[Wikimedia-l] What is our impact and how do we measure it?

Hi all, For a while now I've been thinking about different ways to define and measure the Wikimedia movement's impact. This started for me with various conversations about different iterations of the WMF's Global Metrics and different rounds of FDC bids, but it turns out to be wider than that. Th

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What is our impact and how do we measure it?

Hi James, This paper suggests that Wikipedia has become more influential than a large > proportion of the peer reviewed literature: > > http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~xshuai/papers/jcdl240-shuai.pdf I am not sure that is the correct conclusion from the paper you mention. To quote the conclusion: "W

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

So my 2p: The issue for me is the selection of topics more than the presentation of each topic. I'm not concerned that the document's written differently and with different standards of sourcing to a Wikipedia article. That's fairly natural. But selecting 2x refugees and climate change in a list

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Peter Southwood < peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote: > If the format was compiled before Trump was elected, then this argument is > either irrelevant or becomes that the foundation must avoid offending > politicians in power by changing public statements to be unc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What's making you happy this week? (Week of 2 April 2017)

> > > > Turned out that buried in my images from an editathon at Birmingham > Museum Collection Centre in 2015 there was an image of a pair of > inflated caterpillars. > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_pair_of_inflated_ > caterpillars.JPG > > This image (and the article about Inflated C

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2017 versus movement strategy

Hi Texaner, I don't think everything that WMCON is meant to be a secret! I expect/hope that we'll be hearing more about the WMCON strategy discussions quite soon - after all, WMF is being very proactive about communicating what's going on with the strategy. I can imagine that it takes a little w

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hi Amir, I have a request and/or question. I've got the idea from "Incident report". > When things don't go as planned in servers, we write an incident report and > try to learn from lapses happened. Now my question is. Has something > similar done for chapters that get de-recognized? Do you want

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMIL General Assembly meeting and Board elections 2017

Yes, congratulations on your successful re-elections :) On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Isaac Olatunde wrote: > Congratulations to the new board. > > Regards, > > Isaac > > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:01 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel < > it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > Yester

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

Congratulations Maria, Dariusz, and James - I am sure you will do a great job for the movement over the next few years! I am proud and grateful to have had the support of 2,002 people, particularly because this is a palindrome. :) And thank you to all the other candidates, the elections committee

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Deutschland: Annual Report 2016

> No, it means 15,000 new (paying) members of the association Wikimedia > Deutschland. > Just to be clear - these are basically donors, not volunteers, right? > > However, we also try to recruit new authors/editors via banner campaigns > and are running several of them throughout the year. If yo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising pilot on Facebook

Thanks Sam! Very interesting to see the WMF dip its toe into the water of off-Wikipedia fundraising for small gifts for the first time. :) Out of interest are you planning to use Facebook's custom audiences tool to include (or possibly exclude) people who are already WMF donors? (And, more of a m

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New bureau for the Board of Wikimédia France

teers? Regards, Chris Keating On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Édouard Hue wrote: > Dear Wikimedians, > > This e-mail to let you know of some changes in the Board of trustees of > Wikimédia France. > > Our Chair, Émeric Vallespi, got elected as deputy Member of Parliament > dur

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2014–16 audit of the WMF communications strategy

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Leila Zia wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 3:59 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > > > I found some of the audit's recommendations troubling, and have > summarised > > my concerns on the related talk page on Meta.[3] > > > > ​I would love to find some time

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2014–16 audit of the WMF communications strategy

Dear Rogol, On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Rogol Domedonfors wrote: > > 1: Surely the audit is of interest to those with whom the Foundation wishes > to communicate, which includes the donors, who are paying for it, and the > volunteers, whose work is being presented to the world at large in wa

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2014–16 audit of the WMF communications strategy

Hello Rogol, > > > > Whether the staff concerned feel it's a good use of their time to respond > > in detail on Meta or on this email list, who knows. There is always a > > judgement call to be made about what it's helpful for staff to spend > their > > time replying to. However, if I was in thei

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2014–16 audit of the WMF communications strategy

Hi Robert, > > > > Simply highlighting the ~1 page of arguably controversial stuff in a 67 > > page document is also unlikely to be optimal, because it creates a biased > > and misleading impression of the whole document, and gives the impression > > (accurately or not) that one's main interest i

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Wikimédia France - informations sur la situation actuelle

