Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Samuel Klein
I love the idea of experimenting like this.
More like this please.  The simpler and lighter weight experiments can be
(w little drama ;) the more of possibility space we can explore.

And that's a space we should all be excited by.

On Wed., Jun. 26, 2019, 12:47 p.m. Quim Gil,  wrote:

> Hi, thank you for your feedback about Wikimedia Space.
>
> So far, there have been many comments focusing on _who_ has released _what_
> and _how_. Let me tell you _why_ we are proposing Wikimedia Space. People
> agreeing on _why_ can agree on the rest way easier.
>
> Wikimedia Space is all about Wikimedia growth. If you are supporting
> newcomers or you are contributing to the growth of the Wikimedia movement
> in other ways, we are very interested in your opinions, your suggestions,
> your needs. And we are especially interested in hearing from you if you are
> a promoter of movement diversity and/or part of any kind of group
> underrepresented in Wikimedia.
>
> Why Wikimedia Space, in more detail:
>
> From the Wikimedia movement strategic direction -
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20
>
> * Knowledge equity
>
>
> From the Wikimedia Foundation medium-term plan -
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Medium-term_plan_2019
>
> * Grow participation globally, focusing on emerging markets
> * Thriving movement
> * Support to newcomers
> * Strong, diverse, and innovative communities that represent the World
> * Strong and empowered movement leaders and affiliates
> * Safe, secure spaces and equitable, efficient processes for all
> participants
>
> I hope this explains our _why_. About some of the points mentioned...
>
> Wikimedia Space is a proposal to the movement in the form of a prototype
> https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/what-do-mean-here-by-prototype/188/4.
> We believe it will generate interest, feedback, criticism and contributions
> in a number of ways that a text-only proposal in (say) Meta Wiki wouldn't
> achieve.
>
> For instance, while we discuss here in a black & white and text-only
> environment, more than 60 colorful users have signed up already and
> Wikimedia Space and are getting their own impressions about it.
> https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u .
>
> Or for instance, several event organizers just signed up and added their
> event to the Wikimedia Space map, which, if you ask me, after just one day
> already looks fresh, beautiful and interesting:
> https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/events/l/map
>
> We are happy to discuss possibilities for connection / integration /
> migration between Wikimedia Space and existing community channels. As a
> matter of fact, wikimedia-l could potentially benefit from the features
> offered by Wikimedia Space (a conversation started in this list by
> volunteers years ago):
>
> https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/integrating-mailing-lists-to-wikimedia-space/136
>
> Wikimedia Space doesn't prevent improvements in Meta or other places. If
> anything, we believe it will become an incentive for improvements in all
> community channels willing to keep up. In our opinion, potential
> improvements in Meta shouldn't prevent the release of Wikimedia Space. What
> you see today is the result of about three weeks of part time work by four
> people. Now consider how much time would it take to discuss, agree,
> resource and implement an equivalent feature set in MediaWiki, and (just as
> important) equivalent social expectations and norms in the Meta community.
>
> We are just starting to promote Wikimedia Space. Yesterday we did an
> initial announcement to get a first wave of users, see how the prototype
> would take hold, and gauge the initial response. We plan to continue
> promoting Wikimedia Space in more channels. In fact, you can help. If there
> is a channel missing, please point to its URL, or (even better) feel free
> to forward the announcement yourself.
>
> If you have found an actionable problem, we welcome bug reports and feature
> requests: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/space/
>
> We encourage you to give Wikimedia Space a try. Even if today someone
> remains unconvinced, signing up won't hurt them. Then give it a week, and
> let us know. We really mean it! Prototypes always contribute to better
> discussions.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Quim Gil
> Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
> ___
> 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] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Pine W
Hi Quim,

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 4:47 PM Quim Gil  wrote:

> Hi, thank you for your feedback about Wikimedia Space.
>
> So far, there have been many comments focusing on _who_ has released _what_
> and _how_. Let me tell you _why_ we are proposing Wikimedia Space. People
> agreeing on _why_ can agree on the rest way easier.
>
> Wikimedia Space is all about Wikimedia growth. If you are supporting
> newcomers or you are contributing to the growth of the Wikimedia movement
> in other ways, we are very interested in your opinions, your suggestions,
> your needs. And we are especially interested in hearing from you if you are
> a promoter of movement diversity and/or part of any kind of group
> underrepresented in Wikimedia.
>

I think that it's okay to experiment with new communications tools, but I
would like to hear more specifics about how the new platform is intended to
contribute to growth in a way that providing new features or more
newbie-friendly tools on wiki does not. I say this mindful that talk pages
have a steep learning curve, but there are ongoing efforts to make talk
pages be more user-friendly.


