Re: [Wikimedia-l] ?מה עושה אותך מאושר השבוע / What's making you happy this week? (Week of 10 June 2018)

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I am happy because someone asked me if it was an idea to have a list of
African women performers and base it on [1], we did a similar thing for 100
women BBC [2]. I love the idea :)
Thanks,
  GerardM


[1] https://100women.okayafrica.com
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GerardM/100_Women_-_BBC

On 10 June 2018 at 02:17, Pine W  wrote:

> Here are some highlights:
>
> * "Improved geocoding in CiviCRM", by Eileen McNaughton:
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/06/05/improved-geocoding-in-civicrm/
>
> * "Thank you week-end thread", with posts by hashar (
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2018-June/090126.html)
> and
> legoktm (
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2018-June/090142.html)
>
> * You may be familiar with the United Nations Sustainable Development
> Goals. WMF commented on a draft text that is being considered by UNESCO in
> regards to Sustainable Development Goal 4. You can read about SDG 4 at
> https://en.unesco.org/education2030-sdg4/targets and
> https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg4. Nichole Saad published WMF's
> comments about the draft document at
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_
> Foundation_Comment_on_the_UNESCO_OER_Recommendation_Draft.pdf.
>
>
> * "Rebuilding Wikimédia France", by Charlotte Matoussowsky:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-June/090413.html
>
> * "Stats re new users per gender per year in Hebrew Wikipedia", by Shani
> Evenstein Sigalov:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-June/090429.html.
> Asaf Bartov uploaded a screenshot of the data table here that may be easier
> to read:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:User_gender_on_
> Hebrew_Wikipedia,_by_year,_through_May_2018.png
>
>
> What's making you happy this week? You are welcome to comment in any
> language.
>
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> ___
> 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] Volunteering and Appreciation (was: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF)

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
One reason why you do not get much traction is because many people, myself
included, found that there is little purpose in spending time on Meta. It
is time spend in a frustrating way and it hardly ever results in the kind
of results you hope for. The time necessary to keep up with what is written
there robs you of the time for projects. Projects are practical and expand
on the things you really care for. For me that is work on subjects that do
not get the light of day from most others.

My meta thoughts I publish on my blog [1], subjects are my projects and my
thoughts as I progress .I write there and to be honest, I do not expect
much of anyone; I am happy with a single person seeing the benefits and
contributing in what I do. Currently I work on African politicians, my
interest on Ottoman and Islamic history is on hold for the moment. I find
that my thinking is often controversial.

Currently there are some moves about paying admins, maybe others. I am
strongly opposed because what you sponsor is not so much the work done but
the ability to do the work *and *read Meta. Given reports of ninety pages,
it is hardly feasible to keep up even with Wiki as a full time job. It is
why we should not sponsor what are in effect policy tigers.

When people talk about fulfilment and having a life, in my current job, I
work 51 hours a week, I have plenty of slack time; a few minutes here and
there. For that Wikidata is excellent. In addition I have to shop, cook,
wash the dishes... and be loving to my wife.
Thanks,
 GerardM

[1] https://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/

On 10 June 2018 at 02:08, Richard Ames  wrote:

> Micru,
>
> I think a lot of us care.  I wish you well!
>
> Some time ago I tried to put some thoughts around volunteering at the WMF.
> I thought it needed to be better planed / managed.
>
> I could not get enough interest to progress the conversation.
>
> You may wish to read https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Management
> and the talk page thereof.
>
> Regards, Richard.
>
> On 10 June 2018 at 06:25, David Cuenca Tudela  wrote:
>
> > Aubrey,
> >
> > You speak so much truth in your words that I'm feeling overwhelmed right
> >
>
> 
> ___
> 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] Wikimedia Polska - new Board

[Lodewijk]

Dear Tomasz,

Thank you so much for all those years of thoughtful leadership. It was
always a pleasure to talk with you about what happened this time in our
little movement, and you were in many discussions a voice of reason - while
not shying away from telling people the truth. You managed to 'keep
Wikimedia Polska together', grow it into a professional club and jointly
forge this coalition of friends. Both during the meetings, but perhaps
especially 'after-hours'.

Thank you for the many years of many volunteer hours. I hope and trust we
haven't seen the last of you :)

Lodewijk

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 11:20 AM Eileen Hershenov 
wrote:

> Congratulations to the new board members and others and many thanks for the
> service of those who have left!
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 4:39 AM Wojciech Pędzich 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> >
> >
> > following yesterday's General Assembly of Wikimedia Polska Association,
> > held in Katowice, a new composition of the Board and other statutory
> bodies
> > of the chapter have been established.
> >
> >
> >
> >  Tomasz "Polimerek" Ganicz decided to resign his long-standing position
> on
> > the Board, after 13 years of service - as the Board's Treasurer (first
> term
> > of Wikimedia Polska ever) and President (ever since then). Two other
> > members - Jarosław "Powerek38" Blaszczak and Tomasz "Elfhelm" Skibiński -
> > have also left the Board. The current composition of the statutory bodies
> > of the Association for the term 2018-2020 is as follows:
> >
> >
> >
> > == Board ==
> >
> >
> >
> > * Michał "Aegis Maelstrom" Buczyński, President
> >
> > * Małgorzata “Maire” Wilk, Vice-President
> >
> > * Paweł “Yarl” Marynowski, Vice-President
> >
> > * Piotr “PMG” Gackowski, Vice-President
> >
> > * Marek “Masti” Stelmasik, Treasurer
> >
> > * Wojciech Pędzich, Secretary
> >
> > * Jacek “Phinek” Fink-Finowicki, Member of the Board
> >
> >
> >
> > == Revision Board ==
> >
> >
> >
> > * Juliusz “Julo” Zieliński
> > * Karol “Karol007” Głąb
> >
> > * Maciej “Maikking” Król
> >
> >
> >
> > == Internal Court ==
> >
> >
> >
> > * Tomasz “Polimerek” Ganicz
> >
> > * Maria “Gytha” Drozdek
> >
> > * Julia “Lantuszka” Koszewska
> >
> >
> > All the best!
> >
> > Wojciech
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
> --
> Eileen B. Hershenov
> General Counsel and Secretary
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
> <
> https://maps.google.com/?q=1+Montgomery+Street,+Suite+1600+%0D+San+Francisco,+CA+94104&entry=gmail&source=g
> >
> San Francisco, CA 94104
> <
> https://maps.google.com/?q=1+Montgomery+Street,+Suite+1600+%0D+San+Francisco,+CA+94104&entry=gmail&source=g
> >
> (Licensed in New York; applying for California Registered In-House Counsel
> status)
> ehershe...@wikimedia.org
> (US) 415-483-6676
>
> *NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you
> have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the
> mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation and for legal/ethical
> reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
> members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
> on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
> .*
> ___
> 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] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[Yaroslav Blanter]

