Re: [Wikimedia-l] Trust and safety on Wikimedia projects
The board resolution aims at "addressing harassment and incivility on Wikimedia projects". I don't see that this covers "disputes", i.e disputes over content. We can, of course, disagree with someone totally over a topic, as long as we discuss our differences in a civil and respectful way - and consider our opponent's point-of-view and arguments seriously. Regards, Thyge - Sir48 <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail> Virusfri. www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> Den man. 25. maj 2020 kl. 14.45 skrev DerHexer via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>: > That's a tricky topic, especially when local dispute resolution bodies > (which should in most cases be approached first, I agree here) cannot solve > the dispute or when multiple projects are involved. At the moment, there is > in fact a lack of such body and of course it should be transparent, > composed of multi-diverse community members who are trained and supported > by professional mediation, etc. as pointed out. Currently, stewards like me > are quite often approached with such topics but this user group is more > focused on technical stuff like userrights. A former steward fellow and I > discussed this topic at the Safety Space at Wikimania. Due to the nature of > the space, the discussion have not been documented but you can find the > presentation with backgrounds of the situation and open questions on > Commons > < > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimania_2019_%E2%80%93_Do_we_need_a_global_dispute_resolution_committee%3F.pdf > >. > Maybe it can give some ideas how to proceed with this. > > Best, > Martin/DerHexer > > > Am So., 24. Mai 2020 um 06:19 Uhr schrieb Aron Demian < > aronmanni...@gmail.com>: > > > On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 04:25, AntiCompositeNumber < > > anticompositenum...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Would it be fair to say that: > > > - Enforcement of a universal code of conduct would happen though a > > > fair, clearly-defined process without significant bias and with > > > significant community oversight and input > > > - Universal code of conduct enforcement actions would be appealable > > > through a fair, clearly-defined process with significant community > > > oversight that allowed statements from involved parties and uninvolved > > > community members > > > - To ensure proper community oversight, code of conduct enforcement > > > actions and appeals would be made as public as possible as often as > > > possible (excepting issues where public disclosure would harm privacy > > > or safety) > > > > > > AntiComposite > > > > > > > Yes! These are fundamental requirements that need to be met by the > process > > that will be implemented in the second phase (Aug - end of 2020). > > It seems there will be an opportunity to incorporate these requirements: > > > > The second phase, outlining clear enforcement pathways, and > > > *refined with** broad input from the Wikimedia communities*, will be > > > presented to the Board > > > for ratification by the end of 2020; > > > > > > I'd add a few more points: > > - To handle workload and different languages, local boards should be > > selected as the first step of the process, with possible escalation to a > > global board if necessary (eg. for conflict-of-interest reason). > > - To minimize bias the boards should consist of people from different > > areas. As long as the local DR processes remain operational (ANI and the > > likes), there should be a clear separation of powers: CoC board members > > should not be involved with local DR to avoid concentration of power. > Being > > an admin should not be a requirement, in fact adminship and dispute > > resolution should be separate roles, as the latter requires specific > > training or experience, which is not part of the requirements to be > admin. > > - There should be at least 2 independent global boards so one can review > > the other's decisions and handle appeals. Cases should be evaluated by > the > > board that has more members unrelated to the involved parties. > > - Functionaries and board members should be regularly reviewed and terms > > limited to a few years. > > > > About the DR process: > > - Most of our communication is publicly visible on-wiki, therefore the > > cases should be resolved in public. Transparency is crucial for community &g
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Banning real identities
- and please explain the meaning of 'doxxed" as well. Is that US slang? Thyge - Sir48 Den fre. 5. jul. 2019 kl. 11.53 skrev Thomas Townsend : > Alphos > > You don;t explain why being "doxxed" was a bad thing for you, or > indeed what the downside is for anyone, You simply assert that it is > a Bad Thing and must not happen. Would you like to give your reasons > for those assertions? > > The Turnip > > On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 15:12, Alphos OGame wrote: > > > > I was doxxed by someone in the movement a few years ago, and I cannot > stress this enough : WE MUST NOT DOXX PEOPLE. > > It doesn't matter how good our intentions are. > > It doesn't matter how bad these people are. > > We as a community choose to block, ban, lock, whether or not globally, > the accounts of people we deem unable to contribute. > > We must not disclose unilaterally after the fact the identity of a > contributor. And not only because we may well have no clue about it. It may > get them jailed for the wrong reasons. It may get them harmed for their > genuine contributions. > > That MUST NOT (rfc2119 [1]) be how we handle things. > > Once again, I cannot stress this enough. > > > > Do not do this. This is a bad idea on so many levels. Pretty much all of > them, really. > > > > Alphos > > > > [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt > > > > Le 2 juil. 2019 à 08:17, Thomas Townsend a > écrit : > > > > >> Why do you think this is important and what real purpose do you think > this > > >> will serve? > > > > > > A good question. The stated object of global bans is "to help assure > > > the safety of users of the Wikimedia projects and/or assist in > > > preventing prohibited behavior that hinders dialogue, project > > > development and expansion". Identifying those persons banned as fully > > > as possible helps to achieve that assurance and protect the community. > > > > > > The Turnip. > > > > > > ___ > > > 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, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] On wiki versus off wiki - it may not be that simple
Den søn. 30. jun. 2019 kl. 18.48 skrev Todd Allen : > "Even if the answer is "Some of the conduct was off-wiki", > that tells us nothing about what it was or how WMF came to be aware of it." > I'm not so sure that is correct. Thyge Larsen (Sir48) ___ 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, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] proposals
I for one would prefer that proposals were entered on wiki and only links to them be posted in an email here with a 5-word topic for each. Kind regards, Thyge Larsen Den tir. 9. apr. 2019 kl. 10.58 skrev James Salsman : > I would like to send some proposals, less than a kilobyte each, to > this email list, but just in case I would like to know whether anyone > seeing this would prefer that I not send them. Please let me know. > Thank you. Best regards, -Jim > > ___ > 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, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]
"Imagine a world, where all windows installations have turned off their antivirus protection"! Regards, Thyge Den man. 7. maj 2018 kl. 17.09 skrev Shlomi Fish <shlo...@shlomifish.org>: > Hi Gabriel, > > On Mon, 7 May 2018 14:02:44 +0100 > Gabriel Thullen <gabr...@thullen.com> wrote: > > > I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That > > been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP > than > > there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was > > something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros > > included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem > for > > linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share... > > > > Most linux viruses have never outbroke and never caused much harm. Linux > can be > susceptible to other forms of malware such as worms or rootkits, but it > hasyet > to exhibit a large scale virus epidemic and it isnt because it wasn't > tried. > Linux is an attractive target because many servers run on it. See also > https://duckduckgo.com/?q=linux+viruses=web > > Regards, > > Shlomi > > > Gabe > > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa <shabab.must...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past > > > experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion > about > > > people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I > > > respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs > usually do > > > more harm than good". > > > > > > From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have > than > > > no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus > > > mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker > > > point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other > > > successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all. > > > > > > --- > > > Shabab Mustafa > > > President > > > Wikimedia Bangladesh > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish <shlo...@shlomifish.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500 > > > > John Bennett <jbenn...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours > > > > > warning > > > > you > > > > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I > wanted to > > > > let > > > > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of > the > > > > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps > to > > > > decrease > > > > > the success of attacks like these. > > > > > > > > > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from > our > > > > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized > > > access > > > > to > > > > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for > > > > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been > > > > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small > number of > > > > > accounts which we believe have been compromised. > > > > > > > > > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security > > > > > systems > > > > and > > > > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these, > the > > > > best > > > > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to > > > > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in > the > > > past > > > > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we > > > continue > > > > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a > secure > > > > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your > > > passwords,[2] > > > > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping > your > > > > > system software up to date. > > > > > > > > > > > > > From my ex
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions
I think we all know the substance of this topic and have known for quite some time. Everyone may call the procedure whatever suits her/him best. Regards Thyge - Sir48 2017-08-23 16:32 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>: > On 23 August 2017 at 12:32, Katie Chan <k...@ktchan.info> wrote: > > On 23/08/2017 00:33, Andy Mabbett wrote: > >> > >> > >> By definition, no, it is not. "An election is a formal group > >> decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to > >> hold public office." In this case the choice of who holds office is > >> made by the board, not the community who "vote". At best it's a > >> nomination process. > >> > > > > Let's go with the broader definition from (en) Wiktionary - "A process of > > choosing ... or other representatives by popular vote.", or even beyond > the > > first sentence from en Wikipedia - "To elect means "to choose or make a > > decision", and so sometimes other forms of ballot such as referendums are > > referred to as elections, especially in the United States.". > > The community does not chose the representatives. It merely makes > *non-binding* recommendations. > > The choice - as to whether *or not* to accept them - rests entirely > with the board. > > -- > Andy Mabbett > @pigsonthewing > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk > > ___ > 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, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: stranded travelers offered asylum in Canada
I hope the above is quite off-topic for this list. Regards Sir48-Thyge 2017-01-29 23:58 GMT+01:00 James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com>: > https://www.yahoo.com/news/canada-offers-temporary-home- > those-stranded-trump-order-221401138.html > > I strongly disagree that Bannon is not a if not the primarily > responsible party for both the SSL certificate revocation threats and > the travel ban: > > http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/steve-bannon-personally- > overruled-dhs-decision-not-to-include-green-card-holders-in- > travel-ban-cnn/ > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Concerns in general
