 


Philippe Beaudette

phili...@beaudette.me
415-691-8822
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Better thankspam

[Samuel Klein]

On Jan 14, 2016 8:35 PM, "Luis Villa"  wrote:
>
> I agree that thankspam is somewhat irritating, but it is also a good way
to
> make people feel welcome and appreciated. An alternative is to consider
> moving wikimedia-l to a tool like discourse.org

Thanks for that idea. Discourse looks great.  Maybe worth testing out
casually for some wiki* discussions before deciding whether or not to try
replacing a particular list.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Better thankspam

[Luis Villa]

I agree that thankspam is somewhat irritating, but it is also a good way to
make people feel welcome and appreciated. An alternative is to consider
moving wikimedia-l to a tool like discourse.org that has (1) built-in
likes, which communicate welcome and appreciation without creating noise
and (2) ability for all users to mute/ignore specific threads. (Also better
moderation tools, and likely somewhat more welcoming to people who don't
use email much, or feel overwhelmed by it - both of whom are large groups!)

Obviously that would be somewhat of a big change, but it's something we can
look into (low priority! no promises!) if people have interest.

Luis

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Gergo Tisza  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Chris Keating  >
> wrote:
> >
> > To me, "Hello" and "Thank you" are quite under-used words on this list
> (in
> > the movement generally but particularly here) so I would prefer we didn't
> > rule these emails out.
> >
> > After all, if we remove pile-on positive threads that contain little
> > information then pile-on negative threads with equally little information
> > will probably still remain.
>
> +1
> I would much rather filter outrage spam :-) There is more of it, and unlike
> thanks, it tends to have a demoralizing effect.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Luis Villa
Sr. Director of Community Engagement
Wikimedia Foundation
*Working towards a world in which every single human being can freely share
in the sum of all knowledge.*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikipedia celebrates 15 years of free knowledge

[Florence Devouard]

Le 15/01/16 00:52, Juliet Barbara a écrit :

This press release is also available online here:


https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Wikipedia_celebrates_15_years_of_free_knowledge



And as a blog post here:

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/01/14/wikipedia-15-foundation-endowment/


For more information, see our commemorative website:

https://15.wikipedia.org/

Wikipedia celebrates 15 years of free knowledge

Community celebrates Wikipedia and sister projects with nearly 150
events on six continents

Wikimedia Foundation announces endowment to sustain Wikipedia for the future

San Francisco, CA. January 14, 2016 -- This Friday marks the 15th
anniversary of Wikipedia , the world’s free
encyclopedia that anyone can edit. This week, we celebrate not just
Wikipedia, but the birth of an idea: that anyone can contribute to the
world’s knowledge. Globally, readers and editors are coming together to
celebrate, with nearly 150 events across six continents. From editing
marathons
in
Bangladesh and lectures
in
Switzerland, to picnics
in
South Africa and a conference
in
Mexico, the world is celebrating the joy of knowledge
.

As part of this milestone, the Wikimedia Foundation is pleased to
announce the Wikimedia Endowment
, a permanent source of funding
to ensure Wikipedia thrives for generations to come. The Wikimedia
Endowment will empower people around the world to create and contribute
free knowledge, and share that knowledge with every single human being.
Our goal is to raise $100 million over the next 10 years. The Endowment
has been established, with an initial contribution by the Wikimedia
Foundation, as a Collective Action Fund at the Tides Foundation
.

Wikipedia launched on January 15, 2001 with a bold vision: a world in
which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all
knowledge.At the time, the idea that people around the world would
collaborate to build an encyclopedia—for free—seemed unbelievable. Since
then, Wikipedia has grown to more than 36 million articles in hundreds
of languages, used by hundreds of millions of people all over the world.
Wikipedia and its sister projects are still built by volunteers around
the world: each month, roughly 80,000 volunteer editors contribute to
Wikimedia sites.

"Wikipedia challenged us to rethink how knowledge can be gathered and
shared." said Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, "Knowledge is no longer
handed down from on high, instead it is freely shared by everyone
online. Wikipedia seemed like an impossible idea at the time—an online
encyclopaedia that everyone can edit. However, it has surpassed
everyone's expectations over the past 15 years, thanks to the hundreds
of thousands of volunteers around the world who have made Wikipedia
possible."

We're celebrating Wikipedia's global community with a commemorative
website and week-long campaign, collecting and
sharing the stories of individuals and organizations that have helped
develop Wikipedia into the world's largest collection of collaboratively
created free knowledge. These stories show the truly global nature of
the Wikimedia community: from Ziyad Alsufyani
, a medical
student at Taif University in Ta’if, Saudi Arabia who has been editing
the Arabic Wikipedia since 2009, to Susanna
Mkrtchyan , a
professor and devoted grandmother working to giveArmenian students
better educational opportunities. We will continue to collect stories
throughout the month of January.

Today, we celebrate all of the projects, partnerships, events, and joy
the Wikimedia movement has inspired over the past 15 years, with many
still to come. Wikipedia is much more than a website. Wikipedia and its
sister Wikimedia projects represent a global, ever-expanding resource
and community for free knowledge. Here are just a few examples:

  *

Wikipedia started in January 2001 in English, but soon expanded to
other languages—within the first year, it grew to 18 languages.
Today, it is available in nearly 300.

  *

Volunteers constantly edit and improve Wikipedia. Every hour,
roughly 15,000 edits are made to Wikipedia. Every day, around 7,000
new articles are created.

  *

Wikipedia became one of the top 10 websites in the world in 2007,
and the only non-profit website anywhere near the top.

  *

It’s not just Wikipedia. There are 11 other Wikimedia free knowledge
projects, including Wikimedia Commons

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appreciation

[Luis Villa]

Thanks for the kind words, Pete.

For what it is worth, other details on our initial proposal to FDC are on
meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_2016-17_Annual_Planning_Recommendation
Note that this was the initial proposal, and we are deliberately trying to
keep it fluid, so some things will inevitably change.

I would urge everyone to keep expectations in check: this process will be a
first at this scale for both us and FDC. As with any good experiment(s),
some will succeed and others will fail; hopefully we'll learn along the
way, of course.

