Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to apply to Outreachy Round 21 with Wikimedia!

2020-09-10 Thread James Salsman
Is the Foundation willing to fund pronunciation remediation this winter?

On Wednesday, September 9, 2020, Srishti Sethi  wrote:

> Hello Chris,
>
> Yes, mentoring organizations provide funding for the Outreachy internships.
> For the upcoming winter round, WMF will be funding up to 6 projects.
>
> Cheers,
> Srishti
> *Srishti Sethi*
> Senior Developer Advocate
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 3:44 PM Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is this funded by the WMF? I noticed it in the list of "promoters" but
> was
> > unable to discern whether there was funding involved.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vermont
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 4:00 PM Gopa Vasanth 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > *(feel free to forward the message as is to your friends, family
> members
> > > )*
> > >
> > > Hello folks,
> > >
> > > We would like to invite you to apply to the Outreachy program with the
> > > Wikimedia Foundation (a non-profit organization behind Wikipedia)!
> > >
> > > *About the Outreachy program*
> > >
> > > Wikimedia will be mentoring ~6 projects in the Outreachy’s December
> 2020
> > to
> > > February 2021 Round, around data science and engineering. The initial
> > > applications are due *September 20th at 4 pm UTC*.
> > >
> > > Apply today:  [1]
> > >
> > > Outreachy offers three-month internships to work remotely in Free and
> > Open
> > > Source Software (FOSS) projects, coding, and non-coding related (e.g.,
> > > design, documentation, translation, outreach, and research), with
> > > experienced mentors. Outreachy internships run twice a year – from May
> to
> > > August and December to March. Interns are paid a stipend of USD 5,500
> for
> > > the three months of work. They also have a USD 500 stipend to travel to
> > > conferences and events. Interns often find employment after their
> > > internship with Outreachy sponsors or in jobs that use the skills they
> > > learned during their internship.
> > >
> > > Outreachy is open to both students and non-students. Outreachy
> expressly
> > > invites the following people to apply:
> > >
> > > * Women (both cis and trans), trans men, and genderqueer people.
> > > * Anyone who faces under-representation, systematic bias, or
> > discrimination
> > > in the technology industry in their country of residence is invited to
> > > apply.
> > > * Residents and nationals of the United States of any gender who are
> > > Black/African American, Hispanic/Latin@, Native American/American
> > Indian,
> > > Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander.
> > >
> > > Browse through the participants’ guides, to learn more about the
> > > application process steps <
> > > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreachy/Participants> [2]
> > >
> > >
> > > *About the Wikimedia Foundation*
> > > The Wikimedia Foundation  [3] is the
> > > nonprofit organization that hosts and operates Wikipedia and the other
> > > Wikimedia free knowledge projects <
> > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/our-work/wikimedia-projects/> [4]. Our
> > > vision is a world in which every single human can freely share in the
> sum
> > > of all knowledge. We believe that everyone has the potential to
> > contribute
> > > something to our shared knowledge and that everyone should be able to
> > > access that knowledge, free of interference. We host the Wikimedia
> > > projects, build software experiences for reading, contributing, and
> > sharing
> > > Wikimedia content, support the volunteer communities and partners who
> > make
> > > Wikimedia possible, and advocate for policies that enable Wikimedia and
> > > free knowledge to thrive.
> > >
> > > We hope you will help us spread the word about Wikimedia’s
> participation
> > in
> > > these programs: <
> > > https://twitter.com/gopavasanth1999/status/1299566047423377408> [5]
> (by
> > > retweeting the post in the link or by sharing this email).
> > >
> > > Looking forward to your participation!
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Pavithra, Gopa Vasanth & Srishti (Wikimedia organization administrators
> > for
> > > Outreachy)
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.outreachy.org/apply/
> > > [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreachy/Participants
> > > [3] https://wikimediafoundation.org/
> > > [4] https://wikimediafoundation.org/our-work/wikimedia-projects/
> > > [5] https://twitter.com/gopavasanth1999/status/1299566047423377408
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Gopa Vasanth 
> > > Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham  | Blog
> > > 
> > > amFOSS  | GitHub
> > >  | Gerrit
> > > 
> > >
> > > “Yesterday is not ours to recover, but tomorrow is ours to win or
> lose.”
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcing a new Wikimedia project: Abstract Wikipedia

2020-08-11 Thread James Salsman
Scott,

It is perfectly legitimate to be "anti-racist," but races are completely
artificial constructs. Racial conflict was interposed during the "tea
party" astroturfing in response to the Occupy movements:

https://www.reddit.com/r/occupywallstreet/comments/hyoogt/is_this_accurate/fze7t5c/

Do you support Wikimedia Foundation AI being programmed to be explicitly
anti-classist?

Best regards,
Jim


On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:19 PM C. Scott Ananian 
wrote:

> Sorry I'm coming to this discussion a bit late, but I'd like to underline a
> slightly different aspect of the concern that Phoebe raised:
>
> > It concerns me that, at least in the high-level project proposals I've
> > seen (I haven't been tracking this closely, and haven't read the academic
> > papers) I have not yet seen discussions of ethical data, or how we might
> > think about identifying bias, or even how to recruit contributors and the
> > impact on existing contributors.
> >
>
> Using the terminology of Ibram X. Kendi (and others), I'd put this as:
> "it's not enough to not be racist, you must actively be *anti-racist*."
>
> Abstract Wikipedia is a "color blind" project.  Indeed it is often
> described as advancing WMF goals by improving the amount of content
> available for minority languages.
>
> However, it is built on a huge edifice of ML and AI technology which
> advantages majority languages and the already-powerful.
>
> As Phoebe mentioned, the subtle biases of ML translation toward majority
> views (selecting the "proper" gender pronoun for someone described as a
> "doctor" or "professor", say) are well known, and certainly deserve to be
> foregrounded from the start, as Danny has pledged to do in his response to
> Phoebe.
>
> But the infrastructure of this project is built this way from the ground
> up.  Language models for European languages are orders of magnitude better
> than language models for minority languages (if the latter exist at all).
> The same is true for ontologies and every other constructed abstraction,
> down to choices of what topics are significant enough to include in an
> abstract article---but that ground has been ably covered by Kaldari and
> others.  So let me concentrate solely on language models in the remainder
> (with some parenthetical asides, for which I hope you'll forgive me).
>
> I would like to challenge Abstract Wikipedia not only to be "not racist" or
> "color blind", but to be actively *antiracist*.  That is, instead of
> passively accepting the status quo wrt language models (& etc), to commit
> to actively supporting a language model in *at least one* minority
> language, treating it as a first-class citizen or (better) the *main*
> output of the project.  That means not just looking for "a good enough
> language model that happens not to be a European language" but *actively
> developing the language model* so that the Abstract Wikipedia project *from
> inception* has a positive effect on *at least one* community speaking a
> underrepresented language with a small Wikipedia.  (Again, WLOG this could
> apply to general AI/ML support for many many minority groups, but I'm
> sticking with "at least one" and "language model" in order to make this as
> concrete and actionable as possible.)  This of course also means committing
> to hire a speaker of that non-European language as part of the core team
> (not just an "and translations" afterthought), committing to foregrounding
> that language in demonstrations, and doing outreach and community building
> to the language group in question.  (All the mockups I've seen have been in
> German and English, and have been pitched to an English-speaking audience.)
>
> I don't think it is wise in 2020 to pretend that "colorblind" business as
> usual will advance the goals of our organization.  We need to actively work
> to ensure this project has effects that *work against* the significant
> pre-existing biases toward highly-educated speakers of European languages.
> It is not enough to say that "someday" this "may" have an effect on
> minority language groups if "somebody" ever gets around to doing it.  We
> must make those investments proactively and with clear intention in order
> to effect the change we wish to see in the world.
>   -- C. Scott Ananian
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] How many users really need to have access to readers' IP addresses? Zero.

2020-07-20 Thread James Salsman
Speaking of privacy policies, there are still way more than a hundred
accounts which have access to readers' IP addresses:

https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet/blob/be74f7d1e9fd5ad234c1049a66ddb8c36b3a8d48/modules/admin/data/data.yaml#L254

Given that the European Court of Justice found that the EU-US Privacy
Shield agreement fails to protect Europeans' rights to data privacy, can we
please stop logging readers' IP addresses?

Best regards,
Jim
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcing a new Wikimedia project: Abstract Wikipedia

2020-07-20 Thread James Salsman
Anyone object to using loglan as an interlingua?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loglan

On Saturday, July 4, 2020, phoebe ayers  wrote:

> Thanks Denny! I appreciate this, and your thoughtfulness as always.
>
> Thanks for starting an explicit discussion. I think our field (meaning,
> computer science & internet projects broadly) often assumes that these
> questions will just arise in context, or get solved as we go, but they
> rarely do. So making ethics a focus from the start is crucial. There may
> not be good "solutions"! But inviting lots of people in to talk about
> scenarios etc I think will make a much stronger and innovative project in
> the end.
>
> all best,
> Phoebe
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 7:54 PM Denny Vrandečić 
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you Phoebe for the congratulations, and thank you for the
> > considerations, and I agree with them.
> >
> > On wiki, Denis Barthel and Ryan Kaldari already raised a number of the
> > concerns - although not all - that you are raising here.
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abstract_Wikipedia#
> Kaldari's_concerns
> >
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abstract_Wikipedia#
> Revisiting_and_twisting_a_Kaldari_concern
> >
> > And I tried to answer some of them there. But I do agree that this is not
> > sufficient, and I would love to be able to ensure that the ethical
> concerns
> > you raise do not get lost, and are sufficiently represented when we do
> the
> > project.
> >
> > Alas, I am also a bit at a loss about how to ensure that. Yes, for some
> of
> > them, we have a pretty good, albeit developing understanding of how to
> > cover them, particularly around ethics and AI and about bias and ethical
> > data. Also I think doing several best / worst case scenario exercises at
> > relevant points is a great idea. The one thing that troubles me most,
> > though, is how to ensure that in the new communities that we will foster
> > the representation among contributors is indeed more representative of
> the
> > diversity in the world. To the best of my knowledge, we have no answers
> for
> > that - and I would very much want to learn about this.
> >
> > So, here's what I can promise - among the many topics that we need to
> > discuss while we are ramping up the project, I will also start an
> explicit
> > discussion on how to make sure that ethical considerations are
> sufficiently
> > represented during the development of the project. I obviously cannot
> > promise that we will successfully avoid all ethical pitfalls - but I can
> > promise that I will do my best to do so.
> >
> > It is, in the end, ethical concerns that motivated me, and some of them
> > are discussed and described here:
> >
> > https://wikipedia20.pubpub.org/pub/vyf7ksah/release/6
> >
> > It is this motivation of allowing more people to share in more knowledge
> > in more languages which drives me.
> >
> > I hope you'll join us on the new list and keep an eye on what we're
> doing.
> > Your voice would be very appreciated.
> >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/abstract-wikipedia
> >
> > Thank you!
> > Denny
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 11:07 AM phoebe ayers 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Congratulations to everyone, this is exciting.
> >>
> >> It is also very exciting that we have an almost-unprecedented
> opportunity
> >> to build a new project that is fully informed by both lessons from own
> past
> >> projects, as well as from the rapidly developing field of ethics in
> >> computer science and AI. From our own past projects, we have learned
> (among
> >> other things) that pitfalls could include contributor recruitment;
> >> continued maintenance; transparency and accessibility of the UI; unclear
> >> provenance of data; that many communities want a say in how they are
> >> represented online, but often don't have one; and that the biases and
> >> systemic biases of the world are reflected in who contributes, what
> sources
> >> they use, and what areas of focus are. We have also learned that our
> >> relationship with reusers, particularly around structured data that is
> >> highly valued by commercial entities, is poorly defined and tenuous.
> From
> >> the movement to build more ethical AI systems, we've learned (among
> other
> >> things) that flawed model assumptions can result in unpredictable and
> often
> >> deeply harmful downstream outcomes; that most sources of data are not
> >> transparent in their limitations or provenance; and that incorporating
> the
> >> concerns of people affected by systems can result in less biased data
> and
> >> outcomes.
> >>
> >> These are hard problems, and they are not problems that have obvious,
> >> one-size-fits-all solutions. But we do have an obligation I think to
> >> consider these issues front and center in this new project that we are
> >> building. It concerns me that, at least in the high-level project
> proposals
> >> I've seen (I haven't been tracking this closely, and haven't read the
> >> academic 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

2020-06-29 Thread James Salsman
Hi Zack,

I filled out a survey request for "The Wiki Foundation".

Some of the text of the survey indicated that the legal department thought
that there could be a problem with that possibility, but didn't say why, so
I asked for the source for the claim I quoted in the survey.

How many questions (or, if it's easier '?' question marks) are currently in
the responses to your survey questions? Would you please publish them along
with your answers?

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:37 PM Zack McCune  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We want to confirm that the Brand Project team has been directed by the
> Board to develop new branding options and to evaluate those options with
> communities. We invite your perspectives.
>
> We are asking that you continue to participate in the process which
> includes completing the survey, available in 7 languages.[1] Your
> participation in this survey will not be calculated as support for a
> change.
>
> We have been alerted to the Community open letter on renaming. We will take
> that information into the process.
>
> The Board will consider all the options, including the option to do
> nothing, and make a decision at their August meeting.
>
>-
>
>Zack & the Brand Project team
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_convention_proposals
>
>
> On Friday, June 26, 2020, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> > The timeline is pretty clear. Glad to know about the special board
> meeting
> > in early July. Other than the open letter there was a straw poll also:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_
> > brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Community_feedback_and_straw_poll
> > The early July briefing, I hope that will be presenting all the aspects
> and
> > opinions.
> >
> > Thanks
> > User:Titodutta
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 04:57, Nataliia Tymkiv 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> > >
> > > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was
> supposed
> > to
> > > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> > were
> > > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> > changing
> > > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> > what.
> > > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> > if a
> > > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> > been
> > > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > > August meeting.
> > >
> > > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> > the
> > > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working
> on
> > > for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
> > > also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
> > > planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is
> needed,
> > > and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can
> > have
> > > an in-depth discussion about this, before making any kind of decision.
> > >
> > > We would like to continue with the survey [1] - we have discussed the
> > > possibility of technical changes to the survey with an additional
> option
> > > like “no renaming is needed” (not the exact words, mind you), but with
> > more
> > > than 700 respondents it is not methodologically sound to change the
> > survey
> > > now. Staff have confirmed to the Board that responses to the survey
> will
> > > not be calculated as support for a change. The survey was only designed
> > to
> > > collect feedback on the possible renaming options, not as a yes/no vote
> > on
> > > whether to adopt them.
> > >
> > > Thus the timeline on rebranding for the next 6-7 weeks is as follows:
> > >
> > > * Early July - special Board meeting with the Brand project team to
> > review
> > > and discuss the process so far, and for the Board members to receive
> the
> > > briefing on discussions happening;
> > >
> > > * July - consolidated materials prepared for the July meeting will be
> > > posted publicly after the meeting;
> > >
> > > * August 5th - the Board meeting on renaming part of the rebranding,
> not
> > > about the process. The Board will make the decision about whether to
> > stop,
> > > pause, or continue the work on this, within the framework of a
> discussion
> > > on strategic goals, tensions and tradeoffs, and potential next steps.
> > >
> > > * August (after the meeting) - the Board statement on the next steps
> > about
> > > the Brand project.
> > >
> > > I also want to acknowledge receiving the Community open letter on
> > renaming
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board Update on Branding

2020-06-21 Thread James Salsman
What did the legal department have to say about The Wiki Foundation?
Will Ward end up with that one?

Does the executive staff and Board have a position on supporting the
.ia domain name for the Internet Archive, with the provision that
wikiped.ia is assigned to the Foundation in perpetuity?

Best regards,
Jim

On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 6:54 PM Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> Greetings,
> Thanks for working on this response. I thank you and the board for the care
> you have shown in this email. The upcoming August meeting is going to be an
> important one, as I understand from the email. We will look forward to its
> outcomes.
> There have been concerns that opinions or voices have not been heard. Other
> than the Qualtrics closed survey, opinions have been and are being shared
> in different channels such as Meta-Wiki, mailing list etc. I feel that may
> be taken into consideration, kindly, while preceding.
>
> I once again show my gratitude and sincerely thank you for taking time,
> especially on the weekends, and reaching out directly with help and
> detailed clarification.
> Thanks
> User:Titodutta
>
>
>
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 06:14, Nataliia Tymkiv  wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > As Acting Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees since March
> > [1] I take full responsibility for this situation. I am truly sorry for all
> > the frustration this whole situation has caused to volunteers, who have
> > engaged in discussions expressing their concerns, and to the staff, who
> > have been working and not really sure if that is really the direction the
> > Board is prepared to seriously consider, or if it is just an exercise on
> > our part. As Chair of the Board, I recognize the Board owes clear
> > information to the communities and guidance to the staff.
> >
> > In 2017, the Board approved the 2030 Movement Strategic Direction,
> > recognizing the strategic importance of growing the reach of the Wikimedia
> > projects to new languages, communities, and geographies, as part of our
> > global mission. In June 2018, the Board approved a Foundation Annual Plan
> > that included research into the Wikimedia and Wikipedia brands to
> > understand how they could be tools in helping us reach these goals.
> >
> > In November 2018 [2], the staff presented research to the Board about the
> > Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. I personally, even though a relatively long
> > term Wikipedian (and a bit less long term Wikimedian), was basically
> > convinced by the findings that a rebranding is needed and beneficial for
> > our mission and global vision, and furthermore that it should be based on
> > the Wikipedia brand. The information presented there also convinced the
> > Board that the team should continue their work, but as you can see from the
> > minutes the Board believed that communication is crucial, but already a
> > possibility for a new name for the Wikimedia Foundation was seriously
> > considered [3].
> >
> > And I am going to be frank here - intuitively taking the name of something
> > like “Wikipedia Foundation” makes a lot of sense, whether or not it makes
> > sense upon deeper consideration. But, of course, no one was planning to
> > just rename the organisation, more conversations were needed. It was
> > convincing enough for us (the Board) to approve the budget for this
> > initiative.
> >
> > The Board has received regular updates about the Brand work along the way,
> > including approving continued work in the 2019 and 2020 annual plans.
> > However, the Board has not yet had a very serious, frank conversation about
> > what the Board will do when the work is finished, including how to balance
> > feedback from many communities, and the importance of reaching new
> > communities. The Board also has not yet received a final report, as the
> > exploratory project was and still is ongoing.
> >
> > The process itself, even though the brand project team has designed its
> > process to be inclusive and transparent, has created bitterness in some
> > volunteers, some of whom feel they were led on or even actively
> > manipulated. I am sure there was no intent to do that. But, for instance,
> > people do point to a reported KPI (key performance indicator) in the
> > previous survey as an alleged attempt at deceiving either the community or
> > the Board. The Board did not make its decision to support the brand project
> > based on that number, nor does the clarification of that number or removal
> > of that KPI influence the Board’s support for the project. Good-faith
> > mistakes should not undermine trust in our colleagues’ intentions or the
> > purpose of an entire process. But this “elephant in the room” feeling is
> > hurting all of us - both volunteers and staff, so I acknowledge that this
> > created a lot of bitterness.
> >
> > I want us to take a step back and try to have an honest and constructive
> > conversation on what our future work will be together. I know there is
> > mistrust towards the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

2020-05-02 Thread James Salsman
> "Wikipedia should support any political movement that makes
> people's lives better because they will then have more time to edit
> Wikipedia," is an incredibly dubious line of reasoning. It would literally
> cover anything in politics

On the contrary, by definition, it would be restricted to the subset
of ways to make people's lives better which also allow them more time
to edit. The contrapositive of 'because' is 'is caused by.'

If campaign finance reform makes people's lives better and allows them
more time to edit, then there would seem to be five categories:
'active opposition,' 'inactive opposition,' 'silence,' 'inactive
support,' 'active support.' Obviously the Board wants to do what
supports the community, employees, donors, and readership, not
necessarily in that order.

I personally would love to see a link to https://bit.ly/amendmentact
at least on the Outreach wiki or something, as I have no idea what
passes for petition notability these days.

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF political activism

2020-04-26 Thread James Salsman
I have another question about that document:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal/Foundation_Policy_and_Political_Association_Guideline

In particular, I believe this part is out of date:

> Legislative Activities (Lobbying)
>
> At the federal level, there are serious restrictions on lobbying, including 
> “direct” and “grassroots” efforts:
>
> Direct lobbying consists of “attempts to influence a legislative body through 
> communication with a member or employee of a legislative body, or with a 
> government official who participates in formulating legislation.”
> Grassroots lobbying consists of “attempts to influence legislation by 
> attempting to affect the opinion of the public with respect to the 
> legislation and encouraging the audience to take action with respect to the 
> legislation. In either case, the communications must refer to and reflect a 
> view on the legislation.”

I believe there has since been case law from the Supreme Court
allowing nonprofits including advocacy organizations, churches, and
civic groups, to communicate with legislators and attempt to influence
public opinion. I note that the irs.gov links from those paragraphs
are now dead.

Please correct me if I am mistaken.



On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 11:19 AM James Salsman  wrote:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal/Foundation_Policy_and_Political_Association_Guideline
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 8:45 AM Andy Mabbett  
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 07:27, Yair Rand  wrote:
> >
> > > Also importantly, the Foundation's Policy and Political Association
> > > Guideline, which was written by WMF Legal in the aftermath of SOPA
> >
> > Link, please.
> >
> > --
> > Andy Mabbett@pigsonthewing
> > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF political activism

2020-04-25 Thread James Salsman
> the Foundation's Policy and Political Association Guideline, which
> was written by WMF Legal in the aftermath of SOPA to iron
> out clear boundaries on activism, explicitly rules out any political
> activism relating to environmental issues, stating:
>> Policy and political associations should protect and advance Wikimedia’s
>> mission “to empower and engage people around the world to collect and
>> develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain,
>> and to disseminate it effectively and globally.” Accordingly, we will not
>> support causes unrelated to or inconsistent with that mission. For example,
>> no support should be given to: environmental issues; [...]"

That can't be right, because there was a project to try to procure green
power when it was available, going back to at least 2009 if I remember
it's still ongoing but really hasn't made much progress because the
datacenters don't want to by renewables. They are less expensive to
produce than fossil fuel power, but tariffs still allow electric companies to
charge more for them, in order to speed their transition, supposedly.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sustainability_Initiative

Also, it should go without saying that people are less likely to be engaged
in producing free educational content when they are battling increasing
fires, extreme weather events, and floods from encroaching sea levels. I
guess whomever wrote "Accordingly" in that Guideline didn't think of that.

___
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] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

2020-04-22 Thread James Salsman
Yaroslav,

How do you feel about the system of compulsory royalties they have to pay
for both academic journals and news journalism in Germany? See e.g.
https://www.vgwort.de/die-vg-wort.html

In the U.S., we pay musicians for their works played on the radio, in
public venues, and pirated, all out of taxpayer funds. Does anyone
understand why we don't pay journalist and scientists the same way?

Best regards,
Jim


On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:52 PM Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> As an actively publishing researcher, I just know that mandating open
> access publishing would mean that the author pays the (huge) publication
> fee rather than the library pays the subscription. In an ideal world, the
> universities would refund the fees, and will get subsidy from the
> governments, In our real world, the researchers will have to pay everything
> out of their own pocket, with some of them losing all possibilities to
> publish, for the lack of funds. I tried to raise this before, and the
> universal reply was that this is my problem, not the problem of the
> society. I do not expect anything else this time.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:34 PM Shani Evenstein 
> wrote:
>
> > Jake, well written and nicely put.
> > Is this online somewhere, where we can share it further?
> >
> > Best,
> > Shani.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > *Shani Evenstein Sigalov*
> >
> > * Lecturer, Tel Aviv University.
> > * EdTech Innovation Strategist, NY/American Medical Program, Sackler
> School
> > of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
> >
> > * PhD Candidate, School of Education, Tel Aviv University.
> > * Azrieli Foundation Research Fellow.
> > * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
> >  on Technology,
> > Internationalization
> > and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv University
> > .
> >
> > * Member of the Board of Trustees
> > ,
> > Wikimedia
> > Foundation .
> > * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
> > .
> > * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda .
> >
> > +972-525640648
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:27 PM Pete Forsyth 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Jake,
> > >
> > > How can we most effectively support your excellent effort with this?
> > >
> > > -Pete
> > > --
> > > Pete Forsyth
> > > User:Peteforsyth on Meta, English Wikisource, English Wikipedia, etc.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 PM Tito Dutta 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > > Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for
> sharing.
> > > > Regards.
> > > > User:Titodutta
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy
> > > regarding
> > > > a
> > > > > proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded
> > > research...
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world.
> Each
> > > > month
> > > > > 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> > > > > information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are
> > > loaded
> > > > > by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA
> > > licensing
> > > > > as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> > > > > Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access
> > > scholarly
> > > > > research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds
> of
> > > > > millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper
> research.
> > > > >
> > > > > Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader
> > > > landscape
> > > > > of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to
> > > > verify
> > > > > the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through
> > citations
> > > > > readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the
> > books,
> > > > > scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
> > > > >
> > > > > A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> > > > > publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely
> > available
> > > > on
> > > > > the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of
> > > public
> > > > > education and digital literacy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus.
> By
> > > > April
> > > > > 2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
> > > > > Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles
> > and
> > > 1
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps on Wikimedia Space

2020-02-21 Thread James Salsman
When we decide to use something other than wikis to help those who
don't use wikis, instead of helping those who don't use wikis to use
them, how is that not turning our backs on project editor recruitment?
Is the problem that people can't use wikis or that they don't yet know
how? It just seems like a profound waste to keep building new walled
gardens at the expense of onboarding.