1 21:25 GMT+01:00 Subject: Wikimédia France - informations sur la situation actuelle To: "M. Chris KEATING" Chers membres de Wikimédia France, Depuis plusieurs mois et particulièrement ces dernières semaines, quelques membres de la communauté wikimédienne ont violemment pris à partie d

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Wikimédia France - informations sur la situation actuelle

2017-07-12 1:34 GMT+01:00 Natacha Rault : > So this is the translated part stopping in may 2017 (recent developments not > included) I had a bit of spare time this morning so I've translated part of May (below). 4 May 2017 Explanation of the number of resignations from the Board Emeric Vallesp

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediauk-l] Please welcome new chair for Wikimedia UK

Congratulations Josie! And delighted to see that Wikimedia UK has its highest ever numbers of members and volunteers. :) Regards, Chris (former Wikimedia UK chair from back deep in the mists of time) On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Michael Maggs wrote: > Dear friends > > At today's AGM, three

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimediauk-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum

Forwarding on the worryingly sensible discussion of this "copyfraud" from the wikimediauk-l mailing list. -- Forwarded message -- From: Deryck Chan Date: Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:53 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum To: UK Wikimedia mailing list I a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimédia France

> A few French wkipedians are not happy with the board and some of the > employees. They are about 25-30% of Wikimedia France members To be honest, 25-30% of WMFR members is quite a lot. And, don't forget, include roughly half of the Wikimedia France Board elected at the last General Assembly. Th

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimédia France

A few weeks ago I think I found a copy of WMFR's chapter agreement on a Wiki somewhere. I had the impression (maybe wrongly) that it renewed each January, and had to be cancelled by either party 3 months in advance if they did not wish to renew it. That puts the WMF's decision point somewhere in l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimédia France

> Interesting but: "The review, commissioned by Wikimedia UK..." exactly who? > Board, community, general assembly, group of members? > By the Board. The dynamics were different to the current situation with Wikimedia France, in that the Wikimedia UK Board at the time was not engaged in a big fig

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimania-l] Scholarships for people whose visa were declined

Sounds very sensible! Chris On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > Katherine Maher just announced at Wikimania 2017 that all scholarship > recipients who were unable to obtain a visa, will be automatically > granted a scholarship for Wikimania 2018. > > -- > Andy Mabbett > @pigso

[Wikimedia-l] FW: Mon départ

her resignation inevitable and she feels she has achieved everything she possibly can with the organisation. (There is no mention of her leaving date or interirm arrangements) Regards, Chris Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Nathalie Martin Sent: 02 September 2017 11:00 To: M. Chris KEATING

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Emerging Communities: a proposed new definition

> I would like to thank the Community Resources team for dropping the highly > discriminatory division into North and South and for proposing a more nuanced > approach. Indeed - this is a really useful step forward, and much more practical for the way our movement works. Plus we can now stop ar

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FY1617 Fundraising Report just published

Thanks Sam! And the whole fundraising team – the report makes very interesting reading, and the continued progress in raising more money from less-irritated donors is impressive. Regards, Chris Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Samuel Patton Sent: 29 September 2017 20:18 To: Wikimedia Maili

Re: [Wikimedia-l] September 28: Strategy update - Final draft of movement direction and endorsement process (#25)

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Erik Moeller wrote: > > I wouldn't call information from Wikimedia projects a "mush", but I > think it's a good term for the proprietary amalgamation of information > and data from many sources, often without any regard for the > reliability of the source Is t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee! I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the elections. There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active review by the Election Committee happening? I know in previous years the EC has often made extensive c

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

2017 at 11:14, Chris Keating wrote: > Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee! > > I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the elections. > There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active review > by the Election Committee happe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2018: Program themes, eligibility criteria and reporting deadlines

I just want to add my 2p on this. I raised my eyebrows last year when so many people were invited to WMCON but I could see the rationale for one-off face-to-face strategy conversations. However I am concerned by the idea that WMCON is now turning into a large, standing, deliberative/representativ

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2018: Program themes, eligibility criteria and reporting deadlines

So will there be a broader discussion about the future of the Wikimedia Conference that's open to people who are not attending? I could certainly see a group of people in a conference hotel for a weekend deciding that they are a vital forum for important decisions about the future of the movement,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] New Affiliations Committee appointments

Congrats to Jack and Olushola! I am sure you will do a great job. Kirill – I know this last round of recruitment started some time ago (in June?) – do you expect the next round to run any more quickly? Regards, Chris Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Kirill Lokshin Sent: 08 November 2017 1

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC Recommendations, Round 1 2017-18

Thanks FDC for your hard work on the recommendations, and It's great to see so many applicants earning full funding this time! Chris On 20 Nov 2017 5:43 pm, "Bishakha Datta" wrote: > Dear Wikimedians, > > The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a year to make > recommendations about

Re: [Wikimedia-l] First content made for Wikipedia in space!

