Re: [Wikimedia-l] [recent changes]

[Anthony Cole]

I agree with all of that, MZ. As to your questions:

"Shouldn't we be applauding Google and others for helping us share our
knowledge with the world?"

Yes.

"What size do you think the Wikimedia Foundation should be in terms of yearly
budget and number of full-time employees? How much bigger or smaller should
the Wikimedia Foundation be than other Wikimedia chapters?"

It depends on what we want them to do.

"...are you sure that we're all agreed that this [Google impacting
Wikipedia's
page views and the ability to raise funds and recruit new volunteers] is
problematic?"

I'm less concerned than many, and I'm sure others are unconcerned.

"If Google causes page views to go down and our sites are directly hit
less frequently,
that actually saves us money, doesn't it?"

If our page views drop by 50% and this halves our fundraising capacity, I
doubt that would be offset by the saved hosting costs. But I'm no expert on
these things.


Anthony Cole


On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:46 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> Anthony Cole wrote:
> >Google's "info boxes" and their answers at the top of their results, we're
> >all agreed now, I think, are impacting Wikipedia's page views and,
> >consequently, our ability to raise funds and recruit new volunteers.
>
> Google and others have a direct interest in their data being accurate and
> reliable. We already see that Google has a "report a correction" feature
> for some of its services. It's in both Wikimedia's interest and re-users'
> interest for the underlying data source to be update-to-date and correct.
>
> Our mission is to spread free educational content to the world and we make
> our data available for re-use for this purpose. Shouldn't we be applauding
> Google and others for helping us share our knowledge with the world?
>
> As far as threats to direct-to-user fund-raising go, I'd put
> organizational instability ahead of Google at the moment. The Wikimedia
> Foundation has repeatedly been in the news lately for ongoing management
> issues, both in its executive team and in its board of trustees.
>
> What size do you think the Wikimedia Foundation should be in terms of
> yearly budget and number of full-time employees? How much bigger or
> smaller should the Wikimedia Foundation be than other Wikimedia chapters?
>
> Even if we accepted your premise that Google was impacting Wikipedia's
> page views and the ability to raise funds and recruit new volunteers
> (citations needed, to be sure), are you sure that we're all agreed that
> this is problematic? If others re-using our content has a side effect
> of reducing donations to Wikimedia Foundation Inc., donations which are
> received through questionable and increasingly obnoxious on-site
> advertisements, you will not find universal agreement that this donor
> reduction would be terrible. As others have argued previously, small and
> recurring donations are a means of providing accountability for the
> entities entrusted with these monetary donations. If potential donors no
> longer trust the Wikimedia Foundation to manage and distribute this
> money, no longer donating financially is practical and wise.
>
> If Google causes page views to go down and our sites are directly hit less
> frequently, that actually saves us money, doesn't it? We're theoretically
> then off-loading some of our hosting costs to Google, Facebook, and
> others who are downloading and re-uploading our data to the Web, exactly
> as we mandated that anyone be able to do. With multiple copies of the data
> on the Web, we're better ensuring that the content lives on in perpetuity.
>
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] [recent changes]

[MZMcBride]

Anthony Cole wrote:
>Google's "info boxes" and their answers at the top of their results, we're
>all agreed now, I think, are impacting Wikipedia's page views and,
>consequently, our ability to raise funds and recruit new volunteers.

Google and others have a direct interest in their data being accurate and
reliable. We already see that Google has a "report a correction" feature
for some of its services. It's in both Wikimedia's interest and re-users'
interest for the underlying data source to be update-to-date and correct.

Our mission is to spread free educational content to the world and we make
our data available for re-use for this purpose. Shouldn't we be applauding
Google and others for helping us share our knowledge with the world?

As far as threats to direct-to-user fund-raising go, I'd put
organizational instability ahead of Google at the moment. The Wikimedia
Foundation has repeatedly been in the news lately for ongoing management
issues, both in its executive team and in its board of trustees.

What size do you think the Wikimedia Foundation should be in terms of
yearly budget and number of full-time employees? How much bigger or
smaller should the Wikimedia Foundation be than other Wikimedia chapters?

Even if we accepted your premise that Google was impacting Wikipedia's
page views and the ability to raise funds and recruit new volunteers
(citations needed, to be sure), are you sure that we're all agreed that
this is problematic? If others re-using our content has a side effect
of reducing donations to Wikimedia Foundation Inc., donations which are
received through questionable and increasingly obnoxious on-site
advertisements, you will not find universal agreement that this donor
reduction would be terrible. As others have argued previously, small and
recurring donations are a means of providing accountability for the
entities entrusted with these monetary donations. If potential donors no
longer trust the Wikimedia Foundation to manage and distribute this
money, no longer donating financially is practical and wise.

If Google causes page views to go down and our sites are directly hit less
frequently, that actually saves us money, doesn't it? We're theoretically
then off-loading some of our hosting costs to Google, Facebook, and
others who are downloading and re-uploading our data to the Web, exactly
as we mandated that anyone be able to do. With multiple copies of the data
on the Web, we're better ensuring that the content lives on in perpetuity.

 
MZMcBride



___
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] [recent changes]

[Anthony Cole]

Just for the record, I raised the conflict of interest issue with Denny in
more than one venue - a Signpost discussion and (I think) here, and I
discussed it in other places. I never suggested he was a mole for Google
and I'm not aware of anyone who did - though I may have missed or
forgotten.

Google's "info boxes" and their answers at the top of their results, we're
all agreed now, I think, are impacting Wikipedia's page views and,
consequently, our ability to raise funds and recruit new volunteers. This
was described by Jimmy as an existential threat to the movement recently.
Denny is involved in those aspects of Google's operations. This is a
profound conflict of interest.

Denny is also a main thought leader behind Wikidata, and will have serious
biases concerning its priority.

These interests and involvements (Wikidata  and Google) are a good fit with
each other and we're lucky to have someone with Denny's ability and
integrity bridging the two. But it's just untenable for him to sit on the
board of trustees while he's in those roles.



