[Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!

2022-10-03 Thread Nathan
Gerard, It's a widely shared mailing list. Its members have a wide range of interests. As some have expressed, that includes an interest in the Signpost. Many posts on many topics posted to this list may not be relevant for you or other subscribers. That's the nature of a shared, public resource.

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Decentralized fundraising, centralized distribution

2022-09-07 Thread Nathan
Hi Nicole, Thanks for sharing this - very interesting reading so far. I'm hoping you can elaborate on WMDE's thinking around selecting INGOs for evaluation. Your criteria is very straightforward - INGOs with a confederation of independent organizations, connected by a global mission. But each of

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Taiwan’s statement on the office actions of the Wikimedia Foundation on Chinese Wikipedia

2022-09-05 Thread Nathan
> > > This is a mailing list to which anyone can post, although non-member posts > are held for approval. Your previous reply does, in fact, appear in the > public archives of the list. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,

[Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter

2022-07-12 Thread Nathan
The English Wikipedia community has managed the Main Page in English for many years, including rapidly updated ITN and DYK sections. The prominence of the Main Page has declined a little bit as a landing page, but it suggests that there may be better alternatives to staff planning tweets out a few

[Wikimedia-l] Re: what do we do with all this opportunity?

2022-06-20 Thread Nathan
On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 3:22 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga < galder...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Samuel and James for the constructive approach in your messages. > > I know that I have said this before, but there's a huge problem with > accountability here. We have money to become a great

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Join the new Movement Strategy Forum community review

2022-06-13 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 6:05 AM Yaroslav Blanter wrote: > Dear All, > > I thought I would just let it go, but I do not think the discussion > currently runs in a good direction. > > I do not think it is useful to advocate that Meta is a good discussion > platform. It is not. It is dead. At best,

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Simplifying governance processes

2022-05-19 Thread Nathan
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 5:38 PM Steven Walling wrote: > > > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:27 AM Evelin Heidel > wrote: > >> +1 to this, my perception is that we're wasting a lot of volunteer's + >> staff time + resources into complex governance processes without clear >> results. In theory, the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

2022-04-21 Thread Nathan
How significant is the risk in just granting autoconfirmed (or similar) users IPBE by default? Why does IPBE expire anyway? On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:50 AM DerHexer via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for raising the topic. Being a steward for 14+ years,

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Foundation governance and Russian finances

2022-03-14 Thread Nathan
I read the original e-mail as asking for something more than implementing recent sanctions. I hope and assume that the WMF has already taken the necessary steps to ensure that its activities are in compliance with applicable laws. I agree with Gerard that the WMF is different from Facebook, and

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Board statement endorsing community voting on the enforcement guidelines for Universal code of Conduct (UCoC)

2022-01-30 Thread Nathan
I had the same reaction! Lots of old memories. I wonder, did we ever find out if the Lila-era WMF paid lots of ex-employees in exchange for non-disparagement? Reading through the thread, I find it very confusing how hard people worked to make sure information like that never got out. On Sun,

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

2022-01-30 Thread Nathan
I suspect there weren't that many FT employees of the WMF in 2008, if any? If I remember, WMF started that year based in Florida and moved sometime during the year. Could be that employee expenses were housed in Bomis or ledgered as something other than a labor expense. On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at

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

2022-01-13 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:44 PM Guettarda wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:02 PM Yair Rand wrote: > >> I'm going to strongly disagree with this. >> >> People are allowed to have outside interests. Being incidentally >> interested in blockchain tech is not a disqualifying attribute. Having

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Are we losing our readers?

2022-01-07 Thread Nathan
I think a lot has been said on this list over the last few years about a couple of major factors that probably still play a role: * Shift to mobile device usage and how that affects Wikipedia usage and pageview stats * Availability of more and more "snippets" in search engine results, which often

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Approval of Human Rights Policy

2021-12-21 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 11:12 PM Dan Szymborski wrote: > The WMF likes the *idea* of this being a community-driven, collaborative > project rather than actually doing the stuff that *makes* it a > community-driven, collaborative project. How many times does this process > have to repeat in

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Auction at Christie's

2021-12-05 Thread Nathan
I too expected a stronger reaction from the rigid idealogues and the attention-seekers (although I see that did indeed occur on-wiki, courtesy of the same old grandstanding admins), and thought the minimal response was perhaps a sign of progress! Might just be disinterest and the ever-shrinking

