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

2020-10-07 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello Brad,

Asking what the legitimacy of such a thing is for the broad Movement seems
to me a very reasonable question, especially when I'm not from the US, I'm
not a native English speaker and I'm not US-stuff wise.
You, however, have answered in a defensive and aggressive way, as if
everybody in the globe had to born knowing US laws and bureaucracy, which
seems quite unreasonable.
Stay with your truths and your "Former WMF General Counsel" title, my
argument here is finished.

Best,
Paulo


Brad Patrick  escreveu no dia quarta, 7/10/2020 à(s)
19:45:

> This is a very, very old and tired argument. If you do not understand
> United States non-profit corporations, go educate yourself about those
> first. If your perspective is non-US based, you may have a different frame
> of mind which is irreconcilable with the way WMF is. Take all the time you
> need to see the differences before attacking WMF for (a) what it is and (b)
> why it isn't what you want it to be.
>
> WMF exists legally, and has as its foundation organizational principle,
> authority vested in a Board. WMF is not a membership organization. You
> would not want it to be a membership organization (as a matter of law).
>
> Please temper your criticism accordingly.
>
> Brad Patrick
> Former WMF General Counsel
>
> On 10/7/20, 12:47 PM, "Wikimedia-l on behalf of Paulo Santos Perneta" <
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I knew they are theoretically self-appointed, but was under the
> impression
> that at least until now an appearance of democracy and legitimacy
> towards
> the community has been respected, which no longer seems to be the case.
> I wonder what would be the legitimacy of a self-appointing body in the
> eyes
> of the Wikimedia Movement, and all the communities which are part of
> it?
>
> Regards,
> Paulo
>
> Adam Wight  escreveu no dia quarta,
> 7/10/2020 à(s)
> 17:20:
>
> > Greetings, this is a semiautomated response pointing out that the
> > Wikimedia Foundation Board is not elected, it's self-appointing. The
> > so-called "elections" are in fact nominations to be considered by the
> > Board.  Therefore, the Bylaws have not been broken.
> >
> > This is an unfortunate arrangement, please see [1] for some
> background
> > about the conversion from a membership organization to a
> non-membership
> > organization which is no longer legally required to hold elections.
> >
>     > Regards,
> >
> > Adam W.
> > [[mw:User:Adamw]]
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_membership_controversy
> >
> > On 10/7/20 5:55 PM, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > > The terms of 3 BoT members expired last month, and the BoT itself
> decided
> > > to extend them? What is the legitimacy of that? And why is a BoT
> which is
> > > expected to be in a mere interim management waiting for elections,
> > > presenting profound changes to its Bylaws [1]?
> > >
> > > [1] -
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia quarta,
> > 7/10/2020
> > > à(s) 16:49:
> > >
> > >> 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 terms of the trustees in the affected seats (María
> > Sefidari,
> > >> Dariusz Jemielniak, and James Heilman)[1]. Their terms were
> originally
> > set
> > >> to expire last month, but because of that term extension they are
> still
> > >> serving as trustees, and as such María remains the Board Chair and
> > Dariusz
> > >> and James continue on as Committee Chairs[2].
> > >>
> > >> Raju Narisetti and Esra'a Al Shafei have been reappointed to the
> Board
> > for
> > >> an additional three-year term[3][4].
> > >>
> > >> The current members of the Board of Trustees are listed on the
> Wikimedia
> > >> Foundation website[5].
> > >>
> > >> We do not curren

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

2020-10-07 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I knew they are theoretically self-appointed, but was under the impression
that at least until now an appearance of democracy and legitimacy towards
the community has been respected, which no longer seems to be the case.
I wonder what would be the legitimacy of a self-appointing body in the eyes
of the Wikimedia Movement, and all the communities which are part of it?

Regards,
Paulo

Adam Wight  escreveu no dia quarta, 7/10/2020 à(s)
17:20:

> Greetings, this is a semiautomated response pointing out that the
> Wikimedia Foundation Board is not elected, it's self-appointing. The
> so-called "elections" are in fact nominations to be considered by the
> Board.  Therefore, the Bylaws have not been broken.
>
> This is an unfortunate arrangement, please see [1] for some background
> about the conversion from a membership organization to a non-membership
> organization which is no longer legally required to hold elections.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adam W.
> [[mw:User:Adamw]]
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_membership_controversy
>
> On 10/7/20 5:55 PM, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > The terms of 3 BoT members expired last month, and the BoT itself decided
> > to extend them? What is the legitimacy of that? And why is a BoT which is
> > expected to be in a mere interim management waiting for elections,
> > presenting profound changes to its Bylaws [1]?
> >
> > [1] -
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia quarta,
> 7/10/2020
> > à(s) 16:49:
> >
> >> 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 terms of the trustees in the affected seats (María
> Sefidari,
> >> Dariusz Jemielniak, and James Heilman)[1]. Their terms were originally
> set
> >> to expire last month, but because of that term extension they are still
> >> serving as trustees, and as such María remains the Board Chair and
> Dariusz
> >> and James continue on as Committee Chairs[2].
> >>
> >> Raju Narisetti and Esra'a Al Shafei have been reappointed to the Board
> for
> >> an additional three-year term[3][4].
> >>
> >> The current members of the Board of Trustees are listed on the Wikimedia
> >> Foundation website[5].
> >>
> >> We do not currently have a shortage of trustees on the Board, and we
> have
> >> had a quorum for every decision we have made this year. We have
> published
> >> some outstanding Board records, many of which were just approved at our
> >> recent meeting in September[6][7].
> >>
> >> I have just sent an email to this list, as well as posted an update to
> >> Meta-Wiki, with a request for feedback on matters related to the
> >> Foundation’s Bylaws and trustee selection[8]. That announcement contains
> >> more information about the postponed community selection of trustees.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
> >>
> >> Vice Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Postponement_of_Community_Selection_of_Trustees_and_Extension_of_Community_Selected_Trustee_Terms_until_next_selection_process
> >>
> >>
> >> [2]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Board_Officers_and_Committee_Membership,_2019
> >>
> >>
> >> [3]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Raju_Narisetti%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
> >>
> >>
> >> [4]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Esra%27a_Al_Shafei%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
> >>
> >>
> >> [5] https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/
> >>
> >>
> >> [6] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetings
> >>
> >>
> >> [7] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolutions
> >>
> >> [8]
> >>
> >>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Call_for_feedback_about_Bylaws_changes_and_Board_candidate_rubric
> >> <
> >>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/July_2

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

2020-10-07 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The terms of 3 BoT members expired last month, and the BoT itself decided
to extend them? What is the legitimacy of that? And why is a BoT which is
expected to be in a mere interim management waiting for elections,
presenting profound changes to its Bylaws [1]?

[1] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes

Best,
Paulo

Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia quarta, 7/10/2020
à(s) 16:49:

> 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 terms of the trustees in the affected seats (María Sefidari,
> Dariusz Jemielniak, and James Heilman)[1]. Their terms were originally set
> to expire last month, but because of that term extension they are still
> serving as trustees, and as such María remains the Board Chair and Dariusz
> and James continue on as Committee Chairs[2].
>
> Raju Narisetti and Esra'a Al Shafei have been reappointed to the Board for
> an additional three-year term[3][4].
>
> The current members of the Board of Trustees are listed on the Wikimedia
> Foundation website[5].
>
> We do not currently have a shortage of trustees on the Board, and we have
> had a quorum for every decision we have made this year. We have published
> some outstanding Board records, many of which were just approved at our
> recent meeting in September[6][7].
>
> I have just sent an email to this list, as well as posted an update to
> Meta-Wiki, with a request for feedback on matters related to the
> Foundation’s Bylaws and trustee selection[8]. That announcement contains
> more information about the postponed community selection of trustees.
>
> Best regards,
>
> antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
>
> Vice Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> [1]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Postponement_of_Community_Selection_of_Trustees_and_Extension_of_Community_Selected_Trustee_Terms_until_next_selection_process
>
>
> [2]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Board_Officers_and_Committee_Membership,_2019
>
>
> [3]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Raju_Narisetti%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
>
>
> [4]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Esra%27a_Al_Shafei%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
>
>
> [5] https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/
>
>
> [6] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetings
>
>
> [7] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolutions
>
> [8]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Call_for_feedback_about_Bylaws_changes_and_Board_candidate_rubric
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/July_2020_-_Call_for_feedback_about_Bylaws_changes_and_Board_candidate_rubric
> >
>
>
> *NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working
> hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You
> should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in
> advance!*
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 9:52 PM Bill Takatoshi 
> wrote:
>
> > After I asked my questions on September 4, I was sent the message
> > below by some role account I've never heard of, asking about claims
> > that have used the names of five other people. I don't edit under my
> > real name, but I have never used the names in the linked forum
> > postings.
> >
> > The linked posts also claim that the Foundation's nonprofit status is
> > at risk. I am not a lawyer, but I am skeptical of that claim even
> > though five Trustees whose three-year terms expired in August
> > apparently voted on a Resolution in a Board meeting on September 24.
> > According to Section 4 of the Bylaws, "A quorum shall consist of a
> > majority of Trustees then in office." Section 6 says, "the Board may
> > continue doing business as a Board during the vacancy of any Trustee
> > position." Therefore, since four of the five remaining Trustees all
> > voted in favor, the Resolution was properly carried, in my layperson's
> > view. I am less certain about the propriety of allowing a Trustee
> > whose three year term expired to continue to serve as Chair.
> >
> > The lack of any update or even ETA for an update on
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2020#Postpone%3F
> > is baffling. Elections have never been held in person, only online,
> > and so the excuse that they were postponed because of the pandemic
> > crisis seems extremely suspicious. Indefinitely delaying elections for
> > such a vacuous reason makes the Foundation look like the worst of the
> > bad actors in today's international political climate. Doesn't the
> > cancelled travel of the pandemic crisis give the Foundation more time
> > to hold elections, not less? Whether non-profit status is at risk or
> > not, I would hope that the Foundation, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution to pause Movement Brand Project through March 2021

2020-10-06 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello,

I've read it, and the recommendations sounded all with good sense, and on
point.
I believe there is an excellent base there for future work on the subject.
You've done a good job, despite the difficult conditions.

Just a minor curiosity: The percentages of Africa and Asia participations
on the survey are absent from there, can they be seen somewhere, or shared?

Thanks,
Paulo



Samir Elsharbaty  escreveu no dia terça,
6/10/2020 à(s) 17:25:

> Hi everyone
>
> I wanted to follow up on Zack’s email with an update and links to the
> naming survey resources published today:
>
> The naming survey report is now available.[1] Thank you to everyone who
> provided feedback. To learn more about what naming elements should be
> removed, refined and recombined please view the full report.[2]
>
> We are looking forward to collaborating with you again next year.
>
> Samir and the Brand Project Team
>
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_survey_feedback_report
>
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brand_Project_Naming_Survey_Feedback_Report.pdf
>
> Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
>
> Brand Associate
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 11:43 PM Olga Lidia Paredes Alcoreza <
> olga.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank U!
> >
> > El mié., 30 de septiembre de 2020 15:55, Zack McCune <
> > zmcc...@wikimedia.org>
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Thank you María!
> > >
> > > Following this Board resolution, the Brand Project team will be
> updating
> > > the project hub. [1]  We will also release the Naming Survey results as
> > > both a report and as the anonymized data by October 6. The publication
> of
> > > those materials will be shared on the project hub and announced here.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > - Zack, Essie, and Samir (the Brand Project team)
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:51 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> > > galder...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for hearing the voices, María and members of the board.
> > > >
> > > > Defining common goals is the best practice for reaching to the best
> > > > solution.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > >
> > > > Galder
> > > > 
> > > > From: Wikimedia-l  on
> behalf
> > of
> > > > María Sefidari 
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 9:47 PM
> > > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org  >
> > > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution to pause Movement Brand Project
> > through
> > > > March 2021
> > > >
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, following the
> > recommendation
> > > of
> > > > staff, has resolved to pause the Movement Brand Project until the
> next
> > > > calendar year.[1] We recognize that much of the Wikimedia movement’s
> > > > activities, events, and key collaborations have been put on hold or
> > > > restructured due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and we have received
> formal
> > > > requests to pause Movement Brand Project activities to reflect this
> > > > need.[2]
> > > >
> > > > The Board remains persuaded that there is potential value in making
> > > change
> > > > to our branding system in service of our goals of engaging more
> people
> > in
> > > > our mission. However, we also know that change moves at the speed of
> > > trust.
> > > > We have asked staff to meaningfully engage with community concerns
> and
> > > > address the request for equitable decision-making within the process.
> > We
> > > > also ask members of the community to use this pause to consider how
> > > equity
> > > > may ask us to let go of some aspects of our past, in order to create
> > > space
> > > > for what could be. Making these decisions together, with so many
> > > passionate
> > > > perspectives, will be challenging, but building this capacity is
> > > essential
> > > > for how we grow together as a thriving global movement.
> > > >
> > > > In the meantime, we will establish a small ad-hoc Board committee to
> > > liaise
> > > > with staff, and develop a process of collaboration and
> decision-making
> > > > appropriate for the Movement’s brand. This committee will constitute
> > > > Trustees James Heilman, Raju Narisetti, and Shani Evenstein Sigalov.
> We
> > > > hope and intend for this committee to include a small number of
> > community
> > > > representatives from affiliates, open letter signatories, and
> emerging
> > > > communities, and Foundation staff to be designated by the Executive
> > > > Director. We’ll update you with more details on the committee soon.
> > > >
> > > > In 2021, using insights and recommendations gleaned through the
> ad-hoc
> > > > committee, the Brand Project team will restart collaboration and
> > > > communicate next steps accordingly. This resolution was ratified on
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Institutional memory @ WMF

2020-08-25 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
No, not related in the least.
He's probably talking about a recent situation discussed at this ML where a
WMF employee at T emergency role directed someone complaining of
harassment to the AN/I because they thought it was the appropriate venue.

Amir Sarabadani  escreveu no dia terça, 25/08/2020
à(s) 22:03:

> Hey,
> Can you elaborate what happened? if It's public of course. It's hard to
> understand the problem without proper context.
>
> Is it https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T261133 ?
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:52 PM Strainu  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > It seems the WMF is going through another crisis of institutional
> > memory, with the T team taking center stage. It's not really
> > important what they did wrong, it's minor compared with other faux-pas
> > they did in the past.
> >
> > I was wondering though if the organization as a whole has learned
> > anything from major crisis in the past and if there is a formal way of
> > passing to newcomers information such as when and how to contact
> > communities, what's the difference between a wiki, a community and an
> > affiliate etc.?
> >
> > Strainu
> >
> > ___
> > 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] Board Update on Branding

2020-06-23 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
And there never was any insult or anything close to that, just a
misunderstanding, which I believe was clarified.

A terça, 23 de jun de 2020, 08:56, revi  escreveu:

> Hi,
>
> > 2020. 6. 23. 14:13, Gnangarra  작성:
> >
> > Nat insulted an ESEAP
> > affiliate because she wanted a European affiliate to endorse her
> > nomination.
>
> Fact check: that was Shani Evanstein.
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/Nominations/Shani_Evenstein
> ___
> 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] Board Update on Branding

2020-06-22 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
(Just reminding that Nat was not elected by the community, as Gnangarra
seems to think, but by the affiliates.)

Jan-Bart de Vreede  escreveu no dia segunda,
22/06/2020 à(s) 17:26:

>  Hi Gnangarra
>
> I find your request for Nat to resign uncalled for…. and not in the least
> because of the common misconception you have with regards to the role of
> Board members of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
> Quoting from the excellent Wikimedia Board Handbook(1)
>
> "WMF is an entrusted steward within the Wikimedia movement. The Board's
> role (and legal obligation) is to oversee the management of the
> organization and ensure that it fulfills its mission and responsibilities
> as a steward. To help accomplish this, the Board maintains a strong
> connection to the Wikimedia communities. For example, WMF's bylaws require
> that a majority of Board seats (not including the Founder's seat and
> non-member officer positions) be filled by candidates selected by the
> communities and chapters, and appointed by the incumbent Board members - an
> unusual requirement for a nonprofit board. Board members are often active
> community members as well. That said, Board members have a fiduciary duty
> to represent the overall WMF interests during their service on the Board –
> not just the interests of chapters or certain parts of the communities. “
>
> So while the community certainly gets to elect board members, these board
> members have obligations once they are appointed to the board. And yes:
> that also means getting community input, but all board members should be
> concerned with that, not just those elected by the community.
>
> Jan-Bart
>
> > On 22 Jun 2020, at 08:52, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > The choice is yours to resign because the The Board isnt considering the
> > community as a key part of what we have created, or because you
> > arent representing the community's voice on the Board.
>
>
> 1)
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Handbook#Fiduciary_duties
> ___
> 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] Board Update on Branding

2020-06-21 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Nat,

Thank you very much for managing to put out a statement in a reasonable
timeframe, despite the harsh conditions most of all endure now. I can only
imagine how hard it has been to get to that.
Above all, thank you a lot for the sincerity and for the courage on taking
a blame that I'm certain is not (at least entirely) yours

As a very first reaction,

"*it is important to be clear: the Board absolutely can change the  name of
the Wikimedia Foundation, even to the “Wikipedia Foundation,” if it
decides.*" - Of course you (Board) can, and it will have obvious
consequences. Stating that you can do whatever you please because you can,
looks unnecessary and aggressive. I wished you've not written that there

"*the exploratory project was and still is ongoing*" - The use of the word
"exploratory" here seems to directly contradict the established timeline
[1], which is about defining a concrete proposal and approving it or not,
not about exploring options. At least, not with the involvement of the
community. Can you please clarify?

"*The Board conversation about this is planned to happen during the August
meeting.*" - I hope you recall during that conversation that part of the
current Board terminated (or should have terminated) the mandate they were
elected to.

"*What are the possible outcomes for the August Board meeting on branding?
The Board can 1) stop the project, 2) pause the work being done or 3)
continue with it.*" - It is truly a relief that you are at least
considering as an option to stop or pause the branding project. However,
from the available timeline [1], what follows in August is the final
refinement, which seems to imply that whatever comes from the much
controversial survey going on - with all certainty, one of the 3
"Wikipedia" options - will be all that will be there to be continued. There
is no space nor time for any other version that does not include
"Wikipédia". Is this correct?

"*The currently open survey [6] is intended to find the best possible
outcome if the Foundation's (!) branding*" - This seems to imply the survey
is only about the Foundation "(!)" branding, but that's not what is written
there. This is how the survey starts: " With this survey, the 2030 Movement
Brand Project team invites your feedback on proposals for *movement* names
based on our best-known brand, Wikipedia. The proposed names apply to the
*movement*, the *affiliates* and the Foundation." You say the branding only
applies to the Foundation, the survey says it's also about affiliates, and
- and this is really surprising - to the whole movement, something it's not
really in the hands of the Board to decide, as the movement, as an organic
group of many different people with different opinions, voices, cultures,
is not controlled nor defined in the least by the Board. Could you please
clarify why you say the survey only applies to the Foundation, despite what
the survey itself states?

(when I write "you" here it is the Board, obviously, not you, Nat)

Thanks again for all your dedication, courage and sincerity,
Paulo

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Timeline


Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia segunda, 22/06/2020
à(s) 01:44:

> 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 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Affiliations Committee/Candidates/June 2020

2020-05-23 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello Rosie,

Why after all this time, and after all the convulsions that have happened,
AffCom candidates are still being selected by AffCom itself, instead of by
the community, or other more legitimate process?

You wrote: " As a reflection of our commitment to openness, transparency,
and bilateral engagement with the Wikimedia community, the 2020 member
selection process
will include a public review and comment period." -> how is this different
from what has been happening in the other selections? There is a public
review, and then AffCom recklessly ignores it and does whatever it pleases.

The way it is, it's a game of marked cards, and extremely demotivating for
candidates.
It is also a continuous source of lack of legitimacy and low reputation to
AffCom itself, as a body.
Why don't you change the process? The way it is, it clearly serves no one.