Actually, concerning the group of people working "at the front" might work
(as soon as it is not just about the support of the English Wikipedia), and
I would not count sending them to Wikimania as a monetary reward - assuming
this group undergoes regular rotations, and people who stop working leave
the group.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 8:18 PM, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> James, I think you yourself earlier today put forwards a possible first
> step in this direction.
>
> Support a group of people working "at the front" in neutralizing paid
> editing and other bad editing, by giving them possiblity to meet IRL, and
> why not at a session commited to this issue at WIkimania?
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> Den 2018-06-10 kl. 20:09, skrev James Heilman:
>
>> There is a fair bit of literature on intrinsic versus extrinsic
>> motivation.
>> Wikipedia has been mostly built on the first. Introducing greater
>> extrinsic
>> motivation may decrease intrinsic motivation. Doing so should thus be done
>> with great care, at a small scale that can be reversed, and be well
>> studied
>> to make sure the positive outweigh the negatives before being expanded.
>> Not
>> saying we should not look at this just that it may not result in the
>> benefits we hope far. With respect to burn out, emergency physicians are
>> generally paid well yet over half are experiencing burnout.
>> https://wire.ama-assn.org/life-career/report-reveals-severit
>> y-burnout-specialty
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Yaroslav Blanter 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> Well, I did not reply because I disagree but in my experience having long
>>> arguments with people one disagrees with usually does not lead to
>>> agreement
>>> and is also very tiring. You gave your opinion, I gave mine, it is up to
>>> other readers to decide whose arguments are stronger. I really hate this
>>> "last word" game. If Natacha did not raise exactly the same argument
>>> again,
>>> I would not even respond.
>>>
>>> Concerning people who do the job and do not feel appreciated - I
>>> absolutely
>>> agree with you that they should be rewarded. The appreciation can come
>>> from
>>> both the community and the WMF (and possibly sometimes from the external
>>> parties). I just disagree that this appreciation should be monetary.
>>> There
>>> are many ways to reward people and at the same to avoid introducing
>>> additional factors which I believe are harmful for the community.
>>>
>>> Concerning the premise that the existed model does not work anymore - I
>>> just disagree with the premise. Indeed, we have for example burnout of
>>> volunteers - I myself resigned the admin tools in the English Wikipedia
>>> in
>>> January, and stopped editing for a month in February, after the community
>>> failed to do anything about long-term harassment of a certain user
>>> directed
>>> at me - but this unfortunately happened before and will happen later.
>>> Specifically concerning the administrator issue, in the English
>>> Wikipedia I
>>> would still like to see any evidence that there is work which requires an
>>> admin attention and does not get it. All backlogs I am aware of originate
>>> not because administrators are lazy or there are too few of them, but
>>> because things are being asked are not submitted to a right place - such
>>> as
>>> for example someone asking to resolve a long-standing content dispute
>>> claiming it is vandalism.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Yaroslav
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:21 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yaroslav,

 Yes, you already made your point earlier, and I addressed it here [1]
 and
 also in the draft proposal to enable some volunteers to receive
 donations
 for their work [2]. The fact that you neither commented on my reply to

>>> your
>>>
 initial concern, nor on the proposal suggests me several possibilities.

>>> The
>>>
 first one is that you are not listening to me [3], because you are not
 interacting with the proposals that could counter your fears, and you
 are
 not asking questions about them. The second one is that you don't trust
 your own capacity to listen to other people even when money is involved.
 That could also be, because people with the biggest fear that others do

>>> not
>>>
 listen to them are indeed not well equiped to listen to other people.
 And
 the third one could be that you are a victim of your own observations,

>>> you
>>>
 might be so used to see white swans (people being paid not listening) in
 your life that the mere idea that black swans (people being paid who
 listen) exist might seem inconceibable for you. It could also be that
 you
 find something wrong or that could be done better in my proposal or that
 you have a better one, but since you haven't voiced your opinion, I
 don't
 know what.

 Concerning time and motivation, I consider that the peopl

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[David Cuenca Tudela]

Hi Yaroslav,

Thanks for explaining why you didn't answer. I agree with you, these kind
of conversations can be *very* exausting, but in this case I am not looking
for an argument, I am just trying to understand your position better. You
formulated your standing against "regular paid editors not listening", but
what about "people getting money to learn to listen"? Do you consider it to
be the same? If so, why? And if not, what is wrong about it?

To me if there is harassment, or if you have felt harassed, it is a clear
indication that we are not doing enough as a community to make feel
everybody welcome. There are things we can do as individuals, and others as
a community, but they require *a lot* of time and effort, and if admins
cannot spend time on that, then nobody else can.

@James, I agree with you that any change in the system should start at a
small scale and be studied. But as mentioned before, for me it is not only
about introducing money in the equation, it is about introducing it
together with wisdom, only then the extrinsic motivation will not take
over. To tackle burnout there is the idea of consultation teams from DBT
(basically support groups for professionals):
https://behavioraltech.org/resources/faqs/dbt-consultation-team/#team

@Anders, you seem pretty concerned about bad editing, but I think every
person should be free to decide where they want to put their effort. Some
might find your goal important, but not all. If you go to Cape Town, please
do discuss it there.

