Re: [Wikimedia-l] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-06 Thread James Alexander
Hi all,

Thanks for bringing this up. As you can imagine, we've been considering
this on an ongoing basis as well as specifically after the recent
shootings—and as Philippe and Gnangarra have pointed out, there are good
reasons we can't share complete specifics. Still, here's a bit on our
current strategy.

First, from an office perspective: we recently moved to a new building (as
was discussed here earlier), and the change is a significant improvement
from a security perspective. I will personally admit to some concerns in
how difficult the last one was to secure, but the new one has a multiple
person security team on duty 24/7. They have a complete plan for threats to
the building, including active shooters or bomb threats. They work closely
with us and have helped to train a group of staff to help in the case of
emergency. In addition, we've started looking at additional staff training
options after the recent attacks (one example is
https://www.alicetraining.com/, though we're looking at multiple).

Second, I'm sure many of you know Support & Safety's emerge...@wikimedia.org
system[1], which also plays an important role here. We have close
relationships with both the FBI and the local police department, and when
we receive reports such as Vito linked (threats to the office, to others,
or to themselves)  we evaluate based on criteria we've worked with the FBI
on and pass even remotely credible/imminent threats to the appropriate
authorities quickly. Having dealt with a number of threats against the
office and against others, I have seen the quick and professional response
we get.

Third, events. These are obviously a bit more complicated, since it's hard
to give blanket advice when specific policies are very venue specific. That
said, this has been an increasing and ongoing focus of ours. While these
kinds of threats are rare for us, they are important to think about before
they happen. So far this work has included training modules[2] and a new
handy booklet for organizers that we're creating which will be shared and
tested with affiliates at the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin later this
month.  Both in these materials and elsewhere, we've always recommended
that organizers get to know the security and management of their venue and
that's especially important when thinking about threats of harm at an
event. The first line of defense will be venue support and the local law
enforcement (911, 999 etc) but emergency@ will also be available to help
guide event organizers in crisis situations like that.

James


1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Threats_of_harm
2.
https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/training/support-and-safety/keeping-events-safe


*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:01 PM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote:

> en:wp has a very good concept
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_stuff_beans_up_your_nose
>
> >
>
>
> > ​" In our zeal to head off others' unwise action, we may put forth ideas
> > they have not entertained before. It may be wise not to caution against
> > such possibilities
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Incentive_
> theories:_intrinsic_and_extrinsic_motivation>
> > . Prophylactic <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophylactic> admonition
> > may trigger novel mischief. As the popular saying goes, "don't give 'em
> any
> > ideas". In other words, "​
> >
>
> On 6 April 2018 at 10:34, Philippe Beaudette <phili...@beaudette.me>
> wrote:
>
> > I can not speak to current practice at the WMF, but I can speak to
> > practice when I was there (ancient history, long ago, I know) when I say
> > that this is something that was carefully considered and there were
> > appropriate experts consulted at the time.  Knowing the team there like i
> > do, I'm confident that those plans have not lapsed, and that they
> continue
> > to give appropriate (though not paranoiac) consideration to the realities
> > of the world.
> >
> > I also know that when I was there, we would have considered it
> > inappropriate to share detail about those plans publicly, and I continue
> to
> > believe that is good practice.
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria ... agree, but
> >> the risk assesement we are discussing here is not about safety, but
> >> security. I am sure we might not use them all properly, I am also not a
> >> native English speaker, but they are not the same concept, right?
> >>
> >> Now, there were examples where looking at a dossier where the
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread James Alexander
Welcome Raju!

*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Biyanto Rebin <
biyanto.re...@wikimedia.or.id> wrote:

> Welcome to Wikimedia movements, Raju!
>
> Best regards from Indonesia,
>
> 2017-10-17 1:19 GMT+07:00 Christophe Henner <chen...@wikimedia.org>:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
> > reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new
> Board
> > members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew it
> > was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
> > productive Board.
> >
> > The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
> > detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s background,
> > public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
> > contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to help
> > Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board
> more
> > quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks
> to
> > everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
> > work they have put into these improvements!
> >
> > I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
> > identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed
> Raju
> > Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
> >
> > Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
> > communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of nonprofit
> > governance and currently serves on the board for the International Center
> > for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am confident
> > he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he has
> > agreed to join us!
> >
> > We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
> > example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and apply
> > what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
> > vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and worked
> on
> > recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to
> fill
> > the seats.
> >
> > In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
> > official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
> > welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
> > Wikimedia movement!
> >
> > Christophe
> > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >
> > Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >
> > Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic experience
> in
> > digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> >
> >
> > Image:
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
> > International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
> >
> > San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
> > announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive
> and
> > journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
> >
> > Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three
> continents.
> > He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media
> Group,
> > the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and The
> > Root.
> >
> > “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service.
> His
> > commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is deeply
> > aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
> > strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
> > future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
> > Foundation Executive Director, Katherine Maher.
> >
> > Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
> > President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies in
> > the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
> > London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
> > growth opportunities globally for News Corp.
> >
> >
> > “There has never been more urgency in Wikipedia's 16-year history than
> now,
> > for upholding the valu

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

2017-05-20 Thread James Alexander
Forwarding to WM-l since the auto forward doesn't always work.

-- Forwarded message -
From: matanya moses 
Date: Sat, May 20, 2017 at 5:33 PM
Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation
Board of Trustees election
To: 


Greetings,

The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
election are now available on Meta-Wiki:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results

Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak
(User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the most
community support. Subject to a standard background check, they will be
appointed by the Board at their August meeting at Wikimania.

These results have been certified by the elections committee, the Wikimedia
Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board of Trustees.

There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The 461-vote
difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast ballots
to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 34. (Some of
the recast votes were also struck.)

Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/

More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee will
be published in the coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate your
input—what went well for you in this election?  What could we do better
next time?  These reports are crucial to helping future elections be even
more successful, and we hope that you will offer your feedback and ideas:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mortem

The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this year’s
election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse and
representative in the movement’s history.

Sincerely,
– Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Join us for a conversation with Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustee candidates

2017-05-06 Thread James Alexander
Aye, this will be available (at the same youtube link) starting shortly
after the live stream completes.

On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 8:15 AM Lane Rasberry <l...@bluerasberry.com> wrote:

> Since this is live on YouTube, that also means this will be recorded and
> available after, right?
>
> Thanks.
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:20 PM Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks ElecComm, this is great to hear.   SJ
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 9:07 PM, James Alexander <
> jalexan...@wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all!
> > >
> > > Upon request User:Matanya (from the Election Committee) will be
> hosting a
> > > discussion with the Candidates currently running for the community
> spots
> > on
> > > the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees[1]. The conversation will
> take
> > > place at 17:00 UTC (10:00 Pacific) on Sunday May 7th and we currently
> > > expect up to 8 of the 9 Candidates to be able to attend and all
> > candidates
> > > attending will get equal time. If you'd like to watch you can do so on
> > > Youtube[2] and a back channel will be set up for conversation on the
> > > #wikimedia-office IRC channel on Freenode. We will also send a reminder
> > > email to this list shortly before the event.
> > >
> > > I hope to see you all there!
> > >
> > >
> > > 1.
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > > elections/2017/Board_of_Trustees
> > > 2. The event will be live at
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AhwrJ9qcgc
> > > once it starts.
> > >
> > > For the Election Committee,
> > > James Alexander
> > > Advisor
> > >
> > >
> > > *James Alexander*
> > > Manager, Trust & Safety
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Samuel Klein  @metasj   w:user:sj  +1 617 529
> 4266 <(617)%20529-4266>
> > ___
> > 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>
>
> --
> Lane Rasberry
> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> 206.801.0814 <(206)%20801-0814>
> l...@bluerasberry.com
> ___
> 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] Join us for a conversation with Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustee candidates

2017-05-05 Thread James Alexander
Hi all!

Upon request User:Matanya (from the Election Committee) will be hosting a
discussion with the Candidates currently running for the community spots on
the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees[1]. The conversation will take
place at 17:00 UTC (10:00 Pacific) on Sunday May 7th and we currently
expect up to 8 of the 9 Candidates to be able to attend and all candidates
attending will get equal time. If you'd like to watch you can do so on
Youtube[2] and a back channel will be set up for conversation on the
#wikimedia-office IRC channel on Freenode. We will also send a reminder
email to this list shortly before the event.

I hope to see you all there!


1.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Board_of_Trustees
2. The event will be live at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AhwrJ9qcgc
once it starts.

For the Election Committee,
James Alexander
Advisor


*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF advanced permissions for employees

2017-02-16 Thread James Alexander
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net>
wrote:

> I agree completely with both Robert and Marc.
>
> James, it is my understanding that every global ban must be signed off by
> the Legal department.  Is this correct?  If so, not only would this provide
> a check against the hypothetical situation of someone being globally banned
> in a fit of pique, but it would also confirm the seriousness of whatever it
> was that got them banned.  Obviously knowingly proxying for a user whose
> conduct has been so reprehensible as to require the intervention of
> multiple departments in the WMF is pretty serious business and would lead
> to consequences of some sort, and that appears to be the scenario that
> James is referring to in the link that Fae provided.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig


This is correct, all global bans (after a complaint has been made) go
through:


   - Investigation by Support & Safety team member -->
   - Review and Recommendation by the Manager of Trust & Safety (myself)
   -->
   - Approval by the Director of Support & Safety and the Chief of
   Community Engagement (currently both Maggie) -->
   - Approval by General Counsel (currently Michelle) or designee.

It then comes back to us to actually press the buttons. Global Bans (as
well as Event Bans which are done via the same process) have been
incredibly rare for that very reason, we don't take them lightly and go
through a lot of review before we make the decision.

*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF advanced permissions for employees

2017-02-16 Thread James Alexander
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:58 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi James,
>
> I agree these types of breakages, if unintentional and not regular,
> should be raised elsewhere first.
>
> Given Fae's reluctance to use private correspondence,...
>
> Is there a public wiki page which can be used to alert the relevant
> team to any future breakages, in the first instance?
>
> Or can this be managed through Phabricator? an existing tag?
>

Aye, I think on wiki or Phabricator could work well. Phabricator may
actually be best because it can make tracking of the issue much easier. The
best spot on wiki is likely my meta talk page for ping purposes. While I
can't think of a more specific tag on Phabricator that would work there is
a Support & Safety project that would work perfectly and the whole team is
subscribed :).

*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Elections Committee members

2017-02-14 Thread James Alexander
Just a reminder for those that are interested and have not, yet, applied!
Please consider doing so before the end of February 17th! If you are trying
to make the decision and have any additional questions please feel free to
ask any member or advisor ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_committee#Membership ) or email the
application address: bec-newmemb...@lists.wikimedia.org

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 <(415)%20839-6885> @jamesofur

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Katie Chan <k...@ktchan.info> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation StandingElections Committee is, from today until
> February 17, seeking additional members to help facilitate Wikimedia
> Foundation Board of Trustee and Funds Dissemination Committee elections.
> This is a volunteer role and the appointment is for two years. Please note
> that, while you are a member of the Committee, you will not be able to run
> for any election overseen by the Committee – this includes the upcoming
> 2017 Board and FDC elections and any other election where the committee had
> already begun formal preparation before your departure. You will also be
> restricted in your ability to publicly advocate for community members
> running in those elections.
>
>
> The Elections Committee has the following duties, as defined by a July
> 2015 Board Resolution <https://wikimediafoundation.o
> rg/wiki/Resolution:Elections_Committee>:
>
>  *
>
>The Committee shall recommend the dates, rules, and regulation of
>the voting procedures for approval by the Board of Trustees pursuant
>to Article IV, Section 3(C) in the Foundation Bylaws
><https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws%7CWikimedia>.
>
>  *
>
>The Committee shall recommend who is qualified to vote for the Board
>of Trustees pursuant to Article IV, Section 3(C) in the Wikimedia
>Foundation Bylaws <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws>.
>
>  *
>
>The Committee shall be responsible for preparing recommendations for
>the dates, rules and regulation of the voting procedures for the
>Funds Dissemination Committee
><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Funds_Dissemina
> tion_Committee>,
>and the Funds Dissemination Committee Ombudsperson, consistent with
>the charter of the Funds Dissemination Committee.
>
>  *
>
>To the extent possible, the Committee shall consult with the wider
>Wikimedia community in developing and revising election procedures
>within the scope of this charter.
>
>  *
>
>The Committee shall be a source of information to any member of the
>Wikimedia community interested in the community selection processes
>of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
>  *
>
>Under the direction of the Board Governance Committee, the Committee
>shall take actions as necessary to execute the selection process for
>the Board of Trustees, the Funds Dissemination Committee, and the
>Funds Dissemination Committee Ombudsperson.
>
>  *
>
>As needed, the Committee may assist with other duties as may be
>assigned by the Board or the Board Governance Committee.
>
>
> In practice, a member's duties involve communicating with the global
> committee who help to steward Board and FDC Elections. During an election
> period – one of which is over the next three to four months – this will be
> especially important as you help to run the upcoming elections for the
> Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and the Funds Dissemination
> Committee. During this period, members of the Elections Committee meet for
> semi-regular meetings to discuss the current election.
>
>
> However, this appointment is not just for election periods. Outside of the
> election season you will lead community discussions on election process and
> advise the Board of Trustees Governance Committee <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_
> Governance_Committee>as requested, such as in their search for appointed
> board members. The expected time commitment can range from around 10 hours
> a week during an election to one or two hours outside of the election
> period.
>
>
> If you'd like to apply please send an email to
> bec-newmemb...@lists.wikimedia.org with:
>
>
>  *
>
>Your username;
>
>  *
>
>A brief summary of your Wikimedia related experience and any other
>experience you think may be useful along with;
>
>  *
>
>Why you're interested in the role and a quick statement saying you
>understand the requirements.
>
>
> Given the private information that c

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF advanced permissions for employees

2017-02-14 Thread James Alexander
Hi Pine,

I know we’ve touched on this in past discussions related to this list.
Staff frequently need on wiki user rights to do their work, which can range
all over the map from Meta admin/translate admin to central notice admin or
Checkuser/Oversight and everything in between. Many of these rights are
sensitive in their nature (for example I could make an argument that
central notice admin and its raw crosswiki javascript capabilities are on
par with Checkuser in some cases), and we work to ensure that users only
have rights they need for the time they need it.

Given that these tools are being used on the public wikis, it is natural
(and expected) that the community keeps an eye out and alerts us to issues,
but in the end the staff needs and requirements for those rights are
different and separate from the community ones and they have to be overseen
by staff. As part of that we ensure they go through a multistep (and
multi-person) process involving reaching out to SuSa with a use case,
seeking written approval from their manager, and then getting approval from
a SuSa Manager (and the Director for especially sensitive user rights).
Given the natural oversight and review we have before hiring staff, along
with the ongoing oversight from both their managers and SuSa, we believe
this strikes the right balance.

James

*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:48 PM Adrian Raddatz <ajradd...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Not for any wiki; only Meta had wmf staff with admin rights, and only for
> use within their specific work-related areas.
>
> I am totally unconcerned with WMF staff having the necessary permissions to
> do their job. They can easily be held accountable as paid employees.
>
> On Feb 14, 2017 11:53 AM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Usecases are appearing, thanks to whomever is intervening, though in a
> > narrow column so hard to read.
> >
> > Now I can read it, I see that it is out of date. As a test sample, I
> > JethroBT (WMF) was granted m:admin rights in June, these expired by
> > August 2016 and were eventually removed by a volunteer steward in
> > October 2016. Though I JethroBT is an admin on meta right now, this
> > was via a separate use case dated "42676", which I presume is
> > November. Could the spreadsheet be properly reviewed and updated
> > please, including reformatting the date field so it's easy to
> > understand?
> >
> > Pine - yes this process of "WMF Advanced Permissions" includes admin
> > rights for any WMF website and so by-passes the community procedures.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > On 14 February 2017 at 17:48, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'm curious about what is meant by "advanced permissions" here. If that
> > > refers to translation administrator permissions, I have fewer concerns
> > > about that than I would about admin or CU/OS permissions.
> > >
> > > In general, I'm wary of WMF encroachment on Meta. Placing resources on
> > Meta
> > > that the community will use is fine and good, but WMF taking unilateral
> > > actions that circumvent community processes may be inappropriate. For
> > that
> > > reason, I would like to see most requests for WMF accounts to get
> > > permissions of admin or higher for community wikis go through the same
> > > community vetting process as community members do.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The WMF grants special rights to employees on a case-by-case basis,
> > >> by-passing the normal community driven process to grant admin,
> > >> developer and other rights. A few years ago the WMF officially
> > >> committed to making this process transparent, and maintains a public
> > >> Google Spreadsheet [1] so that anyone can check exactly when rights
> > >> are granted, why they are given and when they are withdrawn.
> > >> Previously these were mirrored on-wiki but this process broke due to
> > >> Google changing its proprietary spreadsheet code.
> > >>
> > >> Checking the latest version of the Google spreadsheet, the use cases
> > >> have been hidden, so non-employees no longer can read the reasons why
> > >> special rights have been granted. Can a WMF representative please
> > >> explain why, or restore the use cases to public view?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Fae
> > >> --
> > >> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikime

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF advanced permissions for employees

2017-02-14 Thread James Alexander
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:53 AM Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:

Usecases are appearing, thanks to whomever is intervening, though in a
narrow column so hard to read.

Now I can read it, I see that it is out of date. As a test sample, I
JethroBT (WMF) was granted m:admin rights in June, these expired by
August 2016 and were eventually removed by a volunteer steward in
October 2016. Though I JethroBT is an admin on meta right now, this
was via a separate use case dated "42676", which I presume is
November. Could the spreadsheet be properly reviewed and updated
please, including reformatting the date field so it's easy to
understand?

Pine - yes this process of "WMF Advanced Permissions" includes admin
rights for any WMF website and so by-passes the community procedures.

Fae


Hi Fae,

As I’ve mentioned on previous occasions when you’ve brought up this
spreadsheet on the mailing list, it occasionally breaks. That was the case
here. If you send me a quick note if you see the issues, we can fix it, as
we did today with the use case query (including make sure that it’s
multiple columns again.) Pointing that out so it can be quickly fixed is
much better done via a private poke that we'll see quickly rather than a
public mailing list post that we may not see until after hours or until
somebody lets us know about it. Obviously if we ignore your emails or
refuse to fix it, then the math changes, and a post to this list makes more
sense. I do not, however, think breakage (or overlooking notes about
breakage) has been a frequent problem over the past couple years (though we
have certainly had a couple breakages).

The public sheet is up to date to the internal version of the data (which
is done automatically). However, the automated data collection is better at
“adding new” than “removing old.” A member of the team does annual audits
of the data to ensure that defunct entries are removed and that everything
else matches reality. The time for the next one is coming up.

James

*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation

PS: I also fixed the weird date thing you were seeing on some of them...
not sure what caused that (was just a format display thing).
___
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] Passing of User:Danveg, and reminder about people in distress

2017-01-04 Thread James Alexander
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:16 PM Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe we should invite the affiliates to put together and maintain a
> resource page on Meta with contact details for such organisations so that
> everyone has access to necessary local details regardless of where they be
>

Great minds think alike :) We're putting together a curated list of
resources on meta
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Support_and_Safety/Mental_health_resources>
for resources like this you can find right now. If anyone has additional
resources (especially for countries not currently listed) we'd love more!
We're trying to look into each resource before listing (and keep the list
short and usable for each country) so the talk page is best for additions.
Right now we have it set up to both list all of the countries we have
information for and list YOUR country (based on your IP) first to make
usable information easiest to find.

James Alexander
*Manager, Trust & Safety*
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [WMF] Update regarding expiring Board terms

2016-12-23 Thread James Alexander
Thanks for the note Christophe and congratulations Alice! So happy to see
you continue on the board!