It's not so challenging, Nathan -we just need to make a copy of a full backup for each language version, we have and store it in the country/countries where the language is spoken. This avoids any bias in the selection. Regards, Sir48-Thyge 2017-01-28 2:12 GMT+01:00 Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com>: > Romaine makes some good points. There is a legitimate concern that the turn > to populism and unpredictability threatens the environment in which > Wikimedia operates, and its only reasonable to consider a move of core > assets somewhere safer from the unspooling of Western social fabric. > Perhaps the Netherlands is a good alternative, although Geert Wilders is > quite popular there... The United Kingdom, perhaps? Yet with Brexit and > UKIP, one wonders how safe Wikimedia would be there. Perhaps France, if not > for Marine Le Pen... This is more challenging than I expected. Where will > we find some place that is protected from the pernicious threats that beset > the Wikimedia Foundation in the United States? > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Romaine Wiki <romaine.w...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Today I was reading in the (international) news about websites with > > knowledge on the topic of climate change disappear from the internet as > > result of the Trump administration. The second thing I read is that > before > > something can be published about this topic, the government needs to > > approve this. > > > > Do you realise what the right word for this is? censorship. > > Even if it is only partially. > > > > Luckily there are many scientists working on getting all the data abroad, > > out of the US to ensure the research data is saved, including on servers > in > > the Netherlands where Trump (hopefully) has no reach. > > > > In the past week I was reading about the Internet Archive organisation, > who > > is making a back up in Canada because of the Trump administration. I did > > not understood this, you may call me naive, but now I do understand, > > apparently they have some visionary people at the Internet Archive. > > > > I miss a good answer to this situation from the Wikimedia Foundation. > > > > Trump is now promoting harassment and disrespect, already for some time, > > > > What signal is given to the rest of the world if an America based > > organisation is spreading the thought of a harassment free Wikipedia and > > the free word, while the president of the US is promoting harassment, > > disrespect and censorship on a massive scale. > > > > This is just the first week of this president! > > > > I am 100% sure everyone in the Wikimedia movement is willing to make sure > > Wikimedia faces no damage whatsoever, including in WMF, but to me this > > still starts to get concerning. > > > > If we as Wikimedia movement think that free knowledge, free speech, > freedom > > of information, etc are important, I would think that the location where > > the organisation is based is that country where liberty is the largest, I > > do not know where this is but it is definitely not the US. > > > > To my impression WMF is stuck in the US, so I do not believe they would > > actually move when the danger grows. > > > > But I think it is possible to make sure risks are spread over the world. > > Certainly as we are an international movement that intends to cover the > > knowledge of the whole humanoid civilisation. > > > > To come to a conclusion, I think WMF and the Wikimedia movement should > > think about a back-up plan if it actually goes wrong. > > > > > > If you do not agree with me: that is perfectly fine, that's your right > and > > should be protected. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Romaine > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] DEITYBOUNCE and reader logs (was Re: Introducing Victoria Coleman, WMF Chief Technology Officer)
James Salsman wrote: > > If this does not imply that the logs are copied from Foundation > servers, that is certainly advantageous over the apparent meaning > of the language used. Reading the links you provided, and Robert West's acknowledgements which you did not link to, the above strikes me as being creation of drama as opposed to asking a question assuming good faith. Since Robert West had a Wikimedia Fellowship 1), I assume that he was able to analyze data from Wikipedia directly and that no transfer data outside of the WMF has taken place. I'm sure Leila Zia is able to clarify. Regards, Thyge - Sir48 1) https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Katy Love to direct WMF Resources team
I'm also in strong support of Maggie - no exception this time :) Thyge 2016-02-26 19:08 GMT+01:00 Sydney Poore <sydney.po...@gmail.com>: > I completely agree with Maggie that promoting Katy Love was the smart > decision. We need someone who can step in and quickly provide strong > leadership. > > Sydney > > Sydney Poore > User:FloNight > Wikipedian in Residence > at Cochrane Collaboration > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Maggie Dennis <mden...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: > > > Hello, Ruslan. > > > > Yes, Katy is stepping into the role in a permanent, full-time basis. > > > > Determining HR direction is not my role. :) Stating how the Board feels > > about open hiring is also not my place (and I don't know). But I am happy > > to share my own opinion. > > > > While some roles will and should be filled in an open, public search, > some > > roles may be appropriately filled by promoting existing staff with a > proven > > track record. The costs of hiring are not small, both in the amount of > time > > it takes to recruit and fill a position and the amount of time it takes > to > > onboard a new person. The leadership of our resources team needs to be > > filled quickly. Stability is important in the work they do. And we have a > > person at hand who has been well trained for the role and successfully > > worked with community on this basis for years. She is not being hired, > but > > promoted - a promotion she has amply earned. > > > > That said, the role Katy had previously filled will be an open new hire, > > with opportunities for all to apply. It'll just take a little bit of time > > to put the hiring packet together. We are also getting ready to open the > > search for the replacement for the leadership of Community Engagement, > > which I have taken in the interim - and for which I hope to see many > > community applicants. > > > > Best, > > > > Maggie > > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Ruslan Takayev < > ruslan.taka...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Maggie, et al > > > > > > Is Katy "stepping into" the role on a full-time, permanent basis? > > > > > > I ask this question, as questions I asked relating to the "new, open > > > approach" towards recruitment at the WMF are yet to be answered[1] and > I > > > don't recall there being any advertisements as a call for applications > to > > > fill Siko's position. > > > > > > TBH, this doesn't sound like a "new, open approach" towards recruitment > > at > > > the WMF, but more of the same..."jobs for the boys". > > > > > > Comment would be welcome Maggie. > > > > > > Warm regards, > > > > > > Ruslan Takayev > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/081677.html > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Maggie Dennis <mden...@wikimedia.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, all. > > > > > > > > I am delighted to announce that Katy Love has agreed to step into the > > > role > > > > of Director of Resources in the Community Engagement department, > > picking > > > up > > > > the baton so ably carried by Siko Bouterse before her. Katy has been > > with > > > > the Wikimedia Foundation since January 2013, beginning as the first > > > program > > > > officer to work with the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC). I’m > > > grateful > > > > to her for moving into this role and am looking forward to > > collaborating > > > > with her closely in WMF’s Community Engagement department. > > > > > > > > We will be hiring her replacement to oversee the FDC/full annual plan > > > > grants program in the weeks ahead. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > Maggie > > > > > > > > P.S. Their page! https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Resources > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Maggie Dennis > > > > Interim Sr. Director of Community Engagement > > > > Director, Support and Safety > > > > Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. > > > > ___ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Gui
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership - Board Reform
I already proposed a "house of representatives" earlier to represent the stakeholders and take care of the diversity issue, appointing the BoT etc. Regards, Thyge 2016-02-25 10:14 GMT+01:00 Jens Best <best.j...@gmail.com>: > just very short input here on the list: > > A community council or membership structure representing the diversity and > plurality of the movement in a democratic way would be great idea, in fact > it is a much needed idea to be realized. > > BUT: > > This structure would need to be a true counter-balance to WMF/BoT. > Therefore true power (decision-making, money etc.) would need to be > transfered in appropiate ways into the responsibility of this new > structure. If all the final decisionmaking would stay with the BoT and the > management of WMF any such more representative council would only be a > toothless thing. > > Best, > Jens > > 2016-02-25 5:21 GMT+01:00 James Alexander <jameso...@gmail.com>: > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Denny Vrandecic < > dvrande...@wikimedia.org > > > > > wrote: > > > > > I disagree very much with Dariusz on this topic (as he knows). > > > > > > I must say I also disagree with you ;). > > > > That is not to say that a community council or membership structure of > some > > sort might not be good (I think there are some logistical challenges that > > are so difficult that it may not be possible... I'd rather us try to deal > > with things like global dispute resolution first before we try to think > > about some governance council... but the idea is certainly intriguing) > but > > I think the idea that that body is 100% independent or that the board > > itself should not/is not speaking for the movement too is missing some of > > the point and being far too simplistic for the good of the org and the > > movement. I know you don't really mean it this way but it can easily come > > across as a bit of "don't look at me if this was bad for the movement I > had > > to ignore that". > > > > > > > I think that > > > a body that is able to speak for the movement as a whole would be > > extremely > > > beneficial in order to relieve the current Board of Trustees of the > > > Wikimedia Foundation from that role. It simply cannot - and indeed, > > legally > > > must not - fulfill this role. > > > > > > > > > To make a few things about the Board of Trustees clear - things that > will > > > be true now matter how much you reorganize it: > > > > > > - the Board members have duties of care and loyalty to the Foundation - > > not > > > to the movement. If there is a decision to be made where there is a > > > conflict between the Movement or one of the Communities with the > > > Foundation, the Board members have to decide in favor of the > Foundation. > > > They are not only trained to so, they have actually pledged to do so. > > > > > > - the Board members have fiduciary responsibilities. No, we cannot just > > > talk about what we are doing. As said, the loyalty of a Board member is > > > towards the organization, not the movement. > > > > > > > > > Whether the board wants it or not it DOES end up serving a leadership > role > > in the Movement and arguably the top leadership role. Yes it has a > > fiduciary responsibility to the org but part of that is it also has a > "duty > > of obedience". That duty of obedience includes, ensuring the board > members > > "have a responsibility to be faithful to the organization’s stated > mission > > and not to act or use its resources in incompatible ways or purposes" in > > addition to ensuring the org follows applicable laws. [1] So if we don't > > think that the Foundation has to do what's best for the movement as well > > then perhaps we should be reevaluating the wording of that mission. > > > > I would say a non-profit has an obligation to wind itself down if its > > mission (and remaining money) is better served elsewhere (as an extreme > > example, but one I've certainly seen) or to transfer the copyrights out > of > > country if that was the right move etc. A duty to the organization does > not > > meant that you do not have a duty to the movement and so I think it is > > wrong to try and side step that under the umbrella of fiduciary > > responsibility which is much more then just money and personnel. > > > > [Could say a lot more but probably not useful here and now :) I feel > like I > > ei
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anybody alive?
