Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Alessandro Marchetti]

Proposal #1... the point is that with an effective average of 15 posts from 
some profile, someone still complains, IMHO it is fine, standard fluctuation. 
You should reduce drastically only if the majority of people complain, that is 
not the case so far. So if you want to give amessage you can reduce it but 
leave it higher... 20 maybe. I accept all posts and I don't think it is healthy 
if a minority, who often or maybe does not complain publicly, fix the agenda 
here. Life is though, deal with it. These processes in my experience always 
start with such good intention and turn out poorly. Everybody basically remains 
dissatisfied, and some people keep complaining (basically, it worked... so why 
they should stop?)
I don't like the automatism of Proposal #2. You can limit the post of globally 
blocked people and specifically if some issue in that direction has emerged 
during the ban discussion. For example, there is no specific reason to refuse 
to post someone who was banned for copyviol. but if you want someone banned put 
your face on it, "I want him/her banned also there because... "
Proposal #3 is also not fully reliable, you can be banned on some local project 
for strange dynamics, for example. I know a lot of people who said "someone 
blocked me on xx.wiki and I basically have no idea why". Just to cite the less 
controversial case, one sysop blocked the wrong account for a similar name 
(upon request) and the guy didn't even noticed because he was not active on 
that wiki. This was on a major one, in minor ones it get sometimes even worse 
because in small environment social dynamics and their output can fluctuate in 
a stronger way. With so many sysops active on different communities is also 
much easier to transfer an excessive dynamics from one project to a 
multilingual one, when few people speak that specific language. 
Alessandro
 

Il Mercoledì 23 Agosto 2017 6:04, John Mark Vandenberg  
ha scritto:
 

 Hi list members,

The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I, your
humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent
posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant atmosphere some
posters (some of them frequent) create.

It is natural that frequent posters will say specific things that more
frequently annoy other list members, but often the complaints are due
to the volume of messages rather than the content of the messages.

We are floating some suggestions aimed specifically at reducing the
volume, hopefully motivating frequent posters to self-moderate more,
but these proposed limits are actually intending to increasing the
quality of the discourse without heavy subjective moderation.

The first proposal impacts all posters to this list, and the last
three proposals are aimed at providing a more clear framework within
which criticism and whistle-blowing are permitted, but that critics
are prevented from drowning out other discussions. The bandwidth that
will be given to critics should be established in advance, reducing
need to use subjective moderation of the content when a limit to the
volume will often achieve the same result.
--

Proposal #1: Monthly 'soft quota' reduced from 30 to 15

The existing soft quota of 30 posts per person has practically never
been exceeded in the past year, and yet many list subscribers still
clearly feel that a few individuals overwhelm the list. This suggests
the current quota is too high.

A review of the stats at
https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html show very few
people go over 15 in a month, and quite often the reason for people
exceeding 15 per month is because they are replying to other list
members who have already exceeded 15 per month, and sometimes they are
repeatedly directly or indirectly asking the person to stop repeating
themselves to allow some space for other list members also have their
opinion heard.
--

Proposal #2: Posts by globally banned people not permitted

As WMF-banned people are already banned from mailing lists, this
proposal is to apply the same ‘global’ approach to any people who have
been globally banned by the community according to the
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans policy.

This proposal does not prevent proxying, or canvassing, or “meat
puppetry” as defined by English Wikipedia policy.  The list admins
would prefer that globally banned people communicate their grievances
via established members of our community who can guide them, rather
than the list admins initially guiding these globally banned people on
how to revise their posts so they are suitable for this audience, and
then required to block them when they do not follow advice.  The role
of list moderators is clearer and simpler if we are only patrolling
the boundaries and not repeatedly personally engaged with helping
globally banned users.
--

Proposal #3: Identity of an account locked / blocked / banned by two
Wikimedia communities limited to five (5) posts per 

[Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[John Mark Vandenberg]

Hi list members,

The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I, your
humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent
posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant atmosphere some
posters (some of them frequent) create.

It is natural that frequent posters will say specific things that more
frequently annoy other list members, but often the complaints are due
to the volume of messages rather than the content of the messages.