Best,
Paulo


Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight  escreveu no dia
sexta, 22/05/2020 à(s) 20:54:

> Hi everyone,
>
> The Affiliations Committee (AffCom) – the committee responsible for guiding
> volunteers in establishing and sustaining Wikimedia chapters, thematic
> organizations, and user groups – is seeking new members!
>
> The main role of the AffCom is to guide groups of volunteers that are
> interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new
> groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia
> affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance
> with requirements and best practices, and update the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board of Trustees as well as advise them on issues connected to chapters,
> thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.
>
> The committee consists of five to fifteen members, selected at least once
> every year, to serve two-year terms. As the committee must hold mid-year
> elections to replenish its members at this time, those joining the
> committee during the current process will serve a slightly extended term
> from July 2020 through December 2022.
>
> AffCom continues to closely monitor the Wikimedia 2030 Strategy process
> initiated in 2016. While the affiliation models continue to be discussed as
> part of the broader strategy discussion, as no decisions have been made to
> change the current affiliation models yet, AffCom continues to work in the
> same manner with regard to affiliate recognitions and intervention support
> for affiliates with issues of non-compliance in 2020. AffCom continues to
> process applications for user group and chapter/thematic organization
> creation, while we await the strategy next steps and begin to prepare for a
> smooth transition of the committee and affiliates ecosystem to any changing
> movement structures and systems in 2021.
>
>
>
> Being a part of the AffCom requires communication with volunteers all over
> the world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to
> understand legal texts. We look for a mix of different skill sets in our
> members.
>
>
>
> ==Responsibilities==
>
>
>
>1.
>
>   Availability of up to 5-8 hours per month
>   2.
>
>   Participate in monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings
>   3.
>
>   Commitment to carry out assigned tasks in a given time.
>   4.
>
>   Facilitate and support communications
>   5.
>
>   Affiliate Support and growth
>
>
>
> == Required and Recommended Abilities, Skills, Knowledge for Affiliations
> Committee Members ==
>
> Strong interpersonal relationship among members of the committee and also
> with the Wikimedia community members. Across all committee members, there
> are additional relevant skills as well as requirements which help to
> support the committee and its sustainability which include both required
> and relevant general skills
>
>
>
> ===Required===
>
> * Fluency in English
>
> * Availability of up to 5 hours per week, and the time to participate in a
> monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings.
>
> * Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities (including
> contacts with current and potential affiliates) when appropriate.
>
> * Strong track record of effective collaboration
>
> *  International orientation
>
>
>
> ===Relevant for all members===
>
> * Public Communications (English writing and speaking skills)
>
> * Skills in other languages are a major plus.
>
> * Understanding of the structure and work of affiliates and the Wikimedia
> Foundation.
>
> * Documentation practices
>
> * Interviewing experience
>
> * Experience with, or in, an active affiliate is a major plus.
>
> * Teamwork: Project and people management skills to coordinate and
> collaborate with different parties on a shared plan and see it through to
> completion.
>
> * Problem-Solving: Ability to evaluate various solutions, consider multiple
> interests and points of view,  revisit unresolved issues, seek compromise
> and work and communicate across languages and cultures.
>
>
>
> Given the expectations for 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Annoying ads

2020-05-05 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Why do you ask? Unregistered readers are some kind of inferior creatures
not worth of any attention?
Registering an account and logging in is optional in Wikimedia.

Paulo

Robert Fernandez  escreveu no dia segunda,
4/05/2020 à(s) 16:27:

> I know this might sound crazy, but have you considered logging in?
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:56 AM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > Often I surf Wikipedia without being logged in, and so I did right now. I
> > got the usual banners, but this time they popped up repeatedly in several
> > locations. This quickly gets extremely annoying, and I find it unwise.
> > Create one banner, and stick with that. Several banners are simply way
> over
> > the top.
> >
> > /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,
> > 
> ___
> 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] Annoying ads

2020-05-05 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
In the first days of the pandemic, while trying to read info on my
cellphone, where I'm usually logged out, I was bombed first with that ugly
black thing signed by Katherine Maher, then in the next page I navigated
to, with a red message directed at "my friend from Portugal", both of them
asking money using the context of the pandemic. Which I found not only
annoying but on a bad taste.

It seems to only affect wiki.en, but it is still quite annoying, as I read
it often using the cellphone.

On the other hand, if WMF insists in that strategy, maybe it means it's
working somehow? But there must be less aggressive ways of reaching to the
people...

Best,
Paulo

John Erling Blad  escreveu no dia segunda, 4/05/2020 à(s)
15:56:

> Often I surf Wikipedia without being logged in, and so I did right now. I
> got the usual banners, but this time they popped up repeatedly in several
> locations. This quickly gets extremely annoying, and I find it unwise.
> Create one banner, and stick with that. Several banners are simply way over
> the top.
>
> /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,
> 
___
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] Message to readers from the Wikimedia Foundation regarding COVID-19

2020-03-19 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Please don't use the "coronavirus pandemic" misnomer, at least in the
version in Portuguese.
"Coronavirus" is a group of virus, not the disease. It's proper name is
COVID-19. Using that misnomer is akin as calling "retrovirus epidemic" to
AIDS, and fertile ground for all kinds of fake news, such as the
"coronavirus" interferons from Cuba and ppl caughting unrelated
"coronavirus" (such as MERS-CoV) and using that to spread panic.
We've already enough "coronavirus" disinformation around without that
banner.

Thanks,
Paulo

Joseph Seddon  escreveu no dia quinta, 19/03/2020
à(s) 20:27:

> Dear list,
>
> Given the unfolding global events, the Wikimedia Foundations feels it is
> important to reassure readers across the globe.
>
> We'll be displaying a short message at the top of the projects reaffirming
> our commitment to keep Wikipedia and the Wikimedia projects online, open
> and free for all. Readers often turn to Wikipedia for neutral information
> in times of stress. This is a critical moment for students who can't go to
> school, people who have to stay home with their families, and anyone who
> needs a trusted source of unbiased information.
>
> We also want to take a moment to acknowledge the invaluable work of all the
> medical contributors on Wikipedia. Thank you for keeping a close watch and
> keeping misinformation at bay. Coronavirus topics have received tens of
> thousands of edits by thousands of editors since the start of the pandemic.
> The article has been read more than 30 million times, in English alone.
>
> The message will be displayed just once to readers, and you can preview the
> banner [1]. The draft is in English but we want this message to be
> multilingual. If you have a moment, please help translate this banner into
> your language [2]. Thank you all, for your work and efforts.
>
> Stay safe, and wash your hands!
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> [1] - Banner Preview:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA?banner=programmatic_mlWW_rsp_covid19=1=US
>
>
> [2] - Translate link:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate=Centralnotice-tgroup-Programmatic_translations_2020=view=%21translated=translate
> ___
> 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] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

2020-03-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The thread was about COVID-19, not about "COVID", so no idea really why Doc
James replied talking about something else. But I don't want to go on with
that subject, at Pine's request. What I wanted to say about it, I've
already said.

Thanks,
Paulo

Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia domingo,
15/03/2020 à(s) 22:01:

> On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 21:07, Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
>
> >> Covid is an abreviaton for coronavirus disease.
>
> > No, it's an abbreviation for *Coronavirus Disease 2019* [1]
>
> That would make "COVID-19" mean "Coronavirus Disease 2019-19".
>
> --
> 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] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

2020-03-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I photographed the COVID-19 isolation room at our local university (it's
precisely in front of the cabinet I usually work in), and created the
category for COVID-19 isolations:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:COVID-19_isolations

Best,
Paulo

Yaroslav Blanter  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020
à(s) 21:46:

> Just to remark that I went today to a supermarket to take a picture of
> empty shelves and eventually to upload it to Commons. Which I did (and
> eventually I added one of the photographs to an English Wikipedia article),
> just to discover that several people had the same idea before me, including
> one in my city. Still, the number of relevant pictures is laughably small,
> and now it is good time to take pictures for example of places which are
> normally overcrowded by tourists and now are empty. Or queues at the
> airports due to cancellations, We need to document the event (obviously not
> compromising on the safety), and anybody with a cell phone can easily
> contribute.
>
> Best
> Yaroslav
>
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Empty_chips_shelves_in_AH_Delft_02.jpg
>
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Empty_butter_shelves_in_AH_Delft_01.jpg
>
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 10:12 PM Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > May I suggest that the discussion regarding the name take place
> > somewhere other than Wikimedia-l? I think that a talk page of one of
> > the relevant articles on English Wikipedia, a WikiProject Medicine
> > talk page, or the WikiProject Medicine Mailing List, would all be
> > reasonable venues.
> >
> > 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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

2020-03-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
No, it's an abbreviation for *Coronavirus Disease 2019* [1]. There are many
other "coronavirus diseases".

[1] - https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/index.html

Best,
Paulo

James Heilman  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020 à(s)
21:02:

> Covid is an abreviaton for coronavirus disease.
>
> J
>
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020, 14:56 Paulo Santos Perneta 
> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations for the new project.
> >
> > Possibly you could start by moving the "coronavirus" pandemic articles at
> > wiki.en to the proper name of the disease, COVID-19.
> > No idea why the English Wikipedia insists naming this disease with the
> name
> > of a group of virus that causes a number of other different diseases,
> > instead of the WHO recognized name, providing misleading information and
> > opening fertile ground to all kind of fake news and disinformation
> selling
> > stuff for other coronavirus diseases as if it was COVID-19.
> > Even worst, it's contaminating other projects, like Wikidata and
> Wikimedia
> > Commons, with teams of wiki.en editors going there to revert anyone that
> > dares to move the disease to its proper name.
> >
> > Please help fix this, providing accurate information, specially at a
> > situation like this, is at the core of Wikipedia mission.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Tito Dutta  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020
> à(s)
> > 19:47:
> >
> > > Please read the noticeboard/talk page link as:
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19. It
> > > looks
> > > like I had another noticeboard open at that time. Apologies for the
> wrong
> > > link in the last post.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Tito Dutta
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 01:15, Tito Dutta  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > > A few Wikipedians on English Wikipedia have decided to start a
> > > WikiProject
> > > > on COVID-19 on English Wikipedia to work more systematically and
> > > > collaboratively on the subject. The WikiProject is started by
> > > > [[User:Another Believer]] on 15 March, and very quickly got ~20
> > > > participants and several discussions started on the talk page.
> > > > Please have a look at WikiProject:
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19
> > > > Questions or comments or suggestions at:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Tito Dutta
> > > > [[User:Titodutta]]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > 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] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

2020-03-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Congratulations for the new project.

Possibly you could start by moving the "coronavirus" pandemic articles at
wiki.en to the proper name of the disease, COVID-19.
No idea why the English Wikipedia insists naming this disease with the name
of a group of virus that causes a number of other different diseases,
instead of the WHO recognized name, providing misleading information and
opening fertile ground to all kind of fake news and disinformation selling
stuff for other coronavirus diseases as if it was COVID-19.
Even worst, it's contaminating other projects, like Wikidata and Wikimedia
Commons, with teams of wiki.en editors going there to revert anyone that
dares to move the disease to its proper name.

Please help fix this, providing accurate information, specially at a
situation like this, is at the core of Wikipedia mission.

Best,
Paulo

Tito Dutta  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020 à(s)
19:47:

> Please read the noticeboard/talk page link as:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19. It
> looks
> like I had another noticeboard open at that time. Apologies for the wrong
> link in the last post.
>
> Thanks
> Tito Dutta
>
>
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 01:15, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > A few Wikipedians on English Wikipedia have decided to start a
> WikiProject
> > on COVID-19 on English Wikipedia to work more systematically and
> > collaboratively on the subject. The WikiProject is started by
> > [[User:Another Believer]] on 15 March, and very quickly got ~20
> > participants and several discussions started on the talk page.
> > Please have a look at WikiProject:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19
> > Questions or comments or suggestions at:
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics
> >
> > Thanks
> > Tito Dutta
> > [[User:Titodutta]]
> >
> >
> ___
> 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] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI

2020-02-29 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Some established users have the habit of reverting every edit by IPs and
newbies in the articles they watch - often with the special reversion tool
-  no mater the content and value of the edition. That is a very consistent
behavior I've been observing over more than one decade at the Wikipedia in
Portuguese, and the newbie edit only stays if another established user
notices the reversion, and reverts it back. Meaning: One established user
has to risk potential conflict with those other established users to
reinstate the newbie edition - with the result that many simply staying
away from that and leaving the IP/Newbie to its fate.

It's against the community rules, but pretty much nobody seems to care -
meaning: it's not really against the will of the community.

The general result is a very poor experience for everyone using IPs; and
slightly better (or less bad) for registered newbies, but still quite
hostile.

Best,
Paulo



Martijn Hoekstra  escreveu no dia quinta,
27/02/2020 à(s) 16:41:

> As a quick/rough data point  I don't frequently edit wikipedia anymore, and
> when I do I never log in.
>
> About 2/3 edits no further interactions happen. About 10% gets reverted,
> about 10% of the time I get a warning and the last 10% I get a welcome
> template.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 15:52 Marshall Miller 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for mentioning the WMF Growth team [1], Pine.  This is a really
> > interesting thread that has touched on much of what the team has been
> > working on alongside the Czech, Korean, Arabic, and Vietnamese Wikipedia
> > communities (and with the advice of people from many different
> communities
> > along the way).
> >
> > We've tried to base our approach in research on newcomers, which taught
> us
> > that newcomers face three main types of challenges: technical,
> conceptual,
> > and cultural [2].  For instance, the research tells us that the rules of
> > the wiki are hard to learn, and that a negative first interaction can
> cause
> > a newcomer to leave the wiki and not return -- but that a positive
> > interaction, such as getting advice from a friendly editor, can cause
> them
> > to stay.
> >
> > Over the last year and a half, we have experimented on mid-size
> Wikipedias
> > with features that promote good communication between new and experienced
> > users [3], that help newcomers teach themselves [4], and that give
> > newcomers easy tasks to do [5].  The goal is to build an experience for
> > newcomers that helps them get on a positive track in their first days on
> > the wiki, and want to stick around to join their communities.  It's
> > possible that what we've learned and built so far will apply differently
> to
> > the largest Wikipedias.
> >
> > I hope that anyone who is interested in newcomers can tell us about their
> > own experiences and ideas on our team's discussion page [6], or on the
> > discussion pages of any of our projects.  It's very important to us that
> > the things we build fit in with how communities work today.  Over the
> next
> > year, we're planning to expand the Growth features to more wikis, so we
> > definitely want to talk to people who think the features might be a good
> > fit for their wikis.
> >
> > To keep informed about the Growth team, please subscribe to our
> newsletter
> > [7].
> >
> > [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth
> > [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Editor_Experiences
> > [3]
> >
> >
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_homepage#Mentorship_module
> > [4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Focus_on_help_desk
> > [5]
> >
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_tasks
> > [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Growth
> > [7] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newsletters
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:07 AM Vi to  wrote:
> >
> > > Not really, drawing practical advices/lessons (e.g. "differentiate
> among
> > > kinds of COIs") is the only sensible path towards solving issues.
> > > "Let's be kind" is close to a tautology.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > Il giorno mer 26 feb 2020 alle ore 09:59 Andy Mabbett <
> > > a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
> > > >
> > > > For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
> > > >
> > > > My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an
> > > > example.
> > > >
> > > > I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a
> > > > pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the
> > > > incident concerned.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andy Mabbett
> > > > @pigsonthewing
> > > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why renaming to Wikipedia will wreak havoc on other projects

2020-02-26 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The OP is misleading. The issue is not with Commons at all, but with OTRS.
As far as I know, Commons never, ever, deleted a file which was in use in
any Wikimedia project, with the notable expectation of copyvios. Otherwise,
use in *any* wikimedia project = on scope for Commons.

Apparently some OTRS volunteers follow some outdated procedures - including
that one related to selfies, which was mentioned - but that is a problem
exclusively with OTRS. I'm part of that team, and I always had the freedom
to decide which looked like a genuine selfie, and which was problematic at
that (e.g., with a copyright notice at the metadata). And, as far as I
know, anyone willing to help fixing those problems at OTRS is very much
welcome there. When the volunteers are very few, and the ones complaining
do not volunteer themselves, it only adds up to the pressure on the few
existing volunteers, making everything worse.

Best,
Paulo

Peter Southwood  escreveu no dia quarta,
26/02/2020 à(s) 06:04:

> This does seem unreasonable. Do they have an explanation at Commons?
> This is happening without standardising in one label Wikipedia, so it is
> jumping to quite a conclusion to assume that the issue is related.
> For the record, I am also opposed to rebranding to Wikipedia, but I do not
> think this issue is necessarily related.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 6:10 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Why renaming to Wikipedia will wreak havoc on other
> projects
>
> Hoi,
> Apparantly at Commons they have standardised themselves to only support
> Wikipedia.
>
> At Wikidata we have people who are notable according to our standards. We
> are actively asking them for images to illustrate our information. The best
> suggestion we get is: do not ask for images because they are deleted at
> Commons.
>
> When this is what awaits us when we standardise on one label Wikipedia, it
> is obvious that this is the worst scenario for the "other" projects. The
> projects who operate to different standards who have notability criteria
> different from English Wikipedia.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
> ___
> 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] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI

2020-02-26 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello Peaceray,

There are many Wikipedians like you who continuously dedicate themselves to
well receive and help newbies, being absolutely decisive in keeping and
improving the projects health. But I was referring specifically to the core
community, the one which regularly frequent village pumps and generally has
a say in the project politics and community issues - no idea if you
consider yourself to be or not be part of that. My perception is that such
core community is generally hostile to newbies. I have been myself an
active part of that core community in my home wiki pretty much since I
joined 11 years ago, but I remember quite vividly how difficult it was to
become part of that club, facing constant accusations of being a
sockpuppet, accused of knowing too much for a newbie while getting my talk
page carpet-bombed with warnings, accused of lying about my nationality,
enduring childish jokes about my family name, accused of coming there to
disturb what was in peace for years, and whatever. And those were the
golden years, now it's way worst than that.

The basic premise for any activity related to Wikipedia, is that Wikipedia
generally is an hostile environment. Whoever joins the project must be
prepared to face the worst, and then anything good that happens gets to be
a wonderful gain. But the stuff about how fun is to edit Wikipedia is not
true a very significant part of the time. Old rats like me got to know very
well over the years how to avoid trouble and get the thing to be as
pleasant as possible, but the poor rookies, they are generally up to some
troubled times if they really want to stay. Social media such as Telegram,
where newbies can socialize with experts and get help in an easy, friendly
and quick way, are playing a very positive role on that. But the onwiki
situation is pretty much awful.

Best,
Paulo



Raymond Leonard  escreveu no dia terça,
25/02/2020 à(s) 19:40:

> I hope I am one of those "rare exceptions" that Paulo Santos Perneta writes
> about. I also wish that welcoming would be neither rare or exceptional.
>
> My habit:
>
>- For newly registered users, which I define as someone with a redlinked
>talk page, I welcome them.
>- If I am going to revert that user's edit then warn them (via Twinkle
>   almost always), I want to ensure that they are welcomed first.
>- For IP editors:
>   -  If I am reverting an obviously inappropriate edit by an
>   un-welcomed IP editor, I typically use one of the Twinkle
> welcome/warning
>   combos, such as Template:Welcome-anon-test,
>   Template:Welcome-anon-unconstructive, or
> Template:Welcome-anon-delete.
>   - If an  un-welcomed IP editor, makes a revertible edit that is
>   non-malicious, I usually do a Template:Welcome-anon without the
> article
>   parameter, then add a warning
>   - If an  un-welcomed IP editor, editor is doing good, I use a
>   Template:Welcome-anon-constructive
>
> Peaceray
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:58 AM Pine W  wrote:
>
> > I have a more nuanced view.
> >
> > The community benefits from new editors who are acting in good faith
> > and willing to learn.
> >
> > I agree that treatment of new editors can be problematic.
> >
> > On the other hand, having become one of the "insiders", I now
> > understand how English Wikipedia has a limited supply of skilled labor
> > from volunteers who are trying to defend Wikipedia against vandals,
> > conflict of interest editors, copyright violations, and other
> > problems.
> >
> > There is a WMF team working to improve the onboarding experience. I'm
> > cc'ing Marshal Miller (WMF) here in case he would like to comment.
> >
> > 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,
> > <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] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI

2020-02-25 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
As a rule, (at least) in Wikipedia, with very rare exceptions,  established
communities of editors treat newbies as unwelcome invaders.
No idea how to solve that, since it's a problem related to the nature of
humane beings, not something technical.
But the result is a very low rate of retention, indeed - and increasingly
reduced diversity and cultural richness, which eventually ends up reflected
on content. At some point those established editors also start preying at
other established editors, specially when newbies are not available. The
environment is awful and toxic in general.

For outreach activities to have at least a minimal rate of success, the
participants need to have some kind of protection shield, such as some
privileged contact with established editors willing to help them.
Otherwise, edithatons and other outreach activities are basically sending
lambs to the slaughterhouse. As for newbies that come to Wikipedia by
themselves, they are generally on their own.