I think the rest is on FB. Thyge 2016-02-24 20:10 GMT+01:00 Joseph Seddon <jsed...@wikimedia.org>: > I got distracted by a passing sheep. > > Seddon > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Richard Symonds < > richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote: > > > I'm not actually here, I'm a sockpuppet using my wife's laptop. > > > > Richard Symonds > > Wikimedia UK > > 0207 065 0992 > > > > Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and > > Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered > > Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A > 4LT. > > United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia > > movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who > > operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). > > > > *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control > > over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* > > > > On 24 February 2016 at 18:20, Thehelpfulone <thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > On 24 February 2016 at 18:18, Milos Rancic <mill...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I think we should find first at least one of the list admins, so we > > > > could find the names of the persons we are searching. Austin? > > > > TheHelpfulOne? Richard (from Australia)? > > > > > > > > > > *waves*, it's actually closer to ~1500, so a few more to find. > > > > > > -- > > > Thehelpfulone > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone > > > ___ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > -- > Seddon > > *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)* > *Wikimedia Foundation* > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership - Board Reform
Lane Rasberry, I'm aware of the ongoing election - but in all respect, that has nothing to do with a house of representavtives as I envision it, i.e. being "above" the board. The present structure allows the existing board to decline access to the persons being elected. Regards, Thyge 2016-02-23 16:05 GMT+01:00 Lane Rasberry <l...@bluerasberry.com>: > Hello, > > Could I remind you all that there is a board election in progress right now > for 2 of the 10 seats? Please see details for the 2016 Affiliate-selected > board seats election at > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016> > > Amir, you said that you wanted representation from "India, China, Russia, > Iran, Brazil, Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, Arab countries and > finally, all of Africa". If you like, you may encourage anyone from those > countries to seek a nomination. Also, it would be very helpful if you could > encourage the Wikimedia chapters in those countries to participate in the > election in any way that they could, especially by planning to vote during > the upcoming voting period. > > Thyge - we do have a sort of house of representatives and it has a board > election happening right now. > > Nominations for the board are open till March 8! Election starts March 24! > Please share the message. > > Thanks - if anyone has questions post on the election page. > > yours, > > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <pute...@mccme.ru> > wrote: > > > On 2016-02-23 14:54, Thyge wrote: > > > >> We should not have direct elections to the board. We should have a > "house > >> of representatives" with X members from each part of the world and > charged > >> with electing the board and decide major issues like location of the > WMF, > >> changed of bylaws etc. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Thyge > >> > >> > > I do not think it could solve the diversity issue. > > > > To appoint the number of individuals with a set of skills and needed > > diversity, one needs candidates which will have needed skills and desired > > diversity to start with. > > > > Our experience as a movement (and also of people in other organizations > in > > different contexts) that these people do not always queue at the doors of > > the WMF office to wait for being elected. They need to be scouted, > > negotiated with, and convinced to be willing to sit at the board. This is > > what currently various companies are paid to do, and this seems to be a > > reasonable arrangement to me. > > > > As far as the candidates are there, I do not see much of a difference > > whether the community, a selected group (like house of representatives), > or > > the Board votes for them. And as soon as there is no difference there is > > also no need to make the structure more complicated. I thus conclude that > > this House of representatives is not needed for the Board elections. > > > > (It might be needed for other things, which are outside the scope of this > > discussion). > > > > > > Cheers > > Yaroslav > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > > > -- > Lane Rasberry > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia > 206.801.0814 > l...@bluerasberry.com > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership - Board Reform
I agree - few complicated problems can be solved once and for all - but it is possible to move in a better direction. "Better" in this context means to improve the existing lack of diversity and WWV (world wide view) of things. I´m fine with outsourcing the search for candidates for the board to ensure that it holds the knowledge and talent required. But the decision should rest with the house of representatives - which then could be also take care of those other things needed. Regards, Thyge 2016-02-23 15:47 GMT+01:00 Yaroslav M. Blanter <pute...@mccme.ru>: > On 2016-02-23 14:54, Thyge wrote: > >> We should not have direct elections to the board. We should have a "house >> of representatives" with X members from each part of the world and charged >> with electing the board and decide major issues like location of the WMF, >> changed of bylaws etc. >> >> Regards, >> Thyge >> >> > I do not think it could solve the diversity issue. > > To appoint the number of individuals with a set of skills and needed > diversity, one needs candidates which will have needed skills and desired > diversity to start with. > > Our experience as a movement (and also of people in other organizations in > different contexts) that these people do not always queue at the doors of > the WMF office to wait for being elected. They need to be scouted, > negotiated with, and convinced to be willing to sit at the board. This is > what currently various companies are paid to do, and this seems to be a > reasonable arrangement to me. > > As far as the candidates are there, I do not see much of a difference > whether the community, a selected group (like house of representatives), or > the Board votes for them. And as soon as there is no difference there is > also no need to make the structure more complicated. I thus conclude that > this House of representatives is not needed for the Board elections. > > (It might be needed for other things, which are outside the scope of this > discussion). > > > Cheers > Yaroslav > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership - Board Reform
We should not have direct elections to the board. We should have a "house of representatives" with X members from each part of the world and charged with electing the board and decide major issues like location of the WMF, changed of bylaws etc. Regards, Thyge 2016-02-23 14:38 GMT+01:00 Yaroslav M. Blanter <pute...@mccme.ru>: > On 2016-02-23 14:30, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: > >> Well, since someone brought that up, I'd risk asking: >> Does it make any sense to make the board in some of its future >> incarnations >> more representative? >> More representative of the editors? >> More representative of the world's lands and languages? >> More representative of the world's different economic regions? >> More representative of some relevant professional fields that are relevant >> for being in the Board of a massively-international-and-multilingual >> transparent web-oriented education-oriented non-profit? >> >> > Hi Amir, > > in my personal opinion, the current composition of the Board (elected vs > nominated by affiliates vs appointed seats) is in principle fine. It can be > fine-tuned by moving may be one seat here and there, but this is a big deal > and it is not clear for me how it is needed. > > A big question which was there from the very beginning is how to ensure > the diversity. This is related to the composition of the board. We know if > we make all seats directly elected we do not necessarily have the desired > diversity and needed skills. If we make all of them appointed we can in > principle have diversity and skills (though recent events shown this can > have some problematic side issues) but then the community has no voice. > > I do not know how this can be currently solved. Or, to be precise, how one > can solve it without compromising on bigger issues. > > Cheers > Yaroslav > > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership
It is in cases like this that an advisory board could/should be an asset. I hope the board could reach out to one or more participants in that group for additional help and advice. Regards, Thyge 2016-02-23 5:41 GMT+01:00 Risker <risker...@gmail.com>: > On 22 February 2016 at 22:00, Sydney Poore <sydney.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > > I also hope that the current Board members will thoughtfully consider > > > whether it's in the best interests of the Wikimedia Foundation and the > > > larger Wikimedia movement for them to continue as Board members. > > > > The instability that would result from large scale resignations of > > Board members would be devastating to WMF. > > > > That aside, under the best of circumstances, the volunteer BoT of WMF > > are faced with an extremely demanding and challenging work load. And, > > no volunteer board has the skill set to manage the problems that have > > come up over the last few months and have escalated out of control. > > > > I strongly encourage giving the BoT time to react to the most recent > > comments, and develop a responsible plan of action. > > > > > > I also agree with Sydney, and will point out that in the past year, we have > had brand new board members in 3 board-selected seats (one of whom only > participated for a few weeks), and 3 community seats (two of whom remain in > place, the third being replaced by a former board member. That is at least > five new members in a single year, no matter how one cuts it - and it > doesn't even take into consideration the ongoing process for > chapter-selected seats. > > This past year has already seen the largest turnover in board membership > that the Foundation has ever experienced; it was unusual to have more than > two seats change incumbents in all the past years. We have already seen > very significant change in the make-up of the Board, and half the board is > still learning the ropes and responsibilities. This level of change is > likely to be at least partly responsible for some of the unfortunate > situations we have seen in the last several months. But those who are > seeking a new board...well, you already have one. > > Risker/Anne > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Post mortems