We are floating some suggestions aimed specifically at reducing the
volume, hopefully motivating frequent posters to self-moderate more,
but these proposed limits are actually intending to increasing the
quality of the discourse without heavy subjective moderation.

The first proposal impacts all posters to this list, and the last
three proposals are aimed at providing a more clear framework within
which criticism and whistle-blowing are permitted, but that critics
are prevented from drowning out other discussions. The bandwidth that
will be given to critics should be established in advance, reducing
need to use subjective moderation of the content when a limit to the
volume will often achieve the same result.
--

Proposal #1: Monthly 'soft quota' reduced from 30 to 15

The existing soft quota of 30 posts per person has practically never
been exceeded in the past year, and yet many list subscribers still
clearly feel that a few individuals overwhelm the list. This suggests
the current quota is too high.

A review of the stats at
https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html show very few
people go over 15 in a month, and quite often the reason for people
exceeding 15 per month is because they are replying to other list
members who have already exceeded 15 per month, and sometimes they are
repeatedly directly or indirectly asking the person to stop repeating
themselves to allow some space for other list members also have their
opinion heard.
--

Proposal #2: Posts by globally banned people not permitted

As WMF-banned people are already banned from mailing lists, this
proposal is to apply the same ‘global’ approach to any people who have
been globally banned by the community according to the
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans policy.

This proposal does not prevent proxying, or canvassing, or “meat
puppetry” as defined by English Wikipedia policy.  The list admins
would prefer that globally banned people communicate their grievances
via established members of our community who can guide them, rather
than the list admins initially guiding these globally banned people on
how to revise their posts so they are suitable for this audience, and
then required to block them when they do not follow advice.  The role
of list moderators is clearer and simpler if we are only patrolling
the boundaries and not repeatedly personally engaged with helping
globally banned users.
--

Proposal #3: Identity of an account locked / blocked / banned by two
Wikimedia communities limited to five (5) posts per month

This proposal is intended to strike a balance between openness and
quality of discourse.

Banned people occasionally use the wikimedia-l mailing list as a
substitute of the meta Request for comment system, and banned people
also occasionally provide constructive criticisms and thought
provoking views.  This proposal hopes to allow that to continue.

However people who have been banned on a few projects also use this
list as their “last stand”, having already exhausted the community
patience on the wikis.  Sometimes the last stand is brief, but
occasionally a banned person is able to maintain sufficient decorum
that they are not moderated or banned from the list, and mailing list
readers need to suffer month after month of the banned person
dominating the mailing lists with time that they would previously have
spent editing on the wikis.
--

Proposal #4: Undisclosed alternative identities limited to five (5)
posts per month

Posting using fake identities allows people to shield their real life
*and* their Wikimedia editing 'account' from the repercussions of
their actions. This provision to allow fake identities on wikimedia-l
is necessary for whistle-blowing, and this mailing list has been used
for that purpose at important junctures in the history of the
Wikimedia movement.

However it is more frequently abused, especially by some ‘critics’ who
have used incessant hyperbole and snark and baiting to generally cause
stress to many readers. Sometimes this is also accompanied with many
list posts on various unrelated threads as the ‘critic’ believes their
criticism is so important that all other discussions about Wikimedia
should be diverted until their problem has been resolved to their
satisfaction, which is unlikely anyway.

Note this explicitly does not include anyone posting using their real
world identity, whether or not they have a Wikimedia account.

Where a poster does not clearly link to either Wikimedia account, or
does not 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

[Joseph Seddon]

Rogol I don't understanding how you have interpreted this as a choice
between community and stability.

Could you explain?