>
> Why Wikimedia Space, in more detail:
>
> From the Wikimedia movement strategic direction -
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20
>
> * Knowledge equity
>
>
> From the Wikimedia Foundation medium-term plan -
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Medium-term_plan_2019
>
> * Grow participation globally, focusing on emerging markets
> * Thriving movement
> * Support to newcomers
> * Strong, diverse, and innovative communities that represent the World
> * Strong and empowered movement leaders and affiliates
> * Safe, secure spaces and equitable, efficient processes for all
> participants
>
> I hope this explains our _why_. About some of the points mentioned...
>

I agree with most of those points, with two possible exceptions.

Regarding "efficient processes for all participants": I understand the
attractiveness of speedy and efficient processes, which often coincide with
unilateral decisions. Sometimes in the community we specifically empower
people to make unilateral decisions, such as blocking vandals. However,
democracy, consensus, legislative processes, and judicial processes are
sometimes not efficient ways of making decisions; they may trade speed and
efficiency for quality, equity, transparency, and/or sustainability. I
would be concerned if WMF is broadly adopting a mindset of "move fast and
break things".

At the same time, I think that we in the community should be open to
considering tools that would let us improve our processes, often in
increments and with careful testing. An example of this would be
considering Discourse as a platform for communications.

Regarding "safe, secure spaces": There will always be contentious topics in
the Wikiverse, such as the sovereignty of contested geographic territories,
the validity of certain scientific theories, policies for the English
Wikipedia Manual of Style, and the morality of certain actions. People will
be upset, angry, disappointed, or offended. There is a tension between
freedom of expression and safety. I think that an unqualified goal of
"safe, secure spaces" is unrealistic, and risks doing more harm than good
by promoting an unrealistic vision and by implying that people have a right
not to feel offended.

At the same time, I am willing to block people in various circumstances
such as if they threaten to commit a criminal action, engage in phishing or
other fraudulent activity, fail to disclose an important relationship to a
subject of their editing or official activities, or engage in harassment of
others. Freedom of expression has some limits, even in the public square.

The Wikiverse is more like a public square than a quiet office, and I worry
that WMF's current vision for safety might be misguided and might be
harmful to candid public discourse and to people who are misled into
relying on an unrealistic implication that the Wikiverse is a place where
they shouldn't expect to feel offended and will reliably be protected from
harm. I think that being honest about the risks would be good, along with
supporting improvements as requested by the community. An example of an
initiative that I believe has community support is the partial blocks
feature.


> Wikimedia Space is a proposal to the movement in the form of a prototype
> https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/what-do-mean-here-by-prototype/188/4.
> We believe it will generate interest, feedback, criticism and contributions
> in a number of ways that a text-only proposal in (say) Meta Wiki wouldn't
> achieve.
>
>
I'm cautiously supportive of experiments and prototyping in general.
However, WMF already appears to be planning to add more resources to this
project. Can you share what the long term plans are?


> For instance, while we discuss here in a black & white and text-only
> environment, more than 60 colorful users have signed up 

[Wikimedia-l] Invitation to the June 2019 Wikimedia Monthly Activities Meeting: Thursday, June 27th, 18:00 UTC

2019-06-26 Thread Sasha Redkina
Hello everyone,
The next Wikimedia Monthly Activities meeting will take place tomorrow,
Thursday, June 27th, 2019 at 18:00  UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel is
#wikimedia-office on https://webchat.freenode.net, and the meeting will be
broadcast as a live YouTube stream:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRjrbl1J1FA
We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.