Anthony Cole


On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Andrea Zanni 
wrote:

> >>>I feel that Denny's decision to resign makes sense, and in no way does
> this
> >>>decision put a cloud over his continued involvement in our community.
>
> Pine,
> I don't necessarily disagree with you,
> but you are doing a very common mistake in the Wikimedia world:
> you are not taking into account people's emotions.
> Making an hard decision always takes its toll, and it's all but granted
> that someone wants to stay
> in the same community that lacked trust in him and stressed him out for
> weeks.
> I personally trusted him, I felt the pain in his messages to this list in
> the last months, and I'm sad he has to leave
> from what I thought was an important decisive role.
>
> Aubrey
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Brill,
> >
> > Speaking generally (meaning, not in regard to the specific situation of
> > Denny), conflict of interest issues do happen on a regular basis. In my
> > experience, we also generally handle them well.
> >
> > Having numerous business relationships and interests is common in the
> > business world. Many times when there is a conflict of interest issue,
> it's
> > sufficient to recuse from particular discussions. Sometimes, the best
> > course of action is to resign from one role or another.
> >
> > Regarding Denny's situation specifically, after leaving the WMF board, he
> > may provide valuable input and may in some ways be more effective because
> > he will have stepped away from numerous COI issues.
> >
> > I feel that Denny's decision to resign makes sense, and in no way does
> this
> > decision put a cloud over his continued involvement in our community.
> >
> > There are many problems in the Wikimedia universe, but I think that our
> COI
> > policies are generally sound.
> >
> > Pine
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Brill Lyle 
> wrote:
> >
> > > I find this issue of Conflict of Interest exceedingly problematic.
> > >
> > > Almost every person working and living today will have a conflict of
> > > interest somehow, especially as one becomes a contributor to any of the
> > > Wikimedia projects, gets to know people, tries to organize events or
> > > promote the value of Wikipedia, Wikimedia, etc. Or if you work in any
> > field
> > > that specializes in anything online or technical. It is an impossible
> > > situation.
> > >
> > > I think that Wikimedia deals with this very badly -- and obviously at
> > great
> > > personal cost to talented, giving people. I am sorry.
> > >
> > > And to the bigger problem: Wikimedia loses a smart person who has loads
> > of
> > > ideas and expertise -- and is a contributor to Wikidata (one of the
> best
> > &
> > > most exciting projects to be visited upon Wikimedia) because of this
> > arcane
> > > and quite frankly needing to be re-evaluated rule? I see this as one of
> > the
> > > many problems of Wikimedia.
> > >
> > > EVERYONE has conflict of interest. We need the smartest and brightest
> > minds
> > > out there to contribute whatever they willingly can and will do on a
> > > volunteer basis. How can they not have connections to the real world as
> > > well as to online? Do we expect volunteers to be in their bunkers
> > > somewhere, siloed from the world, that these clean folks are the ones
> to
> > > move Wikimedia forward? It's laughable.
> > >
> > > One thing Wikimedia seems to do quite well is torture people who want
> to
> > > contribute by rules and policies that I think, quite frankly, are
> > > unworkable.
> > >
> > > Requiring some sort of absolute clean Conflict of Interest is an
> > impossible
> > > ideal. It is also obviously hurting the community.
> > >
> > > There is much change happening. I think it's an opportunity for newbies
> > > such as myself as well as folks with longer views to make things
> better.
> > Or
> > > these mistakes will continue to plague the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What can we learn

[phoebe ayers]

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Chris Keating
 wrote:
> If I read Denny's email correctly, this section is broader than conflict of
> interest:
>
>>
>> I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not
> appropriate to
>> pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice, but
>> it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
>>
>
> E.g. any comment Denny made on Phabricator now being read in the light that
> he was a board member.

While I'm not sure exactly what Denny meant in his mail, I think
Chris' comment is spot on -- every trustee, especially those used to
weighing in on community discussions, feels somewhat limited in what
they can say and how to say it when they join the board, whether
that's proposing a new idea or weighing in on an existing one. (Then,
of course, you also get criticized for not speaking up enough!) It can
be an awkward balancing act that takes some time to learn, and can
indeed be frustrating.

Partly I think it's simply inherently difficult. As a trustee your own
interests and areas of volunteering are often not what's best for the
WMF overall to focus on -- either because they are too narrow, or too
resource intensive, or a host of other reasons -- not least because
one contributor cannot possibly speak for a whole area of the
movement, and as a movement we value consensus and broad input for
every idea. But I also think we're not very good on the board at
utilizing people's individual strengths and recognizing that the very
reasons why someone is interesting as a trustee (because they are an
expert contributor in some area, as all the trustees are) also means
that they likely have biases and opinions about strategic directions,
and could use those opinions productively to help the organization
learn and grow.

As for what we can learn from this situation, I'm intrigued by this proposal:

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Atsme  wrote:
> Establish alternates who are non-voting members but are in the wings waiting 
> to fill vacancies.  It’s a win-win.

We could certainly vote in alternates; it would be as simple as taking
the 4th place winner.
Also, we do have a mechanism set up for observers at the board
meetings, and have not taken advantage of it recently; 1 or 2
community observers could join.
Another idea: what about field training of some sort for candidates or
those considering candidacy? It's a big commitment that people make
and that the movement makes to those people, and having a week or two
immersion and preparation -- it could be done virtually -- wouldn't be
the worst thing. Board boot camp, if you will.

Phoebe


-- 
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
 gmail.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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What can we learn

[Dan Garry]

On 11 April 2016 at 13:29, Chris Keating  wrote:
>
> > I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not
> appropriate to
> > pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice,
> but
> > it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
> >
>
> E.g. any comment Denny made on Phabricator now being read in the light that
> he was a board member.
>

I've found this frustrating myself, at times. For example, I've avoided
commenting in my volunteer capacity on VisualEditor and Flow
related-threads because of how it may be perceived to have staff commenting
on such topics, in spite of the fact that I have never worked on
VisualEditor or Flow in my time at the Wikimedia Foundation.

I don't know what the best course of action to resolve these issues is, but
I am interested in such discussions.

Thanks,
Dan

-- 
Dan Garry
Lead Product Manager, Discovery
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [recent changes]

[Andrea Zanni]

>>>I feel that Denny's decision to resign makes sense, and in no way does
this
>>>decision put a cloud over his continued involvement in our community.

Pine,
I don't necessarily disagree with you,
but you are doing a very common mistake in the Wikimedia world:
you are not taking into account people's emotions.
Making an hard decision always takes its toll, and it's all but granted
that someone wants to stay
in the same community that lacked trust in him and stressed him out for
weeks.
I personally trusted him, I felt the pain in his messages to this list in
the last months, and I'm sad he has to leave
from what I thought was an important decisive role.