Thanks as well guy for being willing to provide your service these past 2
years! Good luck in the future!
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 3:13 PM Patricio Lorente 
wrote:

> Thanks for the update, Christophe!
>
> Alice, I am so glad that you are staying for another term! Thank you so
> much for your dedication and commitment :)
>
> And last but not least, thank you Guy, for sharing with us your vast
> experience and unique perspective. I really appreciate that. Hope that we
> will meet again soon.
>
>
>  Patricio
>
> El vie., 23 de dic. de 2016 a la(s) 17:04, Christophe Henner <
> chen...@wikimedia.org> escribió:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Last week, at our December meeting, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of
> > Trustees made some decisions regarding the two Board terms expiring at
> the
> > end of this year. Alice Wiegand sought and received reappointment for a
> > term which will end at Wikimania 2018. Guy Kawasaki decided not to seek
> > reappointment, and will complete his term at the end of December.
> >
> > Alice joined the Board in 2012 when she was selected to serve in one of
> the
> > two affiliate-selected board seats. She was subsequently appointed to
> fill
> > one of the four appointed expert seats, and will be completing her first
> > full term in that role this month. Alice lives in Germany, and has been
> > involved with German Wikipedia since 2004 and Wikimedia Deutschland since
> > 2008. Her unique background brings an important perspective on matters
> > related to the Wikimedia communities, strategy development,
> organizational
> > structuring, and executive accounting and assessment. Given her skills,
> > experience in the movement, and working knowledge of recent Board
> history,
> > we felt it was important to retain her presence for an additional term.
> >
> > The Board appreciates Guy’s commitment to Wikimedia and the input he
> > provided while serving on the Board. Guy joined the Board in 2015 when he
> > was selected to fill one of the four appointed expert seats. A prominent
> > figure in Silicon Valley, Guy has brought a unique perspective to the
> > challenges and opportunities the Board has considered during his term.
> Even
> > though we only worked together for a short time, I enjoyed his fresh
> point
> > of view that forced us to step out of our comfort zone, and reconsider
> > things we've done for years. In a time of evolution, the value from those
> > questions was really high.
> >
> > Alice's new appointment will last 1.5 years as opposed to 2 years[1]. We
> > have asked Alice to serve a term which ends at Wikimania 2018 (instead of
> > in December 2018) to help consolidate Board transitions to the annual
> > meeting at Wikimania, rather than spread throughout the year. Our hope is
> > this shift will support a more effective onboarding process for new
> > members.
> >
> > We will provide more information in January on our plans for filling the
> > vacancy now left by Guy's departure, as well as the other vacancies on
> the
> > Board. Until then, I invite you to join me in congratulating Alice on her
> > reappointment, and thanking Guy for his service to Wikimedia.
> > Congratulations, Alice, and thank you, Guy!
> >
> > As 2016 comes to an end, please allow me to take a moment and thank all
> of
> > you, on behalf of the Board, for your support, efforts, and contributions
> > this past year. We overcame many hurdles together and achieved many
> > collaborative accomplishments. I am confident that we will make 2017 an
> > amazing year. I am looking forward to continuing to work with all of you
> as
> > we come together in service of the movement in new ways. There is still
> > much to achieve and hurdles to overcome, but, together, we have what it
> > takes.
> >
> > On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees,
> > Christophe Henner, Chair
> >
> > PS. An on-wiki version of this message is available for translation:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > Board_noticeboard/December_2016_-_Update_regarding_expiring_Board_terms
> >
> > [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Term_
> > Limit_Proposal_for_Bylaws
> >
> >
> > Christophe HENNER
> > Chair of the board of trustees
> > chen...@wikimedia.org
> > +33650664739 <+33%206%2050%2066%2047%2039> <+33%206%2050%2066%2047%2039>
> >
> > twitter *@schiste*skype *christophe_henner*
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
> --
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Harassment and blaming the victim

2016-06-05 Thread James Alexander
In general discussing specific cases on public mailings lists is not useful at 
helping the situation (Pax is, of course, feel free to do so if they feel it 
would be right). I think if people want to help then thinking about, and 
talking about, ways to do so is the best way to tackle the problem. Those 
discussions (and possible solutions) can take many forms and while the inspire 
campaign right now is a perfect (and tailor made) opportunity to do so it is in 
now way the only one.

Some thoughts to help people having difficulty coming up with what to do:

1. Do you think that the social or policy rules that currently exist are not 
enough? Then talk about that on the pages and what you think should be changed 
(and why) and how to roll that out. Do we need another policy or a global one? 
Do we need to rewrite an old one? Should it be a local/global community policy 
or a part of the ToU? Something else entirely from the board?

2. Do you think that the current rules are enough but are not being enforced 
properly and/or not ABLE to be enforced properly? Then let's talk about what 
could help. Is it other community members ignoring or misunderstanding the 
rules? Is it people being able to evade too easily? Is it that those who 
enforce the rules get harassed themselves and back off? Are they just so 
overwhelmed that they can't keep up? Something else?

What would be good for this? Is it social pressure or support to enforce the 
rules already in play? A global arbcom type body? Better blocking tools? (do we 
have ideas on better how?) A "reporting" tool that reports to admins/the 
community in some fashion with the ability to escalate to the WMF (either 
harassment specific or made to deal with other reports as well such as 
vandalism or COI)? 

These and others have all been brought up to me in conversations by community 
members so I know people are thinking about it. We want to get it down where 
everyone can think about it. On a personal basis I think it's likely it's a mix 
of different things + something we haven't thought about before but we can only 
do so much at once obviously.

If someone sees a proposal that you think would cause more harm then good I 
would strongly encourage them to consider making other proposals that they 
think WOULD help rather then targeting and attacking those who created other 
proposals (or even attacking the proposals themselves). Doing so has a tendency 
only to help people feel harassed and attacked and moves them to belittle and 
ignore your concerns. What we need is more ideas, not more shit slung over the 
fence. 

In the end I do agree that any idea that harassment is "not real" or not a 
major problem right now is, at best, naive and could overall be very dangerous 
not only to our users but the projects as a whole. That does not, of course, 
mean we know the answer. In fact, we know we don't, it's what we're (all) 
trying to figure out. 

James Alexander
Manager, Trust & Safety
Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 5, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Patrick. The community regularly expends considerable volunteer
> time and effort to protect the intrgrity of article content and to deal
> with block evasion. I think it would be helpful if further efforts could be
> made to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of tools and processes
> for addressing block evasion, including the use of Legal Department
> resources as appropriate. Block evasion is a problem that affects many
> aspects of Wikimedia, including article integrity and loss of volunteer
> time as already mentioned, as well as the harms to harassment victims, the
> stress on the volunteer admins and functionaries, and negative impact on
> community population and health.
> 
> Thanks for working on this. Is there anything more that you can do to
> assist with Pax's situation in particular?
> 
> Pine
>> On Jun 5, 2016 11:11, "Patrick Earley" <pear...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Pine,
>> 
>> As many of our admins and functionaries are well aware, both the Wikimedia
>> sites, and the internet architecture as a whole, favour anonymity and
>> protection of privacy over the ability to track individuals.  When a user
>> is technically proficient in hiding themselves, platforms and even law
>> enforcement can have little luck in determining who or where they are.
>> Anonymity has great benefits, but also can allow great abuses.
>> 
>> There are of course "easy" solutions that would involve changes to our
>> site accessibility - for instance, requiring secondary identification, such
>> as social media accounts or verified emails.  However, those are decisions
>> that the community as a whole needs to discuss, and not something I or my
>> department can change unil

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transparency: special WMF employee rights for Wikimedia projects

2016-06-03 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 5:40 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:

> For anyone unaware, in 2014 I created a bot task to maintain a page on
> Meta[1] showing the special Wikimedia Projects rights being allocated
> to WMF employees and contractors, without following normal community
> processes. The bot mirrors data from a Google Spreadsheet maintained
> by the WMF. Back in 2014, this was praised as a positive move forward
> by the WMF in applying our joint commitment to transparency.
>
> Unfortunately the spreadsheet appeared to drop off the radar last year
> and fell into disuse, only being updated after public complaint. The
> spreadsheet has not been updated since November 2015 (over six months
> ago), includes staff who have now left and presumably excludes several
> recent changes to employee rights.
>

While the recording is still being done it's clear the mirroring broke.
I'll go make sure it's up to date and mirrored correctly so that can be
updated over the course of today.


> Could the WMF please make a positive policy decision to ensure the
> open publication of special project rights for its employees becomes a
> required part of the procedure, and business as normal?


This quarter we've been putting together a more organized policy on our
staff rights so that they can be expanded to allow for rights to be granted
by someone other then just me which is an obvious bus factor and encourages
transparency and openness to slip through the cracks in favor of efficiency
and speed. That said we have certainly not been making any direct attempt
to hide changes or be less transparent about it.

Recently, for example, we created a meta specific 'local' right for the
Support and Safety team
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:WMF_Support_and_Safety> (creating
that page before it was launched) which was a direct response to Steward
requests (and others) to ensure we had global actions such as account
locks, global blocks, user rights changes etc centralized on meta rather
then spread out over 900+ wikis where there was no oversight from
volunteers for those actions. It also allowed us to remove all of those
rights from the global 'staff' right because others there didn't need them.
(which leads to below)

Failing this,
> if rights are to continue to be allocated behind closed doors, with
> some rights being allocated for just a few days at a time so never
> appearing on this spreadsheet, can the rationale for managing project
> rights this way please be explained to the wider community so that we
> might be allowed the opportunity to ask basic questions.
>

In general our goal is to ensure staff have the rights they need to do
their job (whether that's testing a bug, carrying out office actions and
legal process, protecting  setting up grant processes and fundraising
banners or something more unique). We also strive to reduce the attack
vector as much as possible, as much as possible staff shouldn't have rights
they 'don't' need to do their job and they shouldn't have rights much
longer then they actually need them. Because of this I think short term
rights (and occasionally unique rights) are useful tools to ensure that
staff can do their job while remaining with as little access as possible.
In the past everyone having one giant 'all rights staff group' made some
sense but at the size the WMF is now I'm not sure it does.

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What New Thing is WMF Doing w. Cookies, & Why is Legal Involved?

2016-05-01 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Trillium Corsage <trillium2...@yandex.com>
wrote:

> I noticed Michelle Paulson editing the "Cookie Statement" page, and it
> seemed kind of strange to me because I thought it more a technical and IT
> thing to edit. But Michelle is WMF Legal, right
>

I won't/can't comment on the rest of your questions but I'm confused about
why you would be surprised here... the cookie statement is, essentially, a
legal statement/privacy policy "type" document (obviously different but
similar) and just like the privacy policy (or access to non public
information or document retention policy or terms of use or other policy
docs along those lines) the cookie statement has been owned by Legal for as
long as it's existed (I can attest to that fact since the CA team was asked
to help put it up for them).

It's certainly possible that this is only 'obvious' to me because of my
knowledge of outside organizations or law but it doesn't surprise me.
Cookie statements are part of the law in some countries (not necessarily
ones we have to follow given our position in the US but Europe has laws
about it for example) and so would usually be within the legal department
for many organizations. Cookies are also closely tied with privacy and the
privacy policy and so compliance and ensuring that the org stays within
their promises would, also, often fall within the legal department (though
everyone should/does have a hand in ensuring they follow the promises the
org as a whole made).

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reminder: Legal IRC Office Hour starts in about three hours.

2016-04-19 Thread James Alexander
For those that weren't able to attend or want to re re-read the logs have
been posted on meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2016-04-19

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Jan Gerlach <jgerl...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> TLDR:
>
> What: IRC chat with members of Wikimedia Foundation legal
>
> Topic: Freedom of panorama
>
> When: Tuesday, April 19 at 11:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time / 18:00 UTC
>
> Reminder: We can’t do legal advice.
>
> Hi all,
>
> We'd like to remind you of the return of Legal Team IRC office hours,
> starting today, April 19 at 11:00 AM PDT / 18:00 UTC! We’re planning to
> host these once every 3 months or so going forward.
>
> IRC office hours provide an opportunity for members of the Wikimedia
> communities to chat directly with members of the Wikimedia Foundation legal
> team on topics of interest including public policy, legal issues facing the
> Wikimedia movement, and what you can do to get involved. Please keep in
> mind that under California law we can’t give out legal advice, so rather
> than giving out legal advice, we will talk about the Wikimedia Foundation’s
> stance on issues.
>
> For this format, we’ll begin at 11:00 by doing a brief introduction and
> then start taking questions from everyone that’s present. We’ll aim to have
> a few people on at the same time to be able to respond faster and to
> discuss different aspects of the issues.
>
> For our first office hour, we’re planning to discuss the freedom of
> panorama (FoP). With the recent decision in Sweden
> <https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/04/strike-against-freedom-panorama/>,
> holding that Wikimedia Sweden's website/database was in violation of
> Swedish copyright law for making available on the internet photographs of
> artwork permanently situated in public areas, FoP has become more pressing
> than ever. We believe that the ability for members of the public to
> photograph public monuments and landscapes is a fundamental part of free
> expression. We plan to raise this issue to the European Commission this
> summer, and need your help to let them know that it’s important. This first
> one of a series of IRC office hours will be a great opportunity to exchange
> thoughts about it.
>
> If you have questions that you would like to discuss during the office
> hour,
> you can add them on Meta Wiki here
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal_Team_IRC_Office_Hours>.
> ___
> 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] What can we learn

2016-04-13 Thread James Alexander
I'm currently the one in charge of coordinating (on the staff side) the
Standing Elections Committee (Greg resigned from the committee when he
became a communications department contractor and I'm not sure why you
pinged Lane, I assume because of the Affiliate Appointments process but
that is not related to the board elections committee).

*As an update on the committee*: I'm hoping to get the standing committee
fully up and running before Wikimania. It was delayed given the multitude
of other issues recently (for example the resolution actually required us
to have the ED taking part and the last time I had a fully breathing moment
to start the process we didn't...) but once WikiCon is over we should be
able to get that process up and running. We've already started polling the
members of the last committee to see if they'd be willing to serve as
starting members and will be having an internal meeting right after WikiCon
to ensure we do everything right (parts of it can happen very quickly,
parts of it will take some time simply because of volunteer schedules etc).

*Regarding your proposal:* Unfortunately I'm not sure that's within
the committee's
remit from the board
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Elections_Committee> at
this point and so I'm not sure it will be high on their initial list. That
said I would be, at most, an advisor and not a member of either the
Election Committee or the Board Governance Committee which oversees them so
would wish to speak fully for what they would do in the end :). Also one of
their duties is *"As needed, the Committee may assist with other duties as
may be assigned by the Board or the Board Governance Committee." *so
anything is possible :).

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I like the idea of a boot camp or orientation for board members, which
> could be applicable to both affiliate and WMF boards. I believe that the
> standing Elections Committee, once it is operational, has plans to work on
> this, along with cultivating a list of good candidates for affiliate and
> WMF boards.
>
> Greg or Lane, are you able to comment on this?
>
> It would also be nice to get an update on the formation of the standing
> Elections Committee.
>
> Pine
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:47 PM, phoebe ayers <phoebe.w...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Chris Keating
> > <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > If I read Denny's email correctly, this section is broader than
> conflict
> > of
> > > interest:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not
> > > appropriate to
> > >> pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice,
> > but
> > >> it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
> > >>
> > >
> > > E.g. any comment Denny made on Phabricator now being read in the light
> > that
> > > he was a board member.
> >
> > While I'm not sure exactly what Denny meant in his mail, I think
> > Chris' comment is spot on -- every trustee, especially those used to
> > weighing in on community discussions, feels somewhat limited in what
> > they can say and how to say it when they join the board, whether
> > that's proposing a new idea or weighing in on an existing one. (Then,
> > of course, you also get criticized for not speaking up enough!) It can
> > be an awkward balancing act that takes some time to learn, and can
> > indeed be frustrating.
> >
> > Partly I think it's simply inherently difficult. As a trustee your own
> > interests and areas of volunteering are often not what's best for the
> > WMF overall to focus on -- either because they are too narrow, or too
> > resource intensive, or a host of other reasons -- not least because
> > one contributor cannot possibly speak for a whole area of the
> > movement, and as a movement we value consensus and broad input for
> > every idea. But I also think we're not very good on the board at
> > utilizing people's individual strengths and recognizing that the very
> > reasons why someone is interesting as a trustee (because they are an
> > expert contributor in some area, as all the trustees are) also means
> > that they likely have biases and opinions about strategic directions,
> > and could use those opinions productively to help the organization
> > learn and grow.
> >
> > As for what we can learn from this situation, I'm intrigued by this
> > proposal:
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Atsme <at.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

2016-03-21 Thread James Alexander
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:57 PM, K. Peachey <p858sn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 21 March 2016 at 22:47, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote:
> >
> > The extra control is hypothetically nice, but in practice one-off
> services
> > that are different from the rest of the infrastructure (as a shop would
> be,
> > like the blog, OTRS, etc) tend to be *extremely* expensive and difficult
> to
> > care for, and tend to be the very weakest points of the system (including
> > privacy and security).
> >
> > Those are only limited by the choice of the foundation.
>
> If they wanted someone with OTRS/wordpress/cisco ios/SmartTeam/etc skills,
> they would hire appropriately so the operations team was equipped with the
> staff and skills needed.
>
> It's like running a shop without a retail manager, It could work, but would
> work a lot better if it was staffed with people with the appropriate
> skillsets.


Totally but it's all a balancing act even if you assume we have the
resources. To do this correctly you'd need at least one person on the tech
side who understand the platform and payments, preferably a couple who
could back them up if need be and who can support different parts/make sure
they're secure/code reviewed/updated etc + the folks on the front end (the
'shop  manager(s)' organizing the actual design/fulfillment/etc). The more
you add the more you need to be making to justify it and as someone who did
this math a fair bit when I was first setting up the shop we'd need quite a
bit more in terms of orders before we were making enough to cover something
in house and that was being relatively conservative in costing assuming we
would only have to pay for 30-40% of some people etc.

It also gets to the "trade off" question. That is obviously a discussion
that is more open and so I won't pretend to have the right answer but I
think at our current budget basically every new hire/project basically has
to have a trade off the hire that won't be backfilled or the project that
is canceled etc. I imagine we all can think of projects that we think are
more or less important but we don't necessarily think of the 'same'
projects which makes that trade off discussion difficult (but important
since we can't just continue to expand the budget forever).

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Wikipedia Zero mass effect on Wikimedia projects

2016-03-20 Thread James Alexander
Aye, what Vito said.

For some context the WP0 team reached out to me when the partners started
flagging some of this as well. We've been considering a couple different
options which I think should be wider discussed. Part of that was also a
realization that we needed a way to actually tell if something was coming
from WP0 compared to a non-WP0 user and they implemented technical changes
with ops so that a header is passed through flagging that early this year
allowing for more targeted actions to be taken. Completely figuring out the
extent of the problem has also been though since it seems that even when
Wikipedia Zero is blocked the users most set at getting around restrictions
(which are, of course, the most dangerous in many  ways) also use other
options such as Facebook's Internet Basics/FB0 which also apparently gives
free access to our sites.

Some of the options considered (not yet implemented though I'd be
interested in peoples thoughts on them):

   - Edit filters (targeted specifically to WP0 or otherwise) flagging
   abnormally large files when compared to the stated file type or files
   coming in through WP0 in general.
   - File upload blocks or other filtering (such as file sizes over X or
   videos <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T126696>) specifically on WP0
   ranges.
   - More technical measures to try and detect abnormal images or PDFs that
   hold hidden files (apparently this is actually very difficult).

We've been talking with multiple groups within Engineering and given the
new information and options are going to continue to do so. I do think that
it is overall a "good" thing that people are trying to edit (originally all
we saw was the bad uploads and organized copyright violations which was
much less of a good thing...) but it's definitely true that we don't want
to overwhelm the current community in such a way that we not only lose
those new editors but old ones as well (or push them back so hard given the
necessity of protecting the wiki that they never come back). I think it
would be really good to think about ways to help deal with that.

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Anytime a new linguistic group joins Wiki* we should expect a looong
> September <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September> which will
> sooner or later end. Meanwhile what might become *so* problematic (and then
> must be stopped asap) is the usage of Commons as a file sharing platform.
> There's a series of technical countermeasures (stopping truncated files,
> setting requirements for upload of videos...) which don't imply blocking
> editing from Zero.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-03-20 17:05 GMT+01:00 Lodewijk <lodew...@effeietsanders.org>:
>
> > In a way, it is great to hear that Wikipedia zero is attracting new
> > editors! That is what I hoped for more than increasing readership.
> >
> > The general question on how to stimulate positive edits while
> discouraging
> > negative contributions is the tricky part. What we always tell outsiders
> on
> > why we can cope with vandalism or simply bad edits is that we made it
> > easier to identify and revert it than to make them.
> >
> > Maybe a superfluous question, but can we still differentiate individual
> > devices from each other somehow? I can imagine this is a tricky part if
> > not...
> >
> > Besides the obvious downside,  are the positive sides also visible? Do we
> > see more edits on Angola relayed topics? Do you see more positive active
> > users from Angola?
> >
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > Op zondag 20 maart 2016 heeft Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> >
> > het volgende geschreven:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
> > >
> > > Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find
> > > appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate.
> Nobody
> > > would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time
> as a
> > > movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While
> you
> > > may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
> > as
> > > it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
> > >
> > > What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
> > but
> > > throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !!
> > > Thanks,
> > >   GerardM
> > >
> > > On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emr...@gmail.com
> > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
&

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wmfall] Wikimedia Foundation executive transition update

2016-03-10 Thread James Alexander
Congrats Katherine (and commiserations to what free time you still had)
thank you for being willing to take up this role, I think you're exactly
what we need.I'd also like to thank all the c-levels who I know have spent
countless hours over the past week or so talking about the next steps both
for this position and for the foundation as a whole. I'm glad that we have
a smart group of people helping to lead the org as we work to move forward.