Regards,
Micru
___
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] Wikimedia Polska - new Board

[Eileen Hershenov]

Congratulations to the new board members and others and many thanks for the
service of those who have left!

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 4:39 AM Wojciech Pędzich  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
>
> following yesterday's General Assembly of Wikimedia Polska Association,
> held in Katowice, a new composition of the Board and other statutory bodies
> of the chapter have been established.
>
>
>
>  Tomasz "Polimerek" Ganicz decided to resign his long-standing position on
> the Board, after 13 years of service - as the Board's Treasurer (first term
> of Wikimedia Polska ever) and President (ever since then). Two other
> members - Jarosław "Powerek38" Blaszczak and Tomasz "Elfhelm" Skibiński -
> have also left the Board. The current composition of the statutory bodies
> of the Association for the term 2018-2020 is as follows:
>
>
>
> == Board ==
>
>
>
> * Michał "Aegis Maelstrom" Buczyński, President
>
> * Małgorzata “Maire” Wilk, Vice-President
>
> * Paweł “Yarl” Marynowski, Vice-President
>
> * Piotr “PMG” Gackowski, Vice-President
>
> * Marek “Masti” Stelmasik, Treasurer
>
> * Wojciech Pędzich, Secretary
>
> * Jacek “Phinek” Fink-Finowicki, Member of the Board
>
>
>
> == Revision Board ==
>
>
>
> * Juliusz “Julo” Zieliński
> * Karol “Karol007” Głąb
>
> * Maciej “Maikking” Król
>
>
>
> == Internal Court ==
>
>
>
> * Tomasz “Polimerek” Ganicz
>
> * Maria “Gytha” Drozdek
>
> * Julia “Lantuszka” Koszewska
>
>
> All the best!
>
> Wojciech
> ___
> 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,
> 

-- 
Eileen B. Hershenov
General Counsel and Secretary
Wikimedia Foundation
1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600

San Francisco, CA 94104

(Licensed in New York; applying for California Registered In-House Counsel
status)
ehershe...@wikimedia.org
(US) 415-483-6676

*NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you
have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the
mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation and for legal/ethical
reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
.*
___
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] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[Anders Wennersten]

James, I think you yourself earlier today put forwards a possible first 
step in this direction.


Support a group of people working "at the front" in neutralizing paid 
editing and other bad editing, by giving them possiblity to meet IRL, 
and why not at a session commited to this issue at WIkimania?


Anders


Den 2018-06-10 kl. 20:09, skrev James Heilman:

There is a fair bit of literature on intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation.
Wikipedia has been mostly built on the first. Introducing greater extrinsic
motivation may decrease intrinsic motivation. Doing so should thus be done
with great care, at a small scale that can be reversed, and be well studied
to make sure the positive outweigh the negatives before being expanded. Not
saying we should not look at this just that it may not result in the
benefits we hope far. With respect to burn out, emergency physicians are
generally paid well yet over half are experiencing burnout.
https://wire.ama-assn.org/life-career/report-reveals-severity-burnout-specialty

James

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:


Hi David,

Well, I did not reply because I disagree but in my experience having long
arguments with people one disagrees with usually does not lead to agreement
and is also very tiring. You gave your opinion, I gave mine, it is up to
other readers to decide whose arguments are stronger. I really hate this
"last word" game. If Natacha did not raise exactly the same argument again,
I would not even respond.

Concerning people who do the job and do not feel appreciated - I absolutely
agree with you that they should be rewarded. The appreciation can come from
both the community and the WMF (and possibly sometimes from the external
parties). I just disagree that this appreciation should be monetary. There
are many ways to reward people and at the same to avoid introducing
additional factors which I believe are harmful for the community.

Concerning the premise that the existed model does not work anymore - I
just disagree with the premise. Indeed, we have for example burnout of
volunteers - I myself resigned the admin tools in the English Wikipedia in
January, and stopped editing for a month in February, after the community
failed to do anything about long-term harassment of a certain user directed
at me - but this unfortunately happened before and will happen later.
Specifically concerning the administrator issue, in the English Wikipedia I
would still like to see any evidence that there is work which requires an
admin attention and does not get it. All backlogs I am aware of originate
not because administrators are lazy or there are too few of them, but
because things are being asked are not submitted to a right place - such as
for example someone asking to resolve a long-standing content dispute
claiming it is vandalism.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:21 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
wrote:


Yaroslav,

Yes, you already made your point earlier, and I addressed it here [1] and
also in the draft proposal to enable some volunteers to receive donations
for their work [2]. The fact that you neither commented on my reply to

your

initial concern, nor on the proposal suggests me several possibilities.

The

first one is that you are not listening to me [3], because you are not
interacting with the proposals that could counter your fears, and you are
not asking questions about them. The second one is that you don't trust
your own capacity to listen to other people even when money is involved.
That could also be, because people with the biggest fear that others do

not

listen to them are indeed not well equiped to listen to other people. And
the third one could be that you are a victim of your own observations,

you

might be so used to see white swans (people being paid not listening) in
your life that the mere idea that black swans (people being paid who
listen) exist might seem inconceibable for you. It could also be that you
find something wrong or that could be done better in my proposal or that
you have a better one, but since you haven't voiced your opinion, I don't
know what.

Concerning time and motivation, I consider that the people who are
contributing during their official working hours without explicit

permision

to do so are effectively STEALING resources from their employer. This is

of

course a partial view, because who owns actually the planetary resources?
And who is there to say that it is not reasonable to invest some in
Wikimedia projects? Although I understand and I feel empathy for the
volunteers that Bodhisattwa mentions, I feel that what Aubrey said before
holds true here: "You can't do good if there's no "you" in the first
place". So if I ever meet people like that I will tell them: you are not
doing any good here, because you are not putting yourself first.