Seddon

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Lisa
>
> Thanks anyway.  Perhaps one of the members of the Board will comment, in
> the interests of transparency.
>
> Ronald
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Lisa Gruwell 
> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I wasn't at the meeting, so I can't speak to that.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> domedonf...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Lisa
> > >
> > > Thanks for that explanation.  If it had already been decided to
> > contribute
> > > the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then there
> > > would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision.
> > Can
> > > you confirm that was the case?  But the main point of my question to
> the
> > > Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the
> > > Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the
> > > volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was
> part
> > of
> > > that decision) directly.  Can you throw any light on their reasons?
> > >
> > > Rudyard
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the
> > Endowment:
> > > >
> > > > 1) I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment.  As
> > > James
> > > > indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and
> > > this
> > > > is one of the areas of expertise.  We have been looking at
> > environmental,
> > > > social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform
> > against
> > > > the benchmarks financially.  We are going to be publishing more
> > > information
> > > > about this soon.
> > > >
> > > > 2) Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to
> > the
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for
> > almost a
> > > > decade.  They have also now provided major support to the endowment.
> > > They
> > > > have provided generous support for our present work and our future
> > work.
> > > > It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching
> > grant.
> > > > It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our
> online
> > > > donors made this year.  It is a great story that we are sharing with
> > > other
> > > > potential endowment donors.  We are hoping to find another major
> donor
> > > (or
> > > > donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in
> the
> > > FY
> > > > 2017-18 annual plan as well.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Lisa
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our
> > > > > endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.tides.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > James
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni <
> > > crist...@balist.es>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
> > > > > > > Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be
> invested
> > > > > inline
> > > > > > > with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that
> promotes
> > > war
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the
> > case
> > > > but
> > > > > > > would have to verify.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > C
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ___
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > >  > unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > James Heilman
> > > > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > > > >
> > > > > The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > >  unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions

[Katie Chan]

** Personal views follow **

On 22/08/2017 20:10, Andy Mabbett wrote:



María and Dariusz, were re-elected after the recent community election.


This is not correct. There was no "community election"; the community
is only empowered to /nominate/ candidates, which the board may or may
not appoint, at its whim.

Please be more careful to use accurate terms on such points, in the future.



Multiple people put themselves forward for the community considerations. 
The community then voted on it, resulting in a ranking by who got most 
votes based on the voting system used. By definition, that's an 
election. The electoral consisted of members of the Wikimedia community. 
Ergo, there was a community election.


That the winning candidates does not automatically become a member of 
the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees as a result due (at least 
partly) to legal reasons does not make it any less of an election.


"A vote by the Wikimedia community for X numbers of winners to be 
considered by the WMF BoT for appointment as its members" is still an 
election.


Regards,

Katie


--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the 
author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the 
author is associated with or employed by.



Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

[Lisa Gruwell]

Sorry, I wasn't at the meeting, so I can't speak to that.

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Lisa
>
> Thanks for that explanation.  If it had already been decided to contribute
> the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then there
> would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision.  Can
> you confirm that was the case?  But the main point of my question to the
> Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the
> Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the
> volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was part of
> that decision) directly.  Can you throw any light on their reasons?
>
> Rudyard
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell 
> wrote:
>
> > Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the Endowment:
> >
> > 1) I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment.  As
> James
> > indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and
> this
> > is one of the areas of expertise.  We have been looking at environmental,
> > social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against
> > the benchmarks financially.  We are going to be publishing more
> information
> > about this soon.
> >
> > 2) Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to the
> > Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for almost a
> > decade.  They have also now provided major support to the endowment.
> They
> > have provided generous support for our present work and our future work.
> > It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching grant.
> > It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our online
> > donors made this year.  It is a great story that we are sharing with
> other
> > potential endowment donors.  We are hoping to find another major donor
> (or
> > donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in the
> FY
> > 2017-18 annual plan as well.
> >
> > Best,
> > Lisa
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman  wrote:
> >
> > > I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our
> > > endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
> > >
> > > https://www.tides.org/
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni <
> crist...@balist.es>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
> > > > > Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested
> > > inline
> > > > > with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes
> war
> > > or
> > > > > surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case
> > but
> > > > > would have to verify.
> > > >
> > > > I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
> > > >
> > > > C
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > 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
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions

[Andy Mabbett]

On 11 August 2017 at 16:16, Christophe Henner  wrote:

> As is customary, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees met right
> before Wikimania and appointed new trustees and elected its officers.

Yes; the board /appointed/ new trustees...

> María and Dariusz, were re-elected after the recent community election.

This is not correct. There was no "community election"; the community
is only empowered to /nominate/ candidates, which the board may or may
not appoint, at its whim.

Please be more careful to use accurate terms on such points, in the future.

