Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Paul J. Weiss
To expand on the last part of my previous post, one of the things that Peter and other posters are doing that is problematic in my eyes is phrasing their opinions as fact. It is quite clear to me why Dan was put on moderation. So it is a false statement to say that "this is patently unclear". I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Paul J. Weiss
I for one very much appreciate that the moderators put Dan on moderation. I support sanctions for insulting and rude behavior. Peter--if you are looking for exact, quantitative criteria, you aren't going to get it. This is about impact of communication on the receiver, not specific words used by

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

2020-06-26 Thread Paul J. Weiss
"but with more than 700 respondents it is not methodologically sound to change the survey now" This is preposterous and incredibly disrespectful to the community. It is not methodologically sound to continue a biased survey. If the Board and WMF truly want a methodologically sound survey, they

[Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on the rebranding initiative:: Other

2020-06-22 Thread Paul J. Weiss
[From my comments in the rebranding survey] Other "We network around our best-known brand to connect the movement together". That feels like marketing-speak. It is unclear what you are trying to communicate. I do not think that contributors of non-WP projects want to "network" around Wikipedia.

[Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on the rebranding initiative: Name of WMF

2020-06-22 Thread Paul J. Weiss
[From my comments in the rebranding survey] Name of WMF To me a trust implies one party relegating authority over a resource to a second party, who is expected to manage it well, and return it at some point to the first party or a third party. I do not see the WMF's role as including such as a

[Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on the rebranding initiative: Wikimedia vs. Wikipedia

2020-06-22 Thread Paul J. Weiss
[From my comments in the rebranding survey] Wikimedia vs. Wikipedia Our overall community centers around the current Wikimedia concept, not Wikipedia. Naming the whole from one its parts is ambiguous, confusing, and disrespectful to non-Wikipedia projects. The majority of the population of the

[Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on the rebranding initiative: "Movement"

2020-06-22 Thread Paul J. Weiss
[From my comments in the rebranding survey] "Movement" Please stop calling us a "movement". I am an active Wikipedia contributor, but I do not feel part of a movement. Know that I feel excluded when we are referred to as a movement. I would guess that most Wikimedians do not consider themselves

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-01-14 Thread Paul J. Weiss
I share the time concerns that Pine and Todd addressed. But my larger concern is about the purpose of this next community conversation. You say that the core team will summarize the community input, and then the community will have a week to "suggest changes to the posted summary so that it

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

2019-12-15 Thread Paul J. Weiss
"I think we all generally endorse incremental improvements, instead of drastic overhauls." Um, that is clearly not true, since otherwise, for example, the original poster would not have sent out his message. For readers, I think many, if not most, would want a look and feel that works for them,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Chief of Community Engagement to leave the Foundation

2019-11-15 Thread Paul J. Weiss
I find the disbanding of the Community Engagement department at WMF to be quite concerning. I will go so far as to say that I view it as a mistake that will have negative impacts well into the future. For one thing, the structure of an organization is in some sense a statement of priorities. I