I acknowledge that a group of wikipedians may discuss in any forum, they prefer. Doing it in a closed forum on FB does not, however, constitute a discussion by the community, because it excludes a lot of people who reject i.e. the FB license, the FB terms of use, and last not least the FB privacy policy. The latter is of special interest to me after having served as an ombudsman for wikimedia. Are people aware of the fact, that joining that group and commenting there could easily lead to their real identity being linked to their wiki user name - and that this in some cases could be more dangerous than "voicing their opinions in other forums"? Regards, Thyge 2016-02-22 2:57 GMT+01:00 Andrew Lih <andrew@gmail.com>: > Hi all, it’s probably useful to paste in the “What for?” message for the > Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group. Hopefully it will help clear things up. > > —- > From: > > https://www.facebook.com/notes/wikipedia-weekly/introduction-to-the-ww-group/961015923946239 > > This is a quick note about what goes on here in the Wikipedia Weekly > Facebook group. Thanks for joining what has become a useful forum in the > last few years, and especially in recent months. > > Perhaps a useful motto for this group is: "High signal, key voices, > efficient volume." That's a label few would use to describe Wikimedia-L or > on-wiki discussions, even though those are very necessary and key parts of > the movement. In many ways, this is a meta-news group, pointing to the best > and most interesting things happening in our community and the public. It's > not meant to be a direct replacement for any venue that exists now. > > This group started informally as a lively community space in lieu of, or in > reaction to, Wikipedia Weekly podcast episodes. Signpost, Wikimedia chapter > folks, WMF comms team, bloggers or any concerned community members are > welcome in the interest of productive and informative discussions about the > movement. One of the key aspects is that this is a respectful and highly > interactive space that, like it or not, is Facebook's main value. > > As for the public/private nature of what is said here: we probably don't > have a great term for it. In some sense, it's like the open access vs TWL > (The Wikipedia Library) argument – should the comments here be referenced > (or given prominence) if it's firewalled behind a Facebook login. People > can be expected to be quoted here, but not truly hyperlinked-to. Signpost, > for example, has referenced discussions here on multiple occasions in its > news stories. This group might get people to write opinions they wouldn't > voice in other forums. I see that as a useful part of our communications > ecosystem. > > Experiments like Discourse (https://discourse.wmflabs.org/) might be the > answer to help moderate the noisy, disparate and acerbic social spaces in > our movement, and I welcome it. For now, I like that this group is serving > an unmet need, and I thank the folks here for making it engaged and > meaningful. > > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I can agree with what you're saying, Craig. I can also understand what > > Brandon is saying - that some people prefer that interface. > > > > Unlike many Facebook pages, though, this one is not public and cannot be > > viewed by anyone who does not have a FB account. It's the one venue that > > many interested parties cannot even read, let alone participate in, > unless > > they're willing to give up some fairly significant privacy. I am > > disappointed, but I do not hold it against anyone for preferring to > discuss > > issues in a venue not associated with Wikimedia. > > > > Risker/Anne > > > > On 21 February 2016 at 19:01, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> > > wrote: > > > > > People will have discussions at a location that is personally > convenient > > > for them. Unless you're going to reprogram human nature, I don't see > > that > > > there's anything to be done about the resulting balkanisation of the > > > discussion. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Craig > > > > > > On 22 February 2016 at 09:54, Thyge <ltl.pri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I really wonder why wikimedia discussions have migrated to FB. Are we > > > > applying for a grant? > > > > > > > > Thyge > > > > > > > > 2016-02-22 0:51 GMT+01:00 Newyorkbrad <newyorkb...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > I too am one of those people who is not to be found on Facebook. I > > > > > only have
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Post mortems
I really wonder why wikimedia discussions have migrated to FB. Are we applying for a grant? Thyge 2016-02-22 0:51 GMT+01:00 Newyorkbrad <newyorkb...@gmail.com>: > I too am one of those people who is not to be found on Facebook. I > only have room in my life for one online timesink ... and I already > have Wikipedia :) > > Newyorkbrad > > On 2/21/16, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > As has already been explained on this list, many people do not have > access > > to Facebook. If this is something germane and useful to a lot of people > on > > this list, perhaps it would be appropriate to ask Jonathan to post it > here. > > > > Risker/Anne > > > > On 21 February 2016 at 18:34, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> For those not following, I recommend the discussion in response to > >> Jonathan > >> Cardy's comment here: > >> > >> > https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/960989863948845/ > >> > >> Anthony Cole > >> ___ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT
Thanks, Denny Vrandecic (and to Dariusz Jemielniak as well) for expressing some individual views as members of the BoT. Denny: A firm choice between the two communication strategies needs not be made. Both could be proper solutions depending on the situation. But don't you honestly think, that the BoT in this case ought to convene and work out a common and comprehensive response to the issues raised? I don't necessarily see the need for it to be handled through legal or why that would mean its ending up as "a bloodless, corporate-like speech". The BoT should set the direction for the WMF after discussing topics with the community. I am absolutely sure that the intelligence of the members of the BoT is sufficient both to realize the situation and to know that lack of response for so long in itself adds to the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt in the community and the WMF staff. And for one actual thing, I wonder how anybody could enter the BoT as affiliate (s)elected members without knowing the thoughts of the present BoT members on these important issues. Regards, Thyge 2016-02-20 0:49 GMT+01:00 Denny Vrandecic <dvrande...@wikimedia.org>: > Delphine, > > thank you. > > Whereas I do not agree with everything you say (but I think those are > discussions for another time), I wholeheartedly agree with your insight > that the Board as a whole is dumber than its member on average. Thank you > for putting this down to words. I would even say, dumber than any of its > members (including myself, who probably ranks at the bottom). > > The Board is not the governing body of the movement, and the Foundation is > not the movement. The ED is not the president, and the Chair of the Board > is not the Queen or King. The FDC is neither Santa Claus nor the IRS. Some > of the issues come from the demands and expectations to these positions > that would come from such roles - e.g. the expectations towards the Board > are sometimes mistaken for the expectations one would have towards a > representative governing body of the movement. But the actual, and > sometimes legal roles and responsibilities these bodies have (your much > aligned fiduciary responsibility comes to mind) weight stronger than these > mere expectations, which leads to much suffering. > > I do not know of many topics as important as clearing up the roles and > bodies of the movement as a whole. But I know that unless we do, we will > continue to crash face-forward into brick walls again and again. I have no > idea how to get to that promised land, but I hope it will not take us forty > years of wandering in the desert to do so. > > I want to say it very clearly, that I honestly believe that, no matter how > stupid the Board seems to have acted, that I believe that each and every > member of the Board during their time on the Board while I have been there > - and I want to explicitly include James - has acted to their best > intentions and to the best of their knowledge. I expect that to continue. > It is utterly frustrating to see how things are turning out. > > To all others: many of the Board members receive and read these comments on > many different channels. But we have basically two options to engage, and > both are suboptimal. > # One option is to make sure that the Board's communication with the > community always represents the opinion of the Board as a whole, which > means to discuss it internally at first, to check with legal and PR, and to > go through these cycles again and again. Almost any message, no matter how > vivid and bubbly it might have been, will turn out as a bloodless, > corporate-like speech after that. Never mind that such a process will never > be fast enough to allow for anything that resembles a conversation. > # The alternative is to allow every member of the Board to engage > individually as they like. This will mean that there are much more > individual conversations going on, things can be better explained. But this > also means that the individual Trustee's statement must not be taken as > golden representations of the Board's thinking. If ten Board members engage > with the community (which won't happen anyway, but even if it's five), do > expect five different voices and opinions, and don't expect that everything > said will actually become a resolution (which, in the end, is the only way > the Board as a Board can communicate anyway). This obviously can lead to > plenty of "that Trustee said that" or "no, I talked with Trustee X, and she > said that this change is a bad idea", etc. - never mind possible legal > implications. > > Since I have been on the Board there was never even really a discussion > which of these options we should take. And I am not surprised by it - > considering how creative and d
Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT
This marvellous thread goes a long way to prove that we are in possession of a very able, considerate, and polite WMF-oriented community in addition to the "silent" community that goes on editing our sites. But it also makes me wonder whether the BoT as a body maintains its silence about the issues? If they have answered somewhere else, please someone point to it. Regards, Thyge 2016-02-19 23:24 GMT+01:00 Delphine Ménard <notafi...@gmail.com>: > Here you go SJ, > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Sam Klein <sjkl...@hcs.harvard.edu> > wrote: > > > Delphine writes: > >> > >> We freaking built an encyclopedia, of course we can take care of it > > without > >> having to fear everyone and their brother! And while an organisation is > > not > >> a wiki, and revert not always an option, I'm pretty sure that > > > ... reverting sometimes *is* a good idea. And maybe the only idea. > > > Delphine > -- > @notafish > > NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get > lost. > Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - > http://blog.notanendive.org > Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] "9 annoying nonprofit trends that need to die"