___
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] Next steps on Wikimedia Space

2020-02-19 Thread James Salsman
> ... it has been a mistake to keep spinning off new discussion
> platforms, in the hope that the next one will be different and controllable
> and totally replace everything else. This has been an anti-pattern for a
> decade. Far better to make a real investment (including both a social and a
> technical investment) in the actual community platforms based on MediaWiki,

Apparently the plan is to try something completely new other than
Wikis from scratch:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Plan_Infrastructure_Scalability

___
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] New Tool from Community Tech: Who Wrote That?

2020-01-26 Thread James Salsman
WikiWho can do all of that, but it takes considerable effort to build
its databases from the dumps.

It would be great if the Foundation could support more of the
mediawiki-specific tools they build on top of. There is a lot of
expertise in The WMF for building tools across all the languages, and
an official Foundation app depending on a third-party tool which only
supports five languages is going to get some pushback down the road.
If the Foundation supported it, it would be less work to fold it in to
a Mediawiki extension properly, so it doesn't require a
browser-specific extension to run, too. It should really be part of
the API.

On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 3:51 PM James Heilman  wrote:
>
> Would also be nice if it worked on references, external links / urls, and
> policy pages. Not sure what would be required to add that capability?
>
> James
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 12:07 AM  wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 11:05 AM Diane Ranville <
> > dranville-...@wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This is great. But it looks like it's only available on EN:WP?
> > >
> >
> > As the extension provides just a way to display the data provided by the
> > WikiWho service [1], which supports just five sites (enwiki, dewiki,
> > euwiki, trwiki, eswiki), this extension supports only those sites as well.
> > Pity.
> >
> > -- [[ cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec ]]
> >
> > [1]: https://api.wikiwho.net/
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedians for Sustainable Development first newsletter

2020-01-06 Thread James Salsman
Jan and James,

The currently legitimate mitigation controversies, upon which only the
most reasonable people disagree, involve:

1. The proportion of natural gas power plants that power-to-gas flue
CO2 Sabatier recycling (a 100+ year old process) can convert to
recycling and storage for nighttime wind, which is likely to continue
to increase in availability and decrease in cost until alternative
forms of storage are installed.

2. Project Foghorn. This Stony Brook-PARC-AlphabetX seawater carbon
capture will become more economical as the cost of off-peak wind power
decreases, because carbon-neutral liquid transportation fuels are just
another form of storage. More importantly, synthetic composite
building materials are carbon negative.

I will offer you the same advice I offered here:
https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1211213931164733441

Best regards,
Jim

On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 2:17 AM James Heilman  wrote:
>
> Our World in Data has some amazing SDG interactive graphs under an open
> license
>
> https://sdg-tracker.org/
>
> Would be great to integrate these into Wikipedia. We have some half working
> tools that I describe here
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Doc_James/OurWorld
>
>  Still lots of work required from a technical perspective. Am hoping to
> find someone to do a mass upload of the underlying data to Commons.
>
> James
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:13 AM Jan Ainali  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Welcome to the first of the newsletters from Wikimedians for Sustainable
> > Development, covering December 2019. Each month we will collect and
> > distribute activities and news related to sustainable development from all
> > around the movement. If you have anything to share, please add it to our
> > newsletter page. [9]
> >
> > === Meetings ===
> > * We had our first meeting online and there are some minutes [7]
> > * Editathon on Spanish Wikipedia [8]
> >
> > === Statements ===
> > * Wikimedia Foundation releases a Sustainability Impact Statement [1]
> >
> > === Recent blogposts ===
> > * Joy Agyepong believes in open knowledge for a sustainable future [2]
> > * Lukas Mezger – the Wikimedia Sustainability Initiative [3]
> > * Towards a more sustainable Wikimedia Movement [4]
> >
> > === Video ===
> > * Future Climate for Africa released a video from the climate change themed
> > editathon held previously this year. [5]
> >
> > === New properties on Wikidata ===
> > * World Flora Online ID [6]
> > * ScienceOpen publication ID [10]
> > * ScienceOpen author ID [11]
> >
> > === Links ===
> > * [1]
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMF_Sustainability_Impact_Statement_2019.pdf
> > * [2]
> >
> > https://wikimedia.se/2019/12/05/joy-agyepong-oppen-kunskap-for-en-hallbar-framtid/#english
> > * [3]
> >
> > https://wikimedia.se/2019/12/03/lukas-mezger-wikimedia-sustainability-initiative/#english
> > * [4]
> >
> > https://space.wmflabs.org/2019/11/27/towards-a-more-sustainable-wikimedia-movement/
> > * [5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10i-HP1JNBE
> > * [6]
> >
> > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/World_Flora_Online_ID
> > * [7]
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_for_Sustainable_Development/Meeting_minutes_20191215
> > * [8]
> >
> > https://www.climatica.lamarea.com/wikipedia-con-perspectiva-climatica-faltan-activistas-y-sobre-todo-mujeres/
> > * [9]
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_for_Sustainable_Development/Newsletter
> > * [10]
> >
> > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/ScienceOpen_publication_ID
> > * [11]
> >
> > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/ScienceOpen_author_ID
> >
> > On behalf of the Wikimedians for Sustainable Development,
> > Jan Ainali
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] Fundraising

2020-01-06 Thread James Salsman
Is superexponential fundraising really in the minority? Why do we always
treat December like "don't ask for as much as they would give if you were
to ask as much as you said you were going to.

Best regards,
Jim
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The wikisites looks like 1996

2019-12-12 Thread James Salsman
We are constantly fighting to keep aesthetics from interfering with
usability, for example by people using lower-contrast, more
subjectively appealing typography, such as quoting text in green on
white, or using lower contrast backgrounds of any color. Both are hard
even for people with normal vision to read in bright sunlight. A dark
mode might be a better accessibility option at present; the evidence
is inconclusive overall, but much stronger than smaller or lower
contrast text, of course.

The story of Comic Sans' accessibility to dyslexics is truly remarkable:

https://www.thecut.com/2017/03/the-reason-comic-sans-is-a-public-good.html

What makes it remarkable is that Comic Sans outperforms both of the
fonts which were specifically designed to be easier for dyslexics by
copying its surnised features in a more aesthetically appealing way,
Dyslexie and OpenDyslexic. Overriding browser default faults and using
lower contrast, smaller text for aesthetic purposes is an ableist
assault on dyslexics, and it's not hard to find plenty of them
complaining about it.

Our efforts would be better spent allowing people to switch to Comic
Sans as a preference, or trying to get people to remember to include a
shortlink to their slides and upload them before they present, for
nearsighted people not in the  row who might want to read along, and
not use fonts smaller than 1/12 the height of their slides, for that
matter.

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 2:21 PM Amir Sarabadani  wrote:
>
> Do you know about
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements ?
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 10:48 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > Could we please update them with a slightly more up-to-date skin?
> >
> > Take a look at our Norwegian competitor in the lexicon field.
> > https://snl.no/kunstig_intelligens
> >
> > John Erling Blad
> > /jeblad
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

2019-12-09 Thread James Salsman
> There is some data at
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Foundation_Audiences_Metrics_%26_Insights_Q1_2018-19.pdf

"WP0 deactivated for Unitel Angola on June 29
Caused traffic for the entire country to drop
from ~20 million to ~4 million views/month"

But there was no drop at all in Kuwait. Can we get Wikipedia Zero for
only economically below average countries?

___
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] Update on Wikimedia site and system outages

2019-12-09 Thread James Salsman
Is this a good juncture at which to request that the Foundation ask
for a version of Encrypted-SNI from the CDNs which tunnels DNS?

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1142172682751864832

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1142940652851695616

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1053786384463355905

I remember back in 2009 I had specified CDN upgrades, but the privacy
implications were considered prohibitive. In retrospect, establishing
an early relationship with the CDNs would have probably not been
particularly beneficial at the time, but they do have DDoS avoidance
worked out for the most part. There is no reason why we shouldn't ask
for an effective VPN by default from them.

On Sun, Dec 8, 2019 at 8:30 PM Tilman Bayer  wrote:
>
> Hi Benjamin and RhinosF1,
>
> in the meantime, you could also check out the coverage in the September
> edition of the Signpost:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-09-30/In_the_media
>
>
> (I'm sure however that the Foundation's incident report
>  will be more
> detailed and informative, in particular regarding any significant changes
> made to the traffic setup of Wikimedia sites and support obtained from
> third-party companies.)
>
> Regards, HaeB
>
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 8:20 PM Heather Walls  wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > We hope to have something for you in the next few weeks.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Heather
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 2:13 PM Benjamin Ikuta 
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I am also curious about this.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Oct 20, 2019, at 2:55 PM, RhinosF1 -  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Any idea of when an incident report may come out?
> > > >
> > > > RhinosF1
> > > > Wikimedia User & Incident Reporter
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 00:29, Heather Walls 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hello again,
> > > >>
> > > >> As a follow-up to my last note on the September 6th DDoS attack, we
> > > wanted
> > > >> to provide you with an update. There have been no further attacks in
> > the
> > > >> last week and our sites are now running normally. Our SRE team is
> > > >> continuing to monitor the situation.
> > > >>
> > > >> Based on what we learned in this attack, our security and engineering
> > > teams
> > > >> are researching and putting together plans for more protection of our
> > > >> infrastructure to address any potential attacks in the future.
> > > >>
> > > >> We appreciate everyone’s support, particularly the folks on the SRE
> > > team,
> > > >> in helping to restore access.
> > > >>
> > > >> Yours,
> > > >> Heather
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 4:25 PM Heather Walls 
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hello everyone,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> By now you are likely aware that the Wikimedia sites suffered from a
> > > >>> relatively significant botnet driven DDOS attack on September 6th,
> > > taking
> > > >>> them offline in several countries throughout the day. This primarily
> > > >>> affected Wikipedia access in Europe and the Middle East. We posted a
> > > >> short
> > > >>> update of the event on our website.[1]
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I would like to thank everyone who stepped up to support the
> > > restoration
> > > >>> of our projects, including the fast reporting of community members
> > > >>> throughout the world and our security and engineering teams who
> > worked
> > > >> long
> > > >>> hours to address many complex issues surrounding the attack and our
> > > >>> response—the Site Reliability Engineering team in particular.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The Wikimedia Foundation leadership team is proud to work with such
> > > >>> talented and dedicated staff and supporters.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Yours,
> > > >>> Heather
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 1.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> > https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/09/07/malicious-attack-on-wikipedia-what-we-know-and-what-were-doing/
> > > >>>
> > > >>> "Today, Wikipedia was hit with a malicious attack that has taken it
> > > >>> offline in several countries for intermittent periods. The attack is
> > > >>> ongoing and our Site Reliability Engineering team is working hard to
> > > stop
> > > >>> it and restore access to the site.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As one of the world’s most popular sites, Wikipedia sometimes
> > attracts
> > > >>> “bad faith” actors. Along with the rest of the web, we operate in an
> > > >>> increasingly sophisticated and complex environment where threats are
> > > >>> continuously evolving. Because of this, the Wikimedia communities and
> > > >>> Wikimedia Foundation have created dedicated systems and staff to
> > > >> regularly
> > > >>> monitor and address risks. If a problem occurs, we learn, we improve,
> > > and
> > > >>> we prepare to be better for next time.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> We condemn these sorts of attacks. They’re not just about taking
> > > >> Wikipedia
> > > >>> offline. Takedown attacks threaten everyone’s fundamental rights to
> > > >> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

2019-12-01 Thread James Salsman
Kul,

Would you please send a few or more paragraph description of the
accomplishments and costs of the Wikipedia Zero program to the
wikimedia-l list?

I also would love to see it back. The concerns about zero rating
service abuse are real, but they did not apply to WZ no matter how
many people implied they did at the time.

Best regards,
Jim

On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 4:13 AM Peter Southwood
 wrote:
>
> Gerhard,
> I am also interested in what the impact of Wikipedia Zero was, but it is not 
> obvious to me how it would be measured.
> The board members are unlikely to have personally researched this, but might 
> know if there is or was a project and if so what they are or were trying to 
> measure. Equally, someone from WMF might be able to report on what has been 
> or is being done in this regard. It is also possible that nothing has been 
> done, or someone who does not read this list is working on it.
> If anyone reads this and can enlighten us, either to whether it is an ongoing 
> project, has been done and the information is available somewhere, or nobody 
> is known to be working on it, please let us know.
> Anyone who has ideas on how it could be measured or why it can't is also 
> welcome to comment.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf 
> Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 01 December 2019 08:19
> To: Lodewijk Gelauf; Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research 
> about the effects of its demise?
>
> Lodewijk,
> What I asked for is: do we understand what the impact was of the Wikipedia
> Zero project. In the answer of James, a board member of the WMF someone who
> could know, there is nothing that answers that question. All the answer
> does is deflect the question to something else. A notion that it is "not
> that bad because we have these other things". These things we had before
> Wikipedia Zero, they are not Wikipedia and they do not scale.
>
> What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
> to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
> damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
> the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
> It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
> in our film clip at the Erasmus award.
>
> We do not cover Africa properly, we do not need to seek consensus about
> this, that is easily to be shown. Our focus on outreach is in America, then
> Europe, then the rest of the world and there is Africa. From the moment we
> stopped Wikipedia Zero, we have invested heavily in infrastructure in
> Africa, the organisational presence in the USA is now such that it rivals
> Wikimania and is used as an excuse by some to even dismantle Wikimania. As
> an organisation, a movement the "centre periphery" model is alive and well.
> We happily embrace Burke's peerage in Wikidata and we balk at the fact that
> covering science takes resources away from pet projects.
>
> You tell me to be constructive and here I lay out what the situation is.
> How can you be constructive as our movement does not support science, the
> people who need our information most are disenfranchised because we do not
> cover them, support them in an equal manner.
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:31, effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Gerard,
> >
> > It would be great if you could keep a slightly more constructive tone in
> > your messages. On one hand, you seem genuinely interested to help access to
> > free knowledge in Africa, but in your second email, you seem to jump (after
> > one response) to conclusions already. If you like to get real responses to
> > your emails, you may want to try a more constructive attitude. For me, it
> > is at least sufficiently offputting to disengage (I removed the rest of my
> > response/suggestions).
> >
> > -- Lodewijk
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 9:34 PM Gerard Meijssen  > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > Kiwix and off line Wikipedia did exist at the start of Wikipedia Zero.
> > It
> > > is great that you brought some to Africa but you do not scale and it is
> > not
> > > a study into the effects of what the effects are of terminating Wikipedia
> > > Zero.
> >
> >
> > > No idea what "Starlink"  is
> >
> >
> > https://lmgtfy.com/?q=starlink=l
> >
> >
> > > but it is not a reality for a few more years..
> > > It sounds like we have thrown all these kids under the bus but hey, we
> > have
> > > plan. A plan/action is having our own caches in Africa and providing edit
> > > and read capabilities for all who care to use it... and then measure the
> > > extend it helps us recover from our Wikipedia Zero public.
> > > Thanks,
> > >GerardM
> > >
> > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 at 02:48, James Heilman  wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have offline Wikipedia. I have shipped devices to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising needs your help

2019-12-01 Thread James Salsman
As is my custom, I have answered the call for fundraising message; this
time with 14 alternatives to the $3 cup of coffee:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising%2F2019-20_Fundraising_ideas#Story_suggestion_3

I am confident this approach will leave all future fundraisers in the dust.
I hope there is time to try my other suggestions too.

Best regards,
Jim

On Wednesday, November 27, 2019, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> (reposting due to filter rejection)
>
>
> Fundraising are looking for ideas and suggestions for our writing team to
> explore for our messaging in this years fundraiser. I only need a minute of
> your time to answer the following question:
>
>
> --- What’s your favorite thing about Wikipedia that you wish our readers
> and donors knew? ---
>
>
> We'll use the responses to generate new test ideas
>
> Post your answers on list or directly to me :) Thanks in advance
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
> *Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiConference North America live stream

2019-11-10 Thread James Salsman
It would be great if the Foundation hired a dedicated A/V team to
remote-enable as many conferences and meetups as possible.



On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 11:47 AM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:

> Hello Phoebe, thank you for the good news. We invest so much in our
> conferences, that it is a pity that they often are not recorded.
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
> Am Do., 7. Nov. 2019 um 20:31 Uhr schrieb phoebe ayers <
> phoebe.w...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Dear all,
> > We are looking forward to WikiConference North America here at MIT in
> > Cambridge, Massachusetts this weekend! We will be welcoming around 250
> > people over the four-day weekend, with a museum and cultural institution
> > culture crawl on Friday, conference sessions on Saturday and Sunday, and
> > discussion/hackathon focused on reliability and credibility on Monday.
> >
> > For those who can't be here with us in person, we have a live stream
> > planned of three of our session rooms on Saturday and Sunday. To access
> the
> > stream, go here:
> > http://web.mit.edu/webcast/wiki/f19/
> >
> > We are looking forward to sharing as much of the conference as we can
> with
> > you all! To find out what is when, the schedule is here (all times
> eastern
> > time):
> > https://wikiconference.org/wiki/2019/Schedule
> >
> > We have a packed schedule with sessions about education, research,
> > outreach, and more, as well as a special focus/track in our main
> auditorium
> > on credibility and reliability in the news and media, which our partners
> at
> > the Credibility Coalition are assisting with. As we think about the
> future
> > of Wikipedia as a reliable source in a world where social media platforms
> > and media networks are struggling with issues of misinformation and
> > credibility, we hope that this program will be both timely and helpful.
> >
> > Let me know if you have any questions and I hope you are able to tune in
> > online.
> > Phoebe, for WCNA
> >
> >
> > --
> > * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
> 
> > gmail.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,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcoming Wikimedia Foundation’s new CTO, Grant Ingersoll

2019-09-19 Thread James Salsman
Well, I'm thrilled about this, especially after having had a look
through 
https://www.slideshare.net/lucidworks/searching-for-better-code-presented-by-grant-ingersoll-lucidworks

Honestly, though, it's only the third best thing that happened this
week after Valerie Plame entering politics and the UC system divesting
from fossil fuels.

Grant, welcome! My advice is to set make a long list of concrete KPIs
for contributor (e.g. editor) support, reach, and cloud support, in a
way that can be used for fundraising. The fundraising messaging has
been stuck for years on this thing about, "if everyone reading this
contributed the cost of a cup of coffee, then _some goal here_," which
is okay, but could be so much better flipped with the KPIs as the ask,
e.g., "Each $CURRENCY you donate will pay to support N additional
$CONTENTS," where the wikipedias can use ops measurements of the
resources typical to, e.g., take an article from Start to B class, for
example, or how much time, server electricity including idle time, and
other resource it takes to get a new word added to Wiktionary to some
level of proficiency. If these units relate to the potential donor's
language or geography, all the better. People geolocated in the
developed world using languages with highly developed wikipedias and
wiktionaries can be told how much it would cost to, for example,
eliminate units of the various WP:BACKLOG items you find suitable in
multivariate e.g. Latin squares donation message testing. (Or add new
technology projects like an intelligibility- and natural spoken
feedback version of https://www.speechace.co/api_sample/ hint
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T166929#5473028 hint.)

Also please take Curecoin instead of Bitcoin, even if that means
paying the extra transaction fee before converting the Curecoin to
cash. It is the height of folly to be as close to endorsing wasted
electricity-based cryptocurrency as we already do, when alternatives
with a benefit are less commonly known. The only other blockchain
thing I like is that long-term state-sponsored censorship mitigation
program can be based on copying the dumps to IPFS, but please also
support the CDN efforts like Encrypted-SNI:

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1142172682751864832

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1142940652851695616

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1053786384463355905

Please let me know your thoughts.

Best regards,
Jim


On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 12:31 PM Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 at 17:55, Katherine Maher  wrote:
>
> > I’m excited to officially welcome Grant Ingersoll as our Chief Technology
> > Officer! Grant
>
> It is UTTERLY OUTRAGEOUS of Katherine to post this...
>
> > In Grant’s own words
>
> > We're adjusting to the empty nest life with our dog Allie (a
> > black lab mix).
>
> ...without linking to at least one cute pic of Allie ;-)
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
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] Copyright workflows - research (Was: Re: Foundation management of volunteers)

2019-06-17 Thread James Salsman
Google has been offering reverse image search as part of their vision API:

https://cloud.google.com/vision/docs/internet-detection

The pricing is $3.50 per 1,000 queries for up to 5,000,000 queries per month:

https://cloud.google.com/vision/pricing

Above that quantity "Contact Google for more information":

https://cloud.google.com/contact/


On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 8:23 AM James Forrester
 wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 06:28, Yann Forget  wrote:
>
> > It has been suggested many times to ask Google for an access to their API
> > for searching images,
> > so that we could have a bot tagging copyright violations (no free access
> > for automated search).
> > That would the single best improvement in Wikimedia Commons workflow for
> > years.
> > And it would benefit all Wikipedia projects, big or small.
> >
>
> Yann,
>
> As you should remember, we asked Google for API access to their reverse
> image search system, years ago (maybe 2013?). They said that there isn't
> such an API any more (they killed it off in ~2012, I think), and that they
> wouldn't make a custom one for us. The only commercial alternative we found
> at the time would have cost us approximately US$3m a month at upload
> frequency for Commons then, and when contacted said they wouldn't do any
> discounts for Wikimedia. Obviously, this is far too much for the
> Foundation's budget (it would be even more now), and an inappropriate way
> to spend donor funds. Providing the service in-house would involve building
> a search index of the entire Internet's (generally non-free) images and
> media, which would cost a fortune and is totally incompatible with the
> mission of the movement. This was relayed out to Commons volunteers at the
> time, I'm pretty sure.
>
> Obviously Google might have changed their mind, though it seems unlikely. I
> imagine that Google engineers and product owners don't follow this list, so
> it's unlikely that they will re-create the API without being asked directly.
>
> J.
> --
> *James D. Forrester* (he/him  or they/themself
> )
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] strategy working group questions

2019-04-27 Thread James Salsman
Okay, let's see how these go:

CTO criteria:
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Product_%26_Technology=19040328=18121474

Fundraising:
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AStrategy%2FWikimedia_movement%2F2018-20%2FWorking_Groups%2FRevenue_Streams=revision=19040323=18351249

Advocacy:
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AStrategy%2FWikimedia_movement%2F2018-20%2FWorking_Groups%2FAdvocacy=revision=19040315=18231444

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


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

2019-04-17 Thread James Salsman
Jennifer,

> I think what you really mean is that you want (1) for yourself as
> opposed to the movement in general to be personally involved in
> the decision-making process,

I would be happy if the Foundation was doing anything to involve
the community in the process. We are constantly told to get involved,
but if the search process isn't open, how are we supposed to?

> so that you can (2) promote your pet notions about privacy,
> back-doors in hardware and other opinons.

I plead guilty, I want privacy and all the other questions I raised to be
part of the CTO search process, but they are hardly my pet notions,
and again, I'd gladly abstain if the community was made part of this
process. There was one item on the list you could call my pet, since it
has been the source of 98% of my income for the past eight years, but
it wasn't either of the two you guessed. Here is enumerated list, in
hopes that this makes it easier.

Is the Foundation looking for a CTO who can help:

(1) reinforcing their privacy infrastructure;

(2) moving away from providing personally identifiable information
to the dozens of researchers worldwide under nondisclosure agreements;

(3) finding a fuzzing middle ground to provide approximate but non-
personally identyding readership log information;

(4) explore alternatives to staying with PHP long term;

(5) build a strategy to combat censorship in Turkey and China;

(6) support IPFS with more than just dumps;

(7) execute on the industry-wide Encrypted-SNI project with devoted
headcount and budget;

(8) commit to open source hardware, e.g. www.opencompute.org servers;

(9) ramp up Community Wishlist implementation as long term
Foundation technology supporters wrap up or transition to support mode;

(10) fix tools that have fallen into disrepair (e.g., Categorder which sorts
the WP:BACKLOG categories by pageviews on enwiki)

(11) produce a Course Management System for Wikiversity;

(12) produce a pronunciation tutor for Wiktionary;

(13) remain competitive with other top-ten website compensation by
paying SF-livable salaries;

and what search criteria are they using to find candidates that can?