Best,
Paulo

Aron Demian  escreveu no dia domingo, 23/02/2020
à(s) 23:30:

> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:35, Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
> > I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of
> > an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w
> > as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
>
> [...]
> >
> As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk
> > page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a
> > discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094
> > characters or 665 words.
> >
>
> This is a topic that's seldom discussed and somewhat taboo in certain
> areas, therefore not many people are aware of what experiences many
> newcomers have. These events go generally unnoticed, but if you were
> wondering why editor retention is a constant issue, the pattern that lies
> behind this single case you brought to our attention is a top reason.
>
> I've tried to help in a similar case of a footballer unknown in
> English-speaking countries. She was repeatedly reverted without the edits
> being evaluated or the rules being explained. She never returned and I was
> frowned upon by the admin, who was involved, for trying to help.
>
> I've noticed this "shoot first, ask later" pattern in many cases, not just
> with newcomers. Unfortunately, this is all too common and a contributing
> factor to the toxicity.
>
> I've noticed the following issues:
> 1) The general unwelcoming treatment of newcomers: "noobs" are considered
> lacking the proper understanding and necessary knowledge, unless they jump
> right into RC patrolling, which is not the sign of a new editor.
> 2) The lack of protection given to newcomers:  "You have no rights" being
> explicitly said to one newcomer, that I recall.
> 3) Preferential treatment and authority bias: the experienced/established
> user is "trusted", thus must be right, therefore unwelcoming - and often
> hostile - conduct is not considered uncivil or it's "not actionable".
> 4) The excessively vilifying application of the most frowned-upon rules
> such as COI, socking. Editors tagged as such are treated the same
> regardless of the effect of their actions and whether that has caused any
> damage, which can scale from none to introducing bias to many articles for
> years.
>
> Currently, there is no effort to mitigate these issues, to improve the
> policies and community practices. It's also a problem that while the
> "biting newbies" and "civility" policies are very well written, these are
> almost never applied and definitely not in the protection of newcomers. By
> that I don't mean these should always result in sanctions, but that the
> community - and primarily who get involved with handling disputes - should
> take these seriously, approach with a neutral mindset and remind the
> editors about our policies, but that almost never happens and such
> complaints are either ignored or blindly decided in favor of the editor
> with more supporters, enabling the abuse of newcomers.
>
> Tl;dr:  newcomers don't enjoy the safety net created by editors who know
> and care for each other and the community processes are not set up to
> create a welcoming and/or safe environment, this purpose is not manifested
> in any kind of endeavors or practices. If the WMF and the movement take the
> Mid-Term target of a welcoming environment seriously, that's a difficult,
> long-term target that will take a lot of effort.
>
> Aron (Demian)
> ___
> 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why renaming to Wikipedia will wreak havoc on other projects

2020-02-25 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I'm not that familiar with the photosubmissions OTRS queue, and I've no
idea if we have that rule internally on OTRS.
But it surely seems a weird rule. Anything that is on scope to Commons -
which is the case for anything used in Wikdiata too - should be accepted in
photosubmission, period.
That claimed attachment to Wikipedia, a project very well known for often
having a communities with draconian and unhelpful rules of notability,
doesn't seem productive in the least. If that rule exists at all, it should
be dropped and the images accepted.

"some people have turned Wikidata into a dumping ground for scientific
papers and a phone book for scientists" - O RLY?

Best,
Paulo


Gerard Meijssen  escreveu no dia terça,
25/02/2020 à(s) 17:21:

> Hoi,
> This is the chat (too long) at Wikidata
>
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat#Images_for_Wikidata_-_%22Global_Young_Academy%22
> This is the chat at Commons
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#OTRS_&_Wikidata
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 17:45, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> >  Can you provide some links?
> > I keep asking images for Wikidata items since years and I do not recall
> > any issue at all. I have the feeling that as long everything is formally
> > correct (all categories prepared and linked via wikidata infobox) nobody
> > digs into that very much.
> > It's true however that I have a cynical approach. In general, I think
> that
> > whoever spends his/her time on this and not on deleting unused low
> > resolution old images or cropping files or improving categorization is
> > probably more focused on chasing users than actually cleaning up. As soon
> > as you assume that this is the core source of the behavior, you can teach
> > newbies quite well how to avoid it. It's not "good faith" but... it kinda
> > works.
> > Alessandro
> >
> > Il martedì 25 febbraio 2020, 17:11:44 CET, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> >  Hoi,
> > Apparantly at Commons they have standardised themselves to only support
> > Wikipedia.
> >
> > At Wikidata we have people who are notable according to our standards. We
> > are actively asking them for images to illustrate our information. The
> best
> > suggestion we get is: do not ask for images because they are deleted at
> > Commons.
> >
> > When this is what awaits us when we standardise on one label Wikipedia,
> it
> > is obvious that this is the worst scenario for the "other" projects. The
> > projects who operate to different standards who have notability criteria
> > different from English Wikipedia.
> > Thanks,
> >   GerardM
> > ___
> > 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 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

2020-02-18 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello Quim,

I knew this was a possibility, but it still is a big surprise for me that
the WMF has not recognized the enormous value and potential of Wikimedia
Space, which was a space incredibly more friendlier and easier to use than
anything I've ever seen onwiki. As we discussed last November in
WikiIndaba, it only needed to be somehow connected to the Wikimedia
Projects, so that we could get the notifications there - as a standalone
project it's very difficult to follow, since apart from real life we have
mail, social networks, chats - and the wikimedia projects constantly
draining attention and competing for time.

But... All the investment, all the information shared there, will be lost?

I suspect that after this last debacle of Wikimedia Space, it will be
considerably more difficult for people to embark in more new WMF
adventures. It was already difficult with this one.

Bad decisions at top level -> lots of money wasted, valuable WMF staff time
and expertise wasted... and a lot of volunteer time and expertise, and
community goodwill burned for nothing, like if we have plenty of that.

Best,
Paulo

Quim Gil  escreveu no dia terça, 18/02/2020 à(s) 10:31:

> Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment
> with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and
> showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important
> goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation
> has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill
> a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a
> new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that
> we may share them with the movement.
>
> To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at
> https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
>
> We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space
> users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone
> interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join
> us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space
> category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_get_started
> [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all
> [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2
> [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
>
> --
> Quim Gil (he/him)
> Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
> ___
> 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] AffCom - Candidates for new mandate

2020-01-23 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
And the next big surprise, to me, is that so many of their members are
genuinely good people, strongly engaged with the movement. Still, that
committee is something close to a complete failure (if not a complete
failure).
It seems clear to me that the failure of AffCom most probably is not the
fault of its members. But if they do not come in the open to the community
talking about the problems they face there, I don't see much that people
out of WMF can do about it, besides barking at AffCom when it misbehaves.

It seems an useful body, it seems to have been an useful body when it was
still ChapCom - I wonder what have happened after that that led to this sad
situation - and I hope it can be fixed somehow in the near future, as we,
the affiliates, desperately need that body in a functional state - at least
while something else is not devised to coordinate affiliations in the
Wikimedia Movement.

Best,
Paulo - Darwin



Chris Keating  escreveu no dia quinta,
23/01/2020 à(s) 09:57:

> To me the main surprise is that AffCom continues to exist despite being
> obviously broken.
>
> It does not fulfill its mandate, it never has done, everyone knows this,
> yet still the WMF is happy to have a non-functional committee.
>
> Chris
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 12:23 AM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> >  On January the 10th I put it in the home page of meta
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Main_Page/WM_News=prev=19695407
> > , I think I did the same last year but I was considering obvious we had
> > received some mails and I did not pay attention.
> > I am surprised there are so many candidates considering the limited
> > publicity the page gets in the month of December.
> >
> > Next year I will try to put it on the news section of the meta home page
> > sooner.
> > Alessandro
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giovedì 23 gennaio 2020, 01:14:00 CET, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> >  Not sure this made it to the Wikimedia-L - I couldn't find it easily, at
> > least. But the candidates for the new mandate in AffCom are under
> > discussion now (and have been for some time already.
> >
> > Interested ppl, please follow the link and comment/endorse/ask questions
> to
> > them there:
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Candidates/December_2019
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo - DarwIn
> > ___
> > 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] AffCom - Candidates for new mandate

2020-01-22 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
It should also be here in the "News" section:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee
And visible elsewhere in that page, probably close to where the "voting
members" list is. But it's nowhere to seen in that page, as far as I know.
I already knew that selection process should be going on since December, or
else I would have missed it entirely.

There's a lot to improve in AffCom concerning communication with the
communities, for sure... :P

Best,
Paulo


Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
escreveu no dia quinta, 23/01/2020 à(s) 00:23:

>  On January the 10th I put it in the home page of meta
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Main_Page/WM_News=prev=19695407
> , I think I did the same last year but I was considering obvious we had
> received some mails and I did not pay attention.
> I am surprised there are so many candidates considering the limited
> publicity the page gets in the month of December.
>
> Next year I will try to put it on the news section of the meta home page
> sooner.
> Alessandro
>
>
>
> Il giovedì 23 gennaio 2020, 01:14:00 CET, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>  Not sure this made it to the Wikimedia-L - I couldn't find it easily, at
> least. But the candidates for the new mandate in AffCom are under
> discussion now (and have been for some time already.
>
> Interested ppl, please follow the link and comment/endorse/ask questions to
> them there:
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Candidates/December_2019
>
> Best,
> Paulo - DarwIn
> ___
> 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] AffCom - Candidates for new mandate

2020-01-22 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Not sure this made it to the Wikimedia-L - I couldn't find it easily, at
least. But the candidates for the new mandate in AffCom are under
discussion now (and have been for some time already.

Interested ppl, please follow the link and comment/endorse/ask questions to
them there:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Candidates/December_2019

Best,
Paulo - DarwIn
___
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 Chief of Community Engagement to leave the Foundation

2019-11-16 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
 What websites are you talking about, Gerard? I couldn't get that part.

Africa is way more engaged and active that the impression that often passes
to the rest of the movement, and I believe that the WMF staff that went to
Wiki Indaba has noticed that (it was impossible not to notice it, IMO). I
was at Wiki Indaba, and my impression is that the WMF was well and properly
represented at the conference, that the money was well spent and that there
will be/ already are practical and noticeable improvements in the
engagement with the wiki communities in Africa on the part of the WMF after
that.

Best,
Paulo

Gerard Meijssen  escreveu no dia sábado,
16/11/2019 à(s) 16:12:

> Hoi,
> What language does the staff, the departments speak.
>
> What chance for the current bias to be sustained and for no real progress
> where we do a mediocre job at best.. Did we EVER research what the effect
> was of ending the free access to our articles when we ended our program. Do
> we know how to make a difference and are we willing to let go of what holds
> us back?
>
> Just compare the recent conventions and the money spend. Africa could be so
> much more active when our websites are as good there as what we are
> accustomed to. Yes, staff went to Africa and then what?
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2019 at 16:04, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> wrote:
>
> > If the changes get staff more directly and personally involved in
> > communicating with the rest of the community it could be helpful to both
> > groups,
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Dariusz Jemielniak
> > Sent: 16 November 2019 12:39
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Chief of Community
> > Engagement to leave the Foundation
> >
> > hi,
> >
> > speaking just in my personal opinion and capacity, without discussing it
> > with anyone else: only time will tell whether this structural change
> works,
> > and jumping to conclusions is definitely premature.
> >
> > In principle, as a person specializing in management and organizational
> > change, I can tell that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. I can
> > definitely see a lot of possible benefits to the restructuring though,
> and
> > we definitely DO want all WMF departments to be in touch with the
> > communities. The proposed approach tries to address the siloses. Every
> > department will have good interface with the CE issues, and this is a
> good
> > thing. Whether it leads to better CE prioritization is unknown yet, but
> > structurally it can definitely help.
> >
> > On a practical level, given the fact that our previous search for the
> > C-level position for CE took more than half a year, AFAIR, in the short
> > term the assumed approach allows us to leapfrog a lot of turmoil, which
> > could be damaging to community engagement in this crucial moment (last
> > stretch of our strategic exercise effort). In the long run - I am certain
> > that the WMF leadership does not believe in things written in stone.
> >
> > I'd be really reluctant to assume the restructuring is good or bad for
> the
> > community as it is, everything depends on how the new structure is used
> in
> > practice.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > dj "pundit"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 1:29 AM Paul J. Weiss  > pjwe...@uw.edu>> wrote:
> > 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 believe this move does indeed say to
> employees,
> > the community, allied organization, and the rest of the world that the
> WMF
> > is now placing less value on engaging the community. Given that many in
> the
> > community have been feeling this already, this is not an opportune time
> to
> > make this transition, even if it were a good idea for other reasons.
> >
> > Another issue is the specific placement of individual teams. For example,
> > you say that returning the Trust & Safety team to the Legal department is
> > intuitive. It certainly is not to me, and that move in particular is
> > concerning. The team's homepage on Meta states that it "identifies,
> builds
> > and – as appropriate – staffs processes which keep our users safe;
> design,
> > develop, and execute on a strategy that integrates legal, product,
> > research, and learning & evaluation to proactively mitigate risk as well
> as
> > manage the overall safety of our online and offline communities when
> > incidents happen." The legal aspect is only one of many in the team's
> > purview, and hopefully not a large one.
> >
> > In my experience, units within legal departments take a very legalistic
> > view of their work. As one 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Mali User Group

2019-11-08 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Congratulations to all Malian Wikimedians, it's really great to have one
more affiliate from Africa! :D

Paulo

Isaac Olatunde  escreveu no dia sexta, 8/11/2019
à(s) 18:22:

> Congratulations to Wikimedians of Mali. We look toward to collaborating
> with you.
>
> Regards
>
> Isaac
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019, 6:13 PM Kirill Lokshin  wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone!
>>
>> I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
>> [1] the Wikimedians of Mali User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The
>> group aims to promote the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects in Mali,
>> and to support and encourage people to collect, develop and disseminate
>> knowledge and other educational, cultural and historic content under free
>> licenses or in the public domain.
>>
>> Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kirill Lokshin
>> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikimedians_of_Mali_User_Group
>> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Mali_User_Group
>> ___
>> Affiliates mailing list
>> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>>
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-07 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Ziko,

When WMPT was forced by AffCom early this year to change the old chapter
agreement we had signed in 2009 for a new one, which we were told was the
current model for everyone, the main difference between the two was
precisely the end of the chapter hegemony over the national territory. We
were told, back then, that those were the new rules. You can read it here:
https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chapter_agreement

Personally, I don't mind that in the least. If some caution is taken by
AffCom, e.g., to not approve rogue affiliates which at it's very inception
are already at war with the national chapter (or "post/pre"-chapter
affiliate, as AffCom has done in Brazil back in 2015, causing all the mess
everybody knows), all is cool. Spain has already something like 5 or 6
affiliates, and they seem to live happily in peace. If it works, let it go.

Best,
Paulo

Ziko van Dijk  escreveu no dia segunda, 7/10/2019 à(s)
12:50:

> Sorry, people, but I would like to read an official statement of the WMF
> (committee) what is the reason or rationale behind this policy to accept WM
> user groups in countries where you already have a chapter. Does anybody
> have a link?
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
> Am Sa., 5. Okt. 2019 um 19:16 Uhr schrieb Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi Farhad,
> >
> > Very interesting, thank you very much for sharing your insight.
> > The advantages at an organizational level are quite obvious, indeed, and
> > it's a smart way to deal with those membership limitations.
> > I'm glad that the WMF & Wikimedia is abandoning the very rigid chapter
> > model as the preferred one, and is evolving into more flexible and
> nuanced
> > options and varieties, such as those confederations.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> > Фархад Фаткуллин / Farhad Fatkullin  escreveu no dia
> > sábado, 5/10/2019 à(s) 15:38:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > I can probably comment this, as a member of both Wikimedia Russia and a
> > > Tatar language-specific UG.
> > > On top of participation in Wikimedia Language Diversity initiative on
> > > meta, I am also contemplating and working towards starting a
> > > territory-specific UG for my region + an incubator UG for more
> > > language-specific UG in the languages of Russia.
> > >
> > >
> > > Wikimedians of Russia seem to see the matreshkas of (1) "global
> > conference
> > > - regional conference - topic-specific conferences"  & (2) WMF &
> > affiliates
> > > general meeting - national chapters - UGs" as natural structures, each
> > > addressing different tasks, having different priorities, whilst
> > cooperating
> > > in various projects.
> > >
> > > * Wikimedia Russia legal requirements (in-person quorum for
> > > decision-making, etc.) doesn't allow us to accept into membership all
> > > members of all our regional, language or topic specific UGs. So our
> > chapter
> > > is evolving towards a mixed confederation status, selectively welcoming
> > > some members from various groupings around Russia (which themselves
> can't
> > > be neither cells nor branches of WMRU).
> > >
> > > * SPB is not purely a city, but a one of 85 provinces (read states) of
> > the
> > > Russian Federation (like my home Republic of Tatarstan, neighbouring
> > > Republic of Bashkortostan with its Bashkir Wiki-grandmas, or a city of
> > > Moscow).
> > >
> > > * Once we will spin out UG MSK, we will complete transforming Wikimedia
> > > Russia into a collective entity for join tasks, working on
> national-level
> > > advocacy & other projects.
> > >
> > > * We currently have 5 existing UGs, have two more filed & at least one
> > > more at the preparation stage - as this is a good way to engage locally
> > or
> > > topically interested public into Wikimedia universe.
> > >
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > farhad
> > >
> > > --
> > > Farhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин Тел.+79274158066 / skype:frhdkazan
> /
> > > Wikipedia:frhdkazan / Wikidata:Q34036417
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-05 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Farhad,

Very interesting, thank you very much for sharing your insight.
The advantages at an organizational level are quite obvious, indeed, and
it's a smart way to deal with those membership limitations.
I'm glad that the WMF & Wikimedia is abandoning the very rigid chapter
model as the preferred one, and is evolving into more flexible and nuanced
options and varieties, such as those confederations.

Best,
Paulo


Фархад Фаткуллин / Farhad Fatkullin  escreveu no dia
sábado, 5/10/2019 à(s) 15:38:

> Hi folks,
>
> I can probably comment this, as a member of both Wikimedia Russia and a
> Tatar language-specific UG.
> On top of participation in Wikimedia Language Diversity initiative on
> meta, I am also contemplating and working towards starting a
> territory-specific UG for my region + an incubator UG for more
> language-specific UG in the languages of Russia.
>
>
> Wikimedians of Russia seem to see the matreshkas of (1) "global conference
> - regional conference - topic-specific conferences"  & (2) WMF & affiliates
> general meeting - national chapters - UGs" as natural structures, each
> addressing different tasks, having different priorities, whilst cooperating
> in various projects.
>
> * Wikimedia Russia legal requirements (in-person quorum for
> decision-making, etc.) doesn't allow us to accept into membership all
> members of all our regional, language or topic specific UGs. So our chapter
> is evolving towards a mixed confederation status, selectively welcoming
> some members from various groupings around Russia (which themselves can't
> be neither cells nor branches of WMRU).
>
> * SPB is not purely a city, but a one of 85 provinces (read states) of the
> Russian Federation (like my home Republic of Tatarstan, neighbouring
> Republic of Bashkortostan with its Bashkir Wiki-grandmas, or a city of
> Moscow).
>
> * Once we will spin out UG MSK, we will complete transforming Wikimedia
> Russia into a collective entity for join tasks, working on national-level
> advocacy & other projects.
>
> * We currently have 5 existing UGs, have two more filed & at least one
> more at the preparation stage - as this is a good way to engage locally or
> topically interested public into Wikimedia universe.
>
>
> regards,
> farhad
>
> --
> Farhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин Тел.+79274158066 / skype:frhdkazan /
> Wikipedia:frhdkazan / Wikidata:Q34036417
>
> ___
> 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-04 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
BTW, I seem to recall that in last ASBS election, affiliates which
presented something like 70% member overlap with another affiliate would
not be allowed to participate in the process.
If this practice is kept, it avoids gaming the system (intentionally or
unintentionally) through a multiplication of affiliates which are basically
cells or clones of one of them.

If this is safeguarded, cell-style affiliates probably can become a nice
feature.