2016-02-07 19:10 GMT+01:00 Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>: > A marketing slogan that I'd like WMF to banish is that Wikipedia is 100% > written by volunteers. That's simply false. I find that point of view entirely wrong. The WMF does not pay anybody to edit, so editors are volunteers. I might follow the same line of reasoning and say, that Wikipedia is not neutral, because people are allowed to write about their own country/city etc. Contributors make a living from other sources. Anybody could have some affiliation other than getting paid and total neutrality is hard to come by. Thyge 2016-02-07 19:10 GMT+01:00 Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>: > A marketing slogan that I'd like WMF to banish is that Wikipedia is 100% > written by volunteers. That's simply false. Wikipedia is written by > individuals with a mix of motives, and for some people those motives > include financial compensation. > > Diverging a little into the topic of paid contributions: generally I feel > that *disclosed* paid editing is ok so long as it's done in a manner that's > compliant with our policies. For example, a museum staffer who publicly > discloses their affiliation and writes on Wikipedia about a fossil that the > museum has in its collection may be a net positive writer for the > encyclopedia. On the other hand, a someone who's a POV-pusher for a > political interest, whether paid or unpaid, may be a net negative for the > encyclopedia. > > In any case, Wikipedia is only partially written by volunteers, and public > communications from WMF should be consistent with this reality. > > Pine > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 1:58 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > lol This is why “Nonprofit: The Musical” will have, as one of its > > characters, a consultant robot, whose only job is to repeat exactly > > what an internal staff or board member says; the difference is that > > the robot actually gets listened to. > > > > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think that a number of us may appreciate this article, specifically > > > people who are involved with Wikimedia affiliates, grant committees, > and > > > WMF Community Engagement including CR and PC > > > > > > > > > http://nonprofitwithballs.com/2015/06/9-annoying-nonprofit-trends-that-need-to-die/ > > > > > > Pine > > > ___ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board
Transparently, I suppose? Thyge 2016-01-06 19:31 GMT+01:00 Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>: > Just a note that I am continuing to discuss the subjects of turnover and > WMF employee morale with Boryana, and I have also asked Lila about this. > > Pine > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Craig Franklin < > cfrank...@halonetwork.net > > > > > wrote: > > > > > While it's not hard to find a WMF employee who will privately (or > > > increasingly, not-so-privately) complain of poor morale, I'd be wary of > > > reading too much into submissions to sites like Glassdoor. Employees > > that > > > are content rarely take the time to report this, so you end up with a > > > skewed sample consisting largely of the unhappy and demotivated. > > > > > > > > > Looking a bit further into Glassdoor disproves that theory. > > > > For comparison, here are two non-profits of roughly similar size for > > comparison: > > > > * NPR has an approval rating of 4.0 out of 5, based on 96 reviews, with > 79% > > saying they would recommend working there to a friend.[1] > > > > * The American Enterprise Institute has an approval rating of 4.1 out of > 5, > > based on 53 reviews, with 89% saying they would recommend working there > to > > a friend.[2] > > > > You can find approval ratings in excess of 90% on Glassdoor for some > large > > corporates, based on literally thousands of reviews. > > > > [1] > > https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Overview/Working-at-NPR-EI_IE3965.11,14.htm > > [2] > > > https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Overview/Working-at-AEI-EI_IE151782.11,14.htm > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Something
It seams that NDA could by anything (1). Which one is something? (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NDA Thyge 2016-01-03 10:02 GMT+01:00 Milos Rancic <mill...@gmail.com>: > On Jan 3, 2016 09:56, "John Mark Vandenberg" <jay...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Something is covered in NDAs. > > I heard quite general notes, that they couldn't be inside of NDAs. And they > weren't personal, but related to the WMF and WMF leading position inside of > the movement. > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA
I do not think that WMF's filing a suit against NSA should be a starting point for demanding the WMF to cure all the evils of the World, political or otherwise . Even handling the recognized problems of some minor Wikipedias fall outside the scope of the WMF. Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia anyone can edit - except the WMF! (if they want to uphold their status as service provider). Regards, Thyge 2015-03-18 14:03 GMT+01:00 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com: On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:55 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 10:14 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 5:53 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: What other unfortunate laws are happening elsewhere in the world and how do we track and maybe act on those? Here is a concrete suggestion: Reach out to the most reputable human rights organisations. Starting with the countries at the bottom of the press freedom league table, have the human rights organisations form working groups to assess the relevant Wikipedia language versions for their coverage of the human rights situation in the countries they serve. If a working group finds that a Wikipedia language version does not accurately reflect the government's human rights record, issue a public warning that – in the human rights organisations' opinion – the Wikipedia in question appears to be subject to undue political manipulation. Provide funding for this work. Ensure high visibility for the resulting reports. Ideally, place a superprotected link to the report in the Wikipedia itself. This will increase the chances that the content will be accurate, while relieving pressure on activists in the countries concerned. Think of it as a Wikipedia freedom index. One more case to illustrate the need. Human Rights Watch summarizes the situation in Uzbekistan[1] as follows: ---o0o--- Uzbekistan’s human rights record is atrocious. Torture is endemic in the criminal justice system. Authorities intensified their crackdown on civil society activists, opposition members, and journalists. Muslims and Christians who practice their religion outside strict state controls are persecuted, and freedom of expression is severely limited. The government forces more than one million adults and children to harvest cotton under abusive conditions. Authorities still deny justice for the 2005 Andijan massacre, in which government forces shot and killed hundreds of protesters, most of them unarmed. Despite this, the United States and European Union continue to advance closer relations with Uzbekistan, seeking cooperation with the war in Afghanistan. ---o0o--- Here is the biography of Uzbekistan's president in the Uzbek Wikipedia, as translated by Google: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=autotl=enjs=yprev=_thl=enie=UTF-8u=https%3A%2F%2Fuz.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIslom_Karimovedit-text= Even from this broken translation, it is quite evident that this is another hagiography, devoid of any hint of criticism. Here are some samples: ---o0o--- ... a well-thought-out program to build the country's economic foundation ... Karimov initiative promoting global policy is always the best ideas in the world, regardless of their point of view, it is known as a person who can achieve the desired goal. He has been committed to peace and unity policy. Karimov new residential construction, including a great step-by Jolanda prosperity of our ancestors, plays an important role in the implementation of the economic capacity to build large enterprises, cities, towns, and above all, a radical transformation of the capital, Tashkent, https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1hl=enie=UTF8prev=_trurl=translate.google.comsl=autotl=enu=https://uz.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshkentusg=ALkJrhguDlungYjoz2D8dUf12x2v7u6qjA supervises the work. Karimov to establish an independent state and a democratic civil society based on the construction of the new century, the main directions of development of the country has developed into a bright future in the way of the people, it is the great goals. ---o0o--- The English Wikipedia biography of the president[2] mentions dissidents being boiled alive. Peter Hitchens wrote about this some years ago, in an article titled Our new best friends boil dissidents alive.[3] Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan were among the countries represented at the Turkic Wikimedia Conference 2012, which according to the documentation on Meta[4] was coordinated by Wikipedian of the Year winners Wikibilim, and financially supported by the Wikimedia Foundation. [1] http://www.hrw.org/europecentral-asia/uzbekistan [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_Karimov#Human_rights_and_press_freedom [3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-228241/Our-new-best-friends-boil-dissidents-alive.html [4] https
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patrolling photographs of living people
No more, please. If needed, start a thread to discuss the scope of wikimedia-l. Regards, Thyge 2015-03-13 16:57 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk: On 13 March 2015 at 14:32, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote: I'll hold you to this PoV next time I'll feel the need to constantly remember other people about my initiatives. constantly? How many times has Fae made such posts in, say, the last three months? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Warning: Wikimedia-l Google Group