Best regards,
Jim

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 11:33 AM Jennifer Pryor-Summers
 wrote:
>
> Jim
>
>
> >  I would like to comment on the search and requirement
> > criteria. In particular, I'd like to know [...] I would love to know any of
> > this far more than anything about branding.
> >
>
> Yes, but what would you *do* with the answers to all those questions?
> You're not on the search committee, so it seems that what you want is for
> the WMF to answer questions from the 36 million or so account holders, and
> get 36 million comments.   That's useless to them and to us.  I think what
> you really mean is that you want (1) for yourself as opposed to the
> movement in general to be personally involved in the decision-making
> process, probably so that you can (2) promote your pet notions about
> privacy, back-doors in hardware and other opinons.  Perhaps you should try
> standing for election to a community seat on the Board?
>
> JPS
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


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

2019-04-16 Thread James Salsman
Jennifer, I would like to comment on the search and requirement
criteria. In particular, I'd like to know whether the Foundation is
interested in reinforcing their privacy infrastructure, and whether
that is more or less important than being able to provide personally
identifiable information to the several researchers worldwide under
nondisclosure agreements. And whether some kind of a fuzzing middle
ground is interesting to the Foundation? I'd like to know whether the
Foundation wants to stay with PHP long term, or explore alternatives
before deciding whether they do. What is our technical strategy to
combat censorship in Turkey and China? Are we ever going to support
IPFS with more than just dumps? What is the status of the
Encrypted-SNI project and how many headcount do we think we need and
what kind of budget is there for it?

I'd like to know what kind of commitment the Foundation wants to open
source hardware, e.g. www.opencompute.org servers, or if we're just
going to stay with closed source proprietary technology forever? I'd
like to know what the technology goals are. Plenty of Foundation
technology projects look like they are close to wrapping up or have
already transitioned into support mode. Is the Community Wishlist the
sole source of new technology efforts? What is the future of the Tool
Labs? Are any of the tools that have fallen into disrepair (e.g.,
Categorder which sorts the WP:BACKLOG categories by pageviews on
enwiki) ever going to be fixed? Is Wikiversity going to get a Course
Management System? Is Wiktionary going to get a pronunciation tutor?

What is the Foundation looking for in a CTO to address these issues?
How are they looking for them? Is there a short list? Will the
community get a chance to comment on the candidates? Who is performing
the search? What criteria are they using? How much money is being
offered? Are we competitive with other top-ten website CTO
compensation? Is the Foundation still committed to paying competitive
SF-livable salaries for all employees? I would love to know any of
this far more than anything about branding.

Best regards,
Jim

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 11:55 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers
 wrote:
>
> Jim
>
> You ask that "the CTO search team please publish their search and
> requirement criteria" -- what would you, or the public at large, do with
> that information?
>
> JPS
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


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

2019-04-15 Thread James Salsman
I withdraw any opinions and suggestions about the branding discussion,
and don't intend to continue participating in it. Instead, I would
like to have a more substantive discussion:

(1) I ask that the CTO search team please publish their search and
requirement criteria, including the CTO job description and any and
all goals for the CTO position whether in current planning documents
or unpublished drafts of planning materials.

(2) Why are the Strategy Working Group lists not on
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo ? I recall several people
involved with the strategy process as saying it is "open" and asking
at length for additional participation (e.g.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxCFzA3PEaQ=23m and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxCFzA3PEaQ=30m et seq.) To be
honest, there doesn't seem to be much community engagement from
working groups or strategy process facilitators on meta, and the
meeting summaries are very abstract and difficult to understand. If
there is a need for private strategy working group communications, can
people use off-list emails instead?

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


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

2019-04-10 Thread James Salsman
Is there a middle ground that would satisfy all the objections? E.g.,
"Wikipedias and media" as a brand identifier?


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:25 PM Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
 wrote:
>
> Thank Andrew for summing up all the issues around this rebranding issue. I 
> really dont believe it should be done.
> I can’t see that  this could be done without community consultation. I doubt 
> all versions of wikipedia could agree in a unanimous move.
> How would Wikipedia be named if wikimedia takes its name?
> As a wikimedian, I think that Wikimedia is just a lot more than Wikipedia, 
> and that the similarity of the names already establishes a link between the 
> two.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Natacha / Nattes à chat
>
>
> > Le 10 avr. 2019 à 21:05, Andrew Lih  a écrit :
> >
> > I agree with Galder's and Camelia's thoughts and believe we should slow
> > down to think about this issue as a whole. We cannot, and should not,
> > consider this purely a "branding" exercise because the internal and
> > external risks go well beyond this. We need to carefully take them into
> > consideration.
> >
> > At the Berlin Wikimedia Summit, I was asked by Zack McCune and Heather
> > Walls about the branding issue. We talked about this at length so here is a
> > summary of what I expressed to them:
> >
> > - Outside view: I respect the work the comms/branding team has done, but
> > let's remember that the recommendations are from an outside consultancy
> > that focuses on only one dimension of this issue. Their work does not
> > consider our internal community and movement dynamics as a whole. So the
> > recommendation should be seen as just one data point.
> >
> > - Unproven causality: While it's true that familiarity of the "Wikimedia"
> > brand is low, the case has not been made that unifying our identity under
> > "Wikipedia" is a solution for the particular markets in question. There are
> > many other factors regarding adoption and recognition of any brand, not
> > just Wikimedia, including the commercial context of mobile/Internet users
> > and default consumer entry points to the information landscape (ie. search
> > engine settings, starting home page, financial incentives and
> > partnerships). Other factors are: first mover advantages (e.g. Korea, with
> > Naver.com's dominance over Wikipedia), or government regulation (e.g.
> > China, Turkey censorship) that affect any brand footprint. Remaking our
> > whole identity for the possibility that we *might* get better recognition
> > in certain markets needs much more careful study.
> >
> > - That was then, this is now: If this was 10 years ago, I would
> > enthusiastically embrace the idea of putting everything under the Wikipedia
> > umbrella. In 2003, before the WMF had staff and resources, I was one of the
> > primary volunteer contacts for almost all press inquiries about Wikipedia.
> > I know the headaches of having to explain what "Wikimedia" is to
> > journalists and the public. The book I wrote in 2009 was titled "The
> > Wikipedia Revolution" for name recognition, even though I knew "Wikimedia"
> > would be more accurate. But that was then. We are a whole lot more than
> > Wikipedia today.
> >
> > - We stand on three legs (and more): If there was ever a time that
> > Wikimedia was more than Wikipedia, it is now. The trio of Wikipedia,
> > Commons and Wikidata is the bedrock of open knowledge sharing in a way that
> > was not true even 3 years ago. Wikimedia Commons is a community of its own
> > with users of its content who never touch Wikipedia. See the many news
> > outlets and publications that use now use CC licensed Commons images to use
> > as visuals for their stories and products. Wikidata has quickly emerged as
> > the de facto way for libraries, archives and museums to connect their
> > metadata to each other. They are adopting it as their global crosswalk
> > database that has been proven to be more scalable and highly available than
> > anything in the information landscape. Wikidata is now regularly
> > incorporated into conferences outside of our own Wikimedia community, and
> > has the largest museum and library groups (Europeana, AAC, OCLC, IFLA-WLIC,
> > et al) working with it.
> >
> > Many times, I've had librarians and curators tell me the equivalent of: "I
> > never engaged with Wikipedia, because 'article writing' is not what we do.
> > But metadata and authority control records on Wikidata coincide with what I
> > do every day." I just had a phone call with a prominent museum collections
> > manager who said her goal was to eliminate their own local metadata
> > vocabulary in favor of using all Wikidata Q numbers instead. We are
> > reaching a new public with Commons and Wikidata that many Wikipedians, and
> > WMF employees, may not be aware of.
> >
> > - Wikipedia has a systemic bias: The biggest problem with Wikipedia is that
> > you have to know how to read. This sounds ridiculously obvious but
> > consider: in developing countries, 

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

2019-04-09 Thread James Salsman
Hi Elena,

If by "branding project" you mean replacing references to Wikimedia
with Wikipedia, that is fine with me.

Best regards,
Jim

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 1:58 AM Elena Lappen  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks to those of you who have participated in the branding project
> community consultation so far. We’ve received a lot of helpful feedback via
> email, on-wiki, and in small meetings with affiliate group members and
> individual contributors.
>
> I posted this invitation to the project talk page last week [1], but wanted
> to send a reminder here that we will be hosting a video conference session
> to give people a chance to see the presentation, ask questions and provide
> feedback.
>
> When? This Thursday, April 11th from 16:00-17:00 UTC.
>
> Where? https://bluejeans.com/540134391/browser, or call in using your
> closest local number [2] and enter meeting ID 540 134 391#.
>
> If you’d like to see the presentation but cannot attend, that is no
> problem—we will be posting a recording to Commons and putting the link on
> the talk page afterwards.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Elena
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review#Invitation_to_join_a_video_conference_presentation
>
>
> [2] https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers
>
>
> --
> Elena Lappen
> Community Relations Specialist
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 7:14 PM Zack McCune  wrote:
>
> > :: Apologies for cross-posting to multiple mailing lists. We want to ensure
> > we spread the word about this opportunity to as many people as possible. ::
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We are writing today to invite you to be a part of a community review on
> > Wikimedia brand research and strategy.
> >
> > Recently, the Wikimedia Foundation set out to better understand how the
> > world sees Wikimedia and Wikimedia projects as brands.[1] We wanted to get
> > a sense of the general visibility of our different projects, and evaluate
> > public support of our mission to spread free knowledge.
> >
> > We launched a global brand study to research these questions, as part of
> > our planning toward our 2030 strategic goals.[2] The study was commissioned
> > by the Board, carried out by the brand consultancy Wolff Olins, and
> > directed by the Foundation’s Communications team.[3][4] It collected
> > perspectives from the internet users of seven countries (India, China,
> > Nigeria, Egypt, Germany, Mexico and the US) on Wikimedia projects and
> > values.
> >
> > The study revealed some interesting trends:
> >
> > - Awareness of Wikipedia is above 80% in Western Europe and North America.
> >
> > - Awareness of Wikipedia averages above 40% in emerging markets,[5] and is
> > fast growing.
> >
> > - There is awareness of other projects, but was significantly lower. For
> > example, awareness of Wikisource was at 30%, Wiktionary at 25%, Wikidata at
> > 20%, and Wikivoyage at 8%.
> >
> > - There was significant confusion around the name Wikimedia. Respondents
> > reported they had either not heard of it, or extrapolated its relationship
> > to Wikipedia.
> >
> > - In spite of lack of awareness about Wikimedia, respondents showed a high
> > level of support for our mission.
> >
> > Following from these research insights, the Wolff Olins team also made a
> > strategic suggestion to refine the Wikimedia brand system.[6] The
> > suggestions include:
> >
> > - Use Wikipedia as the central movement brand rather than Wikimedia.
> >
> > - Provide clearer connections to the Movement projects from Wikipedia to
> > drive increased awareness, usage and contributions to smaller projects.
> >
> > - Retain Wikimedia project names, with the exception of Wikimedia Commons
> > which is recommended to be shortened to Wikicommons to be consistent with
> > other projects.
> >
> > - Explore new naming conventions for the Foundation and affiliate groups
> > that use Wikipedia rather than Wikimedia.
> >
> > - Consider expository taglines and other naming conventions to reassert the
> > connections between projects (e.g. “__ - A Wikipedia project”).
> >
> > This is not a new idea.[7][8]
> >
> > By definition, Wikimedia brands are shared among the communities who give
> > them meaning. So in considering this change, the Wikimedia Foundation is
> > collecting feedback from across our communities. Our goal is to speak with
> > more than 80% of affiliates and as many individual contributors as possible
> > before May 2019, when we will offer the Board of Trustees a summary of
> > community response.
> >
> > We invite you to look at a project summary [9], the brand research [10],
> > and the brand strategy suggestion [11] Wolff Olins prepared working with
> > us.
> >
> > For feedback, please add comments on the Community Review talk page [12] or
> > email brandproj...@wikimedia.org with direct feedback. You can also use
> > either of these channels to request to join a group meeting.
> >
> > We know this is 

[Wikimedia-l] proposals

2019-04-09 Thread James Salsman
I would like to send some proposals, less than a kilobyte each, to
this email list, but just in case I would like to know whether anyone
seeing this would prefer that I not send them. Please let me know.
Thank you. Best regards, -Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] please hire a CTO who wants to protect reader privacy

2019-03-24 Thread James Salsman
I noticed just now that the Foundation is soliciting applications for a new CTO:
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6515003866130505729

Can we please hire a CTO who would prefer to protect reader privacy
above the interests of any State or non-state actors, whether they
have infiltrated staff, contractor, and NDA signatory ranks, and
whether it interferes with reader statistics and analytics or not,
please?

In particular, I would like to repeat my request that we should not be logging
personally identifiable information which might increase our subpoena
burden or result in privacy violation incidents. Fuzzing geolocation
is okay, but we should not be transmitting IP addresses into logs
across even a LAN, for example, and we certainly shouldn't be
purchasing hardware with backdoor coprocessors wasting electricity and
exposing us to government or similar intrusions:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/analytics/2017-January/005696.html

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] How diverse are your readers?

2019-03-12 Thread James Salsman
Bamyers99's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:POPULARLOWQUALITY
weekly list linked from the Community Portal "Help out" section
addresses the issue directly, thanks to ORES. It would be great if
that were adopted by the Foundation for Wikipedias other than English.

Also, the links from the numbers on WP:BACKLOG which used to sort the
backlog categories by pageviews are broken again. I thought
Dispenser's categorder got moved to Toolforge years ago, but
apparently it's no longer maintained?

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 5:53 AM Amir E. Aharoni
 wrote:
>
> ‫בתאריך יום א׳, 10 במרץ 2019 ב-23:27 מאת ‪Gerard Meijssen‬‏ <‪
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com‬‏>:‬
>
> > Hoi,
> > I have been thinking about it.. There is a place for research but really
> > why can we not have the data that allows us to seek out what people are
> > actually looking for and do not find.. Why can we not promote what proves
> > to be of interest [1] ?
> >
>
> Actually, there was some work done around it. Here are some examples:
>
> 1. The Discovery (Search) team in the Foundation researched searches in
> Wikimedia sites' search box that yielded zero results. This was done in
> 2016 or so, led by Dan Garry as the product manager, and this lead to some
> improvements in the functionality of Wikimedia sites' internal search
> engine, although I don't remember what they were exactly.
>
> 2. Google's Project Tiger provided lists of articles for which people often
> search in the Google search engine in India, and about which there are no
> articles in Wikipedias in languages of India. See
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Supporting_Indian_Language_Wikipedias_Program
>
> 3. Last year I made a list of articles that people search for in their
> language using the interlanguage links search box and cannot find. You can
> see a sample here:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Amire80/WEIRD/2018-04-09%E2%80%932018-04-15
> . I plan to make this list nicer-looking and auto-updating some time soon.
>
> 4. The GapFinder project is another tool that helps people find articles
> that are missing in some wikis: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/GapFinder
>
> 5. This is just an idea, but it's written down, which is a bit better than
> nothing: Show the most popular articles by country in the PageViews tool,
> rather than just by language. It's documented at
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T207171 . The rationale for this is that
> the most popular English Wikipedia articles in the U.S., Nigeria, India,
> the Philippines, and South Africa are significantly different. The English
> Wikipedia is the most popular one in all these countries, but whereas it is
> sensible that it's popular in the U.S., it's a bit depressing that it's
> also the most popular in the other four countries, even though languages
> other than English are spoken there. The reason for this situation is, of
> course, that there is little content in the Wikipedias in the languages of
> these countries, and knowing what the most popular articles are can help
> people who write in these languages choose how to write that will be
> useful, and will hopefully raise the popularity of Wikipedias in these
> languages. The same is true for the most popular Russian Wikipedia articles
> in Kyrgyzstan and Moldova, the most popular French Wikipedia articles in
> Benin and Mali, etc. This is only an idea, but maybe it will be implemented
> some day.
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lisa Lewin joining Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2019-02-02 Thread James Salsman
WOW! How did you find a MOOC enthusiast who still likes class size
reduction, Maria?

https://vimeo.com/126571400

Superb!

Best regards,
Jim

On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 9:18 AM Shlomi Fish  wrote:
>
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 21:45:00 +0100
> María Sefidari  wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I am  very happy to share news with you of our latest appointment to the
> > Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Please join me in welcoming Lisa
> > Lewin as our newest Trustee!
> >
> > Lisa Lewin is Managing Partner at Ethical Ventures, a New York City based
> > management consulting firm. She has worked in strategic growth and
> > development her whole career, helping launch new ventures and increase the
> > impact and growth potential of legacy businesses. Her professional focus
> > has always been at the intersection of technology and learning - and we are
> > very fortunate to have her as a part of our team!
> >
> > Below is the official announcement.[1] Welcome, Lisa, and I look forward to
> > working with you!
>
> welcome, and good luck!
>
> --
> -
> Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
> http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Summer-Glau/
>
> Only two things are infinite: the universe, and Chuck Norris’s destruction
> ability. And we cannot be sure about the former thanks to the latter.
> — http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Chuck-Norris/
>
> Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Survey about the Foundation's Mission

2019-01-17 Thread James Salsman
Are those objecting to discussion of specific choices of advocacy
areas of the Foundation aware that the Movement Strategy staff have
seated an Advocacy Working Group and begun discussions with it
focusing on "public policies and agendas to define areas where active
advocacy and political engagement supports our mission and our
strategic direction"? The rationale for that Working Group leaves no
question that scope of advocacy efforts is a central topic of their
discussion:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Advocacy#Rationale

Here are the top questions staff has posed to that Working Group so far:

> What policy areas do we want to prioritize on our way to becoming the 
> essential infrastructure for free knowledge? Where do we have to align with 
> the broader global movement?
> What policy changes are necessary to achieve our strategic vision? What are 
> areas where the movement has an opportunity to make change?
> What is the most effective way to promote public policy that advances our 
> goals? What kind of legal, public policy and activist capacities do we need 
> within movement organizations and communities, and how can we build them?

Moreover, such questions are clearly "Organizational issues of the
Wikimedia Foundation" and as such are strictly on topic according to
the wikimedia-l charter.

Using polls to settle controversial questions is so established that
it is part of literally every legislature:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Previous_question

Lane Rasberry wrote:
> We do not have community capacity to endlessly complete surveys,
> and I would like survey moderation.

The survey and all its questions are completely optional, and I can
see from the bitly statistics many more people viewed it than
submitted it; I'm sure nobody felt obligated to complete it. The
research guidelines do not appear to apply to studies of populations
including the Foundation staff and contractors, as far as I can tell,
because they only mention project contributors and readers as
subjects. And, "Most research is conducted independently, without
knowledge by or approval from the Wikimedia Foundation," per
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:FAQ#Does_my_project_need_approval

Amir Sarabadani wrote:
> You just disclosed results of the survey before it ends, meaning people who
> fill out the survey are biased on what majority thinks and vote under peer
> pressure.

There was more peer pressure in the opposite direction prior to the
disclosure. The results have always been open to anyone who submits
the form, and all the questions are optional. It was not intended to
be a scientifically accurate poll. There was a discussion of
countering self-selection bias in the Research Showcase today. The
only way to reliably counter self-selection bias is to secure
agreement to answer questions from randomly selected members of the
subject populations before they are posed to the respondents. I would
love to see such a study.

___
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] Survey about the Foundation's Mission

2019-01-16 Thread James Salsman
The "agenda" is shared by a majority of the survey respondents so far.
Why are these questions so offensive to the vocal minority who have
demanded that they not be discussed? Many nonprofit organizations
depending on volunteer labor advocates for social changes in support
of those volunteers, including by lobbying.




On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:05 AM Risker  wrote:
>
> I regret to say that I feel James has abused this forum once again for his
> own personal agenda, much of which is unrelated even indirectly to the WMF
> or the Wikimedia movement. Further, I feel that he has done so in a way
> that is deceptive to members of this mailing list, and that his actions are
> an abuse of the trust of the members of this mailing list.
>
> Generally speaking, I'm pretty tolerant of people bringing different
> perspectives and ideas to this mailing list; however, I believe this is a
> step too far for someone who has been asked in the past on multiple
> occasions to stay on topic.  I am not sure that James needs to remain a
> contributor to this list.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 11:56, James Salsman  wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:23 AM Kevin Payravi 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've heard confusion from a couple folks and want to make sure it's clear
> > > here that this survey is coming from you as an individual, Jim, and has
> > no
> > > origination or coordination with the Foundation - correct?
> >
> > Yes, the survey is just from me, not the Foundation. I'm trying to
> > encourage the Executive Director to bring back the "Letter to Donors"
> > which was discontinued for reasons unknown, but not the explanation
> > given to me at the time, that it was forbidden by law:
> >
> > https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/998272655995240449
> > https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 3:44 AM Dan Garry (Deskana) 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >... (free healthcare, universal basic income, etc.) have very little to
> > > do with the Foundation's mission.
> >
> > That is precisely the matter of opinion which the survey measures. The
> > idea that the abundance of contributors would not increase under the
> > proposals is clearly not shared by most, and whether that means
> > contributors would therefore be "empowered" by them is subjective.
> >
> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019, 8:21 PM James Salsman  > >
> > > > Happy 18th birthday to Wikipedia!
> > > >
> > > > What does it mean for the Wikimedia Foundation to empower
> > > > contributors? Please share your opinion of what the Wikimedia
> > > > Foundation's mission statement means when it describes empowering
> > > > people to collect and develop educational content:
> > > >
> > > > http://bit.ly/wikimission
> > > >
> > > > The survey results are summarized after form submission.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Jim Salsman
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Survey about the Foundation's Mission

2019-01-16 Thread James Salsman
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:23 AM Kevin Payravi  wrote:
>
> I've heard confusion from a couple folks and want to make sure it's clear
> here that this survey is coming from you as an individual, Jim, and has no
> origination or coordination with the Foundation - correct?

Yes, the survey is just from me, not the Foundation. I'm trying to
encourage the Executive Director to bring back the "Letter to Donors"
which was discontinued for reasons unknown, but not the explanation
given to me at the time, that it was forbidden by law:

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/998272655995240449
https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 3:44 AM Dan Garry (Deskana)  wrote:
>
>... (free healthcare, universal basic income, etc.) have very little to
> do with the Foundation's mission.

That is precisely the matter of opinion which the survey measures. The
idea that the abundance of contributors would not increase under the
proposals is clearly not shared by most, and whether that means
contributors would therefore be "empowered" by them is subjective.

> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019, 8:21 PM James Salsman 
> > Happy 18th birthday to Wikipedia!
> >
> > What does it mean for the Wikimedia Foundation to empower
> > contributors? Please share your opinion of what the Wikimedia
> > Foundation's mission statement means when it describes empowering
> > people to collect and develop educational content:
> >
> > http://bit.ly/wikimission
> >
> > The survey results are summarized after form submission.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Jim Salsman

___
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] Survey about the Foundation's Mission

2019-01-15 Thread James Salsman
Happy 18th birthday to Wikipedia!

What does it mean for the Wikimedia Foundation to empower
contributors? Please share your opinion of what the Wikimedia
Foundation's mission statement means when it describes empowering
people to collect and develop educational content:

http://bit.ly/wikimission

The survey results are summarized after form submission.

Best regards,
Jim Salsman

___
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] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

2019-01-08 Thread James Salsman
Why not just officially support Wikipedia on IPFS, which has been
hosting the Turkish Wikipedia in Turkey, unlike the Foundation, for
almost two years now?

https://blog.ipfs.io/24-uncensorable-wikipedia/

https://github.com/ipfs/distributed-wikipedia-mirror


On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:10 PM Philippe Beaudette  wrote:
>
> Nathan, when you write "the very nature of Wikipedia is
> maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia",
> it's very easy for me to fully and totally agree -- as I would have, three
> years ago.  But in those three years, I've seen things in the US that I had
> never thought I would see.  I've seen the rights that I considered
> inviolable... violated.  I've seen the resurgence of a brand of
> conservatism that I find alarming.
>
> I find myself, reluctantly, agreeing with Fae that there should be a backup
> plan.  However I choose to believe this is also an opportunity.  What
> about a fully distributed version that's hosted everywhere, and nowhere?
> What other options, besides the traditional, can the WMF's bright staff and
> creative volunteers come up with? Surely there's something 
>
> Failing that, there's always Iceland. :-)
>
> Philippe
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:05 PM Nathan  wrote:
>
> > Hi Fae,
> >
> > I'm curious what nation you have in mind for your stable Plan B. Is it
> > Brexit Britain? France of the Yellow Vests and Front National? Perhaps
> > Orban's Hungary, Putin's Russia, or Germany with its recent right-wing
> > resurgence?
> >
> > Maybe you'd prefer Jair Bolsonaro's Brazil? I suppose in Italy we'd worry
> > about Beppe and criminal libel statutes, while BJP would hardly seem
> > welcoming in India and I can't imagine you'd suggest a home on the other
> > side of the Great Firewall.
> >
> > Maybe you're hinting at Canada, but otherwise, I'd love to understand what
> > island of liberal stability and legal safeguards you think is safe from the
> > vagaries of electoral politics or rigid authoritarianism.
> >
> > The countries I list above have their own flaws (although in each case, I
> > believe, many desirable traits as well) as does any other alternative.
> > Anyone could reasonably argue it's unfair to stigmatize any of them by
> > glaringly public flaws.
> >
> > To my mind Steve Walling has it right - the very nature of Wikipedia is
> > maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> > unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia.
> >
> > Nathan
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:17 PM Fæ  wrote:
> >
> > > Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> > > following,
> > >
> > > For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
> > > to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> > > reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> > > whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> > > voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> > > politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> > > inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
> > > inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> > > decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> > > virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
> > >
> > > The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> > > switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> > > continue running Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons from other countries
> > > has been raised on this list several times over many years. The WMF
> > > and its employees are heavily invested in staying in Silicon Valley,
> > > and that will stay true unless external risks become extreme.
> > >
> > > However, there has never been a rationale to avoid investing in a Plan
> > > B. A robust plan, where the WMF can switch operations over to a
> > > hosting country with a sufficiently welcoming with stable national
> > > government and legislation, that our projects could continue to meet
> > > our open knowledge goals virtually uninterrupted and without risk of
> > > political control. A Plan B would ensure that if the US Government
> > > started to discuss controlling Wikipedia, then at least that published
> > > plan would be a realistic response. If they tried doing it, we could
> > > simply power off our servers in the USA, rather than compromise our
> > > content.
> > >
> > > If anyone knows of committed investment in a practical WMF Plan B, it
> > > would be reassuring to share it more widely at this time. If not, more
> > > of us should be asking about it, politely, persistently but perhaps
> > > less patiently than indefinitely. :-)
> > >
> > > Links:
> > > 1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46739180
> > > 2. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

2018-12-12 Thread James Salsman
Thanks, Seddon.