Aubrey



On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> Brill,
>
> Speaking generally (meaning, not in regard to the specific situation of
> Denny), conflict of interest issues do happen on a regular basis. In my
> experience, we also generally handle them well.
>
> Having numerous business relationships and interests is common in the
> business world. Many times when there is a conflict of interest issue, it's
> sufficient to recuse from particular discussions. Sometimes, the best
> course of action is to resign from one role or another.
>
> Regarding Denny's situation specifically, after leaving the WMF board, he
> may provide valuable input and may in some ways be more effective because
> he will have stepped away from numerous COI issues.
>
> I feel that Denny's decision to resign makes sense, and in no way does this
> decision put a cloud over his continued involvement in our community.
>
> There are many problems in the Wikimedia universe, but I think that our COI
> policies are generally sound.
>
> Pine
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
> > I find this issue of Conflict of Interest exceedingly problematic.
> >
> > Almost every person working and living today will have a conflict of
> > interest somehow, especially as one becomes a contributor to any of the
> > Wikimedia projects, gets to know people, tries to organize events or
> > promote the value of Wikipedia, Wikimedia, etc. Or if you work in any
> field
> > that specializes in anything online or technical. It is an impossible
> > situation.
> >
> > I think that Wikimedia deals with this very badly -- and obviously at
> great
> > personal cost to talented, giving people. I am sorry.
> >
> > And to the bigger problem: Wikimedia loses a smart person who has loads
> of
> > ideas and expertise -- and is a contributor to Wikidata (one of the best
> &
> > most exciting projects to be visited upon Wikimedia) because of this
> arcane
> > and quite frankly needing to be re-evaluated rule? I see this as one of
> the
> > many problems of Wikimedia.
> >
> > EVERYONE has conflict of interest. We need the smartest and brightest
> minds
> > out there to contribute whatever they willingly can and will do on a
> > volunteer basis. How can they not have connections to the real world as
> > well as to online? Do we expect volunteers to be in their bunkers
> > somewhere, siloed from the world, that these clean folks are the ones to
> > move Wikimedia forward? It's laughable.
> >
> > One thing Wikimedia seems to do quite well is torture people who want to
> > contribute by rules and policies that I think, quite frankly, are
> > unworkable.
> >
> > Requiring some sort of absolute clean Conflict of Interest is an
> impossible
> > ideal. It is also obviously hurting the community.
> >
> > There is much change happening. I think it's an opportunity for newbies
> > such as myself as well as folks with longer views to make things better.
> Or
> > these mistakes will continue to plague the Wikimedia community -- and we
> > will all lose out.
> >
> > - Erika
> > *Erika Herzog*
> > Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle*  >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > Denny I am sorry to have lost a friend who is on the board but I am
> happy
> > > to welcome back a friend who can now express his ideas, his notions,
> his
> > > opposition, his point of view. Yes you work for Google. For me it means
> > > that you are again in an unique position to be an ambassador for both
> > > Google and WMF in either domain.
> > >
> > > You may have gained friends while on the board, the one sad thing is
> that
> > > it came at a huge cost to you personally. Nevermind what you do, I
> trust
> > > you to do well.
> > > Thanks,
> > > Gerard
> > >
> > > On 8 April 2016 at 20:17, Denny Vrandecic 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I exchanged a walk on part in the war for a lead role in the cage.
> > > >
> > > > I find myself tied and limited in my actions and projects. In order
> to
> > > > avoid the perception or potential for Conflict of Interests I have to
> > act
> > > > extremely carefully in far too many parts of my life. Instead of
> being
> > > able
> > > > to pursue my projects or some 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What can we learn

[Chris Keating]

If I read Denny's email correctly, this section is broader than conflict of
interest:

>
> I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not
appropriate to
> pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice, but
> it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
>

E.g. any comment Denny made on Phabricator now being read in the light that
he was a board member.

I think one of the learning points (assuming I have understood correctly)
is that someone who is great at coming up with ideas and making stuff
happen is not necessarily a great fit for the Board. It can actually be
very awkward having a great operational/project idea as a Board member as
just talking about your cool idea creates tensions. Is your project getting
special attention as you're a board member? Are staff spending time
progressing things on it because they think it has special importance
because you're on the Board (possibly taking away from what their manager
thinks are their priorities?) If your cool idea doesn't quite fit with the
ED's direction of travel are you undermining them?

That kind of problem shows up regardless of there is a COI or not.

As a result, board members are actually really restricted in what they can
personally propose and progress.

There is a natural tendency in the community elections to choose people who
have done admirable things but I think this is a case of (among other
things) an amazing "do-er" and thinker being frustrated by the implications
of being on a governance board. (Not the first and probably not the last
time in our movement, I suspect)

Regards,

Chris
___
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] [recent changes]

[Brill Lyle]

Thanks for the response, Pine. I don't know if I agree with your assessment
re: resigning being the solution, but I am as not fully versed in many of
the details as you are obviously. I see this resignation as a real loss to
the community, and hope that possibly going forward there might be
alternatives to what seems to be a very torturous experience for
well-meaning, smart and talented folks who have only helped our community.

You bring up the business world, which is rife with conflicts of interests.
I have a background working in investment banking so I found that sort of
funny. They do a pretty terrible job of this -- see #PanamaPapers, people
sitting on boards, etc :-) So self-recusing seems sort of inadequate
and impractical...

I am obviously very new to all of this, but as I have come to learn more
about the Wikimedia family of projects, I have noticed that there is at
least one high profile public figure who "makes his living" off his
connection to Wikipedia -- Jimmy Wales -- which if that's not a conflict of
interest, well I don't know what is

And then there are various chapters that have paid staff, as well as
Wikimedia Foundation staff, who all what, stop editing once they become
paid?

Our local chapter here in New York City is starting to work with the WMF to
have annual grant-funded project positions, and as someone who is active in
the chapter's organization and event administration as well as a person who
is going to apply for one of the positions, this issue of conflict of
interest is a real stumbling block.

The issue is: Do I do a massive amount of free digital labor as a volunteer
(COI free) or do I get paid to do this work (COI rife)? Being paid seems
only fair, especially in contrast to country chapters who have as many
events as we do, and can rely upon paid staff to implement programming,
planning, and events. But being paid is a minefield of nightmarishness if
COI is applied harshly. It will completely affect the outcome of what can
be accomplished and done. Will pretty much completely handicap many of the
ideas I have to improve much of our work process.

But more on topic: I agree with Gnangarra here VERY well said.