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Manavpreet Kaur's role in AffCom's issues

2021-10-26 Thread Nathan
It doesn't? Killing threads used to be a regular event. Wild that all of this appears to be over a disputed 100 euro payment. On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 7:41 PM Risker wrote: > I think at this point it is time to take this matter off this mailing > list. I think we have all learned more than we

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Regarding a series of serious office actions / 有关于一系列的办事处行动

2021-09-13 Thread Nathan
we may better support the movement's goals in jurisdictions where our values are not respected. Thank you again, Nathan ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustees elections, membership, quorum, and

2020-10-07 Thread Nathan
participation and committee roles? Thanks for any insight, Nathan On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:49 AM Nataliia Tymkiv wrote: > Hello, > > I can answer a few of the questions raised in this thread. > > When the Board postponed the community selection of trustees, we also > extended the ter

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric

2020-10-07 Thread Nathan
share some of the details of that process and how the board arrived at 16 seats specifically? Do you have any data that estimates the time commitment for existing board members, between general board participation and committee roles? Thanks for any insight, Nathan On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:11 AM

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

2020-09-30 Thread Nathan
Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where corporate officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States. So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here: 1) Politically stable 2)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

2020-09-29 Thread Nathan
Which political system would you prefer, so9q? Just a quick survey finds a shortage of totally ideal alternatives with no objectionable political activity in recent years. On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 6:20 PM wrote: > > Hi > > The US seems to me like an increasingly unsafe and unstable place to >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

2020-09-11 Thread Nathan
Cheers, > Peter > > -Original Message- > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On > Behalf > Of Nathan > Sent: 11 September 2020 13:39 > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

2020-09-11 Thread Nathan
Dan, Shouldn't two candidates for the same position for the same company get roughly the same salary, regardless of where they live? On Fri, Sep 11, 2020, 7:00 AM Dan Garry (Deskana) wrote: > Asking candidates for their current salary is prohibited in San Francisco > as of July 2018 [1] which

Re: [Wikimedia-l] UCoC update, emergency@, and T behavioral investigations

2020-08-24 Thread Nathan
regarding local processes is offered would be a good idea. The emergency@ response also did not offer or suggest sending the inquiry to ca@, which might have been helpful. ~Nathan On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 2:38 PM Maggie Dennis wrote: > Hello, all. > > Yesterday some questions we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

2020-07-20 Thread Nathan
Perfect encapsulation of what's gone wrong here in this debate. Andy makes some really solid points; OTRS is a black hole, has a history of being clubby, etc. That history has a lot of smudge marks on it going all the way back to wiki-en IRC channels and the overlap between IRC admins and OTRS

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

2020-07-06 Thread Nathan
OTRS has always seemed modeled after our wikis; self-selecting, self-perpetuating, self-governing... Often inconsistent, and always opaque to outsiders. There was a time when this was regarded as a feature. As other functions have become more transparent and accountable, OTRS has kept a low

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice: Gerard Meijssen

2020-06-29 Thread Nathan
Asaf, Thank you for notifying the list. I have read Gerard's posts to this list since 2007, and it's a safe bet that his thousands of messages make him the single most prolific contributor to this list since it was created. I appreciate that the moderators felt compelled to act, but I find the

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

2020-06-29 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 6:36 AM Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > Just analyse the text, read the arguments. When you express an opinion, it > warrants analysis. When this is not permitted it follows that you can not > argue based on what people state. To what extend do you allow for the >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board Update on Branding

2020-06-23 Thread Nathan
Considering the context, Gnangarra, I think you owe something a little more substantial. In the midst of tearing Nat down for misdeeds which you yourself acknowledge she didn't personally commit (that of Board miscommunication), and considering your opposition is based on Board directives that she

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

2020-04-26 Thread Nathan
There's a tendency of people with an association with the Wikimedia movement to see it as a hammer that can be swung at every nail. This is embodied most perfectly in the e-mail by Rebecca O'Neil, who claims that if WMF doesn't take a position on any issue (or every issue?), it is taking a


2020-02-27 Thread Nathan
I won't claim to speak for an entire state, but as a Vermont resident I find I have no objection to this post. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Snøhetta and Wikimedia

2020-01-20 Thread Nathan
points you are trying to make (which I largely agree with). Hoping with the benefit of a few days of cooling down that is clear to you as well. ~Nathan On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 7:50 PM Pine W wrote: > There are ways that Wikimedia rebranding consultations could be done > collabora