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Johan Jönsson <jjons...@wikimedia.org>
wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Patricio Lorente
> <patricio.lore...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I’m happy to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation leadership team has
> > proposed an interim Executive Director, and the Board has given our full
> > support. Starting on March 14th, current Chief Communications Officer
> > Katherine Maher (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Katherine_(WMF))
> will
> > step into the role of interim Executive Director. We thank the C-levels
> for
> > their careful consideration in this process, and Katherine for stepping
> up
> > during this period of transition.
>
> Excellent choice. And thank you for accepting, Katherine.
>
> //Johan Jönsson
> --
>
> ___
> 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Executive transition planning

2016-03-05 Thread James Alexander
Hey Lodewijk,

I'm definetly talking about the legal concept of a union yeah (which
triggers a lot of legal protections which, at least in the US, are somewhat
assumed when people talk about organizing internally). I do think there are
other options (both formal and informal) which is what I was referring to
in the "There are other options I imagine" bit. As one example the staff
asked for at least one non c-level staff member, chosen by the staff, to be
on the ED search team and the board has suggested that would be accepted
(Obviously it isn't done yet but it was acknowledged as a good idea in an
all staff email). I think that's the first example of a more formal
'representation' for non c-level staff that I've seen in the almost 6 years
I've been in WMF. Informally, of course, staff have been organizing over
the past couple months at different levels trying to help us through
difficult times.

[I should point out that I actually think our c-levels have been, and are,
traditionally very good at representing the needs of the staff as a whole
however having a lower level staff member representative, especially in
times like this, is still very useful both for appearances/trust and for a
different perspective then someone who would be a direct report]

James

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Lodewijk <lodew...@effeietsanders.org>
wrote:

> Hi James,
>
> just to understand correctly: are you talking only about the legal concept
> of a 'union' or also about all informal structures where the wmf staff
> could somehow influence how things go? I mean for example, I could imagine
> that in an organisation with more than 100 people, a representation of
> sorts outside the usual hierarchy might be imaginable and potentially
> beneficial. That representation could possibly be to the board, to the
> C-team or otherwise. Or are such structures already in existance (have been
> in existance)?
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 9:51 PM, James Alexander <jameso...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > A traditional union is also difficult, honestly, because of the nature of
> > the WMF as an incredibly global organization. We are a huge mix of staff
> in
> > SF from the US, staff in SF on Visas (I don't know if this matters), Full
> > Time Equivalent contractors outside the US (and numerous different ways
> to
> > do that os that it's better for the staff member such as being a 'vender'
> > of a sole company etc), temporary contractors and more. I am not perfect
> at
> > Labour law but I'm fairly certainly not all of those can actually
> unionize
> > together officially and so no matter what we do a huge portion of the
> force
> > would be outside of a union and not get the legal protections that
> > provides. There are other options I imagine, and people are looking into
> > it, but sadly unionization laws weren't really written with the idea of
> us
> > in mind.
> >
> > Now that said I'm not 100% sure a union would really be the most
> beneficial
> > thing for the org. I'm just not sure they would be able to fix many of
> our
> > issues while at the same time probably adding some of their own. They can
> > be hugely beneficial when used in the right place but I'm not sure this
> is
> > one of those (they also take a long time to set up and so would not
> really
> > help for the specific, current, issues). Of course as a manager I don't
> > have a vote (and won't be protected) anyway if we go down that route so
> my
> > opinion is mostly academic.
> >
> > James
> > User:Jamesofur
> > [Manager, Trust & Safety, WMF]
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > That would not be a bad idea in and of itself. However, the kind of
> > > troubles are not necessarily the kind where a Union has its experience.
> > > Thanks,
> > >  GerardM
> > >
> > > On 5 March 2016 at 20:45, Gordon Joly <gordon.j...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 05/03/16 16:49, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> > > > > Arguably, the employees have a bigger stake in the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation,
> > > > > they are not even represented.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Then they should unionise?
> > > >
> > > > Gordo
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Executive transition planning

2016-03-05 Thread James Alexander
A traditional union is also difficult, honestly, because of the nature of
the WMF as an incredibly global organization. We are a huge mix of staff in
SF from the US, staff in SF on Visas (I don't know if this matters), Full
Time Equivalent contractors outside the US (and numerous different ways to
do that os that it's better for the staff member such as being a 'vender'
of a sole company etc), temporary contractors and more. I am not perfect at
Labour law but I'm fairly certainly not all of those can actually unionize
together officially and so no matter what we do a huge portion of the force
would be outside of a union and not get the legal protections that
provides. There are other options I imagine, and people are looking into
it, but sadly unionization laws weren't really written with the idea of us
in mind.

Now that said I'm not 100% sure a union would really be the most beneficial
thing for the org. I'm just not sure they would be able to fix many of our
issues while at the same time probably adding some of their own. They can
be hugely beneficial when used in the right place but I'm not sure this is
one of those (they also take a long time to set up and so would not really
help for the specific, current, issues). Of course as a manager I don't
have a vote (and won't be protected) anyway if we go down that route so my
opinion is mostly academic.

James
User:Jamesofur
[Manager, Trust & Safety, WMF]

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> That would not be a bad idea in and of itself. However, the kind of
> troubles are not necessarily the kind where a Union has its experience.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 5 March 2016 at 20:45, Gordon Joly  wrote:
>
> > On 05/03/16 16:49, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> > > Arguably, the employees have a bigger stake in the Wikimedia
> Foundation,
> > > they are not even represented.
> >
> >
> > Then they should unionise?
> >
> > Gordo
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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, 


[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Draft Strategy

2016-03-04 Thread James Alexander
Hi all,

The draft Wikimedia Foundation strategy is now posted on Meta
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Strategy/Draft_WMF_Strategy> for your
feedback and comments[1]. This stage of feedback will be open between now
and March 18, 2016. Please note that WMF Staff will not be able to start
responding to comments until Monday (March 7th) so know that the lack of
comments over the weekend  is not a sign that you're being ignored :). We
welcome and appreciate any translations you are able to give for the draft
as well so that it can be read and understood by as many people as possible.

*Next steps*:

   - During March, the Wikimedia Foundation will use this proposed strategy
   to finalize its draft 2016-2017 Annual Plan.
   - Between March 18th and April 1st we will review and integrate your
   feedback from the draft strategy into the draft Annual Plan as appropriate.
   - On April 1st, The Wikimedia Foundation’s draft annual plan will then
   be submitted for comment.


1, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Strategy/Draft_WMF_Strategy

Thank you again for your feedback earlier that led to this draft and for
your comments in this stage,

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] I am going to San Francisco

2016-02-27 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Something that I would like to understand is why so much WMF information is
> cloaked under NDAs. It seems to me that this is philosophically at odds
> with the values of the community, makes for poor governance, and provides
> cover for opportunities for mischief. I hope that recent events will prompt
> WMF to rethink its habits and assumptions in the realms of transparency,
> openness, and values alignment.
>
> Pine
>

While on a base level I agree with you I feel its important to add some
caveats to that. I think a good portion of this is actually everyone
needing a better understanding about what 'is' expected to be private (and
preferably why) from Management on down. I think a lot of what people are
calling "under the NDA" may not be :).

I also think it's important to consider the categories of private
data/information too, however, because i fear we (both the staff and the
community) use "under NDA" as a very broad and note always accurate
description. The way I see it there is:


   1. Private WMF Data or information that is most definetly covered by the
   NDA: examples include most donor data, attorney-client privileged
   information, information that is legally protected, information we protect
   via official public policy etc.
   2. Information and notes that really don't need to be private: This is
   the stuff we're talking about releasing.
   3. Inter personal/team discussions and similar.

[sorry, this turned out tldr, apologies. TLDR: Careful demanding sharing of
internal team discussions]

3. I actually think is really important because it is not what we think of
when we think of private information (and, honestly, probably isn't under
the NDA usually) but can be very important to be kept privately even if the
end result of the discussion should be made public etc.. This is especially
true to allow open conversations between staff members. Not only do they
need to feel comfortable bringing up crazy idea A (which some are now and
could probably be done more with culture change, possible on both the
community and WMF sides) but they need to feel comfortable saying that
crazy idea A is crazy and bad for reasons X,Y and Z.

Lodewijk made my main point well in the thread about Lawrence Lessig:
People get very uncomfortable talking about others in public. If Staff
member B is breaking apart Staff member A's proposal there is a good chance
at least one of them is going to be feeling very uncomfortable about it.
That discomfort often gets much bigger the more people who see what's
happening either because they feel more shame (to pick just one of the
emotions you can feel in that type of situation) or because they feel like
they're doing more shaming then they want to do. That expanded discomfort
can make them significantly less likely to do any number of things we don't
want: get more defensive/less willing to change, be less wiling to propose
those bold ideas that could be really great (or not), be less willing to
speak out against the bad ideas etc.

The other reason is another one that I imagine we're all familiar with on
wiki: The more people who pile on in one direction (even if it's only 2-3
frequently) (and in my experience the more public that discussion) the less
likely people are going to be to oppose what the direction those initial
commentators/voters/blah went. Suddenly people feel like they need to
defend their opinion much more then they would otherwise or that they could
be faced with angry opposition. These concerns are certainly possible on
internal teams and mailing lists (the WMF Staff list is somewhat famous for
people being afraid to pile on after a lot of people went the other way and
I know some, including me, are trying to change that)  but they become more
and more of a concern the wider that audience becomes and publishing those
discussions is a VERY wide audience.

I think that publishing the Discovery Team meeting with lila recently was a
right and proper move but I also think it was likely an exception to the
rule. Seeing people disagree so strongly and publicly with one of their
regular colleagues could very well scare away those colleagues and we don't
want that.





James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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

2016-02-25 Thread James Alexander
Congrats Katy, the perfect choice :)

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Philippe Beaudette <phili...@beaudette.me>
wrote:

> Congrats to Katy. She will be an excellent person for this role.
>
> On Thursday, February 25, 2016, 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/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Philippe Beaudette
>
> phili...@beaudette.me
> 415-275-1424
> ___
> 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

2016-02-24 Thread James Alexander
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Denny Vrandecic 
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
either need to do that over drinks or have a bit more distance between the
current crisis & time to write it all down in a more coherent fashion ]

[1]
http://www.trusteemag.com/display/TRU-news-article.dhtml?dcrPath=/templatedata/HF_Common/NewsArticle/data/TRU/WebExclusives/2013/WebExclusive0613legalduties
(among many other sites)
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread James Alexander
It is probably best for me not to get into a long count/counterpoint here
but I couldn't avoid not responding at all.

As Ori hinted at I hope that everyone can reflect on the idea of causation
vs correlation
. The
fact that good things have happened is not necessarily because of, but
despite of, current leadership. There is no doubt that there have been a
lot of good things to occur in the past while but those are, very
frequently, because people have been freed up some to do what they want. A
lack of direction or clear strategy can, in fact, have good side effects if
you have amazing people on board because they're able to make decisions
they've wanted to make for a while. However at the same time it can drive
them insane as they strive to keep it on that track and to avoid the taking
crazy routes or stop leadership from making decisions they feel would
disrupt the projects and the movement too much or go against our morals.

We have a lot of great new hires but much of that was driven by the good
people who already existed since it's the older ones who got into more
management type roles either officially or unofficially). Even at the
executive level it's telling that the 3 most long standing and solid
C-levels we have are all pre-lila appointees: Katherine (just before Lila
but still before), Lisa and Geoff. Our cycle of c-level replacements since
then have been both hires and departures (with, unfortunately, less hires
then departures still) including multiple short term hires (in roles that
are traditionally very long term).

I am not going to pretend I agreed with Sue at all times, or that every
decision she made was right however I at least felt like I knew what they
were (In fact I strongly disliked her strategy believing it bad for the org
and the movement, but again, I felt I knew what it was/understood it).
However I am also not going to accept the idea that Lila has made this
place so much better. As someone who saw them happen internally I don't
think her finger prints are really on any of the things you mention, they
were all 'despite' not 'because' of her and so much more could have been
done and wanted to be done. Slight exception possibly for the FDC bit but
that happened after all of this started exploding internally in the past
couple months and so she knew that she had  no trust left internally and
all of the staff close to it basically said "we can not defend you on this
if you don't go the FDC" so I still don't really see it as a proactive
choice on her front.

James
[[User:Jamesofur]]/[[User:Jalexander-WMF]]

Personal capacity, as signaled by my email address, but since some complain
I don't make it clear my role in WMF when I send this type of email: I am
also the Manager of Trust & Safety

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Anthony Cole  wrote:

> I know.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:17 AM, Brion Vibber 
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Anthony Cole 
> wrote:
> >
> > > * The Community Resources Team is in place - it surveyed the community
> > and
> > > discussed with them their technical priorities, and tailored their Idea
> > Lab
> > > Campaign accordingly.
> > >
> >
> > FYI, the head of that team is one of those who resigned last week:
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/081809.html
> >
> > -- brion
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread James Alexander
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
 wrote:

> It is important to do things in good timing, but it is even more important
> to do things right (not just in decision-making - remember the VIsual
> Editor?), not get easily swayed or lead by a crowd, think straight. When
> I'm asking for patience, I'm basically trying to say that the Board is not
>  ignoring you - but I think that as a body it tries its best to focus and
> use good, independent judgment, in the plenty of topics that emerge as
> important. It is not up to me to offer deadlines, but we are not really
> passive, as you seem to believe, either.
>
> dj


I will not pretend to have full insight into the issues the board is
dealing with and so can not pass final judgement on whether the Board did
the best they could given the circumstances (and may never be able to).
However, admitting that, you must appreciate that even those of us who
understand that speed is not always a luxury that is possible eventually
get to a point where it's hard to assume the best anymore or to "just
wait". Waiting a month, or two, or 3... to rethink decisions that were very
clearly going to explode like this... eventually we start to think that
you're not making a decision or that you're trying desperately to avoid it
and hope everything just goes away despite the reality of the situation.

Perhaps you're not being passive, perhaps you are talking a lot and trying
to do what's best (I actually believe that you *do* want to do what's best,
every member of the board) but eventually it's almost impossible to believe
you actually *will* if left alone. Given that, it's not hard to understand
why some are getting angrier and angrier, trying to force an actual
decision. It isn't like this has only been the past week or two, as you
know, this has been much longer then that.

James
[[User:Jamesofur]]/[[User:Jalexander-WMF]]
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Engagement office hour

2016-02-12 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote:

> When one's available, would someone please post a link to the transcript?
>
> Anthony Cole


Sure, Karen posted it on meta shortly after:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2016-02-12


James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] 2016 Ombudsman Committee

2016-02-01 Thread James Alexander
Thanks Patrick for all your work on this and Congratulations to everyone
coming on board! Thank you Thogo, PhilKnight, Avraham and Alhen for your
work over the past years. I know I'll see you all around still :).

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Tanweer Morshed <wiki.tanw...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks Patrick for the announcement. Congratulations to the new members as
> well as the returning members!
>
>
> Regards,
> Tanweer
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Earley <pear...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello, everyone.
> >
> > I'd like to announce the new and returning members of the 2016 Ombudsman
> > Commission (OC), the small group of volunteers who investigate complaints
> > about violations of the privacy policy, and in particular concerning the
> > use of CheckUser and Oversight[1] tools, on any Wikimedia project for the
> > Board of Trustees.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Scope_of_the_Ombudsman_Commission
> >
> > I apologize for the length of the announcement. :)
> >
> > The application period for new commissioners for 2016 recently closed.
> The
> > Wikimedia Foundation is extremely grateful to the many experienced and
> > insightful volunteers who offered to assist with this work.
> >
> > As it has for the past few years, this year’s OC will consist of seven
> > members, with a two-member advisory team who will guide the new
> commission.
> >
> >
> > I am pleased to announce the composition of the 2016 OC. First, the new
> > members are:
> >
> > -
> > User:Alan, who has been a registered Wikimedian for more than three
> years,
> > but an anonymous editor since 2006, working primarily across Spanish
> > language projects. He is a global sysop and global rollbacker, an
> > administrator on Commons, as well as having been an OTRS volunteer for ~3
> > years. In the past he has served as an administrator and bureaucrat on
> > Spanish Wikivoyage.
> >  -
> >
> > User:NahidSultan, who has been volunteering on Wikimedia projects since
> > 2012. He is mostly active on Bengali Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons and
> Meta,
> > where he holds administrator rights. Besides these roles, he is also part
> > of OTRS, a small wiki monitoring team member and a global administrator.
> > Other than his online contributions to the movement, he is also active
> > doing Wikimedia work offline, working actively for the Wikimedia
> Bangladesh
> > chapter, where he currently serves as a Board member.
> >  -
> >
> > User:Pajz, who has been an active contributor to the Wikimedia projects
> for
> > almost a decade. Formerly a bureaucrat on the German-language Wiktionary,
> > he has since mainly focused on contributing to Wikipedia (mostly on
> topics
> > from economic theory and copyright law) and helping out on the Volunteer
> > response team ("OTRS team"). He became a Wikipedia administrator and a
> > Volunteer response team member in 2007, and has served as one of the OTRS
> > administrators.
> >
> >  -
> >
> > User:Taketa, who has been a Wikimedian since 2008. He mostly works on the
> > Dutch Wikipedia, writing content and organising projects. He was a member
> > of the Dutch Wikipedia Arbitration Committee in 2009/10 and 2012/13.
> > Currently, he helps as Wikimedia steward, nlwiki bureaucrat, listadmin
> for
> > the nlwiki admins and bureaucrats, OTRS volunteer and Wikidata admin.
> >
> >
> > Returning members:
> >
> > User:Barras, who is primarily active on the Simple English Wikipedia and
> > Meta. He’s a steward, an Oversighter on Simple English and Meta, and
> also a
> > Checkuser on Simple and Meta. Barras joined the OC in 2015.
> >
> >
> > User:Polimerek, who primarily edits Polish Wikipedia (where he is an
> admin
> > and former arbitrator), Polish Wikibooks and Wikimedia Commons. He also
> > serves the Wikimedia movement as the president of Wikimedia Poland and on
> > the Grant Advisory Committee. He is a former Checkuser. Polimerek joined
> > the OC in 2014.
> >
> >
> > User:Rubin16, who primarily edits the Russian Wikipedia, where he is a
> > bureaucrat and administrator. He is formerly a member of their
> Arbitration
> > Committee. He is an administrator on Wikimedia Commons and is a Central
> > Notice and translation admin on Meta. (He is also a translation admin on
> > Commons.) He is a member of Wiki

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting formula was Appointment of María Sefidari to Wikimedia Foundation Board

2016-01-30 Thread James Alexander
On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 1:00 AM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It would be good if the voting system was built to give a clear next best
> option in these circumstances.
>
> Simple positive voting,  single transferable vote, and proportional Schulze
> would all do that.
>
> I wonder if there's any movement on the idea of a standing election
> committee to consider now how the next community election will be set up?
>
> Chris



There is indeed, the board approved a resolution to create the committee
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Elections_Committee> in
November which was published recently. I've already talked a bit about it
with the members of the most recent election committee but once it was
published I was wary of moving forward with the conversion to a standing
committee until we knew exactly what was happening with James' seat. Now
that that seems to be done I'm hoping to work with everyone over the next
couple weeks to get it going.


James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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

2016-01-10 Thread James Alexander
I will admit that if I knew I would likely not be wiling to say without
talking to others first. However I will never lie and I can honestly say
that I do not.