This seems to be very true, which I have noticed on our chapter level as
well as on the larger WMF level. Denny realized he couldn't wait to start
and create Wikidata. If he didn't do it then it wouldn't have gotten done.
Without his expertise and skillsets -- which come from his professional
experience -- this would not have come to fruition. It is all inextricably
entwined. Quite frankly, to focus on bureaucracy over innovation is a sure
path towards death of all the great stuff that is possible around here. It
is riskier, because it relies upon people sticking their neck out and being
bold, but it's much better for our community than all of these flipping
rules and regulations weighing us down.

Fascinating discussion.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC



On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:

> This is one inherrant problem with COI those who get stuff done are forced
> to sit out discussions in preference for those who spend all their time
> talking and producing nothing. What we end up with is not leadership, its
> not project experience, its bureaucracy with out any true direction  where
> every idea that sounds good, that is well presented gets the go ahead with
> no understanding of what it takes to make a project work. Because of that
> we have KPI or metrics that satisfy the bureaucracy, force the organisors
> to run by the numbers rather than focus on producing real impact results
> over the longer term.
>
> High impact long term projects take considerable investment of time over
> time the dont happen in 3, 6, 12 month cycles, look at WLE & WLM its be
> year in year out commitments by volunteers to build and expand but every
> year they waste time seeking funding for the year this is where the Grant
> process should take the lead and just assign a long term budget to be
> managed by WMF financial staff and let the volunteers concentrate on having
> impact. Wikidata is in the same boat, its the bureaucratic begging
> processes that cost most of our volunteers time and produce the least
> impact.
>
> Denny's loss should be awake up call otherwise it'll be repeated
> continously especially from community selected seats, some where along the
> way we have created a bureaucracy at the expense of trust and assuming
> people are acting in good faith for the betterment of the projects
>
>
___
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] What can we learn

[jytdog]

Dealing with COI is more than just declaring it.  It also needs to be
managed.  Denny's COI issues were apparently somewhat self-managed to a
certain extent, but please pay mind to this part of what he wrote:

I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not appropriate to
pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice, but
it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.

It was apparently in this conversation that a plan to manage Denny's COI
was laid out.  Apparently after he joined the board.  And apparently not
something that he was at all happy with.

Denny also talked about catching lots of flack due to his ties to Google.
Publishing a COI management plan would help allay those concerns. (Not put
them totally away, but at least provide some comfort to those who are
concerned that the board is aware of the COI and is managing it)

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Ilario Valdelli  wrote:

> Any COI generates burocracy. After or before.
>
> Doing it before helps to avoid empty seats.
>
> In an election is the same community to check it. If there is an
> appointment, there is not a preliminary extensive check. A potential COI is
> revealed after the appointment.
> Il 09 Apr 2016 12:15, "Gerard Meijssen"  ha
> scritto:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Really more bureaucracy? As if that does not bring its own conflict of
> > interest?
> > Thanks,
> >  GerardM
> >
> > On 9 April 2016 at 10:20, Ilario Valdelli  wrote:
> >
> > > What should be noted is that a personal declaration of COI cannot be
> > > sufficient. Probably an evaluation of potential conflits done by a
> > > committee as neutral body can help the candidates to better evaluate
> the
> > > candidacy and to manage them better.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Il 09 Apr 2016 8:26 AM, "Anders Wennersten" 
> > ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > I, as all others, has full sympathy for Danny and find that he in his
> > > mail
> > > > made an excellent explanation on how the situation made the option to
> > > > resign the only reasonable way forward
> > > >
> > > > BUT this is the second community selected that has left the Board
> > within
> > > a
> > > > year after being appointed, and before any future election (either a
> > snap
> > > > byelection soon, or the ordinary in a years time) I believe we should
> > > look
> > > > into if anything can be learnt. And if there are things, primary in
> the
> > > > election process, that can be done to ensure the appointed community
> > > > selected members of the Board staying on the whole term.
> > > >
> > > > For Danny my interpretation is that he is very operational role in
> > > > ordinary work leads to many interaction with WMF etc and where COI
> > > > consideration hampers his day-to-days activities. And that his major
> > > > strength, "Wikidata", is hard to make use of in the Board as any
> > > > influencing of decision re this also puts him in a COI situation, and
> > > that
> > > > he outside this competence finds he has limited "value" for the board
> > > work.
> > > >
> > > > But all of these facts was known before the election (but not
> necessary
> > > > the ramification). Would a more elaborate (tedious long?) description
> > of
> > > > requirements of serving in the Board helped Danny to understand the
> > > > challenge before he entered his candidacy? Would some type of
> > > (lightweight)
> > > > "vetting" by the Election committee by all candidates have identified
> > > this
> > > > risk (which then could have been feedbacked to the candidate)? Should
> > for
> > > > future election the election committee not only be facilitator of the
> > > > election, but also help he voters in complementing the data given by
> > each
> > > > candidate by some type of comments? For example last time the
> > requirement
> > > > from the board was non western (non English natives) persons and
> > priority
> > > > for nonmale. but 2 out of 3 was just his. Could some mark on the
> > > candidate
> > > > statement made by the EC (he/she is/is not fulfilling the Board
> > criteria)
> > > > had helped?
> > > >
> > > > The setup up of a Standing Election Committee is under formation but
> it
> > > > will probably still be some month before it is established. Any
> changes
> > > in
> > > > the election process has to await this formation, but I believe a
> > > > discussion of learnings can start independently.
> > > >
> > > > Anders
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > 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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What can we learn

[Ilario Valdelli]

Any COI generates burocracy. After or before.

Doing it before helps to avoid empty seats.