No, that is not the case. I got a confirmation by email about being unsubscribed, and 6 hours later a new email that I was subscribed again. Fortunately, this gave me the opportunity to report the group twice. Regards, Thyge 2015-01-10 0:05 GMT+01:00 Charles Gregory wmau.li...@chuq.net: I believe the problem occurs if you use a gmail (or domain with google apps) email address which differs to the email address you were subscribed to the list with. Being a Google service, the group interface tries to use your gmail account. MZ's email method works well! If you need the direct link to report the group, you can use https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/wikimedia-l/abuse. Regards, Charles / User:Chuq On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 5:43 AM, Thyge ltl.pri...@gmail.com wrote: My experience is the same :-( 2015-01-09 19:28 GMT+01:00 Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org: Thanks for the notice. I unsubscribed some hours ago and got resubscribed again... Il 07/01/2015 19:26, Austin Hair ha scritto: You may have already received a message indicating that you've been added to the Wikimedia-l Google Group; if not, you likely will soon. In case it's not clear, this Google Group is in no way affiliated with Wikimedia-l, the Wikimedia Foundation, me, or anybody you'd ever want to be friends with. If you do find yourself subscribed, I strongly urge you not to engage in any way. Report it to Google (not to me or the list) as an abusive subscription using the link at the bottom of the message, and leave it be. If you find yourself being impersonated or wrongly implicated in this latest round of troublemaking, don't fret. Nobody will hold it against you, and in fact you'll have everyone's sympathies. Austin ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l , mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Warning: Wikimedia-l Google Group
My experience is the same :-( 2015-01-09 19:28 GMT+01:00 Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org: Thanks for the notice. I unsubscribed some hours ago and got resubscribed again... Il 07/01/2015 19:26, Austin Hair ha scritto: You may have already received a message indicating that you've been added to the Wikimedia-l Google Group; if not, you likely will soon. In case it's not clear, this Google Group is in no way affiliated with Wikimedia-l, the Wikimedia Foundation, me, or anybody you'd ever want to be friends with. If you do find yourself subscribed, I strongly urge you not to engage in any way. Report it to Google (not to me or the list) as an abusive subscription using the link at the bottom of the message, and leave it be. If you find yourself being impersonated or wrongly implicated in this latest round of troublemaking, don't fret. Nobody will hold it against you, and in fact you'll have everyone's sympathies. Austin ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Google Groups: You've been added to Gender Gap
I reported the group for spamming. Adding me and others without our consent and sending unsolicited emails must be stopped somehow. Regards, Thyge 2014-12-05 22:12 GMT+01:00 Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com: For the record, about an hour ago I permanently banned Site Admin, going so far as to create regex filters for his content. And no, Russavia, I didn't think it was you. Unfortunately, I can't do anything about the individual subscriptions—yes, I got one too. Austin On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all Below is an email I've just received inviting me to join the Gender Gap mailing list. It's sent from russiaviat...@gmail.com and has been passing off as me. I mentioned on the Gender Gap mailing list the other day that this was not me, but now it would appear that email addresses on this mailing list are being scraped. If you receive an email purporting to be from myself and it's not from this email addy (and with an IINET IP), you can be assured it is not myself. If I wanted to troll you all, you all know that I have more elaborate ways of doing this if I really wanted to do that. :) It could appear from the message they sent it is our Indian friend who is doing this; but of course it could be someone joe jobbing them too. Who knows, who cares, it's not me all the same. Cheers Russavia -- Forwarded message -- From: Russavia (Google Groups) gender-gap+nore...@googlegroups.com Date: Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 1:08 AM Subject: Google Groups: You've been added to Gender Gap To: russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com Gender-Gap International spreading Transparency and WikiLove -- I regret that XYZ has thought it necessary to bring his/her personal grievance to the Wikimedia-l mailing list now that s/he is unable to make such comments on the Wikimedia-XYZ list or the WM-XYZ website. I would hope that the moderators will consider whether providing a platform for this type of attack is conducive to the health of the Wikimedia movement. ___ Michael Maggs Chair, Wikimedia UK About this group: Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects. We want to encourage you to engage with others in this effort. The owner of the group has set your subscription type as Email, meaning that you'll receive a copy of every message posted to the group as they are posted. Visit This Group http://groups.google.com/d/forum/gender-gap?hl=en [image: Visit Google Groups] https://groups.google.com/?hl=en Start your own group http://groups.google.com/d/creategroup?hl=en, unsubscribe from this group http://groups.google.com/d/forum/gender-gap/unsubscribe/1KzA4xQp3EJgqb7qgoVQ1Ojd6d1ig1serHmoKtUOx11h3NXzJA?hl=en , or stop invitations like this http://groups.google.com/d/optout?hl=en. or report spam http://groups.google.com/d/abuse/YQAAAEwZXucMMHY_I2wAAADPrIBRAUs70uGdiRxE_60cAW3p5LQ?hl=en . ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia and Ebola
What a positive and encouraging information. Thanks a lot, James Heilman! Regards, Thyge 2014-12-04 15:34 GMT+01:00 James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com: Hey All I would like to share the following: “Wikipedia has been the most widely used single source of information about Ebola in the most affected countries, among people who searched for information through Bing. The use of Wikipedia was greater than that of either CNN, the World Health Organization, or the Center for Disease Control during the time periods examined. The countries in question include: Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea. I have been collaborating with a researcher from microsoft by the name of Elad Yom-Tom who has provided this interesting data. We are looking at submitting something to a peer reviewed journal soon. Journal will of course need to be Open Access, PLoS Medicine or Open BMJ interested? :-) I think this is a real accomplishment for all the amazing individuals and organizations that have made Wikipedia what it is today including the many dedicated Wikipedians, the Wikimedia Foundation, our collaborators at Translators Without Borders, the Cochrane Collaboration, and the University of California San Francisco College of Medicine among others. I hope this is also encouragement for organizations such as the World Health Organisation among others that are not currently engaging with Wikipedia as a platform for knowledge sharing to do so. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] $20 donation to WMF for vandalism edit from US House of Representatives
To me, the only thing at stake is the seriousness of this list - and that is not a new issue, unfortunately. Regards, Thyge /Sir48 2014-08-01 21:59 GMT+02:00 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com: On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Rjd0060 rjd0060.w...@gmail.com wrote: No, I'm saying this doesn't matter and people should get back to doing whatever they feel is actually important. Let it go. It really does not matter. AT ALL. I can't agree. It's clear that lives are at stake, not to mention our international reputation and the livelihood of all employees as well as the self-esteem of many thousands of contributors. This couldn't possibly be more serious. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
the http:// part has been left out. Correct link is http://fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/ Regards Sir48/Thyge 2014-07-16 8:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net: Link does not work. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Askin Sent: 16 July 2014 04:00 AM To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is designed to help us understand group decision-making and Wikipedia’s Articles for Deletion (AfD) process. The research is being carried out under the terms of the University of Western Ontario - Code of Conduct; it will not lead to any sales follow up; no individual (or organization) will be identified in our reporting. If you are an adult Wikipedian, we would be grateful if you could spare approximately 10-15 minutes to complete this survey. As a token of our gratitude, for each completed survey we will make a charitable donation of CAD$2 to the Wikimedia Foundation. If you have any questions, please contact Lu Xiao at lxiao24 (at) uwo.ca. To start the survey please click ONCE on the link below: http:// fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/ Please try to complete the survey by August 1, 2014. Thank you very much for your time, we really value your input. Sincerely, UWO Wikipedia Research Team ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4716 / Virus Database: 3986/7858 - Release Date: 07/15/14 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Increase participation [WAS: The first three weeks]
I agree with Ting's remarks about the importance of the social aspect. Maybe we need a taskforce against rudeness. But looking into the social aspect does not exclude improvements on the tech side. I think that maybe instead of VE we should have an 'invisible editor', meaning that if someone hits edit, no edit window with syntax shows up, but the page gets open for marking/inserting some text and change it (like it is done in wordprocessing programs). To place the change correctly in the body text or in some highly complicated template should be done by the wikimedia software without user intervention. As it is now, even simple changes like correcting a typo or a date often requires a lot of effort in locating it in the edit window. If it is hidden inside a template, even a page search does not show it. Regards, Thyge 2014-06-01 11:53 GMT+02:00 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de: Hello Risker, you have my sympathy, and let me tell you this: I am man and programmer, and when I edit articles nowaday I tend to ignore the info boxes and the templates at the end of each article. If I create a new article and I happen don't have a similar article with the templates and infobox already at hand, I simply create an article without both. And I think it is essential to tell the beginner to do the same: Don't bother with things that are too complicated, it is the content that counts. What I also do is help newcomers to wikify articles. I think it is an utterly bad habitate just to put a wikify template in a not nicely structured article instead of to do something by one self. It is usually just a few edits, two '''s, a few [[ and ]]s, and maybe a [[cateogry:...]] that can make the difference. Personally, there are two reasons that I don't really care about info boxes and templates: First it is my own habitate as a user. For me the summary at the begin of an article tells me more than the info boxes. Info boxes are great for machines, for semantic web or things like that, but as a human I am more content with the summary. Second, I am sure that there will be at some time some nice and capable people who will put the necessary info boxes and templates in the articles I created. I never try to start a perfect article (I even never start an article in my own sandbox, people can always see my progress in the articles), I just do something and then leave it as I am able to. In all the discussions about editor retention and new comer barriers there is one thing that astonishes me again and again, and that is the whole discussion seems to be highly biased on the technical aspect, while the social aspect mostly tend to be neglected. People put a HUGE TON of hope in the visual editor as if it can resolve everything. But actually I think what VE can do is very limited, as far as our rules and our scope don't change. Nowaday Wikipedia articles (across all major languages) are highly biased in style and in content to academic thesis. How references are used and put, the criteria for references as valid, are almost one-by-one copied by the standards from academic thesis. Content without references are by itself considered as delete candidates. Both of these strongly put up constraints on who can put new content in Wikipedia and what content is considered as viable. I always feel sorrow, that both the Foundation and the community neglected the Oral Citation Project lead by Achal ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Oral_citations ). I believe it has the potential to revolutionary how anthropology (and maybe a lot of other sciences where field study is necessary) is done just like Wikipedia revolutionized how Encyclopedia can be done. And it can really give a lot of people, who did not enjoyed the academic training, the possibility to contribute their knowledge. The other major topic that I see neglected in this whole complex of discussion is how our rules are set up. They don't really put on a price or punishment against rude behavior. There are a lot of initiative to be welcoming and helpful, they are all great, but in the end, one rude comment can destroy efforts of two or three welcoming volunteers. Our rules only set in if the rude behavior is obvious, but not if they are acid and suttle. And people tend to ignore rude behavior if they come from a high performer editor. Change our attitude to non-academic-content and change our play rule on rude behavior is harder than change in technology, this is why people do so as if the VE is the holy grale. But it is not. By the start of the last strategic period, in the years 2009 and 2010, the Foundation conducted a lot of studies about why people leave our community, and Wiki-syntax is only one of at least three other reasons. VE is just a tool, tools can be used for good or for bad, it is the mind, that decides for which the tools are used. Greetings Ting Am 01.06.2014 08:55, schrieb Risker: On 1 June 2014 01:39
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy
2014-05-29 7:46 GMT+02:00 Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com: * I'm quite capable of thinking for myself. I am truly interested in protecting children and preventing harassment. And I'm particularly interested in the current state of the policies around these issues as the leadership of the WMF changes. Old discussions might contain outdated information. I could go on-wiki to see the current policies, but I keep having to reply to mails like these that somehow attribute a bunch of opinions to me that I've never expressed. I'm still trying to understand what I've done wrong here. I've basically asked some questions and replied to posts that either were directly addressed to me (as yours is here), or made extensive reference to me (as some of the mails calling for my blocking). Let me ask you a simple question that may help me understand where you are coming from: do you find the questions themselves personally upsetting? Thanks again! ,Wil Wil, if the discussions are outdated, so are the questions, since they for years already have been considered at length on-wiki with a lot of spill-off here. In order to make progress in any direction, new suggestions that can obtain consensus are needed. As far as I can see, you raise old questions without apparently showing interest in the comprehensive past treatment and without presenting any new point of view or a perspective that points to a solution. In addition, as I and others have remarked earlier, the questions basically belong to meta and not on this list. This is what I feel you 'have done wrong' and - since that takes away from my available time and from my reading about other topics here - that is what upsets me. Regards, Thyge ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Child Protection and Harassment Policy
Please raise and discuss questions about policy on meta. This is not the place. Regards, Thyge 2014-05-28 23:54 GMT+02:00 Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com: Sorry, the n00b has to step in with a couple of clarifications. :) I was asking about 2 separate issues, so no conflation there. Also I asked very carefully for *all* sides of the issues: Now, I'll just sit back and hear all sides of the story. All right, back on topic! :) ,Wil On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: Child Protection- I'd like to hear about ways that policy might be changed here to better protect children, especially given some of the content on Commons. I'd also like to hear about specific examples of content on Commons that a parent might not find appropriate for their children. Note that this is not a repeat of the discussion to understand what policies are in place, as I have already opened a specific thread for that. You seem to have conflated two items here... one is the idea of child protection, and the other is of objectionable items on commons. I don't think that in any way works. Our child protection policies are about protecting children when they interact online. This is a perennial problem for any internet site, as I am sure you know. We do have some policies that help a lot (for example, admins always err on the side of caution and delete personal details that underage editors post). We have avenues to report potential issues such as grooming. Could more be done? Yes, I've thought so; for example publicising the problem more. But is WP worse that other communities (note; not site) of similar size? Probably not. At least not in my experience (which, of course, is pretty extensive given my former job). Child protection from porn, etc.? I think it's well established that kids can come across porn anywhere (apparently, Facebook, if my cousins' activity on there are anything to go by :S). And frankly, it's never struck me as an issue under the umbrella of xhild protection. How far does policing it become our job and not that of a parent? It's a difficult decision... especially when browser-based content filters are prevelant and easy to set up. I've always said; we should educate our users about how to install and use content filters, as this will benefit them outside WP too! So then, on the flip side of your comment here you have the global issue of objectionable images. This is a much broader issue that the narrow one you're focusing on here. For example, one of the main (and by main I mean constant and persistent, beyond any complaints of porn!) complaints we see relate to images of the prophet mohammed. How do you, then, feel about Commons hosting images like that? One of the tenets of the projects are that they are not censored, which I think is a good thing. However, we've not yet struck a balance between displaying everything and filtering things an individual doesn't want to see. I like the Mohammed example because it emphasises the problem where those of us who are not Muslim find a subset of images perfectly okay, but a Muslim might not. Since I don't have enough experience with the community and WP yet to discuss controversial topics myself, I will not chime in unless the thread has very obviously gone off topic. Just to pick an arbitrary about of time that is more than the few months that others have mentioned here, let's say that you can only participate in this discussion if you have at least one year of experience as an active contributor. I'm not sure what purpose it serves to bring up controversial topics, in this forum, with an express note that you have nothing new to bring? ;) Not to be too critical; but do you imagine that these issues aren't being discussed on the various projects - hopefully with incremental improvement each time. Or that individuals here are not aware of them? More than anything though, I'm sure you're an experienced internet chap - what did you expect to recieve in stirring up two relatively ingrained sides? It wasn't very deft, I have to observe :) One thing it might be important to communicate is that whilst this list is useful for global discussion, it's not a venue that any agreement or consensus is reached. So these discussions are really best conducted on-wiki. I'm not sure if you've actually attempted to open such topics on any of the projects, but the discussion you appear to be looking for can really only happen there (rather than here, or IRC, for example). Regards, Tom ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikidata vs Wikipedia
Something seems to have gone wrong. According to the list, en:wikipedia specifies the birth date of Jimmy Waleshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Walesas being 1966-08-08, where in fact Wikipedia has the (sourced) date August 7, 1966 which is identical to the date in Wikidata. Regards, Thyge 2014-05-20 9:33 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, Amir Ladsgroup has developed reports that show differences between the date of birth and the date of death as known in the English Wikipedia and Wikidata. Such differences may be wrong in either Wikidata or Wikipedia. They are the ones that need attention, they are the ones where sources makes a real difference. At this stage Amir is finalising the code. Given that this software can run repeatedly, the results will change when the software l earns about changes in either Wikidata or Wikipedia. One practical question is where should these reports be located. It can be in both Wikipedia and Wikidata. It is likely that many similar reports reporting on different statements will become available. Thanks, GerardM https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Ladsgroup/Birth_date_report/Conflict_with_Wikidata https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Ladsgroup/Death_date_report/Conflict_with_Wikidata http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/05/wikipedia-vs-wikidata-qualitative.html ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] COM:IDENT?