You say that "we indeed have a lot of people who shout loud, do very
little, and get all kinds of credits for the work others have done". But

we

also 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[James Heilman]

There is a fair bit of literature on intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation.
Wikipedia has been mostly built on the first. Introducing greater extrinsic
motivation may decrease intrinsic motivation. Doing so should thus be done
with great care, at a small scale that can be reversed, and be well studied
to make sure the positive outweigh the negatives before being expanded. Not
saying we should not look at this just that it may not result in the
benefits we hope far. With respect to burn out, emergency physicians are
generally paid well yet over half are experiencing burnout.
https://wire.ama-assn.org/life-career/report-reveals-severity-burnout-specialty

James

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> Well, I did not reply because I disagree but in my experience having long
> arguments with people one disagrees with usually does not lead to agreement
> and is also very tiring. You gave your opinion, I gave mine, it is up to
> other readers to decide whose arguments are stronger. I really hate this
> "last word" game. If Natacha did not raise exactly the same argument again,
> I would not even respond.
>
> Concerning people who do the job and do not feel appreciated - I absolutely
> agree with you that they should be rewarded. The appreciation can come from
> both the community and the WMF (and possibly sometimes from the external
> parties). I just disagree that this appreciation should be monetary. There
> are many ways to reward people and at the same to avoid introducing
> additional factors which I believe are harmful for the community.
>
> Concerning the premise that the existed model does not work anymore - I
> just disagree with the premise. Indeed, we have for example burnout of
> volunteers - I myself resigned the admin tools in the English Wikipedia in
> January, and stopped editing for a month in February, after the community
> failed to do anything about long-term harassment of a certain user directed
> at me - but this unfortunately happened before and will happen later.
> Specifically concerning the administrator issue, in the English Wikipedia I
> would still like to see any evidence that there is work which requires an
> admin attention and does not get it. All backlogs I am aware of originate
> not because administrators are lazy or there are too few of them, but
> because things are being asked are not submitted to a right place - such as
> for example someone asking to resolve a long-standing content dispute
> claiming it is vandalism.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:21 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
> wrote:
>
> > Yaroslav,
> >
> > Yes, you already made your point earlier, and I addressed it here [1] and
> > also in the draft proposal to enable some volunteers to receive donations
> > for their work [2]. The fact that you neither commented on my reply to
> your
> > initial concern, nor on the proposal suggests me several possibilities.
> The
> > first one is that you are not listening to me [3], because you are not
> > interacting with the proposals that could counter your fears, and you are
> > not asking questions about them. The second one is that you don't trust
> > your own capacity to listen to other people even when money is involved.
> > That could also be, because people with the biggest fear that others do
> not
> > listen to them are indeed not well equiped to listen to other people. And
> > the third one could be that you are a victim of your own observations,
> you
> > might be so used to see white swans (people being paid not listening) in
> > your life that the mere idea that black swans (people being paid who
> > listen) exist might seem inconceibable for you. It could also be that you
> > find something wrong or that could be done better in my proposal or that
> > you have a better one, but since you haven't voiced your opinion, I don't
> > know what.
> >
> > Concerning time and motivation, I consider that the people who are
> > contributing during their official working hours without explicit
> permision
> > to do so are effectively STEALING resources from their employer. This is
> of
> > course a partial view, because who owns actually the planetary resources?
> > And who is there to say that it is not reasonable to invest some in
> > Wikimedia projects? Although I understand and I feel empathy for the
> > volunteers that Bodhisattwa mentions, I feel that what Aubrey said before
> > holds true here: "You can't do good if there's no "you" in the first
> > place". So if I ever meet people like that I will tell them: you are not
> > doing any good here, because you are not putting yourself first.
> >
> > You say that "we indeed have a lot of people who shout loud, do very
> > little, and get all kinds of credits for the work others have done". But
> we
> > also have many people who speak quietly, do very much, and get no credit
> > for what they are doing, and I do not see harm in recognizing their work
> > with donations, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[Yaroslav Blanter]

Hi David,

Well, I did not reply because I disagree but in my experience having long
arguments with people one disagrees with usually does not lead to agreement
and is also very tiring. You gave your opinion, I gave mine, it is up to
other readers to decide whose arguments are stronger. I really hate this
"last word" game. If Natacha did not raise exactly the same argument again,
I would not even respond.

Concerning people who do the job and do not feel appreciated - I absolutely
agree with you that they should be rewarded. The appreciation can come from
both the community and the WMF (and possibly sometimes from the external
parties). I just disagree that this appreciation should be monetary. There
are many ways to reward people and at the same to avoid introducing
additional factors which I believe are harmful for the community.

Concerning the premise that the existed model does not work anymore - I
just disagree with the premise. Indeed, we have for example burnout of
volunteers - I myself resigned the admin tools in the English Wikipedia in
January, and stopped editing for a month in February, after the community
failed to do anything about long-term harassment of a certain user directed
at me - but this unfortunately happened before and will happen later.
Specifically concerning the administrator issue, in the English Wikipedia I
would still like to see any evidence that there is work which requires an
admin attention and does not get it. All backlogs I am aware of originate
not because administrators are lazy or there are too few of them, but
because things are being asked are not submitted to a right place - such as
for example someone asking to resolve a long-standing content dispute
claiming it is vandalism.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:21 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
wrote:

> Yaroslav,
>
> Yes, you already made your point earlier, and I addressed it here [1] and
> also in the draft proposal to enable some volunteers to receive donations
> for their work [2]. The fact that you neither commented on my reply to your
> initial concern, nor on the proposal suggests me several possibilities. The
> first one is that you are not listening to me [3], because you are not
> interacting with the proposals that could counter your fears, and you are
> not asking questions about them. The second one is that you don't trust
> your own capacity to listen to other people even when money is involved.
> That could also be, because people with the biggest fear that others do not
> listen to them are indeed not well equiped to listen to other people. And
> the third one could be that you are a victim of your own observations, you
> might be so used to see white swans (people being paid not listening) in
> your life that the mere idea that black swans (people being paid who
> listen) exist might seem inconceibable for you. It could also be that you
> find something wrong or that could be done better in my proposal or that
> you have a better one, but since you haven't voiced your opinion, I don't
> know what.
>
> Concerning time and motivation, I consider that the people who are
> contributing during their official working hours without explicit permision
> to do so are effectively STEALING resources from their employer. This is of
> course a partial view, because who owns actually the planetary resources?
> And who is there to say that it is not reasonable to invest some in
> Wikimedia projects? Although I understand and I feel empathy for the
> volunteers that Bodhisattwa mentions, I feel that what Aubrey said before
> holds true here: "You can't do good if there's no "you" in the first
> place". So if I ever meet people like that I will tell them: you are not
> doing any good here, because you are not putting yourself first.
>
> You say that "we indeed have a lot of people who shout loud, do very
> little, and get all kinds of credits for the work others have done". But we
> also have many people who speak quietly, do very much, and get no credit
> for what they are doing, and I do not see harm in recognizing their work
> with donations, specially if they commit to improve themselves and to
> listen. You don't explain why you don't like people who listen and who get
> donations. Tbh, I do not like to have slaves in our movement, and I think
> we should free them from this kind of ungrateful slavery that many seem to
> be very happy about. At least slaves got some food, and a place to sleep.
>
> And also listen to what Anders is saying, our model is not working any more
> (it was not sustainable to start with), we have reached the limit, and now
> it is time to reinvent ourselves. And as far as I know most of us here are
> "bottom", so we are building "bottom-up".
>
> @Aubrey: Thanks for your long answer :) I'll address it later on, to write
> this email took me at least 5h of coming to the keyboard and leaving to
> manage the stress. I hope a reply to your email takes me a bit less...
>
> Regards,
> Mi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[David Cuenca Tudela]

Yaroslav,

Yes, you already made your point earlier, and I addressed it here [1] and
also in the draft proposal to enable some volunteers to receive donations
for their work [2]. The fact that you neither commented on my reply to your
initial concern, nor on the proposal suggests me several possibilities. The
first one is that you are not listening to me [3], because you are not
interacting with the proposals that could counter your fears, and you are
not asking questions about them. The second one is that you don't trust
your own capacity to listen to other people even when money is involved.
That could also be, because people with the biggest fear that others do not
listen to them are indeed not well equiped to listen to other people. And
the third one could be that you are a victim of your own observations, you
might be so used to see white swans (people being paid not listening) in
your life that the mere idea that black swans (people being paid who
listen) exist might seem inconceibable for you. It could also be that you
find something wrong or that could be done better in my proposal or that
you have a better one, but since you haven't voiced your opinion, I don't
know what.

Concerning time and motivation, I consider that the people who are
contributing during their official working hours without explicit permision
to do so are effectively STEALING resources from their employer. This is of
course a partial view, because who owns actually the planetary resources?
And who is there to say that it is not reasonable to invest some in
Wikimedia projects? Although I understand and I feel empathy for the
volunteers that Bodhisattwa mentions, I feel that what Aubrey said before
holds true here: "You can't do good if there's no "you" in the first
place". So if I ever meet people like that I will tell them: you are not
doing any good here, because you are not putting yourself first.

You say that "we indeed have a lot of people who shout loud, do very
little, and get all kinds of credits for the work others have done". But we
also have many people who speak quietly, do very much, and get no credit
for what they are doing, and I do not see harm in recognizing their work
with donations, specially if they commit to improve themselves and to
listen. You don't explain why you don't like people who listen and who get
donations. Tbh, I do not like to have slaves in our movement, and I think
we should free them from this kind of ungrateful slavery that many seem to
be very happy about. At least slaves got some food, and a place to sleep.

And also listen to what Anders is saying, our model is not working any more
(it was not sustainable to start with), we have reached the limit, and now
it is time to reinvent ourselves. And as far as I know most of us here are
"bottom", so we are building "bottom-up".

@Aubrey: Thanks for your long answer :) I'll address it later on, to write
this email took me at least 5h of coming to the keyboard and leaving to
manage the stress. I hope a reply to your email takes me a bit less...

Regards,
Micru

[1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-May/090365.html
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Micru/Draft_RFC
[3]
https://www.csh.umn.edu/education/focus-areas/whole-systems-healing/leadership/deep-listening
___
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] Announcing Consortium of Wikipedia Military Historians

[Krishna Chaitanya Velaga]

Greetings,


Following several discussions on English Wikipedia and Meta-Wiki, the planned 
collaboration for the users working on military history content on all of 
Wikipedias (may be other projects as well) is now live. The Consortium of 
Wikipedia Military Historians is intended to bring together military historians 
from various Wikimedia projects and provide a common platform to military 
historians from various language, to exchange ideas, share best practices and 
support each other in the best way possible. The page is at 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Consortium_of_Wikipedia_Military_Historians. If 
you're interested to be a part, please join at 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Consortium_of_Wikipedia_Military_Historians/Members.


As we've just started to form the group, there are several things to work on. 
If you're interested to be the part an informal core working group, kindly 
contact me.


Regards,

Krishna Chaitanya 
Velaga
___
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] Recognition of Jenga Wikipedia ya Kiswahili User Group

[Kirill Lokshin]

Hi everyone!

I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
[1] Jenga Wikipedia ya Kiswahili User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group.
The group aims to create and improve content for the Swahili Wikipedia, and
to support the recruitment and development of Wikimedia contributors from
East Africa.

Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!

Regards,
Kirill Lokshin
Chair, Affiliations Committee

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_Jenga_Wikipedia_ya_Kiswahili
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Jenga_Wikipedia_ya_Kiswahili
___
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] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[Andrea Zanni]

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 10:25 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
wrote:

Dear David,
your mail is very long and dense, I don't know where to start:
so I'll start from a random point ;-)


> You say that that WMF bears responsibility in the "failure" of our
> Wikisource community project, and that it is not important now. I do not
> agree about the timing, I find it is very relevant now, because the same
> pattern that has happened before, it is happening again now. And the
> pattern is that of the individual voice vs. the organization. We are like
> ants next to a giant, we complain and say what we need, but we are so
> little in comparison that our voice doesn't reach any ears.