In an election is the same community to check it. If there is an
appointment, there is not a preliminary extensive check. A potential COI is
revealed after the appointment.
Il 09 Apr 2016 12:15, "Gerard Meijssen"  ha
scritto:

> Hoi,
> Really more bureaucracy? As if that does not bring its own conflict of
> interest?
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 9 April 2016 at 10:20, Ilario Valdelli  wrote:
>
> > What should be noted is that a personal declaration of COI cannot be
> > sufficient. Probably an evaluation of potential conflits done by a
> > committee as neutral body can help the candidates to better evaluate the
> > candidacy and to manage them better.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Il 09 Apr 2016 8:26 AM, "Anders Wennersten" 
> ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > I, as all others, has full sympathy for Danny and find that he in his
> > mail
> > > made an excellent explanation on how the situation made the option to
> > > resign the only reasonable way forward
> > >
> > > BUT this is the second community selected that has left the Board
> within
> > a
> > > year after being appointed, and before any future election (either a
> snap
> > > byelection soon, or the ordinary in a years time) I believe we should
> > look
> > > into if anything can be learnt. And if there are things, primary in the
> > > election process, that can be done to ensure the appointed community
> > > selected members of the Board staying on the whole term.
> > >
> > > For Danny my interpretation is that he is very operational role in
> > > ordinary work leads to many interaction with WMF etc and where COI
> > > consideration hampers his day-to-days activities. And that his major
> > > strength, "Wikidata", is hard to make use of in the Board as any
> > > influencing of decision re this also puts him in a COI situation, and
> > that
> > > he outside this competence finds he has limited "value" for the board
> > work.
> > >
> > > But all of these facts was known before the election (but not necessary
> > > the ramification). Would a more elaborate (tedious long?) description
> of
> > > requirements of serving in the Board helped Danny to understand the
> > > challenge before he entered his candidacy? Would some type of
> > (lightweight)
> > > "vetting" by the Election committee by all candidates have identified
> > this
> > > risk (which then could have been feedbacked to the candidate)? Should
> for
> > > future election the election committee not only be facilitator of the
> > > election, but also help he voters in complementing the data given by
> each
> > > candidate by some type of comments? For example last time the
> requirement
> > > from the board was non western (non English natives) persons and
> priority
> > > for nonmale. but 2 out of 3 was just his. Could some mark on the
> > candidate
> > > statement made by the EC (he/she is/is not fulfilling the Board
> criteria)
> > > had helped?
> > >
> > > The setup up of a Standing Election Committee is under formation but it
> > > will probably still be some month before it is established. Any changes
> > in
> > > the election process has to await this formation, but I believe a
> > > discussion of learnings can start independently.
> > >
> > > Anders
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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 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] What can we learn

[Andy Mabbett]

On 11 April 2016 at 14:03, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> The election does not elect members of the Board, and I have not written
> that

Firstly, please don't top-post.

> The election does, though, elect candidates to be considered by the Board
> for appointment to the Board

That's not an election:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election

   An election is a formal decision-making process by which a
population chooses an individual to hold public office

> The three members in the Board are not community elected (and I have never
> written that), but they are selected from the community and I call them
> being community selected (but perhaps it is bad English)

"community selected" means "selected *by* the community ", not "from" it.

-- 
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] The option:Byelection soon

[James Heilman]

IMO we would do well with more democratic processes when it comes to the
board. Not having or not following democratic processes has led to a great
deal of distraction among the community these last 6 months as we have
struggled to deal with what has occurred. A by-election would hopefully get
the board on more solid footing as it would give the board greater
legitimacy. A majority of the board should be accountable to the community.

James

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Anders Wennersten <
m...@anderswennersten.se> wrote:

> My spontaneous reaction, like others in the Election Committee, when
> informed of Dennys resignation was to think a byelection, soon in time,
> would be the "natural" way to fill the empty seat.  This is how it has been
> done earlier (even if now some years back)  and while the appointment of
> Maria after James had support of existing (informal?)  thinking ("if the
> Board reject any of the elected three, as they are entitled to do, they
> should appoint at No 4") , no such thinking has existed to support appoint
> no 5 in case of a resignation.
>
> But the more I think the more hesitant I become, and also taking into
> account the (excellent) feedback in the thread "what can we learn" that at
> least to me give a feeling the election process for community election can
> be adjusted (without need making it more complicated) so that a situation
> like this in the future would be resolved without any need of byelection.
>
> A Bylection
> *Draws a lot a resources from WMF
> *Draws a lot of resources from the Election Committee. While almost all in
> out internal discussion is willing to support a byelection (even among the
> ones not interested to stay on in a standing EC) , we are fewer then for
> last election. Greg has resigned as some others.
> *Draws a lot on energy from the community. Think of all banners that was
> put up and even at some time dedicated e-mails being sent out, just the
> translation was a huge effort as such
>
> I also want to highlight that that I can see risks in running a byelection
> *what if we are not able to live up to the demands of process quality and
> the elections legitimacy will become disputed?
> *what if we wear out the community motivation to participate in community
> election, could it make next ordinary election in less the a year less
> successful?
> *what if the process as such reopens earlier traumas in the movement (like
> James re the Board issue)?
>
> So while not "ruling out" a byelection, I believe we should not go for
> that option without thoroughly considering other option for filling the
> seat. There can be other alternative then look for no 5 in last election
> and we should remember it is only to fill a seat for less then a year, is a
> bylection an overkill for what it can resolve?
>
> Anders
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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,
> 




-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What can we learn

[Anders Wennersten]

The election does not elect members of the Board, and I have not written 
that


The election does, though, elect candidates to be considered by the 
Board for appointment to the Board


The three members in the Board are not community elected (and I have 
never written that), but they are selected from the community and I call 
them being community selected (but perhaps it is bad English)


Anders

Den 2016-04-11 kl. 13:13, skrev Andy Mabbett:

On 9 April 2016 at 07:26, Anders Wennersten  wrote:


this is the second community selected

ITYM "community suggested". The selection is done by the board.


that has left the Board within a year
after being appointed, and before any future election

There are no elections.




___
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] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

[Fæ]

If we are going to have more elections, can we please hold Jimmy to
account this year rather than waiting for him to leave the board under
his own steam?

His use of "utter fucking bullshit", then using these distraction
politics to avoid answering basic questions intended to deal with his
repeated public allegations of lying against a respected community
member, is not what the Wikimedia movement needs or wants from a
Trustee, or someone who represents the movement to the press.

If Jimmy were a WMF employee, he'd be gone by now.

P.S. We are still waiting for Jimmy to publish his interviews with WMF
employees resulting from his trip to SF, when he was claiming to act
for the WMF board, I can't be bothered to work out how many weeks ago
that was. Is this sort of promise that Jimmy would call "bullshit" if
it was yet another person he had an ongoing feud with?

Fae

On 11 April 2016 at 12:24, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> On 23 March 2016 at 11:48, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>> On 23 March 2016 at 10:01, Jimmy Wales  wrote:
>>
>>> But I did publish something on my user talk page that is relevant.
>>
>> Diff, please.
>
> Answer came there none...

___
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] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

[Andy Mabbett]

On 23 March 2016 at 11:48, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> On 23 March 2016 at 10:01, Jimmy Wales  wrote:
>
>> But I did publish something on my user talk page that is relevant.
>
> Diff, please.

Answer came there none...