Agenda

Facilitator: TBA

   - Welcome and introduction to agenda - 2 minutes
   - Movement update - 3 minutes
   - Wikis for children - 10 minutes
   - Wikimedia 2030 movement strategy update - 15 minutes
   - Questions and discussion - 10 minutes
   - Wikilove - 5 minutes



Please review the meeting's Meta-Wiki page for further information about
the meeting and how to participate:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_monthly_activities_meetings



Thank you!
___
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 Research Showcase] June 26, 2019 at 11:30 AM PST, 19:30 UTC

2019-06-26 Thread Janna Layton
Hello everyone,

Just a reminder that this event will be happening in about half an hour!
Here's the Youtube link again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiUfpmeJG7E

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:14 AM Janna Layton  wrote:

> Time correction:
>
> The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed next Wednesday, June 26,
> at *11:30 AM PDT/18:30 UTC*.
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:11 PM Janna Layton 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Wednesday, June 26,
>> at 11:30 AM PST/19:30 UTC. We will have three presentations this showcase,
>> all relating to Wikipedia blocks.
>>
>> YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiUfpmeJG7E
>>
>> As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research.
>> You can also watch our past research showcases here:
>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase
>>
>> This month's presentations:
>>
>> Trajectories of Blocked Community Members: Redemption, Recidivism and
>> Departure
>>
>> By Jonathan Chang, Cornell University
>>
>> Community norm violations can impair constructive communication and
>> collaboration online. As a defense mechanism, community moderators often
>> address such transgressions by temporarily blocking the perpetrator. Such
>> actions, however, come with the cost of potentially alienating community
>> members. Given this tradeoff, it is essential to understand to what extent,
>> and in which situations, this common moderation practice is effective in
>> reinforcing community rules. In this work, we introduce a computational
>> framework for studying the future behavior of blocked users on Wikipedia.
>> After their block expires, they can take several distinct paths: they can
>> reform and adhere to the rules, but they can also recidivate, or
>> straight-out abandon the community. We reveal that these trajectories are
>> tied to factors rooted both in the characteristics of the blocked
>> individual and in whether they perceived the block to be fair and
>> justified. Based on these insights, we formulate a series of prediction
>> tasks aiming to determine which of these paths a user is likely to take
>> after being blocked for their first offense, and demonstrate the
>> feasibility of these new tasks. Overall, this work builds towards a more
>> nuanced approach to moderation by highlighting the tradeoffs that are in
>> play.
>>
>>
>> Automatic Detection of Online Abuse in Wikipedia
>>
>> By Lane Rasberry, University of Virginia
>>
>> Researchers analyzed all English Wikipedia blocks prior to 2018 using
>> machine learning. With insights gained, the researchers examined all
>> English Wikipedia users who are not blocked against the identified
>> characteristics of blocked users. The results were a ranked set of
>> predictions of users who are not blocked, but who have a history of conduct
>> similar to that of blocked users. This research and process models a system
>> for the use of computing to aid human moderators in identifying conduct on
>> English Wikipedia which merits a block.
>>
>> Project page:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/University_of_Virginia/Automatic_Detection_of_Online_Abuse
>>
>> Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhdb4-hKBo
>>
>>
>> First Insights from Partial Blocks in Wikimedia Wikis
>>
>> By Morten Warncke-Wang, Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>> The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation released the
>> partial block feature in early 2019. Where previously blocks on Wikimedia
>> wikis were sitewide (users were blocked from editing an entire wiki),
>> partial blocks makes it possible to block users from editing specific pages
>> and/or namespaces. The Italian Wikipedia was the first wiki to start using
>> this feature, and it has since been rolled out to other wikis as well. In
>> this presentation, we will look at how this feature has been used in the
>> first few months since release.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Janna Layton (she, her)
>> Administrative Assistant - Audiences & Technology
>> Wikimedia Foundation 
>>
>
>
> --
> Janna Layton (she, her)
> Administrative Assistant - Audiences & Technology
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>


-- 
Janna Layton (she, her)
Administrative Assistant - Audiences & Technology
Wikimedia Foundation 
___
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] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Quim Gil
Hi, thank you for your feedback about Wikimedia Space.

So far, there have been many comments focusing on _who_ has released _what_
and _how_. Let me tell you _why_ we are proposing Wikimedia Space. People
agreeing on _why_ can agree on the rest way easier.