Glad to see that the final frontier is falling to Wikipedia! Lovely blog post Andy. This reminds me that (entirely separately) there was an initiative to send copies of Wikipedia into space, does anyone know if that every happened? Chris Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Andy Mabbett Sent:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Wikimedia Enterprise API project

Thanks Liam! Great to see such clear and thorough documentation of what this project is about, why we're doing it, and why it's being done in this particular way. Regards, Chris / The Land On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:03 PM Liam Wyatt wrote: > Dear all, > > Over the last few months, a small team

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy support in the next 10 weeks

Hello all, A group of us who have previously been involved with the strategy process have made a proposal on how to move the Movement Charter process forward. It's on Meta as well: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Transition/Proposal:_Drafting_a_Movement_Charter

Re: [Wikimedia-l] COVID-19 second wave and protection of our most valuable movement asset

> > > Personally I feel, insuring individuals against COVID-19 or helping people > to get vaccines or sending other supports can be better handled locally by > local affiliates (or local committees as proposed by Tito, whichevers seems > fit) instead of a central organization like WMF. Local affili

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Join the new Regional Committees for Grants

So while this thread has highlighted many sensible comments and questions, I also want to recognise the value in the approach the WMF is taking to this. A consistent piece of feedback within the Movement is that support in the form of grants and capacity-building feels remote from most affiliates

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

Hi Maggie, I am flabbergasted. It is verging on inappropriate for the WMF to immediately hire a trustee the moment they step down from the Board. I could just about understand if the focus was solely on the executive transition. But this seems much wider. As a former affiliate Chair I would nev

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

Hi Maggie, Thanks for the clarification, but that doesn't really affect anything. Staff roles vs contractors/consultants are not that different. And the fact that you didn't discuss the post with Maria while she was on the Board doesn't mean it isn't a governance problem. First because decisions c

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

Hi Amanda, Thanks for the detailed comments. However, still, this doesn't really help that much. >From your email it seems that over several months the WMF has created a new role which just happens to be ideal for its outgoing Chair to fill, and indeed could scarcely be filled by anyone else beca

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

> > > >> It is a good practice to create a 12 month waiting period before board >> members of non-profits can become a staff member/paid contractor/consultant. >> > > A few people mentioned that their own orgs or committees have norms or > policies around this (Chris, Philip, Tito); could you descr

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

Hi Amanda and Maggie, On the whole I am a great fan of this kind of office hour and believe it does a lot to improve communication between the WMF and community members. However this is not a problem of communication. The people speaking up in this thread are largely not the people who are in

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

> > I will note that, as Chris pointed out, even WMUK's current policies > would permit a transaction like the one we're discussing if approved > by the Board ("no trustee may _without the consent of the board_" > [8]), and Wikimedia Austria's Good Governance Kodex would permit it if > approved by

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Conflict of Interest - Transition from Trustee to Staff

+1 to this - thank you to the senior staff who led the call, as well as the team that organised it at short notice, and to the Board members who attended. I would like to echo Jan-Bart's sentiments. Mistakes will always be made where human judgement is involved, but it seems that this one is being

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Conflict of Interest - Transition from Trustee to Staff

: > On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 20:58, Chris Keating > wrote: > > > Mistakes will always be made where human judgement is involved, but it > seems > > that this one is being remedied and learned from both quickly and openly. > > For those of us not on the call; how so?

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to check...

> > > >> The costs of doing this now will hardly have been prohibitive. >> Commissioning a report like this would have been well within the WMF's >> means in 2013 as well. (The WMF reported a budget surplus of $13 million in >> 2013.) So I stand by my assertion: the WMF could have done then what it

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Results for the most contended Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

> > I too am disappointed (but not surprised) that STV had almost no effect at > all on the outcome of this election > This may be true, but if it's true, it was only true very narrowly. The margin between the 4th and 5th placed candidates was 12.27 votes in a situation where 1,188 were needed to

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Results for the most contended Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 8:40 PM Chris Keating wrote: > I too am disappointed (but not surprised) that STV had almost no effect at >> all on the outcome of this election >> > > This may be true, but if it's true, it was only true very narrowly. The > margin b

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Report about Regional Hubs Ready

Hi Anass, Thank you very much for this report! It really highlights both the strength of the demand/need for hubs, and the many challenges that we will face in setting them up. The list of areas where there is and isn't a consensus among the people you spoke to is very useful and clearly highligh

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement Charter Drafting Committee elections are now open!