Why aren't the two mobile banners listed on
https://frdata.wikimedia.org/campaign-vs-amount.csv -- or am I just
not finding them?

Also, how do you feel about measuring the extent to which you would
have to run more single-line banners to match the donation volume of
larger banners? I have a feeling that optimizing mobile might be in
the smaller direction than either of the two you're presently running,
and that very few people will care if they see single-line banners
days to weeks after having dismissed them (e.g. with "not now".)

Finally, was there a decision on measuring NextDoor, Reddit, and Google Ads?

Best regards,
Jim



On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:47 AM Joseph Seddon  wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
>
> The fundraising team genuinely hears and appreciates all the feedback we've
> received about this mobile banner. For the past week and a half  - for the
> majority of our mobile campaign - we have been extensively working and
> acting on that feedback to reduce the length of this banner, emphasize the
> ability to skip the content, and improve accessibility across the board.
>
>
> For our mobile large banners, we've been focusing on three things:
>
>
> * Removing the bottom fixed element reminder banner - DONE
>
>
> * Reducing the length of the banner ---In Progress--- Last week we make
> some changes to the text reducing the appeal by 5% and over the weekend we
> reduced the overall length of the banner by 18% on phones through extensive
> but subtle design changes. There are more changes to come in this area.
>
>
> * Making it clearer to users that they are able to SKIP the banner ---In
> Progress--- We've already altered the language in the toolbar. There are
> more potential changes and tests to come in this area
>
>
> * Ensuring that the banners are suitable for users who access us through
> accessibility software. - DONE - The same options to skip the banner were
> always presented to users of accessibility software. We've also made
> changes to the underlying structure of the banner to improve navigation by
> these users.
>
>
> The fundraising team works extensively in a data driven manner but I must
> emphasise that doesn't mean that we don't listen to community feedback. The
> very opposite. It means that we work very hard to ensure that the changes
> the community seeks drives our work and this feedback has been the main
> focus of our work for much of the last week.
>
>
> I’ll update on further changes asap.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:52 PM GorillaWarfare <
> gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I feel a little bad raising this because I know there was some community
> > vetting of fundraising initiatives that I ignored, but please forgive me. I
> > brought this up in the Wikimedia Weekly Facebook group asking where best to
> > raise the issue, and it was suggested I post here.
> >
> > I was looking something up on my phone just now, apparently not logged in
> > to Wikipedia, and I discovered that mobile users in the US (and presumably
> > elsewhere) are being shown enormous ads. It took four full page scrolls for
> > me to reach the content of the article I was hoping to read. Even once I
> > made it past the ads at the top of the page, I was greeted with a pop-in
> > banner from the bottom of the page, as if I could possibly have not noticed
> > the four pages of text asking me to donate. (Screenshots attached).
> >
> > I understand that we need donations to keep the site running and all, but
> > this seems excessive. I particularly worry for people who use assistive
> > technology who are having to listen to or try to skip through four pages'
> > worth of text-to-speech before they can get to what they want to know. The
> > WMF needs donations, but I think we need to weigh the need for cash against
> > the goal of providing free and accessible information to our readers. A
> > couple of page scrolls might not seem like much, but I assume if they're
> > off-putting to me (a reader with good vision and generally high tolerance
> > for WMF money pleas) they'll be off-putting to others.
> >
> > So much of this text could be cut out. I work for a marketing/sales company
> > in a non-marketing role, and I've heard from colleagues that it's
> > frustrating when people writing copy like this hear from people who are not
> > educated about appealing to people, so I don't pretend to know better than
> > you at the WMF or your consultants about how to write good donation copy.
> > But to my (admittedly uneducated eye), copy like "It's a little awkward to
> > ask you, this Friday, as we're sure you are busy and we don't want to
> > interrupt you." and "We can't afford to feel embarrassed, asking you to
> > make a donation—just like you should never feel embarrassed when you have
> > to ask Wikipedia for information." seems like at best it's not adding
> > anything besides more words to have to scroll past, and at worst it's
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

2018-12-09 Thread James Salsman
For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
example:

https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png

The fundraising message literally takes 4.5 screens that have to be
scrolled through to get to the article. I don't think its accurately
reflected with how desktop browsers render the example given by the
Fundraising team at
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA?banner=B1819_0701_mlWW_mob_p1_lg_template=1=US
which is only a little over one screenful before the article text on
typical landscape-shaped desktop browser rendering.

In years past, it seemed like the fundraising team was more
forthcoming about their choices and the reasons for making them. Has
anyone inside or outside of the Foundation seen any explanation of why
so much text, with such odd formatting, is necessary on mobile this
year?

On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:44 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
>
> I love the focus on mobile and smaller format interfaces, quite generally;
> it's increasingly how I use the projects too!
>
> A)  This banner-text-series is clearly impactful, gave me a bit of a jump
> scare, and got me to read it to find out why. I'm still not sure how I feel
> about it.
> ~ Visual effect: Messages that flow smoothly in and out of the reading
> experience are even nicer.
> ~ Message: Is there an estimate of the total impact on all readers, as well
> as total effective fundraising?  If there is a very effective
> compact/delightful banner, and an even more effective large/ambivalent
> one, is there some internal calculus about the overal impact of running the
> former for longer vs. the latter for a short period?
> I'd like to think the best possible messages inspire and delight and
> draw on positive emotions while raising funds, including for those who
> don't donate, even if they do not yield the most donations per view.
>
> B)  The tracking of whether I've donated, when choosing to show or not show
> me banners, is definitely lacking.  Part of this is that we have taken an
> overly-paranoid approach to gathering and anonymizing user data.  It is
> entirely possible to cluster users for the purposes of
> not-continuing-to-show-banners (maintain a dictionary of
> user-fingerprint-hashes-already-seen, check to see if the current user is
> in there, don't show banners if they are) without being able to see what
> pages a given user is viewing.
>
> I wrote more about this here:
> https://blogs.harvard.edu/sj/2018/07/25/anonymizing-data-on-the-users-of-wikipedia/
>  Please consider doing this; it is really hurting the user-experience of
> the wiki projects (not only in this instance -- in so many other basic
> instances of usage stats + testing over time!), for no benefit to anyone.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] supporting the informed, healthy, and abundant availability of community volunteers

2018-12-08 Thread James Salsman
I'm presently in Oakland, California at the Ranked Choice Voting
Summit 2018, where FairVote California's Director Jennifer Pae has
pointed out this excellent resource from the U.S. national Alliance
for Justice designed to answer questions about what kind of advocacy
nonprofit organizations can and can not -- and should and should not
-- engage in:

https://bolderadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/The-Connection-4th-Edition.pdf

https://www.afj.org/our-work/issues/bolder-advocacy

I suggest that these recommendations -- literally designed, as the
title says, for being bold -- are useful guidance for determining
which aspects of the Foundation's Mission should be subjects of
Foundation advocacy, beyond copyright law and the like. I am well
aware that there is a vocal minority who believe that many aspects of
the Mission are not worthy of our advocacy efforts, but I continue to
believe in the results of my in-person and on-line surveys of
Wikimedians suggesting about 80% of us want to support the whole
Mission, not just a few niche and adjunct aspects of it.

I welcome debate on my pending recommendation, that movement leaders
need to advocate for policies which directly support the informed,
healthy, and abundant availability of community volunteers. E.g., that
the Executive Director resume regular periodic correspondence with
donors on other ways they can support the movement, beyond copyright
and internet law advocacy that the Foundation traditionally supports
directly and indirectly. I hope we can keep personality, nationality,
and related issues out of such debate.

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] can we enable blog comments please?

2018-12-04 Thread James Salsman
Regarding 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2018-12-01/Opinion

Why does the https://wikimediafoundation.org/ blog not allow comments?

Is the software capable of allowing comments? If so, could someone
please turn that on?

Why are we not using a wiki for the main blog?

___
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] Mobile fundraising ads

2018-12-01 Thread James Salsman
Seddon, thanks for addressing this.

What are your thoughts about measuring the extent to which you would
have to run a minimalist banner to achieve current goals, as per
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2018-19_Fundraising_ideas#Design
?

Both of the "small" banners in the set of four (total?) you are
testing -- linked from the top of that page -- seem to be as big as
the average banner was ten years or so ago. Is that a fair statement?

Do you agree with Yair's sentiment that you should have never measured
the cost per donation on Facebook as expressed at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2018-19_Fundraising_ideas#Technical
?

Best regards,
Jim




On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:47 PM Joseph Seddon  wrote:
>
> Hey Molly,
>
> Thank you for your feedback, it is really appreciated. There are a fair few
> points you’ve raised so I will do my best cover them all. For some
> background, mobile fundraising is vitally important. Desktop page views
> have been in decline for the past 2-3 years from 4.36 billion (Oct 2016) to
> 3.64 billion (Oct 2018). Likewise, the relative effectiveness as of mobile
> as a fundraising platform has historically been substantially lower
> compared with desktop. So we’ve been working hard to ensure that as user
> behaviours shift we are well prepared and that the future of the movement
> is safeguarded.
>
> We show two types of banner to users on both desktop and mobile. The first
> banner is larger and shown only once to user in their browser followed by a
> second banner that is show to the user typically up to a maximum of 9 times
> and is substantially smaller.
>
> Our mobile large banner changed last November from a splash style banner to
> the current text message style. Since then one of the things that has
> constantly surprised us, is that people seem to genuinely read the extra
> content. We’ve repeatedly tested over the past year removing content and
> every time, the shorter banners loose. Now this could just imply that it’s
> length that was producing move effective banners. So we decided to confirm
> if people were actually reading our banners. We tested two banners of
> similar length, one with our best copy and one where we replaced some of
> the lower paragraphs with copy had historically lost out in previous
> testing. Our best copy won and confirmed that people are actually invested
> in reading our banners. So the copy is long and we are continuing to try
> and shorten it but we genuinely believe its not just impactful of genuine
> value to our readers and donors.
>
> When we implemented this style of banner we made sure to add a toolbar to
> the top that enabled users to skip straight to the article. You mentioned
> on facebook that you didn’t notice that we will look to see if we can make
> the toolbar a little more visible to users.
>
> Regarding the bottom red banner, that is something that was retained from
> previous versions of this banner. We actually have just instrumented our
> banners so that we could track the effectiveness. We got data that this
> additional call to action was not performing as originally expected, most
> likely due to the format of the banner having changed since last year. We
> re-tested removing this and the effect was minimal and so we have removed
> this in our large banner on the first impression.
>
> We completely agree that it’s vitally important to ensure our readers who
> use assistive technologies are supported and we are going to look at how we
> can improve our banner content to ensure compatibility and provide a good
> experience including improving descriptions, providing better descriptions
> and maybe look at suppressing some content for screen readers to reduce
> some of the impact for them.
>
> I will copy this to your cross post on wiki too :) Thank you again for your
> feedback, it is genuinely appreciated and the fundraising team are actively
> acting on it.
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:52 PM GorillaWarfare <
> gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I feel a little bad raising this because I know there was some community
> > vetting of fundraising initiatives that I ignored, but please forgive me. I
> > brought this up in the Wikimedia Weekly Facebook group asking where best to
> > raise the issue, and it was suggested I post here.
> >
> > I was looking something up on my phone just now, apparently not logged in
> > to Wikipedia, and I discovered that mobile users in the US (and presumably
> > elsewhere) are being shown enormous ads. It took four full page scrolls for
> > me to reach the content of the article I was hoping to read. Even once I
> > made it past the ads at the top of the page, I was greeted with a pop-in
> > banner from the bottom of the page, as if I could possibly have not noticed
> > the four pages of text asking me to donate. (Screenshots attached).
> >
> > I understand that we need donations to keep the site running and 

[Wikimedia-l] appeal of fundraising technical wish denial

2018-11-20 Thread James Salsman
I would like to appeal
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2019%2FArchive%2FAssist_Wikimedians_with_crowdfunding=revision=18603544=18594887

on the grounds that adding a different behavior to existing behavior
in order to try to measure which is better is an inherent part of
every technical and documentation approval. In other words, trying
something new isn't the same as irrevocable change unless it is
incontrovertible that the change is an obvious improvement, the extent
of which should be measured.

Or to put it another way, the Foundation should build manual-only
fundraising bots and give access to them in addition to ordinary
grants. I hope you agree, but if you don't, that's okay too.

Thank you for reading this appeal. Whether this project succeeds or
otherwise, I wish you the best.

Regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Subject lines for WMF fundraising emails

2018-11-13 Thread James Salsman
On the contrary, Nathan, every single time I have asked them to hold
the campaigns open after the fundraising goal has been met (most if
not almost all of the past ten years) in order to, for example, fund
the Endowment or save more money before the Endowment existed, they
have refused to do so. Is there some document I am missing?

Best regards,
Jim


On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 3:16 PM Nathan  wrote:
>
> "Deleting Wikipedia?" was the subject line of the e-mail I received as
> well. It also, as usual, included the claim that if enough donations were
> received the campaign would end early. That hasn't been the case in the
> past when campaign goals are met.
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 6:04 PM Pine W  wrote:
>
> > There is a report from a user on Jimbo's talk page on ENWP regarding
> > receiving fundraising a fundraising email with the subject line "[NAME] -
> > Deleting Wikipedia?"
> >
> > In previous years I've disagreed with some of WMF's fundraising choices,
> > and it would be unfortunate if in the era of "fake news" becoming
> > mainstream WMF chooses to continue to be a part of the problem. If this is
> > happening then I request that WMF put a stop to it. Regardless of how
> > effective it is to send misleading fundraising appeals and that WMF has
> > received minimal repercussions for doing so over the years, it's wrong and
> > it should stop.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] measure cost of donations from NextDoor.com and Google?

2018-11-03 Thread James Salsman
Does anyone have any objections to running fundraising experiments to
measure the cost of donations from https://ads.nextdoor.com and
https://ads.google.com similar to the recent Facebook ads experiment?

I predict NextDoor will offer the best value, and I'm guessing Google
will place a relatively weak second of the three.

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] strategy proposals on meta (was Re: convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work)

2018-11-02 Thread James Salsman
Thanks to all who participated in this discussion. I am glad to
withdraw my cryptocurrency proposals below, which are not included in
the proposals at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20=prev=18545871

It seems fair to assume that changing circumstances can result in
changing answers to questions. Anyone should be forgiven for asking
the same question when there is evidence that consensus has changed.
Accordingly, I do expect that the cryptocurrency cash-out instructions
question will arise again, probably in years or decades not months. I
remain in favor of converting to foldingcoin before cashing out in
fiat currency if and only if foldingcoin hasn't been corrupting the
validity of the Folding@Home results.

Best regards,
Jim

On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 7:30 PM Joseph Fox  wrote:
>
> Please please please take this conversation to another venue. It has little
> to nothing to do with this movement.
>
> Joe
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 18:15, geni  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 07:23, James Salsman  wrote:
> > >
> > > Geni, it's the "Day of the Dead" now so I want to attempt to resurrect
> > > this thread.
> > >
> > > Is FoldingCoin still vulnerable to a 51% attack? What is a 51% attack?
> >
> > You've had 6 months to do this basic research.
> >
> > > Do you think it is reasonable for the Foundation to convert bitcoin to
> > > FoldingCoin as part of its program to source clean electricity?
> >
> > No. Cash is more efficient.
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

2018-11-02 Thread James Salsman
David, what if the Foundation converted their next largest bitcoin
donation over some set amount to foldingcoin, and then cash in a press
event designed to educate cryptocurrency enthusiasts that they don't
have to be as destructive, strictly as a principled stance against
bitcoin's waste of electricity? I'd love to get a sense of your idea
of the potential drawbacks.

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 1:49 AM David Gerard  wrote:
>
> worth noting again that in my (I am paid to have these opinions now)
> professional opinion, nothing about cryptocurrencies is good or
> useful, and WMF's involvement should proceed precisely as far as
> taking donations at arm's length (never touching an actual
> cryptocurrency). And documenting the phenomenon accurately on the
> wikis.
>
> yet again, anyone reading this list is welcome to read my book for
> free! (Got good reviews in NYRB and BBC News)
>
> http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=41A766EE9752E757169A46C936C2EC17
>
> there you go, an *official* bootleg copy.
>
>
> - d.
>
>
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 05:54, Father Of Lies  wrote:
> >
> > That is a complete useless responds. Bitcoin, Litecoin and all are no 
> > piramide games.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On 1 Nov 2018, at 11:57, Gerard Meijssen  
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hoi,
> > > Bitcoin and its ilk rely on an overabundance of energy. In this day and 
> > > age
> > > the speculation of these "currencies" is irresponsible. The best attack on
> > > this pyramide game is to stay away from it.
> > > Thanks,
> > > GerardM
> > >
> > > On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 10:38, Robert Rohde  wrote:
> > >
> > >>> What is a 51% attack?
> > >>
> > >> A 51% attack is when a single malicious entity controls >51% of the
> > >> computing power being used to validate the blockchain of a particular
> > >> digital currency.  Blockchain-based digital currencies rely on a 
> > >> consensus
> > >> of computing participants acting in good faith to verify transactions and
> > >> coin ownership.  However, if a single entity controls a majority of the
> > >> compute power, then it is possible for them to maliciously validate bad
> > >> transactions to steal, double spend, and otherwise commit fraud using the
> > >> currency.
> > >>
> > >> Smaller digital currencies, with fewer participants acting to maintain
> > >> their blockchain, are generally more vulnerable to this kind of attack.  
> > >> A
> > >> bad actor can rent a large block of computing power and then use it to
> > >> attack a small blockchain.   Such attacks have been becoming more common,
> > >> though the largest coins (e.g. BTC) are still resistant due to the size 
> > >> of
> > >> their community.
> > >> https://www.coindesk.com/blockchains-feared-51-attack-now-becoming-regular/
> > >>
> > >> I don't know anything about FoldingCoin and whether it is more or less
> > >> vulnerable to this kind of fraud than other cryptocurrencies.
> > >>
> > >> However, the 51% attack may just be the death of many smaller alt-coins,
> > >> unless an effective countermeasure can be developed.
> > >>
> > >> -Robert Rohde
> > >>
> > >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 8:23 AM James Salsman  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Geni, it's the "Day of the Dead" now so I want to attempt to resurrect
> > >>> this thread.
> > >>>
> > >>> Is FoldingCoin still vulnerable to a 51% attack? What is a 51% attack?
> > >>>
> > >>> Do you think it is reasonable for the Foundation to convert bitcoin to
> > >>> FoldingCoin as part of its program to source clean electricity?
> > >>>
> > >>> Best regards,
> > >>> Jim
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM James Salsman 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Cryptocurrency. If your first thought isn't "how could a scammer
> > >>>>> exploit this" you are doing it wrong.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I've thought about that for several hours now, and I'm sure scammers
> > >>>> far prefer bitcoin. Folding@Home's lab director is a partner
> > >>>> Andreessen Horowitz, so he has certainly had no lack of resources to
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

2018-11-01 Thread James Salsman
Geni, it's the "Day of the Dead" now so I want to attempt to resurrect
this thread.

Is FoldingCoin still vulnerable to a 51% attack? What is a 51% attack?

Do you think it is reasonable for the Foundation to convert bitcoin to
FoldingCoin as part of its program to source clean electricity?

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:21 AM James Salsman  wrote:
>
> > Cryptocurrency. If your first thought isn't "how could a scammer
> > exploit this" you are doing it wrong.
>
> I've thought about that for several hours now, and I'm sure scammers
> far prefer bitcoin. Folding@Home's lab director is a partner
> Andreessen Horowitz, so he has certainly had no lack of resources to
> defend against the possibility, and I am persuaded that the Indiana
> nonprofit behind FLDC is sincere and acting in good faith at present.
> If the Foundation is hesitant, they might sponsor an audit of either
> or both, but the Folding@Home project is so established that its
> article is featured on enwiki.
>
> I have no financial interest in any cryptocurrency, and I never have,
> and I don't have a familial interest with anyone who I am aware has
> any either.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] when is the last time a one-line fundraising banner was A/B tested

2018-10-05 Thread James Salsman
Apparently it says $10 in Brazil?

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 3:29 AM Paulo Santos Perneta
 wrote:
>...
> Looking by the sample I know in Brazil (last year fundraising campaign, in
> August I believe) the Brazilian Portuguese Wikipedia readers often got
> enraged to the point of vandalizing articles stating their disgust for a
> campaign asking money to an impoverished country (even more saying 10$ was
> the cost of a coffee there). Others "donated" money or attempted to donate
> it thinking it was a kind of a fee for being allowed to read Wikipédia
> (kind of a subscription).
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 10:28 AM Peter Southwood
 wrote:
>
> I thought this specific message was targeting North Americans for whom $3 is 
> a realistic price. If the message is for worldwide use I would also find it 
> offensive in its US centric price claims. I am in Africa, where a cup of 
> coffee would normally be less than $3 US, but is enormously variable 
> depending on where you are, what coffee you drink, and who you buy it from. I 
> don't drink coffee myself, so not particularly expert on the topic.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf 
> Of James Salsman
> Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 7:17 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] when is the last time a one-line fundraising 
> banner was A/B tested
>
> Someone recently complained that referring to the equivalent of USD $3
> as the cost of a cup of coffee was incorrect and substantially
> offensive in Brazil. And then a few weeks later there was a discussion
> about how donations are so much smaller in the developing world.
>
> Coincidence? I don't think so.
>
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 10:11 AM Peter Southwood
>  wrote:
> >
> > It is a bit of a wall of text, but at first reading the message is less 
> > offensive than many previous versions.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] when is the last time a one-line fundraising banner was A/B tested

2018-10-05 Thread James Salsman
Someone recently complained that referring to the equivalent of USD $3
as the cost of a cup of coffee was incorrect and substantially
offensive in Brazil. And then a few weeks later there was a discussion
about how donations are so much smaller in the developing world.

Coincidence? I don't think so.

On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 10:11 AM Peter Southwood
 wrote:
>
> It is a bit of a wall of text, but at first reading the message is less 
> offensive than many previous versions.
> Cheers,
> Peter

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] when is the last time a one-line fundraising banner was A/B tested

2018-10-05 Thread James Salsman
The fundraising banner has gotten much bigger again:
https://i.imgur.com/vMVbAHz.png

I know it is bigger because it performs better relative to similar
somewhat smaller banners, but I have a quantitive question: How much
longer would the annual fundraiser need to take in order to raise the
same amount of money from a one-line banner such as Google uses for
their charitable fundraising? E.g.: https://i.imgur.com/mm31Qn5.png

As far as I can tell, the last time a one-line banner was tested seems
to be 2008. Shouldn't we try again? Section links don't work on a lot
of browsers when a large banner is written in through javascript after
the html vertical layout has been rendered, which is really annoying.
That and other factors could make a one line banner surprisingly more
effective than a big one. The pitch at the sidebar donation link's
donate.wikimedia.org landing page is just as persuasive and
featureful.

Wouldn't it be better to show more one-line banners to achieve the same amount?

___
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] FY1718 Fundraising Report now published

2018-09-29 Thread James Salsman
Ah, I see, it's the Endowment Advisory Board member Peter Baldwin and
his wife Lisbet Rausing.

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/09/25/wikimedia-endowment-matching-gift/

Was the donation from the individuals or the Arcadia Fund?