I don't agree with this, because I think that the WMF was the least of my
problems with Wikimedia, when I decided to take my "wiki sabbatical".
I actually have problems with the *Wikimedia movement*: with the whole
thing (volunteers, chapters, WMF, everything).
I think that our mission is so ambitious, transcendent and great that we
sometimes forget that there are some negative side-effects.
One of them we can call "volunteer burn-out", for lack of a better term,
but I think it's little bit deeper than this.
I maybe repeat myself, but: I think that if you (me) look for Meaning and
Purpose in Wikimedia, you (me) are wrong.
It's not the place where you should look for that.
I think that many of us, in certain difficult moments of our life, turn on
Wikimedia and invest a lot of time and effort there, because we feel that
it's the "right" thing to do, and maybe, secretly, we think that we'll get
some kind of reward in the future. We "invest" our time, hoping for a
return, we "expect" something (what is it I don't really know).
The harsh truth, for me, is that, often, there no sure reward to "doing
good". There's no sure and real reward in putting too much effort in
collaborative wiki projects. I think we as a movement could do more to
recognize this, to understand when people are not balanced and they "use
and abuse" wikimedia.
I remember the Dutch chapter doing something like provide counselling for
wikipedia admins, and I found that one the best ideas ever.
We can build on that and find new ways of providing support for our
volunteers.

You see, this is why I think you are conflating different problems here.
One is issues between movement and WMF, another one is "volunteer burnout".
I don't think that WMF is perfect, and as I said it played a little but
significant role in my disillusion regarding Wikimedia, but I definitely
don't think it's the culprit here for larger problems of wiki volunteer
base.
You just cannot expect too much by your work in Wikimedia: you need to
damper you expectations.
I don't think you can expect to create a real community from a bunch of
people that like to edit an encyclopedia online.
If it happens, it's great: but it's not like you can expect it. I've met
many wikimedians in my life: very few I can call "friends".
I actually discussed with my therapist abut this: I remember feeling very
lonely at wikiconferences, wondering why that was.
Wasn't I with my "people", with my "tribe", the people that shared my
delusions in a more open and better world trough online and relentless
editing of a website¹? Was I wrong not feeling "whole" in such a company,
finally in my element?

Eventually, I figured out I was wrong: I discovered that I could find
friends, but they were few. If you think about it, how many wikimedians you
know you could talk of personal stuff? For me, I count an handful.
With the rest of our community, I find myself always talking about projects
and wiki staff, which is...*work*. We talk shop when we are are discussing
wikimedia stuff.  And that's ok. For me, at least, recognizing this was a
big step.
Wikimedia doesn't *complete* me:  and there are very, very few people for I
could say this could be true (and of these few, majority is WMF, so at
least they can pay their bills with their wiki work).

This is my major source of disagreement with you.
I think you are addressing the wrong problem, because I don't think there
is a "silver bullet" in giving money to volunteers.
I'll let other more knowledgeable than me try to explain this and discuss
complex models to improve the current situation.
I don't have an answer to this specific problem: I just know that improving
the hierarchy issue in wikimedia is not gonna solve the major issue I see
at the core of your messages. This is not to say that creating Meta pages
about volunteers is a bad idea: I think it's a great one, but it will not
solve the problem I think you want to solve.

I hope this helps,

Aubrey


¹ it's a joke, I do believe this is often true, but let me use some sarcasm
from time to time ;-)

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[James Heilman]

We did have a proposal on EN WP for a group of functionaires to help deal
with issues pertaining to undisclosed paid editing. I do not feel this
group would require payment but support to meet once or twice a year IMO
could be useful. Such a group could play a leading roll in:

1) Collecting and organizing the knowing companies that are in breach of
our TOU. This will help warn people not to hire these companies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PAIDLIST

2) Collecting groups of known undisclosed paid editors to feed into the AI
tools that are being build. More AI folks would also be helpful.

3) Managing private details about undisclosed paid editing

4) Working with intermediaries like Upworks to help address some of the
worst offenders working via that site among others

Arbcom has recently agreed to take on some of this work but not sure if
they have the time or inclination to manage it fully.

With respect to appreciate for work on Wikipedia / Wikimedia, we have few
mechanism for our readers to provide such feedback. And members of the
community are often more critical of our efforts than the wider world. The
offline apps are interesting as Google play provides better mechanisms for
positive feedback and reading the feedback helps remind me that what we are
doing really does matter.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.kiwix.kiwixcustomwikimed