-- 
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] What can we learn

[Andy Mabbett]

On 9 April 2016 at 07:26, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> this is the second community selected

ITYM "community suggested". The selection is done by the board.

> that has left the Board within a year
> after being appointed, and before any future election

There are no elections.

-- 
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] Wikipedia Kenya - copyright infringement

[Amir E. Aharoni]

Precisely: It only goes to show that it's languages and not countries :)


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

2016-04-11 12:15 GMT+03:00 Gerard Meijssen :

> Hoi,
> Sorry for some nit-picking. It is only one variation of NDS it is not a
> variation of NL. The problem with NDS is that there has been a formal
> adoption of one variant of NDS that is only for Germany.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 11 April 2016 at 09:34, Amir E. Aharoni 
> wrote:
>
> > Wikipedia goes by languages, never by countries. (There's
> > nds-nl.wikipedia.org, where nl kind of stands for “Netherlands”, but
> it's
> > still a language variant for Netherlands. In any case, it's very much an
> > anomaly.)
> >
> > Wikimedia Kenya would be ke.wikimedia.org, if it existed.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> > http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> > ‪“We're living in pieces,
> > I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> >
> > 2016-04-11 4:35 GMT+03:00 Gnangarra :
> >
> > > wouldnt wikipedia kenya be at ke.wikipedia.org  not wikipedia.or.ke
> > >
> > > On 10 April 2016 at 19:31, John Mark Vandenberg 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > http://www.wikipedia.or.ke/ now has ads dancing around the screen,
> the
> > > > donate link is gone, and the privacy policy and general disclaimer
> > > > have been removed.
> > > >
> > > > It only has 107,391 articles according to special:statistics.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> > > > > I took a look at this. From my brief investigation, this appears to
> > be
> > > a
> > > > > good-faith effort by someone to locally host a Kenyan version of
> > > > Wikipedia.
> > > > > The donation button properly links to https://donate.wikimedia.org
> .
> > > The
> > > > > server geolocates to Estonia. I am forwarding this report to
> Legal. I
> > > > hope
> > > > > that formal legal action is not necessary and that if the
> maintainers
> > > of
> > > > > the website are responsive that a mutually agreeable settlement can
> > be
> > > > > arranged.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for finding this, Teles.
> > > > >
> > > > > Pine
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Lucas Teles 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi, everyone.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Somehow I was directed to this project in a search on Google:
> > > > >> http://www.wikipedia.or.ke/
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Does anybody know what is that project?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It seems to have a large content in English but pages doesn't
> > mention
> > > > >> authorship properly. I am assuming it uses Wikipedia content in
> > > > violation
> > > > >> of copyrights.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It also uses the Wikipedia logo improperly. Not sure if a mirror
> can
> > > do
> > > > >> that...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Regards,
> > > > >> Teles
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >>
> > > > >> *Lucas Teles*
> > > > >>
> > > > >> * Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator *
> > > > >> *at Portuguese Wikipedia.*
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles
> > > > >> Contact me:
> > > > >> [image: Facebook]  <
> > > > >> https://www.facebook.com/telesr 
> >
> > > > >> [image: Twitter]  <
> > > > >> https://twitter.com/Lucas_Teles >
> > > > >> [image: Skype] < lucastelesr >
> > > > >> Mobile: < 55 71 9374 2725 >
> > > > >> I am a Wikimedia volunteer.
> > > > >> Wikimedia Foundation can not be held responsible for my actions.
> > > > >> ___
> > > > >> 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
> > > ,
> > > > >>  > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > ___
> > > > > 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,
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > John Vandenberg
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > 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: htt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Kenya - copyright infringement

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Sorry for some nit-picking. It is only one variation of NDS it is not a
variation of NL. The problem with NDS is that there has been a formal
adoption of one variant of NDS that is only for Germany.
Thanks,
 GerardM

On 11 April 2016 at 09:34, Amir E. Aharoni 
wrote:

> Wikipedia goes by languages, never by countries. (There's
> nds-nl.wikipedia.org, where nl kind of stands for “Netherlands”, but it's
> still a language variant for Netherlands. In any case, it's very much an
> anomaly.)
>
> Wikimedia Kenya would be ke.wikimedia.org, if it existed.
>
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
>
> 2016-04-11 4:35 GMT+03:00 Gnangarra :
>
> > wouldnt wikipedia kenya be at ke.wikipedia.org  not wikipedia.or.ke
> >
> > On 10 April 2016 at 19:31, John Mark Vandenberg 
> wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.wikipedia.or.ke/ now has ads dancing around the screen, the
> > > donate link is gone, and the privacy policy and general disclaimer
> > > have been removed.
> > >
> > > It only has 107,391 articles according to special:statistics.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> > > > I took a look at this. From my brief investigation, this appears to
> be
> > a
> > > > good-faith effort by someone to locally host a Kenyan version of
> > > Wikipedia.
> > > > The donation button properly links to https://donate.wikimedia.org.
> > The
> > > > server geolocates to Estonia. I am forwarding this report to Legal. I
> > > hope
> > > > that formal legal action is not necessary and that if the maintainers
> > of
> > > > the website are responsive that a mutually agreeable settlement can
> be
> > > > arranged.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for finding this, Teles.
> > > >
> > > > Pine
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Lucas Teles 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi, everyone.
> > > >>
> > > >> Somehow I was directed to this project in a search on Google:
> > > >> http://www.wikipedia.or.ke/
> > > >>
> > > >> Does anybody know what is that project?
> > > >>
> > > >> It seems to have a large content in English but pages doesn't
> mention
> > > >> authorship properly. I am assuming it uses Wikipedia content in
> > > violation
> > > >> of copyrights.
> > > >>
> > > >> It also uses the Wikipedia logo improperly. Not sure if a mirror can
> > do
> > > >> that...
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >> Teles
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >> *Lucas Teles*
> > > >>
> > > >> * Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator *
> > > >> *at Portuguese Wikipedia.*
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles
> > > >> Contact me:
> > > >> [image: Facebook]  <
> > > >> https://www.facebook.com/telesr  >
> > > >> [image: Twitter]  <
> > > >> https://twitter.com/Lucas_Teles >
> > > >> [image: Skype] < lucastelesr >
> > > >> Mobile: < 55 71 9374 2725 >
> > > >> I am a Wikimedia volunteer.
> > > >> Wikimedia Foundation can not be held responsible for my actions.
> > > >> ___
> > > >> 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
> > ,
> > > >>  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > ___
> > > > 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,
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > John Vandenberg
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New mess

[Wikimedia-l] The option:Byelection soon

[Anders Wennersten]

My spontaneous reaction, like others in the Election Committee, when 
informed of Dennys resignation was to think a byelection, soon in time, 
would be the "natural" way to fill the empty seat.  This is how it has 
been done earlier (even if now some years back)  and while the 
appointment of Maria after James had support of existing (informal?)  
thinking ("if the Board reject any of the elected three, as they are 
entitled to do, they should appoint at No 4") , no such thinking has 
existed to support appoint no 5 in case of a resignation.