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi James Alexander,
>
> Thanks for writing here. As a WMF insider, do you know who recommended
> Arnnon to the trustees for a seat on the board?
>
> I can think of no reason why that should be a secret.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
>
> On 10 January 2016 at 10:16, James Alexander <jameso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Oh dear god everyone... [This is in general, not any specific person]
> >
> > I think everyone knows there are a lot of legitimate concerns to be
> > concerned about and certainly Arnnon's actions at Google are legitimate
> for
> > question however this whole "google is controlling the board/wmf" line of
> > thought is turning into a huge and enormous conspiracy theory and what
> > seems to be a giant school of red herring
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring>. We haven't quite yet
> gotten to
> > "Frieda has 6 letters in her name and you know what else has 6 letters in
> > it's name? GOOGLE!" but we're getting damn close. If anything the only
> > concern about google I've heard within the actual WMF is that the
> > "Knowledge Engine" was a plan to 'compete' against google for traffic
> (for
> > the record my personal opinion is that would be a waste of money on
> > something we could never succeed if true but ALSO that it isn't actually
> > true at all at this point).
> >
> > There are a lot of people with legitimate and understandable concerns (in
> > many ways I wish I could take part in the discussion but there is just no
> > good way to do that) but please let's try to keep the lines of thought as
> > sane as possible (which I know is the norm for all of you so I know it's
> > possible). When people get worked up and there is a lack of information
> our
> > imagination can always get the best of us, I certainly understand that,
> but
> > it is rarely helpful.
> >
> > James
> > User:Jamesofur
> > User:Jalexander-WMF
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> 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

2016-01-10 Thread James Alexander
Oh dear god everyone... [This is in general, not any specific person]

I think everyone knows there are a lot of legitimate concerns to be
concerned about and certainly Arnnon's actions at Google are legitimate for
question however this whole "google is controlling the board/wmf" line of
thought is turning into a huge and enormous conspiracy theory and what
seems to be a giant school of red herring
. We haven't quite yet gotten to
"Frieda has 6 letters in her name and you know what else has 6 letters in
it's name? GOOGLE!" but we're getting damn close. If anything the only
concern about google I've heard within the actual WMF is that the
"Knowledge Engine" was a plan to 'compete' against google for traffic (for
the record my personal opinion is that would be a waste of money on
something we could never succeed if true but ALSO that it isn't actually
true at all at this point).

There are a lot of people with legitimate and understandable concerns (in
many ways I wish I could take part in the discussion but there is just no
good way to do that) but please let's try to keep the lines of thought as
sane as possible (which I know is the norm for all of you so I know it's
possible). When people get worked up and there is a lack of information our
imagination can always get the best of us, I certainly understand that, but
it is rarely helpful.

James
User:Jamesofur
User:Jalexander-WMF

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> On 10 January 2016 at 09:53, Yaroslav M. Blanter  wrote:
> > On 2016-01-10 10:49, Lilburne wrote:
> >> Meanwhile one knows that a Google appointed board member objected to
> >> James,
> >> presence at a meeting where they were most likely to be finalizing the
> >> appointment
> >> of another from the Googleplex, who is a little tarnished.
> > Would you please remain civil. We do not have a Google appointed board
> > member, nor the bylaws provide a possibility for Google to appoint a
> board
> > member. If you mean Denny, he was not Google appointed, but community
> > elected, which makes a big difference. I, for one, voted for him.
>
> Literally speaking, Denny was appointed by Google to Google, so
> "Google appointed board member" is not untrue, though "board member on
> Google's payroll" would be less confusing.
>
> As for a member of the "Googleplex" who is "a little tarnished", well
> that's a mild way of putting the facts about illegal activities of
> major public interest, very polite even.
>
> To help debunk conspiracy theorists, it would be interesting to find
> out how many of the board of trustees have shares in Google, a useful
> way of finding out who is part of the Googleplex. Presumably current
> and past employees would have taken their stock options. Is that
> possible to discover from the public record in the USA?
>
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Paid Intern/Fellowship Opportunity

2016-01-05 Thread James Alexander
Hey Lodewijk,

I'm not acutely aware of the details for this specific position but in the
interest of "probably" answering the question quickly in the US the term
benefits in that context is generally used to specifically talk about
health care, retirement, life insurance or other "fringe" benefits that the
company would pay for with a full time (or sometimes longer term
contractor) position. A position like this would generally be paid but not
receive those benefits. Do you know of a better way to say when that
applies? I think it's good to make sure people aren't taken unaware by that
but if it's confusing I'm sure HR could look at changing job descriptions
to make it clearer.

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Lodewijk <lodew...@effeietsanders.org>
wrote:

> Hi Jaime,
>
> In the topic of your email, you mention 'paid' - but the description says
> 'This
> position does not offer benefits.'
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Jaime Anstee <jans...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Greetings Wikimedians,
> >
> > I wanted to quickly draw your attention to a new temporary contractor
> > position [1] open in the Community Engagement Department of the Wikimedia
> > Foundation  which may be especially relevant to experienced Wikimedians.
> >
> > The Programs Capacity & Learning team [2] is currently seeking a
> qualified
> > candidate for a paid intern/fellowship to assist with our upcoming
> > conference and workshops communications.
> >
> > The position will be be supported for up to 40 hours a week over a
> > six-month period beginning late January. Wikimedians with communications
> or
> > related backgrounds and experience are especially encouraged to apply.
> >
> >
> > For more information on qualifications, duties, or to apply, please see
> the
> > job details at:
> >
> > https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/142252#.VoxJJsArIvo
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your time and attention with regard to this opportunity.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >
> > Jaime
> >
> >
> > Links:
> >
> > [1] https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/142252#.VoxJJsArIvo
> >
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programs:Capacity_%26_Learning
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Jaime Anstee, Ph.D
> > Senior Strategist
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > +1.415.839.6885 ext 6869
> > www.wikimediafoundation.org
> >
> > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> > sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> > *https://donate.wikimedia.org <https://donate.wikimedia.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>
>
___
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] Wikimedia Foundation quarterly reviews for July-September 2015

2015-10-19 Thread James Alexander
Thanks for reading them Pine! I think it would be great if you reach out to
those teams (either on meta talk pages if they have them, other mailing
lists etc). I think leaving the questions here all as one pile is sadly a
recipe for non-response as not only are most staff members (like most
community members) not subscribed (for the best, it would be an enormous
amount of donor funds spent all combined with them reading it) it's also
rarely a productive use of a thread to try and throw it in so many
directions at once. That said, the high level comments seem perfect for the
thread.

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Tilman. I finally got around to skimming most of this. Questions &
> Comments below:
>
> Communications: seems to be firing on all cylinders.
>
> Team Practices: seems to be making a difference in supporting other
> individuals and teams. Some of the metrics chosen look great.
>
> Release engineering: great idea about the skill matrix; would HR and Team
> Practices like to expand this to other teams?
>
> Grants restructuring: big job, thanks/congrats for how it was done, looking
> forward to execution
>
> TechOps: nice to see that OTRS upgrade is in progress; I believe that this
> has been talked about for years
>
> Labs: I have a subjective impression of much improved reliability, so thank
> you
>
> Design research: University of Washington mentioned; what's the connection?
>
> Performance: thank you for working on paint time
>
> Security: I have a suggestion for KPIs: maximum and median times for
> resolution of critical and high priority bugs; and maximum and median time
> for first response to bug reports on all channels (Phabricator, email, etc)
>
> Reading: can we get an update on what's being done WRT push notifications?
>
> Partnerships: happy to see pre-install deal coming soon
>
> Editing: how is the community feedback about the split of Echo
> notifications.
>
> Multimedia: yay for ability to upload to Commons from VE; excited that
> Excel import is coming (this may stop my complaints to Grantmaking about
> MediaWiki tables for budgets)
>
> High level comment: from these reports it looks like the Foundation is
> generally making good progress. Going forward a theme that I'd really like
> to see is closer integration of WMF priorities with community priorities. I
> hear from my colleagues at in-person meetings and online that there is a
> sense that WMF's priorities may or may not be the community's priorities. A
> certain amount of that is understandable, but my subjective sense is that
> there's a fair amount of frustration in the community and that the
> situation could be better. Suggestion: take advantage of the Evaluation
> team's enhanced survey capacity to run surveys like the one that WMIL ran,
> and run them every 6 months. Prioritize the languages to maximize return on
> translation investment. Then adjust WMF quarterly priorities in alignment
> with the priorities expressed in the community priorities survey. Also,
> establish SLAs for all departments with regard to responses to community
> questions.
>
> Thanks! I hope that other community members will write comments and
> questions also.
>
> Pine
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Tilman Bayer <tba...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Greetings everyone,
> >
> > the Wikimedia Foundation's quarterly reviews of teams' work in the
> > past quarter (July-September, Q1 of the 2015-16 fiscal year) took
> > place last week. Minutes and slides for those meetings are now
> > available:
> >
> > Community Engagement:
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Community_Engagement,_October_2015
> >
> > Discovery:
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Discovery,_October_2015
> >
> > Reading and Advancement (with Fundraising Tech):
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Reading_and_Advancement,_October_2015
> >
> > Editing (comprising the Collaboration, Language Engineering,
> > Multimedia, Parsing, and VisualEditor teams):
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Editing,_October_2015
> >
> > Infrastructure (comprising the Analytics, Release Engineering,
> > Services, TechOps, and Labs teams) and CTO (comprising the Design
> > Research, Research & Data, Performance, and Security teams):
> >
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Board nominees

2015-09-26 Thread James Alexander
Thanks Pine, I've uploaded the file she was trying to send up on
foundationWiki for now at
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/File:RoleDescription-WikimediaFoundationTrusteeAppointment2SeatsSept2015.pdf.
I'll try to convert it into wikitext for Meta over the next couple days as
well (though obviously anyone who has some free time should feel free).

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Welcome Boryana. (:
>
> Will you be able to come to WikiConference USA in DC to mix with some of
> the community? This might net you some contacts that would be good for
> board candidates, employees, etc. moving forward. (From my perspective, we
> are sorely missing having the C-level engineering and technology roles
> filled.)
>
> I believe that attachments get screened out of the public mailing lists.
> Can you send a link to a JD on the Foundation site or Meta?
>
> My understanding is that the Board itself, with the assistance of
> consultants, has conducted searches for candidates in the past. You might
> check to see if there is a stack of CVs somewhere for potential board
> candidates.
>
> See you around,
>
> Pine
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Boryana Dineva <bory...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > As you may have heard, I joined the Wikimedia Foundation last Monday as
> the
> > VP of Human Resources. I am so excited to be here and help to the best of
> > my abilities.
> >
> > One of the projects that I am currently focusing on is adding two members
> > to our board of trustees. I wanted to reach out to you and ask you to
> > nominate candidates that you think should be considered.
> >
> > I am attaching a role description that will provide more insight into
> what
> > the ideal candidates for these two board slots would be. If someone you
> > know comes to mind, please send the name of the candidate including some
> > information regarding why you think they would be great. Also let me know
> > if you know that person is interested in the position and can afford the
> > time commitment the role will require or if it’s someone you think may be
> > great but are unsure if they are interested or would have time to commit.
> >
> > Please email nominations to board-nominati...@lists.wikimedia.org by
> next
> > Wednesday, Sept 30th. I understand that this is a short notice and not
> much
> > time to nominate, but we need to find someone that can start in Nov and
> we
> > need to contact, screen, interview, etc before then.
> >
> > Thank you in advance for your nominations and have a wonderful weekend!
> >
> > Warmest regards,
> > Boryana
> > ___
> > 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] WMF Advanced Permissions

2015-09-24 Thread James Alexander
Hey Fae,

As you know that I'm responsible for the spreadsheet that your bot is copying 
to make that spreadsheet (since you're one of the ones who asked me to make the 
process more transparent) I would have really appreciated a more private email 
before this public one. That said, yes there have both been some changes on the 
private versions of the sheet that caused the public version to break as well 
as very few actual rights changes which means I haven't been looking at it 
often. Because of a back log of issues within my Trust and Safety work I 
haven't been able to fully find the time to fix and update everything but I 
actually have time set aside on my calendar on Monday to do that :).

Sent from my iPhone


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
+1 415-839-6885 x6716


> On Sep 24, 2015, at 16:57, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I notice that the table on Meta of specially granted project rights
> for WMF employees has not been updated since June 2015.[1] Last year
> it was being amended at least a couple of times a month.
> 
> Is this down to a technical problem or was there no need to change any
> employee rights on Wikimedia projects over the last  the last twelve
> weeks?
> 
> Links:
> 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Advanced_Permissions
> 
> Thanks,
> Fae
> -- 
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> 
> ___
> 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] Imminent block of access to Wikipedia in Russia

2015-08-24 Thread James Alexander
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com
wrote:

 I wonder if this is related to the recent blocking of reddit.

 

 http://www.vocativ.com/news/221534/the-story-behind-russias-reddit-shutdown/


Same law of course, but there doesn't appear to be a direct connection.

James
___
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] Wikimedia Foundation quarterly reviews for April-June 2015

2015-07-19 Thread James Alexander
How can you experiment and explore while going through processes like that? The 
policy already applied for the IdeaLab areas during inspire (including letting 
the community know beforehand). I think process for processes sake, especially 
on meta, does more harm then good.

Sent from my iPhone


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
+1 415-839-6885 x6716


 On Jul 19, 2015, at 16:55, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Hmm. It seems to me that having WMF create a policy for conduct that it
 imposes on non-WMF wikis would effectively be an office action
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Office_actions, and the policy for office
 actions doesn't seem to contemplate them being expanded in to general
 moderation of Wikimedia sites. I don't know what Board resolutions would
 allow for WMF to impose a policy like this on its own; it seems to me that
 the correct routes to take are (1) a Board resolution, which is probably
 more appropriate for a ToS amendment that I hope will come after community
 consultation, or (2) a community RfC that creates community policy. If
 there is another way that staff is authorized to create policies that
 govern volunteer-created content, I'm not aware of it. Perhaps the Board
 should consider creating one.
 
 
 Pine
 
 
 On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
 On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 
 1. Will the friendly-space expectations (policy?) for grants spaces on
 Meta be proposed as an RfC on Meta? The documentation on the rollout plan
 doesn't mention and RfC. My understanding is that the right way to
 implement a policy change like this on Meta is for it to go through an
 open
 and transparent RfC process, and that the implementation decision is
 ultimately the community's to make. The experience would inform further
 discussions about (1) a project-wide friendly space policy on Meta, and
 (2)
 a wider consultation on a friendly space amendment to the ToS that the
 WMF
 Board may eventually ratify.
 
 
 I don't see any reason why an RFC would be required (or appropriate) here.
 The grantmaking process is a WMF function, and the associated pages on meta
 are managed by the WMF grantmaking team; they are free to impose
 requirements (such as compliance with a friendly space standard) on anyone
 participating in that process (whether as an applicant or as a commenter or
 reviewer).
 
 Kirill
 ___
 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] Renewal of the Recognition to Wikisource Community User Group

2015-06-21 Thread James Alexander

 On Jun 21, 2015, at 00:52, Carlos M. Colina ma...@wikimedia.org.ve wrote:
 
 Dear all,
 
 On behalf of the Affiliations Committee, I am honoured to announce the 
 renewal of the recognition of Wikisource Community User Group as a Wikimedia 
 User Group. They have been working hard this past year and it is the 
 Affiliations Committee's opinion that they meet the criteria for having their 
 user group status renewed indefinitely, starting the date of publication of 
 the resolution.
 
 Congratulations!!!

Congrats! I absolutely love wikisource both as a reader and (more and more) as 
an editor. I'm excited to see the user group continuing to move forward.

Sent from my iPhone


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
+1 415-839-6885 x6716
___
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] Announcing staff changes at the WMF

2015-06-18 Thread James Alexander
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Tomasz W. Kozłowski twkozlow...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I have just noticed that Damon Sicore's account has been removed from
 the Foundation wiki[1] and that his global account has just been
 locked on Meta[2].



Hi Tomasz,

We adjust the rights of, or access to, staff accounts for many different
reasons. For example, last weekend, we temporarily removed the rights from
another staff member because they were in a country where having those
permissions could have been sensitive. Sometimes we can’t disclose reasons
prior to taking an action, or discuss them immediately. Although we aim for
full transparency, occasionally there are factors in place that mean we
can’t be as transparent as we'd like in the moment. Thanks for
understanding.

James



James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
___
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-BN] 10th year founding anniversary of Bengali Wikipedia

2015-06-07 Thread James Alexander
Thank you Ravi for bumping this thread so that I saw it and thank you
Hasive for the letting us know about the recent events! The pictures make
it clear that you they were not only successful events but a lot of fun and
that's exactly what you should have for such a momentous occasion.

I joke sometimes that work on the projects, in the WMF and in the movement
as a whole can feel like dog years where you become an old experienced
had after only a couple quick years (and are seen as such because there are
so many new faces around). 10 years can feel very short in some ways but
there is so much work that has been done during those 10 years that it
really is a marathon. Here's to 10, 20, 100+ more years :) Congrats!

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Ravishankar Ayyakkannu 
ravidre...@wikimedia.in wrote:

 Hi Hasive,

 On behalf of Wikimedia community from India, my best wishes for the
 Bangladesh Wikimedia community.

 We look forward to more interaction between both the communities in the
 coming months.

 Thanks,

 Ravi

 On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Hasive Chowdhury 
 nhas...@wikimedia.org.bd
 wrote:

  Hi All,
 
  We're happy to share another good news from Bengali Wikipedia Community.
  You already know that Bengali Wikipedia has reached It's 10 year journey.
  We celebrate a program on last February 10 and Jimmy Wales joined with us
  as Chief Guest.
  After that recently (May 30) we again successfully complete 'Bengali
  Wikipedia 10th year Founding Anniversary Conference' by Wikimedia
  Bangladesh. We are happy to run this anniversary program around the
  country. We conduct several series Wikipedia workshop/seminar seven
  division in our country. After that we arrange day long program in Dhaka.
  300+ registered Wikipedian from different part of country attend this
  conference. Few Wikipedians from Kolkata (India) also join with us to
  celebrate Bengali Wikipedia 10th year anniversary.
 
  ​In our final event we arrange day long event including Workshop,
  Seminar, Special workshop for women, discussion about outreach program,
  coloration discussion with Wikipedian from Kolkata etc. Our conference
  inaugurated by honorable state minister of ICT Division of Govt. Republic
  of Bangladesh Mr. Zunaid Ahmed Palak [1]. We give 10 best Wikipedian
 award
  and best three photographer who attend our Wikimedia Commons photo
 contest.
  All award handover by popular award winner writer and journalist Anisul
  Hoque [2].​
 
  ​All program photo available this link:
 
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:10th_Anniversary_of_Bengali_Wikipedia,_Bangladesh
 
  Cheers!
 
  [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zunaid_Ahmed_Palak
  [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisul_Hoque
 
 
  Hasive
 
  --
  *Hasive **Chowdhury** :: **নুরুন্নবী চৌধুরী **হাছিব*
  Global User: Hasive http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hasive
  ​
  Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia
  http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Hasive
  Member | GAC Committee, Wikimedia Foundation
  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Grant_Advisory_Committee
  Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia Foundation
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/People
  Director | Wikimedia Bangladesh Operations Committee
  http://www.wikimedia.org.bd
  fb.com/Hasive http://fb.com/itsNCH | @nhasive
  http://www.twitter.com/nhasive | Skype: nhasive | www.nhasive.com
 
 
  ___
  Wikipedia-BN mailing list
  wikipedia...@lists.wikimedia.org
  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-bn
 
 
 ___
 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] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

2015-06-06 Thread James Alexander
[For the record I'm running the vote dumps now that should allow some of
that analysis to be done by those interested. No exact promises on timing
because while I'll send it out today it will take some time to approve for
anonymization etc.]

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  Well, the funny thing with current system is that if people had voted in
  most rational way - i.e. to maximize the impact of their votes - the
  results would have been negative for all candidates - as this year none
 of
  them got more than 50% of positive votes. But in fact if all people would
  vote in that way - negative votes would be negligible - as the result
 will
  be simple exactly the same as if there will be no no votes - in both
  methods of calculation :-) What makes negative votes so important is just
  because people are not voting in rational way as they have some mental
  objections to vote no. But those brave ones (or smart ones or bad ones)
  enough to vote no have much higher impact on the results than the
 others
  - which I think is not good by itslef.
 
  By the way would interesting to know how many voters voted only yes and
  no, and how many voted yes for only one candidate and no for all
  others (the most impact for selected candidate).

 Based on the numbers, it's likely that the voting was dominantly like:
 I want this candidate or two; I have no opinion about these
 candidates; and I really really wouldn't like to see this one or two
 as Board members.

 I'd say that our democracy depends on such behavior of voters, as at
 the end we are getting good people in the Board, no matter who has
 been elected particularly. However, it could change and it could have
 dramatic consequences, as we are operating with small numbers.