Paulo

Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu no dia sábado,
5/10/2019 à(s) 00:45:

> Hey,
>
> "*1) if a group has more active cores, maybe they should be more broadly
> represented in Berlin. Maybe these constructs shouldn't be necessary.*"
> -> I can agree with that point, yes;
> "*2) No matter how much some care about the ASBS, I doubt that this will
> be a driving force to get more bureaucracy (because that is the cost of
> setting up a UG).*" - I respect your opinion, but IMO getting to have
> increased, or even decisive power on the election of 2 of the 5 members
> (which in turn appoint and confirm the other 5) of the board of one of the
> biggest players and stakeholders of modern days, as the Wikimedia
> Foundation has been growing into progressively, is indeed a powerful driven
> force. Furthermore, as far as I know, bureaucratic requirements for UGs are
> really low, and in line with a department or cell would have to report to
> the mother organization. I'm not saying or even suggesting this was the
> driven force behind the formation of the SPUG, I certainly assume good
> faith. I'm saying that it may be a driven force for similar cases presented
> as local affiliates more or less explicitly under the umbrella of a
> national chapter to pop up. And this aspect can be potentially unfair, and
> even amount to abuse of the system, as a trick to gather more votes;
> *"3) funding for local activities is probably not really a consideration
> in the case of Russia, where foreign funding is (to put it mildly)
> 'complicated'.* I mentioned funding, not WMF funding necessarily. It's
> perfectly understandable that a locally registered association may have, in
> some contexts, more easy access to funds than a national one. I live in an
> autonomous region where it is very common, so I understand it may be indeed
> a legitimate reason to create and register a local affiliate. No idea if
> that is the case of Saint Petersburg, but if it is, it's a smart move.
>
> Basically, I'm not criticizing this approval - I've no idea what is behind
> the group formation, though I assume the members have the best intentions,
> and it actually looks like a smart move. I'm just curious if this will
> become a trend, and how will it develop.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> effe iets anders  escreveu no dia sexta,
> 4/10/2019 à(s) 21:39:
>
>> Sure, if you want to see it through that lens I guess you could argue
>> such.
>> However, just to put things in perspective: 1) if a group has more active
>> cores, maybe they should be more broadly represented in Berlin. Maybe
>> these
>> constructs shouldn't be necessary. 2) No matter how much some care about
>> the ASBS, I doubt that this will be a driving force to get more
>> bureaucracy
>> (because that is the cost of setting up a UG). 3) funding for local
>> activities is probably not really a consideration in the case of Russia,
>> where foreign funding is (to put it mildly) 'complicated'.
>>
>> Lets assume for the sake of the discussion that the group has legitimate
>> reasons to request affiliate status (although I have my assumptions, I'm
>> curious what tipped the scale).
>>
>> Lodewijk
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:01 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
>> paulospern...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > This is a very interesting strategy for any well developed affiliate. It
>> > allows :
>> >
>> > * decentralization, and stronger local groups, now as full fledged
>> > affiliates
>> > * more seats in Berlin and other conferences
>> > * more votes in the ASBS election
>> > * less financial burden over the national chapter, and additional
>> funding
>> > for local activities.
>> >
>> > Huge and well established chapters like WMDE could easily set up dozens
>> of
>> > local affiliates, with great advantage.
>> >
>> > Paulo
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > A sexta, 4 de out de 2019, 08:04, Philip Kopetzky <
>> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
>> > escreveu:
>> >
>> > > I can only reiterate what Lodewijk said - I'm trying to find the
>> approach
>> > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-04 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hey,

"*1) if a group has more active cores, maybe they should be more broadly
represented in Berlin. Maybe these constructs shouldn't be necessary.*" ->
I can agree with that point, yes;
"*2) No matter how much some care about the ASBS, I doubt that this will be
a driving force to get more bureaucracy (because that is the cost of
setting up a UG).*" - I respect your opinion, but IMO getting to have
increased, or even decisive power on the election of 2 of the 5 members
(which in turn appoint and confirm the other 5) of the board of one of the
biggest players and stakeholders of modern days, as the Wikimedia
Foundation has been growing into progressively, is indeed a powerful driven
force. Furthermore, as far as I know, bureaucratic requirements for UGs are
really low, and in line with a department or cell would have to report to
the mother organization. I'm not saying or even suggesting this was the
driven force behind the formation of the SPUG, I certainly assume good
faith. I'm saying that it may be a driven force for similar cases presented
as local affiliates more or less explicitly under the umbrella of a
national chapter to pop up. And this aspect can be potentially unfair, and
even amount to abuse of the system, as a trick to gather more votes;
*"3) funding for local activities is probably not really a consideration in
the case of Russia, where foreign funding is (to put it mildly)
'complicated'.* I mentioned funding, not WMF funding necessarily. It's
perfectly understandable that a locally registered association may have, in
some contexts, more easy access to funds than a national one. I live in an
autonomous region where it is very common, so I understand it may be indeed
a legitimate reason to create and register a local affiliate. No idea if
that is the case of Saint Petersburg, but if it is, it's a smart move.

Basically, I'm not criticizing this approval - I've no idea what is behind
the group formation, though I assume the members have the best intentions,
and it actually looks like a smart move. I'm just curious if this will
become a trend, and how will it develop.

Best,
Paulo

effe iets anders  escreveu no dia sexta,
4/10/2019 à(s) 21:39:

> Sure, if you want to see it through that lens I guess you could argue such.
> However, just to put things in perspective: 1) if a group has more active
> cores, maybe they should be more broadly represented in Berlin. Maybe these
> constructs shouldn't be necessary. 2) No matter how much some care about
> the ASBS, I doubt that this will be a driving force to get more bureaucracy
> (because that is the cost of setting up a UG). 3) funding for local
> activities is probably not really a consideration in the case of Russia,
> where foreign funding is (to put it mildly) 'complicated'.
>
> Lets assume for the sake of the discussion that the group has legitimate
> reasons to request affiliate status (although I have my assumptions, I'm
> curious what tipped the scale).
>
> Lodewijk
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:01 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This is a very interesting strategy for any well developed affiliate. It
> > allows :
> >
> > * decentralization, and stronger local groups, now as full fledged
> > affiliates
> > * more seats in Berlin and other conferences
> > * more votes in the ASBS election
> > * less financial burden over the national chapter, and additional funding
> > for local activities.
> >
> > Huge and well established chapters like WMDE could easily set up dozens
> of
> > local affiliates, with great advantage.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> >
> > A sexta, 4 de out de 2019, 08:04, Philip Kopetzky <
> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > I can only reiterate what Lodewijk said - I'm trying to find the
> approach
> > > and goals in the decision to acknowledge user groups that seem to be an
> > > integral part (or from an outside perspective, should be) of the
> national
> > > chapter. In the past this has been an indicator of personal conflicts
> > > within a chapter or user group and AffCom perpetuating these conflicts
> by
> > > setting up competing affiliates (the situation in Albania being a
> recent
> > > example of this).
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Philip
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 06:33, effe iets anders <
> effeietsand...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would like to note that one of the contacts of this user group is
> > > > Vladimir Medeyko, the director of Wikimedia Russia. I'm assuming
> > > > comfortably that this application happened in full

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-04 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
This is a very interesting strategy for any well developed affiliate. It
allows :

* decentralization, and stronger local groups, now as full fledged
affiliates
* more seats in Berlin and other conferences
* more votes in the ASBS election
* less financial burden over the national chapter, and additional funding
for local activities.

Huge and well established chapters like WMDE could easily set up dozens of
local affiliates, with great advantage.

Paulo



A sexta, 4 de out de 2019, 08:04, Philip Kopetzky 
escreveu:

> I can only reiterate what Lodewijk said - I'm trying to find the approach
> and goals in the decision to acknowledge user groups that seem to be an
> integral part (or from an outside perspective, should be) of the national
> chapter. In the past this has been an indicator of personal conflicts
> within a chapter or user group and AffCom perpetuating these conflicts by
> setting up competing affiliates (the situation in Albania being a recent
> example of this).
>
> Best,
> Philip
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 06:33, effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
> > I would like to note that one of the contacts of this user group is
> > Vladimir Medeyko, the director of Wikimedia Russia. I'm assuming
> > comfortably that this application happened in full coordination with
> > Wikimedia Russia.
> >
> > The question about process is still an interesting one though (what is
> > nowadays the approach of Affcom, and what are the considerations) when a
> > user group application comes in from a geographic area with an active
> > affiliate at a 'higher level' (in this case, a country). You could
> continue
> > the comparison with what happens if an application would come in from
> South
> > of Nevsky (a neighborhood in St. Petersburg).
> >
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 3:29 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Wikimedia NYC is a very different situation, there is not a national
> > > chapter in the US, so it's not a cell of anything.
> > > Just to clarify: Saint Petersburg eventually could not be a cell, but
> the
> > > way it is presented (to promote Wikimedia RU activities in SP, with
> same
> > > Wikimedia RU people), it's basically a cell.
> > >
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Yuri Astrakhan  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > 3/10/2019
> > > à(s) 23:06:
> > >
> > > > What about Wikimedia NYC?  (I'm not sure of its organizational
> status)
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > > paulospern...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Wales is a whole country complete with it's own language, I don't
> > > believe
> > > > > it compares with a city UG.
> > > > >
> > > > > Paulo
> > > > >
> > > > > Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > > > 3/10/2019
> > > > > à(s) 22:53:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 20:45, Paulo Santos Perneta
> > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently
> it's
> > > > > > basically
> > > > > > > a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's a curious precedent.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The precedent was already set, in March 2017, by Wikimedia
> > Community
> > > > > > User Group Wales (c/f Wikimedia UK).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 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:
> > > > > h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-03 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Wikimedia NYC is a very different situation, there is not a national
chapter in the US, so it's not a cell of anything.
Just to clarify: Saint Petersburg eventually could not be a cell, but the
way it is presented (to promote Wikimedia RU activities in SP, with same
Wikimedia RU people), it's basically a cell.

Paulo

Yuri Astrakhan  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
à(s) 23:06:

> What about Wikimedia NYC?  (I'm not sure of its organizational status)
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Wales is a whole country complete with it's own language, I don't believe
> > it compares with a city UG.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia quinta,
> 3/10/2019
> > à(s) 22:53:
> >
> > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 20:45, Paulo Santos Perneta
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's
> > > basically
> > > > a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
> > > >
> > > > It's a curious precedent.
> > >
> > > The precedent was already set, in March 2017, by Wikimedia Community
> > > User Group Wales (c/f Wikimedia UK).
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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>
> ___
> 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-03 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Wales is a whole country complete with it's own language, I don't believe
it compares with a city UG.

Paulo

Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
à(s) 22:53:

> On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 20:45, Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
>
> > Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's
> basically
> > a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
> >
> > It's a curious precedent.
>
> The precedent was already set, in March 2017, by Wikimedia Community
> User Group Wales (c/f Wikimedia UK).
>
> --
> 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-03 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I don't see a problem with sending several representatives to the Wikimedia
Summit, instead of 1, as would be the case if there was only Wikimedia
Russia (that would be a Wikimedia Summit problem). But cells of Wikimedia
Russia or other national chapters voting for ASBS elections is a different
thing, as it unfairly duplicates the vote of the communities that follow
that strategy.

Paulo

Mārtiņš Bruņenieks  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
à(s) 21:04:

> Hello!
>
> There are different aspects to this trend.
> In upcoming CEE Meeting in Belgrade there will be 9 people from different
> affiliates based in Russia. There are other examples you can explore in
> official participant list from other countries, too [1]
>
> As long as there is no system abuse, I see this as a valid way for Erzya
> language or different Albanian language communities in different countries
> to grow their capacity.
> It might not seem fair, but on the other hand it can seem unfair that in
> the past both large and small affiliates could send 2 representatives each.
>
>  Mārtiņš
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CEE_Meeting_2019/Participants/List
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:46 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's
>> basically a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
>>
>> It's a curious precedent.
>>
>> Paulo
>>
>> Asaf Bartov  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
>> à(s) 20:41:
>>
>>> Ziko: Yes, it is about the major Russian city.  And one of its listed
>>> contacts is the longstanding president of Wikimedia Russia itself.
>>>
>>> Philip: this is not an example of a large country being "split up",
>>> since Wikimedia Russia is still around, and was not broken up.  It is also
>>> not the first user group operating within Russia, nor even the first group
>>> with a geographic remit.[1]
>>>
>>>A.
>>>
>>> [1] e.g. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don_Wikimedians_User_Group
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:34 PM Ziko van Dijk 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Philip,
>>>>
>>>> I was asking the same question - isn't there already a Wikimedia
>>>> Rossiya -
>>>> but I guess this is the User Group of Saint Petersburg in Florida (USA),
>>>> not Sankt Peterburg in Russia.
>>>> Oh wait... this IS about the city in Russia!
>>>>
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards
>>>> Ziko
>>>>
>>>> Am Do., 3. Okt. 2019 um 16:15 Uhr schrieb Philip Kopetzky <
>>>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> > Hi Kirill,
>>>> >
>>>> > so it seems like geographically large countries are being split up
>>>> into
>>>> > different user groups - do you think that this is a viable model for
>>>> the
>>>> > future or just happened because of certain circumstances within the
>>>> Russian
>>>> > community? Would your template allow a User Group from Rome, Paris,
>>>> Munich
>>>> > or Sydney for example?
>>>> >
>>>> > Best,
>>>> > Philip
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 12:20, Kirill Lokshin >>> >
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Hi everyone!
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>>>> recognized
>>>> > > [1] the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group [2] as a
>>>> Wikimedia
>>>> > User
>>>> > > Group. The group aims to unite Wikimedians living in St.
>>>> Petersburg, to
>>>> > > support the development of content on topics related to St.
>>>> Petersburg
>>>> > > across different Wikimedia projects, to promote the Wikimedia
>>>> projects
>>>> > and
>>>> > > movement in St. Petersburg, and to build partnerships between the
>>>> > Wikimedia
>>>> > > community and cultural, scientific, educational, and media
>>>> institutions
>>>> > in
>>>> > > St. Petersburg.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>>>> > >
>>>> > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-03 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's basically
a cell of Wikimedia Russia?

It's a curious precedent.

Paulo

Asaf Bartov  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019 à(s)
20:41:

> Ziko: Yes, it is about the major Russian city.  And one of its listed
> contacts is the longstanding president of Wikimedia Russia itself.
>
> Philip: this is not an example of a large country being "split up", since
> Wikimedia Russia is still around, and was not broken up.  It is also not
> the first user group operating within Russia, nor even the first group with
> a geographic remit.[1]
>
>A.
>
> [1] e.g. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don_Wikimedians_User_Group
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:34 PM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
>> Hello Philip,
>>
>> I was asking the same question - isn't there already a Wikimedia Rossiya -
>> but I guess this is the User Group of Saint Petersburg in Florida (USA),
>> not Sankt Peterburg in Russia.
>> Oh wait... this IS about the city in Russia!
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Ziko
>>
>> Am Do., 3. Okt. 2019 um 16:15 Uhr schrieb Philip Kopetzky <
>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> > Hi Kirill,
>> >
>> > so it seems like geographically large countries are being split up into
>> > different user groups - do you think that this is a viable model for the
>> > future or just happened because of certain circumstances within the
>> Russian
>> > community? Would your template allow a User Group from Rome, Paris,
>> Munich
>> > or Sydney for example?
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Philip
>> >
>> > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 12:20, Kirill Lokshin 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi everyone!
>> > >
>> > > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>> recognized
>> > > [1] the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group [2] as a Wikimedia
>> > User
>> > > Group. The group aims to unite Wikimedians living in St. Petersburg,
>> to
>> > > support the development of content on topics related to St. Petersburg
>> > > across different Wikimedia projects, to promote the Wikimedia projects
>> > and
>> > > movement in St. Petersburg, and to build partnerships between the
>> > Wikimedia
>> > > community and cultural, scientific, educational, and media
>> institutions
>> > in
>> > > St. Petersburg.
>> > >
>> > > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Kirill Lokshin
>> > > Chair, Affiliations Committee
>> > >
>> > > [1]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>> > > [2]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>> > > ___
>> > > Affiliates mailing list
>> > > affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>> > >
>> > ___
>> > 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,
>> 
>
>
>
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> https://donate.wikimedia.org
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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 work environment

2019-10-02 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
A surprising amount of staff turnover, and the relation between WMF and the
communities extremely eroded by a row of bad moves and general bad attitude.

I was told I'm too new to this, and it was worst during superprotect, but
it's still mind-boggling why what was supposed to be a symbiotic and happy
relation ends up being a sort of intermitent nightmare.

I guess that ultimately the fault and responsibility is ours, as a
community, for failing to elect BoT members in the last years more
competent in directing the ED and avoiding those situations (which, for the
most part, seem to be generally avoidable in an aftermath analysis, though
lessons seem to be hard to learn).

Best,
Paulo


Pine W  escreveu no dia quarta, 2/10/2019 à(s) 21:09:

> Hello,
>
> Something I am sensing from multiple sources, sometimes more through
> implication than specific statements, is that there is a sense of turmoil
> in WMF. I think that some amounts of internal politics and staff turnover
> are normal, but over the past few months I am sensing an increase in
> internal turmoil. I am noticing the departures of some staff people that I
> personally like and respect. I am wondering if WMF Talent and Culture or
> maybe someone on the ED's office would be willing to comment regarding
> these issues. I'm not intending to add additional stress to people who are
> generally competent and are trying to do good work. I would like to better
> understand the degree of turmoil (perhaps my impressions are incorrect),
> what might be causing the turmoil, and whether the turmoil is good or bad.
> Hopefully any increase in turmoil is temporary, but I am somewhat
> concerned. If staff are focused too much on internal WMF issues then this
> may affect their productivity on projects that support the community, and
> having highly stressed or discouraged staff would be a problem.
>
>
> Thank you,
> 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] Movement Strategy: Outcomes of the Harmonization Sprint in Tunis

2019-10-02 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Henry,

Apparently things have changed since then: "
*The timeline will shift and we are looking into options for another round
of community input.*" (Nicole)

These are promising news from the core team, I hope this new round of
community input goes forward.

Best,
Paulo

Henry Wood  escreveu no dia quarta, 2/10/2019
à(s) 15:42:

> Paulo,
>
> There is nothing more for us to do, since community input closed on
> the 15 September.  The community will next be consulted on the
> implementation of the recommendations after they are finally agreed.
>
> Henry
>
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:08, Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
> >
> > " A second iteration of draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta
> > just before the sprint for
> > the communities’ information." - It's quite unclear what are we supposed
> to
> > do with this, since those recommendations most probably became outdated
> in
> > the course of the Tunis meetings in the days following their publication.
> > Are we supposed to do anything at all with them?
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia segunda,
> > 30/09/2019 à(s) 17:27:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > We recently held the harmonization sprint in Tunis [1], where
> > > representatives from each working group met in person to continue
> bringing
> > > nine separate sets of draft recommendations into one set. The event
> also
> > > brought together staff members from the Wikimedia Foundation and
> Wikimedia
> > > Deutschland, the WMF Chair of the Board of Trustees, and members of the
> > > core team. A longer narrative report will be published in the coming
> weeks;
> > > in the meantime, see a short day-by-day report on Meta, photos on
> commons
> > > [2], and check out the hashtag #hs2030 on Twitter [3].
> > >
> > > In the lead up to the meeting, the working groups were busy refining
> their
> > > draft recommendations based on feedback received at in person events
> from
> > > Wikimedians across the movement as well as on wiki, via email, and on
> > > social media since March of this year. They had also begun identifying
> > > overlaps in each other’s recommendations and content. A second
> iteration of
> > > draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta just before the sprint
> for
> > > the communities’ information.
> > >
> > > At the sprint, we continued to group recommendations based on
> > > commonalities. From there, we looked at what kinds of structures would
> need
> > > to be in place to deliver the Wikimedia 2030 vision. A first, rough
> > > grouping of recommendations came together at the sprint. But what
> became
> > > clear during the event was that before it’s possible to create a
> coherent
> > > and actionable set of recommendations, fundamental principles that
> underpin
> > > the path towards 2030 need to be formalized.
> > >
> > > The core team is currently processing the discussion materials and
> > > outcomes. Analysis of the current draft recommendations will continue
> so as
> > > to create one unified set. The timeline will shift and we are looking
> into
> > > options for another round of community input.
> > >
> > > I would like to make clear that the reason we were not able to achieve
> our
> > > initial goal in Tunis was due to a lack of clarity and guidance on the
> core
> > > team’s part. Still, the time was not wasted and important, honest
> > > conversations were had. The working group members, as ever, devoted an
> > > enormous amount of energy and care in the lead up to and during the
> event,
> > > and demonstrated their deep understanding of the challenges and
> > > opportunities in our movement. We are extremely grateful for all their
> > > effort. In short, the harmonization sprint underlined the high level of
> > > work and dedication every single working group member has put into
> getting
> > > the movement strategy to its current point, and the passion to shape
> the
> > > future of the diverse and inclusive movement we envision.
> > >
> > > We have valuable lessons to take from this event and incorporate into
> the
> > > overall process and the next steps. We will share these with you all as
> > > soon as possible. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel
> free
> > > to reach out to me.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Nicole
> > >
> >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Outcomes of the Harmonization Sprint in Tunis

2019-10-01 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" A second iteration of draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta
just before the sprint for
the communities’ information." - It's quite unclear what are we supposed to
do with this, since those recommendations most probably became outdated in
the course of the Tunis meetings in the days following their publication.
Are we supposed to do anything at all with them?

Best,
Paulo

Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia segunda,
30/09/2019 à(s) 17:27:

> Hi everyone,
>
> We recently held the harmonization sprint in Tunis [1], where
> representatives from each working group met in person to continue bringing
> nine separate sets of draft recommendations into one set. The event also
> brought together staff members from the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia
> Deutschland, the WMF Chair of the Board of Trustees, and members of the
> core team. A longer narrative report will be published in the coming weeks;
> in the meantime, see a short day-by-day report on Meta, photos on commons
> [2], and check out the hashtag #hs2030 on Twitter [3].
>
> In the lead up to the meeting, the working groups were busy refining their
> draft recommendations based on feedback received at in person events from
> Wikimedians across the movement as well as on wiki, via email, and on
> social media since March of this year. They had also begun identifying
> overlaps in each other’s recommendations and content. A second iteration of
> draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta just before the sprint for
> the communities’ information.
>
> At the sprint, we continued to group recommendations based on
> commonalities. From there, we looked at what kinds of structures would need
> to be in place to deliver the Wikimedia 2030 vision. A first, rough
> grouping of recommendations came together at the sprint. But what became
> clear during the event was that before it’s possible to create a coherent
> and actionable set of recommendations, fundamental principles that underpin
> the path towards 2030 need to be formalized.
>
> The core team is currently processing the discussion materials and
> outcomes. Analysis of the current draft recommendations will continue so as
> to create one unified set. The timeline will shift and we are looking into
> options for another round of community input.
>
> I would like to make clear that the reason we were not able to achieve our
> initial goal in Tunis was due to a lack of clarity and guidance on the core
> team’s part. Still, the time was not wasted and important, honest
> conversations were had. The working group members, as ever, devoted an
> enormous amount of energy and care in the lead up to and during the event,
> and demonstrated their deep understanding of the challenges and
> opportunities in our movement. We are extremely grateful for all their
> effort. In short, the harmonization sprint underlined the high level of
> work and dedication every single working group member has put into getting
> the movement strategy to its current point, and the passion to shape the
> future of the diverse and inclusive movement we envision.
>
> We have valuable lessons to take from this event and incorporate into the
> overall process and the next steps. We will share these with you all as
> soon as possible. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel free
> to reach out to me.
>
> Best regards,
> Nicole
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Harmonization_Sprint
> [2]
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_2030_Harmonization_Sprint
> [3] https://twitter.com/search?q=%23hs2030
> [4]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> ___
> 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 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

2019-09-25 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I've no idea what you mean by " second iteration". I was told by Work Group
members that those are the recommendations that were used as starting
points for the discussions by the Work Groups at Tunis last weekend.