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:38 PM James Salsman  wrote:
>
> What or who is "Arcadia," listed in the Endowment Benefactors as
> having given more than $5 million?
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:16 PM Thea Skaff  wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I am writing to share with you our fundraising report for fiscal year 2018
> > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2017-18_Report>. This report
> > is a collaborative effort on behalf of many teams: fundraising tech, ops
> > and donor services, major gifts, online fundraising, legal, communications,
> > and more.
> >
> > The fundraising report offers us an opportunity to pause and reflect on
> > learnings from last year and also consider where we're headed, particularly
> > as we approach one of our busiest times of the year for fundraising. It's
> > also an inspiring reminder of how many people across the world support the
> > work of the community and WMF staff.
> >
> > We welcome your questions and feedback.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Thea
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Thea Skaff*
> > Fundraising Program Manager
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
> > San Francisco, CA 94104
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FY1718 Fundraising Report now published

2018-09-29 Thread James Salsman
What or who is "Arcadia," listed in the Endowment Benefactors as
having given more than $5 million?


On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:16 PM Thea Skaff  wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am writing to share with you our fundraising report for fiscal year 2018
> . This report
> is a collaborative effort on behalf of many teams: fundraising tech, ops
> and donor services, major gifts, online fundraising, legal, communications,
> and more.
>
> The fundraising report offers us an opportunity to pause and reflect on
> learnings from last year and also consider where we're headed, particularly
> as we approach one of our busiest times of the year for fundraising. It's
> also an inspiring reminder of how many people across the world support the
> work of the community and WMF staff.
>
> We welcome your questions and feedback.
>
> Thank you,
> Thea
>
>
>
> --
> *Thea Skaff*
> Fundraising Program Manager
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
> San Francisco, CA 94104
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] C-team Statement on the Code of Conduct

2018-08-14 Thread James Salsman
Victoria,

Does the restriction on "Disclosure of a person's identity or other
private information without their consent" forbid the Foundation from
sharing the geolocation and IP addresses of editors with researchers
under NDA or law enforcement officials claiming to have, e.g., an
Interpol subpoena?

Sincerely,
Jim Salsman

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Victoria Coleman
 wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> The executive leadership team, on behalf of the Foundation, would like to 
> issue a statement of unequivocal support for the Code of Conduct[1] and the 
> community-led Code of Conduct Committee. We believe that the development and 
> implementation of the Code are vital in ensuring the healthy functioning of 
> our technical communities and spaces. The Code of Conduct was created to 
> address obstacles and occasionally very problematic personal communications 
> that limit participation and cause real harm to community members and staff. 
> In engaging in this work we are setting the tone for the ways we collaborate 
> in tech. We are saying that treating others badly is not welcome in our 
> communities. And we are joining an important movement in the tech industry to 
> address these problems in a way that supports self-governance consistent with 
> our values.
>
> This initiative is critical in continuing the amazing work of our projects 
> and ensuring that they continue to flourish in delivering on the critical 
> vision of being the essential infrastructure of free knowledge now and 
> forever.
>
> Toby, Maggie, Eileen, Heather, Lisa, Katherine, Jaime, Joady, and Victoria
>
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct 
> 
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Wikimedia Foundation has soft launched!

2018-08-02 Thread James Salsman
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy


On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:13 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 4:56 AM, Yair Rand  wrote:
>
>> The new website highlights "Advocacy" as one of the three areas that the
>> Foundation deals with, along with Research and Technology. From the page
>> linked, it promotes the WMF's misguided and unauthorized venture into
>> trying to influence US immigration law, now claiming it to be something the
>> WMF does "routinely". These statements do not belong on the WMF website.
>>
>
> Completely agree. But given that there is no sign of WMF willing to keep
> advocacy within its core mission, I would like to know where can we propose
> and discuss advocacy areas? There is a number of issues that affect the
> work of Wikimedians that would need to be prioritized.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Celebrating Wikimania 2018 online

2018-07-23 Thread James Salsman
Chris Henner's proposal to limit future Wikimanias to the developing
world caught my interest:

https://twitter.com/schiste/status/1020682919826939904

I'd certainly support that as we all ponder whether the US is a
reasonable HQ anymore.

Best regards,
Jim

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 12:26 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak  wrote:
> Hi Romaine,
>
> What a nice idea! Thanks!
>
> Dj "pundit"
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018, 20:25 Romaine Wiki  wrote:
>
>>  The official part of Wikimania is over, this does not prevent ourselves
>> from celebrating Africa's first Wikimania online, in more particular:
>> writing Wikipedia articles.
>>
>> Africa is under represented in Wikipedia, by writing about it we both
>> celebrate our great conference as well as we work on solving the Africagap
>>
>> With some Dutchies we started the idea of having a list of like 10-20
>> articles of subjects from Cape Town and surrounding area. For example:
>>
>>
>> Well-known park in Cape Town:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company%27s_Garden
>>
>> The often referred to Dassie:
>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q323847
>>
>> Input needed!
>>
>> Romaine
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Movement Strategy Working Group goal proposals some of which overlap Thematic Areas

2018-07-19 Thread James Salsman
I'm forwarding my Movement Strategy proposals for wider comment.

Best regards,
Jim

-- Forwarded message --
From: James Salsman 
Date: Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:06 PM
Subject: Movement Strategy Working Group goal proposals some of which
overlap Thematic Areas
To: kvai...@wikimedia.org
Cc: Nicole Ebber , Ad Huikeshoven
, Pine W 


Hi Kaarel,

Thank you for facilitating the Movement Strategy teleconference.

As promised, here are the Working Group proposals I would like to
make, each of which is listed with the applicable Thematic Area(s)
from the abbreviations below. I hope this helps resolve the issue of
how to assign questions which overlap in different Areas.

[R] [COM] [DIV] [ADV] Movement leaders need to advocate for policies
which directly support the informed, healthy, and abundant
availability of community volunteers. I.e.
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-June/090494.html
;

[R] [REV] [ADV] CFO should be trying to achieve capital appreciation
instead of cash retention, the former being a refinement of the
latter, and our investments should be consistent with our principles
-- https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-January/089458.html
-- and -- 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_227=828849352#Warren_Buffett_investment_lessons_and_our_endowment_fund
;

[R] [PAR] [T] [CAP] intelligibility remediation on Wiktionary as a
Foundation
technology development project http://j.mp/scraise ;

[R] [COM] [T] [CAP] [DIV] [ADV] we should not be logging
personally identifiable information which might increase our subpoena
burden or result in privacy violation incidents. Fuzzing geolocation
is okay, but we should not be transmitting IP addresses into logs
across even a LAN, for example, and we certainly shouldn't be
purchasing hardware with backdoor coprocessors wasting electricity and
exposing us to government or similar intrusions
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/analytics/2017-January/005696.html
;

[R] [RES] [COM] [CAP] [DIV] [ADV] we need to make sure our economics
articles aren't pro-austerity or pro-trickle down --
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-May/090181.html
-- and, e.g. --
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wiki-research-l/2018-April/006256.html
;

[R] [RES] [COM] [T] [CAP] [DIV] we need to provide more
telepresence opportunities for participation -- I do not have a
current URL for the best telepresence robots, but e.g. Amazon likely
does -- I do note that the Smithsonian recently started featuring a
robot docent  ;

[R] [RES] [PAR] [COM] [DIV] [ADV] we should add an essay contest
into the Education program
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/education/2018-May/002002.html ;

[R] [RES] [COM] [DIV] [ADV] we should be demanding compulsory
royalties for Wikipedians --
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/publicpolicy/2016-December/001559.html
;

[R] [REV] [PAR] [CAP] We should grow the Endowment with exclusive
fundraiser galas competing with the World Economic Forum for the most
exclusive fundraising events; and

(via Pine) [R] [RES] [COM] [CAP] Working Groups should be allowed to
make exceptions to the hour requirements in pursuit of expertise and
diversity -- Kaarel, you mentioned you have already added language to
address this issue.

Please let me know your thoughts.

Best regards,
Jim

P.S. Thematic areas and abbreviations:

[R] Roles & Responsibilities

[REV] Revenue Streams

[RES] Resource Allocation

[PAR] Partnerships

[COM] Community Health

[T] Technology & Product

[CAP] Capacity Building

[DIV] Diversity

[ADV] Advocacy

___
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] HHS Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's National Guideline Clearinghouse

2018-07-17 Thread James Salsman
Can we move the Department of Health and Human Services' National
Guideline Clearinghouse to Wikisource? Do we have contacts in HHS to
help?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/hhs-plans-to-delete-20-years-of-critical-medical-guidelines-next-week

"The Trump Administration is planning to eliminate a vast trove of
medical guidelines that for nearly 20 years has been a critical
resource for doctors, researchers and others in the medical community.

"Maintained by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [AHRQ],
part of the Department of Health and Human Services, the database is
known as the National Guideline Clearinghouse [NGC], and it’s
scheduled to “go dark,” in the words of an official there, on July
16.\\

https://www.ahrq.gov/gam/about/index.html

https://www.ahrq.gov/gam/updates/index.html

___
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] Curating YOUR Wikipedia

2018-07-16 Thread James Salsman
Gerard and Alessandro,

The taxonomy question is very important. I touched on it in the
ethnicity categorization discussion:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-May/090366.html

I suggest that both the Enwiki Categories and Wikidata are most
deficient from a utilitarian perspective because of their poor support
of the bijection between subject matter experts and their subjects,
which is one of the man reasons for the existence of encyclopedias and
"Who's Who in ..." references to begin with. This issue has come up
more and more in my mentoring, and these two patent applications
caught my eye:

IBM: 
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/ec/a6/fe/b47153da8a0a0d/US20100262610A1.pdf

Siemens: 
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/b0/7b/b1/5bdcddc6370ceb/US20160140186A1.pdf

Those are different approaches to the general over-arching problem,
pursued as patent applications -- even under the current pro-free
(perhaps overly pro-free) software patent reexamination regime -- by
those companies because they recognize the centrality of the problem
to be solved.

Do you think Wikidata can serve as a unified subject matter expert database?

Best regards,
Jim

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 4:56 AM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 wrote:
> Hi.
> You said that you find an area where there is a problem. I found another one 
> too, taxonomy, and in this case I am quite sure it won't be solved for a 
> while even without better diagnostic tools. Yet I am optimistic on the long 
> term. I have also found areas where problems were similar to yours, and they 
> were solved. Like the examples of ancient Greece items. In that case you need 
> enough people that knows ancient Greek, possibly, and those can be rare to 
> find as well.
> For one thing you notice, there are other ones other people noticed. But they 
> also see them improving, we have examples.
>
> As far I can say from my experience, the main issue, if the discrepancies 
> were not structural (that is: in the sources), was not having a super tool. 
> In the end, it was about understanding the sources. Tools help, they are 
> cool, is nice to show them, but you need human resources. For all these 
> possible gaps I can notice, my strategy is to look for people.
> Sometimes I ask to improve tools based specifically on what these people, the 
> newbies of wikidata, want, not what the "expert users" want. I don't say 
> these people know what is best but they kinda feel what is necessary, 
> especially what is necessary to integrate more users with specific necessary 
> knowledge in the workflow.
>
> So my core advice remain the same: create a dedicated project, ask users 
> interested in the topic, teach them wikidata. You can teach them without a 
> project too, but I guess the project could help.
>
> I made you one example in the private mail, the situation of the Italian 
> hamlets imported by some archive on some minor wikipedians (to pick a theme 
> among possible dozens). Some of them are correct, some of them are weird . 
> They are still there but, as I said, if you want to get rid of the trash I 
> can find you 30 users now willing to clean up in a short amount of time and 
> leave only what has a real meaning. So it's not so bad. I could have written 
> general emails and the structural starting point would have not changed this 
> way.
>
> What I am trying to say is that you probably have around the human resources 
> to tackle most of this cluster of work, you just have to find them. I see the 
> energy inside the communities. Your mail is more centered on the issue, the 
> guideline, the possible tool... it 's not "warm". You don't seem to consider 
> the people who should do the continuous, constant work. You describe 
> something where you are alone and I might say, if I ask this help inside the 
> wikidata community, I have the same feeling sometimes. That is true, since 
> there are many small tasks that are much simpler, very generic tasks that are 
> interesting to write a nerdy post on ablog, or virgin areas ready to be 
> conquered massively importing data from archives... and many established 
> wikidata users prefer to focus on these things. But when I look for users at 
> the level of local communities, I had much less problems, i had good 
> feedback. That's it. And that is why I am basically optimistic.
>
> When I see a situation that is not evolving inside wikidata, my instinct 
> remains to ask around to people who create real content wherever they are.
> About this specific problem, did you contact the users who created these 
> contents on local wikipedias? 50% of them should have a decent English 
> working proficiency, in my experience. Did you scroll the history of the 
> pages here and there, found the most common usernames dedicated to their 
> creation and maintennace, and left the a message in their user talks? that's 
> what I am trying to understand.
>
> Il Lunedì 16 Luglio 2018 8:13, Gerard 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Response to recent developments of United States travel ban

2018-07-08 Thread James Salsman
Mario,

Your argument is not convincing, because:

"The so called ‘travel ban’ that was introduced by President Trump and
the re-evaluation of the H-1B visa programme threaten the ability of
the US to attract skilled talent into the country (Mahmud, 2017; You,
Bohannon, & Stone, 2017). Indeed, Microsoft has already opened a
satellite office in Vancouver, Canada to mitigate the challenges in
accessing key talent created by these changes, with many other tech
companies reported to be considering their options (Dixon, 2017)"
citing:

Mahmud, A. (2017). Looking beyond H-1B visas to attract technical
talent. Harvard Business Review [online]. Retrieved June 26, 2017,
from https://hbr.org/2017/06/looking-beyond-h-1b-visas-to-find-tech-talent

You, J., Bohannon, J., & Stone, R.(2017). Raising the drawbridge.
Science, 355(6328), 896.10.1126/science.355.6328.896

Dixon, L. (2017). Tighter immigration policy pushes firms to open
foreign satellite offices. Talent Economy [online]. Retrieved June 26,
2017, from 
http://www.talenteconomy.io/2017/06/19/tighter-immigration-policy-pushes-firms-open-foreign-satellite-offices/

Please see also:

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-1e40517da152288614b980cf9087e7dd

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/23/opinions/trump-travel-ban-fuels-terrorism-clapper-geltzer-olsen/index.html

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/04/25/trumps-travel-ban-might-be-legal-but-its-bad-policy/

Sincerely,
Jim


On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 3:20 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 8:53 PM, James Salsman  wrote:
>
>> The is between arbitrary border security theater and allowing the
>> Foundation to recruit and hire the best candidates. If the Foundation
>> was silent on the matter, there would be less of a chance of retaining
>> the right.
>>
>
> Not really. IMHO, the choice is between 1) acknowledging that we have a
> diverse community where everyone may choose to support an organization
> (other than the WMF) that matches their political position, or 2) imposing
> a very specific political position upon the community.
>
> I consider the "best candidate" point a fallacy, since it works with the
> premise that human talent is so scarce that for every position in an
> organization there is a single or very few people in the world fit for it.
> I have seen the exact same point used so often to justify positions against
> diversity, equality or economic independence policies that I don't buy it
> anymore. There are many organizational policies that are more effective to
> increase the pool of candidates, such as being globally distributed rather
> than forcing relocation to the US, and they do not involve this kind of
> lobbying.
>
> PS.- In order to avoid thread hijacking, I will not answer here your points
> about the other thread.
>
> Best,
>
> MarioGom
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Response to recent developments of United States travel ban

2018-07-07 Thread James Salsman
P.S. The choice* is between

On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 12:53 PM, James Salsman  wrote:
> Mario,
>
> The is between arbitrary border security theater and allowing the
> Foundation to recruit and hire the best candidates. If the Foundation
> was silent on the matter, there would be less of a chance of retaining
> the right.
>
> Thank you for your reply on the other thread about the Executive
> Director's Letter to Donors. I think you raise a few good points,
> which I hope to respond to soon. But your argument isn't compelling
> enough to make it a priority over my work at present. I look forward
> to reading a reply from you responding to more than just the first
> reference on free college. The answers to most if not almost all of
> your questions are in the other three references on free college,
> although they are dense and difficult to read, and require the
> understanding of amortization.
>
> [from that other thread:]
>
>>> I've spoken with perhaps fifty wikimedians over the past couple years,
>>> and I simply do not believe that more than 20% could wish such ill
>>> will on their peers.
>>
>> Let me be bold and suggest that around 99% of the people on this list
>> disagree with the percentages you keep making up.
>
> Why the Foundation wouldn't have already called this question with a
> survey is beyond me.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 5:10 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>> I find these activities by the WMF really disturbing for the community.
>> Looking at previous discussions, I am not the first one to voice these
>> issues, but here is my summary:
>>
>> == It is cherry-picking ==
>>
>> The WMF has no long-term commitment to immigration issues. This leads to
>> the appearance that the WMF is cherry-picking an issue against a specific
>> US administration while ignoring both previous administrations and
>> established bipartisan trends in US foreign policy. When I read these
>> communiqués, there are immediate questions that arise about its consistency:
>>
>> * Why does the WMF remain silent about US immigration policies towards
>> Mexicans, which have been going on for more time?
>>
>> * Why does the WMF position itself against religious discrimination on
>> immigration policies, but ignores ideological discrimination?
>>
>>
>> == It is not necessary ==
>>
>> A lot of us in the community support organizations that engage in advocacy
>> on immigration issues. We chose to support organizations that match our
>> political positions and I encourage other members of the community to get
>> involved in organizations matching theirs. But it does not make sense that,
>> when I support the Wikimedia Foundation, I get to support an organization
>> sustaining political positions that enter in conflict with mine.
>>
>>
>> == It does not respect ideological diversity in the community ==
>>
>> As an extension of previous point: the WMF position does not respect the
>> ideological diversity in the community. We signed up for free knowledge,
>> not to promote a very narrow and particular political position. Some
>> example of issues that raise political conflicts for some members of the
>> community:
>>
>> * When the WMF says "the U.S., where we have unique freedoms that are
>> essential to supporting the Wikimedia projects", what unique freedom are
>> they referring to? Some of us find that plainly offensive from a country
>> that we consider to have severe problems for freedom, and that we consider
>> that play an international role that is damaging to freedom worldwide.
>>
>> * When the WMF specifically refers to Libya: why doesn't it condemn NATO
>> invasion of Libya, which destroyed the country and caused a major
>> immigration crisis in Europe? Some of us find this kind of position
>> offensive too.
>>
>>
>> == It alienates the community ==
>>
>> If the WMF wants to get involved in advocacy activities beyond its core
>> mission, at least, it should perform a global consultation process with the
>> community to approve it. Otherwise, a lot of us are alienated by the fact
>> that we are supporting a project that performs advocacy activities that we
>> might not share, and we didn't even had the chance to get out voices heard.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> MarioGom
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> *This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068
>>> &l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Response to recent developments of United States travel ban

2018-07-07 Thread James Salsman
Mario,

The is between arbitrary border security theater and allowing the
Foundation to recruit and hire the best candidates. If the Foundation
was silent on the matter, there would be less of a chance of retaining
the right.

Thank you for your reply on the other thread about the Executive
Director's Letter to Donors. I think you raise a few good points,
which I hope to respond to soon. But your argument isn't compelling
enough to make it a priority over my work at present. I look forward
to reading a reply from you responding to more than just the first
reference on free college. The answers to most if not almost all of
your questions are in the other three references on free college,
although they are dense and difficult to read, and require the
understanding of amortization.

[from that other thread:]

>> I've spoken with perhaps fifty wikimedians over the past couple years,
>> and I simply do not believe that more than 20% could wish such ill
>> will on their peers.
>
> Let me be bold and suggest that around 99% of the people on this list
> disagree with the percentages you keep making up.

Why the Foundation wouldn't have already called this question with a
survey is beyond me.

Best regards,
Jim


On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 5:10 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
> I find these activities by the WMF really disturbing for the community.
> Looking at previous discussions, I am not the first one to voice these
> issues, but here is my summary:
>
> == It is cherry-picking ==
>
> The WMF has no long-term commitment to immigration issues. This leads to
> the appearance that the WMF is cherry-picking an issue against a specific
> US administration while ignoring both previous administrations and
> established bipartisan trends in US foreign policy. When I read these
> communiqués, there are immediate questions that arise about its consistency:
>
> * Why does the WMF remain silent about US immigration policies towards
> Mexicans, which have been going on for more time?
>
> * Why does the WMF position itself against religious discrimination on
> immigration policies, but ignores ideological discrimination?
>
>
> == It is not necessary ==
>
> A lot of us in the community support organizations that engage in advocacy
> on immigration issues. We chose to support organizations that match our
> political positions and I encourage other members of the community to get
> involved in organizations matching theirs. But it does not make sense that,
> when I support the Wikimedia Foundation, I get to support an organization
> sustaining political positions that enter in conflict with mine.
>
>
> == It does not respect ideological diversity in the community ==
>
> As an extension of previous point: the WMF position does not respect the
> ideological diversity in the community. We signed up for free knowledge,
> not to promote a very narrow and particular political position. Some
> example of issues that raise political conflicts for some members of the
> community:
>
> * When the WMF says "the U.S., where we have unique freedoms that are
> essential to supporting the Wikimedia projects", what unique freedom are
> they referring to? Some of us find that plainly offensive from a country
> that we consider to have severe problems for freedom, and that we consider
> that play an international role that is damaging to freedom worldwide.
>
> * When the WMF specifically refers to Libya: why doesn't it condemn NATO
> invasion of Libya, which destroyed the country and caused a major
> immigration crisis in Europe? Some of us find this kind of position
> offensive too.
>
>
> == It alienates the community ==
>
> If the WMF wants to get involved in advocacy activities beyond its core
> mission, at least, it should perform a global consultation process with the
> community to approve it. Otherwise, a lot of us are alienated by the fact
> that we are supporting a project that performs advocacy activities that we
> might not share, and we didn't even had the chance to get out voices heard.
>
>
> Best,
>
> MarioGom
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
> wrote:
>
>> *This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068
>> *
>> *Please consider supporting with translations. *
>>
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> On Tuesday, the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court,
>> ruled in favor of the current U.S. administration’s restrictions[1] on
>> travel and immigration from seven countries.[2] In a 5-4 ruling, the Court
>> found that the restrictions were lawfully created, despite their breach of
>> the longstanding ideals of the U.S. immigration system and disturbing
>> comments [3] made by the current administration about the religious basis
>> for some of these restrictions.
>>
>> Of the seven countries named, at least three have active Wikimedia
>> communities. The Wikimedia chapter in Venezuela, Iranian Wikimedians user
>> group, and proposed 

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

2018-07-06 Thread James Salsman
Lodewijk,

I want to ask about something you wrote:

>... Not taking a position is definitely not the same as
> taking a 'neutral' position or holding the middle ground.

Suppose for the sake of argument that there are two competing popular
opinions, one of which is more true than another. If the opinions are
noteworthy statements on notable subjects, then it is appropriate to
describe both. In accepting the right to do so for others, isn't there
a corresponding responsibility to describe which of the two reliable
sources say is more true?

The point I am trying to make, is that those who view a lack of
partisanship as a benefit are those who don't speak up when things are
going wrong, and those people are hurting the people our Mission seeks
to educate, and the people our Mission depends on to volunteer.

Are there any specific reasons that the Foundation should remain
neutral on any topic, economic, political, or otherwise, which clearly
impacts the readership or community?

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Wikimedia Foundation's FY18-19 Annual Plan is on Meta-wiki

2018-07-04 Thread James Salsman
Pine,

Thanks for your reply. Can you say more about which kind of SMART you
prefer? According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria the
definitions have drifted since original publication of the term,
including by authors who seem to have eclipsed the original's
popularity. The T = Timely vs. Time-constrained seems like a pretty
large difference.

Best regards,
Jim


On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 11:02 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> Hi James,
>
>
> Let me start with something positive to say before I discuss problems.
>
>
> I think that there were some good intentions with this plan. Also, I think 
> that some good things will happen this year, such as with Structured Data on 
> Commons and with the Audience Department's Growth Team, regardless of the 
> shortcomings with the WMF AP.
>
>
> Unfortunately, good intentions don't fully compensate for poor design or 
> incompleteness.
>
>
> A good place to start to see problems is here: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2018-2019/Final#Appendix_1:_resources.
>  I am looking for project-based budgets, SMART goals, and detailed financial 
> projections. I sampled three departmental APs: Communications, Audiences, and 
> Talent and Culture.
>
>
> I want to distinguish plans from promises. I don't expect that every SMART 
> goal will be met, and I understand that plans and goals can change over time 
> due to changes in available resources, new information, projects failing or 
> succeeding beyond expectations, or other factors. An Annual Plan is not an 
> Annual Promise. I also want to keep in mind that flexibility is valuable to 
> take advantage of emergent opportunities, and that excessively detailed 
> planning can be unnecessarily costly.
>
>
> But proceeding without SMART goals for T (is there a single SMART goal for 
> them?), and with such limited financial detail for all three of the 
> departments that I sampled, is disappointing. I am also disappointed by the 
> lack of project-based budgeting.
>
>
> Realistically, unless the WMF Board decides to get serious about making and 
> publishing good annual plans, we are stuck.
>
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> null
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Wikimedia Foundation's FY18-19 Annual Plan is on Meta-wiki

2018-06-30 Thread James Salsman
> WMF APs consistently fail to meet my expectations

Pine do you have a list of specific flaws somewhere? You have good
advice, but I've lost track of much of it.

Did you participate in the AP talk page discussions? Did you try
editing it to meet your standards?