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-12 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:12 PM Pete Forsyth wrote: > Ziko's original comment appears to derive from the "Terms of Use/Licensing" > section of the Recommendations.[1] It says: "Present licensing for both > text and photographs should change to allow restrictions for non-commercial > use and no

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

2019-07-04 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 10:56 AM Gerard Meijssen wrote: > > > It is well known that English Wikipedia is considered a toxic environment > This has been known by all for a very long time. The fact of the matter is > that the arbitration committee is not able to do something about it. There > are

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

2019-07-04 Thread Nathan
> > > Also, I believe that the > near-miracle of English Wikipedia should be tended with great care, and > that the scars from this incident will be with us for a long time. > > Pine > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) > I

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

2019-06-28 Thread Nathan
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:58 PM Robert Fernandez wrote: > Because they'd be immediately accused of libeling him and it would > turn into a he said/they said. > > Also, while I do think the WMF should be in the business of blocking > problem-causing users, it shouldn't be in the business of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-20 Thread Nathan
I think it's OK to mourn the loss of someone's future contributions and participation, without purporting to make a decision on the substance of any accusations. I read Romaine's e-mail and thought it sad that he felt it necessary to withdraw. I also am not blindly trusting of T This is the same

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-16 Thread Nathan
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 5:03 PM Ad Huikeshoven wrote: > > > The Wikimedia Foundation took a bold step in banning Fram for a year. They > have the authority to do so. They are not obliged to give reasons. > > Here's a fundamental source of disagreement. It gets at something I'm not sure the

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

2019-06-12 Thread Nathan
A lot of different issues are being conflated by commenters on-wiki and here, muddying the issue. The WMF responses and some others think that this is about policing conduct, and the perennial difficulty of doing that against people who have entrenched support and lots of positive contributions.

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

2019-06-11 Thread Nathan
Wow, what a cluster. How does the WMF get themselves into these things? I have ten edits to en.wp since 2018 and even I could have 100% predicted the entire spectrum, and scale, of the reaction here. Why are WMF staffers so deeply, fundamentally disconnected from the communities where they feel

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki Movimento Brasil

2019-06-07 Thread Nathan
Philip - as can be seen from the group's meta page, this is the former Wikimedia Community User Group Brasil. Originally founded in 2013, this organization was de-recognized by AffCom about one year ago. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF commitment for a Wikimedia projects archive

2019-05-14 Thread Nathan
d be a recommendation that gets included in the > final reports - regardless of which entity assumes responsibility for it or > who pays for it. > > Risker/Anne > > On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 18:03, Nathan wrote: > > > The Internet Archive, incidentally, already seems to maintain co

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF commitment for a Wikimedia projects archive

2019-05-14 Thread Nathan
The Internet Archive, incidentally, already seems to maintain copies of Wikimedia projects. I don't know to what degree of fidelity. Additionally, the WMF's core deliverable is already to provide and sustain access to its projects. It has an endowment for that purpose already. Other websites and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing our newest chapter, Wikimedia Korea

2019-04-23 Thread Nathan
I'll ask the obvious question - why is it not Wikimedia South Korea? And congrats to the participating Wikimedians on their achievement and recognition! On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 6:11 PM María Sefidari wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I am happy to share that earlier this year, the Wikimedia Foundation

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

2019-04-13 Thread Nathan
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 12:42 PM phoebe ayers wrote: > > > Dear all, > I haven't weighed in before. But it seems to me there's a simple question > underlying all of this: do we actually want, or need, to increase public > awareness of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia chapters/affiliates

Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

2019-01-08 Thread Nathan
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

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

2018-11-13 Thread Nathan
"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:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

2018-10-11 Thread Nathan
Thank you for acknowledging the existence of this thread and the fact that AffCom is still making some effort to bring the problem to a resolution. It doesn't seem like it should be all that challenging, if one disputant is a single individual and the other is a community of people led by those

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

2018-10-11 Thread Nathan
I can't tell which part of this situation is the more sad; is it the events themselves, the total absence of any comment from AffCom, or the very limited interest evinced by the rest of the folks subscribed to this list? It seems if we follow the AffCom model described here, we should take WMPT

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

2018-08-10 Thread Nathan
Mike, the "soft" part of the launch is that it is available only in English, has not been heavily promoted and every link and reference elsewhere has not been transitioned. This info was in Gregory's initial post about the soft launch on the 1st. On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 9:50 PM Michael Peel

