0 people would have such proportionately high
> representation compared to the broader community (through either
> affiliate-selected or participant-selected seats).
> And, having read your "revised" versionno, just no. Projects don't
> belong there.
Here is the predicted org chart with Risker's suggestions:
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 7:24 PM Bill Takatoshi wrote:
> Hi Anne,
> Thank you for both of your excellent questions.
> 1) In Germany, rank-and-file empl
; 1) Labour representation? Huh?
> 2) Where are the actual Wikimedia projects? I meanall of this is hubris
> if the projects aren't on the org chart. They're the raison d'etre of every
> aspect of the community.
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 19:03, Bill Takatosh
Earlier today I tried to predict what the WMF org chart will look
like, but I wasn't confident about my suggestion, so I created a new
email account, subscribed it to wikimedia-l, and tried to send from
there. I learned that new subscribers are moderated, which seems
sensible given the level of
> Can anyone from the elections committee comment? What is the current
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 8:05 PM Bill Takatoshi
> > How long can the Foundation legally postpone Board of Trustees elections?
How long can the Foundation legally postpone Board of Trustees elections?
has a comment from April saying, "Once things get moving again,
appopriate [sic] date for the election will be decided and an
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:41 PM Yair Rand wrote:
> Neutral Point of View is a fundamental founding principle. Per the policy,
> NPOV "is non-negotiable, and the principles upon which it is based cannot
> be superseded by other policies or guidelines, nor by editor consensus." It
> may not be
I have been waiting for more than three years for the WMF to settle
the question (below) of whether our long-term editor community
supports political activism, and if so, what sort, by surveying the
opinions of established editors. I was promised that the WMF would
include such questions in their
> No idea what could be the relation with GamerGate
I too see nothing in common, and since at least a handful of people
hold this view, could the parallels that they see to be made explicit,
> pathological people, having been called out on being pathological
I am having trouble finding
Over the past few weeks I have been discussing how to correct the lack
of information about community opinion and the disadvantages of
relying on opt-in (RFCs or less formal "speak up and stick your neck
out") methods for addressing the problem with Foundation staff, other
community members, and
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Nathan wrote:
> What would your intended use of the results of such a survey be? How do you
> think the community, or any group of people, should interpret, value and
> react to the results?
I only intend that the results be published as soon
When a contentious question about the community's opinion is
preventing consideration of one or more proposals, what is the best
way forward, in general?
I am considering commissioning a survey of community opinion from a
neutral and respected third party who has published a well-received
>>> The people who are loudest in their demands for consensus
>>> do not represent the Wikimedia movement.
>> The voices loudest for the WMF doing something against the
>> Trump administration are not representative of the Wikimedia
>> movement either
> Is the Community Process Steering
In the past two days I've been four off-list messages in response to
my request for proposed banner language, all but one from James
Salsman, who I recently defended here and who was subsequently "placed
on moderation." I asked moderator Richard Ames whether it would be
appropriate to forward his
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen
> I don't think this mailing list should be open to just any and
> all discussion of politics, regardless of viewpoint. What is
> and isn't appropriate to post is a delicate judgment call
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 1:02 AM, Michael Peel wrote:
> Have you seen Katherine's statement at:
That statement is well worth reading. It says,
"we believe in a world that encourages and protects the open
Mail list logo