Therefore, all that is most probably outdated stuff by now (it was already
outdated by the time it was posted).
I really don't know what happens to the discussions going on there, but I
don't believe they will be taken into account, since by now those
recommendations have already advanced to somewhere else.

Best,
Paulo

Mario Gómez  escreveu no dia quarta, 25/09/2019
à(s) 08:45:

> The recommendations from the second iteration are available now:
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
>
> Looking at the formatting with discussion links and so on, I assume
> community feedback is still welcome. It would be good to announce this in
> wikimedia-l, meta main page, etc.
>
> Best,
>
> MarioGom
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:48 PM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have
> > been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the
> future
> > of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of
> the
> > working groups.
> >
> > If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give
> > feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be
> > ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing
> > the recommendations.
> >
> > Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the
> > documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are
> much
> > more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the
> Wikimeda
> > volunteers.
> >
> > There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one
> > sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to
> > back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At
> least
> > at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".
> >
> > The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought
> through.
> > There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how
> > that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the
> statement
> > that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC
> > content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After
> > years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open
> content
> > organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic
> change?
> >
> > And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed
> > about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All
> change
> > has negative connotations to some members of the community."
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
> >
> > I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents
> > before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is
> giving
> > a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the
> very
> > same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).
> >
> > This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations
> > are unusable or damaging. I also cannot judge about the efforts invested,
> > as I have no insight in the inner workings. But it is very frustrating
> for
> > me to read the documents and often have to guess what they actually mean.
> > And it seems to me, given the comments on the user pages on Meta Wiki, on
> > this list, on de:WP:Kurier and on Facebook, that I am not the only one
> who
> > feels this frustration.
> >
> > Therefore, I ask the people responsible: please reconsider the timeline.
> If
> > these documents are the result of one year work, then the documents will
> > not be ready within two and a half months. Consider several months for
> the
> > working groups to use the present feedback for a redraft, and then give
> the
> > Wikimedia volunteers at least the same amount of time for giving feedback
> > again.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> > ___
> > 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "The Foundation does not care so much of the French-speaking contributors

2019-09-23 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hey Gregory,

Are you planing to include Portuguese in the list of target languages?

Best,
Paulo

Gregory Varnum  escreveu no dia segunda,
23/09/2019 à(s) 18:32:

> I am not entirely sure how this connects to the topic of the thread.
>
> However, I feel I should note that we are indeed interested in translating
> into other languages, and have been seeking people to help with translation
> of the website and other organization materials:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Organization_communications_translators_group
>
> I do not want to derail this conversation, so will leave it at that and
> encourage you to utilize that page or the website's Meta-Wiki page to
> discuss this further, as this thread seems to be about other topics.
>
> -greg
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:28 AM Ferdinando Traversa <
> ferdi.trave...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Please note that Foundation website is translated in French, but not in
> > many other languages (including Italian, mine)...
> > I don’t know why they don’t give the chance to translate.
> >
> > > ___
> > > 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 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 joins the global climate strike

2019-09-23 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello,

I totally support Illario words: "if the option is to pay 500 long travels
for scholarships by flight to attend a single event or to pay 500 travels
for the staff of WMF to attend several regional conferences,  the answer
will be in favor of the second option which is more sustainable and more
efficient." and what Fae and others have been saying all along. It makes
much more sense to restrict global meetings and events to the minimum
essential, and support instead regional events, which are way more cheaper,
democratic, sustainable (in all ways) and have a much less significant
carbon footprint. By inviting Wikimedians from nearby countries, WMF staff
and very selected international scholarships we can still be able to
provide great "flesh-and-bones" interaction, and can eventually coordinate
with other groups of Wikimedians from any part of the world through
videoconferencing. In this last Wikimania in Stockholm, I was actually able
to successfully participate remotely in a panel there, along with 2 other
remote fellows (me in Madeira Island, one in Israel and another in Mexico):
https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Education/Education_%26_Libraries:_Opportunities_Explored

Of course, presential attendance and interaction is still crucial, as we
(generally) are not hermits editing from caves, and it has a fundamental
effect in local community capacity and structure building, but that can be
done at a regional (rather than national, as travel costs and footprint do
not  respect national boundaries) level.
For those reasons, I believe there should be a strong strategic focus on
funding regional conferences in the Wikimedia Movement, and was somewhat
disappointed when the organizing teams at Wikimania 2019 and the last Wiki
Education conference at the Basque country apparently had not also focused
on this regional approach (if it existed, it either was not explicit, or I
couldn't find it), with a weighting factor on scholarships related to the
proximity/vicinity of attendants.

I agree that it is very cool to be immersed in a sea of diversity and
cultural interchange at Wikimedia events, with people coming from all parts
of the world, but that is not sustainable, and as has been mentioned, that
group of attendants is not necessarily representative of the active
Wikimedian communities. More regional events, building up a strong regional
Wikimedia structure, and limiting global events to the very essential, is
the way to go IMO.

Best,
Paulo

Fæ  escreveu no dia segunda, 23/09/2019 à(s) 13:10:

> Imagine a world where instead of going through security for 2 or 3
> hours, flying for 4 hours and travelling by train and bus to get to
> and from airports in order to enjoy a physical meeting with fellow
> Wikimedians, you simply got a bus or train and travelled for an hour
> to a fun meeting place where you met several fellow Wikimedians in
> your country, and together spend the day playing around with immersive
> conferencing to workshop, discuss and learn from fellow Wikimedians in
> other countries. All this and still get home to spend the night in
> your own bed, feed your cat, or meet your kids coming back from
> school.
>
> That's "making time and space for both" while taking real measurable
> action for climate change by reducing our entirely avoidable numbers
> of international flights.
>
> The truth is, that despite discussing this since Wikimania events
> started, and in that time technology making doing this is almost as
> simple as an Affiliate hiring headsets for mobile phones, we have
> never even trialled decent immersive virtual conferencing spaces for
> productive conferencing.
>
> Fae
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 12:57, Rebecca O'Neill 
> wrote:
> >
> > Is it, perhaps, that the value a lot of people derive from these events
> is
> > not just the conference itself, but the ability to meet fellow
> Wikimedians
> > face-to-face and make meaningful contacts and even friendships that may
> > never otherwise have come about? I'm all about virtual, but there is
> value
> > in physical events, and I would say that we should make time and space
> for
> > both.
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 12:54, Ilario Valdelli 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Yes
> > >
> > > We dont give all scholarships for that reason while for regional
> Wikicon we
> > > receive more requests and we fill the amount immediately.
> > >
> > > It's not an opinion that in our events people prefer to arrive by
> train and
> > > not by flight. We see it as soon we receive the expenses report and
> when we
> > > ask the reason the answer is the climate change.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > >
> > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, 13:25 Gabriel Thullen, 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am a Swiss member, and I did go to Wikimania (and did a small
> > > > presentation).
> > > >
> > > > I think that you need to clarify you statement:
> > > > "In Wikimedia CH we cannot give scholarships for Wikimania because
> people
> > > > would not do long trips."
> > > >
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Partial blocks update

2019-09-20 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi,

How and where can one request enabling this at the Portuguese Wikipedia?

Paulo

James Forrester  escreveu no dia sexta,
20/09/2019 à(s) 02:01:

> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 17:16, Steven Walling 
> wrote:
>
> > How do we see which wikis have partial blocks deployed already / are
> > planning to have it deployed?
>
>
> On a technical level, this is defined as wgEnablePartialBlocks in config,
> which is currently:
>
>
>- Meta;
>- MediaWiki.org;
>- test wikis;
>- all Wikisources (except Old Wikisource), all Wikivoyages, and all
>Wiktionaries; and
>- most of the big Wikipedias: Arabic, Bengali, German, Farsi, Finnish,
>French, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Polish, Russian, Serbian,
>Telugu and Chinese.
>
> Changes can be tracked in https://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/index.php (but
> the
> files are large and not very friendly).
>
>
> > And is there any way administrators can request deployment?
> >
>
> I'll leave that to the brilliant Anti-Harassment Tools team.
>
> 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, 


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

2019-09-13 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Diane,

If there will be a new discussion (and rightly so), what happens to the
"harmonization sprint in Tunis on 20-22 September" mentioned by Nicole in
her messages?
I don't believe there will be much to harmonize between the new discussion
with the community takes place.

Best,
Paulo


Diane Ranville  escreveu no dia sexta,
13/09/2019 à(s) 14:20:

> Hi Andy,
>
> Working groups are currently working off-wiki on a new version that will
> soon be submitted to discussion again. Current versions are indeed not
> being updated (I think they are not meant to be).
> If you want to reach out directly to the diversity working group, I suggest
> using their mailing list : wg2030-divers...@wikimedia.org
>
> Best,
> Diane
> (community strategy liaison for the french speaking community)
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Garanti
> sans virus. www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 2:28 PM Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
> > The section remains unchanged. Is anyone planning to update it?
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 at 14:29, Andy Mabbett 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 at 19:48, Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:41 PM Andy Mabbett <
> > a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 09:55, Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > the WG then collate them and decide the final form of the
> > > > > > recommendations, to be implemented by the WMF
> > > > >
> > > > > This seems to be missing a rather crucial intermediate step; the
> one
> > > > > where the recommendations are accepted, or not, by the wider
> > Wikimedia
> > > > > community.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >  That step is not mentioned at
> > > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_steps_will_take_place_in_the_next_few_months_to_put_a_decision-making_process_in_place
> > ?
> > >
> > > But it is alluded to further down that page, albeit with an apparent
> > > assumption that the recommendations will (all) be implemented:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_are_the_steps_that_will_take_place_between_recommendations_being_published_and_implementation
> > ?
> > >
> > > In the light of Nicole's recent - and reassuring - email:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2019-August/093303.html
> > >
> > > perhaps that section could be updated to reflect that:
> > >
> > >"[recommendations not needing the legal authority of the board] will
> > > then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and
> > > structures for approval or further consultation."
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andy Mabbett
> > > @pigsonthewing
> > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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,
> 
___
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] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-09 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I only started following WMF stuff more closely around 2 years ago, but I
don't remember it being this permanent state of crisis as it is now, with
an ever increasing - now, apparently at an accelerating pace too -
detachment from the onwiki communities.
This is tiresome and distracting for those of us who are volunteers at the
Wikimedia projects, but it's certainly painful too for the WMF staff.

What's going on with the WMF?

Paulo

Pine W  escreveu no dia segunda, 9/09/2019 à(s) 07:59:

> It crosses my mind that I would think that some of the WMF office staff
> would also be getting tired of crisis, conflict, and unwelcome surprises.
> These types of problems are unlikely to ever be fully prevented, but I
> would think that the parade of difficulties in the past few months would
> also be testing the patience of at least some people inside of WMF who
> might like to not have a new earthquake to deal with on what seems like a
> biweekly basis.
>
> Pine
>
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2019, 17:59 Yair Rand  wrote:
>
> > The broad proposal was clearly rejected. The community has not authorized
> > the Wikimedia Foundation to let any organization speak under Wikipedia's
> > name. If a formal RfC is to be held to make a final decision (perhaps
> with
> > the question subdivided, per Pine), I recommend delaying it for a while
> so
> > we might have a chance for some respite from permanent crisis mode.
> >
> > The summary, in my opinion, is not adequate, and skips many of the most
> > significant arguments. (The talk page itself skips some, after the WMF
> had
> > a large portion of the talk page moved to a different page, including a
> > string of "strong oppose"s. Those who participated in the removed
> sections
> > were not counted in the WMF's count, for some reason.)
> >
> > I do not understand what is going on within the Foundation regarding
> KPIs,
> > but I get the impression that groups were required to establish metrics
> of
> > some kind, without any actual oversight on how those metrics would work.
> > Thus, we get things like the branding proposal's "anything less than 1800
> > users posting statements in opposition will be considered strong support,
> > 1800-2700 will be considered substantial support, 2700-3600 opposed will
> be
> > considered moderate support". Similar things have been happening
> elsewhere,
> > eg, for the WMF's "Space" project. (Speaking of which, holding a
> discussion
> > on a private off-wiki forum is not a valid method of community decision
> > making, for branding or otherwise.)
> >
> > -- Yair Rand
> >
> >
> >
> > ‫בתאריך שבת, 7 בספט׳ 2019 ב-20:54 מאת ‪Pine W‬‏ <‪wiki.p...@gmail.com
> ‬‏>:‬
> >
> > >  I too think that an RfC is a good option here. I suggest having
> multiple
> > > questions in the RfC. Questions could include, "What should the
> > > organization that is currently known as the Wikimedia Foundation be
> > > named?", "Should there be a unifying brand for the online projects such
> > as
> > > Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Commons?", "If there is a unifying
> > brand
> > > for the online projects then what should it be?", "Should there be a
> > > unifying brand for affiliates?", and "If there is a unifying brand for
> > > affiliates then what should it be?"
> > >
> > > Overall I think that the report on Meta
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review/results
> > > >
> > > makes for good reading as background information for an RfC.
> > >
> > > I want to caution against trying to make too many big decisions at
> once.
> > > There is already a strategy process underway which has consumed a
> > > considerable number of volunteer hours, and the community has precious
> > > little capacity relative to normal operational demands without this
> > ongoing
> > > strategy process being piled on top of everything else that people want
> > the
> > > community to do. There seems to be infinite demand for free skilled
> > labor,
> > > but a finite supply of that same labor. I encourage both WMF and the
> > > community to think carefully about which questions to prioritize so
> that
> > we
> > > are not all overstretched and a significant number of problems slip
> > through
> > > the cracks because collectively there were not adequate human resources
> > to
> > > thoughtfully address so many questions in a narrow period of time and
> > > develop consensus regarding how to move forward.
> > >
> > > 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,
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
After the last disastrous WMF intervention in Wikipedia - Framgate - I
believe the timing is just perfect for the WMF to go forward with this fit
of creativity of branding themselves as the "Wikipedia Foundation".

It's one after another, and never stops.

Best,
Paulo

Yaroslav Blanter  escreveu no dia sexta, 6/09/2019 à(s)
18:25:

> I agree with Fae. I strongly oppose the proposal, and I somehow used to
> assume that our opinion would be asked in a structured way.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:03 PM Fæ  wrote:
>
> > If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived from all
> > the demonstrable facts, perhaps the community should now respond with
> > a completely unambiguous RFC on meta so there can be no doubt?
> >
> > Something along the lines of:
> > "The WMF have employed Wolff Olins for rebranding advice, and they
> > recommend that Wikimedia rebrands itself around the word "Wikipedia"
> > and projects like Wikimedia Commons are renamed to "Wikicommons" to
> > ensure marketing of the projects can easily be delivered by the WMF.
> > Do you support or oppose this rebranding programme?"
> >
> > With a straightforward RFC to keep on linking to in every discussion
> > on every venue, we might then have tangible evidence of whether "There
> > is considerable support for the branding proposal" or "There is
> > considerable opposition for the branding proposal" is factual. Rather
> > than drifting along for months with the debate and unhappiness that
> > comes from arguing both sides of a mostly political case without
> > firmly verifiable evidence available or relying on complex and less
> > credible stats from surveys that are likely to suffer from embedded
> > bias, especially considering the already banked investment in
> > consultancy that drives the need to change something, to prove the
> > spent money had impact and "value".
> >
> > P.S. Zack and others, it's best to avoid the word "collaboration" when
> > communicating with an international group. It has unfortunate history
> > and gives the impression that you are quoting views from collaborators
> > rather than holding open collegial discussion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Fae
> >
> > On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 17:19, Diane Ranville  >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I agree with Pine.
> > > There is a majority of people who actually oppose the rebranding
> > > proposition.
> > > I don't quite understand why this is still going forward (except that
> it
> > is
> > > difficult to acknowledge a mistake and take steps backwards - but it is
> > > sometimes necessary).
> > > Have other options even been considered?
> > >
> > > -speaking in my own name here-
> > >
> > > Diane
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Pine W  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello Zack,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the report on Meta.
> > > >
> > > > I am troubled by your statement in this email that "There is
> > considerable
> > > > support for the brand proposal and general appetite to improve our
> > > > movement’s branding system." What that statement appears to omit is
> > that,
> > > > according to the report on Meta, there is also considerable
> opposition
> > to
> > > > the rebranding proposal.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Can you explain why you characterized the proposal as having
> > "considerable
> > > > support" without in the same sentence acknowledging what appears to
> be
> > > > considerable opposition?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Of the three top-level metrics that the report on Meta displays that
> > > > measure community and affiliate support or opposition regarding the
> > > > rebranding proposal, one of the three metrics is in favor and two of
> > the
> > > > three metrics are opposed. If this was an RfC, and I was using those
> > > > measures of sentiment to evaluate support and opposition regarding
> the
> > RfC,
> > > > I would probably close the current rebranding proposal as declined.
> > > >
> > > > Pine
> > > >
> > > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019, 20:49 Zack McCune 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > *Summary* - We want your help with a voluntary, OPT-IN design
> > process for
> > > > > movement branding.  Please join the in-depth discussion group, or
> > watch
> > > > for
> > > > > updates on Meta-Wiki.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello all,
> > > > >
> > > > > After 4 months of community consultation, spanning dozens of
> > affiliates,
> > > > > several mailing lists, community conferences, and Meta-Wiki, I am
> > pleased
> > > > > to share a summary of feedback on the proposed 2030 movement brand
> > > > strategy
> > > > > [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > From more than 319 comments, representing 150 individual
> > contributors and
> > > > > 63 affiliates, we assessed 6 major themes in feedback:
> > > > >
> > > > >1.
> > > > >
> > > > >Reducing confusion
> > > > >2.
> > > > >
> > > > >Protecting reputation
> > > > >3.
> > > > >
> > > > >Supporting 

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

2019-08-24 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
 time.
> > > >
> > > > J
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:47 PM Jeff Hawke  >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> James
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for that.  As a member of the Board, would you clarify the
> > > Board's
> > > >> position on whether it is prepared to see the final Recommendations
> > > >> implemented irrespective of any disagreement from the community?
> > > >>
> > > >> Jeff
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:05 PM James Heilman 
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> James
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke <
> geoffey.ha...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Paulo,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
> > > community
> > > >>>> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall
> that
> > > >> just
> > > >>>> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> > > >>> expressed
> > > >>>> the opinion
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> > > >>>> over
> > > >>>> a much less dramatic change.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> > > >>>> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part
> of
> > > >> this
> > > >>>> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to
> > > >> take a
> > > >>>> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you
> > have
> > > >> to
> > > >>>> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next
> > step
> > > >>> when
> > > >>>> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you
> > > will
> > > >>>> return when the time is right.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Jeff
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > >>>> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the
> Wikimedia
> > > >>>>> community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the
> WGs
> > > >>> 8and
> > > >>>>> their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> > > >>> December.
> > > >>>>> Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will
> > > >> only
> > > >>> be
> > > >>>>> dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in
> > the
> > > >>>>> process of implementation.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> > > >>>> Wikimedia
> > > >>>>> community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass
> > all
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>> way till implementation phase.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Paulo
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > > >>>>> 22/08/2019
> > > >>>>> à(s) 11:58:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Dear all,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing
> so
> > > >>> much
> > > >>>>>> attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for
> > > >> build

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

2019-08-24 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" I hope the wider community will engage with and provide feedback to the
core group" - At the meta pages everybody can see the community is engaging
very actively, it's WG and core group engagement there which is very low or
null. And we are already only some 3 weeks before the window for community
engagement closes. How can this look good and inspiring?

I also don't understand why people keep saying that "many of the
recommendations are fine" - Those obviously are not the problem. The
problem is that we, as the wider community, are now seeing the final draft
for some quite egregiously controversial recommendations, and there is not
any indication that they will be removed or adapted in a consensus with the
community. Some crucial WGs such as Roles & Responsibilities seem to have
reduced the output to 3 complex theoretical models that we are supposed to
evaluate in some few days. This can't be right.