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:15 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> I am looking forward to the year ahead too. However, for the record, I am 
> disappointed with several aspects of the AP document as currently written, 
> and it is not a document that I would have approved in its current form. I 
> think that WMF should have its APs scrubbed by an uninvolved expert party, 
> similar to how the FDC scrubs the APs of Wikimedia affiliates that submit AP 
> funding requests to WMF. I am unhappy about WMF approving its own APs, 
> particularly given how the WMF APs consistently fail to meet my expectations, 
> and if given the choice I would put a stop to this practice.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>  Original message From: Katherine Maher 
>  Date: 6/29/18  5:43 PM  (GMT-08:00) To: Wikimedia 
> Mailing List , Funds Dissemination Committee 
> List , "Staff (All)" , 
> wikimediaannounce-l  Subject: Re: 
> [Wikimedia-l] The Wikimedia Foundation's FY18-19 Annual Plan is
> on Meta-wiki
> Hi all,
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation is pleased to announce that our final FY18-19
> Annual Plan[1] is now available on Meta. The Annual Plan was approved by
> the Board of Trustees on June 12th.
>
> This Annual Plan remains organized around three goals that focus on making
> critical improvements to our systems and structures to ensure that we’re
> better positioned for our ongoing work against the strategic direction[2].
> The Foundation’s goals for this year should not only move us closer to
> knowledge equity and service, but will prepare us to execute against the 3
> to 5 year strategic plan which we intend to develop this year in order to
> guide the Foundation’s work into the future.
>
> From all of us here at the Foundation, we thank everyone who engaged with
> the process by asking questions and providing feedback on the Annual Plan
> throughout its development. This insight continues to push us to improve
> our planning, our programs, and the way that we share our work.  Based on
> this feedback and our continued refinement of our plans, we have updated
> the budget and several of the specific program plans that are linked in the
> Appendix.
>
> We look forward to the year ahead!
> Katherine
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2018-2019/Final
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Katherine Maher 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm delighted to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation's Annual Plan for
>> FY18-19 is now on Meta[1].
>>
>> This year, we have organized our efforts around three goals that focus on
>> making critical improvements to our systems and structures to ensure that
>> we’re better positioned for our coming work against the strategic
>> direction[2]. The Foundation’s goals for this year should not only move us
>> closer to knowledge equity and service, but will prepare us to execute
>> against the 3- to 5-year strategic plan which we intend to develop this
>> year in order to guide the Foundation’s work into the future.
>>
>> As you’ll see, we’ve made some changes to the structure of this year’s
>> annual plan. This year’s plan is organized around three goals for the
>> Foundation’s work in the year to come. By restructuring the Annual Plan, we
>> have written a plan for the whole Foundation,  rather than an aggregation
>> of plans from all of our departments and teams. In this sense, we’re
>> seeking to become a better-integrated institution, rather than a collection
>> of teams and departments with disparate goals.
>>
>> We’ve also reduced the overall length of the published Annual Plan. We
>> wanted to make sure that the focus and goals of our work don’t get lost in
>> the details. Of course, we know that many community members enjoy reading
>> the particulars of our planned work, so you can still access the details of
>> departmental programs through links to their descriptions on Meta or
>> MediaWiki.org. These links will provide interested readers with detailed
>> departmental programs, which describe the specific and detailed program
>> goals, impact and outcomes. This change does not sacrifice the depth and
>> rigor of our planning process, but rather, it is meant to keep the Annual
>> Plan lean and focused while allowing interested readers to dive deep into
>> the details.
>>
>> Finally, we’ve expanded the planning framework we instituted last year for
>> cross-departmental programs to all of our programs across the Foundation.
>> This allows us to clearly link a program’s resources to outcomes and
>> measures. As such, we’ve presented the Annual Plan budget in terms 

[Wikimedia-l] what is making me happy this week

2018-06-28 Thread James Salsman
map internationalization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otAX58IZ6KA?t=8m40s

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


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

2018-06-18 Thread James Salsman
> I think the general attitude is clear: not interested.

I've spoken with perhaps fifty wikimedians over the past couple years,
and I simply do not believe that more than 20% could wish such ill
will on their peers.

I am hardly the only one to speak up for community attraction and
retention issues.

Best regards,
Jim


On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Lodewijk  wrote:
> Dear James,
>
> this is a returning topic, it seems (Wikimedia should take political stands
> on XYZ economic policies). And somehow it's always initiated by you.
>
> I think the general attitude is clear: not interested.
>
> I join the chorus: Wikimedia should remain nonpartisan, and not take any
> position in political debates - unless it is directly relevant for our
> mission. Exceptions may arise if there is a demonstrated overwhelming
> consensus (as seems to have been the case with the climate neutral
> policies), but even then focused on our projects. Not taking a position is
> definitely not the same as taking a 'neutral' position or holding the
> middle ground.
>
> This has nothing to do with the ED's resume, or what she does or doesn't
> like to do. This has to do with core fundamental values our movement is
> built on. Not taking a position in political debates is a core requirement
> for us to remain acceptable as a source of information to all parties.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:57 AM James Salsman  wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 5:38 PM, Dennis During  wrote:
>> > Yes. I think I am. I wouldn't have thought that WMF would be so driven by
>> > economics.
>>
>> Have you looked at the ED's CV?
>>
>> > I would bail from this project and find another that was less partisan
>>
>> If the ED told donors to take steps that might get American editors
>> health care, UK editors free college, German editors shorter work
>> weeks, or Greek editors a two-bracket tax structure, that would be
>> enough to make you want to stop participating? Why?
>>
>> > fewer and fewer institutions seem nonpartisan to me.
>>
>> I wish I could say the same. The Denver Post was just taken over by a
>> hedge fund a couple months ago, and the newsroom staff gutted. That
>> was certainly the kind of libertarian partisanship which the
>> Foundation certainly supported through early support of civil
>> liberties groups to the exclusion of tax and transfer equity groups,
>> not to mention the Objectivist bent of most of the wikipedias'
>> economics articles. Now the reporters are jumping ship and forming a
>> new employee-owned newspaper, the Colorado Sun, using blockchain
>> technology to facilitate a new equity structure.
>>
>> Being nonpartisan is like being neutral: relative to what? I am merely
>> asking that the Foundation's default partisan position be modified for
>> instead of against individual wikimedian editors.
>>
>> > the WMF projects would be more to your liking without people of my
>> > beliefs intruding on policy discussions.
>>
>> Nonsense! Some of my best friends believe
>>  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dfs1nG_UwAEsST3.jpg
>>
>> > I favor the WMF focusing its efforts on serving a vast public by offering
>> > content that is not
>>
>> Not what? Not biased like the enwiki's "Economics" article implying
>> that the government never spends taxes in a pathetic sophomorish
>> attempt to claim that taxes are always bad?
>>
>> >> We should measure how much donors are likely
>> >> to donate more or less for each of the issues.
>> >
>> > That is a short-run view.
>>
>> No, measurement to optimize donations is how we have always built the long
>> run.
>>
>> > I prefer institutions that seem committed to a minimal core set of
>> values.
>>
>> Such as fighting for the economic health of their volunteers thus
>> enlarging the pool of potential volunteers and winning the concordant
>> PR?
>>
>> > I am also surprised that you believe that the economics of donations
>> > and grants should be driving the projects.
>>
>> I was not surprised when others confirmed that the articles I've been
>> monitoring as quality barometers turned out to be heavily correlated
>> with articles likely to be associated with above-average donations.
>>
>> > Is WMF for sale to corporate donors, to large private donors, or to
>> those who
>> > craft seductive fund-raising messages?
>>
>> Well obviously not because there are still hundreds of banner messages
>> which have never been measured.
>>
>> >

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

2018-06-18 Thread James Salsman
On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 5:38 PM, Dennis During  wrote:
> Yes. I think I am. I wouldn't have thought that WMF would be so driven by
> economics.

Have you looked at the ED's CV?

> I would bail from this project and find another that was less partisan

If the ED told donors to take steps that might get American editors
health care, UK editors free college, German editors shorter work
weeks, or Greek editors a two-bracket tax structure, that would be
enough to make you want to stop participating? Why?

> fewer and fewer institutions seem nonpartisan to me.

I wish I could say the same. The Denver Post was just taken over by a
hedge fund a couple months ago, and the newsroom staff gutted. That
was certainly the kind of libertarian partisanship which the
Foundation certainly supported through early support of civil
liberties groups to the exclusion of tax and transfer equity groups,
not to mention the Objectivist bent of most of the wikipedias'
economics articles. Now the reporters are jumping ship and forming a
new employee-owned newspaper, the Colorado Sun, using blockchain
technology to facilitate a new equity structure.

Being nonpartisan is like being neutral: relative to what? I am merely
asking that the Foundation's default partisan position be modified for
instead of against individual wikimedian editors.

> the WMF projects would be more to your liking without people of my
> beliefs intruding on policy discussions.

Nonsense! Some of my best friends believe
 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dfs1nG_UwAEsST3.jpg

> I favor the WMF focusing its efforts on serving a vast public by offering
> content that is not

Not what? Not biased like the enwiki's "Economics" article implying
that the government never spends taxes in a pathetic sophomorish
attempt to claim that taxes are always bad?

>> We should measure how much donors are likely
>> to donate more or less for each of the issues.
>
> That is a short-run view.

No, measurement to optimize donations is how we have always built the long run.

> I prefer institutions that seem committed to a minimal core set of values.

Such as fighting for the economic health of their volunteers thus
enlarging the pool of potential volunteers and winning the concordant
PR?

> I am also surprised that you believe that the economics of donations
> and grants should be driving the projects.

I was not surprised when others confirmed that the articles I've been
monitoring as quality barometers turned out to be heavily correlated
with articles likely to be associated with above-average donations.

> Is WMF for sale to corporate donors, to large private donors, or to those who
> craft seductive fund-raising messages?

Well obviously not because there are still hundreds of banner messages
which have never been measured.

>> I would also like to know the proportion of wikimedians who think the Mission
>> is so restrictive.
>
> Facts are always nice

The idea that more than a few percent of wikimedians think that the
Mission limits political advocacy to libertarian copyright and
internet law organizations is absurd. It may be 10% tops. If there is
an actual question, we can and should measure the quantity.

> What is an "optimized influence likelihood"?

For example, the arguments for free college, shorter work weeks,
payroll subsidies, and two-bracket taxation are appropriate for the
UK, but single payer health care is not, because they've already won
that a long time ago. Instead, the ED could substitute mental health
care increases for her letter to UK donors, for example.

But seriously, what kind of a UK wikimedian or donor is going to be
offended by a one-size-fits-all-nations letter asking for donors to
work for single payer in America? What kind of an African, Indian, or
Chinese Wikipedian wouldn't want American and UK wikipedians to have
free health care, shorter work weeks, and a more equitable tax and
transfer incidence?

Best regards,
Jim

>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 4:58 PM, Dennis During  wrote:
>> > I'd reconsider contributing content to WMF projects if WMF became a
>> > partisan on issues outside its basic remit.
>> >
>> > On Jun 15, 2018 16:11, "James Salsman"  wrote:
>> >
>> > Regarding https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273
>> >
>> > I propose that the Executive Director resume regular periodic
>> > correspondence with donors on other ways they can support the
>> > movement, beyond copyright and internet law advocacy that the
>> > Foundation traditionally supports directly and indirectly. In
>> > particular, I propose that the Executive Director ask donors to
>> > support other organizations which are working for free college,[1-4]
>> > single payer universal health care,[5] shorter work weeks,[6-7]
>>

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

2018-06-16 Thread James Salsman
Dennis,

Are you suggesting that public policy to support wikimedians outside
of copyright and internet law would be outside of the basic remit as
specified by the Mission? We should measure how much donors are likely
to donate more or less for each of the issues. I would also like to
know the proportion of wikimedians who think the Mission is so
restrictive.

> US only or worldwide

Peter, both in proportion to optimized influence likelihoods.

Best regards,
Jim

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 4:58 PM, Dennis During  wrote:
> I'd reconsider contributing content to WMF projects if WMF became a
> partisan on issues outside its basic remit.
>
> On Jun 15, 2018 16:11, "James Salsman"  wrote:
>
> Regarding https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273
>
> I propose that the Executive Director resume regular periodic
> correspondence with donors on other ways they can support the
> movement, beyond copyright and internet law advocacy that the
> Foundation traditionally supports directly and indirectly. In
> particular, I propose that the Executive Director ask donors to
> support other organizations which are working for free college,[1-4]
> single payer universal health care,[5] shorter work weeks,[6-7]
> payroll subsidies,[8] and two-bracket taxation.[9]
>
> I believe all of these goals are favored by wikimedians, for
> wikimedians, I predict at around 80% for the least popular. If there
> is any question I ask that a statistically robust and significant
> survey of the question among community and staff be conducted with the
> urgency commensurate that work in these areas deserves.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim Salsman
>
> [1]
> https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/free-community-college-california_n_6474940.html
>
> [2]
> https://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Documents/20121212_Economics%20of%20Higher%20Ed_vFINAL.pdf
>
> [3] https://www.docdroid.net/epSjOI2/peracchi2006.pdf
>
> [4] https://www.docdroid.net/joXd2MZ/heckman2006.pdf
>
> [5] https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1007106802507378689
>
> [6]
> https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/does-working-fewer-hours-make-you-more-productive/
>
> [7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workweek_and_weekend#Length
>
> [8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_Work_Pay_tax_credit
>
> [9]
> https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1595/12bb30b0ceddfe0525addf777bb2c31542b6.pdf
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

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

2018-06-15 Thread James Salsman
Thanks. I'd also like to temporarily relinquish work on
https://goo.gl/forms/BZVgFgFs8P5pCNUW2 to the Foundation. -Best
regards, Jim


On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:
> Hi James.
>
> Your suggestion is noted but there are lot's of things that we want to do
> with email but only a finite amount of resources in this area with which to
> achieve it so it'll be something for to thinking about in the future.
>
> Many Thanks
> Seddon
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 9:11 PM James Salsman  wrote:
>
>> Regarding https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273
>>
>> I propose that the Executive Director resume regular periodic
>> correspondence with donors on other ways they can support the
>> movement, beyond copyright and internet law advocacy that the
>> Foundation traditionally supports directly and indirectly. In
>> particular, I propose that the Executive Director ask donors to
>> support other organizations which are working for free college,[1-4]
>> single payer universal health care,[5] shorter work weeks,[6-7]
>> payroll subsidies,[8] and two-bracket taxation.[9]
>>
>> I believe all of these goals are favored by wikimedians, for
>> wikimedians, I predict at around 80% for the least popular. If there
>> is any question I ask that a statistically robust and significant
>> survey of the question among community and staff be conducted with the
>> urgency commensurate that work in these areas deserves.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jim Salsman
>>
>> [1]
>> https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/free-community-college-california_n_6474940.html
>>
>> [2]
>> https://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Documents/20121212_Economics%20of%20Higher%20Ed_vFINAL.pdf
>>
>> [3] https://www.docdroid.net/epSjOI2/peracchi2006.pdf
>>
>> [4] https://www.docdroid.net/joXd2MZ/heckman2006.pdf
>>
>> [5] https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1007106802507378689
>>
>> [6]
>> https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/does-working-fewer-hours-make-you-more-productive/
>>
>> [7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workweek_and_weekend#Length
>>
>> [8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_Work_Pay_tax_credit
>>
>> [9]
>> https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1595/12bb30b0ceddfe0525addf777bb2c31542b6.pdf
>>
>> ___
>> 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>
>
>
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
> *Advancement (Fundraising), 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>

___
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] Executive Director's Letter to Donors

2018-06-15 Thread James Salsman
Regarding https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273

I propose that the Executive Director resume regular periodic
correspondence with donors on other ways they can support the
movement, beyond copyright and internet law advocacy that the
Foundation traditionally supports directly and indirectly. In
particular, I propose that the Executive Director ask donors to
support other organizations which are working for free college,[1-4]
single payer universal health care,[5] shorter work weeks,[6-7]
payroll subsidies,[8] and two-bracket taxation.[9]

I believe all of these goals are favored by wikimedians, for
wikimedians, I predict at around 80% for the least popular. If there
is any question I ask that a statistically robust and significant
survey of the question among community and staff be conducted with the
urgency commensurate that work in these areas deserves.

Best regards,
Jim Salsman

[1] 
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/free-community-college-california_n_6474940.html

[2] 
https://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Documents/20121212_Economics%20of%20Higher%20Ed_vFINAL.pdf

[3] https://www.docdroid.net/epSjOI2/peracchi2006.pdf

[4] https://www.docdroid.net/joXd2MZ/heckman2006.pdf

[5] https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/1007106802507378689

[6] 
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/does-working-fewer-hours-make-you-more-productive/

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workweek_and_weekend#Length

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_Work_Pay_tax_credit

[9] 
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1595/12bb30b0ceddfe0525addf777bb2c31542b6.pdf

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


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

2018-06-15 Thread James Salsman
Hi Chris,

Thanks for posting the minutes. Regarding "Jaime presented a proposed
revision to the Foundation investment policy that shifted to a model
more focused on cash preservation than on short-term equity," who is
Jamie and why is appreciation not considered a goal on equal footing
with (and subsumed by first principles in) appreciation?

Best regards,
Jim


On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Charles M. Roslof
 wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has approved and published
> minutes from its meeting on April 19, 2018:
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2018-04-19
>
> Best,
>
> Charles M. Roslof
> Legal Counsel
> Wikimedia Foundation
> cros...@wikimedia.org
> (415) 839-6885
>
> NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical
> reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
> members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
> on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer.
>
> ___
> 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] Second Fundraising experiment on Facebook

2018-06-15 Thread James Salsman
Caitlin,

Are we planning to compare the costs and outcomes of donation appeals
using other internet advertisers?

I predict Nextdoor.com have a substantially lower cost per donation
than Facebook, but there is only one way to find out. I would say the
same for Google Adwords and Bing ads, in that they should cost less
per the same donated amounts than Facebook, but probably not
Nextdoor.com.

Please post detailed conversions statistics to the Updates page on meta.

Best regards,
Jim

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Caitlin Cogdill
 wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> A year ago, the WMF Fundraising team ran an experiment showing donation
> appeals on Facebook. While the experiment was valuable, we need more
> experience and data to properly assess Facebook’s viability as a potential
> revenue channel. This is important to us because leveraging Facebook’s
> broad audience allows us to meet our users where they prefer to engage
> online.
>
> Over the last few months, we have been working on content variations for a
> new experiment, trying content more closely based on the messaging that
> already performs well on Wikipedia. *I’m writing today to say we will be
> launching our second Facebook ads experiment on Monday, June 18.*
>
> We would like to note we are approaching this test with caution and are
> making every effort to protect our donors’ information. We’ve been working
> closely with the Foundation’s Legal team to re-review Facebook’s latest
> policies and terms of service before a single ad is placed. We are not
> uploading our donor lists to Facebook for any list matching or donor
> suppression (meaning active Wikipedia donors may see these ads). All ads
> will direct donors to the Foundation’s hosted donation pages, and we are
> not sending Facebook any conversion metrics or personally identifiable
> information on who donates from the ads we run.
>
> The parameters for this experiment are very similar to those my colleague
> Sam laid out in his email last year, which I am including below for
> reference. The high level details are:
>
> *WHEN:* Beginning Monday, June 18 - appx June 30
> *WHO:* Facebook users in the US who speak English. We will do some more
> specific demographic targeting based on age, education, and interests, but
> are deliberately starting by casting a wide net for this experiment.
> *COST: *We are committing $5,000 USD in a cost per click agreement. If this
> experiment shows promising results, we may commit more funds to additional
> creative tests.
>
> Facebook advertising is not yet a fixture of our long-term fundraising
> strategy; this is simply an experiment to help us gauge how valuable this
> platform could be to us in the future. If we decide to more permanently
> integrate Facebook into our budget and strategy, we will follow up.
>
> If you have questions about this experiment, please don't hesitate to ask.
>
> Thanks,
> Caitlin
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Samuel Patton 
> Date: Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:58 AM
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising pilot on Facebook
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm writing to let you know about a project we're trying on the
> Foundation's fundraising team. Thanks to all the help and advice we've
> received from our colleagues in Communications, Legal, and Community
> Engagement.
>
> *I've posted this announcement as an update on Fundraising's Meta Page
> , and would be happy
> to answer questions and keep the discussion up there.*
>
> Over the next three weeks, the Advancement team will be conducting a small
> fundraising pilot on Facebook and Instagram. This will involve sponsored
> posts, served in English to people in the United States, that will direct
> users to donate to the Foundation using our own donation processing pages.
>
> Fundraising is always interested in exploring new ways to reach people who
> find value in Wikipedia and are interested in supporting the Foundation’s
> mission. Advertising across social networks is a proven and popular way for
> nonprofits to find new supporters and build organizational awareness, and
> we’re excited to dip our toes into this.
>
> Like the many tests we run for Fundraising, this pilot will involve
> experiments testing different imagery, copy, and calls to action. We hope
> to answer the question: how well does our on-Wikipedia.org messaging
> perform when presented on another site? It will also examine how our
> appeals perform across demographic and interest groups.
>
> *Where will the ads appear?*
>
> This pilot will use “sponsored posts,” which is what Facebook calls content
> that appears in the news feed of Facebook users.
>
> They will also appear on Instagram as “sponsored stories” that appear
> within the flow of photo and video posts users scroll on that network.
> (Instagram is a Facebook property.)
>
> They will not appear as banners, pop-ups, or display ads that appear
> 

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

2018-06-07 Thread James Salsman
Oh, it's this discussion again. This is my favorite discussion.
Movement roles discussion is how we got the UK chapter recognized as a
charity capable of political lobbying. That was satisfying.

Maybe we can get the letter to donors back.
https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273

Don't forget to edit the matrix:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles/Roles_Matrix#Roles_matrix


On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:23 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> to quote
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups
>
> *During the Wikimedia Conference 2018, the Working Group “Roles &
> Responsibilities” proposed “Power Dynamics” as a title instead. As power is
> only a part of the broader conversation around global, regional and local
> responsibilities and roles, and we wouldn’t want the group to only
> concentrate on this aspect, the Strategy Core Team decided to keep the
> original name. *
>
> To me power dynamics gives a poor interpretation and sets up the work group
> to focus as individual hierarchical building, rather than equity and
> distribution of responsibilities
>
> On 7 June 2018 at 17:47, Peter Southwood 
> wrote:
>
>> Roles and responsibilities may be a better term, It has a meaning that is
>> more likely to be understood than "power dynamics", which frankly sounds
>> more like rocket science than what people in a group are expected to do.
>> Cheers,
>> Peter
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>> Behalf Of Natacha Rault
>> Sent: 07 June 2018 06:08
>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
>> Cc: Staff (All); EDs mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update #4: Upcoming call for participation in
>> Working Groups
>>
>> Dear Katherine,
>>
>> Thank very much you for this update. I was working in the “role and
>> responsibilities” group in Berlin and the outcome was that we had decided
>> to rename it “power dynamics” if I recall correctly.
>>
>> Now I see this name has not been used, so I feel a little surprized?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Natacha / Nattes à chat
>>
>>
>>
>> > Le 7 juin 2018 à 03:36, Katherine Maher  a écrit :
>> >
>> > Dear all,
>> >
>> > It’s been a while since I sent out the last movement strategy update. A
>> lot
>> > has happened in the meantime, and I wanted to give you a heads-up
>> regarding
>> > an upcoming call for participation!
>> >
>> > But first things first:
>> >
>> > 1. The report from the Wikimedia Conference Movement Strategy Track
>> > > 2018/Documentation/Movement_Strategy_track>
>> > has been published[1]. It captures all the conversations, insights and
>> > outputs from three days of intense strategy work, so it’s a (quite) long
>> > but very interesting read. It is meant to document the state of the
>> process
>> > and to allow for a deep dive into it. It should be especially valuable
>> for
>> > those of you who did not have a chance to participate in the conference
>> or
>> > attended another conference track.
>> >
>> > 2. Based on WMCON outputs (and various conversations we’ve been having in
>> > our movement for years), the core strategy team has mapped eight key
>> > thematic areas
>> > > movement/2018-20/Working_Groups#What_are_the_key_thematic_areas%3F>
>> > [2] -- and some initial guiding questions -- that should to be answered
>> to
>> > enable us to advance towards our strategic direction. These areas
>> include:
>> >
>> >   - Roles & Responsibilities
>> >   - Resource Allocation & Revenue Streams
>> >   - Diversity
>> >   - Partnerships
>> >   - Capacity Building
>> >   - Community Health
>> >   - Technology
>> >   - Advocacy
>> >
>> > 3. The core team will be supporting the creation of Working Groups to
>> take
>> > on these critical conversations. These working groups will be asked to
>> > assess the current situation of the thematic area, and obstacles and
>> > opportunities. They’ll have access to all the relevant information
>> already
>> > collected, and the chance to do further research if needed. They’ll be
>> > asked to identify the changes needed in movement structures and develop
>> > concrete recommendations for the movement on how to ratify and implement
>> > them.[3] An open call for working group members will go out to the
>> movement
>> > this week -- please stay tuned for an update from Nicole!
>> >
>> > I also had the chance to present more about these plans at last week’s
>> > Metrics Meeting. Please do take a look, either look it all up on the
>> > Meta[3] or watch the video![4]
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Katherine
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_
>> 2018/Documentation/Movement_Strategy_track
>> >
>> > [2]
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
>> movement/2018-20/Working_Groups#What_are_the_key_thematic_areas%3F
>> >
>> > [3]
>> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing the Wikimedia Foundation's Technical Engagement team

2018-05-29 Thread James Salsman
Hi Victoria,

Are questions regarding electricity sourcing and usage better directed
to you or Bryan?