> Agreed. Is this something that the Election Committee > , > as a standing committee not tied to a single election, can help with? SJ > > I would like the answer to this to be 'yes', but the Elections Committee doesn't se

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Feedback requested on draft updated Wikimedia Foundation Conflict of Interest Policy

Hi Amanda, Thanks for this. I've noted a suggestion on the talk page to state explicitly that the Board should include reputational concerns (including the reaction of community members and affiliates) when weighing up whether to approve a transaction where there is a conflict. I feel this is wor

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Feedback requested on draft updated Wikimedia Foundation Conflict of Interest Policy

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 4:02 PM Philip Kopetzky wrote: > I would also find that helpful (if this isn't a policy that's been completely rewritten). The legal text isn't especially easy to read and understand either, so my only question would be if this new policy would prevent past events that happe

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Luis Bitencourt-Emilio Joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:41 PM Guettarda wrote: > Crypto + NFTs + {tech startup + disrupt + housing market} sounds like > *just* the kind of person WMF needs on its board! > > Luis Bitencourt-Emilio might be a great person, and just who we need on > the Board right now, but the optics seem terri

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia payroll and related (WAS: Re: Media coverage in Germany: Enterprise / Advocacy)

On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 1:25 PM Andreas Kolbe wrote: > > Cost per employee 28796 39801 51133738968478186493 > 102053 106065 116726 131734 140419 149155 > I find it hard to believe that the WMF's average cost per employee has increased from $28,796 in 2008 to $149

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia payroll and related (WAS: Re: Media coverage in Germany: Enterprise / Advocacy)

On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, 00:45 Nathan, wrote: > I suspect there weren't that many FT employees of the WMF in 2008, if any? > According to Andreas's table there were 72 total employees. How many were full time? Pass! But his numbers make little sense, so it's hard to draw conclusions from them. > _

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2022 election - updates

On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 1:32 PM Andreas Kolbe wrote: > Dear Dariusz, > > I am surprised your post has not attracted more attention. It's probably > because you did not spell out what the adopted recommendation involves. It > says (my emphases):[1] > > > *The Board of Trustees wants to improve the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2022 election - updates

On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 11:32 PM Andreas Kolbe wrote: > Chris, > > There is no longer any distinction between community and affiliate > trustees. For reference, see the "Type of seat" column in the current board > member table on Meta, as well as the footnote under the table.[1] > > What Dariusz

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2022 election - updates

On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 1:13 AM Todd Allen wrote: > Yes, and let me say it in stronger terms: This is unacceptable. > Community-selected seats have nothing to do with affiliates; affiliates are > absolutely not the community. Community-selected seats must be an at-large > election from Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Time to simplify the Bureaucracy ?

Hi Zubin, > As a rare newcomer to the Wikimedia project, I've been thinking of some of > the factors that seem to discourage me from contributing and one of the > primary ones seem to be the fact that the way the administration is > organized and rules enforced is often vague and unclear. The defi

[Wikimedia-l] Suspension of FDC grantmaking

Hello, I read in a Facebook discussion about the Wikimedia Conference that the Annual Plan Grants are being paused (or stopped or suspended or something) shortly, presumably after the end of the Round 2 deliberations that are going on. Can't see any information about this on the list, or the Gran

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Suspension of FDC grantmaking

e information and updates on this mailing list and > on Meta and I look forward to your contribution to this process. In the > meantime, I hope that we can count on you for reviewing this current round > of FDC proposals > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2017-2018

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [WMCON18] WMCON18: Movement Strategy Track report has been published

Thanks Nicole and Cornelius. Great to see such clear documentation - it must have been a big challenge to synthesise such a lot of conversation. Also good to see some clear next steps on the implementation of the strategy, I was concerned it'd been going slowly over the winter. Chris On Thu, May

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update #4: Upcoming call for participation in Working Groups

Hi Katherine! Thanks for the update and look forward to the call for working groups. I don't know if anyone has considered where the boundary will lie between the different groups. For instance, "roles and responsibilities" strikes me as potentially having a big overlap with "resources" - given t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update #4: Upcoming call for participation in Working Groups