[The above not withstanding, congratulations to new - and returning -
trustees and officers; and thank you for your service to them and
those departing]

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

[Rogol Domedonfors]

Lisa

Thanks for that explanation.  If it had already been decided to contribute
the $5M to the Endowment before the offer of matching funds, then there
would be no appearance of the offer influencing the Board's decision.  Can
you confirm that was the case?  But the main point of my question to the
Board is to ask why they decided that placing this large sum into the
Endowment was more important than using it to support the work of the
volunteer community (whether or not the offer of matching funds was part of
that decision) directly.  Can you throw any light on their reasons?

Rudyard

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Lisa Gruwell 
wrote:

> Just jumping in with a few points of information regarding the Endowment:
>
> 1) I met with Lukas at Wikimania regarding SRI and the endowment.  As James
> indicated, the endowment is invested through the Tides Foundation and this
> is one of the areas of expertise.  We have been looking at environmental,
> social, and governance (ESG) ratings as well as how funds perform against
> the benchmarks financially.  We are going to be publishing more information
> about this soon.
>
> 2) Regarding the matching grant, this funder has made large grants to the
> Wikimedia Foundation for general support for our annual work for almost a
> decade.  They have also now provided major support to the endowment.  They
> have provided generous support for our present work and our future work.
> It is positive thing that this grant was positioned as a matching grant.
> It doubles the impact of a portion of the contributions that our online
> donors made this year.  It is a great story that we are sharing with other
> potential endowment donors.  We are hoping to find another major donor (or
> donors) that will match the $5 million for the endowment that is in the FY
> 2017-18 annual plan as well.
>
> Best,
> Lisa
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:15 AM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > I have been send further details. As expected Tides (who runs our
> > endowment) has a strong philosophy around social justice.
> >
> > https://www.tides.org/
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Cristian Consonni 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 22/08/2017 17:03, James Heilman wrote:
> > > > Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested
> > inline
> > > > with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes war
> > or
> > > > surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case
> but
> > > > would have to verify.
> > >
> > > I wholeheartedly agree with Andrea.
> > >
> > > C
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

[James Heilman]

Andrea I agree completely that movement monies should be invested inline
with our values. We should not be invested in stuff that promotes war or
surveillance for example. I would image this is currently the case but
would have to verify.

J

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Andrea Zanni 
wrote:

> Personally I think the endowment is a great idea,
> stability and growth for our movement are paramount, IF, we use our money
> in the best way we can.
>
> I also don't really care about how big the banner is: it's a minor
> inconvenience to click the "Hide" button (provided that we are able to hide
> automatically the button for those who actually donated: they deserve a
> bannerless page. I remember some complaints during the years about this).
>
> What it's more important to me is where are we putting donors' money, both
> in terms of endowment and actual spending.
> The WMF is spending money to serve the movement, and how effective and
> efficient they are
> should be our only focus.
>
> Regarding the endowment, the only little complaint I have is *where* we are
> investing those money.
> Reading the documentation page [1], I don't see mentioned anything
> regarding
> ethical or socially responsible investing (SRI).
>
> There are many funds (of stocks or ETFs) that manage selected "ethical"
> financial products:
> these are also our values, and I think we should put donors' money where
> our mouth is.
> (I get that sometimes non-ethical investments yield more money, but at
> least we should have this discussion)
>
> Aubrey
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Endowment
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Strainu  wrote:
>
> > Both stability and growth come at a cost - is that cost acceptable?
> > The way I understand it from the mid-year fundrasing report in
> > January, the $5M were on top of the fundraising target, basically
> > gathered by exposing our readers to more banners than needed. My
> > opinion is that's a very high price to pay and that there should be
> > more stringent rules regarding continuing fundraisers after their
> > target has been reached (which in turn will probably require even
> > better planning, including for the Endowment).
> >
> > As to whether some donor influenced the Board's decision, that
> > statement looks really far-fetched based on available information. It
> > sounds more like an opportunity that either appeared or was created
> > after the $5M target had been set.
> >
> > Strainu
> >
> >
> > 2017-08-21 23:49 GMT+03:00 James Heilman :
> > > My personal position is it is critical to have a stable organization
> > before
> > > growing. The WMF has achieved greater stability over the last 1.5 years
> > so
> > > I think further growth is becoming again a good idea.
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of
> > >> endowment,  The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort --
> > one
> > >> of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the
> > benefit
> > >> of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the
> > >> projects tomorrow.  I am asking the Board to say why they decided to
> > strike
> > >> that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support
> > >> right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to
> > apparently
> > >> influence that decision.
> > >>
> > >> Reinhard
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Yaroslav Blanter 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision.
> The
> > >> idea
> > >> > of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community,
> > >> > including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF
> merely
> > >> > follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know
> that
> > a
> > >> > donor agreed to match this amount.
> > >> >
> > >> > Cheers
> > >> > Yaroslav
> > >> >
> > >> > On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to 
> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the
> > endowment.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating
> *lots*
> > of
> > >> > > money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in
> pursuing
> > >> the
> > >> > > plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove,
> > for
> > >> > > donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Vito
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors <
> domedonf...@gmail.com
> > >:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > I was surprised to read the record
> > >> > > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_
> > >> > > > of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$
> > >> > > > 