Luis

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Today in the Metrics & Activities meeting, the WMF took a significant step
> toward improving its transparency and accountability -- something under
> much discussion in recent weeks.
>
> The cause of this was not the recent drama around the Board, but a
> recommendation given by the FDC in November 2015, that the WMF should hold
> its own financial decisions to a standard similar to that expected of the
> organizations it funds.
>
> Kudos to the FDC for taking the initial step, the WMF board for approving
> the recommendation, and Luis Villa (who discussed the issue in some depth
> at the meeting) and everyone at WMF who worked toward implementing the
> recommendation. I'm sure many of us will be looking forward to the results.
>
> I have discussed this in a bit more detail on my blog:
> http://wikistrategies.net/fdc-recommendation/
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Luis Villa
Sr. Director of Community Engagement
Wikimedia Foundation
*Working towards a world in which every single human being can freely share
in the sum of all knowledge.*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia's 15th BD

[Tanvir Rahman]

Nice to hear about it, Mardentanha. Great news!

Bangladesh has planned to celebrate it in a few hours. :-)

More later. Till then, keep celebrating people.

T.

Tanvir Rahman
Wikitanvir on Wikimedia

On 15 January 2016 at 00:30, Mardetanha  wrote:

> Dear Fellow Wikimedians
> I would like to congratulate you on Wikipedia's 15th birthday, it was
> historic moment for all of us, I am glad to let you know we had a
> celebration in Tehran and we were the first country to celebrate it.
> you can find images here
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_15_in_Iran
> Mardetanha
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia's 15th BD

[Mardetanha]

Dear Fellow Wikimedians
I would like to congratulate you on Wikipedia's 15th birthday, it was
historic moment for all of us, I am glad to let you know we had a
celebration in Tehran and we were the first country to celebrate it.
you can find images here
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_15_in_Iran
Mardetanha
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appreciation

[Dariusz Jemielniak]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

>
> The cause of this was not the recent drama around the Board, but a
> recommendation given by the FDC in November 2015, that the WMF should hold
> its own financial decisions to a standard similar to that expected of the
> organizations it funds.
>

Yes, the FDC has been in discussion about this since at least 2013, and my
hope is that 2016 will start a good example and tradition.

In principle, the way I see it (and it is my personal view only), there
should be different standards for small/grassroot organizations (let's say,
up to 100,000$ budget), medium ones (100k-1m), and the large, fully
professional ones, including WMF, so I think that as a final outcome WMF
should set standards, that will be higher than required from most of the
organizations. But one step at a time.

best,

dariusz




-- 

__
prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
i grupy badawczej NeRDS
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
http://n wrds.kozminski.edu.pl

członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Nauk
członek Komitetu Polityki Naukowej MNiSW

Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
autorstwa http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010

Recenzje
Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
Pacific Standard:
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/
Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
The Wikipedian:
http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [announcement] Ombudsman commission wider scope

[Tomasz Ganicz]

Thanks Dariusz. As not all members of the Ombudsman Commission subscribe
this list, I forwarded this to them :-)



2016-01-14 15:58 GMT+01:00 Dariusz Jemielniak :

> hi,
>
> I'm writing to you to bring the news that, after a while of work and
> discussion, the Board has finally addressed the need to amend the scope of
> our Ombudsman Commission, following the community consensus from a while
> back [1]
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scope_of_Ombudsman_Commission
> >
> .
>
> The resolution was approved in November [2]
> <
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
> >
> and
> has been just published.
>
> As a former ombudsman, as well as an endorser of the proposal, I can say
> that while this may not be a huge thing, it still is important and will,
> hopefully, make our work easier :)
>
> best,
>
> dj
>
> The Ombudsman Commission is currently the body which investigates
> complaints about violations of the privacy and access to nonpublic
> information policies established by Wikimedia Foundation and which apply to
> all Wikimedia wiki projects. The Ombudsman Commission was appointed on 23
> July 2006 by the Wikimedia Foundation Board with the generally narrow scope
> of investigating potential privacy violations performed by users having
> access to the CheckUser interface (namely CheckUsers and Stewards).
>
> Over time, the Ombudsman Commission has received a growing number of
> requests to investigate cases which are not clearly complaints about
> individual CheckUser actions but may be potential or real violations of the
> privacy policy. Following the 2006 Board Resolution's definition of the
> scope, the Ombudsman Commission has consistently rejected these requests,
> and the applicants remain unsatisfied as there is no other body in the
> Wikimedia movement tasked to resolve these problems. Therefore, the members
> of Ombudsman Commission, with help of the WMF legal team, asked the WMF
> Board to redefine the scope of the Ombudsman Commission.
> The Board of Trustees of the Foundation has accepted the community's
> consensus and has authorized an expansion of the Ombudsman Commission's
> scope to include two more tasks:
> To review, upon request, local project CheckUser and Oversight policies to
> ensure that they do not violate the respective global policies.
>
> To investigate, upon request, potential violations of the appropriate
> global policies by local CheckUsers and Oversighters.
>
> Investigation of potential violations of local policies which are not
> violations of the global polices remain the responsibility of the local
> project and not within the scope of the Ombudsman Commission at this time.
>
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scope_of_Ombudsman_Commission
> [2]
>
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Appreciation

[Pete Forsyth]

Today in the Metrics & Activities meeting, the WMF took a significant step
toward improving its transparency and accountability -- something under
much discussion in recent weeks.

The cause of this was not the recent drama around the Board, but a
recommendation given by the FDC in November 2015, that the WMF should hold
its own financial decisions to a standard similar to that expected of the
organizations it funds.

Kudos to the FDC for taking the initial step, the WMF board for approving
the recommendation, and Luis Villa (who discussed the issue in some depth
at the meeting) and everyone at WMF who worked toward implementing the
recommendation. I'm sure many of us will be looking forward to the results.

I have discussed this in a bit more detail on my blog:
http://wikistrategies.net/fdc-recommendation/

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Endowment Update

[Andy Mabbett]

On 14 January 2016 at 18:41, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:

>  The Wikimedia Endowment has been established as a Collective Action Fund

For those of us not familiar with US laws and terminology, what is a
"Collective Action Fund?


(I tried [[Collective Action Fund]], on en.Wikipedia - it doesn't exist).




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

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Endowment Update

[geni]

On 14 January 2016 at 18:41, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:

>
>
>The Wikimedia Endowment has been established as a Collective Action Fund
>at Tides Foundation  as a permanent,
>income-generating fund to support the Wikimedia projects. Tides has
> over 40
>years of experience administering funds for nonprofits and helping to
>launch such efforts.  They often serve as fiscal sponsors for
> organizations
>when they are first starting out and will be providing administrative
>support to the Wikimedia Endowment.  The endowment will be independent
> from
>WMF but an Advisory Board, nominated by the WMF and appointed by Tides,
>will make recommendations to Tides related to the endowment.  We have
> the
>option in the future to transfer the endowment out of Tides to the WMF
> or
>to a new charitable entity. The endowment will continue to be a
> permanent,
>income-generating fund to support the Wikimedia projects under any
> entity.
>For now, we feel Tides is a great, cost effective place to start and we
>will look at other options when the endowment reaches critical mass.
>
>


Heh I remember those guys. Their fees were one of the costs that caused
Citizendium so much trouble (not that Citizendium didn't have a bunch of
other issues). Ah 2007. Fun times.