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

2018-07-22 Thread Nathan
I think Andrea's post perfectly illustrates the risk to WMF and WM affiliates of embracing political positions outside the core mission of the projects. The number of worthy causes is near infinite; every time you endorse one you please some people and make many other people wonder why you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Concerns about WMF's "Manager of Community Development" job posting

2018-07-15 Thread Nathan
I agree with Ad and keyed on the same objection when reading Pine's complaint. The WMF has been the primary organization responsible for developing the community since the inception of the Wikimedia movement. That isn't changed by the titles of any particular position. To the extent that conflicts

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Rebuilding Wikimédia France

2018-06-06 Thread Nathan
Congrats Charlotte and WMFr for everything you have done and achieved in such a short period of time. A truly impressive and meaningful accomplishment and demonstration of the capacity of Wikimedians to use the movement's tools and ethos to effect positive change. On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 6:04 PM

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

2018-05-25 Thread Nathan
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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails

2018-05-06 Thread Nathan
I get hundreds of these a year (my user name, Nathan, seems to be a popular target). It would nice to be able to use some sort of multi-factor authentication, which is actually supported by OAUTH. However, it seems most projects (including en.wp) restrict use to accounts with elevated rights. Can

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

2017-07-11 Thread Nathan
Everything else aside, the apparent fact that the ED of WMFr hired her husband in any capacity is a clear sign of serious dysfunction and poor governance controls. If the association has had half its board resign and is accusing Anthere and Christophe Henner of misconduct, it suggests that WMFr's

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

2017-04-25 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > When individuals are discredited in this way, your option, you are judging > these people. That is in my opinion a mistake. You may judge a situation > and determine because of what you consider your

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

2017-03-02 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:46 AM, Anna Stillwell wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I want to thank everyone for offering their considered thoughts. I mean > that genuinely. There are many legitimate views expressed in this thread, > many by generous, constructive, wise, and

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

2017-02-17 Thread Nathan
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Pine W wrote: > How would you suggest modifying the process so that it is compatible with > community governance? Note that while I'm dissatisfied with the system that > is in place now, I doubt that there will be a perfect solution that is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] community survey request

2017-02-13 Thread Nathan
What would your intended use of the results of such a survey be? How do you think the community, or any group of people, should interpret, value and react to the results? On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Bill Takatoshi wrote: > When a contentious question about the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing the Foundation's challenge to recent U.S. immigration executive order

2017-02-06 Thread Nathan
I generally share Yair's reluctance to see the WMF engage in political activity outside the scope of the Wikimedia mission, but I'd like to express my support for the WMF taking action specifically in pursuit of maintaining the freedom to travel and work of its employees and volunteers engaged in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Delegation of policy-making authority" resolution

2017-02-06 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Rogol Domedonfors wrote: > Christophe > > On 20 December, you wrote > > > Basically it's making the legal team life's easier when they need to do > > small and/or quick changes. They don't have to go through the whole > > resolution process

Re: [Wikimedia-l] De-Recognition of Affiliates with Long-standing Non-Compliance

2017-02-05 Thread Nathan
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > I fail to see who you are targeting and on what basis. My impression is > that it only has to do with money.. I understand this. For other parts like > the language committee there are no reports except

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

2017-02-05 Thread Nathan
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Andrea Zanni wrote: > On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Yair Rand wrote: > > > "Wikipedia is something special. It is like a library or a public park. > It > > is like a temple for the mind. It is a place we can all

Re: [Wikimedia-l] De-Recognition of Affiliates with Long-standing Non-Compliance

2017-02-04 Thread Nathan
illuminate why WM AM is in compliance but others are not, I would appreciate it! Thanks, Nathan ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

2017-02-04 Thread Nathan
I did not see many arguing that the WMF must be neutral; the debate is not about political neutrality, but about political activity outside the mission of the WMF. Few argue, on the substance or even principle, that the WMF's statement about the travel ban is wrong or misplaced - merely that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

2017-02-03 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:26 PM, Natacha Rault wrote: > ...After all there is a notion called "freedom of speech" Katherine > Maher did a statement and so what? That does not prevent wikipedians from > editing, and confronting opinions to approach NPOV (actually there is no >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Publicpolicy] news events impacting the Foundation's ability to hire and its employees' ability to travel