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:31 PM, James Salsman wrote: > Oh, it's this discussion again. This is my favorite discussion. > Movement roles discussion is how we got the UK chapter recognized as a > charity capable of political lobbying. That was satisfying. > > Maybe we can get the letter to donors ba

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Executive Director's Letter to Donors

Very diplomatic, Seddon! But... no. Seriously. Let's not pretend that having the WMF ED send a bunch of emails to Wikimedia donors about general US public policy issues is a remotely good idea. Chris On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 9:46 PM, Joseph Seddon wrote: > Hi James. > > Your suggestion is note

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimédia France Governance review

Congratulations to Wikimedia France for undertaking this review and publishing the results. I believe all of the 3 governance reviews are important reading for anyone involved with the WMF or any of the affiliates, and all have important lessons for the movement. It's interesting to note that this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustees participation in the Movement Strategy Process

No-one seems to be particularly sure if the Advisory Board is still a thing or not. https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is marked as historical and possibly inaccurate, and it hasn't been edited for about 7 years! Chris User:The Land On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 4:48 PM Craig Newmark

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustees participation in the Movement Strategy Process

ll year. > > > > > Which group focuses on information quality and accuracy? > > > > And which group focuses on information breadth and coverage? > If these are cross-cutting issues touching on many groups, where should > relevant input go? > > On Thu, Jul 1

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:23 AM Shlomi Fish wrote: > > Hi Itzik, > > > I do not oppose the LGBT movement, but please explain how an official support > of that falls under the global Wikimedia project's mission, and does not > dilute our policy of avoiding having a stance on issues that are unrela

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

Hi Paolo, In my experience Wikimedia staff are always just as committed and enthusiastic as volunteers - it's not a job anyone takes if all they care about is collecting their paycheque. :) But where I share some of your concern is with the balance of some of the working groups. Staff and board m

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2019: New name, new concept, eligbility criteria

I have so many questions. Is anything concrete planned to replace the learning and capacity-building work that used to happen at WMCON? (Or has the identification of capacity building as a strategic priority just resulted in the abandonment of the main capacity building event?) And why after

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

So it seems that the main rationale for an annual Wikimania brought up in the 2016 meeting was that Wikimania was vital for movement governance and accountability. Which wasn't particularly stressed in the WMF's consultation, but I can see why that kind of issue was very fresh in peoples' minds in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 1:10 PM Andrew Lih wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:40 AM Chris Keating > wrote: > > > So it seems that the main rationale for an annual Wikimania brought up in > > the 2016 meeting was that Wikimania was vital for movement governance and &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

> > So it seems that the main rationale for an annual Wikimania brought up in > > the 2016 meeting was that Wikimania was vital for movement governance and > > accountability. Which wasn't particularly stressed in the WMF's > > consultation, but I can see why that kind of issue was very fresh in >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

ding the main > conference, but also tons of meetups, preconferences, committee meetings, > strategy processes, consultations and side conferences. > > Lodewijk > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:36 AM Chris Keating > wrote: > > > > > So it seems that the main rationale for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

a three-year rotation between North America, Europe and Everywhere Else, which now seems to have been quietly abandoned (like... has it?) Thank you for engaging in this conversation, Chris On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:28 PM Andrew Lih wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:31 AM Chris Keating > wr

[Wikimedia-l] Movement strategy - some thoughts on issues to address

Hello, I've just written a short essay on Meta about issues I think the Movement Strategy working groups ought to be thinking about. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:The_Land/Tensions_facing_movement_strategy tl:dr: Firstly, '''accountability''' and '''equality''' are both complicated conce

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

I think there's a question to think about, about how the movement handles this kind of situation where there are evidently serious governance problems affecting an affiliate. There are some clear-cut situations (e.g. total inactivity) where the current de-recognition process can simply be followed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board of Trustees July 2018 meeting minutes

An interesting read! Thank you Charles (and indeed the Board) for a significantly more substantive set of minutes than has been the practice in the past - I don't know how recent that change is but it's very welcome Chris On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM Chuck Roslof wrote: > > Hi all, > > The Wik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Contents of annual reports from Wikimedia affiliate organizations

Hi Pine, Standardising reporting across affiliates is an attractive-sounding idea in theory but turns out to be very difficult in practice. A few issues that spring to mind: - User Groups are meant to be a low-barrier-to-entry, lightweight form of affiliation. Basically you need 10 people and a g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposed changes to the Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws

Same here! TL:DR – This might not be a great idea, because it’s not what User Groups were designed for. And shouldn’t the WMF Board be thinking more broadly than this sort of fiddling round the edges? Chris Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Lane Rasberry Sent: 07 December 2018 17:13 To: Wik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Questions about proposed new Chapter agreement for Wikimedia Portugal

Hi Gonçalo, Looks to me like someone in the WMF has decided that, given the recent challenges with WMPT, it's a good idea to create a chapter agreement that's somewhat more restrictive in terms of trademark usage and reporting as a way of mitigating any future problems the chapter might encounter

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposed changes to the Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws

Hi Maria, I wondered if there was any news about whether the Board had, in the end, adopted any of these proposals. I see that the ASBS process is now on the agenda for the Wikimedia Summit in late March. There is now not much time to figure out who is going to run this process and what the proce

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Inisghts from a meeting with NGO representatives

Hi Micru, How about documenting your insights on here. I know a number of people in the Roles & Responsibilities group have been reading with interest, thank you very much for sharing. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Roles_%26_Responsibiliti

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changed plus next steps

The way I'm making sense of the timeline is: Last summer the Board remembered that the ASBS was coming up (in among all their conversations about the strategy). Probably in July they discussed it for the first time and they asked AffCom to look at a way of including User Groups. At the November me

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reducing stress and friction in interactions between WMF, affiliates, and community

On this note, here's an essay I wrote along similar lines in 2016. I think things have improved significantly since then, but most of the observations are still true... https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:The_Land/Why_do_They_always_do_It_wrong On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 7:01 PM Pine W wrote: > H

[Wikimedia-l] Roles & Responsibilities working group - Short update

s by agreeing to share their views in this process to date, and happy reading! Yours, Chris Keating on behalf of the Roles & Responsibilities Working Group ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Gu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Foundation events team

Thanks for the update Maggie and welcome Joel and Isabel! I just wanted to ask about this bit of your email: > this new Events > Team, which will be focused on convenorship -- a critical part of our > outreach and growth dynamic. I haven't heard the word "convenorship" before, could someone ex

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [strategy process] Fwd: I decided to leave the working group

Hello, I just want to chime in here. Like Itzik I'm a working group member with a community and chapter background, unlike him I am not resigning :) I certainly identify with many of the frustrations he shares. Everything in the process is slow and that is very frustrating for those of us who ju

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Affiliate Selected Board Seats - Resolution finalized. Next steps.

Thank you, facilitators, for your hard work on this process! Chris (ASBS facilitator the last two times around) On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 11:12 AM Ad Huikeshoven wrote: > Hi all, > > The Election Facilitators met on Friday, April 5. We finalized the > resolution, which is now frozen.[1] The Board

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

> At the occasion, we should also reconsider the expressions "chapter" > and "user group". > "Chapter" is more suitable for local divisions of a national > association. And "user group" sounds just like some group. We also > already have "user group" as a technical term in MediaWiki. > You may be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

In many ways yes - not that branding isnt important, but these two conversations are a great example of people engaging with the narrow questions that are easy to have a view on, and not the big, difficult questions. (Though also, there is nothing more interesting on the working group email lists

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

rategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Diversity (2) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Roles_%26_Responsibilities > Thanks, > GerardM > > On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 10:53, Chris Keating > wrote:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Board WMNL

> > (new) Jan Bart de Vreede, community health > > I'm not sure "new" is quite the right word, possibly "recycled" ;) Chris ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Be the change you want to see (was: WMF commitment for a Wikimedia projects archive)

Thanks Asaf for this thoughtful email! I just want to respond to this bit - after all, the history is the history: > > It is WMF that is not behaving collaboratively here. And it is within > WMF's power to change it. C-levels, the ED, and other managers at WMF > could all decide to participate

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

I think we should probably reflect on the fact we've got to the point where arguments along the lines of "This guy shouldn't be blocked, he was only telling people to fuck themselves" are sort of normal. This kind of behaviour wouldn't be acceptable in any other movement or community or workplac

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

> > So, pretty much every discussion is decided by those who choose to > participate in it. I don't know any way around that; we can't force people > to participate. At some point, if you don't stick your hand up, you don't > get counted. > > Well, Maria Sefidari (Raystorm) showed up and ended up b

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:48 PM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote: > Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate kind > of stuff, what was she expecting, really. > > Maybe she was expecting people to read what she actually said, and engage with it, r

  1   2   3   4   >