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Re: Funding the endowment

[Cristian Consonni]

On 19/08/2017 12:05, Lodewijk wrote:
> Thanks for the link, Rogol. It is wonderful to hear that these generous
> donors have decided to match a deposit of $5 million into the endowment.
> 
> It is always a good thing if someone from the board could expand on what
> (if anything) the board is planning to do with the proposed expenses. The
> way you're framing this decision is not something I consider fair.

I agree with Lodewijk.

On 21/08/2017 18:48, Rogol Domedonfors wrote:
> I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of
> endowment,  The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort -- one
> of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the benefit
> of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the
> projects tomorrow.  I am asking the Board to say why they decided to
strike
> that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support
> right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to apparently
> influence that decision.

This is a much better way to approach this discussion. I recognize the
concern, and - although admittedly I don't know in the detail how the
endowment is managed - I wouldn't say that the donor is influencing the
decision as long as there are no further restrictions on how the money
will be invested.

Cristian



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding the endowment

[Andrea Zanni]

Personally I think the endowment is a great idea,
stability and growth for our movement are paramount, IF, we use our money
in the best way we can.

I also don't really care about how big the banner is: it's a minor
inconvenience to click the "Hide" button (provided that we are able to hide
automatically the button for those who actually donated: they deserve a
bannerless page. I remember some complaints during the years about this).

What it's more important to me is where are we putting donors' money, both
in terms of endowment and actual spending.
The WMF is spending money to serve the movement, and how effective and
efficient they are
should be our only focus.

Regarding the endowment, the only little complaint I have is *where* we are
investing those money.
Reading the documentation page [1], I don't see mentioned anything
regarding
ethical or socially responsible investing (SRI).

There are many funds (of stocks or ETFs) that manage selected "ethical"
financial products:
these are also our values, and I think we should put donors' money where
our mouth is.
(I get that sometimes non-ethical investments yield more money, but at
least we should have this discussion)

Aubrey

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Endowment

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Strainu  wrote:

> Both stability and growth come at a cost - is that cost acceptable?
> The way I understand it from the mid-year fundrasing report in
> January, the $5M were on top of the fundraising target, basically
> gathered by exposing our readers to more banners than needed. My
> opinion is that's a very high price to pay and that there should be
> more stringent rules regarding continuing fundraisers after their
> target has been reached (which in turn will probably require even
> better planning, including for the Endowment).
>
> As to whether some donor influenced the Board's decision, that
> statement looks really far-fetched based on available information. It
> sounds more like an opportunity that either appeared or was created
> after the $5M target had been set.
>
> Strainu
>
>
> 2017-08-21 23:49 GMT+03:00 James Heilman :
> > My personal position is it is critical to have a stable organization
> before
> > growing. The WMF has achieved greater stability over the last 1.5 years
> so
> > I think further growth is becoming again a good idea.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I'm know that the WMF has determined that it should have some form of
> >> endowment,  The question is -- as is usual in question of this sort --
> one
> >> of balance: in this case, balance between current spending for the
> benefit
> >> of the projects today, and accumulating capital for the benefit of the
> >> projects tomorrow.  I am asking the Board to say why they decided to
> strike
> >> that balance where they did -- given the obvious need for that support
> >> right now -- and whether it is appropriate for large donors to
> apparently
> >> influence that decision.
> >>
> >> Reinhard
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Yaroslav Blanter 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I am often critical of WMF, but I can only support this decision. The
> >> idea
> >> > of creating of an environment was widely discussed in the community,
> >> > including this mailing list, and had a widespread support. WMF merely
> >> > follows the community wish in this case, and it is great to know that
> a
> >> > donor agreed to match this amount.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers
> >> > Yaroslav
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Vi to 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Caveat: I support a definitely more frugal WMF so also the
> endowment.
> >> > >
> >> > > Try to read it from a different perspective. Before donating *lots*
> of
> >> > > money donor wants to be sure WMF will be truly committed in pursuing
> >> the
> >> > > plan of an endowment. Putting the same amount of money is a prove,
> for
> >> > > donors, WMF truly wants to create an endowment.
> >> > >
> >> > > Vito
> >> > >
> >> > > 2017-08-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Rogol Domedonfors  >:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I was surprised to read the record
> >> > > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Approval_
> >> > > > of_Endowment_funding_(Fiscal_Year_2016-2017)_and_matching_$
> >> > > > 5_million_gift_from_Peter_Baldwin_and_Lisbet_Rausing
> >> > > > of the decision to place $5M into the endowment.  After the
> >> anouncement
> >> > > by
> >> > > > Lisa Gruwell on this list
> >> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-
> >> > > > December/085712.html
> >> > > > there was a discussion of what might be done with the funds
> raised,
> >> > and a
> >> > > > number of suggestions were made for how these funds could be used
> to
> >> > > > directly support the work of the volunteers who contribute the
> >> content
> >> > to
> >> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

[Nurunnaby Hasive]

Cool!

Hasive

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Nabin K. Sapkota <
nboycreationne...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sound's great :)
>
> On Aug 22, 2017 12:13 PM, "James Heilman"  wrote:
>
> > Once again great stuff from the community tech team. Many thanks :-)
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 2:46 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > > thats a great outcome, thanks to those that have made this happen
> > >
> > > On 19 August 2017 at 07:19, Todd Allen  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Great to see this, thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Todd
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 18, 2017 5:15 PM, "Danny Horn"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > The Community Tech team has released a new security feature this
> > week:
> > > > > LoginNotify, which gives you a notification when someone tries and
> > > fails
> > > > to
> > > > > log in to your account. This project was wish #7 on the 2016
> > Community
> > > > > Wishlist Survey [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > Here’s how it works:
> > > > >
> > > > > If someone tries and fails to log in to your account from a device
> or
> > > an
> > > > IP
> > > > > address that hasn’t logged into your account recently, then you’ll
> > get
> > > an
> > > > > on-wiki notification at the first attempt. For a familiar device or
> > IP
> > > > > address, you’ll get an on-wiki notification after 5 failed logins.
> > This
> > > > is
> > > > > on by default, but you can turn it off in your preferences; you can
> > > also
> > > > > turn on email notifications.
> > > > >
> > > > > It’s also possible to turn on email notifications when there’s a
> > > > successful
> > > > > login from a new device or IP address. This is turned off by
> default,
> > > but
> > > > > it might be useful for admins or other functionaries who are
> > concerned
> > > > that
> > > > > their user rights could be misused. This means that you’ll get a
> > > > > notification every time you log in from a new device or IP address.
> > > > >
> > > > > We want to take this opportunity to thank Brian Wolff for all his
> > work
> > > in
> > > > > writing the underlying extension for this feature.
> > > > >
> > > > > There’s more information on the feature on the Community Tech
> project
> > > > page
> > > > > on Meta, and please feel free to post questions on the talk page:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/LoginNotify
> > > > >
> > > > > PS: If you’re wondering what happened to the Syntax Highlighting
> beta
> > > > > feature that we deployed a couple weeks ago and then had to roll
> > back:
> > > > > it’ll be back soon!
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]: 2016 Community Wishlist Survey:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Community_Wishlist_
> > Survey/Results
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > >  unsubscribe>
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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 and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