 What's more likely to be seen as the outcome of rational voting is
 to get one or few candidates with 50% less opposing votes and although
 it wouldn't need to be bad in the sense of particular candidates, it
 would make very negative consequences to the rest of the community.

 First time such thing happens, next time we'd have bitter fight for
 every vote. And that would be the changing point: from friendly to
 competitive atmosphere. It would also mean that we'd get serious
 hidden lobby groups. (We have them now, but it's relaxed and much more
 about it would be great if our candidate would pass, than about
 serious fights for own candidates.)

 ___
 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] While Election committee counts the votes...

2015-06-04 Thread James Alexander
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:27 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:


 Small point -- because this is the first election we've done using SUL
 (hooray!!) the wiki listed is whatever someone's home wiki is
 according to SUL (I think) and not, as in past years, the wiki where
 you actually clicked the vote link from.


Aye, this is right, the wiki listed on SecurePoll is what CentralAuth says
is your 'home' wiki. Actually, in most cases, this has been the case for a
while. If you look at a voter list for the English Wikipedia Arbcom
Elections
https://vote.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500title=Special%3ASecurePoll%2Flist%2F392
for example you'll see that there are random examples of people with
Domain of another wiki because that's their home wiki even though the
only place you could vote from was enWiki. Of course in the past not
everyone was global and in those cases it was the Domain the account was
coming from.


 The point that many editors are active on many wikis, and thus
 potentially eligible on many wikis, is certainly true. I would guess
 that (again because of SUL) each wiki's voter list represents those
 eligible voters who have that wiki as their home wiki, so there's not
 duplication. But the election committee can verify that.

 best,
 Phoebe


Thanks Phoebe, it's actually important to note that in this election (and
likely future global elections, perhaps even most future elections in
general, the voter list was actually global (on the centralAuth database
rather then local wiki databases). Therefore there was no such thing as
being 'eligible on multiple wikis' or duplication (other then someone
having multiple accounts) like there has been in the past. In the results
we'll have X people eligible on wiki Y is X people who have Y wiki labeled
as their home wiki and those X people will not be counted in any other
wiki. In the past this was a big problem, trying to find out exactly how
many unique users were eligible to vote in the 2013 or 2011 elections for
example has been incredibly difficult since some of them (cough stewards
/cough ) could be eligible on not only a couple wikis but sometimes 100s
of wikis and would be listed independently on each one.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] While Election committee counts the votes...

2015-05-31 Thread James Alexander
A couple comments inline from a technical election process (not commenting
on much of the rest not because I'm not interested but just for simplicity
right now given other work :) ).

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:

 ... it would be good to talk a bit about the state of our community
 and movement.

 Initially, I was quite positively surprised by the fact that this will
 be the best WMF Board elections ever in the terms of turnout of
 voters. It will beat 2007 elections and it will be likely 2.5 times
 better than previous one.

 I would really like to know what's so different than in 2013. Also, if
 this is the sign of the community health, how come that we are now
 better than we were at the peak of our movement?



While I think there are probably lots of things that contributed to the
increase (and completely separating them can be difficult) I do think there
are a couple specific things that helped a lot. This was a goal Philippe
and I had for the election process very very early on (it was even one of
our annual goals) and so we've been focusing on trying to set up pieces of
it for much of the year many of which seem to have worked well. There is
still an enormous amount of things we could do better both from things that
were out of our control (timing for the start of the process and technical
issues) and things that we've learnt more about (some of the translation
work for example) but I think much of it has had some dramatic improvement.


   1. There has been an amazing group of volunteers, led by Greg Varnum as
   coordinator, on the election committee this year. It was both bigger then
   it has been in the past (many more people willing to server) and more
   active. This has allowed us to move much faster and have better
   conversations given the short time schedule at times.
   2. One of the big issues that was seen both in the last election and, to
   be honest, in previous ones was the difficulty (even for experienced
   voters) in just 'getting' to the voting process.
  - In the past you had to vote from your local wiki, so you had to
  follow a link to the meta pages, learn about the candidates, and then go
  BACK to your home wiki and go directly (by typing in the page) to the
  specific SecurePoll voting page to start the process. Of course sometimes
  that meant you were typing in a vote page that wasn't even in
the language
  or script you were used too and confused a lot of people. It also caused
  problems because basically every step you make someone go through causes
  drop off (sometimes significant).
  - This year we pushed very hard for some improvements to SecurePoll.
  Some were less visible such as an interface for creating the election (so
  it wasn't as error prone being created by a manual xml file in the past)
  and logs when messages were changed so that we knew if someone, for
  example, changed what 'name' was shown for a vote option (not that it's
  happened in the past, but in theory it could have and we had no log).
  However 1 in particular was, I think, huge: With the coming of SUL
  unification Tim Starling helped us to set it up so that we had a global
  list of voters and everyone could vote directly from Meta. This means we
  could give every single person a link, the same link, that went
directly to
  the voting system (where the committee also put brief summaries and
  pictures of each candidates along with links to their statements and
  questions). That means that, unlikely 2 years ago or previous elections,
  the banners and emails and voting boxes all linked DIRECTLY to the vote
  system rather then meta and requiring them to bounce around after that.
   3. We also spent a lot of effort this year trying to ensure that all of
   the summaries and voter information was translated into at least 17-18
   languages. There is still a lot that could be done better on this front
   (especially if we can give the committee more time then was given this
   year) but I still think it was much better overall in most cases then it
   has been in the past.

...

 And two more precise requests:

 1) May Election committee give unified data for all previous
 elections? If possible, structured by countries and projects. Output
 of all democratic elections assume presenting data according to area.
 It's legitimate to know that voters from country X voted for candidate
 Y. It gives a clue of what's going on inside of the movement


I know both the committee and I definitely want to put out as much data as
possible about the results. Some of it I'm already putting together (such
as votes by project, eligible users by project, percentage voting etc) as
well as graphs and data comparing this year to 2013. Votes by country could
be tougher... in theory

Re: [Wikimedia-l] While Election committee counts the votes...

2015-05-31 Thread James Alexander
Ukraine has done great this year! Your work clearly paid off, currently
11.74% of the eligible users on ukWiki have voted (making it one of the
highest % wikis, and the highest if you only count medium/large wikis some
of the smaller ones get an advantage when % is factored in). It also
accounts for 2.58% of the total votes compared to less then 1% (.99%) of
the whole electorate.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 3:14 PM, attolippip attolip...@gmail.com wrote:

 There were only 9 votes from Ukrainian community in 2013, I believe

 So this year we just made sure that our community REALLY knows about the
 elections, thus we:

 - translated the candidates statements into Ukrainian
 - prepared a short table with the essence of these statements in Ukrainian
 and posted it in the Village pump [1]
 - created a list of everybody eligible to vote from Ukrainian Wikipedia and
 sent them a message with invitation to vote and with the links to read more
 about the candidates via talk pages
 - and just talked :)

 [1]

 https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D1%96%D0%BA%D1%96%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D1%96%D1%8F:%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8_%D0%92%D1%96%D0%BA%D1%96%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%B4%D1%96%D0%B0-2015

 Best regards,
 antanana
 ED of Wikimedia Ukraine

 2015-06-01 1:00 GMT+03:00 Johan Jönsson brevlis...@gmail.com:

  2015-05-31 22:57 GMT+02:00 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
 
   ... it would be good to talk a bit about the state of our community
   and movement.
  
   Initially, I was quite positively surprised by the fact that this will
   be the best WMF Board elections ever in the terms of turnout of
   voters. It will beat 2007 elections and it will be likely 2.5 times
   better than previous one.
  
   I would really like to know what's so different than in 2013. Also, if
   this is the sign of the community health, how come that we are now
   better than we were at the peak of our movement?
  
 
  There's a fair chance the difference says far more about the amount of
  effort spent getting the word out about the election, than about how much
  the movement cares about it compared to previous elections.
 
  //Johan Jönsson
  --
  ___
  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] While Election committee counts the votes...

2015-05-31 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 3:20 PM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 Ukraine has done great this year! Your work clearly paid off, currently
 11.74% of the eligible users on ukWiki have voted (making it one of the
 highest % wikis, and the highest if you only count medium/large wikis some
 of the smaller ones get an advantage when % is factored in). It also
 accounts for 2.58% of the total votes compared to less then 1% (.99%) of
 the whole electorate.


Mea Culpa: For the record I was double counting many of the eligible voters
here (we had an old voter list that was also being counted). The correct
numbers for ukWiki would be just over 25% of eligible voters voting and
2.61% of the total votes (still .99% of the electorate).

We will certainly be releasing more detailed results for projects with
results and in the post mortem.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Results of the 2015 Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) election

2015-05-15 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 That formatting is messy for me (and it isn't perfect on Meta either),  but
 just to clarify:

 The elected candidates are Lorenzo Losa, Michal Buczynski, Liam wyatt, Mike
 Peel and Itzik Edri? And for the ombusman, the elected person is Kirill
 Lokshin?

 Thanks,
 ~Nathan


Correct, more specifically those are the top people in the results. In the
end the board has to officially seat them and that generally happens after
some time for background checks etc (as far as I know, I have never
personally been involved in that part). The board candidates don't
generally get seated officially until WIkimania for similar reasons as an
example.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Board of Trustee elections

2015-04-29 Thread James Alexander
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 1:03 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi James, is there any good reason to keep the exception? Imo it is a wrong
 signal we send out. At the end of the day all good governance rules suggest
 to minimize administrative tasks. And by definition everything which a
 client  does not see,  I.e
 Content or software, is administrative.

 Rupert


[ended up being long, sorry :( ]

Are you speaking about the staff rule only or all of them? I had one of the
committee members call me out for calling it an 'exception' before and
their argument made sense to me, so I'm currently trying to think of them
all as they recommended as different ways to be enfranchised. That may
sound a bit like word play but... the more I've thought about it the more I
agreed the exception word sounded wrong.

Speaking just for myself I would say yes to generally all of the different
rules (though I would, personally, lower the edit requirements). This
because I do not think the community is one group and until and unless we
parcel out seats to different groups (which I'm not actually sure we should
do, I'd prefer them all to be more general 'community' seats). As part of
that I don't think we should be strict with what we consider the community
because I think, in a very real sense, each of the how to vote options
represent a way to ensure the community and the stakeholders can be
involved. I think that having the other options actually sends a better
message then not having them.

*Editing: *Obviously editors are the biggest group here, and the vast
majority of staff who would be so inclined to vote will fall here too (I
qualify on both my volunteer account and my staff account for example,
though given my election role I don't vote at all). That's how it should
be, and I honestly don't see that changing. It's also why I probably
wouldn't fight too hard if the other options were remove simply

*Staff: *I have always thought that the Staff need to be considered part of
the community. While they have different roles at times (and at times share
roles with volunteers) the Us v Them mentality that can become part of the
thinking for both groups is poisonous to the projects as a whole. In order
for it to succeed everyone needs to be seen as on the same side. There are
never going to be many people who would qualify as Staff but don't qualify
as Editors (at least with their staff account and we've never drawn a
distinction for voting historically) and still want to vote but I think
encouraging them to think of themselves as part of the community (and to
send the message that they are) is important. [I also think it's good to
involve staff in governance wherever possible, though not exclusively
obviously, they need to feel part of it. Similar reasons why a corporation
often gives out stock to their employees which allows them to own part of
the company and to, indeed, vote for the Board of Directors.]

*Developers*: Again we've historically had very few people who met this
requirement, wanted to vote, and didn't qualify through some other means
(usually editing) but MediaWiki is not just the software we run it's also,
essentially, a full fledged project that an enormous amount of 3rd parties
use. I would love to find good ways to encourage the community of 3rd party
developers to take part in this governance.

*Current/Old Board/FDC/Advisory Board: *I see this mostly as not booting
those who have been in the trenches and know what the work actually entails.

I could certainly see other groups, including affiliates, who might make
sense to be in this list (though with the current structure I have some
concerns of double enfranchisement even if I personally wouldn't choose the
current structure) but I don't currently see great reasons to get rid of
the options we have other then just 'simplicity'. That isn't a horrible
reason of course, I'm just not sure it's necessary.

(obviously not speaking for the committee or with my staff hat on though
obviously, as Greg said, those roles influence me.. though most of it
hasn't changed since long before I was staff)

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Board of Trustee elections

2015-04-28 Thread James Alexander
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
it...@wikimedia.org.il wrote:

 Any response or input from the Election Committee?



I think Greg said it relatively well earlier as the coordinator for the
committee (I am it's staff advisor). At this point the committee has
decided on the voting requirements and it is highly unlikely to change for
the current election cycle. They did have serious discussions about
everything mentioned in this thread both on their list and during the first
committee meeting but in the end decided that they did not believe there
was a strong need for change right now. When this conversation came back up
it was broached whether we wanted to revisit and no one said expressed a
desire to.

Also as Greg said I think this is a good topic for a permanent election
committee which I very much think should exist.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Board of Trustee elections

2015-04-28 Thread James Alexander
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
 
 wrote:

  On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
  it...@wikimedia.org.il wrote:
 
   Any response or input from the Election Committee?
  
  
 
  I think Greg said it relatively well earlier as the coordinator for the
  committee (I am it's staff advisor). At this point the committee has
  decided on the voting requirements and it is highly unlikely to change
 for
  the current election cycle. They did have serious discussions about
  everything mentioned in this thread both on their list and during the
 first
  committee meeting but in the end decided that they did not believe there
  was a strong need for change right now. When this conversation came back
 up
  it was broached whether we wanted to revisit and no one said expressed a
  desire to.
 
  Also as Greg said I think this is a good topic for a permanent election
  committee which I very much think should exist.
 
  James Alexander
  Community Advocacy
  Wikimedia Foundation
  (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


 This is a weakness in the process. Itzik raised an issue and was told it
 was too early to discuss. He raised it again when the elections approached,
 and is being told its too late. Obviously the committee conducted its
 deliberations on this question in secret, which is a strange approach
 considering there have been requests and a desire for open discussion from
 the community.


I agree, I also wish that the committee had more time to make the decision.
I had hoped to seat them in January and they would have had a lot of time
to discuss this both here and elsewhere. Sadly we were waiting for the
board on a couple things and were unable to seat them until recently and at
that point there was a time crunch and things needed to be decided quickly.
As both Greg and I said however, these arguments were in no way ignored,
when I introduced the topic (in one of the very first emails to the
committee) I listed all of the questions here about staff voting, chapter
staff/board, edit requirements etc and then backed off. The committee
discussed all of those and decided, in the end, that this was the right
decision.



 It's also worth pointing out that many of the people in this discussion
 agreed that the community requirements are so low that there should be no
 reason any interested employee (of the WMF or elsewhere) can't qualify
 under other criteria, eliminating the need for a special franchise for WMF
 employees.


On a completely personal level I actually think the requirements could be
lowered. We already had at least 1 individual who I think was a perfect fit
for the FDC for example but was unable to run and had to move himself to
ineligible because of the edit requirements (he may have had over 150 edits
this year and be very active in the movement as a whole but he did not have
the 20 edits in the past 6 months required).  However the committee decided
not to do so and that is their prerogative.

Unfortunately it appears that anyone interested in adjusting the criteria
 will need perfecting timing while broaching this subject next year.


This is why Greg (and myself. and the election committee from last
year who made
a proposal http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Standing_Election_Committee,
and from what I've seen the election committee from this year)  want to
have the board create a standing committee. That standing committee would
be empowered to have this discussion at any point and to discuss the
positives and negatives both themselves and with the community and make a
decision. They are much less likely to run into the problem that a one off
committee has where decisions need to be discussed and made and quickly so
that they can get other logistics in place.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Next steps regarding WMF-community disputes about deployments

2015-04-23 Thread James Alexander
James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Pete,

 Philippe is on vacation, so I'm forwarding this to Rachel.

 Pine


He pops in every once in a while during his break but while he is away
Maggie and I are splitting his work up (and this is, for better or worse,
well before Rachel's time).



 On Apr 22, 2015 11:59 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:

  Philippe, can you address what you were talking about here last fall --
 was
  the draft feature, and the way it directed new contributors toward the
  Articles for Creation process, the thing you alluded to, that WMF did in
  response to ACTRIAL?
 
  If so -- has there been any study of whether its intended outcomes panned
  out? If not -- could you outline what you meant by [WMF] proposed and
  built a set of tools to directly address that problem without
 compromising
  the core value of openness?
 
  Pete
  [[User:Peteforsyth]]
 


I do not believe he was talking about the Draft feature, which came later.
I think he was referring to the Page Curation
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Curation tool which I know for a fact
was created in direct response to ACTRIAL because one of the big complaints
was the difficulty with patrolling new pages. While I wasn't directly
involved it was one of the first software products I remember (either as a
community member or staff member) the Foundation trying to engage closely
with the community throughout it's development to create something that
would work well. I also think it was the first product with a Community
Liaison (who, incidentally, had been the most active page patroller for
multiple years before as a community member).
___
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] Design of BoT election banner

2015-04-22 Thread James Alexander
Aye, I asked a designer to give some nice options and presented them to the
committee. While there are certainly some people who have not liked the
banner I have generally heard good feedback overall from community members
(significantly more good then bad) and have made adjustments to the banner
to make it more accessible after some comments over the past 2 days. The
banner is certainly a bit more colorful then most but that is, indeed, very
much on purpose.

The board specifically asked Philippe and I to create some banners that are
a bit flashier so that we could draw attention to the call for candidates
(and the desire for diversity) and, later, the election itself. There was a
strong concern that the traditional banners were significantly harder to
notice and pay attention too and that drawing your eye was important for
this work.

There is no doubt that *any* banner gets complaints and is at some level
intrusive. However, I will say that it was important to me, personally, not
too be 'too' flashy. This is an election banner, not a fundraising banner,
and that's why I made it clear to our designer that it had to be smaller
and 'relatively' simple comparatively (this is actually smaller then
many/most banners that are shown for non-fundraising purposes just
brighter) and I think we came to a safe balance.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I should note it was a WMF design consultant that did this and not a
 volunteer (well - that it was not a committee volunteer I can verify). My
 understanding was they were working from UX team's guidelines as they
 design other banners for WMF. The request that we received was to go with a
 banner design that was intentionally not the same as others. However, I
 will pass the notes along for the next designs.

 Also, I recognize it wasn't about the banner's existence or performance - I
 meant that I hear complaints about the design of nearly every banner that
 goes up. I cannot, off the top of my head, think of a recent banner that I
 haven't heard a few folks offer opinions about improving the look of. My
 personal opinion is that it's an ongoing process, and the banners used
 often reflect a snapshot in strategies being tried at that exact moment.

 -greg

 On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Szymon Grabarczuk 
 tar.locesil...@gmail.com wrote:

  Oh, it's not about the idea of banners or about their usual performance,
  it's about this particular ribbon. When I set anonnotice or sitenotice
 on a
  big wiki, I aim the statement to be aligned with UX... discoveries. Don't
  set extensive dark backgrounds (unless it's about to be
  accessibility-oriented), use one colour palette, don't use many icons,
  borders or any additional/unnecessary/redundant elements in general, be
  consistent. WMF has UX team (it even has a Visual Experience Designer), I
  kindly suggest to watch their efforts and make our users benefit from
 that.
 
  On 22 April 2015 at 16:58, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.com
  wrote:
 
   To be clear by our banners I meant Wikimedia banners - not elections
   banners. ;)
  
   -greg
  
   On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Gregory Varnum 
  gregory.var...@gmail.com
   
   wrote:
  
I appreciate that there are basically always concerns with our
 banners.
Generally, I hear from volunteers on nearly every banner we use. ;)
   
That said, it would be helpful to have some more constructive
 feedback
  to
pass along to the next committee. What exactly would you suggest be
changed? Passing along the note and some people disliked the
 banners
  is
unlikely to produce much actual change.
   
Anything specific we can pass along? Also, any examples of
 alternatives
can be saved and passed along as well.
   
-greg (User:Varnent)
Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
   
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Szymon Grabarczuk 
tar.locesil...@gmail.com wrote:
   
I must agree with that. I've received clearly negative feedback from
several volunteers.
   
On 22 April 2015 at 13:18, Amir Ladsgroup ladsgr...@gmail.com
  wrote:
   
 It's horribly ugly, I expected more.

 I don't want to de-value someone's work (a person or persons that
 I
don't
 know) but we had way better designs before.


 Best
 --
 Amir
 ___
 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
   
   
   
   
--
*Szymon Grabarczuk*
   
Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU
Head of Research  Development Group, Wikimedia Polska

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright status of the mobile application button icons?