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Endowment Update

[Pine W]

Thanks for this announcement, Lisa. This fits in nicely with the
discussions some of us are having about strategic planning for the
community and for WMF.

Adding Pete to this email thread because he might want to take note of this
announcement for the panel discussion that he is moderating on Saturday.

I'm glad to hear of this use of the funds from Jim Pacha. I wish I'd had an
opportunity to meet Jim when he was still with us. Seeding the endowment
with Jim's gift makes good sense.

Regards,
Pine

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Lisa Gruwell 
wrote:

> Hi all-
>
> As you may have seen today, we announcing the Wikimedia Endowment as a part
> of WIkipedia’s 15th birthday.
>
> I want to thank everyone who engaged on meta
>  to help us think
> through the initial decisions regarding the endowment.  Here is a summary
> of the steps we have taken so far:
>
>
>1.
>
>We are announcing the endowment today!  For more information, please
>read the announcement
><
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Wikipedia_celebrates_15_years_of_free_knowledge
> >
>.
>2.
>
>The purpose of this endowment is to act as a permanent safekeeping fund
>to generate income to ensure a base level of support for the Wikimedia
>projects in perpetuity.  It will not fully fund WMF’s work, so it is
> not a
>replacement for annual fundraising, but it will supplement it in the
>future.  We are setting the initial goal at $100 million over 10 years.
>There is a strategic distinction between the endowment and the annual
>fundraising effort.  The endowment will help ensure that Wikipedia lives
>forever; It will enable us to fulfill the part of our mission
> that says we
>will provide support to the projects in perpetuity.  Our annual
> fundraising
>campaigns aim to fund the work we are doing in the coming year and
> sustain
>the operating reserve.
>3.
>
>The Wikimedia Endowment has been established as a Collective Action Fund
>at Tides Foundation  as a permanent,
>income-generating fund to support the Wikimedia projects. Tides has
> over 40
>years of experience administering funds for nonprofits and helping to
>launch such efforts.  They often serve as fiscal sponsors for
> organizations
>when they are first starting out and will be providing administrative
>support to the Wikimedia Endowment.  The endowment will be independent
> from
>WMF but an Advisory Board, nominated by the WMF and appointed by Tides,
>will make recommendations to Tides related to the endowment.  We have
> the
>option in the future to transfer the endowment out of Tides to the WMF
> or
>to a new charitable entity. The endowment will continue to be a
> permanent,
>income-generating fund to support the Wikimedia projects under any
> entity.
>For now, we feel Tides is a great, cost effective place to start and we
>will look at other options when the endowment reaches critical mass.
>4.
>
>We have hired an Endowment Director, Marc Brent.  Marc is an experienced
>fundraiser, having worked at Harvard University and Code for America.
> Marc
>is excited to lead this effort and we are thrilled that he has joined
> us!
>5.
>
>We are using the gift from Jim Pacha
> to start
>the endowment.  This was Jim’s request.  He asked us that if we ever
>started an endowment to please move his gift from the reserve to the
>endowment.  We are happy to be able to honor his wishes and to start the
>endowment with Jim’s generous and inspirational gift.
>
>
> There is still a lot to figure out about the endowment over the next few
> months. Marc or I will be posting some more questions on the discussion
> page on meta to get your thoughts on this next set of decisions. (I just
> added a new question related to governance
> .)
>
> Thank you to everyone who helped inform our thinking.  We have lots of work
> ahead of us to make this successful and I hope you continue to help us
> going forward.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lisa Gruwell
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Beyond the Board (was: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google)

[James Alexander]

Honestly while I think that more community governance could be good I worry
that this conversation is going into a direction that is doomed to failure
and distracts us from the REAL issues that people are frustrated about.
Large governing bodies are complicated, difficult to set up and difficult
to administer especially with limited official power and scope. We have had
off and on discussions about them for ages but they aren't particularly
feasible and aren't suddenly more feasible now. They also don't really fix
the problems that people are having I think. There are some relatively
stable facts that I, personally, see though some may disagree with all or
some:


   - The board has a leadership role in the movement and the communities as
   well as the WMF though how that manifests itself differs at times.
   - The WMF serves at the defacto "head" (for lack of a better term) of
   the movement. They are the trademark holders, the server operators, the
   legal stewards, the fundraisers etc. The affiliates and community groups
   all serve immensely important roles but but in the end can not get away
   from the fact that the legal responsibility rests in the WMF. The WMF can
   not get away from that either.
   - The community and the board and the WMF are irretrievably intertwined.
   "The communities" came before the WMF, it "created" the WMF (of course in
   practice Jimmy did but you know what I mean) and it will, almost certainly,
   exist after the WMF. Some level of "separation" from the volunteer
   community as a whole can be good for us all because it allows the
   foundation to help see things that need to change which are harder to
   fix/change when you're deep in the weeds HOWEVER if they separate 'too'
   much from the community as a whole it makes it impossible for them to truly
   effect any change or support the projects in the way they need to because
   they are unable to understand the environment they are working in.

and to some of the specific questions Denny was talking about:


   - The board/WMF 'has' the power to do things like super protect, just
   like it has the power to globally ban someone, to create and shut down
   projects, to sue and be sued.
   - The problem people had with super protect was some combination of how
   it was done, why it was done and how the response was done.
   - I do not see a ton of people saying that it doesn't have that power,
   or even (at some level) that it 'shouldn't have that power (some might
   think that but in the end they usually want the WMF to be responsible for
   things or have other powers that intrinsically require them to have the
   power to do things like that. If you run the servers you need the ability
   to control them etc).


I will fully admit the possibility that my read of this may be biased by my
own thoughts but from what I can tell (both within staff and on this
mailing list/on wiki) the concern is that the WMF/"the board" is getting
too far apart. More community governance or representation is not
necessarily bad but but it will not solve the actual problem and I think
right now it is a distraction. As Dariusz said what is desired here is a
Senate not a new body. Would that help? I don't know, it might, though it
alone is still not really attacking the actual issue. The issue is a lack
of trust in the board and the WMF because of a history of past concerns
(either real or imagined) and, now, what is seen as multiple different
issues coming to a head at once. We have to address those before we talk
about much larger broad reaching questions.