2017-01-30 Thread Nathan
It might be more effective, and certainly more courteous, if you could avoid making essentially the same set of advocacy posts almost every day. On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 6:38 PM, James Salsman wrote: > I propose that the Foundation issue a statement in support of striking >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Concerns in general

2017-01-27 Thread Nathan
Romaine makes some good points. There is a legitimate concern that the turn to populism and unpredictability threatens the environment in which Wikimedia operates, and its only reasonable to consider a move of core assets somewhere safer from the unspooling of Western social fabric. Perhaps the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Concerns in general

2017-01-27 Thread Nathan
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:39 PM, John wrote: > Im not sure you are reading section 14 correctly. It makes reference to > Privacy Act (Privacy Act of 1974) and the privacy policy of the federal > agencies involved in immigration enforcement and law enforcement agencies.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] LGBT+ safety considerations for conference venues

2016-11-09 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:08 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > Not going to North Corolina is absolutely fine with me. We do not gain > anything by going there arguably not to any state in the United States. > What Wikimania is, is a platform for propaganda for what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria

2016-08-20 Thread Nathan
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Pine W wrote: > Hi Carlos, > > As I mentioned previously, I would suggest that the criteria should also > apply to existing chapters. If any chapter's status is in doubt as a result > of the new criteria, then the chapter can be given 6

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Suggesting moderation

2016-07-27 Thread Nathan
I find Trillium's denied e-mail to be off-topic but hardly so objectionable that a moderator reviewing it should deny it. If it is the case that a moderator suggested minor stylistic changes (couple days to couple of days), that seems a bit distasteful and probably not what list members would

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [discovery] Fwd: Improving search (sort of)

2016-07-15 Thread Nathan
How hard would it be to ask for search feedback on search results, perhaps piloting with some small subset of zero-result searches? For 1/1000 ZRRs, prompt the user to provide some type of useful information about why there should be results, or if there ought to be, or what category of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] With my thanks to everyone ...

2016-07-13 Thread Nathan
Congrats Geoff on your new and extraordinarily challenging role! Best of luck and thank you for all of your hard work on behalf of the WMF. ~Nathan On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Geoff Brigham <gbrig...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > Over the past five years, I’ve been h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing and the privacy policy

2016-07-01 Thread Nathan
Paid editing is addressed in the WMF terms of service and is a problem that has confronted or will confront most of the prominent projects in the movement. An alert to an RfC regarding principles of broader import, and a small amount of linked discussion, seems to be a perfectly reasonable use of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

2016-06-25 Thread Nathan
Experiences described by a new editor are valid and meaningful even if, in relating them, the new editor shows some lack of familiarity with Wikipedia customs and established doctrines. It's certainly true that the process of patrolling pages for quality can be, from the perspective of a newbie

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions

2016-06-23 Thread Nathan
Congrats all, and thank you Patricio. I'll observe that it is interesting that the Board chose Christophe as Chair on his first day as a member, I think that is unprecedented in the short history of the WMF Board. On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Patricio Lorente < patricio.lore...@gmail.com>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on WMF Governance reviews

2016-06-02 Thread Nathan
Marc - just wanted to thank you for using "begging the question" properly! Chris - thanks for your insight. To Anders' point, perhaps not all insights offered will be new to everyone. But where some problems or potential solutions have been identified by some, it will be nice for them to have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

2016-05-06 Thread Nathan
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Denny Vrandečić wrote: > Just a few points of clarification: > > * I have, to the best of my memory, passed on information only with the > understanding of my sources. If any of my sources disagrees with that, > please send me a message - I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

2016-05-02 Thread Nathan
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: > While *some* of research ethics comes from the medical world - > particularly from the Belmont report and the Western-centric research > atrocities of the last century - much of it does not. Things like the > Zimbardo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

2016-05-02 Thread Nathan
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Justin Senseney wrote: > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: > > > +1 to that question, which is the biggest flag I have here. > > > > "The highest standards of confidentiality" is nice but, as you note, >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

2016-04-26 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 8:49 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Trillium Corsage > > wrote: > > > > Jimbo responded to arbitrator GorillaWarfare on this list, basically, > > "yes, I supported with sadness the decision to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

2016-04-19 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: > > > Also, no, the United States is explicitly not a democracy. It's a republic. > And no, the Wikimedia movement is not a democracy - but it's *also* not a > dictatorship or a banana republic with a President For Life.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] DARPA FOSSS programs of interest