Paulo

James Heilman  escreveu no dia sábado, 24/08/2019 à(s)
09:51:

> @ Benjamin I have never said that I would "consider overriding the
> community in such a massive way". What I have said is that I hope the wider
> community will engage with and provide feedback to the core group who is
> working on developing the strategy. Much of the draft is really good, some
> requires more discussion and some adjustments.
>
> James
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:12 PM Benjamin Ikuta 
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > It is disturbing that you would even consider overriding the community in
> > such a massive way.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 23, 2019, at 9:44 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> >
> > > The board will be discussing this of course. We do not have a group
> > > position at this point in time.
> > >
> > > J
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:47 PM Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> James
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for that.  As a member of the Board, would you clarify the
> > Board's
> > >> position on whether it is prepared to see the final Recommendations
> > >> implemented irrespective of any disagreement from the community?
> > >>
> > >> Jeff
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:05 PM James Heilman 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
> > >>>
> > >>> James
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke 
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Paulo,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
> > community
> > >>>> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall that
> > >> just
> > >>>> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> > >>> expressed
> > >>>> the opinion
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> > >>>> over
> > >>>> a much less dramatic change.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> > >>>> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part of
> > >> this
> > >>>> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to
> > >> take a
> > >>>> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you
> have
> > >> to
> > >>>> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next
> step
> > >>> when
> > >>>> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you
> > will
> > >>>> return when the time is right.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Jeff
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > >>>> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
> > >>>>> community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs
> > >>> 8and
> > >>>>> their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> > >>>

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

2019-08-23 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello James,

If we can do that together, it is not evident from the timeline sent by
Nicole. How can we " collaborate with each other", "the wider community
engage with the proposals that have been made", and we together "develop a
final document that the majority of us in all parts of the movement can
support" if after 15 September or so we will be excluded from the entire
process that will led to the final recommendations?

All we can do is to comment on this very preliminary draft, kind of
shouting in the dark in the hopes that someone would hear, with very little
dialogue with the people that will be defining them, if at all.

Paulo

James Heilman  escreveu no dia sexta, 23/08/2019 à(s)
12:09:

> To clarify on this, yes we need to make changes as a movement, but we need
> to do so in collaboration with each other. My hope is that the wider
> community will engage with the proposals that have been made. And that we
> can develop a final document that the majority of us in all parts of the
> movement can support.
>
> James
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 5:04 AM James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Paulo,
> >>
> >> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia community
> >> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall that just
> >> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> expressed
> >> the opinion
> >>
> >>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> >> over
> >> a much less dramatic change.
> >>
> >> > All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> >> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part of this
> >> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to take
> a
> >> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you have
> to
> >> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next step
> >> when
> >> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you will
> >> return when the time is right.
> >>
> >> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> >> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
> >> > community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs
> 8and
> >> > their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> December.
> >> > Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only
> >> be
> >> > dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
> >> > process of implementation.
> >> >
> >> > It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> >> Wikimedia
> >> > community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all
> the
> >> > way till implementation phase.
> >> >
> >> > Paulo
> >> >
> >> > Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta,
> >> > 22/08/2019
> >> > à(s) 11:58:
> >> >
> >> > > Dear all,
> >> > >
> >> > > Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so
> >> much
> >> > > attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for
> building
> >> our
> >> > > future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
> >> > >
> >> > > DRAFTS
> >> > > As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently
> shared
> >> are
> >> > > recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but
> >> working
> >> > > documents that are currently being refined by the working groups.
> Some
> >> > > answers still read like stubs that are longing for further
> >> development,
> >> > > others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next
> >> few
> >> > > weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give
> >> everyone a
> >> > > full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into
> >> multiple
> >> > > progress levels.
> 

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

2019-08-23 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Except that this time they don't "hope that all of you will be a part of
this next step in our evolution", since Wikimedia community input ceases
around 15 September in what has been constantly defined as a very
preliminary draft, with very low to null engagement from the WGs, and next
time we'll see that, it will be already the finished product under
deployment.

Not good.

Paulo

Jeff Hawke  escreveu no dia sexta, 23/08/2019 à(s)
11:40:

> Paulo,
>
> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia community
> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall that just
> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board, expressed
> the opinion
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> over
> a much less dramatic change.
>
> > All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part of this
> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to take a
> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you have to
> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next step when
> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you will
> return when the time is right.
>
> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
> > community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs 8and
> > their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around December.
> > Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only be
> > dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
> > process of implementation.
> >
> > It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> Wikimedia
> > community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all the
> > way till implementation phase.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > 22/08/2019
> > à(s) 11:58:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so much
> > > attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for building
> our
> > > future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
> > >
> > > DRAFTS
> > > As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently shared
> are
> > > recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but
> working
> > > documents that are currently being refined by the working groups. Some
> > > answers still read like stubs that are longing for further development,
> > > others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next few
> > > weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give
> everyone a
> > > full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into
> multiple
> > > progress levels.
> > >
> > > I would also like to reiterate that movement values, priorities and
> > > community conversation processes are high on our radar. A
> recommendation
> > to
> > > change the existing license model, for example, will not just go
> through
> > a
> > > quick approval process, but lead to a deeper exploration into the
> > reasoning
> > > behind it: What problems are we trying to tackle, and what could be
> ways
> > to
> > > mitigate them? Such recommendation would then rather suggest to look
> into
> > > different measures to ensure indigenous knowledge is included in the
> > > Wikimedia ecosystem, deploy research and further consultation, instead
> of
> > > rushing to a quick fix.
> > >
> > > INTEGRATION
> > > The working groups are taking input that they gathered at Wikimania and
> > via
> > > different movement channels and incorporating it into the next
> iteration
> > of
> > > their recommendations. These documents will then serve as a basis for
> > > harmonization across working groups.
> > >
> > > The input that we are gathering comes in on different levels. Some of
> it
> > > targets structural level changes or emphasizes specific principles or
> > > values, while other feedback is more on the programmatic side or
> already
> > > addressing implementation. Structural input will continue to be
> > considered

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

2019-08-22 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs 8and
their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around December.
Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only be
dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
process of implementation.

It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all the
way till implementation phase.

Paulo

Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta, 22/08/2019
à(s) 11:58:

> Dear all,
>
> Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so much
> attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for building our
> future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
>
> DRAFTS
> As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently shared are
> recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but working
> documents that are currently being refined by the working groups. Some
> answers still read like stubs that are longing for further development,
> others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next few
> weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give everyone a
> full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into multiple
> progress levels.
>
> I would also like to reiterate that movement values, priorities and
> community conversation processes are high on our radar. A recommendation to
> change the existing license model, for example, will not just go through a
> quick approval process, but lead to a deeper exploration into the reasoning
> behind it: What problems are we trying to tackle, and what could be ways to
> mitigate them? Such recommendation would then rather suggest to look into
> different measures to ensure indigenous knowledge is included in the
> Wikimedia ecosystem, deploy research and further consultation, instead of
> rushing to a quick fix.
>
> INTEGRATION
> The working groups are taking input that they gathered at Wikimania and via
> different movement channels and incorporating it into the next iteration of
> their recommendations. These documents will then serve as a basis for
> harmonization across working groups.
>
> The input that we are gathering comes in on different levels. Some of it
> targets structural level changes or emphasizes specific principles or
> values, while other feedback is more on the programmatic side or already
> addressing implementation. Structural input will continue to be  considered
> in forthcoming iterations of the recommendations. Programmatic input will
> be documented and taken forward to inform the implementation.
>
> TIMELINE
> We wanted to get the English drafts out as soon as possible and the
> translations on a rolling basis, so that Wikimania participants could read
> and prepare to engage in person. Over the next few weeks, we will do
> targeted, public outreach to online project communities in multiple
> languages. We are soliciting feedback to shape the overall direction of the
> recommendations through mid-September. Working Groups are already working
> on identifying gaps and overlaps with other groups to prepare for
> harmonization.
>
> At the harmonization sprint in Tunis on 20-22 September, we will bring 3
> representatives from each Working Group together to work to develop a more
> coherent set of recommendations. The group will be supported by
> facilitators and external advice, as well as the core team. We have also
> invited María Sefidari, Katherine Maher, Ryan Merkley, Valerie D’Costa
> (Wikimedia Foundation) and Abraham Taherivand (Wikimedia Deutschland) to
> the sprint. They contribute expertise and experience from their work and
> leadership in the movement and beyond. They will be active listeners and
> can challenge recommendations by pointing out risks and consequences on the
> organizational and movement level. They also participate as the
> representatives of organizations that may be impacted by the
> recommendations. Involving them early is important so they can anticipate
> any possible changes for their staff and programs, and plan for
> implementation.
>
> Our aim is to release recommendations in November 2019, and present them to
> the Board of Trustees for approval in December. We will need the legal
> authority of the board for some of the recommendations, while others will
> then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and structures for
> approval or further consultation.[1] There will be additional public
> consultation activities around implementation that will be discussed and
> owned across the movement.
>
> WORKING GROUPS
> We have chosen the working group model to ensure that the process that
> embarks to make significant changes to our movement structures is owned by
> the community. Members of the nine working group were selected by 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcoming Ryan Merkley to the Wikimedia Foundation

2019-08-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Glad to have someone from CC onboard, welcome Ryan!

Paulo

Katherine Maher  escreveu no dia terça, 13/08/2019
à(s) 23:02:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I’m excited to let you all know that Ryan Merkley, formerly CEO of
> Creative Commons, is joining the Wikimedia Foundation as my new chief of
> staff.
>
> Many of you have met Ryan before -- at CC Summit, Wikimania, Wikimedia
> Summit, or MozFest. He’s a leader in open source, open knowledge, and
> free-culture communities, and for the past five years, he’s been the CEO of
> Creative Commons, initiating programs like CC search to index all 1.6
> billion licensed works online. He’s passionate about the power of the
> commons, and the role that everyone can play in making it sustainable and
> open to all. I couldn’t be happier he’s now bringing this passion and
> experience to our movement.
>
> In Ryan’s own words, “My heart has always been in open communities, and
>  the power of collective acts --  that is, the things that people can only
> do when they work together, like building a commons of free knowledge for
> every person.”
>
> For now, Ryan’s two top priorities will be bolstering the work of the
> movement strategy team and supporting the Board. He’ll support the strategy
> core team to move the Working Group recommendations into implementation
> within the community and Foundation over the course of the coming year.
> He’ll also serve as Board liaison to the Board of Trustees, strengthening
> the connections, communications, and coordination between Trustees and the
> Foundation. Internally, he’ll support the office of the Executive Director,
> acting in my stead on various projects.
>
> I’m excited by this new role for an old friend of the open community. Ryan
> knows our movement well. He has spent many hours with many Wikimedians, and
> understands the centrality of the community to the Wikimedia mission and
> identity. His background as a partner to Wikimedia, and a leader in the
> broader open movement will be invaluable to our work, and confirmation of
> the importance of community experience in Foundation leadership.
>
> Ryan doesn’t start in his new role until Monday, September 16th. However,
> he will be at Wikimania, so for those of you attending, please say hi, and
> join me in welcoming him to Wikimedia!
>
> Katherine
>
> P.S. This announcement can also be found on our news page:
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/08/13/wikimedia-foundation-welcomes-ryan-merkley-as-chief-of-staff-to-the-office-of-the-executive-director
>
> --
>
> Katherine Maher (she/her)
>
> Executive Director
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello Leila,

Just two quick notes on what you've said:
*" We should get comfortable thinking about these trade-offs as we think
about how to bring more diverse people and content to the project" - I face
this argument constantly in my life as an active Wikimedian. University
teachers tell we can have all papers from their university on Commons,
Wikisource, if we allow NC-ND. VIPs tell me they will give a number of
exclusive materials, given that they are blocked from commercial use.
Professional photographers, same story. To all of them I explain this is a
question of a basic principle of the project, the principle of Free
Knowledge, and that this is the essence, this is at the core of Wikimedia
projects, and can't be negotiated. This is how I've been understanding our
communities general thinking and ideals for the many years I've been
around, so changing that to accommodate more diversity really seems
something absolutely alien to our mission as Wikimedians, independently of
the merits of the content that could be incorporated in the projects that
way.
*In order to protect local folklore from "undue exploitation", Mozambique
government has decided that all manifestations of folklore in the country
are protected by copyright, and that they own that copyright. Result: we
end up with an huge cultural gap in Mozambique at the Wikimedia projects.
Not only in Mozambique, but in a number of other countries that apply
similar legal restrictions to this kind of cultural materials.

The solution for both cases has been, for well more than a decade, to
include that content as necessary under special provisions in some of our
projects - SEE EDP at
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy -
depending on approval of the project local community. So the solution for
that problem already exists for long, and this is not only reinventing the
wheel, but doing so at the expense of our most dear core principles and
mission.

Best,
Paulo


Leila Zia  escreveu no dia quinta, 15/08/2019 à(s)
05:42:

> Hi Paulo,
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 6:38 PM Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
> >
> > If they don't have legal resources, then it is pointless to use NC ND for
> > the content, as they will not be suing anyone that ignores the license
> and
> > commercializes it anyway.
>
> In practice, this can happen. Two points to keep in mind:
>
> * Building trust and relationships with new communities may require
> taking steps that we may not have been taking so far. People operate
> in different contexts and they have varying experiences, and we may
> sometimes have to change the way we do things to include them and
> their knowledge. We should get comfortable thinking about these
> trade-offs as we think about how to bring more diverse people and
> content to the project. (I'm not arguing that we should do what this
> proposal says at this point. We should discuss it though in the talk
> page.)
>
> * Having some legal pathway can be attractive to some folks, /even if/
> they don't exercise it. This is an assurance that they can have some
> control over their culture and the narratives around it and I can see
> how this can be important for some marginalized communities. This
> middle step may be needed. Also, if the legal pathway is there, they
> can always some day decide to pursue it.
>
> > If such knowledge can't be freely shared, then it has no place in
> Commons,
> > in my opinion. If that makes it less visible, then that is the problem of
> > the communities that don't share it freely. One cannot have both things
> at
> > the same time.
>
> Two points again: ;)
>
> * Re Commons or not is something we should discuss in the talk pages.
> Peter had some really good points early on on this thread about the 3
> different options available.
>
> * This won't be only their problem. It will be our shared problem. If
> Commons ends up not being the solution, we shouldn't stop there. We
> should think through what else we can do to make bringing of their
> knowledge to Wikimedia projects happen. While I don't know what the
> answers are, I know that we should try more. From a narrow research
> perspective: this is immensely important for addressing Wikimedia's
> knowledge gaps for the sake of our own immediate users but also for
> the sake of indirect users of Wikimedia content. Wikimedia is imo one
> of the cornerstones of the Web. The content we collectively bring to
> Wikimedia projects is no longer /just/ used directly on Wikipedia
> (even that alone is enough argument to attempt to find solutions for
> the kind of gaps we're talking about). It's being used by a variety of
> technologies to build algorithms and machines that have impact on
> people's l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

2019-08-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I subscribe Ziko's request to redefine the timeline of Strategy 2030, for
the stated reasons. Not only it looks absurd, looking at the quality of the
published materials, which are obviously not fit for a final discussion on
this mater, but also because there's no rush to present results already in
October.
Rushing to present a final set of recommendations, without proper
discussion, risks producing a faulty and immature document, facing a
barrage of resistence from the part of the community when trying to
implement the recommendations, and basically destroy more than 1 year of
hard work from everyone involved (core team, WGs, liasion, and the part of
the community who involved itself on the process).

I endorse the request to the Strategy 2030 Core Team: Please review your
schedule, and adjust your timetable, so to allow some reasonable time for
that draft to be discussed and properly finished.

Best,
Paulo

Ziko van Dijk  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s)
14:48:

> Hello,
>
> Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have
> been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the future
> of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of the
> working groups.
>
> If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give
> feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be
> ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing
> the recommendations.
>
> Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the
> documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are much
> more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the Wikimeda
> volunteers.
>
> There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one
> sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to
> back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At least
> at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".
>
> The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought through.
> There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how
> that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the statement
> that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC
> content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After
> years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open content
> organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic change?
>
> And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed
> about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All change
> has negative connotations to some members of the community."
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
>
> I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents
> before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is giving
> a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the very
> same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).
>
> This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations
> are unusable or damaging. I also cannot judge about the efforts invested,
> as I have no insight in the inner workings. But it is very frustrating for
> me to read the documents and often have to guess what they actually mean.
> And it seems to me, given the comments on the user pages on Meta Wiki, on
> this list, on de:WP:Kurier and on Facebook, that I am not the only one who
> feels this frustration.
>
> Therefore, I ask the people responsible: please reconsider the timeline. If
> these documents are the result of one year work, then the documents will
> not be ready within two and a half months. Consider several months for the
> working groups to use the present feedback for a redraft, and then give the
> Wikimedia volunteers at least the same amount of time for giving feedback
> again.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-14 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
If they don't have legal resources, then it is pointless to use NC ND for
the content, as they will not be suing anyone that ignores the license and
commercializes it anyway.

If such knowledge can't be freely shared, then it has no place in Commons,
in my opinion. If that makes it less visible, then that is the problem of
the communities that don't share it freely. One cannot have both things at
the same time. If it is notable, we may try to accommodate it in some
projects that allow that kind of content under an exception policy.

In any case, I don't believe it is in Wikimedia scope to worry about the
possible misuses people can do of the content we provide, and much less to
subvert our license policy in order to avoid stuff we should not be worried
with in first place.

Best,
Paulo


A quarta, 14 de ago de 2019, 23:27, Lucas Werkmeister <
m...@lucaswerkmeister.de> escreveu:

> I doubt that the communities in question are likely to have the same
> legal resources available to them as The Coca-Cola Company, so I must
> admit I don’t find this argument entirely convincing. Asking them to
> share their content, but then leaving them alone in the face of any
> problems arising from it, sounds more like reinforcing the status quo
> than promoting knowledge equity to me. And note that the law may not be
> written in their favor in the first place, so suggesting them to “secure
> their concerns in a legal way” may require a lengthy legislative process
> first, with uncertain outcome.
>
> (I must admit that I haven’t yet read the articles linked in the draft,
> so this email is phrased rather vaguely. I hope it still makes sense.)
>
> Cheers,
> Lucas
>
> On 14.08.19 23:51, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > All this stuff about misappropriation and unwanted commercial use of
> > certain content which is being used to justify the inclusion of NC/ND CC
> > licenses in Commons and other Wikimedia projects, really isn't Wikimedia
> > concern. If some communities object to certain types of use on content
> > produced by them, they should secure them in the law, same way as
> personal
> > image rights, trademarks, etc. No one at Commons cares if the Coca-Cola
> > logo we host there, which is both PD-old and PD-textlogo, is misused by
> 3rd
> > parties to sell some other cola beverage as if it was the original one.
> > That's Coca Cola concern, not ours, and they are absolutely free to sue
> the
> > infractor. If those communities object to certain uses, first they secure
> > their concerns in a legal way, then act upon it. As it is now, anyone who
> > get access to that content in a legal way and wants to share it, can do
> it
> > freely at Commons, and nobody at Commons is going to delete it just
> because
> > some other people, which have not any legal right over that content,
> claim
> > that using it commercially is against their beliefs or traditions.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > geni  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s) 22:22:
> >
> >> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 21:34, Aron Manning 
> wrote:
> >> .
> >>> The draft already refers to 2 articles (1
> >>> <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/20/us/slave-photographs-harvard.html
> >,2
> >>> <
> >>
> https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c0043945-852b-4d7e-94ad-1859f91ba418
> >>> )
> >>> that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show
> the
> >>> benefits of NC and ND licensed materials.
> >>>
> >>> Aron
> >>
> >> 1 refers to images that are public domain in terms of copyright and
> >> the latter is mostly talking about trademark or stuff so broad that
> >> you couldn't usefuly copyright it in the first place. ND isn't a
> >> useful protection in these cases (it might be of some use for current
> >> individual artists but they can publish their work elsewhere).
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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://l

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

2019-08-14 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
All this stuff about misappropriation and unwanted commercial use of
certain content which is being used to justify the inclusion of NC/ND CC
licenses in Commons and other Wikimedia projects, really isn't Wikimedia
concern. If some communities object to certain types of use on content
produced by them, they should secure them in the law, same way as personal
image rights, trademarks, etc. No one at Commons cares if the Coca-Cola
logo we host there, which is both PD-old and PD-textlogo, is misused by 3rd
parties to sell some other cola beverage as if it was the original one.
That's Coca Cola concern, not ours, and they are absolutely free to sue the
infractor. If those communities object to certain uses, first they secure
their concerns in a legal way, then act upon it. As it is now, anyone who
get access to that content in a legal way and wants to share it, can do it
freely at Commons, and nobody at Commons is going to delete it just because
some other people, which have not any legal right over that content, claim
that using it commercially is against their beliefs or traditions.

Paulo

geni  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s) 22:22:

> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 21:34, Aron Manning  wrote:
> .
> > The draft already refers to 2 articles (1
> > ,2
> > <
> https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c0043945-852b-4d7e-94ad-1859f91ba418
> >)
> > that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show the
> > benefits of NC and ND licensed materials.
> >
> > Aron
>
> 1 refers to images that are public domain in terms of copyright and
> the latter is mostly talking about trademark or stuff so broad that
> you couldn't usefuly copyright it in the first place. ND isn't a
> useful protection in these cases (it might be of some use for current
> individual artists but they can publish their work elsewhere).
>
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-14 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" I don't want people to feel that their ideas are being casually
dismissed" - Don't worry, it is not "their ideas. As Nicole Ebber
explained, those recommendations resulted from a lot of different inputs,
and none of them is supposed to be the brainchild of anyone inside the WGs.
If they are nonsense, don't be afraid to go there and tell/write what you
think.