2015-04-18 Thread James Alexander
The WMF Logos are now all or almost all released under cc-by-sa 3.0 now as
well rather then All Rights Reserved. I think you should be fine but if you
want to be double sure you can email tradema...@wikimedia.org with what
you're thinking and they are very good at getting back to you.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On 18 April 2015 at 11:32, Aleksey Bilogur aleksey.bilo...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  I want to use it to illustrate something I'm building in the Wikipedia
  domain on the en-wiki, so I'd like to know this for sure. Who's a good
  person to ask; or, will they come here instead? :)
 
  I thought that WMF logos can be used freely within the projects, however
  that's arranged legally, and thought it was strange that this would be an
  exception.


 You can use Wikimedia trademarks on a Wikimedia site without asking anyone.
 See here:
 https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_policy#trademark-allowed

 Dan

 --
 Dan Garry
 Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps
 Wikimedia Foundation
 ___
 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] A transition and a new chapter.

2015-04-13 Thread James Alexander
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:53 AM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

  Denver that a departure from a role like this only allow you to take on
 different roles ;).


Remember that a departure auto correct can be both a dangerous and
wondrous thing.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] A transition and a new chapter.

2015-04-13 Thread James Alexander
I know you will find an interesting and awesome next chapter but it is 
certainly a bittersweet pill to see you heading out. I've enjoyed working 
alongside you for the past 5 years from debates about jimbo banners to what 
show we should play at Science Tuesday. You have been a huge presence in the 
movement since it's very creation and you better not completely disappear. 
Denver that a departure from a role like this only allow you to take on 
different roles ;). 

I'll have time to do this more later this month I'm sure but may your next 
adventure be as or more fulfilling then your last :).

Sent from my iPhone


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
+1 415-839-6885 x6716


 On Apr 13, 2015, at 11:27, Brion Vibber bvib...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 It's been a long journey -- I remember that 2007 office well, and the crazy
 times before even that. :)
 
 Best of luck on what's next!
 
 -- brion
 On Apr 13, 2015 11:12 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 Hi all --
 
 As Lila noted, since January 2008 I've worn many hats at the Wikimedia
 Foundation, and in the six years before that I was a Wikipedian,
 MediaWiki developer, and member of the WMF board of trustees. I became
 involved in Wikipedia when I was 22 years old. :) The Wikimedia
 movement has accomplished amazing things, but I believe it's time now
 for me to do something different and new.
 
 It's been a long and incredible journey, and one I am privileged to
 have helped to shape. When I joined the Foundation in December 2007 we
 were a staff of a dozen people, with barely enough funds to keep the
 lights on. Since then, we've tackled challenges of a complexity and
 scale faced by few other organisations. In doing so, we’ve been
 generously supported by people all over the world who are grateful for
 the gift of free knowledge.
 
 I’m proud of and happy with what we've achieved. Reaching people on
 mobile. Pioneering new approaches working with universities.
 Painstakingly building a visual editing experience on top of wikitext.
 :) I’m glad we’ve taken a stand when it matters (SOPA blackout, NSA
 lawsuit) and that we don’t shy away from complex issues such as
 community health and diversity.
 
 I’m excited that Wikidata is growing in leaps and bounds with the help
 of Wikimedia Germany, and that more and more powerful tools and
 services are being built on the basis of Wikimedia APIs and data. I’ve
 always believed that Wikimedia chapter and affiliate organizations are
 key to the success of the movement, and I hope they are going to truly
 thrive in years to come.
 
 But it's time. As the leadership team begins to coalesce under Lila, I
 want to open up space for the organization to learn and explore anew
 -- and I’d like to rediscover for myself what it means to tackle
 challenges outside of my areas of comfort and familiarity.
 
 I’m very interested in the technical challenges of federated
 collaboration, and am looking forward to getting my hands dirty in
 that domain. I also want to explore how to make patterns of ethics,
 policy, and self-governance more accessible and re-usable for
 communities. In short, I’m itching to immerse myself in new problem
 spaces and new ideas.
 
 Lila, Damon, Terry, myself and others in the org have been discussing
 how to organize product going forward to set the org up for success in
 the years to come, and we’ll have an update on that very soon. This is
 a very natural point for me to pursue something new.
 
 What Wikimedia does in the world is wonderful  important. I’m sure I
 will continue to cross paths with many of you in future as I continue
 to move in free culture circles, and I very much look forward to it.
 
 I’ll continue to be @ WMF full-time through April, and will make
 myself available as necessary afterwards, for when the org needs human
 institutional memory that surpasses digital archives. I wish you all
 success and joy :-)
 
 Love,
 
 Erik
 --
 Erik Möller
 VP of Product  Strategy, Wikimedia Foundation
 
 ___
 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] Access to Private Information Policy: How Long Will This Be Left a Question Mark?

2015-04-12 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Trilium,

 My understanding is that the new policy is now active, meaning that
 identification documents are not required for checkusers and oversighters.
 I believe that identification documents are still required for WMF Board,
 FDC, Board Elections Committee, and Board Audit Committee appointments.

 Can you explain what it is that worries you about this change in policy for
 checkusers and oversighters?


tldr: It isn't rolled out yet, however I'm hoping to do so during my free
moments over the next month as we set up the election.


Actually, the policy is not yet active for anyone and identification is
still required from checkusers and oversighters. Because of logistical
(including that we needed to have a tool for the sign off and some
adjustments to the confidentiality agreement itself to ensure it made more
sense) and resource (both the lawyers involved and the CA staff have been
slammed for the past year) issues the speed moving forward has been
incredibly slow. The confidentiality agreement text has final approval from
meta now (I haven't updated meta but I will early this week), at this point
the only thing left is for translation of the agreement and for me to write
up the announcements the teams who are affected and then notify them. That
will start the 3 month time window and I hope to do so very soon. The
upcoming board election is my number one priority, however this is my 2nd.

There is no doubt that we would have preferred to have finished this long
ago at this point. However in the end the combination of figuring out
exactly how to do the agreement and just finding time to do the necessary
steps prevented us from going forward how we wanted too. We had to make
quite a few compromises from how it was originally envisioned technically
both throwing out the original idea of a unique tool to do it (in favor of
using Phabricator legal pad) and not being able to do everything we
originally expected in Phabricator. For better or worse the people
responsible for the rollout on both the Legal and CA side are also some of
the most over scheduled members of those teams during the past year and so
the speed of advancement hasn't been what we'd like because other
responsibilities had to take priority given that the existing policy was
still in place.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Q on the 2013 elections re voter breakdown

2015-04-06 Thread James Alexander
Aye, as Katie said we do not keep track of who voted under what
requirements (and many of them are, indeed, eligible under multiple
requirements). You can see a list at
https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/list/290 and probably
surmise some of it from there but once they voted, if they were eligible,
they went into one giant bucket.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Katie Chan k...@ktchan.info wrote:

 On 06/04/2015 18:14, Denny Vrandečić wrote:
  Hi,
 
  regarding the Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013, I was trying to find a
  breakdown of the voters, i.e. how many voted based on which requirements,
  i.e. as editors, developers, staff and contractors, and board members,
 but
  I could not find anything.
 
  I would appreciate a pointer to that data.

 As far as I can remember, that's not something that's collected. A list
 of eligible voters are created and fed to the software, which either let
 or don't let someone vote. All votes are recorded the same regardless of
 how someone is qualified to vote, which may of course be via more than
 one way.

 Katie


 --
 Katie Chan
 Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the
 author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the
 author is associated with or employed by.


 Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
 - Heinrich Heine

 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 http://www.avast.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] 60 Minutes episode link

2015-04-05 Thread James Alexander
Ivan: I think we were told the link should be without country restrictions.
Do you get a 'not available in your country' type warning when you go?

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Ivan Martínez gala...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks for sharing Kevin. In countries like mine CBS is not available for
 free.
 Regards,

 2015-04-05 19:17 GMT-05:00 Kevin Rutherford ktr...@hotmail.com:

  Hey all,
 
  Here is a link to the segment that just aired earlier tonight that
  Katherine mentioned earlier today. There are also some bonus bits on the
  side, and it lasts for under fifteen minutes, so check it out when you
 have
  a moment as it features a lot of footage from last year’s Wikimania:
 
 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/wikipedia-jimmy-wales-morley-safer-60-minutes/
 
  Kevin Rutherford
  Ktr101
  ___
  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




 --
 *Iván Martínez*



 *Wikimanía 2015 Chief CoordinatorUser:ProtoplasmaKid
 @protoplasmakidhttp://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org
 http://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org*

 Hemos creado la más grande colección de conocimiento compartido. Ayuda a
 proteger a Wikipedia, dona ahora:
 https://donate.wikimedia.org
 ___
 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] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

2015-03-13 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 I'm generally supportive of this legal action, but I am troubled by this
 statement:

 I trust our legal team to make decisions about what legal actions to
 participate in.

 In general I think highly of Michelle, but this statement fits a
 long-running pattern I percieve in WMF governance of the board being
 deferential to the ED and staff. This goes back to Sue's tenure and
 possibly longer. I feel that the Board should respectfully ask tough
 questions about staff recommendations. Had the board done so, we might all
 have been saved from the MediaViewer, VisualEditor, and other product
 dramas because the Board would have been vigilant about project selection
 and quality control. WMF needs an activist board. All of the guidance that
 I read about boards in general says that good boards do due diligance, and
 I would encourage the WMF board to be proactive and ask tough questions.
 This can be done while maintaining a positive and respectful atmosphere.

 Thank you,

 Pine


I think I would disagree Pine. Our board will always have a bit of an odd
place because of our movement (this is not a bad thing) and will therefore
be more hands on, however, a good board needs to be about oversight and
strategic direction. They are NOT, very explicitly NOT about day to day
management and they can not be because if they are they are unable to focus
on the strategic direction part that is their primary responsibility. This
includes the fact that while they should be consulted and notified about
major decisions and actions (just like they were here, and if they had said
that this was a bad mood I imagine that the staff would have reconsidered
:) ). They should not be having votes or making resolutions about staff
decisions like that, that is not the boards role. It is also not their role
to challenge the staff in public, so therefore the fact that you see them
saying they trust the staff to do X or Y does not actually mean that they
are not challenging them behind the scenes and giving them a hard
time/making them adjust things.

Also, the only individual employee in the entire organization they oversee
is the CEO/ED and it is through him or her that they do their work. If they
think the organization is going in the wrong direction and needs correction
then they should certainly take action (since they are ultimately
responsible) but they work with the ED or they get rid of them if the ED
isn't working with them.  This is an important separation between the staff
and the board and further encourages their distinct roles.

Now this IS a bit different for very small organizations (including many of
our chapters for example) but the foundation has been large enough to need
the separation for quite some time now (this isn't a new thing because of
our recent growth, I would say that WMDE and probably a couple of the other
chapters are also at this level). I DO think we have an activist board,
that's a good thing (not a bad thing) but I'm not sure you'd generally SEE
when they decide to be activists and that is ALSO a good thing, not a bad
thing. The board and staff disagreeing publicly and trying to hash out
their differences causes enormous rifts within the organization and the
community that are even harder to heal then the current ones between the
foundation and the community (which we most definitely need to heal).

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

2015-03-12 Thread James Alexander
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:12 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:

  A page on Meta-Wiki
 collecting information about this lawsuit might be nice to have.


When we were rolling out I put the FAQ at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_v._National_Security_Agency/FAQ
for translation etc. The base page is currently just a redirect until there
was more to put there but could certainly get used.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

2015-03-10 Thread James Alexander
Aye, I also only have anecdotal evidince at this point (from my father who
has been messaging me and myself) but the comments I've seen in the
american press have been 10:1 (higher on tech sites) with generally more
thoughtful comments then usual and where there are critiques they are not
bad ones. So far it looks like folks are very supportive of it.

This of course comes with the usual caveats of possible filter bubbles and
commenters on american news sites not necessarily equating to a range of
american views.

James


On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:

 It's difficult to overstate how much people love us. We tell them
 everything about everything, and we're mostly right and try to stay
 neutral. But it's all written by just people! So it's cosy as well.

 With SOPA, we discovered that: when Wikipedia says you suck, you *suck*.

 So I'd expect that this will only look good for us. But I don't claim
 to have numbers to this effect.

 On 10 March 2015 at 19:55, Johan Jönsson brevlis...@gmail.com wrote:
  2015-03-10 8:53 GMT+01:00 Michelle Paulson mpaul...@wikimedia.org:
 
  Hi All,
 
  I’m writing to let you know that today the Wikimedia Foundation[1] is
  filing suit against the National Security Agency
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency, the
 Department
  of
  Justice 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Justice
  ,
  and the U.S. Attorney General
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Attorney_General[2] in
 order
  to challenge certain mass surveillance practices carried out by the U.S.
  government. We believe these practices are impinging the freedom to
 learn,
  inquire, and explore on Wikimedia sites.
 
  Since the 2013 mass surveillance disclosures, we’ve heard concerns from
 the
  community about privacy on Wikipedia. This lawsuit is a step towards
  addressing the community's justified concerns. We believe that the
  surveillance methods being employed by the NSA under the authority of
 the
  FISA
  Amendments Act
  
 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act_of_1978_Amendments_Act_of_2008
  
  negatively impact our users' ability and willingness to participate in
 our
  projects. Today, we fight back.
 
  An op-ed
  
 
 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/opinion/stop-spying-on-wikipedia-users.html?_r=0
  
  by Lila and Jimmy about the lawsuit, and Wikimedia's stance on
 government
  surveillance, appeared in The New York Times this morning.
 Additionally, we
  just published a blog post
  https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/10/wikimedia-v-nsa/ with more
  information about the suit. (The post will also up on Meta for
  translation).
 
 
  Curious question, by the way: how controversial would you expect this
 move
  to be domestically? From e.g. a Swedish perspective, the NSA is an
  intelligence agency of a foreign power and the other mentioned
  organizations are either largely uncontroversial and seen in a positive
  light (Amnesty, PEN, HRW) or unknown, but will it affect how the WMF is
  seen in the US?
 
  //Johan Jönsson
  --
  ___
  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] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-13 Thread James Alexander
Yeah, it seems like they have the deed in a bunch of languages now but the
actual full license is officially only in En,no and fi (
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode#languages )

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:

 According to the footer at:
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
 CC-BY-SA 4.0 is currently available in 34 languages/language variants:
 Castellano http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.es
 Castellano (España) 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.es_ES Català 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ca Dansk 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.da Deutsch 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.de English 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en Esperanto 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.eo français 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.frGalego 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.gl hrvatski 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.hr Indonesia 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.id Italiano 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.it Latviski 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.lv Lietuvių 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.lt Magyar 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.hu Melayu 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ms Nederlands 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.nl Norsk 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.no polski 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.pl Português 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.pt Português (BR) 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.pt_BR Suomeksi 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.fi svenska 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.sv Türkçe 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.tr íslenska 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.isčesky 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.cs Ελληνικά 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.el русский 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ru українська 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.uk العربية 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ar پارسی 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.fa 日本語 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ja 華語 (台灣) 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.zh_TW 한국어 
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.ko .

 Thanks,
 Mike

  On 12 Feb 2015, at 20:26, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
  CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?)
 so
  it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
  traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
  Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)
 
  [To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
  *acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
  be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more
 languages
  and a movement-wide discussion.]
 
  Luis
 
  On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com mailto:
 wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Hi,
 
  Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing
 increasing
  amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would
 like us
  to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
  with new content where possible.
 
  I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
  deconflict licenses.
 
  Thanks,
  Pine
  On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
  Hi, Rupert-
 
  I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0
 at
  roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
  different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
  Foundation
  content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
  across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this
 jump on
  the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for
 example
  
 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiriesdiff=prevoldid=622093759
 
  .)
 
  WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
  issued
  a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
  understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
  weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
  https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Legal_Tools_Translation#4.0[2].
 
  Realistically,
  given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-13 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:05 PM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 Yeah, it seems like they have the deed in a bunch of languages now but the
 actual full license is officially only in En,no and fi (
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode#languages )

 James Alexander
 Legal and Community Advocacy
 Wikimedia Foundation
 (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


errr... for the record I'm not sure why this sent now... it was written
before Kat had said this exact same thing...

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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: It's the end

2014-12-19 Thread James Alexander
Also: We've actually had the DC Address for a couple years now, it's for a
check processing service (Years ago they were processed by hand at the
office but that took a lot longer and was no longer the most cost or time
efficient way to do it).

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Pharos pharosofalexand...@gmail.com
wrote:

 For those unfamiliar with the glories of the United States Postal Service,
 a P.O. Box is simply a rented mail slot in a public post office.

 Thanks,
 Pharos

 On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
 it...@wikimedia.org.il wrote:
 
  Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
  P.O. Box 98204
  Washington, DC 20090-8204
 
  We have a new office at D.C? :)
 
 
 
  *Regards,Itzik Edri*
  Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
  +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
  Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
  sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia don...@wikimedia.org
  Date: Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 8:18 PM
  Subject: It's the end
  To: itz...@wikimedia.org.il
 
  *If all our past donors simply gave again today, we wouldn't have to
 worry
  about fundraising for the rest of the year.*
 
  Dear Itzik,
 
  This is the last email reminder you'll receive. We hope the response to
  today's email will let us end the fundraiser. Please take one minute to
  keep Wikipedia online and ad-free another year
  
 
 http://links.email.donate.wikimedia.org/ctt?kn=6ms=NDc2NjQ5MTYS1r=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1b=0j=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0mt=1rt=0
  
  .
 
  To protect our independence, we'll never run ads. We receive no
 government
  funds. We survive on donations from our readers. If all our past donors
  simply gave again today, we could end the fundraiser. Please help us
 forget
  fundraising and get back to improving Wikipedia.
 
  We are deeply grateful for your past support. This year, please consider
  making another donation to protect and sustain Wikipedia
  
 
 http://links.email.donate.wikimedia.org/ctt?kn=6ms=NDc2NjQ5MTYS1r=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1b=0j=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0mt=1rt=0
  
  .
 
  Click to donate $5 right away.
  
 
 http://links.email.donate.wikimedia.org/ctt?kn=2ms=NDc2NjQ5MTYS1r=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1b=0j=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0mt=1rt=0
  
 
  Click to donate $25 right away.
  
 
 http://links.email.donate.wikimedia.org/ctt?kn=1ms=NDc2NjQ5MTYS1r=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1b=0j=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0mt=1rt=0
  
 
  Click to donate $50 right away.
  
 
 http://links.email.donate.wikimedia.org/ctt?kn=5ms=NDc2NjQ5MTYS1r=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1b=0j=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0mt=1rt=0
  
 
  Or click to donate another amount.
  
 
 http://links.email.donate.wikimedia.org/ctt?kn=7ms=NDc2NjQ5MTYS1r=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1b=0j=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0mt=1rt=0
  
 
  Thank you,
  Jimmy Wales
  Wikipedia Founder
*DONATE NOW »*
  
 
 http://links.email.donate.wikimedia.org/ctt?kn=6ms=NDc2NjQ5MTYS1r=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1b=0j=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0mt=1rt=0
  
  --
 
  You are receiving this email at itz...@wikimedia.org.il as a valued
 donor
  of the Wikimedia Foundation. If you do not wish to receive any future
  emails from the Wikimedia Foundation, unsubscribe instantly
  
 
 http://wikimedia.pages04.net/WMFUnsubscribe/Unsubscribe?spMailingID=47664916spUserID=NjI3MjkzMTU0NzAS1spJobID=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0spReportId=NTgzNjIxMTAzS0
  
  .
 
  Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
  P.O. Box 98204
  Washington, DC 20090-8204
  United States of America
 
  enUS14
  ___
  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: It's the end

2014-12-19 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Brad Courcelles courcellesw...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Perhaps because that is the address they want people to use if they are
 mailing in a check for a donation?


Obviously not in Fundraising so grain of salt but I think that's exactly
the reason. If someone is using the address on a donation email it's
usually for a donation (and any real mail that gets sent there can likely
be forwarded on to us easily).

James [Switching to personal account since this isn't my work anymore]
___
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] Commons copyright extremism

2014-12-11 Thread James Alexander
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 P.S. Stephen, you are young and handsome, in fact rather dishy to my
 ageing eyes. Good for you. Keep in mind that your fellow volunteers
 might not have been born so lucky, and that being young and pretty all
 too soon passes into memory, sigh.


Fæ, this is not acceptable for the list (or for that matter on wiki).
Stephen's neckbeard comment certainly wasn't helpful either but it's no
excuse.