2016-04-13 Thread Nathan
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 9:53 AM, James Salsman wrote: > > > Doesn't that mean that the Foundation has the legal standing to see all > three of those projects published? Where do you see legal standing being a factor here, and how would the WMF have it?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] DARPA FOSSS programs of interest

2016-04-12 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 1:54 PM, James Salsman wrote: > Re > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/publicpolicy/2016-April/001335.html > > > > Are there any reasons that trying to do this might be a bad idea? > > __ Because the WMF is not, at least as far as we know,

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

2016-03-22 Thread Nathan
FWIW, it's clear that the trademark policy is intended to apply to users other than the WMF. This is all a bit overblown, considering the tiny scale of use and money involved. On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Fæ wrote: > Tim, thanks for raising the Trademark Policy. > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

2016-03-14 Thread Nathan
of those individuals who > are directly affected. Privacy should win. > > Risker/Anne > > On 14 March 2016 at 12:50, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It's an easy question to ask in a non-specific way: > > > > In the last six months, has the WM

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

2016-03-14 Thread Nathan
It's an easy question to ask in a non-specific way: In the last six months, has the WMF approved severance agreements with departing employees with language that, in effect, prevented them from publicly criticizing the WMF, its management or the Board on matters of public interest?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

2016-03-14 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote: > On 16-03-14 10:33 AM, Steinsplitter Wiki wrote: > > Per commons Policy's the RFC is valid. > > Then the policy is broken. It seems more than a little insane to me > that an opinion poll having had participation of a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Easier browsing of Board minutes, agendas, etc., plus summaries

2016-03-09 Thread Nathan
Great work, Pete, all very interesting and useful. Thanks for dedicating your time to do this. On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: > As many of you are aware, it's always been difficult to navigate > information about the proceedings of the Board of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Oh the irony

2016-03-08 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Chris Keating wrote: > I'm really glad that Guy is able to bring this kind of insight to the Board > HR committee. > > ... > > OK, in possibly good news and trying to be fair to Guy, it looks like the > @guykawasaki bears very little

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

2016-03-07 Thread Nathan
If the board is choosing not to participate for a particular reason, or Jimmy is choosing not to release e-mails for a particular reason, then they should say so. Nothing keeps them from offering that information themselves. It isn't necessary for other people to speculate on whether the deafening

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Leadership changes for Talent, Culture, and Team Practices

2016-03-04 Thread Nathan
Hi Geoff, Would it be wildly wrong to infer from this message that you are assisting the WMF by taking on some or all of the duties of the ED? ~Nathan On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Geoff Brigham <gbrig...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I’m writing to let you k

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

2016-03-03 Thread Nathan
What do we want? We want to understand what board members think about major issues, we want some sense of the direction of the organization as driven by the board, we want to be able to see and verify that issues important to stakeholders throughout the movement are being considered and addressed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

2016-03-03 Thread Nathan
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Chris Sherlock wrote: > > > Do you serve on any non-profit boards Chris? > > Chris > Chris Keating is on the board of the WMUK. In any case, it seems like there are many deliberative or legislative bodies that see themselves as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Armenia candidate for the board

2016-03-02 Thread Nathan
Is there any actual connection between Susanna and the high-level government interest or effort around the Armenian Wikipedia? What I'm asking is if there is anything here, other than supposition that because she is Armenian and the Armenian government is interested in Wikipedia that Susanna must

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter: Issues needing addressing by the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees

2016-02-29 Thread Nathan
Jimmy - the limit is a "soft limit" of 30 posts per month. If someone goes well over you might get an e-mail from Austin or another moderator to cut back, but otherwise there is no need to ask for an exception. Chris Sherlock - It is certainly not "unambiguous" what qualifies in that statute as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A quick note about the future

2016-02-29 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Jimmy Wales wrote: > > One of the things that someone asked me privately to discuss is what I > think of the possibility of James running for the board again. > > First, I have no opinion about whether or not he will be eligible at the >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Jimmy Wales' potential conflict of loyalties for Wikia Inc. versus WMF

2016-02-29 Thread Nathan
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:35 AM, Fæ wrote: > > Ownership of Wikia is a relationship where loyalty will be perceived > by the public as questionable, and there may be indirect financial > gains, even though there is no traceable direct benefit. > > Fae, Is there any evidence

  1   2   3   4   5   >