But the more I think the more hesitant I become, and also taking into 
account the (excellent) feedback in the thread "what can we learn" that 
at least to me give a feeling the election process for community 
election can be adjusted (without need making it more complicated) so 
that a situation like this in the future would be resolved without any 
need of byelection.


A Bylection
*Draws a lot a resources from WMF
*Draws a lot of resources from the Election Committee. While almost all 
in out internal discussion is willing to support a byelection (even 
among the ones not interested to stay on in a standing EC) , we are 
fewer then for last election. Greg has resigned as some others.
*Draws a lot on energy from the community. Think of all banners that was 
put up and even at some time dedicated e-mails being sent out, just the 
translation was a huge effort as such


I also want to highlight that that I can see risks in running a byelection
*what if we are not able to live up to the demands of process quality 
and the elections legitimacy will become disputed?
*what if we wear out the community motivation to participate in 
community election, could it make next ordinary election in less the a 
year less successful?
*what if the process as such reopens earlier traumas in the movement 
(like James re the Board issue)?


So while not "ruling out" a byelection, I believe we should not go for 
that option without thoroughly considering other option for filling the 
seat. There can be other alternative then look for no 5 in last election 
and we should remember it is only to fill a seat for less then a year, 
is a bylection an overkill for what it can resolve?


Anders




___
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] [recent changes]

[Gnangarra]

This is one inherrant problem with COI those who get stuff done are forced
to sit out discussions in preference for those who spend all their time
talking and producing nothing. What we end up with is not leadership, its
not project experience, its bureaucracy with out any true direction  where
every idea that sounds good, that is well presented gets the go ahead with
no understanding of what it takes to make a project work. Because of that
we have KPI or metrics that satisfy the bureaucracy, force the organisors
to run by the numbers rather than focus on producing real impact results
over the longer term.

High impact long term projects take considerable investment of time over
time the dont happen in 3, 6, 12 month cycles, look at WLE & WLM its be
year in year out commitments by volunteers to build and expand but every
year they waste time seeking funding for the year this is where the Grant
process should take the lead and just assign a long term budget to be
managed by WMF financial staff and let the volunteers concentrate on having
impact. Wikidata is in the same boat, its the bureaucratic begging
processes that cost most of our volunteers time and produce the least
impact.

Denny's loss should be awake up call otherwise it'll be repeated
continously especially from community selected seats, some where along the
way we have created a bureaucracy at the expense of trust and assuming
people are acting in good faith for the betterment of the projects

On 11 April 2016 at 15:55, rupert THURNER  wrote:

> For denny I see the situation simple and I am only able to write it as I
> read his clear email.
>
> First he is able to influence projects and general direction with his
> judgement and expertise.
>
> Second he has the expertise to get projects done.
>
> While I find it a real pity that we have less of first when he resigns I
> must admit that I consider second even more important. Choosing amongst
> proposals is easier than properly proposing. Especially if nobody steps up
> for something he feels should get done. For my part, I trust his expertise.
>
> I admire and find exemplary denny showing backbone here, something we see
> not enough. Deciding on this trade off should be possible at any time
> appropriate,  I do consequently *not* see something went awry with denny,
> nor a problem with the process.
>
> One hole in the process seems to be there though. Should a replacement be
> voted now or just the old result be taken. As the situation is new for
> every participant I tend to favour a vote.
>
> Rupert
> On Apr 11, 2016 07:56, "jytdog"  wrote:
>
> > Here is a response to Denny's resignation; his email has been sticking to
> > me.   To provide some context for what follows, I work a lot on COI and
> > advocacy issues in Wikipedia, and worked on COI issues professionally at
> a
> > university for the past 15 years.
> >
> > The limitations created by managing or eliminating Denny's various
> > conflicts of interest, appear to have been surprising to Denny, and were
> > definitely frustrating for him.
> >
> > Surprising and frustrating.  This is perhaps the result of a lack of
> > process.
> >
> > The WMF might want to consider putting in place a system of disclosing
> and
> > managing conflicts of interest for Trustees, before they actually join
> the
> > board, so that conflict management issues are both clear and acceptable
> to
> > the new Trustee and the Board at the start.
> >
> > The process could be the same as it is in many sectors -  a confidential
> > disclosure of relevant interests, identification of possible and
> perceived
> > conflicts between those interests and the obligations of a Trustee, and
> > then creation of a plan to manage those conflicts (and identification of
> > areas where the conflicts can't be managed but need to be eliminated by
> > recusal).  All done before the person actually joins the board.
> >
> > Once the person joins, the relevant external interests could be disclosed
> > at the board member's profile on the WMF board webpage.  The additional
> > step of publishing an outline of the management plan (at the same
> location)
> > would be something very useful in light of the high value that WMF staff
> > and the movement places on transparency.
> >
> > Please consider that.  And please pardon me if this is already done, but
> > something went awry with Denny.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Denny Vrandecic <
> dvrande...@wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I exchanged a walk on part in the war for a lead role in the cage.
> > >
> > > I find myself tied and limited in my actions and projects. In order to
> > > avoid the perception or potential for Conflict of Interests I have to
> act
> > > extremely carefully in far too many parts of my life. Instead of being
> > able
> > > to pursue my projects or some projects at work - which I think would
> > align
> > > very well with our mission - I found myself trapped between too many
> > > 

[Wikimedia-l] Writing week about Brussels

[Romaine Wiki]

Hello all! After some acts of hate
 in Brussels, it is
now time again for love. In this week and next week we organise a double
writing week about Brussels! We like to invite you to join this project by
writing about subjects related to this region
 in any Wikipedia you like.

More information, the participants list, and the list of articles that have
been written, can be found at: *Writing week/Brussels
*.

Participating is easy:

   1. Add your user name and wiki(s) you work on on the participants list
   .
   2. Add the articles you have written on the contributions list
   .