James
___
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] [Wikimedia France] WikiCheese crowdfunding - Let's photograph 'em all

2014-11-24 Thread James Alexander
This is an awesome idea Christophe! I'm only jealous that I'm not in France
to take part (in the editing... editing... in no way do I want to be there
mostly for the eating of course).

Also, KissKissBankBank is an amazing name for a crowd funding site.

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Christophe Henner 
christophe.hen...@gmail.com wrote:

 Good news everyone,

 Cheese articles are gonna get improved!

 As french, it was dreadful for us to see so few illustrations of cheese on
 Wikipedia. This is about to change.

 A group of french Wikimedians, lead by Pierre-Yves Beaudouin, designed a
 project to photograph many cheeses, up to 200 for the moment.

 This project is perticular as we aim to have it found through a french
 crowdfunding platform, KissKissBankBank.

 Of course Wikimedia France could have funded it itself, but we wanted to
 use the project as a way to get the larger audience aware of their ability
 to contribute and to give a fun image of contributing.

 The project in few words iss follow :
 * 10 cheeses per session
 * During the session the cheeses are photographed and their articles
 improved
 * During the sessions experimented wikimedian would train new editors
 * At every session every participant would enjoy eating good cheese too

 If you want to read more, or even contribute, about the project you can go
 on KissKissBankBank :
 http://www.kisskissbankbank.com/fr/projects/wikicheese


 If you have any questions, please feel free to shoot them on or off list.

 All the best,

 --
 Christophe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@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] Re-licensing Wikimedia logos on Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0

2014-10-30 Thread James Alexander
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:48 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com
wrote:



 The license is clear, and wmf is an expert in these licenses . So a
 previous trademark is void in the respect where it restricts what is
 defined in the license?

 Rupert


I'm sorry, I don't completely understand the question but if I understand
it correctly: I do in fact believe that they are experts in these licenses
and do in fact know what they are doing here. However copyright law and
trademark law are completely independent, you can very easily be allowed to
do something under copyright law and not allowed to do it under trademark
law (and vice versa) these are completely and utterly independent.

The relicensing of the logos (under copyright law) does not affect the
trademark policy or any of the Wikimedia Foundation's rights under
trademark law... at all. This is just like the fact that the coca-cola logo
may or may not be Public Domain copyright wise does not mean that someone
can make a soda, slap the coca-cola logo on it and be safe (or, in fact,
sell almost anything with the coca-cola logo on it because it's so widely
recognized that it would be confusing even outside of the soda sphere).

Just as an example to be clear: I don't think i've ever seen the foundation
send a takedown to someone using our logos under copyright law, they were
always sent because someone was abusing the trademark (pretending to be
something official for example). Nothing changes about these takedowns,
they are still completely enforceable and completely legitimate.

There is no doubt that the distinction between copyright and trademark law
can confuse (this is one of the reasons most organizations, including
Creative Commons as I said earlier, keep the copyright more restricted)
especially since they often use very similar terms (license, intellectual
property, registration etc) but in the end it's fairly simple: they do not
affect each other. Whether something is copyrighted (or even copyrightable)
is completely independent, and unrelated, to whether it is trademarked (or
trademarkable).

James
___
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] Re-licensing Wikimedia logos on Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0

2014-10-29 Thread James Alexander
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Allan J. Aguilar ral...@vmail.me wrote:

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA512

 On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:15:17 -0500
 Yana Welinder ywelin...@wikimedia.org wrote:
  To address Allan's question, this does not affect the trademark
  status of the logos as governed by the new trademark policy:
  https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_policy.
 

 Thank you, Yana.

 However, as someone who understand little about copyright and
 trademarks, for me it is difficult to understand how can a logo be used
 commercially and not at the same time, and how can a logo be edited in
 any but at the same time it only can be published according to specific
 visual guidelines.

 Are the logos Free Cultural Works (as defined by Erik Möller on
 http://freedomdefined.org) or not?


I don't think Erik was completely thinking about trademarks when he wrote
that but I would say no, essentially nothing covered by a trademark  would
completely meet that definition. (and there would be major issues in my
mind with not covering our major logos by trademark) Even the Creative
Commons logos doesn't (for that matter I don't think the CC Logo is even
under a CC License, at least not a by-sa one).

James

[not speaking for Legal/WMF etc]
___
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] Wikimedia Foundation Audit - June 30, 2014

2014-10-13 Thread James Alexander
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Garfield,

 Thanks for the update.

 Is there public documentation somewhere about WMF investment policy? Who
 manages the investments, how was that firm or people chosen, and how often
 is the performance and risk of the portfolio and the investment manager
 reviewed by the Board? I am particularly interested in making sure that the
 investments chosen are in alignment with the values of the Foundation and
 have suitable risk levels, and I hope that the Board reviews these issues
 periodically.


Hey Pine, it looks like you may be looking for
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Investment_Policy
and https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Investment_Guidance.

I will say that as someone on the internal 401k committee ( employee
retirement program) mission and values driven decisions are incredibly
difficult to balance well with our legal fiduciary responsibility and so
always ended up having to be a secondary (though not ignored) issue. That
is, however, a bit of a different case then the greater WMF investments
since our main job is to make sure good 'options' are available for the
staff to choose from rather then actually controlling their money.


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Quarterly goals for WMF Legal

2014-10-10 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Kirill, my understanding is that Affcom functions under the Legal
 department, much like the Individual Engagement Grants Committee functions
 under the Grantmaking department. Is that so, and if not, which department
 is responsible for Affcom.


Those two committees are completely different. Affcom is a self operating
committee created by the board and, as far as know, reports directly to the
board while IEG is a committee created by staff (in this case the
Grantmaking group) and they, understandably, run it (I have no knowledge of
how much community members like yourself help do so of course and it
certainly wouldn't surprise me if it is also partially or mostly self
operating).

James
[While I work for LCA Affcom is in no way connected to my duties and I have
no inside knowledge about whether this is somehow correct/incorrect just
what I know from the years of watching]
___
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] Reminder: Damon Sicore office hours in 5 minutes

2014-10-09 Thread James Alexander
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

 Log of this office hours:
 http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-office/20141009.txt

 (Will also be posted on Meta)

 Risker=


Thanks Risker,

It Is indeed at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2014-10-09

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Board of Trustee elections

2014-10-06 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 5:12 AM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 A completely un deduped (and so is double+ counting anyone who is eligible
 on multiple wikis because of activity there) number is 207911 for 2013.

 Caveats:

 This number is quick and dirty and 'reasonable' as a starting point but
 far from perfect, among other things:

- It doesn't include 100% of the staff or developers, only the staff
who had staff rights or asked and developers who asked because they
couldn't vote in other ways). This is a relatively small amount of missing
people.
- It still includes bots and blocked users, because that was checked
later in the process. I, again, think this is a relatively small amount
given number of bots + blocked users with more then 300 edits relative to
the total. It is possible some of the bots are very active across the board
though which will be helped by the de dupping.
- It is not de dupped meaning it double+ counts people who were active
on many wikis or accounts, sometimes a lot (for example there are 7 entries
for my personal account, 7 for my work account, and 69 for the steward
DerHexer given global work). Sorting through the crap that the script spat
out is more then I'm willing to do at 5am but I will try to do this later
today and get this number down. My guess is this is in the 10k range.




So I was wrong about the extent of the de duplication. In the end there
were about *50124* unique people marked off on the voter list (again, like
above, that does still include some bots/blocked on multiple wiki users but
they are only counted once each)  so call it 50k.

Using that number:

   - With a total of 1809 valid votes that is about a 3.6% turnout.
   - We know that another 534 people authenticated to vote but did not
   actually cast a valid vote (and so most likely left after seeing the
   ballot)[1]. That would account for an additional 1%


[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013/Post_mortem#Voter_participation
___
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] Office Hours with VPE Damon Sicore - 9 October 2014 20:00 UTC / 13:00 PDT

2014-10-06 Thread James Alexander
Hi everyone,

As our new Vice President of Engineering, Damon Sicore, just announced in
his longer email to Wikimedia-l he will be having his first IRC Office
hours on Thursday, October 9th, at 20:00 UTC (13:00 PDT). This hour long
office hour is a chance to meet the new VPE and ask your burning questions.

The office hour will be held in #Wikimedia-office on the Freenode network.
You can find information on how to get online, including a link to a
webchat option if you don't have an IRC client, on the meta office hours
page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours#How_to_participate.
You can also find a time converter for the start of the hour at
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=20min=00sec=0day=09month=10year=2014
. Like most of our public office hours this one will be publicly logged and
should be posted on the meta office hour page shortly after it's conclusion.

If you want to know you more about Damon you can read the Wikimedia Blog
announcement
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/29/damon-sicore-joins-wmf-as-vice-president-of-engineering/
or check out his personal blog http://damon.sicore.com.

James

[[cross posted on wikitech-l and wikimedia-l]]

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Board of Trustee elections

2014-10-05 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com
wrote:

 (*) No official numbers exist... but I already opened one thread on
 transparency this week.


Just to clarify so that I know what you're looking and can try and
prioritize it. You are looking for the total number of eligible voters so
that we can determine the actual turn out percentage? It could be a bit of
a pain because of the lack of SUL and the fact that people can be eligible
on multiple wikis but if I assume that 'same name = duplicate' then it
shouldn't take too much manual jiggering after the scripts run. I will try
to do that this afternoon (Sunday).

I always intended to release more stats after the last election (and I know
you've asked before), sadly issues came up in the pipeline and other work
over came it priority wise so at the moment it would have to be in my
personal time I do still want too or to find someone else who is able too
:(.


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Board of Trustee elections

2014-10-05 Thread James Alexander
A completely un deduped (and so is double+ counting anyone who is eligible
on multiple wikis because of activity there) number is 207911 for 2013.

Caveats:

This number is quick and dirty and 'reasonable' as a starting point but far
from perfect, among other things:

   - It doesn't include 100% of the staff or developers, only the staff who
   had staff rights or asked and developers who asked because they couldn't
   vote in other ways). This is a relatively small amount of missing people.
   - It still includes bots and blocked users, because that was checked
   later in the process. I, again, think this is a relatively small amount
   given number of bots + blocked users with more then 300 edits relative to
   the total. It is possible some of the bots are very active across the board
   though which will be helped by the de dupping.
   - It is not de dupped meaning it double+ counts people who were active
   on many wikis or accounts, sometimes a lot (for example there are 7 entries
   for my personal account, 7 for my work account, and 69 for the steward
   DerHexer given global work). Sorting through the crap that the script spat
   out is more then I'm willing to do at 5am but I will try to do this later
   today and get this number down. My guess is this is in the 10k range.


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:36 AM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 (*) No official numbers exist... but I already opened one thread on
 transparency this week.


 Just to clarify so that I know what you're looking and can try and
 prioritize it. You are looking for the total number of eligible voters so
 that we can determine the actual turn out percentage? It could be a bit of
 a pain because of the lack of SUL and the fact that people can be eligible
 on multiple wikis but if I assume that 'same name = duplicate' then it
 shouldn't take too much manual jiggering after the scripts run. I will try
 to do that this afternoon (Sunday).

 I always intended to release more stats after the last election (and I
 know you've asked before), sadly issues came up in the pipeline and other
 work over came it priority wise so at the moment it would have to be in my
 personal time I do still want too or to find someone else who is able too
 :(.


 James Alexander
 Legal and Community Advocacy
 Wikimedia Foundation
 (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

___
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] Board of Trustee elections

2014-10-05 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 5:09 AM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net
wrote:

 I think the issue is that the employee vote is now a significant proportion
 of the electorate.  When this was originally set up, nobody complained too
 loudly about giving WMF staff the vote simply because their numbers were
 small and they were too small a constituency to sway the result on their
 own.  The number of voters choosing to exercise their suffrage is
 decreasing, while the number of staff are increasing.  While this
 illustrates a problem all on its own, it also means that WMF staff who may
 not be participants on the projects may now have enough pull to decide a
 closely fought election.

 I know it's too late to change the rules for this year, but I'd really
 recommend getting rid of the complex criteria for the next election, and
 dialing it back to a simple X number of edits, or Y number of patches
 rule.  Not only would this be simpler to administer and easier to
 understand, but I would imagine most of the WMF staff who care enough to
 actually vote would probably qualify through those criteria anyway.  A few
 worthy folk might miss out on the chance to lodge a ballot, but then
 that's going to be the case in any situation other than complete and
 universal suffrage.

 Cheers,
 Craig Franklin


First off, setting aside the question about what I (personally) think
should be the requirements I would say that it is in no way too late to
change the rules. The election is not until mid year next year (I think we
usually do it in June?) The election committee hasn't even been sat yet and
they will be the ones to decide that in the end (that is not to say that we
shouldn't have the discussion now too if people want, just that the
decision makers aren't even decided yet).

I don't have exact numbers, but I do remember that there are already very
few people who wanted to vote, were only eligible as staff, and couldn't.
Most of them were developers and so would be eligible via patches anyway
(and most of THEM were eligible by edit count as well), among the non
developers people like myself and Philippe refrained from voting because we
were working with the election committee and felt that most appropriate. I
don't believe there was an overwhelming vote of staff members in proportion
to the total.


Voter turn out is something I really want to see better though, it's
something that I know we've discussed in the office and I'm sure that the
election committee will have as a top priority. The biggest things I see
right now is finishing SUL unification which will allow us to have '1
click' voting (and not sending people to meta first to learn about the
election/candidates then to their undefined 'home wiki' to see if they can
vote) completely anecdotally that seems to have consistently scared a lot
of voters off and confused even some of our more experienced users (it also
seems to be a bigger complaint each year) SUL will allow us to just have
everyone click a start voting button on Meta and not have to go back to
their home wiki. I also seriously wonder about the joint FDC/Board ballot
giving people too much to look at, we know for example that over 500 people
'saw' the ballot but never submitted their vote.

I also really think notifications could be incredibly helpful to get the
word out, but so far that does not seem very likely to be available by then.


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Invitation to beta-test HHVM

2014-09-19 Thread James Alexander
Yeah, I can confirm this.

It appears that when you turn on HHVM it forces the default time setting to
be UTC, so if you're on a wiki which uses a non UTC default time zone
(usually the time zone of the region most using the language, we do this on
around 200 wikis) suddenly all of the times you are used to seeing (in the
history, recent changes, contributions, signature time stamps etc) change
what time they are showing which gets confusing.

This does not appear to happen if you have 'manually' set your time zone
(only if you are using the local default).

I'm going to file a bug now for it assuming someone else hasn't.

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se
 wrote:

 It has to do with timezone preferences. All times in latest changes and in
 my edits states time two hour wrong

 In am not sure what you mean with take timezone into account, I just
 clicked into the box as stated in your mail, and then all times changed,
 and when I took off the feature all times went back to correct time

 Anders

 Ori Livneh skrev 2014-09-19 09:46:

  On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Anders Wennersten 
 m...@anderswennersten.se wrote:

  I experienced no improved answer time, but all time stamps in Wikipedia
 for me become wrong making it impossible to use the feature. I would call
 this problem a thing that should have been found in an alpha text...
 Anders

  Hi Anders,

 Thanks for trying it out. Could you clarify what you mean? I don't see
 anything wrong, but I'm not very observant. If you're comparing the
 logged-in and logged-out views, did you remember to take into account the
 timezone offset preference (if set)?
 ___
 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] Invitation to beta-test HHVM

2014-09-19 Thread James Alexander
Bug filed at: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71036

To correct myself: It does NOT appear that the signature time zone is
affected, that is always the local wiki default as defined in
http://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/InitialiseSettings.php.txt no matter what you
set in appearances.

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 2:02 AM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 Yeah, I can confirm this.

 It appears that when you turn on HHVM it forces the default time setting
 to be UTC, so if you're on a wiki which uses a non UTC default time zone
 (usually the time zone of the region most using the language, we do this on
 around 200 wikis) suddenly all of the times you are used to seeing (in the
 history, recent changes, contributions, signature time stamps etc) change
 what time they are showing which gets confusing.

 This does not appear to happen if you have 'manually' set your time zone
 (only if you are using the local default).

 I'm going to file a bug now for it assuming someone else hasn't.

 James Alexander
 Legal and Community Advocacy
 Wikimedia Foundation
 (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

 On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Anders Wennersten 
 m...@anderswennersten.se wrote:

 It has to do with timezone preferences. All times in latest changes and
 in my edits states time two hour wrong

 In am not sure what you mean with take timezone into account, I just
 clicked into the box as stated in your mail, and then all times changed,
 and when I took off the feature all times went back to correct time

 Anders

 Ori Livneh skrev 2014-09-19 09:46:

  On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Anders Wennersten 
 m...@anderswennersten.se wrote:

  I experienced no improved answer time, but all time stamps in Wikipedia
 for me become wrong making it impossible to use the feature. I would
 call
 this problem a thing that should have been found in an alpha text...
 Anders

  Hi Anders,

 Thanks for trying it out. Could you clarify what you mean? I don't see
 anything wrong, but I'm not very observant. If you're comparing the
 logged-in and logged-out views, did you remember to take into account the
 timezone offset preference (if set)?
 ___
 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] Underwater photos and videos / WMRS Microgrants 2014

2014-07-19 Thread James Alexander
I think if you are going to be releasing images or video you would be
better using a Creative Commons license or similar. The RPL (like the GPL
it's based on) is significantly more designed for source code and programs
and the requirements make media much harder to reuse.

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote:
  Uh, wait. Please answer the question clearly and unambiguously. What
 exact
  license will the proposed contributions be under?
  On Jul 18, 2014 2:06 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:

 I think that the best one is Reciprocal Public License [1]. What do you
 think?

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_Public_License

 ___
 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] Where did noboards go

2014-07-15 Thread James Alexander
Hi Erlend,

Have you filed a request on bugzilla yet? That would generally be the right
place for all technical config requests (or issues you run into).

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Erlend Bjørtvedt erl...@wikimedia.no
wrote:

 I am sorry,

 but an admin at MediaWiki (?) needs to enable upload to the noboards site.

 We use this site to store all our documents relating to accounting,
 salaries, tax, etc.

 After the troubles mentioned, it is not any more possible to upload
 anything to this site.

 Do anyone have any idea of who, where, and how this admin rights can be
 changed so that we can upload?

 I am sorry to bother l-list with this, but at WMF and Meta there aren't any
 contact infos for this, whatsoever.


 best regards

 Erlend Bjørtvedt
 WMNO


 2014-07-01 18:58 GMT+02:00 Casey Brown li...@caseybrown.org:

  On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Casey Brown li...@caseybrown.org
 wrote:
   I reopened the bug that probably broke the wiki's configuration:
   https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31335
 
  This has since been fixed by Sam Reed. See the bug for more information.
 
  The new site address is https://noboard-chapters.wikimedia.org/ and
  previous links might not work, so make sure everyone with access to
  the wiki knows to update their bookmarks.
 
  --
  Casey Brown (Cbrown1023)
  caseybrown.org
 
  ___
  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
 



 --
 *Erlend Bjørtvedt*
 Nestleder, Wikimedia Norge
 Vice chairman, Wikimedia Norway
 Mob: +47 - 9225 9227
  http://no.wikimedia.org http://no.wikimedia.org/wiki/About_us
 ___
 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] Number of volunteers. (Was: How many volunteers (not editors) ...?)

2014-07-01 Thread James Alexander
Is sysop supposed to be an on wiki sysop?

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 5:23 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:

 Rjd0060 wrote:
 As for the Volunteer Coordinator, he was Cary Bass and left the
 Foundation some time ago. See
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Bastique
 or https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Cary_Bass .

 Indeed.

 There was also a Volunteer Development Coordinator position for a bit:
 https://www.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/87987.

 The original question remains unclear to me. How are volunteer positions
 which work for the Wikimedia Foundation defined? It seems unlikely we'll
 ever have completely accurate numbers here, but even ballparking is
 almost impossible without first establishing a very clear definition of
 who is and is not considered a volunteer and who is and is not considered
 working for the Wikimedia Foundation. And there are other important
 questions such as whether we're counting people or positions (e.g.,
 there is overlap between sysops and OTRS responders).

 MZMcBride



 ___
 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] Let Commons do what it knows best and use Wikidata for it and the rest

2014-06-17 Thread James Alexander
I believe they are generally supposed to be listed at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non-free_content which looks relatively up
to date, though it does not look like the resolution actually requires it.

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 9:10 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:

  exemption doctrine policy (incidentally does anyone know if there
  is a central list of these?)


 Yeah, I've often wished there was a central list at Meta (and I'm glad the
 legal team set up a central place for Alternate Disclosure Policies). But,
 at least there's Wikidata:

 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11160614#sitelinks-wikipedia

 -Pete
 [[User:Peteforsyth]]
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@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] Slide deck about Wikimedia?