[Nabin K. Sapkota]

Sound's great :)

On Aug 22, 2017 12:13 PM, "James Heilman"  wrote:

> Once again great stuff from the community tech team. Many thanks :-)
>
> James
>
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 2:46 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > thats a great outcome, thanks to those that have made this happen
> >
> > On 19 August 2017 at 07:19, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> > > Great to see this, thanks!
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Aug 18, 2017 5:15 PM, "Danny Horn"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > The Community Tech team has released a new security feature this
> week:
> > > > LoginNotify, which gives you a notification when someone tries and
> > fails
> > > to
> > > > log in to your account. This project was wish #7 on the 2016
> Community
> > > > Wishlist Survey [1].
> > > >
> > > > Here’s how it works:
> > > >
> > > > If someone tries and fails to log in to your account from a device or
> > an
> > > IP
> > > > address that hasn’t logged into your account recently, then you’ll
> get
> > an
> > > > on-wiki notification at the first attempt. For a familiar device or
> IP
> > > > address, you’ll get an on-wiki notification after 5 failed logins.
> This
> > > is
> > > > on by default, but you can turn it off in your preferences; you can
> > also
> > > > turn on email notifications.
> > > >
> > > > It’s also possible to turn on email notifications when there’s a
> > > successful
> > > > login from a new device or IP address. This is turned off by default,
> > but
> > > > it might be useful for admins or other functionaries who are
> concerned
> > > that
> > > > their user rights could be misused. This means that you’ll get a
> > > > notification every time you log in from a new device or IP address.
> > > >
> > > > We want to take this opportunity to thank Brian Wolff for all his
> work
> > in
> > > > writing the underlying extension for this feature.
> > > >
> > > > There’s more information on the feature on the Community Tech project
> > > page
> > > > on Meta, and please feel free to post questions on the talk page:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/LoginNotify
> > > >
> > > > PS: If you’re wondering what happened to the Syntax Highlighting beta
> > > > feature that we deployed a couple weeks ago and then had to roll
> back:
> > > > it’ll be back soon!
> > > >
> > > > [1]: 2016 Community Wishlist Survey:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Community_Wishlist_
> Survey/Results
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature: LoginNotify

[James Heilman]

Once again great stuff from the community tech team. Many thanks :-)

James

On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 2:46 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:

> thats a great outcome, thanks to those that have made this happen
>
> On 19 August 2017 at 07:19, Todd Allen  wrote:
>
> > Great to see this, thanks!
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Aug 18, 2017 5:15 PM, "Danny Horn"  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > The Community Tech team has released a new security feature this week:
> > > LoginNotify, which gives you a notification when someone tries and
> fails
> > to
> > > log in to your account. This project was wish #7 on the 2016 Community
> > > Wishlist Survey [1].
> > >
> > > Here’s how it works:
> > >
> > > If someone tries and fails to log in to your account from a device or
> an
> > IP
> > > address that hasn’t logged into your account recently, then you’ll get
> an
> > > on-wiki notification at the first attempt. For a familiar device or IP
> > > address, you’ll get an on-wiki notification after 5 failed logins. This
> > is
> > > on by default, but you can turn it off in your preferences; you can
> also
> > > turn on email notifications.
> > >
> > > It’s also possible to turn on email notifications when there’s a
> > successful
> > > login from a new device or IP address. This is turned off by default,
> but
> > > it might be useful for admins or other functionaries who are concerned
> > that
> > > their user rights could be misused. This means that you’ll get a
> > > notification every time you log in from a new device or IP address.
> > >
> > > We want to take this opportunity to thank Brian Wolff for all his work
> in
> > > writing the underlying extension for this feature.
> > >
> > > There’s more information on the feature on the Community Tech project
> > page
> > > on Meta, and please feel free to post questions on the talk page:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/LoginNotify
> > >
> > > PS: If you’re wondering what happened to the Syntax Highlighting beta
> > > feature that we deployed a couple weeks ago and then had to roll back:
> > > it’ll be back soon!
> > >
> > > [1]: 2016 Community Wishlist Survey:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Results
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,