James
User:Jamesofur
User:Jalexander-WMF

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Denny Vrandecic 
wrote:

> David,
>
> thanks for that perspective. I agree that in theory the Foundation has the
> power you describe. But it is the same theory that lead to the
> implementation of Superprotect, and we know how this worked out. I do not
> think that the use of such a power would be accepted.
>
> Or am I wrong?
>
> Denny
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:01 AM, David Goodman  wrote:
>
> > Whatever I may think of some of the recent actions of the board,
> > I think its present role goes well beyond
> > " bring stability and assure that
> > the daily business is done: keep the platform online, deal with legal
> > cases and keep a positive financial balance. "
> >
> > The key roles are to ensure the quality of WP, and
> > " to lead   'in a political manner' "  the open information movement.
> >
> > First, it  it does have the power to deal with a situation  where"Let's
> > say, a specific Wikipedia would be in trouble - maybe there are reports
> > that it was taken over by a small group of POV-pushers. "
> > It has  control of the trademark, and the ability to prevent any
> particular
> > WP from using it. It cannot prevent any aberrant group from using our
> > material while calling itself something else, but it can prevent it
> calling
> > itself Wikipedia.
> > True, this may not be effect

[Wikimedia-l] Endowment Update

[Lisa Gruwell]

Hi all-

As you may have seen today, we announcing the Wikimedia Endowment as a part
of WIkipedia’s 15th birthday.

I want to thank everyone who engaged on meta
 to help us think
through the initial decisions regarding the endowment.  Here is a summary
of the steps we have taken so far:


   1.

   We are announcing the endowment today!  For more information, please
   read the announcement
   

   .
   2.

   The purpose of this endowment is to act as a permanent safekeeping fund
   to generate income to ensure a base level of support for the Wikimedia
   projects in perpetuity.  It will not fully fund WMF’s work, so it is not a
   replacement for annual fundraising, but it will supplement it in the
   future.  We are setting the initial goal at $100 million over 10 years.
   There is a strategic distinction between the endowment and the annual
   fundraising effort.  The endowment will help ensure that Wikipedia lives
   forever; It will enable us to fulfill the part of our mission
    that says we
   will provide support to the projects in perpetuity.  Our annual fundraising
   campaigns aim to fund the work we are doing in the coming year and sustain
   the operating reserve.
   3.

   The Wikimedia Endowment has been established as a Collective Action Fund
   at Tides Foundation  as a permanent,
   income-generating fund to support the Wikimedia projects. Tides has over 40
   years of experience administering funds for nonprofits and helping to
   launch such efforts.  They often serve as fiscal sponsors for organizations
   when they are first starting out and will be providing administrative
   support to the Wikimedia Endowment.  The endowment will be independent from
   WMF but an Advisory Board, nominated by the WMF and appointed by Tides,
   will make recommendations to Tides related to the endowment.  We have the
   option in the future to transfer the endowment out of Tides to the WMF or
   to a new charitable entity. The endowment will continue to be a permanent,
   income-generating fund to support the Wikimedia projects under any entity.
   For now, we feel Tides is a great, cost effective place to start and we
   will look at other options when the endowment reaches critical mass.
   4.

   We have hired an Endowment Director, Marc Brent.  Marc is an experienced
   fundraiser, having worked at Harvard University and Code for America.  Marc
   is excited to lead this effort and we are thrilled that he has joined us!
   5.

   We are using the gift from Jim Pacha
    to start
   the endowment.  This was Jim’s request.  He asked us that if we ever
   started an endowment to please move his gift from the reserve to the
   endowment.  We are happy to be able to honor his wishes and to start the
   endowment with Jim’s generous and inspirational gift.


There is still a lot to figure out about the endowment over the next few
months. Marc or I will be posting some more questions on the discussion
page on meta to get your thoughts on this next set of decisions. (I just
added a new question related to governance
.)

Thank you to everyone who helped inform our thinking.  We have lots of work
ahead of us to make this successful and I hope you continue to help us
going forward.

Best regards,

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

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: ** DATE CHANGE ** Invitation to WMF December 2015 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, January 14, 19:00 UTC

[Praveena Maharaj]

REMINDER: This meeting starts in 30 minutes.

-- Forwarded message --
From: Praveena Maharaj 
Date: Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 11:00 AM
Subject: ** DATE CHANGE ** Invitation to WMF December 2015 Metrics &
Activities Meeting: Thursday, January 14, 19:00 UTC
To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org


Dear all,

The next WMF metrics and activities meeting will take place on
Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 7:00 PM UTC (11 AM PST). Please note, on
this occasion, we are holding this meeting on the second Thursday in
January. We will resume holding the meetings on the first Thursday of
each month beginning in February 2016.

The IRC channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the
meeting will be broadcast as a live YouTube stream.

Meeting agenda:


* Welcomes

* Community update

* WMF top-level metrics

* Research showcase

* Feature presentation

* Product demo
* Questions/discussions

Please review https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings
for further information about the meeting and how to participate.

We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.

Thank you,
Praveena


-- 

Praveena Maharaj
Executive Assistant to the VP of Product
Wikimedia Foundation \\ www.wikimediafoundation.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Beyond the Board (was: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google)

[Denny Vrandecic]

David,

thanks for that perspective. I agree that in theory the Foundation has the
power you describe. But it is the same theory that lead to the
implementation of Superprotect, and we know how this worked out. I do not
think that the use of such a power would be accepted.

Or am I wrong?