Wikimedia Space is all about Wikimedia growth. If you are supporting
newcomers or you are contributing to the growth of the Wikimedia movement
in other ways, we are very interested in your opinions, your suggestions,
your needs. And we are especially interested in hearing from you if you are
a promoter of movement diversity and/or part of any kind of group
underrepresented in Wikimedia.

Why Wikimedia Space, in more detail:

From the Wikimedia movement strategic direction -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20

* Knowledge equity


From the Wikimedia Foundation medium-term plan -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Medium-term_plan_2019

* Grow participation globally, focusing on emerging markets
* Thriving movement
* Support to newcomers
* Strong, diverse, and innovative communities that represent the World
* Strong and empowered movement leaders and affiliates
* Safe, secure spaces and equitable, efficient processes for all
participants

I hope this explains our _why_. About some of the points mentioned...

Wikimedia Space is a proposal to the movement in the form of a prototype
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/what-do-mean-here-by-prototype/188/4.
We believe it will generate interest, feedback, criticism and contributions
in a number of ways that a text-only proposal in (say) Meta Wiki wouldn't
achieve.

For instance, while we discuss here in a black & white and text-only
environment, more than 60 colorful users have signed up already and
Wikimedia Space and are getting their own impressions about it.
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u .

Or for instance, several event organizers just signed up and added their
event to the Wikimedia Space map, which, if you ask me, after just one day
already looks fresh, beautiful and interesting:
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/events/l/map

We are happy to discuss possibilities for connection / integration /
migration between Wikimedia Space and existing community channels. As a
matter of fact, wikimedia-l could potentially benefit from the features
offered by Wikimedia Space (a conversation started in this list by
volunteers years ago):
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/integrating-mailing-lists-to-wikimedia-space/136

Wikimedia Space doesn't prevent improvements in Meta or other places. If
anything, we believe it will become an incentive for improvements in all
community channels willing to keep up. In our opinion, potential
improvements in Meta shouldn't prevent the release of Wikimedia Space. What
you see today is the result of about three weeks of part time work by four
people. Now consider how much time would it take to discuss, agree,
resource and implement an equivalent feature set in MediaWiki, and (just as
important) equivalent social expectations and norms in the Meta community.

We are just starting to promote Wikimedia Space. Yesterday we did an
initial announcement to get a first wave of users, see how the prototype
would take hold, and gauge the initial response. We plan to continue
promoting Wikimedia Space in more channels. In fact, you can help. If there
is a channel missing, please point to its URL, or (even better) feel free
to forward the announcement yourself.

If you have found an actionable problem, we welcome bug reports and feature
requests: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/space/

We encourage you to give Wikimedia Space a try. Even if today someone
remains unconvinced, signing up won't hurt them. Then give it a week, and
let us know. We really mean it! Prototypes always contribute to better
discussions.

Best regards,
-- 
Quim Gil
Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
___
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 Research Showcase] June 26, 2019 at 11:30 AM PST, 19:30 UTC

2019-06-26 Thread AZ Mayank
Any wikipedia meetup or anything next month ? I want to participate from
Nepal ? Let me know?

Best,
Owlf

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019, 10:00 PM Janna Layton  wrote:

> Time correction:
>
> The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed next Wednesday, June 26,
> at *11:30 AM PDT/18:30 UTC*.
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:11 PM Janna Layton 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Wednesday, June 26,
> > at 11:30 AM PST/19:30 UTC. We will have three presentations this
> showcase,
> > all relating to Wikipedia blocks.
> >
> > YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiUfpmeJG7E
> >
> > As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research.
> You
> > can also watch our past research showcases here:
> > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase
> >
> > This month's presentations:
> >
> > Trajectories of Blocked Community Members: Redemption, Recidivism and
> > Departure
> >
> > By Jonathan Chang, Cornell University
> >
> > Community norm violations can impair constructive communication and
> > collaboration online. As a defense mechanism, community moderators often
> > address such transgressions by temporarily blocking the perpetrator. Such
> > actions, however, come with the cost of potentially alienating community
> > members. Given this tradeoff, it is essential to understand to what
> extent,
> > and in which situations, this common moderation practice is effective in
> > reinforcing community rules. In this work, we introduce a computational
> > framework for studying the future behavior of blocked users on Wikipedia.
> > After their block expires, they can take several distinct paths: they can
> > reform and adhere to the rules, but they can also recidivate, or
> > straight-out abandon the community. We reveal that these trajectories are
> > tied to factors rooted both in the characteristics of the blocked
> > individual and in whether they perceived the block to be fair and
> > justified. Based on these insights, we formulate a series of prediction
> > tasks aiming to determine which of these paths a user is likely to take
> > after being blocked for their first offense, and demonstrate the
> > feasibility of these new tasks. Overall, this work builds towards a more
> > nuanced approach to moderation by highlighting the tradeoffs that are in
> > play.
> >
> >
> > Automatic Detection of Online Abuse in Wikipedia
> >
> > By Lane Rasberry, University of Virginia
> >
> > Researchers analyzed all English Wikipedia blocks prior to 2018 using
> > machine learning. With insights gained, the researchers examined all
> > English Wikipedia users who are not blocked against the identified
> > characteristics of blocked users. The results were a ranked set of
> > predictions of users who are not blocked, but who have a history of
> conduct
> > similar to that of blocked users. This research and process models a
> system
> > for the use of computing to aid human moderators in identifying conduct
> on
> > English Wikipedia which merits a block.
> >
> > Project page:
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/University_of_Virginia/Automatic_Detection_of_Online_Abuse
> >
> > Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhdb4-hKBo
> >
> >
> > First Insights from Partial Blocks in Wikimedia Wikis
> >
> > By Morten Warncke-Wang, Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation released the
> > partial block feature in early 2019. Where previously blocks on Wikimedia
> > wikis were sitewide (users were blocked from editing an entire wiki),
> > partial blocks makes it possible to block users from editing specific
> pages
> > and/or namespaces. The Italian Wikipedia was the first wiki to start
> using
> > this feature, and it has since been rolled out to other wikis as well. In
> > this presentation, we will look at how this feature has been used in the
> > first few months since release.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Janna Layton (she, her)
> > Administrative Assistant - Audiences & Technology
> > Wikimedia Foundation 
> >
>
>
> --
> Janna Layton (she, her)
> Administrative Assistant - Audiences & Technology
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> ___
> 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] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Isaac Olatunde
The outreach Wiki and Wikimedia Space have some similarities but I don't
they serve the same purposes.

Regards,

Isaac

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019, 7:56 PM Pine W  Hi Maria,
>
> Thanks for this update.
>
> I hope that you can answer a question. I may be mistaken, but my impression
> is that the purposes that are outlined for Wikimedia Space are within the
> intended scopes of the Meta and Outreach wikis, as well as Wikimedia-l. I
> think that the community would be willing to consider design improvements
> and additional features for Meta and Outreach, such as calendar and map
> tools that are easy to use. Design improvements and additional features
> might also be welcome by third parties who use MediaWiki software and could
> eventually have the option to implement the changes on their own sites. Can
> you explain the decision to launch a new site instead of proposing design
> improvements and additional features for Meta and Outreach?
>
> Thank you,
>
> 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] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The interface seems to be completely static. Then there seems to be some
kind of possible interaction, which I was unable to see, as it requires
registration and registration is not working for Firefox ATM.

Maybe it is open in the sense that it shows to everyone what is there, but
participation seems to be in a not wiki way and strictly controlled (by the
WMF, apparently).

Paulo

A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 11:32, Lucas Werkmeister <
m...@lucaswerkmeister.de> escreveu:

> Why do you consider Wikimedia Space a closed platform?
>
> Cheers,
> Lucas
>
> On 26.06.19 11:27, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > I also generally discuss what I can offwiki (using a number of channels,
> > but mainly Telegram) , and leave to onwiki discussions what is strictly
> > necessary, but it has much more to do with the slowness and lack of
> > usability of the wiki talk system, than with a toxic environment.
> >
> > That being said, the wiki talk appears to me as the main bastion
> protecting
> > openness in our projects. We may discuss a lot offwiki, but a summary of
> it
> > is always presented onwiki and can be challenged by the onwiki community
> > that do not have an offwiki presence, which is considerably large and an
> > essential part of the process too.
> >
> > I understand that some people who have an habit of discussing and
> arranging
> > everything offwiki are not prepared to face resistance from the onwiki
> > communities when their new apparently wonderful and flawless idea is
> > presented there, but that is truly and essentially part of the process,
> and
> > if they are unable to live with that, they should consider refraining to
> > take part on it, instead of trying to artificially bend a system which
> was
> > designed to be onwiki and open to submit itself to offwiki and closed
> > platforms. I am seeing this kind of discussions and proposals at the
> > Community Health strategy work group, for instance.
> >
> > In the case at hand, I would like to understand specifically why the
> choice
> > of mounting yet another platform, and a non wiki and closed one, instead
> of
> > improving the existing one, wiki and open, at Outreach.
> >
> > As for the WMF, despite what Amir has said, which possibly refer to
> > different visions, or even dissidents among WMF staff ranks, at the end
> of
> > the day there still is only one WMF, the one directed by the ED and
> > presided by the BoT, the same one which issues those software releases,
> and
> > the same one which issues the secretive and out of process punishments
> > which are causing so much controversy these days.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 08:27, Ziko van Dijk 
> > escreveu:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
> >> enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/
> >>
> >> In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
> >> telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer
> discussing
> >> wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including
> me.
> >> One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
> >> Facebook groups are moderated.
> >>
> >> Kind regards
> >> Ziko
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> 
>  I'm getting so many red flags.
> 
>  Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> >>> community
>  involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing
> >> wikis?
>  WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF
> employee?
>  Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
>  (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside
> Wikimedia
>  spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> >>> mailing
>  list?
> 
>  Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> 
>  -- Yair Rand
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> >>> some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
> >>> satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
> >>> here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
> >>> from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
> >>> after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
> >>> suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
> >>> doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
> >>> central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
> >>> it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
> >>> understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
> >>> the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Lucas Werkmeister
Why do you consider Wikimedia Space a closed platform?

Cheers,
Lucas

On 26.06.19 11:27, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> I also generally discuss what I can offwiki (using a number of channels,
> but mainly Telegram) , and leave to onwiki discussions what is strictly
> necessary, but it has much more to do with the slowness and lack of
> usability of the wiki talk system, than with a toxic environment.
> 
> That being said, the wiki talk appears to me as the main bastion protecting
> openness in our projects. We may discuss a lot offwiki, but a summary of it
> is always presented onwiki and can be challenged by the onwiki community
> that do not have an offwiki presence, which is considerably large and an
> essential part of the process too.
> 
> I understand that some people who have an habit of discussing and arranging
> everything offwiki are not prepared to face resistance from the onwiki
> communities when their new apparently wonderful and flawless idea is
> presented there, but that is truly and essentially part of the process, and
> if they are unable to live with that, they should consider refraining to
> take part on it, instead of trying to artificially bend a system which was
> designed to be onwiki and open to submit itself to offwiki and closed
> platforms. I am seeing this kind of discussions and proposals at the
> Community Health strategy work group, for instance.
> 
> In the case at hand, I would like to understand specifically why the choice
> of mounting yet another platform, and a non wiki and closed one, instead of
> improving the existing one, wiki and open, at Outreach.
> 
> As for the WMF, despite what Amir has said, which possibly refer to
> different visions, or even dissidents among WMF staff ranks, at the end of
> the day there still is only one WMF, the one directed by the ED and
> presided by the BoT, the same one which issues those software releases, and
> the same one which issues the secretive and out of process punishments
> which are causing so much controversy these days.
> 
> Best,
> Paulo
> 
> A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 08:27, Ziko van Dijk 
> escreveu:
> 
>> Hello,
>>
>> Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
>> enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/
>>
>> In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
>> telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer discussing
>> wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including me.
>> One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
>> Facebook groups are moderated.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Ziko
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:

 I'm getting so many red flags.

 Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
>>> community
 involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing
>> wikis?
 WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
 Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
 (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
 spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
>>> mailing
 list?

 Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?