Paulo

Pine W  escreveu no dia terça, 13/08/2019 à(s) 22:09:

> I have what seems to be a minority opinion so far. I think that hosting NC
> and ND media is worth considering. If the Commons community does not want
> media with those licenses to be on Commons then I think that Peter's
> suggestion is good.
>
> A tricky issue may be whether to allow NC and NC media on Wikipedias, where
> the media could get a lot of visibility but also cause additional licensing
> complexity beyond what we already have with the English Wikipedia fair use
> exception. This issue would need some deliberation, but any outcome
> wouldn't be a blocker to a new repository for hosting NC and ND media.
>
> I have some bigger concerns with a few of the other strategy proposals and
> I am thinking about how to engage with the people who made those proposals.
> I don't want people to feel that their ideas are being casually dismissed,
> nor do I want to have hostility between the WGs and the wider community. I
> would prefer to have constructive discussions, but I don't know how best to
> do that at this point. I think that waiting a week or two for tempers to
> cool might be good before engaging.
>
>
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-14 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" To distribute many of the function now at WMF in SF to different
locations in the world (whereof 50% in Global south)" - Distributing work
now being paid with US wages to US staff at SF to people at the Global
South paying "Global South wages" sounds a lot like moving the factories
from San Francisco to Dhaka because wages are much lower there, while
parading it as moving towards "diversity" and "inclusion".

Paulo

Anders Wennersten  escreveu no dia segunda,
12/08/2019 à(s) 18:31:

> I want to express my appreciation for the work being done and the result.
>
> I am not able to get to grips with all parts of the recommendation but
> as I understand there are two key messages:
>
> *To distribute  many of the function now at WMF in SF to different
> locations in the world (whereof 50% in Global south). I find this is
> most appropriate, both to lessen the feeling of We-them, but also to get
> more salaried people spread over the World. It is also a natural
> development as out organisation mature over time
>
> *To really go, without any compromise for the discussion in the movement
> in our communities must be held in a civil tone and in a friendly
> atmosphere  where respect for everyone is a key. I believe also this is
> long overdue and necessary when we now are over 15 years of age.
>
> I love these two issues and hope it will be implemented in full.
>
>   Anders
>
>
>
> Den 2019-08-12 kl. 17:51, skrev Nicole Ebber:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > We would like to offer further clarification that the recommendations for
> > Wikimedia 2030 [1] that were shared earlier with you are indeed drafts.
> > They represent discussions around a wide array of topics that the nine
> > thematic working groups, affiliates and communities had identified
> > important for our movement’s future. They are the product of
> conversations
> > over many months with a variety of stakeholders, and the working groups
> are
> > eager to hear from you. The draft recommendations are neither final nor
> > complete, but a continuation of an ongoing conversation happening across
> > wikis, platforms, surveys, meetings, and meet-ups. As such, constructive
> > feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed. The draft
> > recommendations are based on contexts that deserve due review and
> > reflection, and are the result of the efforts of many, rather than single
> > individuals.
> >
> > Many of the draft recommendations underline structural changes needed for
> > the growth and expansion of a movement like ours. Many are representative
> > of wider societal, historical and global dynamics around us. Please take
> > the time to review the draft recommendations in their entirety, pose
> > questions, hear from others, and in the spirit of collegial
> collaboration,
> > offer suggestions that you think can address the issues at hand. This is
> a
> > process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
> > engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Nicole
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> >
> > On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:49, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> >> "And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> >> incorporate
> >> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> >> licensing scheme?"
> >>
> >> We can't and no one can.
> >>
> >> Knowledge, ideas, and concepts cannot be copyrighted to begin with. Now,
> >> specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
> >> facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> >> Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> >> without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> under
> >> an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> for
> >> it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
> >> then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter
> what
> >> one does.
> >>
> >> Todd
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> >> You're
> >>> the only one telling people to shut up here.
> >>>
> >>> And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> >> incorporate
> >>> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> >>> licensing scheme?
> >>> ___
> >>> 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] [Affiliates] Introducing our newest thematic organisation, Wikimedia Medicine

2019-08-02 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Those are really great news to the "health" of our movement,
congratulations and thanks to all those who helped making this a reality! :D

Paulo

Shani Evenstein  escreveu no dia quarta, 31/07/2019
à(s) 18:05:

> Thank you, Kirill, and all who have been involved in making this a
> reality!
>
> It's an exciting moment in our growth as an organization and we are
> thrilled to be recognized as a Thematic Organization.
> As Kirill mentioned, we do hope that this will lead the way for the
> scaling of other cross-movement thematic efforts.
>
> We look forward to continuing working with affiliates in the movement and
> especially expanding our collaborations with affiliates we haven't had the
> chance to work closely with, as we scale our efforts worldwide. If you are
> interested in working with us, please feel free to contact us at:
> wikiproject...@gmail.com
>
> We look forward to meeting some of you in the Health Space at Wikimania
> , where you'll be able
> to find out more about what we've been doing and how you can join forces
> with us.
>
> Best,
>
> Shani Evenstein
> Chairperson, Wikimedia Medicine.
>
>
>
> ---
> *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.
> * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
>  on Technology,
> Internationalization and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv
> University .
> * Chairperson, Wikimedia Medicine
> .
> * Chairperson, Wikipedia & Education User Group
> .
> * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
> .
> * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda .
> +972-525640648
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 6:58 PM Rajeeb Dutta  wrote:
>
>> Great news and many many congratulations to Wikimedia Medicine and all
>> the people involved in making this happen.
>> Thanks Kirill for the update.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Rajeeb Dutta.
>> (U: Marajozkee)
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On 31-Jul-2019, at 9:16 PM, camelia boban 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Many congratulations to Wikimedia Medicine, so happy for this
>> > recognition.
>> >
>> > Camelia, WikiDonne User Group
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > *Camelia Boban*
>> >
>> > *| Java EE Developer |*
>> >
>> > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
>> > Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
>> > Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
>> >
>> > *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
>> > WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
>> >
>> > M. +39 3383385545
>> > camelia.bo...@gmail.com
>> > *Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
>> >  *|* *LinkedIn
>> > *
>> > *Wikipedia  **|
>> **WikiDonne
>> > UG * | *WikiDonne Project
>> >  *
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Il giorno mer 31 lug 2019 alle ore 17:25 Kirill Lokshin <
>> > kirill.loks...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> >
>> >> Hi everyone!
>> >>
>> >> I'm very happy to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of
>> Trustees
>> >> has approved the recognition of Wikimedia Medicine [1] as a Wikimedia
>> >> thematic organisation.
>> >>
>> >> Over the past several years, Wikimedia Medicine has successfully
>> planned
>> >> and executed a significant program portfolio, attracting new
>> contributors
>> >> and forming partnerships with both movement affiliates and external
>> >> institutional partners around the world.  Wikimedia Medicine is an
>> >> ambitious, innovative, and highly effective organization that has
>> >> demonstrated a substantial record of independent programmatic impact
>> and
>> >> continues to foster innovation and collaboration with numerous other
>> >> entities across the Wikimedia movement.
>> >>
>> >> Wikimedia Medicine's efforts to deliver critical medical information to
>> >> underserved and underrepresented communities reflect the principles of
>> >> infrastructure and inclusiveness espoused in the Wikimedia movement
>> >> strategic direction, and represent a key potential area of growth for
>> >> emerging movement communities.  The recognition of Wikimedia Medicine
>> as a
>> >> Wikimedia thematic organisation reinforces the our movement’s shared
>> >> commitment to this direction, and will support Wikimedia Medicine's
>> future
>> >> partnerships with high-profile government 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikipedians of Goa User Group

2019-07-31 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Splendid news, congratulations Wikipedians of Goa!! :D

Frederick: It was really great and a privilege meeting you at CC Global
Summit. We at WMPT are very much looking forward to partner with you in
Wikimedia projects, specially those related to lusophony!

Best,

Paulo




Kirill Lokshin  escreveu no dia quarta,
31/07/2019 à(s) 16:41:

> Hi everyone!
>
> I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> [1] the Wikipedians of Goa User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The
> group aims to build content related to Goa in all possible languages, to
> conduct Wikipedia-related training in Goa, and to help build and sustain
> the Konkani Wikipedia.
>
> Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikipedians_of_Goa_User_Group
>
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedians_of_Goa_User_Group
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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 updated design for the Wikimedia Foundation website

2019-07-11 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hey Greg,

Looks way nicer than the previous version. The thing always moving may be a
little bit annoying after some time, maybe it could have a stop button, and
it would be nice if we could slide it on our will. But the drawing is very
cool.

+1 to change the bright canary yellow box to a more discrete colour (like a
pale yellow, maybe).

Best,
Paulo



Gregory Varnum  escreveu no dia quarta, 10/07/2019
à(s) 02:32:

> Hello!
>
> Today, we are  thrilled to share an updated visual design style on the
> Wikimedia Foundation website (wikimediafoundation.org)!
>
> This updated design was developed by the Wikimedia Foundation’s Product
> design team. We worked on feedback from Meta-Wiki, emails, Phabricator, and
> hundreds of conversations paired with user testing with people in the
> target audiences for the website. We are incredibly appreciative of the
> great care that team has taken in making strategic, data-led design
> decisions and really helping us amplify the website's ability to convey our
> story to people generally unfamiliar with Wikimedia.
>
> We have also expanded on the information about the website on its Meta-Wiki
> page,[1] and updated the public mirror of the code base to reflect the
> technical changes made to the site for this updated design.[2]
>
> Thank you to the now hundreds of people that have been involved in helping
> us build a website for the Foundation which we can be proud of!
> -greg & the Wikimedia Foundation Communication team
>
> = A bit more about the site =
>
> == How is the site doing? ==
>
> Since the site's soft launch in July 2018, traffic has continued to
> increase. There has also been a significant increase in donations collected
> via this website. Two key audiences, potential staff and partners, have
> shared positive feedback on the site’s content and organization, enabling
> them to find jobs and contact key teams respectively. Additionally, user
> testing has shown a positive response to the content and overall
> architecture of the site.
>
> == What brought us here ==
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation Communications department has been collecting
> feedback on the Foundation's website since late 2016 and beginning in
> early 2017 has been working on addressing the backlog of issues related to
> the website. The original Foundation site, launched in 2004, did not have a
> clear audience, and as a result was not effectively serving any of the
> hundreds of uses people saw for it. Maintaining the site's content beyond
> English had become a growing problem - leaving visitors with different
> information, depending on which language they were using, on basic details
> like our address and executive staff. Additionally, the site had over
> 17,000 pages - a vast majority of which were either out of date or no
> longer in use.
>
> In 2017-18, the Communications department ran a "Discovery" process to help
> inform our decision making. This process included reviews of methods used
> by other organizations, assessment of our current communication channels,
> collecting feedback at Wikimania, and interviews with dozens of volunteers,
> donors, contractors, and staff. The resulting report[3] and recommendations
> helped identify the objectives and audiences of the website,[1] and were
> utilized throughout the initial design and development of the new website.
>
> Shortly after the soft launch, the department began working with the
> Product department's design team to perform user testing, process feedback
> collected in the weeks following the soft launch, and collect additional
> feedback to help us make informed decisions. They helped us collect and
> process feedback from hundreds of individuals within and outside of the
> movement.
>
> Based on feedback, they conducted user testing and developed the updated
> design we deployed this morning. We will continue to use a data and
> feedback informed decision making in managing the site. Given the external
> audience nature of the site, it has consistently proven important to take
> the time to collect feedback and data from a wide variety of sources -
> including volunteers, press, donors, partner organizations, and readers of
> the projects.
>
> == What comes next ==
>
> More languages! The Communications department will continue to work on
> content development and expanding translations to additional languages. If
> you are interested in our plans for translations, please check out the
> information shared recently about the Organization communications
> translators group.[5]
>
> == Providing feedback ==
>
> The Communications department will continue to monitor the talk page for
> the Foundation's website on Meta-Wiki.[6] Additionally, I will be attending
> Wikimania in Stockholm and available to chat with folks.[7]
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_website
> [2] https://github.com/wikimedia/wikimediafoundation-org
> [3]
>
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediaindia-l] Fwd: Open Letter to Affiliations Committee : Wikimedia India's Demand For A Fair And Transparent Hearing

2019-07-09 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hello,

Reading about these developments in India has been absolutely painful, and
a sad reminiscent of a number of past situations.

Most of all, the case with Wikimedia Portugal, when AffCom started imposing
restrictions and "mediation plans" without having any kind of official
hearing with the chapter; the whole environment of secrecy and power/fear
games; the prerogative of making all kinds of unsubstantiated affirmations,
presented as if they were god's truth; the notice of suspension for the
chapter, based on information which remains to be substantiated till today;
the feeling of hopelessness.

Then the old, cold case of Brazil, where back in 2010, like in India, the
WMF decided to experiment with local WMF representations, with very tragic
consequences, heavily disturbing the progress of the local Wikimedia
community, and hindering its progress for about a decade; the reckless
approval by AffCom, and subsequent WMF support of clone/conflicting local
affiliates with the one (s) already existing in the region; and the way it
was unilaterally "solved" by AffCom, dismantling a community which was
hanging around Wikimedia since 2008.

And then the recent case which happened to myself where an old and
exclusively Wikipedia-related case was somehow morphed and cooked in secret
inside WMF, deceitfully presenting it as affiliate related, and secretly
judged, with false accusations and sanctions issued without even informing
the target of what was happening.

One thing common to all those situations is the environment of secrecy and
obscurity cultivated by AffCom, completely at odds with the values of the
Wikimedia Movement - starting with the way AffCom deceitfully defines and
presents itself - "a Wikimedia community-run committee" [1], when it is all
but run by the Wikimedia community. It's not even chosen by the community,
to start with, but by the committee itself. But the main question probably
is: Why is AffCom cultivating all this environment of secrecy and obscurity
in what should be straightforward and clear proceedings? What may be
secretive at all, in the quest of a group of Wikimedians to become an
affiliate? Why those processes do not occur in daylight from their start
till the end - with the obvious exception of sensitive information
involving privacy, such as real names? And then - who is AffCom accountable
to? Who oversees AffCom? The BoT? Are they monitoring AffCom? Does the BoT
agrees with this way of acting?

All this cult of secrecy by AffCom and other powers-that-be inside WMF
creates a very unhealthy and toxic environment for everyone. I personally
appreciate and hold in high esteem a number of members of AffCom, possibly
the majority of them. And it has been very much mind-boggling watching the
way AffCom choses to act as a whole. I've suggested to the Strategy WG of
Roles & Responsibilities that AffCom should be wholly redefined, to make it
more transparent, community-connected and accountable. The way it is now, I
don't believe it is properly filling and complying with its role.

I really hope things improve, and our Wikimedian brothers at WMIN - who I
believe have made the right decision of bringing their case into the
clarity of daylight - will manage to revert the suspension and continue
working for a world of free knowledge accessible to everyone, despite the
difficulties they are passing through at this moment.

And it would be much more motivating for everyone if we could get out of
this kind of Age of Darkness at AffCom (and WMF in general).

[1] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee

Best,
Paulo


Abhinav srivastava  escreveu no dia terça, 9/07/2019
à(s) 08:10:

> Hi Lodewijk,
>
> I will try and simplify
>
> (a) *What is the exact and complete set of reasons that Affcom put the
> chapter on suspension?*
> This has been listed under six bullet points in my initial mail. I
> encourage you and everyone reading here to have a look at them. I have
> further shared a synopsis for the same again in part (c) along with WMIN
> responses.
>
> (b)* what additional complaints are part of the big picture ?*
> The trouble of having a Staff-based organisation (CIS-A2K) at national
> level where there is lesser transparency such that there MoU is not in
> public domain [1] and the trouble caused to India Chapter like attribution
> grabbing for WMIN's self-financed projects etc. [2]
>
> (c) w*hat is the response from WMIN.*
>  Our primary concern remains that Affcom on a good-faith could have asked
> for a clarification and if found they could have proceeded with the
> suspension. They took an official position without even hearing us once.
> There basis has been further described again in brief
>
> * Legal Structure : Affcom asked WMIN to resolve their necessary financial
> licenses. WMIN informed them that Government directives [3] have been
> restrictive in this regard, however, to keep the movement active,
> activities have been happening by members self-financing 

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

2019-07-04 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
What exactly has the English Wikipedia accepted? As far as I know we don't
known on what the WMF thinks they failed. It is just speculation and
personal opinions.

Paulo

A quinta, 4 de jul de 2019, 10:11, Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> escreveu:

> Hoi,
> I am astounded that you write as if the WMF is at fault in this. What I
> find is that in stead of pointing to the WMF, it is first and foremost the
> community of the English Wikipedia who accepted the unacceptable and
> finally has to deal with consequences. True to form, no reflection on en.wp
> practices and the blame is conveniently put elsewhere.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 10:48, Peter Southwood  >
> wrote:
>
> > Gerard,
> > Is your response to my email intended to have any relevance to my
> > statement? If so please clarify.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> > Sent: 04 July 2019 09:59
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> >
> > Hoi,
> > The community is responsible for its actions. It is widely acknowledged
> > that the English Wikipedia is a toxic environment. The community has not
> > taken this on board, has not fixed the damage. At some stage an
> inflection
> > point exists where the community if forced to reflect. Sadly, the English
> > Wikipedia has proven to be unable to get its house in order nor does it
> > show reflection that give hope for a better future.
> > Thanks,
> >GerardM
> >
> > On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 09:32, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The board does not manage WMF. It is not their fault when a department
> > > does something stupid if they had no warning that it was likely to
> > happen.
> > > People who signed off on the ban decision may have reason to apologise,
> > > others not.  The board is responsible for ensuring that the damage is
> > fixed
> > > and taking reasonably practicable precautions for preventing a
> > recurrence.
> > > Due diligence is their duty, not exhaustive diligence or
> micromanagement.
> > > Cheers, Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Pine W
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 10:29 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> > >
> > >  Hello Wikimedia-l colleagues,
> > >
> > > I hope that your day is going well.
> > >
> > > There are some updates regarding the topics that we are discussing in
> > this
> > > thread. I am writing this email in a personal capacity.
> > >
> > > As a reminder, the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee published an
> > > open letter on 30 June that was directed to the WMF Board
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram=904149076=904147649
> > > >.
> > > I will share a few quotes from that statement before providing some
> > > updates, and finally making some personal comments.
> > >
> > > I am retaining the font styles that Arbcom used in its letter.
> > >
> > > * "As of 30 June, two bureaucrats, 18 administrators, an ArbCom clerk,
> > and
> > > a number of other editors have resigned their positions and/or retired
> > from
> > > Wikipedia editing in relation to this issue."
> > >
> > > * "If Fram’s ban—an unappealable sanction issued from above with no
> > > community consultation—represents the WMF’s new strategy for dealing
> with
> > > harassment on the English Wikipedia, it is one that is fundamentally
> > > misaligned with the Wikimedia movement’s principles of openness,
> > consensus,
> > > and self-governance."
> > >
> > > * "*We ask that the WMF commits to leaving behavioural complaints
> > > pertaining solely to the English Wikipedia to established local
> > processes.*
> > > Those unsuitable for public discussion should be referred to the
> > > Arbitration Committee. We will solicit comment from the community and
> the
> > > WMF to develop clear procedures for dealing with confidential
> allegations
> > > of harassment, based on the existing provision for private hearings in
> > the
> > > arbitration policy. Complaints that can be discussed publicly should be
> > > referred to an appropriate community dispute resolution process. If the
> > > Trust & Safety team seeks to assume responsibility for these cases,
> they
> > > should do so by proposing an amendment to the arbitration policy, or an
> > > equivalent process of community consensus-building. Otherwise, we would
> > > appreciate the WMF’s continued support in improving our response to
> > > harassment and hostility on the English Wikipedia
> > >
> > > * "We feel strongly that this commitment is necessary for the
> Arbitration
> > > Committee to continue to perform the role it 

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

2019-06-28 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The files were mainly kept because most of them were considered to be
utilitarian objects, but IMO the rationale was correct, as all of them are
modern props from the Lord of the Rings movie series.

Personally, I think it could be interpreted or construed as some kind of
petty revenge from Fram on Rama (every day wikipolitics) , but technically
the nominations were correct, indeed.

And it is very true that the Commons community is completely independent
from the English Wikipedia, and fiercely adamant defenders of that
independence. Someone being a sysop on the English Wikipedia, or on any
other Wikipedia project generally count zero on content decisions there.

In this specific case, it is absolutely irrelevant that Fram is or was a
sysop at wiki.en.