Do you have any objections to questions being asked directly of you,
and if not, do you intend to answer questions from the community?

To whom are questions about the user targeting selections of the
English Wikipedia's Feedback Request Service best directed?

Best regards,
Jim

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:35 PM, Victoria Coleman
 wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> to better serve the technical communities that build free and open source 
> software for the movement as well as the communities who use Wikimedia's APIs 
> to interact with our projects, the Wikimedia Foundation is making some 
> structural changes. The Technical Engagement team is a new team in the 
> Technology department of the Wikimedia Foundation reporting to the 
> Foundation's Chief Technology Officer (CTO), Victoria Coleman. This new team 
> has two sub-teams: the Wikimedia Cloud Services team and the Technical 
> Advocacy team. Bryan Davis will manage the Technical Engagement teams. He 
> will also lead the hiring process for a new Developer Advocacy Manager 
> position, which will take over some of the management duties.
>
> The Wikimedia Cloud Services team will continue to focus on maintaining the 
> Wikimedia Cloud VPS infrastructure as a service 
> 
>  platform, the Toolforge platform as a service 
>  project, and additional 
> supporting technologies used in the Cloud Services environment such as the 
> Wiki Replica databases and the hosting infrastructure for dumps.wikimedia.org 
> . The existing team of Andrew Bogott, Arturo 
> Borrero Gonzalez, Brooke Storm, and Chase Pettet will be joined by James Hare 
> in the role of Product Manager. The team is also hiring for a fifth 
> Operations Engineer and for a part-time technical support contractor.
>
> The Technical Advocacy team will focus on creating improved documentation for 
> Wikimedia APIs and services as well as providing support for technical 
> contributors and API consumers. The new team is being formed by moving the 
> Foundation's Developer Relations team to the Technology department, with the 
> exception of Rachel Farrand who will remain in Community Engagement in close 
> collaboration with other event organizers. Andre Klapper and Srishti Sethi 
> are both taking the role of Developer Advocate in the new team. A developer 
> advocate is someone whose primary responsibility is to make it easy for 
> developers to use a platform. Typically they do this by producing example 
> software, tutorials, and other documentation explaining how to use the 
> platform's products and services. Sarah R. Rodlund will also be joining the 
> team as a Technical Writer. Technical writing has many subspecialties. Sarah 
> will be focusing on improving our existing documentation by helping create a 
> style guide and editing existing documentation to fit with that guide. She 
> will also be supporting volunteers who are interested in practicing their 
> technical writing skills on Wikimedia documentation. The team will be hiring 
> for a Developer Advocacy Manager role in July. This new person will help 
> round out the skills of the team and will take the lead in developing their 
> programs.
>
> The Technical Engagement team will work with other teams inside the Wikimedia 
> Foundation as well as groups at affiliate organizations and the larger 
> Wikimedia volunteer community to provide technical outreach services and 
> support. We hope to continue to grow the number of people involved in our 
> programs until we can confidently say that we are providing the best help 
> possible to the hundreds of volunteer developers, designers, technical 
> writers, and end users of the Wikimedia movement's APIs and services. We will 
> continue to be involved in existing programs to attract and support new 
> technical contributors like the Wikimedia Hackathons, Outreachy, and Google 
> Summer of Code. We also hope to find new ways to connect with new and 
> existing technical contributors as we support the Wikimedia movement's 2030 
> strategic direction and the shared goals of knowledge as a service and 
> knowledge equity.
>
> Very excited to be getting started down the path of  strengthening our 
> developer advocacy program!
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Victoria Coleman
>
> Chief Technology Officer
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
> San Francisco, CA 94104
>
> +1-650-703-8112
>
> vcole...@wikimedia.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Category: French Jews on en.wp / GPDR

2018-05-28 Thread James Salsman
> categories and lists related to ethnicity, religious views, and sexual
> orientation are often created and/or filled by POV pushers who usually do
> not care much about sourcing. On top of this, the inclusion criteria,
> especially for categories, are often not defined

Absolutely correct, Yaroslav. Compare the original design plan from 2003:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Categorization_requirements

and the current set of conventions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization

with bona-fide academic scholarship on subject categorization:

https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/8930/pdf

Wikipedians have a long way to go to achieve a reputable
classification scheme that cares more about the essential
characteristics of subjects including living people and doesn't
classify them by non-noteworthy incidentals like ethnicity.



On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
> Hi David,
>
>>It occurs to me: Has anyone gone through the cat and made sure every
>>instance is cited to best BLP standards?
>
> no, likely not (nobody has gone through the cat). In my experience,
> categories and lists related to ethnicity, religious views, and sexual
> orientation are often created and/or filled by POV pushers who usually do
> not care much about sourcing. On top of this, the inclusion criteria,
> especially for categories, are often not defined. For example, if we are
> talking about French jews - are we talking about observing religious jews,
> or anybody of Jewish origin, including those who are not religious or
> converted to other religions? The list is very clear that it is about the
> origin, the category does not say anything.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 1:41 AM, David Gerard  wrote:
>
>> I'm not 100% comfortable with the approach of doing it because we legally
>> can - we do a lot of stuff because it's the right thing, not just because
>> we're legally obliged to. The concern is a real one and worth giving
>> serious consideration.
>>
>> (As I noted in my email about the GDPR, we do a lot of stuff because it's
>> the right thing to do, not just because we're forced to - hence our
>> ridiculously low DMCA rate.)
>>
>> It occurs to me: Has anyone gone through the cat and made sure every
>> instance is cited to best BLP standards?
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 28 May 2018 at 00:33, Todd Allen  wrote:
>>
>> > "Privacy" is often censorship by another name. Seems so here too.
>> >
>> > Of course, if the information is not sourced, or is not well sourced, it
>> > can and should be removed as a potential BLP issue. But if it is sourced,
>> > we're not making anything available to the public that wasn't already
>> > publicly known--after all, our source already published the information!
>> >
>> > It has nothing to do with "humble" or not. We don't, and shouldn't, worry
>> > about the laws of countries with no jurisdiction. Be that France or
>> Vatican
>> > City, doesn't matter. We of course have to follow US law, because the US
>> > actually does have jurisdiction.
>> >
>> > Todd
>> >
>> > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 8:41 AM, sashi  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hello again,
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for your input on this question!  I'll add a few clarifications
>> > > here to respond to points raised in the discussion so far.  (As I'm
>> > > subscribed in digest mode, I'll have to cut & paste.)
>> > >
>> > > ---
>> > > Nathan commented:  "I'm not seeing an argument here for why Wikimedia
>> > > should adhere to this law, if it is correctly stated by the OP. If
>> France
>> > > passed a law banning Internet-published photos of living people, how
>> > would
>> > > we approach that law? If Germany barred publishing the place of birth,
>> > date
>> > > of birth or religious preference of public figures? If the United
>> States
>> > > banned publishing the name of individuals accused of mass murder?"
>> > > ---
>> > >
>> > > Since I quoted it the law of 6 January 1978 in French, I'm pretty sure
>> I
>> > > got it right. ^^ On the other hand, I didn't translate or interpret the
>> > law
>> > > in the context of current jurisprudence, so yes, maybe some more should
>> > be
>> > > said...
>> > >
>> > > It is  legal in France to write an article about a notable person and
>> > > mention their religious affiliation if they volunteer that information.
>> > > What is *not* legal is to extract that information about them and add
>> it
>> > to
>> > > a database which lists Catholics -- as was done during the Vichy regime
>> > > with punchcards.  How exactly were Jewish people rounded up and sent
>> off
>> > to
>> > > concentration camps? (How did prefects go about locating Freemasons
>> > during
>> > > the war?). While there was certainly some collaboration with the
>> National
>> > > Statistics Service (SNS) established during the Occupation, the most
>> > recent
>> > > research suggests that this collaboration was not as significant as was
>> > > once commonly 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Category: French Jews on en.wp / GPDR

2018-05-28 Thread James Salsman
It's also important to point out that Wikidata can be used to
semi-automatically replace the wikipedias' manual category trees:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Ontology

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Ontology/Classes

It looks like some of the Wikidata people discussing such solutions
are semi-active on this list. I'm sure the Foundation would prefer
that volunteers address this issue, but I wonder how much can happen
without concerted behavior between enwiki admins and legal.

Until we get a Foundation official clearly stating that ethnicity
isn't an essential characteristic of living people, relative to their
accomplishments and the events for which they are notable, I doubt
anyone is going to actually put in the effort.



On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 11:50 AM, James Salsman  wrote:
>> categories and lists related to ethnicity, religious views, and sexual
>> orientation are often created and/or filled by POV pushers who usually do
>> not care much about sourcing. On top of this, the inclusion criteria,
>> especially for categories, are often not defined
>
> Absolutely correct, Yaroslav. Compare the original design plan from 2003:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Categorization_requirements
>
> and the current set of conventions:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization
>
> with bona-fide academic scholarship on subject categorization:
>
> https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/8930/pdf
>
> Wikipedians have a long way to go to achieve a reputable
> classification scheme that cares more about the essential
> characteristics of subjects including living people and doesn't
> classify them by non-noteworthy incidentals like ethnicity.
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>>>It occurs to me: Has anyone gone through the cat and made sure every
>>>instance is cited to best BLP standards?
>>
>> no, likely not (nobody has gone through the cat). In my experience,
>> categories and lists related to ethnicity, religious views, and sexual
>> orientation are often created and/or filled by POV pushers who usually do
>> not care much about sourcing. On top of this, the inclusion criteria,
>> especially for categories, are often not defined. For example, if we are
>> talking about French jews - are we talking about observing religious jews,
>> or anybody of Jewish origin, including those who are not religious or
>> converted to other religions? The list is very clear that it is about the
>> origin, the category does not say anything.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Yaroslav
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 1:41 AM, David Gerard  wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not 100% comfortable with the approach of doing it because we legally
>>> can - we do a lot of stuff because it's the right thing, not just because
>>> we're legally obliged to. The concern is a real one and worth giving
>>> serious consideration.
>>>
>>> (As I noted in my email about the GDPR, we do a lot of stuff because it's
>>> the right thing to do, not just because we're forced to - hence our
>>> ridiculously low DMCA rate.)
>>>
>>> It occurs to me: Has anyone gone through the cat and made sure every
>>> instance is cited to best BLP standards?
>>>
>>>
>>> - d.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28 May 2018 at 00:33, Todd Allen  wrote:
>>>
>>> > "Privacy" is often censorship by another name. Seems so here too.
>>> >
>>> > Of course, if the information is not sourced, or is not well sourced, it
>>> > can and should be removed as a potential BLP issue. But if it is sourced,
>>> > we're not making anything available to the public that wasn't already
>>> > publicly known--after all, our source already published the information!
>>> >
>>> > It has nothing to do with "humble" or not. We don't, and shouldn't, worry
>>> > about the laws of countries with no jurisdiction. Be that France or
>>> Vatican
>>> > City, doesn't matter. We of course have to follow US law, because the US
>>> > actually does have jurisdiction.
>>> >
>>> > Todd
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 8:41 AM, sashi  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hello again,
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks for your input on this question!  I'll add a few clarifications
>>> > > here to respond to points raised in the discussion so far.  (As I'm
>>> > > subscr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

2018-05-28 Thread James Salsman
Hi Nadine, thank you for this update.

Does the French Chapter have a position on replacing bitcoin mining
with foldingcoin (http://foldingcoin.net)? I hope that all Wikimedians
will oppose the wasteful consumption of electricity when useful
alternatives exist.

Best regards,
Jim

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Nadine Le Lirzin
 wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Update on the topic.
>
> Since Request Network were so slow and reluctant to change their delusive
> communication into a fair and clean information, Wikimédia France broke the
> agreement with them. Thus, this partnership is over.
>
> We deleted our blog post about it. And we keep on trying to obtain the same
> from Request Network (who are turning a deaf ear until now).
>
> Once again, sorry for the noise and thanks for alerting us,
>
> Nadine Le Lirzin
> *Secrétaire du conseil d'administration*
> *Wikimédia France*
>
> *Post-scriptum:* no other cryptocurrency donations project is planned ^^'
>
>
>
>
>
> 2018-04-28 17:12 GMT+02:00 Nadine Le Lirzin :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> First of all, thanks for reporting the issue. Impressive reactivity :)
>>
>> Then, sorry for the intempestive and unwelcome communication about this
>> local partnership. The agreement is quite clear, it has been established by
>> Wikimédia France (of course *not* in name of Wikimedia Foundation) and
>> our partners are obviously *not allowed* to use any of Wikimedia projects
>> marks.
>>
>> Today, Request Network updated their posts to clarify things and
>> suppressed Wikipedia logo from their communication messages :
>> — https://www.reddit.com/r/RequestNetwork/comments/8firkq/up
>> date_to_clarify_wikimedia_france_partnership/
>> — https://blog.request.network/request-network-project-
>> update-april-27th-2018-partnership-with-wikimedia-
>> woocommerce-plugin-c598372e9b58
>>
>> We updated our blog post as well, with an introductive warning :
>> — https://www.wikimedia.fr/2018/04/27/wikimedia-france-annon
>> ce-partenariat-fondation-request-network-accepter-donations-
>> crypto-monnaies/
>>
>> After the week-end and labor day (1 May), we are expecting that all
>> occurrences of this misunderstanding have disappeared.
>>
>>
>> Nadine Le Lirzin
>>
>> *Secretary of the Board*
>> *Wikimédia France *
>>
>>
>>
>> 2018-04-27 16:23 GMT+02:00 Devouard (gmail) :
>>
>>> Definitly confusing.
>>>
>>> See also this : https://blog.request.network/r
>>> equest-network-project-update-april-27th-2018-partnership-wi
>>> th-wikimedia-woocommerce-plugin-c598372e9b58
>>>
>>>
>>> Florence
>>>
>>> Le 27/04/2018 à 15:49, geni a écrit :
>>>
 According to their twitter feed they have announced a partnership with
 something called the "Request Network‏" for cryptocurrency donations.
 Also this article here

 https://www.wikimedia.fr/2018/04/27/wikimedia-france-annonce
 -partenariat-fondation-request-network-accepter-donations-cr
 ypto-monnaies/

 Ok. I don't approve but I'm not french so not its not an area where I
 can reasonably expect anyone to pay any attention to my opinions.

 What concerns me is that they have retweeted something claiming the
 partnership is with the wikimedia foundation rather than just
 wikimedia france:

 https://twitter.com/wikimedia_fr?lang=en

 Is some form of clarification possible?


>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>> i/Wikimedia-l
>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>>
>>
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
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] Are we losing out against bad editing?

2018-05-27 Thread James Salsman
> I am open to more input, and more exchange of views.

My view is that the Foundation was suddenly (but not without warning)
made legally responsible for its own content after Trump made hosting
providers responsible for facilitating online prostitution
advertising, at pretty much the same time the GDPR went in to effect.
The Foundation has frequently tried a number of paid editing trials,
and I think that's a good thing because donors are likely to stabilize
at paying enough to pay all the past, present, and future wikipedias a
very comfortable hourly rate, plus interest, still have a large and
swiftly endowment to figure out how to invest responsibly, and will be
able to outfit offline applications such as space hotels with a new
LCARS skin I am trying to get Mike Okuda to commission.

> After this conversation it might be interesting to ask the people involved and
> see how would they feel by being more supported and appreciated by the
> community, then request to the community the necessary action to make it
> happen.

I think the Foundation employees know I support them. I recently asked
their boss to make sure they are able to afford the median SF home
capable of bird ranching. For the record, I think most crucial tech
employees in Norcal are not paid what they are actually worth, because
then they would have greater labor mobility. This has come about after
attempts at colluding in no-poaching agreements and needs to be
corrected. The Foundation needs to take the lead on lowering their
income inequality by raising employee salaries. (As the topic has
included appropriate use of donor funds.)

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are we losing out against bad editing?

2018-05-25 Thread James Salsman
>> Paid professionals work alongside volunteers in fire departments and
>> hospitals throughout the world. Are there any essential
>> characteristics which exclude such cooperation in Wikipedia?

> There is a difference, and that is the degree of professionalization. The
> role of admin is not a profession because there are no stablished bodies
> that have defined who is a professional admin and who is not.

I'm not sure that's true. Whether it started as a game of Nomic or
not, almost all of the admins have been elected through a certainly
established process.




On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 4:48 PM, David Cuenca Tudela <dacu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:16 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Paid professionals work alongside volunteers in fire departments and
>> hospitals throughout the world. Are there any essential
>> characteristics which exclude such cooperation in Wikipedia?
>>
>
> There is a difference, and that is the degree of professionalization. The
> role of admin is not a profession because there are no stablished bodies
> that have defined who is a professional admin and who is not. And still it
> would be difficult to professionalize since the distinction between
> volunteer/paid professional could make some people feel excluded (as in,
> "why is this person getting money for something I do for free?").
>
>
>> > the will to cooperate in our mission should have precedence over the
>> will to make a profit out of it
>>
>> Does that exclude the financially disadvantaged?
>
>
> The wikimedia projects assume that you have time to spare without any
> compensation and that everybody can do the same. That is not true. In my
> view the wikimedia projects are already excluding the financially
> disadvantaged, because the people who are part of this project do not have
> the direct experience necessary to understand that their reality is not the
> same as the reality out there, and as a result they might find difficult to
> take the perspective of a person who needs the financial means in order to
> be able to contribute.
>
> However, if the doors of generosity were open towards volunteers and flocks
> of people were attracted because of it, there wouldn't be enough resources
> for everyone, then how could I tell who deserves it most? I would follow a
> progressive approach by offering first little, and then more depending on
> how much the community appreciates the skills and involvement of this
> person in the mission. There are many ways to keep track of said
> appreciation, but writing encyclopedic articles about each
> community-supported volunteer (not on Wikipedia) could be very effective,
> also to create community bonds and to understand better the person behind
> the nickname.
>
> If anything, we would remove the financial barrier that is keeping some
> (many?) people from contributing in the first place.
>
> The thing is that a project like this should start small in order to learn
> from the experience what works socially/practically, and how it integrates
> conceptually into our worldview. I believe that it should be totally in the
> hands of the volunteer community, because appraisal of every day tasks can
> only be done if you are involved in the project and understand the
> challenges, the tasks, the pitfalls, and what it means to do a good job.
> For instance I normally review property proposals for creation in Wikidata,
> it requires a set of skills and dedication that only the handful of people
> who understand the challenge could evaluate. And there is more, how do you
> evaluate the time spent building community and creating a good atmosphere
> unless you are part of it?
>
> I appreciate your questions because they are very interesting to examine.
> Regarding the reputation tracking system I assume that it would only work
> for the restricted use-case of direct article editing (cf. exopedianism),
> but not for the whole range of tasks that volunteers perform. In any case,
> thanks for bringing it to my attention.
>
> Regards,
> Micru
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Category: French Jews on en.wp / GPDR

2018-05-25 Thread James Salsman
Nathan, the Enwiki organic category system is not very good. For
example, there are no consistent ontological constraints placed on the
entire ontological tree (which should not be surprising because the
Library of Congress Card Number system, the Dewey decimal system, the
SIC ontology, and even Wordnet to some extent, are all insufficient
for topic subject matter classification as specializations increase.)
As ontologies go, it barely ranks in the fourth decile. Wikidata
already has inherent ontology patches to the organic category system,
and most if not all of them are compliant with European laws. I am
going to love what happens to Wikipedia's organic categories as they
meet normal forms.

Enjoy!

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 6:24 PM, Nathan  wrote:
> I'm not seeing an argument here for why Wikimedia should adhere to this
> law, if it is correctly stated by the OP. If France passed a law banning
> Internet-published photos of living people, how would we approach that law?
> If Germany barred publishing the place of birth, date of birth or religious
> preference of public figures? If the United States banned publishing the
> name of individuals accused of mass murder? Passionate arguments could be
> made in favor of each, but none of them would support the perspective of an
> educational organization dedicated to the freedom of knowledge.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are we losing out against bad editing?

2018-05-25 Thread James Salsman
>... about the classical employer-employee relationship, I am totally
> against it. The reason is that there is so much effort wasted tracking
> and keeping people accountable

Priyanka Mandikal implemented a way to keep paid editors accountable
using reputation tracking two years ago:

https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/

Accountability is calculated as an agreement ratio between reviewers:

https://github.com/priyankamandikal/arowf/blob/master/app.py#L462

>...that is not the basis for a healthy relationship for a Wikimedia volunteer

Paid professionals work alongside volunteers in fire departments and
hospitals throughout the world. Are there any essential
characteristics which exclude such cooperation in Wikipedia?

> the will to cooperate in our mission should have precedence over the will to 
> make a profit out of it

Does that exclude the financially disadvantaged?

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:02 AM, Gerard Meijssen
 wrote:
> Hoi,
> You compare two things that are not related and where there is a conflict
> of interest. As it is, we are severely lacking in information in many of
> our Wikipedias. Given that not even percent of the humans in Wikidata is
> from Africa, the #AfricaGap is bigger than the #GenderGap (no percent vs
> 16/17% of humans). This gets us into issues about English Wikipedia
> administration versus what it covers and how we can get people to write
> about for instance Africa and Gender.
>
> Your interest of keeping up with vandalism and the fight against massive
> POV pushing, paid editing is something else altogether. I have no interest
> at all in your struggles, I will not volunteer to become an admin. I find
> that admins do and what I would expect from them is incompatible with what
> I want to spend time on. The aggression in many conversations I have come
> across makes me cringe.
>
> When you want to improve issues that have to do with vandalism, POV, there
> are possibilities in tooling. One partial solution that I have in mind
> would improve the quality in articles, makes it obvious where there is a
> difference allowing for more focus. The point/problem is that this will not
> be specific to any one Wikipedia, it will show differences between projects
> and consequently it is not specifically a tool with a focus on POV pushing.
> With sufficient UI attention it may get more of the focus you are seeking.
>
> As you seek control of our data, quality is king, it is what we should
> build upon. When you seek to exclude the interest of others over your own,
> I would hate to see you succeed.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On 25 May 2018 at 11:59, Anders Wennersten  wrote:
>
>> My main worry, during my daily patrolling, is if we manage to neutralize
>> the bad editing (vandalism, POV pushing) or if the destructive editing is
>> slowly successfully degenerating the great content we have created in our
>> projects.
>>
>> In todays Sign-post it indicates an accelerating rate of decrease of
>> admins on enwp, and some likewise tendency on dewp. Is this a sign that the
>> "good" powers are losing out to the "bad" ones?
>>
>> I also seen a very passive response to two massPOV editing . One, on 35
>> versions, is related to Hans Asperger, to state he was a nazi doctor
>> (false, even if he was somewhat passive in some cases). Here dewp reacted
>> quickly and after a while enwp, so these articles are OK, but in most of
>> the other 35 this false info lies unchanged. Also I react to the effort
>> from GazProm promoting their  propaganda article /Football for Friendship /
>> in up to 80 version, and where almost noone has neutralized it.
>>
>> Are  we  slowly losing the battle against the "evil" forces? And if so, is
>> then our new strategy (being good in itself) and the plan to implement  it
>> all too naive? For example I like very much the ambition to help out on
>> areas in the world where Wikipedia etc is not established, but would it be
>> more correct to put effort in regaining control of the very many Wikipedia
>> versions, that is definitely degenerating and we are loosing what has been
>> done on these. (as a test look at "latest changes" on some of the versions
>> with low editing, it is depressing to see that there often are more vandal
>> editing, not being undone, then proper new material)
>>
>> Would it be most appropriate if we all in a 2-3 years effort concentrated
>> on getting (back) control on our material in our projects, before we start
>> efforts in implementing the strategy we have agreed upon. Perhaps a number
>> of paid admins, vandal/pov fighters, about as many as there are stewards
>> today, would be necessary not to lose out.
>>
>> Anders
>>
>>
>>
>> //
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 

[Wikimedia-l] reason for happiness this week

2018-05-18 Thread James Salsman
The English Wikipedia has finally returned to economics topics:

-- Forwarded message --
From: Weeklypedia Digest 
Date: Fri, May 18, 2018 at 4:20 AM
Subject: Weeklypedia English #218

the WEEKLYPEDIA

Issue 218, May 18, 2018 (English Wikipedia edition)

Hello there! Welcome to our weekly digest of Wikipedia activity.