 -- Yair Rand

>>>
>>>
>>> While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
>>> some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
>>> satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
>>> here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
>>> from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
>>> after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
>>> suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
>>> doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
>>> central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
>>> it.
>>>
>>>
>>> So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
>>> understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
>>> the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> geni
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I also generally discuss what I can offwiki (using a number of channels,
but mainly Telegram) , and leave to onwiki discussions what is strictly
necessary, but it has much more to do with the slowness and lack of
usability of the wiki talk system, than with a toxic environment.

That being said, the wiki talk appears to me as the main bastion protecting
openness in our projects. We may discuss a lot offwiki, but a summary of it
is always presented onwiki and can be challenged by the onwiki community
that do not have an offwiki presence, which is considerably large and an
essential part of the process too.

I understand that some people who have an habit of discussing and arranging
everything offwiki are not prepared to face resistance from the onwiki
communities when their new apparently wonderful and flawless idea is
presented there, but that is truly and essentially part of the process, and
if they are unable to live with that, they should consider refraining to
take part on it, instead of trying to artificially bend a system which was
designed to be onwiki and open to submit itself to offwiki and closed
platforms. I am seeing this kind of discussions and proposals at the
Community Health strategy work group, for instance.

In the case at hand, I would like to understand specifically why the choice
of mounting yet another platform, and a non wiki and closed one, instead of
improving the existing one, wiki and open, at Outreach.

As for the WMF, despite what Amir has said, which possibly refer to
different visions, or even dissidents among WMF staff ranks, at the end of
the day there still is only one WMF, the one directed by the ED and
presided by the BoT, the same one which issues those software releases, and
the same one which issues the secretive and out of process punishments
which are causing so much controversy these days.

Best,
Paulo

A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 08:27, Ziko van Dijk 
escreveu:

> Hello,
>
> Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
> enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/
>
> In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
> telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer discussing
> wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including me.
> One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
> Facebook groups are moderated.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :
>
> > On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm getting so many red flags.
> > >
> > > Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> > community
> > > involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing
> wikis?
> > > WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
> > > Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> > > (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
> > > spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> > mailing
> > > list?
> > >
> > > Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> > >
> > > -- Yair Rand
> > >
> >
> >
> > While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> > some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
> > satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
> > here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
> > from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
> > after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
> > suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
> > doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
> > central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
> > it.
> >
> >
> > So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
> > understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
> > the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > geni
> >
> > ___
> > 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/

In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer discussing
wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including me.
One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
Facebook groups are moderated.

Kind regards
Ziko






Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :

> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> >
> > I'm getting so many red flags.
> >
> > Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> community
> > involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing wikis?
> > WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
> > Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> > (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
> > spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> mailing
> > list?
> >
> > Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> >
> > -- Yair Rand
> >
>
>
> While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
> satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
> here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
> from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
> after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
> suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
> doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
> central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
> it.
>
>
> So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
> understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
> the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.
>
>
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> 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] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Dan Garry (Deskana)
On Wed 26 Jun 2019 at 00:58, Amir Sarabadani  wrote:

> I have no comment on Wikimedia Space. IMHO it's too soon to criticize it
> but I want to point out to a pattern that I have been seeing in the past
> couple of months by several people in this very mailing list.
>
> You have been repeating the word "WMF" (four time, for four different
> purposes) and treating it as a big monolith which is far from truth, WMF
> consists of different teams with different focuses, priorities, goals, and
> processes.
>
> This type of comments also increases the tension by promoting concept of
> "volunteer vs. WMF". It's not a war, we have the same mission. Stop
> criticizing a huge organization devoted to support volunteers (which you
> can't deny all of its good deeds, like keeping servers the world-class
> website running while being horribly understaffed, we have only 1% of
> Google's staff) because you disagree with this project or that program.
>
> Criticize projects, criticize actions (which can be valid), but don't be
> like "here we go again, WMF".


Largest possible +1 to this. Thanks Amir.

Dan
___
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] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread geni
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
>
> I'm getting so many red flags.
>
> Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no community
> involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing wikis?
> WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
> Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
> spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki mailing
> list?
>
> Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
>
> -- Yair Rand
>


While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
it.


So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.



-- 
geni

___
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,