Denny


On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:01 AM, David Goodman  wrote:

> Whatever I may think of some of the recent actions of the board,
> I think its present role goes well beyond
> " bring stability and assure that
> the daily business is done: keep the platform online, deal with legal
> cases and keep a positive financial balance. "
>
> The key roles are to ensure the quality of WP, and
> " to lead   'in a political manner' "  the open information movement.
>
> First, it  it does have the power to deal with a situation  where"Let's
> say, a specific Wikipedia would be in trouble - maybe there are reports
> that it was taken over by a small group of POV-pushers. "
> It has  control of the trademark, and the ability to prevent any particular
> WP from using it. It cannot prevent any aberrant group from using our
> material while calling itself something else, but it can prevent it calling
> itself Wikipedia.
> True, this may not be effective in some cases as it used to be, before some
> of the individual language chapters had developed organizational and
> financial resources of their own, to the extent that some of them could
> well persist as the major free encyclopedia in their language communities
> even without the WP name
>
> Second, when dealing with the ongoing threats to free information, the WMF
> can and does effectively speak for all those interested as perhaps the best
> known and the strongest voice. This is not something to be regarded
> lightly.  It can organize the greatest general public indignation that any
> one organization can, and it can coordinate and act asa center for the work
> of others. Much as all languages in the world need a good free
> encyclopedia, all the people in the world need this freedom even more.
>
> On the other hand, it is not needed financially--many other groups in the
> movement can successfully raise sufficient money to keep the whole
> operation going, if not to maintain the present number of programers
> working on ancillary projects
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> wrote:
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Am I the only one who would rather see an independent body represent
> the
> > > communities than one subordinate to the Board?
> >
> >
> > My concern is that in the long run such a body may lead to excluding
> > community representation from the Board ("since we have a community body
> > already..."). Also, I think that we're lacking a senate, not a government
> > per se.
> >
> > dj
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> David Goodman
>
> DGG at the enWP
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Beyond the Board (was: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google)

[Denny Vrandecic]

No, I think the questions of community representation on the Board and the
creation of an independent body able to represent the communities are
orthogonal. I do not see anyone suggesting that the Board should not have
community representatives.

But I see the need for a body representing the communities that does not
derive its power from the Board, but from the communities directly.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
wrote:

> >
> >
> >
> > Am I the only one who would rather see an independent body represent the
> > communities than one subordinate to the Board?
>
>
> My concern is that in the long run such a body may lead to excluding
> community representation from the Board ("since we have a community body
> already..."). Also, I think that we're lacking a senate, not a government
> per se.
>
> dj
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board and Board-appointed seats (was: Beyond the Board)

[David Goodman]

My experience with advisory boards is that they tend not be taken
seriously: if they do anything independently they are ignored.  They are a
good forum for venting grievances, but we seem to have no lack of such.
But  I at least am not particular interested in a large infrastructure of
meeting in groups to either ratify decisions taken by other, or express
wishes that will never be accomplished.

Rather, we need working groups or committees  with authority  in a
decentralized manner.



On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Milos Rancic  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> wrote:
> > I've been also thinking about revitalizing our Advisory Board - the way I
> > would like to see it would be dividing it into (a) community (b) tech and
> > (c) academic subgroups, available for immediate consulting and feedback.
>
> Long time ago I suggested more structured way to use Advisory Board.
> So, here is the draft of the idea again.
>
> I don't think you need too specific "Community Advisory Board", as you
> could reach, for example, AffCom, LangCom, stewards, en.wp ArbCom etc.
> -- or, if you really need too general advice and there is no assembly
> yet, all of them -- if you need a specific advice. Basically, you have
> much better granulated "Community Advisory Board", although the Board
> is not using it usually.
>
> You definitely need a kind of "Governing Advisory Board", which would
> be consisted of the former Board members and people with very good
> knowledge of governing and other ways of social organization (NPOs,
> business, movements...).
>
> But, on top of that you could structure your needs. You could start it
> by imagining any expertise you collectively lack (I could give you one
> clear example immediately: relations with formal diplomacy) and start
> thinking how to find appropriate people for that group.
>
> Then, you could create an "Innovation Advisory Board", put there all
> Jimmy's technolibertarian ubercapitalist friends and ask them about
> their ideas. I am sure they could be very useful in such body. They
> could also find useful to participate in such body for Wikim/pedia
> cause.
>
> And so on. Any of such advisory boards be even more useful if you
> could find them not just an advisory role, but a committe-like
> ("Diversity Committee", with strong advisory role in relation to the
> social diversification of Wikimedia bodies, for example -- "strong
> advisory role" = people don't do something against their
> recommendation without very strong reason) or even more active role
> inside of the movement ("Technology Innovation Committee", with the
> role to plan long-term technological innovation).
>
> If you have a couple of active advisory boards, you could recruit new
> Board members from them, with the specific purpose, based on the
> Strategic Plan or other organizational needs. That could give us
>
> After their mandate as Board members, they would still stay inside of
> hopefully active Wikimedia bodies and we won't lose their experience.
> Actually, if they don't have enough time to fully participate as Board
> members and you still have the same focus, you could always replace
> them with a fellow  Advisory Board members.
>
> Said so, this is not that straight-forward task and requires active
> work per advisory board you create. There should be a need, a
> structure and a way how to engage them. Find a person per advisory
> board who is willing to lead such body and delegate the creation and
> communication of that body to her or him. (That could be Board member,
> somebody from the movement or an employee.)
>
> I also don't think it's in collision with the assembly. Those should
> be Wikimedia bodies and any Wikimedia body should be able to ask them
> for advice. They could be helpful bodies to the future assembly, as
> well.
>
> While I wrote the last paragraph, I realized that we badly need one of
> those bodies: Legal Advisory Board: the body which could be asked by
> any Wikimedia organization or Wikimedian in relation to any legal
> issue they are struggling with.
>
>
> --
> Milos
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
David Goodman

DGG at the enWP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Beyond the Board (was: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google)

[David Goodman]

Whatever I may think of some of the recent actions of the board,
I think its present role goes well beyond
" bring stability and assure that
the daily business is done: keep the platform online, deal with legal
cases and keep a positive financial balance. "

The key roles are to ensure the quality of WP, and
" to lead   'in a political manner' "  the open information movement.

First, it  it does have the power to deal with a situation  where"Let's
say, a specific Wikipedia would be in trouble - maybe there are reports
that it was taken over by a small group of POV-pushers. "
It has  control of the trademark, and the ability to prevent any particular
WP from using it. It cannot prevent any aberrant group from using our
material while calling itself something else, but it can prevent it calling
itself Wikipedia.
True, this may not be effective in some cases as it used to be, before some
of the individual language chapters had developed organizational and
financial resources of their own, to the extent that some of them could
well persist as the major free encyclopedia in their language communities
even without the WP name

Second, when dealing with the ongoing threats to free information, the WMF
can and does effectively speak for all those interested as perhaps the best
known and the strongest voice. This is not something to be regarded
lightly.  It can organize the greatest general public indignation that any
one organization can, and it can coordinate and act asa center for the work
of others. Much as all languages in the world need a good free
encyclopedia, all the people in the world need this freedom even more.