ARTICLES

This week, 112,696 authors made 823,694 changes to 396,351 different
articles. The top 20 articles for the week:

1. Corporate haven (766 changes by 4 authors)
2

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board Recruitment: Updates

2018-05-15 Thread James Salsman
James, are there any reasons that having a community-friendly opinion on
the subpoena, national security letter, political risks and related
overheads of using closed source hardware with backdoor coprocessors is an
inappropriate litmus test for the Technology Expert seat on the Board?


On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:45 PM, James Hare <jh...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> This mailing list thread is about the Wikimedia Foundation recruiting
> members for its board and I would like to ask we stick to that, please.
>
> 
> James Hare
> Associate Product Manager
> Wikimedia Foundation
> https://wikimediafoundation.org
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:22 AM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > To follow up on this, Katherine, would you please state the relative risk
> > to politically controversial editors of using CPUs without backdoor
> > coprocessors to host Foundation projects?
> >
> > Ref.:
> > https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2017/02/03/for-deep-security-
> > use-arm-avoid-intel-amd-processors/
> >
> > Are there a corresponding subpoena and national security letter burden
> > differences in choosing open source hardware without backdoor
> coprocessors?
> > Thank you for considering these questions.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Jim
> >
> > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:28 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On the original topic of technology advocacy representation on the
> Board,
> > > [c]an we please get someone from the open source hardware community and
> > > Legal to tell us how much we could save in subpoena, hardware, and
> > overhead
> > > costs by avoiding backdoors? Has anyone on the Board ever championed
> open
> > > source hardware, since, Sam maybe?
> > >
> > > Please see:
> > >
> > > https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/5xvn4i/update_
> > > corebootlibreboot_on_amd_has_ceo_level/
> > >
> > > https://np.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/8aovfb/
> > > china_has_started_ranking_citizens_with_a_creepy/
> > >
> > > https://teachprivacy.com/why-i-love-the-gdpr/
> > >
> > > https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_
> > > Technology%2FAnnual_Plans%2FFY2019%2FCDP3%3A_Knowledge_
> > > Integrity=revision=2762601=2762351
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Jim
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Philippe Beaudette <
> > > phili...@beaudette.me> wrote:
> > >
> > >> And even if such laws do not exist (and I'm no expert), as an
> employee I
> > >> would be gravely concerned about taking a role with any employer
> where I
> > >> knew that they would be publishing the reason for my departure.
> > >>
> > >> Now, employees may /choose/ to publish a reason (as I did) but to
> > presume
> > >> that it would be mandatory (and to be willing to stake your career on
> it
> > >> in
> > >> advance) would likely seriously inhibit some candidates from applying.
> > >> When you pair that with the WMF's (relatively) transparent
> > organization, I
> > >> think the two together would be a significant inhibitor to recruiting.
> > >>
> > >> Philippe
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Joseph Seddon <
> josephsed...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > "I am unaware of any laws which would prohibit WMF from publishing
> the
> > >> > entirety of executives' compensation
> > >> > details including their employment contracts, severance agreements,
> > >> > and the circumstances
> > >> > in which their departures happen."
> > >> >
> > >> > Pine, I often appreciate your view and input on a range of topics
> but
> > >> to be
> > >> > blunt if this is your genuine opinion I'm personally rather glad my
> > >> > employer does not base its HR policies and practices on your
> personal
> > >> > interpretation of employment law.
> > >> >
> > >> > Seddon
> > >> >
> > >> > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 8:59 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Given Jaime's previous statement on this matter, and my general
> > >> > > dissatisfaction with WMF's level of financial transparency, I am
> > &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board Recruitment: Updates

2018-05-15 Thread James Salsman
To follow up on this, Katherine, would you please state the relative risk
to politically controversial editors of using CPUs without backdoor
coprocessors to host Foundation projects?

Ref.:
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2017/02/03/for-deep-security-use-arm-avoid-intel-amd-processors/

Are there a corresponding subpoena and national security letter burden
differences in choosing open source hardware without backdoor coprocessors?
Thank you for considering these questions.

Best regards,
Jim

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:28 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On the original topic of technology advocacy representation on the Board,
> [c]an we please get someone from the open source hardware community and
> Legal to tell us how much we could save in subpoena, hardware, and overhead
> costs by avoiding backdoors? Has anyone on the Board ever championed open
> source hardware, since, Sam maybe?
>
> Please see:
>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/5xvn4i/update_
> corebootlibreboot_on_amd_has_ceo_level/
>
> https://np.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/8aovfb/
> china_has_started_ranking_citizens_with_a_creepy/
>
> https://teachprivacy.com/why-i-love-the-gdpr/
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_
> Technology%2FAnnual_Plans%2FFY2019%2FCDP3%3A_Knowledge_
> Integrity=revision=2762601=2762351
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Philippe Beaudette <
> phili...@beaudette.me> wrote:
>
>> And even if such laws do not exist (and I'm no expert), as an employee I
>> would be gravely concerned about taking a role with any employer where I
>> knew that they would be publishing the reason for my departure.
>>
>> Now, employees may /choose/ to publish a reason (as I did) but to presume
>> that it would be mandatory (and to be willing to stake your career on it
>> in
>> advance) would likely seriously inhibit some candidates from applying.
>> When you pair that with the WMF's (relatively) transparent organization, I
>> think the two together would be a significant inhibitor to recruiting.
>>
>> Philippe
>>
>> On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Joseph Seddon <josephsed...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > "I am unaware of any laws which would prohibit WMF from publishing the
>> > entirety of executives' compensation
>> > details including their employment contracts, severance agreements,
>> > and the circumstances
>> > in which their departures happen."
>> >
>> > Pine, I often appreciate your view and input on a range of topics but
>> to be
>> > blunt if this is your genuine opinion I'm personally rather glad my
>> > employer does not base its HR policies and practices on your personal
>> > interpretation of employment law.
>> >
>> > Seddon
>> >
>> > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 8:59 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Given Jaime's previous statement on this matter, and my general
>> > > dissatisfaction with WMF's level of financial transparency, I am
>> > > uncomfortable with his involvement with selecting a new WMF Board
>> member
>> > > based on his or her finance expertise. I would encourage the Board to
>> > > reconsider Jaime's role in the selection process, and to place a
>> strong
>> > > emphasis on identifying a new board member who has experience with
>> > > significantly increasing the financial transparency of organizations.
>> > >
>> > > Pine
>> > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>> > >
>> >
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board Recruitment: Updates

2018-05-14 Thread James Salsman
On the original topic of technology advocacy representation on the Board,
an we please get someone from the open source hardware community and Legal
to tell us how much we could save in subpoena, hardware, and overhead costs
by avoiding backdoors? Has anyone on the Board ever championed open source
hardware, since, Sam maybe?

Please see:

https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/5xvn4i/update_corebootlibreboot_on_amd_has_ceo_level/

https://np.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/8aovfb/china_has_started_ranking_citizens_with_a_creepy/

https://teachprivacy.com/why-i-love-the-gdpr/

https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Technology%2FAnnual_Plans%2FFY2019%2FCDP3%3A_Knowledge_Integrity=revision=2762601=2762351

Best regards,
Jim

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Philippe Beaudette 
wrote:

> And even if such laws do not exist (and I'm no expert), as an employee I
> would be gravely concerned about taking a role with any employer where I
> knew that they would be publishing the reason for my departure.
>
> Now, employees may /choose/ to publish a reason (as I did) but to presume
> that it would be mandatory (and to be willing to stake your career on it in
> advance) would likely seriously inhibit some candidates from applying.
> When you pair that with the WMF's (relatively) transparent organization, I
> think the two together would be a significant inhibitor to recruiting.
>
> Philippe
>
> On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > "I am unaware of any laws which would prohibit WMF from publishing the
> > entirety of executives' compensation
> > details including their employment contracts, severance agreements,
> > and the circumstances
> > in which their departures happen."
> >
> > Pine, I often appreciate your view and input on a range of topics but to
> be
> > blunt if this is your genuine opinion I'm personally rather glad my
> > employer does not base its HR policies and practices on your personal
> > interpretation of employment law.
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 8:59 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Given Jaime's previous statement on this matter, and my general
> > > dissatisfaction with WMF's level of financial transparency, I am
> > > uncomfortable with his involvement with selecting a new WMF Board
> member
> > > based on his or her finance expertise. I would encourage the Board to
> > > reconsider Jaime's role in the selection process, and to place a strong
> > > emphasis on identifying a new board member who has experience with
> > > significantly increasing the financial transparency of organizations.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > >
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] an observation on economic biases in Wikipedia

2018-05-12 Thread James Salsman
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:42 PM, Dennis During <dcdur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At the level of generalization of the cited statement in the WP article, it
> is pretty much impossible to approach objectivity in economics articles.

Dennis, for what reason(s) do you believe that? The statement is
easily corrected, but in the form it's existed since it was inserted,
it's easy to show how false it is. I would also like to know your
thoughts on these two stories:

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-paying-ireland-16-billion-dollars-back-taxes-2018-4

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/may/09/fuck-off-google-the-berlin-neighbourhood-fighting-off-a-tech-giant-kreuzberg

> I doubt that an instance of bias should lead us to include

I was not proposing to include the video in the article. That video
wouldn't really counter the magnitude of the damage bias from the
still barely glowing embers of objectivist-influenced austerian
trickle-down economics have done to society through their prevalence
in Wikipedia, but perhaps sources such as these could:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/free-community-college-california_n_6474940.html

https://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Documents/20121212_Economics%20of%20Higher%20Ed_vFINAL.pdf

https://www.docdroid.net/epSjOI2/peracchi2006.pdf

https://www.docdroid.net/joXd2MZ/heckman2006.pdf

Best regards,
Jim

> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 1:44 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The more I survey different language wikipedias, the more I am
>> convinced an effort at the chapters level is needed to address this
>> problem:
>>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wiki-research-l/
>> 2018-April/006256.html
>>
>> It occurred to me that this Max Roser video might help:
>>
>> A Selfish Argument for Making the World a Better Place – Egoistic Altruism
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvskMHn0sqQ
>>
>> I hope in particular that objectivists and former objectivists would
>> share their thoughts on it.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jim
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dennis C. During
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for an Animation artist for Wikipedia Video

2018-05-11 Thread James Salsman
You're welcome, Rupika. I'm happy to help, and do hope you will please
make an effort towards answering my question:

What are the most reputable websites like GoFundMe and WeFunder in India?

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 12:01 PM, Rupika Sharma <ons3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank You Jim!! That was fantastic to create a video in such a short
> amount. I will check into those details. We do have budget of around
> $500-600 set for Animation artist. Our script is more like a short feature
> movie. However, the report and the information is very interesting.
>
> Thanks you again,
> Cheers!
> Rupika
>
> On 4 May 2018 at 22:54, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Rupika,
>>
>> Here are the artists who did the Accuracy Review fundraising video:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30LvELic624
>>
>> Animator: Steve Lewis, hello at SteveLew dot is.
>>
>> Voiceover: Bryan Pike http://www.bryanpike.com/voicework.html
>>
>> Icons: https://www.flaticon.com/authors/freepik
>>
>> We only raised $85:
>>
>> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/accuracy-review-of-wikipedia
>>
>> but the project got completed, thanks to the Foundation and Google:
>>
>> https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/
>>
>> Steve Lewis also did this diagram:
>>
>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/File:Accuracy_review.png
>>
>> What are the most reputable Indian versions of Indiegogo, FreeFunder
>> and WeFunder?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jim
>>
>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Rupika Sharma <ons3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > Does anyone knows an amazing animation artist? We are hiring someone for
>> a
>> > one-time project for animation video for Punjabi Wikipedia. Although, our
>> > budget is small and the video duration will be around 90 seconds, please
>> > let me know if anyone knows someone who might be right fit for the
>> project.
>> >
>> > Warm Regards
>> > Rupika Sharma
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Was macht dich diese Woche glücklich? / What's making you happy this week? (Week of 15 April 2018)

2018-05-09 Thread James Salsman
> What's making you happy this week? You are welcome to comment in any
> language

Les lecteurs du Wikipédia français ont 75% plus de chances de faire un
don que les lecteurs du Wikipedia anglais.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7cHxlGgEt4=44m30s

Meilleures salutations,
Jim


On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Stephan Gambke via Wikimedia-l
 wrote:
>
>> What's making you happy this week? You are welcome to comment in any
>> language
>
> I have not always been happy in the past with the handling of deprecations, 
> but I really appreciate on how it is done for the PHPUnit upgrade (incl. 
> provision of compat layer and clear instructions on what to do).
> So here's a big thanks to legoktm and everybody involved.
>
> Stephan
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] an observation on economic biases in Wikipedia

2018-05-08 Thread James Salsman
The more I survey different language wikipedias, the more I am
convinced an effort at the chapters level is needed to address this
problem:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wiki-research-l/2018-April/006256.html

It occurred to me that this Max Roser video might help:

A Selfish Argument for Making the World a Better Place – Egoistic Altruism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvskMHn0sqQ

I hope in particular that objectivists and former objectivists would
share their thoughts on it.

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for an Animation artist for Wikipedia Video

2018-05-04 Thread James Salsman
Hi Rupika,

Here are the artists who did the Accuracy Review fundraising video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30LvELic624

Animator: Steve Lewis, hello at SteveLew dot is.

Voiceover: Bryan Pike http://www.bryanpike.com/voicework.html

Icons: https://www.flaticon.com/authors/freepik

We only raised $85:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/accuracy-review-of-wikipedia

but the project got completed, thanks to the Foundation and Google:

https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/

Steve Lewis also did this diagram:

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/File:Accuracy_review.png

What are the most reputable Indian versions of Indiegogo, FreeFunder
and WeFunder?

Best regards,
Jim

On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Rupika Sharma  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Does anyone knows an amazing animation artist? We are hiring someone for a
> one-time project for animation video for Punjabi Wikipedia. Although, our
> budget is small and the video duration will be around 90 seconds, please
> let me know if anyone knows someone who might be right fit for the project.
>
> Warm Regards
> Rupika Sharma
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wmfall] Recognizing the one-year anniversary of the Wikipedia block in Turkey

2018-05-03 Thread James Salsman
Jacob,

Does your answer at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vMFUaEeH3w=33m
pertain to these specific links about IPFS?

https://ipfs.io/blog/24-uncensorable-wikipedia/

http://observer.com/2017/05/turkey-wikipedia-ipfs/

Are there any reasons the Foundation or community volunteers shouldn't
point to those links as an approach forward for Turkey and other
government censors?


On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 5:24 AM, Jessica Robell  wrote:
> Thank you for the update, Greg! Great job comms team and everyone involved
> in this project. I am glad that we continue to communicate about this issue
> and will happily help circulate the video.
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 6:26 PM, Gregory Varnum 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Today the Wikimedia Foundation, in cooperation with a number of volunteers
>> who attended the Wikimedia Conference, have posted on Twitter and Facebook
>> a video message speaking to the one-year anniversary of the block of
>> Wikipedia in Turkey.
>>
>> The video re-enforces our message that this block is a lost opportunity
>> both for the people of Turkey and the rest of the world. Any assistance
>> that you all can offer in terms of helping circulate the video amongst your
>> networks would be greatly appreciated!
>>
>> Video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhrsnqvmhxg
>>
>> Tweet:  https://twitter.com/Wikipedia/status/991663606856077312
>>
>> Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/wikipedia/videos/vb.
>> 33138223345/10156176050713346/
>>
>> Blog post:  https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/02/we-miss-turkey/
>>
>> We have also made the video available on Wikimedia Commons if you would
>> like to help us with translating: https://commons.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/File:A_year_without_Turkey.webm
>>
>> This is a part of our ongoing efforts around the block in Turkey, and done
>> with input from members of the local community in Turkey. We GREATLY
>> appreciate the help of everyone involved in the development and all of you
>> who are sharing these messages. If you have any questions, please let us
>> know.
>>
>> -greg
>>
>> --
>> Gregory Varnum
>> Communications Strategist
>> Wikimedia Foundation 
>> gvar...@wikimedia.org
>> Pronouns: He/His/Him
>>
>> ___
>> Wmfall mailing list
>> wmf...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wmfall
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jessica Robell
>
> Sr. Global Campaign Manager
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate.
> *
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

2018-04-27 Thread James Salsman
>> It can be interesting to use blockchain technology in our movement for
>> transparency purposes.
>...
> Not really. At best you end up with a less efficient version of a
> downloadable database

Less efficient unless a government authority is attempting to censor.

After advocating all this year for the Turkish Wikipedia on IPFS, I
very recently learned that it has been a success for a year now:

https://ipfs.io/blog/24-uncensorable-wikipedia/

http://observer.com/2017/05/turkey-wikipedia-ipfs/

So I propose that we use IPFS for any project that is at risk of
government censorship.

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

2018-04-18 Thread James Salsman
Anthony, it is not off topic at all, and some of the related Annual
Plan effects are very troubling in their present manifestation.

Please see: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Ubi1v8gwsq09bzjp


On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:23 AM, Anthony Cole  wrote:
> This is off-topic (I presume) but the idea of the WMF increasing its
> dependence on large corporate donors is beginning to trouble me. I want the
> WMF to answer to our readers and volunteers not Bezos, Brin and Zuckerberg.
>
> I say I presume this is off-topic because I presume the WMF isn’t, even
> subconsciously, soft-peddling our share-alike right and right to effective
> attribution from these re-users in exchange for dollars from these re-users.
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 5:58 pm, James Heilman  wrote:
>
>> Agree with Gerard. We WANT Youtube, Facebook, and others to use our
>> content. That is one reason why we have released it under an open license
>> and I believe one reason why we have been so successful. We of course also
>> want them to provide appropriate attribution. I think this would be better
>> achieved by reaching out and discussing it with these groups directly
>> rather than initially by legal means. In my experience most reputable
>> organizations are happy to attribute when asked.
>>
>> With respect to intermediation and them providing financial or direct
>> technical support Google, Apple, and Microsoft are listed here as major
>> beneficiaries as is the Brin Wojcicki Foundation
>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors Would the WMF be happy
>> with greater support? Yes I imagine so.
>>
>> James
>>
>> Please note that this is written in a personal capacity and does not
>> represent an official position of anyone but myself.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
>> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hoi,
>> > Maybe you know, but Katherine Mayer gave a talk at the CC conference The
>> > subject was big companies using our content (it is not just writing) and
>> > making a profit giving nothing / not much in return. The issue she raised
>> > is that it may interfere with our collaboration model. People will
>> > associate our content with the company that profits in this way and not
>> > contribute their knowledge their expertise with us.
>> >
>> > So no word from the WMF, far from it. When you want the WMF to sue..
>> There
>> > is wonder if the effect it will have is really what we want. For me it is
>> > first and foremost that people are properly informed and I prefer a
>> YouTube
>> > a Facebook to use our data over them not to do so over license issues.
>> > Remember the days when Wikipedia was young; it was a wide held belief.
>> > Thanks,
>> >GerardM
>> >
>> > On 16 April 2018 at 01:53, Anthony Cole  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Is someone from WMF monitoring wikimedia-l and notifying relevant
>> > employees
>> > > when an issue arises under their remit? This issue - big companies
>> using
>> > > our writing without attribution and like-licensing - has been hanging
>> > with
>> > > no word from the WMF for six months.
>> > >
>> > > Anthony Cole
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Anthony Cole 
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I see this from Brian Heater at Tech Crunch on 25 March:
>> > > >
>> > > > "In a conversation earlier this week, Wikimedia’s Chief Revenue
>> Office,
>> > > > Lisa Gruwell told TechCrunch that this sort of usage doesn’t
>> constitute
>> > > any
>> > > > sort of formal relationship. Most companies more or less hook into an
>> > API
>> > > > to utilize that breadth of knowledge. It’s handy for sure, and *it’s
>> > all
>> > > > well within Wikimedia’s fair use rules*, but as with Maher’s letter,
>> > the
>> > > > CRO expressed some concerns about seemingly one-sided relationships
>> ...
>> > > *Smart
>> > > > assistants are certainly playing by the applicable rules when it
>> comes
>> > to
>> > > > leveraging that information base.*"[1]
>> > > >
>> > > > That article I link to has both Katherine (WMF ED) and Lisa (Chief
>> > > Revenue
>> > > > Officer) asking the companies who use our work for free to "give
>> > back." I
>> > > > want them to give back too, but I don't absolve them of their
>> > obligation
>> > > to
>> > > > meaningfully attribute my work and share it with the same rights
>> > > attached.
>> > > > If it is the opinion of the WMF that these smart assistants are not
>> > > > breaching my rights, I'd like to see the legal advice that opinion is
>> > > based
>> > > > on.
>> > > >
>> > > > 1.https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/24/are-corporations-that-
>> > > > use-wikipedia-giving-back/
>> > > >
>> > > > Anthony Cole
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:47 PM, WereSpielChequers <
>> > > > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
>> > > >> content without fully complying 

[Wikimedia-l] proposal: branded reader-pens in the store

2018-04-15 Thread James Salsman
I propose https://store.wikimedia.org/collections/accessories

include http://www.ectaco.com/cpen-30/

branded with the Wikimedia logo.

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia

2018-04-15 Thread James Salsman
If we want to do fact checking, which we do whether Congress has
decided publishers are responsible for the content of their
publications or not, the way to automate it is shown at
https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/

Best regards,
Jim

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Amir E. Aharoni
 wrote:
> I'd just stick to "The Free Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really agree
> upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.)
>
> But I am curious - who made this ad?
>
> בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole ‏>:
>
>> I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to
>> wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used
>> to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest
>> than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and
>> oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion
>> about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else
>> uncomfortabe with this?
>> --
>> Anthony Cole
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
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] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

2018-04-13 Thread James Salsman
> Cryptocurrency. If your first thought isn't "how could a scammer
> exploit this" you are doing it wrong.

I've thought about that for several hours now, and I'm sure scammers
far prefer bitcoin. Folding@Home's lab director is a partner
Andreessen Horowitz, so he has certainly had no lack of resources to
defend against the possibility, and I am persuaded that the Indiana
nonprofit behind FLDC is sincere and acting in good faith at present.
If the Foundation is hesitant, they might sponsor an audit of either
or both, but the Folding@Home project is so established that its
article is featured on enwiki.

I have no financial interest in any cryptocurrency, and I never have,
and I don't have a familial interest with anyone who I am aware has
any either.

Best regards,
Jim

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

2018-04-12 Thread James Salsman
> Only works if most people aren't trying to scam you

What else works that way?

> you'd need to get Bitpay to accept FoldingCoin in this arrangement

https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/984428258530705408


On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:39 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> On 11 April 2018 at 22:56, geni  wrote:
>
>> But the foundation wants actual money (US$ mostly). Why convert
>> bitcoin into anything other than cash (which is what it does at the
>> moment)?
>
>
> in fact, I believe the WMF never touches a bitcoin - BitPay takes in
> the bitcoins, changes them to actual money and gives that to WMF.
>
> So you'd need to get Bitpay to accept FoldingCoin in this arrangement.
>
> (I predict this will never happen.)
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

2018-04-11 Thread James Salsman
> FoldingCoin is the one where you give fake results to Folding@home
> (since the maths is NP hard there is no real time way to check if your
> results are real or not)

Proof is stochastic, by random audit of submitted results, as I
understand the situation. I'm not sure whether that understanding is
congruent with their whitepaper, but that's the only way I can figure
out how it could work with intelligibility remediation tasks.
Improvements to the encyclopedia is a harder problem than attempted
pronunciation or transcription.

In regard to the earlier responses, I the Foundation should offer to
convert Bitcoin to FoldingCoin for those who wish to contribute
Bitcoin.

Best regards,
Jim


On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 3:24 PM, geni <geni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10 April 2018 at 22:45, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The Foundation has been accepting BitCoin donations. Unfortunately,
>> BitCoin is very wasteful in terms of electricity, and is therefore a
>> dirty cryptocurrency.
>
> They all are. The only difference is that bitcoin is Asic mined so
> doesn't directly drive up the price of graphics cards.
>
>> I recommend that the Foundation immediately cease accepting BitCoin,
>> and require donors who wish to donate in cryptocurrency to convert to
>> FoldingCoin instead. Please see: FoldingCoin (FLDC)
>
>
> FoldingCoin is the one where you give fake results to Folding@home
> (since the maths is NP hard there is no real time way to check if your
> results are real or not) in return for tokens that have little in the
> way of actual value.
>
>
>> This conversion will place the Foundation at the forefront of
>> cryptocurrency technology,
>
>
> The forefront of cryptocurrency technology is coming up with new and
> exciting ways to scam people. The Foundation should not be getting
> involved.
>
>
>> As other cryptocurrencies based on proofs of useful work
>> instead of useless work emerge,
>
> Is gaming a Proof-of-Research useful? Because if so Gridcoin exist. In
> theory burstcoin could be used to provide archival storage although
> there are a bunch of ways of doing that without driving up hard disc
> prices.
>
>
>> the Foundation should consider those.
>> FoldingCoin is based on proofs of useful prediction of protein
>> folding,
>
> No it isn't. The problem is it is based off the old folding@home which
> works on the basis that most people aren't trying to scam the system.
> If FoldingCoin ever became popular that would no longer be the case at
> which point it becomes proof of results given to results to
> Folding@home with no requirement that those results be real.
>
>
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <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>

  1   2   3   4   5   >