2014-05-29 Thread James Alexander
I believe the list Sue is talking about (which has some nice presentations)
is at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_room/WMF_Presentations

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hi Yves,

 I've been meaning to reply as well but had forgotten. So you know: the
 Wikimedia Foundation tries to publish all our public, general decks on the
 WMF site, so that other people can use them or pieces of them, as they see
 fit. Not everything is there, but there should be lots of material you may
 find helpful.

 I don't have a link (on my phone) but perhaps if Tilman or somebody else
 who know where they're kept sees this note, they can send it to the list.
 If not, I'll do it later.

 Thanks,
 Sue
 On 28 May 2014 14:22, Yves Z zyzz...@outlook.com wrote:

  Thank you, Federico and Jean-Frédéric.  This is what I was looking for.
 
   From: jeanfrederic.w...@gmail.com
   Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 09:31:09 +0200
   To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Slide deck about Wikimedia?
  
   Hello,
  
   Hello, Where can I find recent presentations about Wikimedia and what
  each
of the main projects is for?  I visited outreach.wikimedia.org but
  didn't
see slides or overviews.  Thanks!
   
  
   You might want to check out 
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Presentations.
  
   It’s probably not super up-to-date, but many folks indicate a way to
 get
   the source ODP file  (usually by contacting them, SlideShare link,
 etc).
  
   --
   Jean-Frédéric
   ___
   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] Affiliation in username

2014-05-21 Thread James Alexander
Thanks so much for the help with this Fæ!

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 10 May 2014 19:02, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
  ... I'll take a look at Faebot keeping
  a table regularly synchronized on meta using the Google spreadsheets
  API.

 For anyone that may be interested in seeing which WMF employees have
 what advanced permissions, there is now a wikitable on meta
 automatically generated from the Google spreadsheet that the WMF
 maintains.

 The table is at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Advanced_Permissions

 I don't want to encourage folks to start relying on Google
 spreadsheets(!), however keeping spreadsheets like this in-sync with
 on-wiki tables is not a new issue. Anyone interested in how I did it
 can find a copy of the Python script at
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Faebot/code/advanced_permissions

 I have also asked for a meta bot flag, as I'm planning for Faebot to
 check/update the table once a week:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Requests_for_bot_status#Faebot

 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 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] Affiliation in username

2014-05-14 Thread James Alexander
I'm heading to bed but will follow up with you tomorrow from the office.
Publishing is on for that sheet at the moment (that's what I'm using to
show it through the link I gave) so not exactly sure what else you need but
I'd love if faebot was able to help keep it synced up on wiki.

Actually, others may have figured it out (I know the one on wiki works),
but I just noticed that particular link was broken somehow in my email
(sysadmin got added to the end). The correct, working, link is
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AvhjkTJIpW2zdDl1bVBuOU1jQUJwOHd5YmhmSzFaZHcsingle=truegid=5output=html



James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 10 May 2014 19:02, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
  On 21/04/2014, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org wrote:
  ...
  we ask for a use case for every rights request, you can see most of them
  here
 
 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AvhjkTJIpW2zdDl1bVBuOU1jQUJwOHd5YmhmSzFaZHcsingle=truegid=5output=htmlsysadmin
 
  James, if you open this spreadsheet and switch on publishing (go to
  File / Publish to the web...) then I'll take a look at Faebot keeping
  a table regularly synchronized on meta using the Google spreadsheets
  API.

 Ping.

 I would like to repeat my offer to add this extra level of openness to
 this information, my email might have been lost in the long thread. Is
 there a reason for not switching on publishing to the public
 spreadsheet so that the community can refer to a maintained wiki-table
 of the same data on meta rather than relying entirely on Google's
 excellent but closed-source collaboration tools?

 Thanks,
 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
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] Affiliation in username

2014-04-21 Thread James Alexander
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
 wrote:

  On 04/21/2014 12:07 PM, Nathan wrote:
   Of the 120 staffers that don't have a staff account, how many have
   accounts with (WMF) in the username - or accounts at all?
 
  I honestly do not know the numbers, though I'd wager most is close to
  reality - certainly any recent addition to the teams.
 
 
 Ah, interesting. I wonder why its necessary for most or all WMF staffers to
 have accounts with an explicit WMF affiliation.



Aye, given the nature of our work the vast majority of staff have a staff
account of some sort (not everyone uses separate accounts though we
strongly encourage them to). In the end almost everyone on staff has a
reason, at some point, to edit on a public wiki whether they are HR/Finance
( discussions or postings about FDC proposals/budget publications etc) or
technical/community/grant focused. For many that need actually tends to
lean towards meta and/or mediawiki only though a fair bit stretch elsewhere
on the projects ( engineering and community people especially ).

Philippe and I have worked hard to try and make the 'staff' user group as
it traditionally stands a very 'as needed' right and so the default is now
to give out no rights or smaller, more focused, rights (meta admin,
central notice admin, global interface editor etc) that fit their need. (
we ask for a use case for every rights request, you can see most of them
here
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AvhjkTJIpW2zdDl1bVBuOU1jQUJwOHd5YmhmSzFaZHcsingle=truegid=5output=htmlsysadmin
rights aren't on there because they are generally handled by
engineering).

Overall we don't actually require separate accounts at the moment but I
strongly encourage them, I think it behooves everyone to have a clear
distinction between 'personal' and 'work' actions and the separate accounts
help that significantly. I also think it helps in locking down access if
they depart the foundation at some point.

James

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Affiliation in username

2014-04-21 Thread James Alexander
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:

 Hi James,

 On 21 Apr 2014, at 19:16, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:

  Philippe and I have worked hard to try and make the 'staff' user group as
  it traditionally stands a very 'as needed' right and so the default is
 now
  to give out no rights or smaller, more focused, rights (meta admin,
  central notice admin, global interface editor etc) that fit their need. (
  we ask for a use case for every rights request, you can see most of them
  here
 
 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AvhjkTJIpW2zdDl1bVBuOU1jQUJwOHd5YmhmSzFaZHcsingle=truegid=5output=htmlsysadmin
  rights aren't on there because they are generally handled by
  engineering).

 Thanks for sharing that link. It didn't work for me the first time, but
 removing the output= parameter fixes that, so the working URL is:

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AvhjkTJIpW2zdDl1bVBuOU1jQUJwOHd5YmhmSzFaZHcsingle=truegid=5
 Please can this be turned onto an on-wiki document, rather than being a
 google doc, as it's quite an important one that should be transparent to
 the community as a whole! I'd be happy to help with the wikification if
 that would be useful.

 Thanks,
 Mike


Nemo was nice enough to add it to the the user groups page on meta so that
it's linked from there as well.

Right now it's on a google doc because it is a public view of the tracking
spreadsheet Philippe and I use (which includes staff whose rights requests
were denied or removed as well as some contact info and additional tracking
(for example for the formal staff rights themselves we give training on
what kind of approvals are needed for certain actions and record when that
was done) and so gets automatically updated as I update that. I originally
did it on a private wiki (I have a strong preference for wiki of some sort
vs google docs personally)  but the spreadsheet has just tended to be a
significantly easier tool for tracking and updating. I wouldn't want to
duplicate it on wiki unless we put my whole process there (otherwise it is
significantly more likely to get out of date) and to do that would require
some additional discussion and thinking.

James
___
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 FDC Proposal: we invite your participation

2014-04-06 Thread James Alexander
James,

You have continued this, and related, lines of questioning of multiple
staff members and of the community for quite some time now. It is clear
that you have not received an answer that you find satisfactory, and I
understand that, but may I ask what makes you think that you will receive
an answer that is satisfactory to you by continuing to ask the same
questions. It is possible, and in my opinion likely right now, that you
will never receive an answer that satisfies you given the realities of the
conversation.

My read of the discussions (and lack thereof) that have happened here and
elsewhere over the course of many years when you bring these topics up is
that the level of interest in pursuing your specific agenda is not only low
but, if anything, actively negative. That is not to say that many of us do
not, personally, agree with the goals that you espouse just that we do not
believe the foundation should be actively participating in them. Spreading
us too thin is not helpful for any of our goals and focus, including in
advocacy, is incredibly important.

I would encourage you, James, to move on from this line of discussion.
Continued work on it, whether it be via passive aggressive emails 'to'
staff members (while copying in a public mailing list), attempts to rally
up support through different mailing lists or via proposed surveys of the
community are unlikely to change the response that has been clear for at
least 5 years. I understand that you may not see these emails or proposals
in the way I described but I urge you look at them through others eyes.

James Alexander
User:Jamesofur


On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 4:47 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Geoff,

 Would you please clarify which of the advocacy topics below, if any,
 are precluded by the restrictions at

 https://web.archive.org/web/20120621122539/http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163392,00.html
 ?

 Since multiple people have claimed that some are without saying which,
 it would be very helpful to have some clarity from an authority. The
 topics were designed to address volunteer quality of life issues on
 which the Foundation has not been active because they were not
 considered when volunteer survey respondents were polled on their
 advocacy preferences. I am not interested in correcting those
 omissions with any topics which are precluded by IRS regulations.

 Thank you!

 1. Labor rights, e.g., linking to fixmyjob.com

 2. Support the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the
 Child and its protocols without reservation

 3. Increase infrastructure spending

 4. Increase education spending

 5. Public school class size reduction

 6. College subsidy with income-based repayment terms

 7. More steeply progressive taxation

 8. Negative interest on excess reserves

 9. Telecommuting

 10. Workweek length reduction

 11. Single-payer health care

 12. Renewable power purchase

 13. Increased data center hardware power efficiency

 14. Increased security against eavesdropping

 15. Metropolitan broadband

 16. Oppose monopolization of software, communications, publishing, and
 finance industries

 ___
 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] [Wikimania-l] Setting ticket prices

2014-03-26 Thread James Alexander
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Benjamin Lees emufarm...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:19 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  James,
 
  In the past you have supported a hardline position regarding
  publishing of private correspondence, and in circumstances when the
  reasons for publishing the private correspondence were of greater
  importance to the community than Rupert's private questions to Nathan,
  and lots of drama value too.
 
 
 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Durova/Proposed_decision#Private_correspondence
 

 Just to be clear for the record, that was James Forrester, not James
 Alexander.


Thanks Ben,

As emufarmers points out (sorry, I would have earlier but gmail compresses
this thread into the wikimania-l thread... I missed your email), but that
wasn't me. I stand by my opinion (knowing that not everyone agrees).

James
___
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] [Wikimania-l] Setting ticket prices

2014-03-23 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Carlos M. Colina
ma...@wikimedia.org.vewrote:

 Wait, are we in kindergarden? I think Rupert's email was sent off-list, so
 basically there is no need to bring it up to the list, regardless how
 related it is to the thread. Private discussions between two people should
 remain that, _private_, no?

 I just don't get it.

 M.


While in general that is the goal (private emails staying private) I would
say that in a case like this, no, you have no expectation of privacy when
you go 'off list' to, in my opinion, harass and intimidate someone about
what they did on the list. I think Nathan was completely reasonable to
bring it back on list and that MZs comment is completely correct. It's like
'taking it outside' of a bar to have a fight, the bar is completely
reasonable in banning you for it and it's still illegal.

Rupert's email was completely unacceptable and I'm glad Nathan brought it
to our attention rather then either getting into a prolonged off-list
debate that helps no one or letting it lie so that no one else was aware of
the attacks.

James


 El 23/03/2014 04:33 p.m., MZMcBride escribió:

  I just wanted to chime in here to say that, at least in a vacuum, I found
 Rupert's e-mail to be highly inappropriate and I found Nathan's response
 to it to be wholly appropriate.

 Rupert, I hope to never see a repeat of this incident, in which you
 attempt to badger a list participant and Wikimedia volunteer off-list with
 uninformed and irrelevant questions under the guise of saving bandwidth
 and faux concern. Cut it out.

 MZMcBride



 ___
 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


 --
 *Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua
 junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain.
 Carlos Manuel Colina
 Vicepresidente
 A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela
 RIF J-40129321-2
 +972-52-4869915
 www.wikimedia.org.ve

 ___
 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] Hotmail fatal bounces

2014-03-20 Thread James Alexander
For those interested it looks like this happened for at least a couple days
and was resolved yesterday (at least so much as we were removed from the
blacklist), the bug ( there was some discussion with ops prior to it trying
to track down the issue as well) is at
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62838.

James

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Richard Ames rich...@ames.id.au wrote:


 Hotmail has bounced many connections with a 'fatal' error code: 550
 SC-004. This happened at about 0015 on 19 March (UTC).

 Looking at Hotmail's error page at: http://mail.live.com/mail/
 troubleshooting.aspx#errors says it was rejected for Policy reasons

 The result is many (all?) hotmail users have been 'disabled' in the
 mailing list.

 List users can reactivate themselves at https://lists.wikimedia.org/
 mailman/options/wikimedia-l

 Regards, Richard.

 ___
 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] Office Hours with Gayle Karen Young Thursday (March 13th) 19:00 UTC (noon PDT)

2014-03-11 Thread James Alexander
Hi all,

Gayle Karen Young ( https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Gyoung ), the
Chief Talent and Culture Officer for the Wikimedia Foundation will be
hosting office hours on Thursday March 13th (2 days from this announcement)
at 19:00 UTC/Noon pacific. The office hours will be held on Freenode IRC in
the #wikimedia-office channel. There is no planned discussion topic and
this is meant as an open office hours and a chance to chat with Gayle.

You can find a link to a time converted and a webchat client to join the
conversation below and on the upcoming office hours page (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours#Upcoming_office_hours ).

James

Office hours start: 19:00 UTC 12:00 PDT Other times -
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=19min=00sec=0day=13month=03year=2014

Scheduled end: 20:00 UTC 13:00 PDT Other times -
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=20min=00sec=0day=13month=03year=2014

Webchat - http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#wikimedia-office


Office hours
James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
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] Non-free images in collaborations

2014-03-10 Thread James Alexander
I'm confused about what you mean? The Wikivoyage logo for example is
certainly marked as free
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikivoyage-logo.svg can you clarify?

James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:08 PM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote:

 @ Yana. You write But we hope to make them all freely licensed eventually
 and have already done so for newer logos (e.g. the new Wikivoyage logo).

 But commons does not reflect this
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Please advise?

 --
 James Heilman
 MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

 The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
 www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
 ___
 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] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done

2014-03-09 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote:

 But we close wiki. We not set wiki read only. Why should we use another
 therm than the procedure is called?


Because what we DO (no matter what we call it) is set it as Read Only, it
is still 100% accessible you just can't edit it. I think it does make sense
that 'read-only' is more understandable then 'close' which sounds like we
completely shut it off and you can't read it either.

James
___
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] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done

2014-03-09 Thread James Alexander
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote:

 Is it *just *can't edit? I believe at least we can't create a new acc in
 there. Closing is more then setting read only. We should use proper therms
 instead of those that more understandable by noobs. --Base


Well, then we can disagree on this. I don't believe 'closed' is any more
correct then 'read only' and I believe we should always strive to keep
language as understandable as possible to as many people as possible. We
don't always succeed, but we can always get better.

James
___
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] Wikimedia-l archives

2014-02-24 Thread James Alexander
Hi Cornelius,

There is a bug about this at the moment, we're not completely sure what it
is yet because the settings on the interface side appear correct. You can
still see the archives at
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.foundation however for now.

James

Bug: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61792



James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Cornelius Kibelka jckibe...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hi,

 I can't access the supposed-to-be-public archive of wikimedia-l anymore (
 http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/).

 What happened? Or I am doing anything wrong?

 Best
 Cornelius

 
 Cornelius Kibelka

 Twitter: @jaancornelius
 Mobile:+351-91-9860232 (Vodafone PT)
 German number currently offline
 ___
 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] Wikimedia Ukraine -- is everyone safe?

2014-02-23 Thread James Alexander
:( 

Not much else to say. Too many to die too many to face their end. Whatever side 
you're on he faced a patriot's death fighting for his beliefs. It should not 
be, but he should be remembered along with all those who stood their conscience.

My thoughts and prayers are with you all and his family in particular :(.

James 


Whether our lives and our deaths were for
peace and a new hope or for nothing we cannot say,
it is you who must say this.

We leave you our deaths. Give them their meaning.
We were young, they say. We have died; remember us.

--Archibald MacLeish

Sent from my iPhone


James Alexander
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
+1 415-839-6885 x6716


 On Feb 23, 2014, at 17:01, Maryana Pinchuk mpinc...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 For those of you who don't read Ukrainian, a quick ad-hoc translation of
 the blog post. So sorry for the loss of a fellow Ukrainian and such a
 bright young member of the Wikimedia movement :(
 
 * * *
 
 Wikipedian Igor Kostenko dies on the Maidan.
 
 February 20, 2014, during the protests in Kiev, Igor Kostenko – an active
 contributor to the Ukrainian Wikipedia, journalist and geography student –
 died tragically.
 
 Igor Kostenko was born December 31, 1991, in the village of Zubrets in the
 Buchach region of Ternopil. After graduating from high school, he attended
 Ivan Franko University in Lviv, where he was in his fifth year of study in
 the department of geography, majoring in Organizational Management. In
 addition to his studies, he worked as a journalist for the publication
 Sports Analysis.
 
 Igor was an active contributor to the Ukrainian Wikipedia, writing under
 the username Ig2000.[1] Igor registered an account on July 23, 2011, and in
 just that month began writing his first articles. In two and a half years,
 he wrote over 280 articles and made over 1,600 edits. He had a wide range
 of encyclopedic interests – he wrote articles on sports topics (soccer,
 Formula One), geography, economics, and the history of the Ukrainian
 military. His article on the Nezamozhnyk destroyer of the Ukrainian and
 Soviet fleet in the first half of the 20th century[2] was acknowledged for
 its quality by the community and achieved the status of Good article.
 Additionally, he contributed many updates on sports events to Wikinews.
 
 Igor was also active in promoting Ukrainian Wikipedia on social media,
 through which he sought to gain more contributors. He was an administrator
 of the Ukrainian Wikipedians Facebook page,[3] where he regularly posted
 interesting facts from Wikipedia. In August 2013 he proposed hosting a Wiki
 Flashmob – inviting a large group of Ukrainians to participate in a day of
 article-writing on Wikipedia. The Wiki Flashmob was planned for January 20,
 2014, the 10-year anniversary of Ukrainian Wikipedia, but due to the tragic
 events in the country, the event was cancelled. Igor believed that the
 flashmob would help fill Wikipedia with thousands of new articles in the
 course of a day and proposed a strategy to realize his dream, but
 unfortunately, he did not live to see it become a reality.
 
 On February 18, 2014, along with other students from Lviv, Igor came to
 Kiev to the Euromaidan, because he wanted Ukraine to be led by people with
 a patriotic spirit. On February 20th, during a protest on Instytutskaya
 Street, Igor died tragically: he bravely went ahead with a shield, but he
 was shot by two bullets, one of which struck him in the head...
 
 Today, February 23, Igor was buried in his home town of Buchach. Thousands
 of people accompanied him on his final journey – both students from Lviv
 and residents of Ternopil.
 
 In honor of Igor and the tens of others who died on the Euromaidan,[4] on
 February 21, the community decided to modify the logo of the Ukrainian
 Wikipedia with a black ribbon as a symbol of mourning.
 
 The editors of Ukrainian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Ukraine offer their
 condolences to the friends and family of Igor Kostenko. A page has been
 created on Wikipedia where you can leave your condolences.[5]
 
 Memory eternal...
 
 1.
 https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87:Ig2000
 2.
 https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA_(%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BC%D1%96%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%86%D1%8C)
 3. https://www.facebook.com/groups/ukwiki/
 4.
 https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%85_%D1%83%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%96%D0%B2_%D0%84%D0%B2%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%83
 5.
 https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8F_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B0:Ig2000/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%BC%27%D1%8F%D1%82%D1%8C
 
 
 On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Amir E. Aharoni 
 amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
 
 Big sigh.
 
 According to Wikimedia Ukraine

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community consultation + Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director selection process

2014-01-31 Thread James Alexander
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:55 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 We should be discussing the merits of individual candidates in the open.



No... we should not. That would greatly hamper the board's ability to get
good candidates. Most people who are already in a current job are not going
to be willing to have open debates about the job opportunities they are
seeking. Not only because their 'boss' will know but also because if they
are in a public company that could cause large issues in the market etc
(all for naught if they don't get selected).
___
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

  1   2   >