On the other hand, it is not needed financially--many other groups in the
movement can successfully raise sufficient money to keep the whole
operation going, if not to maintain the present number of programers
working on ancillary projects


On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
wrote:

> >
> >
> >
> > Am I the only one who would rather see an independent body represent the
> > communities than one subordinate to the Board?
>
>
> My concern is that in the long run such a body may lead to excluding
> community representation from the Board ("since we have a community body
> already..."). Also, I think that we're lacking a senate, not a government
> per se.
>
> dj
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
David Goodman

DGG at the enWP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Beyond the Board (was: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google)

[Dariusz Jemielniak]

>
>
>
> Am I the only one who would rather see an independent body represent the
> communities than one subordinate to the Board?


My concern is that in the long run such a body may lead to excluding
community representation from the Board ("since we have a community body
already..."). Also, I think that we're lacking a senate, not a government
per se.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Beyond the Board (was: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google)

[Denny Vrandecic]

My issue with the current proposal on Meta is that it creates a body which
works towards the Board.

This is, in my opinion, a fundamental mistake: it perpetuates the idea that
the Board is the major governing body of the movement at large.

I would very much prefer an independent and strong body that can speak and
represent the communities but is not subordinate to any bodies of the
Wikimedia Foundation, including its Board.

I see how the community council as currently suggested in

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

can be useful, but I am not sure whether that would resolve the kind of
conflicts that we are seeing currently and which arise from the perception
that the Board is the top body of the Movement, but instead it has legal
obligations to the Foundation.

Am I the only one who would rather see an independent body represent the
communities than one subordinate to the Board?


On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Milos Rancic  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter 
> >> My impression is therefore that some sort of a preparatory work is
> needed
> >> to avoid these two traps. Ideally, there would be a drafting group with
> a
> >> broad representation (possibly the members of the group will be
> prohibited
> >> to sit in the first edition of the elected body), and the Board will
> >> preliminary express an interest (so that the group knows the chances are
> >> not zero). Of course we can just agree on electing the representative
> body
> >> witout actually asking the Board, but I am not sure this would be the
> right
> >> way of doing it.
> >>
> > Agreed. A mixed working group could be a way to go.
>
> From my perspective, anything which would move the situation from the
> status quo would work.
>
> Presently, the discussion has been started on Meta and it would be
> good to see your input there. I don't see the proposal as anything in
> the form take it or leave it, but as the beginning of the discussion
> (or reloading it after a lot of time).
>
> Working group could be created based on that discussion; the other
> option -- and I'd like to believe in it -- is to create the final
> proposal based on completely public discussion.
>
> Significant difference between the previous attempts to do something
> like this is the fact that at least three Board members (Denny,
> Dariusz and Guy) support something similar to this idea. Previously,
> Board was the body which at least passively obstructed the idea. That
> means that we have much better chances for success this time.
>
> So, please join the discussion; if you have a different idea as the
> whole proposal, write it there, so we could discuss. We could
> rearrange the page into the set of relatively coherent proposals and
> discuss about the proposals integrally, about their features and
> finally find the best possible solution, which would be the product of
> as wide as possible consensus.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Reminder of Deadline to Participate in Future of Wikimania Consultation

[Ellie Young]

Dear Colleagues,

I’m writing to seek your feedback on the consultation to improve Wikimania,
open until 18 January 2016. If you have already contributed, we are most
grateful.


The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania
to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad
community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in
2018).

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania


Feedback on both of these goals is welcome on a survey provided on the
project page, and can also be given on the project discussion page.  In
addition, I also invite you to share any personal experiences you have had
at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania.  We plan to
compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.

I look forward to working with you to develop a Wikimania that better
serves the needs of your communities.

With thanks,

Ellie Young

WMF Events Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] [announcement] Ombudsman commission wider scope

[Dariusz Jemielniak]

hi,

I'm writing to you to bring the news that, after a while of work and
discussion, the Board has finally addressed the need to amend the scope of
our Ombudsman Commission, following the community consensus from a while
back [1]

.

The resolution was approved in November [2]

and
has been just published.

As a former ombudsman, as well as an endorser of the proposal, I can say
that while this may not be a huge thing, it still is important and will,
hopefully, make our work easier :)

best,

dj

The Ombudsman Commission is currently the body which investigates
complaints about violations of the privacy and access to nonpublic
information policies established by Wikimedia Foundation and which apply to
all Wikimedia wiki projects. The Ombudsman Commission was appointed on 23
July 2006 by the Wikimedia Foundation Board with the generally narrow scope
of investigating potential privacy violations performed by users having
access to the CheckUser interface (namely CheckUsers and Stewards).

Over time, the Ombudsman Commission has received a growing number of
requests to investigate cases which are not clearly complaints about
individual CheckUser actions but may be potential or real violations of the
privacy policy. Following the 2006 Board Resolution's definition of the
scope, the Ombudsman Commission has consistently rejected these requests,
and the applicants remain unsatisfied as there is no other body in the
Wikimedia movement tasked to resolve these problems. Therefore, the members
of Ombudsman Commission, with help of the WMF legal team, asked the WMF
Board to redefine the scope of the Ombudsman Commission.
The Board of Trustees of the Foundation has accepted the community's
consensus and has authorized an expansion of the Ombudsman Commission's
scope to include two more tasks:
To review, upon request, local project CheckUser and Oversight policies to
ensure that they do not violate the respective global policies.

To investigate, upon request, potential violations of the appropriate
global policies by local CheckUsers and Oversighters.

Investigation of potential violations of local policies which are not
violations of the global polices remain the responsibility of the local
project and not within the scope of the Ombudsman Commission at this time.


[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scope_of_Ombudsman_Commission
[2]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Better thankspam

[Vituzzu]

These days those messages are the best stuffs sent to this list, I'm 
definitely not bored by them. Anyone subscribing this list knows is a 
500 emails/months list.


Vito

Il 13/01/2016 19:15, Milos Rancic ha scritto:

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Chris Keating
 wrote:

To me, "Hello" and "Thank you" are quite under-used words on this list (in
the movement generally but particularly here) so I would prefer we didn't
rule these emails out.

After all, if we remove pile-on positive threads that contain little
information then pile-on negative threads with equally little information
will probably still remain.

Although I am quite rarely sending "thank you" messages (OK, it's not
just "quite rarely", as I sent it once and it was privately to Cary
Bass), I tend to agree with Chris. This list is quite tough and it's
nice to see thanking and welcoming threads, no matter if I am not
reading them.

As sending those messages is quite controllable -- meaning that people
from WMF/chapters/similar structures are doing that, I think simple
addition into the subject line like "[notification]" would allow those
who don't like to filter such messages.