James

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 6:19 AM, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> I can agree with most what you write Yaroslav, but I want also to remind
> the scenario that started this issue.
>
> I believe we are in a process of worsening deterioration of the content in
> our major project (Enwp,dewp etc). This as the rewards to enter biased info
> in these are getting higher as the reliability in our content/brand project
> increase. At the same time there are indication that the people "at the
> front" of neutralizing these "attack" are getting fewer and overstrained.
> (number of admins of the being decreasing). According to me it forces us to
> act before the situation gets out of control (we lose the quality and
> credibility in our content). And the choices, as I see it, is to either
> give up our vision "free to all to update" (only validated accounts to
> update) or to strengthen our "defending" forces.
>
> It is not unique to have participant in our project to being given
> financial support. We have our Wikipedian in residence, and at the top in
> the hierarchy of Check users we have WMF employee, and in my understanding
> these cooperations work OK.
>
> I have no direct suggesting how a model to financial support these
> defenders should look like and I do not see it being many perhaps 10-15 in
> total. But I do think it would be a good ting discuss these option, and see
> if a proposal could be put forwards without the negative risks you mention.
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> Den 2018-06-10 kl. 12:30, skrev Yaroslav Blanter:
>
>> If it goes back as a salary, you have people
>> working together, some of them being paid for the work, and some doing it
>> for free. If there is any conflict, "volunteers" getting salary will
>> defend
>> their decision until they get blocked.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:01 AM, Natacha Rault  wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for having this conversation.
>>> Having a balanced life is important, but why should the revenues
>>> generated
>>> by volunteer work not go back to volunteers also?
>>> In truth, wikimedia projects are addictive, time consuming, they generate
>>> passionate debates and I have seen many going down the black hole and
>>> finding it hard to manage “priorities”.
>>> This situation is detrimental to those who struggle most to survive.
>>> Should contributing  be the activity of only those rich people who can
>>> afford to be volunteers on their free time? I dont think so.
>>> Tackling with gendergap issues, I see many women not contributing because
>>> they say “it’s time consuming” and they cant afford it.
>>> I don’t know how to deal with these issues, but at the core of
>>> implementing “strategic orientations” which include diversity issues,
>>> well
>>> it is a must have conversation.
>>> As for the wikimedia blog I dont really have an idea on that: if the WMF
>>> does it, finances it, well ... At the same time it would need to remain
>>> under free licence so that we can use the stories in our projects,
>>> because
>>> the revenue paying it is generated from our volunteer work.
>>>
>>> Have a nice day, I have just bought myself a canoe kayak, which is the
>>> only way for me not to get entangled in contributing on a bright sunny
>>> day.
>>> I cant bring my computer on the river!
>>> I think we should finance “wikimedians go green off wiki for the week end
>>> projects”. Some days off the internet walking, swimming, having chats by
>>> a
>>> fire wood and just taking care of ourselves off wiki.
>>>
>>>
>>> Nattes à chat
>>>
>>> Le 10 juin 2018 à 05:38, Bodhisattwa Mandal >>> >

>>> a écrit :
>>>
 Hi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[Anders Wennersten]

I can agree with most what you write Yaroslav, but I want also to remind 
the scenario that started this issue.


I believe we are in a process of worsening deterioration of the content 
in our major project (Enwp,dewp etc). This as the rewards to enter 
biased info in these are getting higher as the reliability in our 
content/brand project increase. At the same time there are indication 
that the people "at the front" of neutralizing these "attack" are 
getting fewer and overstrained. (number of admins of the being 
decreasing). According to me it forces us to act before the situation 
gets out of control (we lose the quality and credibility in our 
content). And the choices, as I see it, is to either give up our vision 
"free to all to update" (only validated accounts to update) or to 
strengthen our "defending" forces.


It is not unique to have participant in our project to being given 
financial support. We have our Wikipedian in residence, and at the top 
in the hierarchy of Check users we have WMF employee, and in my 
understanding these cooperations work OK.


I have no direct suggesting how a model to financial support these 
defenders should look like and I do not see it being many perhaps 10-15 
in total. But I do think it would be a good ting discuss these option, 
and see if a proposal could be put forwards without the negative risks 
you mention.


Anders



Den 2018-06-10 kl. 12:30, skrev Yaroslav Blanter:

If it goes back as a salary, you have people
working together, some of them being paid for the work, and some doing it
for free. If there is any conflict, "volunteers" getting salary will defend
their decision until they get blocked.

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:01 AM, Natacha Rault  wrote:


Thanks for having this conversation.
Having a balanced life is important, but why should the revenues generated
by volunteer work not go back to volunteers also?
In truth, wikimedia projects are addictive, time consuming, they generate
passionate debates and I have seen many going down the black hole and
finding it hard to manage “priorities”.
This situation is detrimental to those who struggle most to survive.
Should contributing  be the activity of only those rich people who can
afford to be volunteers on their free time? I dont think so.
Tackling with gendergap issues, I see many women not contributing because
they say “it’s time consuming” and they cant afford it.
I don’t know how to deal with these issues, but at the core of
implementing “strategic orientations” which include diversity issues, well
it is a must have conversation.
As for the wikimedia blog I dont really have an idea on that: if the WMF
does it, finances it, well ... At the same time it would need to remain
under free licence so that we can use the stories in our projects, because
the revenue paying it is generated from our volunteer work.

Have a nice day, I have just bought myself a canoe kayak, which is the
only way for me not to get entangled in contributing on a bright sunny day.
I cant bring my computer on the river!
I think we should finance “wikimedians go green off wiki for the week end
projects”. Some days off the internet walking, swimming, having chats by a
fire wood and just taking care of ourselves off wiki.


Nattes à chat


Le 10 juin 2018 à 05:38, Bodhisattwa Mandal 

a écrit :

Hi David,

I hear you.

I live in that part of the world where getting any job and earning money,
by any means possible, is the topmost priority of life, as unemployment

and

corruption has become intimate part of most of the people. Involvement in
volunteer works with no personal or financial gain, is not appreciated at
all and sanity is frequently questioned even by family members and close
friends. The real life is far more harsh for us than the issues we face

in

Wikipedia.

But, I have seen people, who have fought against all extreme odds to

create

contents in Wikimedia. I met an Wikimedian, who would have no food or

money

for the next day to survive, if he didn't go and look for some labour

work

and earn some money for his family, yet learned advanced computer works
from scratch with the help of a Jurassic age broken laptop gifted by a
well-wisher and built the most impactful project in his language, believe
me, I have seen that laptop with my own eyes. I know someone, very close

to

my heart, who once spent the small amount of money he had with him, to

pay

the cyber cafe, he went almost everyday to edit Wikipedia, even if he

knew,

that the money he was spending, was his last resort for that day. These
Wikimedians are no less than a legend to me and whenever I feel

frustrated

and burnt out, I remember them. I am pretty sure, everyone in this

movement

knows someone amazing.

You are absolutely right, people who build Wikipedia from their core of
their heart are not heard or appreciated in larger Wikimedia world, some

of

them are silently contributing forl a long time , without any expectation
from anyone. On the othe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[Yaroslav Blanter]

I made this point earlier this month, but let me make it again.