If you like you can also create a page for the writing weeks on your local
wiki.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me.

Greetings,
Romaine
___
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] [recent changes]

[rupert THURNER]

For denny I see the situation simple and I am only able to write it as I
read his clear email.

First he is able to influence projects and general direction with his
judgement and expertise.

Second he has the expertise to get projects done.

While I find it a real pity that we have less of first when he resigns I
must admit that I consider second even more important. Choosing amongst
proposals is easier than properly proposing. Especially if nobody steps up
for something he feels should get done. For my part, I trust his expertise.

I admire and find exemplary denny showing backbone here, something we see
not enough. Deciding on this trade off should be possible at any time
appropriate,  I do consequently *not* see something went awry with denny,
nor a problem with the process.

One hole in the process seems to be there though. Should a replacement be
voted now or just the old result be taken. As the situation is new for
every participant I tend to favour a vote.

Rupert
On Apr 11, 2016 07:56, "jytdog"  wrote:

> Here is a response to Denny's resignation; his email has been sticking to
> me.   To provide some context for what follows, I work a lot on COI and
> advocacy issues in Wikipedia, and worked on COI issues professionally at a
> university for the past 15 years.
>
> The limitations created by managing or eliminating Denny's various
> conflicts of interest, appear to have been surprising to Denny, and were
> definitely frustrating for him.
>
> Surprising and frustrating.  This is perhaps the result of a lack of
> process.
>
> The WMF might want to consider putting in place a system of disclosing and
> managing conflicts of interest for Trustees, before they actually join the
> board, so that conflict management issues are both clear and acceptable to
> the new Trustee and the Board at the start.
>
> The process could be the same as it is in many sectors -  a confidential
> disclosure of relevant interests, identification of possible and perceived
> conflicts between those interests and the obligations of a Trustee, and
> then creation of a plan to manage those conflicts (and identification of
> areas where the conflicts can't be managed but need to be eliminated by
> recusal).  All done before the person actually joins the board.
>
> Once the person joins, the relevant external interests could be disclosed
> at the board member's profile on the WMF board webpage.  The additional
> step of publishing an outline of the management plan (at the same location)
> would be something very useful in light of the high value that WMF staff
> and the movement places on transparency.
>
> Please consider that.  And please pardon me if this is already done, but
> something went awry with Denny.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Denny Vrandecic 
> wrote:
>
> > I exchanged a walk on part in the war for a lead role in the cage.
> >
> > I find myself tied and limited in my actions and projects. In order to
> > avoid the perception or potential for Conflict of Interests I have to act
> > extremely carefully in far too many parts of my life. Instead of being
> able
> > to pursue my projects or some projects at work - which I think would
> align
> > very well with our mission - I found myself trapped between too many
> > constraints. I feel like I cannot offer my thoughts and my considerations
> > openly, since they might easily be perceived as expressions of interests
> -
> > regarding my previous work, regarding my friends, regarding my current
> > employment.
> >
> > This hit home strongly during the FDC deliberations, where I had to deal
> > with the situation of people deliberating a proposal written by my Best
> > Man, around a project that has consumed the best part of the previous
> > decade of my life. Obviously, I explained the conflicts in this case, and
> > refrained from participating in the discussion, as agreed with the FDC.
> >
> > This hit home every time there was a topic that might be perceived as a
> > potential conflict of interest between Wikimedia and my employer, and
> even
> > though I might have been in a unique position to provide insight, I had
> to
> > refrain from doing so in order not to exert influence.
> >
> > There were constant and continuous attacks against me, as being merely
> > Google’s mole on the Board, even of the election being bought by Google.
> I
> > would not have minded these attacks so much - if I would have had the
> > feeling that my input to the Board, based on my skills and experiences,
> > would have been particularly valuable, or if I would have had the feeling
> > of getting anything done while being on the Board. As it is, neither was
> > the case.
> >
> > I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not
> appropriate
> > to pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice,
> > but it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
> >
> > As some of you might know, Wikidata was for me just one step towards my
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Kenya - copyright infringement

[Amir E. Aharoni]

Wikipedia goes by languages, never by countries. (There's
nds-nl.wikipedia.org, where nl kind of stands for “Netherlands”, but it's
still a language variant for Netherlands. In any case, it's very much an
anomaly.)

Wikimedia Kenya would be ke.wikimedia.org, if it existed.


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

2016-04-11 4:35 GMT+03:00 Gnangarra :

> wouldnt wikipedia kenya be at ke.wikipedia.org  not wikipedia.or.ke
>
> On 10 April 2016 at 19:31, John Mark Vandenberg  wrote:
>
> > http://www.wikipedia.or.ke/ now has ads dancing around the screen, the
> > donate link is gone, and the privacy policy and general disclaimer
> > have been removed.
> >
> > It only has 107,391 articles according to special:statistics.
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> > > I took a look at this. From my brief investigation, this appears to be
> a
> > > good-faith effort by someone to locally host a Kenyan version of
> > Wikipedia.
> > > The donation button properly links to https://donate.wikimedia.org.
> The
> > > server geolocates to Estonia. I am forwarding this report to Legal. I
> > hope
> > > that formal legal action is not necessary and that if the maintainers
> of
> > > the website are responsive that a mutually agreeable settlement can be
> > > arranged.
> > >
> > > Thanks for finding this, Teles.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Lucas Teles 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi, everyone.
> > >>
> > >> Somehow I was directed to this project in a search on Google:
> > >> http://www.wikipedia.or.ke/
> > >>
> > >> Does anybody know what is that project?
> > >>
> > >> It seems to have a large content in English but pages doesn't mention
> > >> authorship properly. I am assuming it uses Wikipedia content in
> > violation
> > >> of copyrights.
> > >>
> > >> It also uses the Wikipedia logo improperly. Not sure if a mirror can
> do
> > >> that...
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Teles
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>
> > >> *Lucas Teles*
> > >>
> > >> * Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator *
> > >> *at Portuguese Wikipedia.*https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles
> > >> Contact me:
> > >> [image: Facebook]  <
> > >> https://www.facebook.com/telesr  >
> > >> [image: Twitter]  <
> > >> https://twitter.com/Lucas_Teles >
> > >> [image: Skype] < lucastelesr >
> > >> Mobile: < 55 71 9374 2725 >
> > >> I am a Wikimedia volunteer.
> > >> Wikimedia Foundation can not be held responsible for my actions.
> > >> ___
> > >> 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,
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > John Vandenberg
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> 
>
___
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,