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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How To Recover From Having Made A Mistake [a reminder]

[Tito Dutta]

Thanks Asaf for sharing this (for last 3 days I am thinking to send this
email)

Hello Kelly :)

On 14 January 2016 at 12:27, Kelly Battles  wrote:

> Thank you Ad!
> Hi everyone, I am Kelly : ) !
>
> Seriously, very happy to be part of this amazing effort.
> Have lots to learn but committed to doing my best.
> Thank you everyone for giving me this opportunity.
> Happy New Year and here is to a great 2016!
> Best,
> Kelly
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:21 AM, Ad Huikeshoven  wrote:
>
> > Hi All, and Asaf,
> >
> > Thanks for the advice Asaf. I've made a mistake and processed steps 1 and
> > 2.
> > Step 3
> >
> >- what the mistake was, as precisely as possible (e.g. not "I used bad
> >judgment" but "I neglected to look at relevant data before deciding to
> > fund
> >Wikimedia Antarctica");
> >
> > I failed to welcome incoming directors to the board of the Wikimedia
> > Foundation and I failed to thank outgoing directors of the same board for
> > the time and effort they have spent.
> >
> >- that you are sorry about the harm/damage/waste/confusion your
> mistake
> >caused (being specific would demonstrate understanding);
> >
> > I'm sorry for this unpolite and rude behavior.
> >
> >- what you have learned from making this mistake;
> >
> > The Wikimedia Movement depends on volunteers and on the willingness of
> > capable people to contirbute their time and effort. Volunteers not only
> to
> > edit Wikipedia and others projects, and commit to Gerrit but also spend
> > time on governing bodies like the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia
> > Foundation. For the diverse communities of volunteering people in the
> > movement to thrive it is esstential to retain a welcoming culture and
> show
> > respect for those who do boring tasks and the janitoral work.
> >
> >- what steps you have already taken to redress the damage or undo the
> >results of your mistake;
> >
> > So far I've done nothing to repair this mistake, except reading the
> ongoing
> > discussion on wikimedia-l and thinking about what is going on and
> preparing
> > this e-mail.
> > To repair the damage done:
> >
> >1. Hereby my welcome to Kelly Battles. Don't be shy to introduce
> >yourself to this list. I wish you a lot of strength and wisdom while
> >serving your time on the board.
> >2. Hereby my welcome to Arnnon Geshuri. You left Google in 2009. I
> don't
> >know if you were sacked or that you fled from the illegal practices
> you
> >were forced to commit in your position at Google. I sincerely belief
> you
> >have learned your lesson over six years ago. You now have a paid
> > position
> >at Tesla Motors, a company destined to disrupt the automobile
> industry.
> >Welcome again to the Wikimedia movement which does not aim to disrupt
> > the
> >automobile industry. Wikipedia does disrupt a whole range of other
> >industries, but please be aware that Wikipedia started after most
> paper
> >encyclopedias were already out of print. I wish you a lot of strength
> >and wisdom while serving your time on the board.
> >3. La bienvenida al movimiento Jaime Villagomez. I wish you a lot of
> >strength and wisdom while serving your time on the board as CFO. I'll
> >assume you will going to be or become Treasurer of the Board of
> > Trustees of
> >the Wikimedia Foundation. You will have a pivotal role in assisting
> the
> > BoT
> >in performing a series of 'fiduciary duties'. I wish you a lot of
> >strength and wisdom in your job.
> >4. Goodbye James Heilman, and thanks for volunteering your time on the
> >Board of Trustees. You've been fired. Don't take it personally.
> >5. Goodbye Stu West, and thanks for volunteering your time on the
> Board
> >of Trustees.
> >6. Goodbye Jan-Bart de Vreede, and thanks for volunteering your time
> on
> >the Board of Trustees.
> >
> >
> >- what steps you are going to take to mitigate or reduce the odds of a
> >mistake of this sort recurring, including timelines for specific
> > actions,
> >if possible and applicable; and
> >
> > My preferred habit of welcoming and thanking people is in real life
> > meeting, to have the opportunity to shake hands, kiss, hug, whatever, and
> > hand over a symbolic when I feel like to it. Opportunities for them
> abound,
> > including, but not limited to the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin and
> > Wikimania Esino Lario.
> >
> >- invite comments on your understanding as reflected in this post,
> >explicitly encouraging people to tell you if they think you've missed
> > the
> >point or if one of your intended actions is inadvisable, insufficient,
> > or
> >can otherwise be improved.
> >
> >
> > Please comment on my understanding as reflected in this post. Did I miss
> > the point? Please tell me! What do you think about my intended and
> > preferred way of welcoming incoming directors, and thanking outgoing
> > directors? Is there a way to i

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How To Recover From Having Made A Mistake [a reminder]

[Kelly Battles]

Thank you Ad!
Hi everyone, I am Kelly : ) !

Seriously, very happy to be part of this amazing effort.
Have lots to learn but committed to doing my best.
Thank you everyone for giving me this opportunity.
Happy New Year and here is to a great 2016!
Best,
Kelly

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:21 AM, Ad Huikeshoven  wrote:

> Hi All, and Asaf,
>
> Thanks for the advice Asaf. I've made a mistake and processed steps 1 and
> 2.
> Step 3
>
>- what the mistake was, as precisely as possible (e.g. not "I used bad
>judgment" but "I neglected to look at relevant data before deciding to
> fund
>Wikimedia Antarctica");
>
> I failed to welcome incoming directors to the board of the Wikimedia
> Foundation and I failed to thank outgoing directors of the same board for
> the time and effort they have spent.
>
>- that you are sorry about the harm/damage/waste/confusion your mistake
>caused (being specific would demonstrate understanding);
>
> I'm sorry for this unpolite and rude behavior.
>
>- what you have learned from making this mistake;
>
> The Wikimedia Movement depends on volunteers and on the willingness of
> capable people to contirbute their time and effort. Volunteers not only to
> edit Wikipedia and others projects, and commit to Gerrit but also spend
> time on governing bodies like the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia
> Foundation. For the diverse communities of volunteering people in the
> movement to thrive it is esstential to retain a welcoming culture and show
> respect for those who do boring tasks and the janitoral work.
>
>- what steps you have already taken to redress the damage or undo the
>results of your mistake;
>
> So far I've done nothing to repair this mistake, except reading the ongoing
> discussion on wikimedia-l and thinking about what is going on and preparing
> this e-mail.
> To repair the damage done:
>
>1. Hereby my welcome to Kelly Battles. Don't be shy to introduce
>yourself to this list. I wish you a lot of strength and wisdom while
>serving your time on the board.
>2. Hereby my welcome to Arnnon Geshuri. You left Google in 2009. I don't
>know if you were sacked or that you fled from the illegal practices you
>were forced to commit in your position at Google. I sincerely belief you
>have learned your lesson over six years ago. You now have a paid
> position
>at Tesla Motors, a company destined to disrupt the automobile industry.
>Welcome again to the Wikimedia movement which does not aim to disrupt
> the
>automobile industry. Wikipedia does disrupt a whole range of other
>industries, but please be aware that Wikipedia started after most paper
>encyclopedias were already out of print. I wish you a lot of strength
>and wisdom while serving your time on the board.
>3. La bienvenida al movimiento Jaime Villagomez. I wish you a lot of
>strength and wisdom while serving your time on the board as CFO. I'll
>assume you will going to be or become Treasurer of the Board of
> Trustees of
>the Wikimedia Foundation. You will have a pivotal role in assisting the
> BoT
>in performing a series of 'fiduciary duties'. I wish you a lot of
>strength and wisdom in your job.
>4. Goodbye James Heilman, and thanks for volunteering your time on the
>Board of Trustees. You've been fired. Don't take it personally.
>5. Goodbye Stu West, and thanks for volunteering your time on the Board
>of Trustees.
>6. Goodbye Jan-Bart de Vreede, and thanks for volunteering your time on
>the Board of Trustees.
>
>
>- what steps you are going to take to mitigate or reduce the odds of a
>mistake of this sort recurring, including timelines for specific
> actions,
>if possible and applicable; and
>
> My preferred habit of welcoming and thanking people is in real life
> meeting, to have the opportunity to shake hands, kiss, hug, whatever, and
> hand over a symbolic when I feel like to it. Opportunities for them abound,
> including, but not limited to the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin and
> Wikimania Esino Lario.
>
>- invite comments on your understanding as reflected in this post,
>explicitly encouraging people to tell you if they think you've missed
> the
>point or if one of your intended actions is inadvisable, insufficient,
> or
>can otherwise be improved.
>
>
> Please comment on my understanding as reflected in this post. Did I miss
> the point? Please tell me! What do you think about my intended and
> preferred way of welcoming incoming directors, and thanking outgoing
> directors? Is there a way to improve on this?
>
>
> Ad Huikeshoven
>
> P.S.
>
> The board of Wikimedia Nederland will meet on Thursday January 21st.
> Wikimedia Nederland is an affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. It's
> mission is to further the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation and the
> Wikimedia Movement in the Netherlands. This mail was sent by me without
> it's content being read by fellow board mem

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Better thankspam

[Ricordisamoa]

Thankspam is not big a problem in my opinion. One or two seconds per 
message and you're done, then your mind will be full of good. What I 
find most annoying are long emails with few actual contents. You have to 
read them to find out they were not worth reading.


Il 13/01/2016 12:11, Fæ ha scritto:

TL;DR
Can anyone suggest of a better way of publicly logging thanks, hellos
& goodbyes for our public email lists?

BACKGROUND
Wikimedia lists are probably unique in the number of emails over a
year which 'thankspam'. For example there is a pattern set that an
awful lot of chapter representatives send public welcomes and goodbyes
without conveying any new information. Sometimes when my email
notifier shows about ten of these on the same day, I've made the
effort to block that thread, I don't know of a way of specifically
muting the notifications for these types of emails on my mobile phone.

Though everyone could chose to send these privately rather than making
a public statement, I understand the motivation for "us too"s to be
noticed by others who are not the intended 'thanked'. On email lists
something like ensuring thank email subject lines have a formulaic
part of the title would help, so that readers can choose to mute them;
equivalent to marking "minor" or "bot" edits on our projects so they
don't get flagged in recent changes.

This thought stirred by Ad's email, but not against the sentiment he
was aiming for.

PS For those that recall my meta thanks reports, I hope to get this
online again soon once a related phabricator task is resolved.

Fae

On 13 January 2016 at 09:21, Ad Huikeshoven  wrote:
...

I failed to welcome incoming directors to the board of the Wikimedia
Foundation and I failed to thank outgoing directors of the same board for
the time and effort they have spent.

- that you are sorry about the harm/damage/waste/confusion your mistake
caused (being specific would demonstrate understanding);

I'm sorry for this unpolite and rude behavior.

...



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Better thankspam

[Gnangarra]

Crikey, balance, spam, dont contribute, very little contribution, +1 pile
on (though we dont see many -1 pile ons).

we are society/community that works because we collaborate we assume good
faith int he actions of others, we know that while we speak(email) in
english many of  us have different levels of understanding, hey even those
fluent in english dont necessarily understand what each other is saying.

Fae is right there could be a better ways to communicate we should explore
how to achieve that and we should keep going back to that very question
from time to time improve how we do things.

the most important point that is;
Its just good manners to welcome people, and to say thank you.


Consider the advice to send a message off list, would you really like to be
on the receiving end of a 100 thank you emails, or 100 welcome emails all
saying similar but possibly different things wow talk of creating  spam,
then that person would feel obliged to answer every one of them
individually. The beauty of the list is we all see and acknowledge an
appreciation of what someone has achieved or to welcome them to the group
and they only have to respond once or twice to the group.

When you distill it down all sharing an equal burden of the odd extra
email, is still a better way to support the communities growth than making
one individual accept a heavy burden so we dont have to see that practice
people exercising courtesy and good manners publicly



On 14 January 2016 at 15:13, Lodewijk  wrote:

> I do agree in general that generic '+1' emails contribute very little. If
> you really want to thank someone, or welcome them, it probably makes a
> better impression if you write a little more than that. Say a few lines to
> introduce the list, give them a tip or offer them to show them around.
>
> Personally, I prefer to send those mails offlist by the way - but I can
> feel with people that with all the dramaspam (how important and justified
> it sometimes may be/feel) you kinda feel a need to balance that out ;)
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Gergo Tisza  wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Chris Keating <
> chriskeatingw...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > To me, "Hello" and "Thank you" are quite under-used words on this list
> > (in
> > > the movement generally but particularly here) so I would prefer we
> didn't
> > > rule these emails out.
> > >
> > > After all, if we remove pile-on positive threads that contain little
> > > information then pile-on negative threads with equally little
> information
> > > will probably still remain.
> >
> > +1
> > I would much rather filter outrage spam :-) There is more of it, and
> unlike
> > thanks, it tends to have a demoralizing effect.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,