Money generated by volunteers should indeed go back to volunteers. It just
can not go back as a salary. If it goes back as a salary, you have people
working together, some of them being paid for the work, and some doing it
for free. If there is any conflict, "volunteers" getting salary will defend
their decision until they get blocked. We have seen this happening with
some of the WMF staffers who were not succeptible to any feedback of the
community. We have seen it with people who were not paid but who still got
some bonuses from WMF or the chapters. If a considerable amount of
volunteers get paid we are going to have it all over the place.

Concerning the motivation and the lack of time. Well, we all have real-time
obligations. I am a professor in a top research university. An hour of my
time costs, well, a lot. If I spent these three-four hours per day I am
currently spending for Wikimedia projects instead for my primary duties
(and our working time is essentially unlimited despite the 40 hr/week legal
restriction), I would probably produce much more results than I currently
do. And what I am doing on Wikipedia nobody else is doing. If I disappear,
the work just stays not done.  But this is our choice. If someone has no
time for editing Wikipedia - well, obviously, they have other priorities.
In this sense I fully symphatize with Bodhisattwa's example of a user
spending their last money to go to internet cafe to edit Wikipedia.
Wikimedia projects have grown as bottom-up institutions. All attempts to
rebuild them top-down failed miserably. We indeed have a lot of people who
shout loud, do very little, and get all kinds of credits for the work
others have done. But paying these other people if not the way to go.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:01 AM, Natacha Rault  wrote:

> Thanks for having this conversation.
> Having a balanced life is important, but why should the revenues generated
> by volunteer work not go back to volunteers also?
> In truth, wikimedia projects are addictive, time consuming, they generate
> passionate debates and I have seen many going down the black hole and
> finding it hard to manage “priorities”.
> This situation is detrimental to those who struggle most to survive.
> Should contributing  be the activity of only those rich people who can
> afford to be volunteers on their free time? I dont think so.
> Tackling with gendergap issues, I see many women not contributing because
> they say “it’s time consuming” and they cant afford it.
> I don’t know how to deal with these issues, but at the core of
> implementing “strategic orientations” which include diversity issues, well
> it is a must have conversation.
> As for the wikimedia blog I dont really have an idea on that: if the WMF
> does it, finances it, well ... At the same time it would need to remain
> under free licence so that we can use the stories in our projects, because
> the revenue paying it is generated from our volunteer work.
>
> Have a nice day, I have just bought myself a canoe kayak, which is the
> only way for me not to get entangled in contributing on a bright sunny day.
> I cant bring my computer on the river!
> I think we should finance “wikimedians go green off wiki for the week end
> projects”. Some days off the internet walking, swimming, having chats by a
> fire wood and just taking care of ourselves off wiki.
>
>
> Nattes à chat
>
> > Le 10 juin 2018 à 05:38, Bodhisattwa Mandal 
> a écrit :
> >
> > Hi David,
> >
> > I hear you.
> >
> > I live in that part of the world where getting any job and earning money,
> > by any means possible, is the topmost priority of life, as unemployment
> and
> > corruption has become intimate part of most of the people. Involvement in
> > volunteer works with no personal or financial gain, is not appreciated at
> > all and sanity is frequently questioned even by family members and close
> > friends. The real life is far more harsh for us than the issues we face
> in
> > Wikipedia.
> >
> > But, I have seen people, who have fought against all extreme odds to
> create
> > contents in Wikimedia. I met an Wikimedian, who would have no food or
> money
> > for the next day to survive, if he didn't go and look for some labour
> work
> > and earn some money for his family, yet learned advanced computer works
> > from scratch with the help of a Jurassic age broken laptop gifted by a
> > well-wisher and built the most impactful project in his language, believe
> > me, I have seen that laptop with my own eyes. I know someone, very close
> to
> > my heart, who once spent the small amount of money he had with him, to
> pay
> > the cyber cafe, he went almost everyday to edit Wikipedia, even if he
> knew,
> > that the money he was spending, was his last resort for that day. These
> > Wikimedians are no less than a legend to me and whenever I feel
> frustrated
> > and burnt out, I remember them. I am pretty sure, eve

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Appropriation of the Wikimedia Blog by the WMF

[Isarra Yos]

On 10/06/18 05:01, Natacha Rault wrote:

Have a nice day, I have just bought myself a canoe kayak, which is the only way 
for me not to get entangled in contributing on a bright sunny day.
I cant bring my computer on the river!


Yes you can, if you have the money for it. They make waterproof computers.

___
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] Wikimedia Polska - new Board

[Wojciech Pędzich]

Dear all,



following yesterday's General Assembly of Wikimedia Polska Association,
held in Katowice, a new composition of the Board and other statutory bodies
of the chapter have been established.



 Tomasz "Polimerek" Ganicz decided to resign his long-standing position on
the Board, after 13 years of service - as the Board's Treasurer (first term
of Wikimedia Polska ever) and President (ever since then). Two other
members - Jarosław "Powerek38" Blaszczak and Tomasz "Elfhelm" Skibiński -
have also left the Board. The current composition of the statutory bodies
of the Association for the term 2018-2020 is as follows:



== Board ==



* Michał "Aegis Maelstrom" Buczyński, President

* Małgorzata “Maire” Wilk, Vice-President

* Paweł “Yarl” Marynowski, Vice-President

* Piotr “PMG” Gackowski, Vice-President

* Marek “Masti” Stelmasik, Treasurer

* Wojciech Pędzich, Secretary

* Jacek “Phinek” Fink-Finowicki, Member of the Board



== Revision Board ==



* Juliusz “Julo” Zieliński
* Karol “Karol007” Głąb

* Maciej “Maikking” Król



== Internal Court ==



* Tomasz “Polimerek” Ganicz

* Maria “Gytha” Drozdek

* Julia “Lantuszka” Koszewska


All the best!

Wojciech
___
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,