What a kind communication! It gives me the impression that you are afraid to discuss matters outside of Commons. The special role of Commons as a joint resource should occationally allow concerns to be raised outside the community of commonites. If concerns are not of a general nature, please at least deal with them in a friendly manner. Regards, Thyge 2014-05-20 17:51 GMT+02:00 Pipo Le Clown plecl...@gmail.com: You didn't get the answer you wanted, so you're forum shopping to get the right one ? How nice of you. Le 20 mai 2014 17:37, Jeevan Jose jkadav...@gmail.com a écrit : https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Odderoldid=124445321#Commons_talk:Nudity Is this the way Commons:Photographs of identifiable people works? Regards, Jee ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Botopedia?
A great tip would be to avoid changing this thread into a personal attack on Risker or anybody else. Thank you. Thyge/Sir48 2014-02-04 Fæ fae...@gmail.com: On 4 February 2014 17:48, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 4 February 2014 12:27, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Risker, 04/02/2014 17:59: doesn't deserve to have his case reheard on this mailing list Risker, here's a great tip: If you *really* do not want the case reheard, then why not just stop emailing and publicising the case, repeating the name of the accused and providing links in an attempt to prove some point or other. Try spending your volunteer time welcoming a few new Wikipedia editors instead of banning contributors and making life ghastly for those who are under your hammer. I welcomed and helped many thousands of newer en.wp contributors during the time I was an admin. Even after the machinations of a few individuals shot my reputation to hell and got me banned from what was my home project for many years, I still helped Wikipedians with tricky problems behind the scenes; in fact my highly publicised case made me someone that those upset and having difficulties with our arcane processes could turn to in confidence, in a way that most trusted users do not have the real life experience and grey hairs to offer. Having authority is not all about dishing it out, or even having the badges to prove you must be respected. Fae ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users
I'm not into the technicalities, but to hide ip's entirely on the sites would be the biggest advance in improving privacy I can think of... regards, Thyge - Sir49 2014/1/13 Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org On 01/13/2014 12:19 AM, Tim Starling wrote: Not as fast as revisions, and we seem to cope with those. Fair enough. So you'd implicitly create the user, track it by cookie? With some well designed UX this'd work well and hide IPs entirely (and allow users that do create an account to retroactively rename their contribs). Wouldn't that affect caching though? -- Marc ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300
I'm not in principle against transparent paid editing, but it could actually be considered to violate the ToU's wording: misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity Regards, Sir48 2014/1/6 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com Sure, Todd. But that is not actually in the Wikimedia terms of use. The terms of use say, - Attempting to impersonate another user or individual, misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity, or using the username of another user with the intent to deceive; They do not say, - Attempting to impersonate another user or individual, misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity, or *using more than username* with the intent to deceive; That whole section is about impersonating other people, making out that you represent someone you do not represent, etc. Silence as to one's affiliations and identity has always been permitted on Wikimedia projects. Andreas On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: They are, however, avoiding scrutiny, as evidenced by widespread disapproval of their actions. That is not a permissible use of socks. The community expects to place more scrutiny on paid editors, not less. On Jan 6, 2014 6:23 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: That doesn't follow to me from that wording, Nathan. The English Wikipedia for example allows socking to enable contributors to contribute to articles that they would rather not have their real-life name or normal Internet persona associated with. User:John Smith is allowed to create an account named User:ColourfulCharacter to edit those articles. In doing so, he is not using the username *of another user* with the intent to deceive. There is no other user of that name. (The only exception would be if there were a user called User:ColorfulCharacter, say, and Smith's intent was to create confusion between the two accounts.) User:John Smith is using a secondary screen name to obscure the fact that both accounts are operated by the same person. And that is allowed. I don't even see that Wiki-PR infringed the letter of that section, as a normal person would read it. Just like John Smith, they did not use the name of some other user. They created multiple accounts. There was no other user whose username they used, or whom they tried to impersonate. On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Nathan, I am unable to find a mention of sockpuppetry in the Terms of Use, whether in Section 4 or elsewhere. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use I don't think there could be such a mention, really, given that project policies recognise a number of legitimate uses of socks. A. The term isn't used, but the behavior is clearly encompassed by the prohibition described in the Engaging in False Statements, Impersonation or Fraud - specifically using the username of another user with the intent to deceive. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300
To edit is to say something, Andreas Kolbe. To me it is very fortunate that the right to anonymity takes presedence over COI-editing. Edits can be changed or removed, a personal identity cannot. Regards, Sir48 2014/1/6 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com Well, if you don't say anything, Sir48, you are not misrepresenting anything, are you? It's a path many people have chosen in Wikipedia. They just remain silent. The right to remain silent about who you are and who you work for is enshrined in the principle of anonymity. People (including the English Wikipedia's arbitration committee) have long said that the policies guaranteeing the right to edit anonymously are in tension with the guidelines discouraging editing with a conflict of interest, and that the conflict between these two sets of policies and guidelines is imperfectly resolved. And in the final analysis, the English Wikipedia's policy against harassment and outing takes precedence over the conflict-of-interest guideline. At any rate, conflict-of-interest editing is discouraged, but not forbidden in the English Wikipedia, while posting another editor's employer is a banning offence (unless the editor has previous disclosed it himself on Wikipedia). That this creates a lucrative market for companies like Wiki-PR should not come as a surprise. While non-transparent paid editing does not seem to me to violate the Wikimedia terms of use, transparent paid editing clearly does not violate them either. Surely, the way forward lies that way. But while the German Wikipedia community for example is quite welcoming to paid editors who act transparently – the German Wikipedia even has verified company accounts like User:Coca_Cola_Germany – the English Wikipedia community is exceedingly hostile to such users, to the point of blocking company account names *on sight*, with the result that many such editors prefer to fly under the radar, using a made-up name and the shield of the anonymity policy. Andreas On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Thyge ltl.pri...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not in principle against transparent paid editing, but it could actually be considered to violate the ToU's wording: misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity Regards, Sir48 2014/1/6 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com Sure, Todd. But that is not actually in the Wikimedia terms of use. The terms of use say, - Attempting to impersonate another user or individual, misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity, or using the username of another user with the intent to deceive; They do not say, - Attempting to impersonate another user or individual, misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity, or *using more than username* with the intent to deceive; That whole section is about impersonating other people, making out that you represent someone you do not represent, etc. Silence as to one's affiliations and identity has always been permitted on Wikimedia projects. Andreas On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: They are, however, avoiding scrutiny, as evidenced by widespread disapproval of their actions. That is not a permissible use of socks. The community expects to place more scrutiny on paid editors, not less. On Jan 6, 2014 6:23 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: That doesn't follow to me from that wording, Nathan. The English Wikipedia for example allows socking to enable contributors to contribute to articles that they would rather not have their real-life name or normal Internet persona associated with. User:John Smith is allowed to create an account named User:ColourfulCharacter to edit those articles. In doing so, he is not using the username *of another user* with the intent to deceive. There is no other user of that name. (The only exception would be if there were a user called User:ColorfulCharacter, say, and Smith's intent was to create confusion between the two accounts.) User:John Smith is using a secondary screen name to obscure the fact that both accounts are operated by the same person. And that is allowed. I don't even see that Wiki-PR infringed the letter of that section, as a normal person would read it. Just like John Smith, they did not use the name of some other user. They created multiple accounts. There was no other user whose username they used, or whom they tried to impersonate. On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Nathan, I am unable to find a mention of sockpuppetry in the Terms of Use
[Wikimedia-l] Ombudsman commission activity report
Please note that a report about the activities of the Ombudsman commision, covering the months February through June, 2013, has now been published on Meta. The report can be found here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission/Report_Feb-Jun_2013 Looing forward to hearing any remarks! On behalf of the Commision, Sir48 / Thyge ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