Best,
Paulo

A sexta, 28 de jun de 2019, 15:09, Todd Allen 
escreveu:

> I think many Commons users would be flatly insulted by the idea that they
> wouldn't take action against something done on Commons because an English
> Wikipedia admin did it. Commons is as fiercely protective of its
> independence as EN-WP is.
>
> And this elides a crucial question: Were the deletion nominations largely
> correct or incorrect? If someone nominates a bunch of entirely appropriate
> files for deletion, that could certainly be construed as harassment or at
> minimum poor judgment on the nominator's part, but if the complaint is "I
> uploaded a bunch of inappropriate stuff and I got caught", that's
> appropriate maintenance work. So, were those files mainly deleted, or kept?
>
> Todd
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 4:22 AM Isaac Olatunde 
> wrote:
>
> > Nobody seems to be insinuating that Fram is lying. It's just plain
> > stupidity to demonize the WMF's action solely on their part of the story
> > alone. Fram has penchant  for irritating  people he disagrees  with and
> > it's possible they have crossed the line.
> >
> > Recently there was an AbCom case against Rama,  an English Wikipedia
> > administrator (now desysoped),  Commons administrator and oversighter.
> > While the case was ongoing,  Fram began to follow this user to an extent
> > that they began to mass-nominate for deletion the user's uploads on
> > Commons, a behavior the user considered as stalking and harassment. Some
> > users including myself requested that Fram stay away from Rama and their
> > uploads. A behavior  like this would normally  get users blocked but
> > nobody  felt the reason to ban or blocked Fram partly because they wear
> the
> > English Wikipedia's admin hat.
> >
> > This incident is barely a month ago.
> >
> > I am unsure if this form part of the reasons for the ban but I have no
> > enough reasons to think that the ban was unjustifiable.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Isaac
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 10:15 AM Benjamin Ikuta  > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Why do you doubt Fram? What do you think happened? And why can't the
> WMF
> > > say even so much as a, "That's not accurate."?
> > >
> > > You really think he's just outright lying?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jun 14, 2019, at 4:03 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> > >
> > > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> > > > let alone the story, then you're less competent than I have
> previously
> > > > considered you to be.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 18:47, Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> According to Fram, the WMF told him his "interaction ban" was for
> > > >> maintenance tagging two articles, yes (and when I looked at the
> diffs,
> > > the
> > > >> maintenance tags were accurate and necessary). So, either Fram is
> > lying
> > > or
> > > >> omitting something (and the WMF, for whatever reason, is not
> > challenging
> > > >> him on it), the WMF lied to Fram, or they did indeed sanction him
> for
> > > what
> > > >> they told him they sanctioned him for.
> > > >>
> > > >> Todd
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:37 AM David Gerard 
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for
> > > >>> doing only what you describe?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:32, Todd Allen 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > >  The only case of "harassment" apparently cited here was "I kept
> > > writing
> > >  garbage articles, and someone kept flagging them as garbage!
> > > Harassment!
> > >  Bad!"
> > > 
> > >  If you don't want your articles to be flagged as garbage, FIND
> YOUR
> > > >>> SOURCES
> > >  PRIOR TO WRITING THEM, AND CITE THEM. That's rather a requirement
> > > anyway.
> > >  The editor in question repeatedly failed to do that, repeatedly
> had
> > > her
> > >  articles flagged for failure to do that, and regarded that as
> > > >>> "harassment"
> > >  rather than her own failure to follow the English Wikipedia's
> > > policies.
> > >  Next time, she needs to find the sources first, and write the
> > article
> > > >>> only
> > >  after she has them in hand.
> > > 
> > >  Todd

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

2019-06-28 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Not really demonizing WMF, but healthily not trusting at face value what
they say, specially given WMF quite messy record at that.

The WMF interference in that Wikipedia community was completely out of
process, and to the moment lacking any justification worth of that name.
IMO it is OK for that community to take the measures they deem as
appropriate to prevent such kind of interference in the future.

Best.
Paulo


A sexta, 28 de jun de 2019, 11:22, Isaac Olatunde 
escreveu:

> Nobody seems to be insinuating that Fram is lying. It's just plain
> stupidity to demonize the WMF's action solely on their part of the story
> alone. Fram has penchant  for irritating  people he disagrees  with and
> it's possible they have crossed the line.
>
> Recently there was an AbCom case against Rama,  an English Wikipedia
> administrator (now desysoped),  Commons administrator and oversighter.
> While the case was ongoing,  Fram began to follow this user to an extent
> that they began to mass-nominate for deletion the user's uploads on
> Commons, a behavior the user considered as stalking and harassment. Some
> users including myself requested that Fram stay away from Rama and their
> uploads. A behavior  like this would normally  get users blocked but
> nobody  felt the reason to ban or blocked Fram partly because they wear the
> English Wikipedia's admin hat.
>
> This incident is barely a month ago.
>
> I am unsure if this form part of the reasons for the ban but I have no
> enough reasons to think that the ban was unjustifiable.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Isaac
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 10:15 AM Benjamin Ikuta  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Why do you doubt Fram? What do you think happened? And why can't the WMF
> > say even so much as a, "That's not accurate."?
> >
> > You really think he's just outright lying?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jun 14, 2019, at 4:03 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> > > let alone the story, then you're less competent than I have previously
> > > considered you to be.
> > >
> > > On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 18:47, Todd Allen  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> According to Fram, the WMF told him his "interaction ban" was for
> > >> maintenance tagging two articles, yes (and when I looked at the diffs,
> > the
> > >> maintenance tags were accurate and necessary). So, either Fram is
> lying
> > or
> > >> omitting something (and the WMF, for whatever reason, is not
> challenging
> > >> him on it), the WMF lied to Fram, or they did indeed sanction him for
> > what
> > >> they told him they sanctioned him for.
> > >>
> > >> Todd
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:37 AM David Gerard 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for
> > >>> doing only what you describe?
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:32, Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > 
> >  The only case of "harassment" apparently cited here was "I kept
> > writing
> >  garbage articles, and someone kept flagging them as garbage!
> > Harassment!
> >  Bad!"
> > 
> >  If you don't want your articles to be flagged as garbage, FIND YOUR
> > >>> SOURCES
> >  PRIOR TO WRITING THEM, AND CITE THEM. That's rather a requirement
> > anyway.
> >  The editor in question repeatedly failed to do that, repeatedly had
> > her
> >  articles flagged for failure to do that, and regarded that as
> > >>> "harassment"
> >  rather than her own failure to follow the English Wikipedia's
> > policies.
> >  Next time, she needs to find the sources first, and write the
> article
> > >>> only
> >  after she has them in hand.
> > 
> >  Todd
> > 
> >  On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:14 AM Robert Fernandez <
> > >>> wikigamal...@gmail.com>
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > If someone is able to harass someone for years and nothing is done
> > then
> > > clearly community procedures are not “perfectly adequate”
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 11:36 AM Fæ  wrote:
> > >
> > >> This misses the point, as others have highlighted already.
> > >>
> > >> The WMF can and /should/ globally and permanently ban paedophiles,
> > >> terrorists, system hackers and people making multiple cross-wiki
> > >>> death
> > >> threats or threats of suicide. There are perfectly good and
> > >> understandable reasons as to why the evidence behind these attacks
> > >>> and
> > >> threats would be kept unpublished, it's seriously personal or
> > >>> criminal
> > >> stuff.
> > >>
> > >> The WMF making topic bans, interaction bans and limited project
> > >> specific bans against Wikipedians is a brand new invention, which
> > >>> goes
> > >> against the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > >> existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > >> banning bad behaviour on our projects. Once full time WMF
> employees
> > >> start doing in parallel what 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The interface seems to be completely static. Then there seems to be some
kind of possible interaction, which I was unable to see, as it requires
registration and registration is not working for Firefox ATM.

Maybe it is open in the sense that it shows to everyone what is there, but
participation seems to be in a not wiki way and strictly controlled (by the
WMF, apparently).

Paulo

A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 11:32, Lucas Werkmeister <
m...@lucaswerkmeister.de> escreveu:

> Why do you consider Wikimedia Space a closed platform?
>
> Cheers,
> Lucas
>
> On 26.06.19 11:27, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > I also generally discuss what I can offwiki (using a number of channels,
> > but mainly Telegram) , and leave to onwiki discussions what is strictly
> > necessary, but it has much more to do with the slowness and lack of
> > usability of the wiki talk system, than with a toxic environment.
> >
> > That being said, the wiki talk appears to me as the main bastion
> protecting
> > openness in our projects. We may discuss a lot offwiki, but a summary of
> it
> > is always presented onwiki and can be challenged by the onwiki community
> > that do not have an offwiki presence, which is considerably large and an
> > essential part of the process too.
> >
> > I understand that some people who have an habit of discussing and
> arranging
> > everything offwiki are not prepared to face resistance from the onwiki
> > communities when their new apparently wonderful and flawless idea is
> > presented there, but that is truly and essentially part of the process,
> and
> > if they are unable to live with that, they should consider refraining to
> > take part on it, instead of trying to artificially bend a system which
> was
> > designed to be onwiki and open to submit itself to offwiki and closed
> > platforms. I am seeing this kind of discussions and proposals at the
> > Community Health strategy work group, for instance.
> >
> > In the case at hand, I would like to understand specifically why the
> choice
> > of mounting yet another platform, and a non wiki and closed one, instead
> of
> > improving the existing one, wiki and open, at Outreach.
> >
> > As for the WMF, despite what Amir has said, which possibly refer to
> > different visions, or even dissidents among WMF staff ranks, at the end
> of
> > the day there still is only one WMF, the one directed by the ED and
> > presided by the BoT, the same one which issues those software releases,
> and
> > the same one which issues the secretive and out of process punishments
> > which are causing so much controversy these days.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 08:27, Ziko van Dijk 
> > escreveu:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
> >> enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/
> >>
> >> In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
> >> telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer
> discussing
> >> wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including
> me.
> >> One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
> >> Facebook groups are moderated.
> >>
> >> Kind regards
> >> Ziko
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm getting so many red flags.
> >>>>
> >>>> Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> >>> community
> >>>> involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing
> >> wikis?
> >>>> WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF
> employee?
> >>>> Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> >>>> (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside
> Wikimedia
> >>>> spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> >>> mailing
> >>>> list?
> >>>>
> >>>> Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Yair Rand
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> >>> some CCDs wou

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I also generally discuss what I can offwiki (using a number of channels,
but mainly Telegram) , and leave to onwiki discussions what is strictly
necessary, but it has much more to do with the slowness and lack of
usability of the wiki talk system, than with a toxic environment.

That being said, the wiki talk appears to me as the main bastion protecting
openness in our projects. We may discuss a lot offwiki, but a summary of it
is always presented onwiki and can be challenged by the onwiki community
that do not have an offwiki presence, which is considerably large and an
essential part of the process too.

I understand that some people who have an habit of discussing and arranging
everything offwiki are not prepared to face resistance from the onwiki
communities when their new apparently wonderful and flawless idea is
presented there, but that is truly and essentially part of the process, and
if they are unable to live with that, they should consider refraining to
take part on it, instead of trying to artificially bend a system which was
designed to be onwiki and open to submit itself to offwiki and closed
platforms. I am seeing this kind of discussions and proposals at the
Community Health strategy work group, for instance.

In the case at hand, I would like to understand specifically why the choice
of mounting yet another platform, and a non wiki and closed one, instead of
improving the existing one, wiki and open, at Outreach.

As for the WMF, despite what Amir has said, which possibly refer to
different visions, or even dissidents among WMF staff ranks, at the end of
the day there still is only one WMF, the one directed by the ED and
presided by the BoT, the same one which issues those software releases, and
the same one which issues the secretive and out of process punishments
which are causing so much controversy these days.

Best,
Paulo

A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 08:27, Ziko van Dijk 
escreveu:

> Hello,
>
> Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
> enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/
>
> In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
> telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer discussing
> wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including me.
> One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
> Facebook groups are moderated.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :
>
> > On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm getting so many red flags.
> > >
> > > Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> > community
> > > involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing
> wikis?
> > > WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
> > > Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> > > (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
> > > spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> > mailing
> > > list?
> > >
> > > Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> > >
> > > -- Yair Rand
> > >
> >
> >
> > While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> > some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
> > satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
> > here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
> > from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
> > after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
> > suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
> > doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
> > central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
> > it.
> >
> >
> > So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
> > understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
> > the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-25 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
There seems to be a trend on the part of the WMF, however, both to try to
control onwiki Wikimedia communities (wiki.en current case), and at the
same time divert part of the communities to closed platforms under direct
or indirect WMF control.

I'm also not sure anymore that Wikimedia volunteers and the WMF do share
the same mission. I would like to be, but I'm not.

Best,
Paulo



Amir Sarabadani  escreveu no dia quarta, 26/06/2019
à(s) 00:58:

> I have no comment on Wikimedia Space. IMHO it's too soon to criticize it
> but I want to point out to a pattern that I have been seeing in the past
> couple of months by several people in this very mailing list.
>
> You have been repeating the word "WMF" (four time, for four different
> purposes) and treating it as a big monolith which is far from truth, WMF
> consists of different teams with different focuses, priorities, goals, and
> processes.
>
> This type of comments also increases the tension by promoting concept of
> "volunteer vs. WMF". It's not a war, we have the same mission. Stop
> criticizing a huge organization devoted to support volunteers (which you
> can't deny all of its good deeds, like keeping servers the world-class
> website running while being horribly understaffed, we have only 1% of
> Google's staff) because you disagree with this project or that program.
>
> Criticize projects, criticize actions (which can be valid), but don't be
> like "here we go again, WMF".
>
> I'm a volunteer at night, WMDE staff at day. Right now, it's the volunteer
> hats on.
>
> Best
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, 01:19 Yair Rand  wrote:
>
> > I'm getting so many red flags.
> >
> > Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> community
> > involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing wikis?
> > WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
> > Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> > (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
> > spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> mailing
> > list?
> >
> > Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> >
> > -- Yair Rand
> >
> > ‫בתאריך יום ג׳, 25 ביוני 2019 ב-14:56 מאת ‪Pine W‬‏ <‪
> wiki.p...@gmail.com
> > ‬‏>:‬
> >
> > > Hi Maria,
> > >
> > > Thanks for this update.
> > >
> > > I hope that you can answer a question. I may be mistaken, but my
> > impression
> > > is that the purposes that are outlined for Wikimedia Space are within
> the
> > > intended scopes of the Meta and Outreach wikis, as well as
> Wikimedia-l. I
> > > think that the community would be willing to consider design
> improvements
> > > and additional features for Meta and Outreach, such as calendar and map
> > > tools that are easy to use. Design improvements and additional features
> > > might also be welcome by third parties who use MediaWiki software and
> > could
> > > eventually have the option to implement the changes on their own sites.
> > Can
> > > you explain the decision to launch a new site instead of proposing
> design
> > > improvements and additional features for Meta and Outreach?
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > 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 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] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-21 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Camelia,

My comment was not about harassment, was about systemic and rampant lack of
due process on the part of the WMF.
And it's not drama, it's reality.

Paulo

camelia boban  escreveu no dia sexta, 21/06/2019
à(s) 15:24:

> Oh my Gosh Paulo, can you stop this dramma about yourself and your problem
> with everything is connected with WMF?
>
> To others, please have respect for the both parts engaged in this sad
> story and do what Geert asked, stop discussing about this specific
> conflict publicly.
> If you want to talk more about harassment (in a generic way), then open
> another thread.
>
> Thank you,
> Camelia
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Il giorno ven 21 giu 2019 alle ore 16:05 Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>> False accusation with the respective punishment, that is. If it was just a
>> false accusation I would not care that much about it, though I obviously
>> dislike being falsely accused.
>>
>> Paulo
>>
>> A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 15:01, Paulo Santos Perneta <
>> paulospern...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>>
>> > Hi Robert,
>> >
>> > I believe you will only keep that opinion until the day you would be
>> > subject to a false accusation by the WMF, without even knowing it, and
>> > having no way to defend yourself appeal.
>> >
>> > Everything is easy to talk about and have opinions while it is only
>> > happening to the others. Unfortunately it is not my case, and I know in
>> > first person how flawed the system is.
>> >
>> > Apart from the details of the case described by the OP, the almost total
>> > lack of due process is extremely worrying, especially to those who
>> already
>> > experimented it failing in first hand.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Paulo
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 14:43, Robert Fernandez <
>> > wikigamal...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>> >
>> >> At some point we have to decide who this movement and community is
>> >> for.  Is it for popular individuals to act out in any way they please
>> >> and be awarded maximum freedom and lack of accountability?  Or is it
>> >> so we can insure a friendly space for everyone, including those who
>> >> are not popular, who are not loud voices on community forums, who do
>> >> not want to be harassed or leered at or made uncomfortable?
>> >>
>> >> Everything is a tradeoff, and based on what I've seen I'll take the
>> >> lack of "due process" from trained and responsible professionals over
>> >> the popularity contests of the mob any day.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:56 AM Paulo Santos Perneta
>> >>  wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Taking everything and their dog as "harassment", without due process
>> to
>> >> > verify it, and issuing punishments one can't appeal based on that,
>> >> creates
>> >> > a feeling of fear and insecurity in the events; and provides a tool
>> >> easy to
>> >> > abuse by clever persons who understood how to game the system, as a
>> >> vehicle
>> >> > for severe harassment itself.
>> >> >
>> >> > This creates an unsafe and unfriendly space in the events,and should
>> >> really
>> >> > be looked at.
>> >> >
>> >> > Best,
>> >> > Paulo
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 06:57, Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l <
>> >> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> escreveu:
>> >> >
>> >> > > First of all I don’t know the context of this conversation. I know
>> >> that I
>> >> > > personnally find that the actions of  Trust& Safety  very valuable
>> and
>> >> > > wise. I totally support and trust their judgement.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I am tired of seing their work criticized, and do not appreciate
>> >> official
>> >> > > chapter representants and employees publicly supporting alleged
>> >> offenders,
>> >> > > showing no aknowledgement of the fact that this is very toxic for
>> >> alleged
>> >> > > victims, and does not help to change attitude towards issues of
>> >> >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-21 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
False accusation with the respective punishment, that is. If it was just a
false accusation I would not care that much about it, though I obviously
dislike being falsely accused.

Paulo

A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 15:01, Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com> escreveu:

> Hi Robert,
>
> I believe you will only keep that opinion until the day you would be
> subject to a false accusation by the WMF, without even knowing it, and
> having no way to defend yourself appeal.
>
> Everything is easy to talk about and have opinions while it is only
> happening to the others. Unfortunately it is not my case, and I know in
> first person how flawed the system is.
>
> Apart from the details of the case described by the OP, the almost total
> lack of due process is extremely worrying, especially to those who already
> experimented it failing in first hand.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
>
>
> A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 14:43, Robert Fernandez <
> wikigamal...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>
>> At some point we have to decide who this movement and community is
>> for.  Is it for popular individuals to act out in any way they please
>> and be awarded maximum freedom and lack of accountability?  Or is it
>> so we can insure a friendly space for everyone, including those who
>> are not popular, who are not loud voices on community forums, who do
>> not want to be harassed or leered at or made uncomfortable?
>>
>> Everything is a tradeoff, and based on what I've seen I'll take the
>> lack of "due process" from trained and responsible professionals over
>> the popularity contests of the mob any day.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:56 AM Paulo Santos Perneta
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > Taking everything and their dog as "harassment", without due process to
>> > verify it, and issuing punishments one can't appeal based on that,
>> creates
>> > a feeling of fear and insecurity in the events; and provides a tool
>> easy to
>> > abuse by clever persons who understood how to game the system, as a
>> vehicle
>> > for severe harassment itself.
>> >
>> > This creates an unsafe and unfriendly space in the events,and should
>> really
>> > be looked at.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Paulo
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 06:57, Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l <
>> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> escreveu:
>> >
>> > > First of all I don’t know the context of this conversation. I know
>> that I
>> > > personnally find that the actions of  Trust& Safety  very valuable and
>> > > wise. I totally support and trust their judgement.
>> > >
>> > > I am tired of seing their work criticized, and do not appreciate
>> official
>> > > chapter representants and employees publicly supporting alleged
>> offenders,
>> > > showing no aknowledgement of the fact that this is very toxic for
>> alleged
>> > > victims, and does not help to change attitude towards issues of
>> > > harrassment.
>> > >
>> > > How can we feel safe in the movement if the decisions of T are
>> > > questionned by official members of our movement?
>> > >
>> > > Nattes à chat
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le 21 juin 2019 à 01:04, Chris Keating  a
>> > > écrit :
>> > >
>> > > >>
>> > > >> It is extremely disappointing, and *extremely typical* of the
>> Wikimedia
>> > > >> movement, to see an entire thread like this dedicated to supporting
>> > > someone
>> > > >> who Trust & Safety has found to have acted in such a way that they
>> had
>> > > to
>> > > >> intervene. It is even more disappointing to see a person who was
>> > > affected
>> > > >> by his actions told "this is not your story" and "it may help you
>> when
>> > > you
>> > > >> grow some sensitivity and respect this experience, the
>> > > >> feelings of others."
>> > > >>
>> > > >> If you're wondering why women leave the Wikimedia movement, and why
>> > > >> Wikimedia has such a bad harassment problem in general, just
>> reflect on
>> > > >> this thread.
>> > > >
>> > > &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-21 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Robert,

I believe you will only keep that opinion until the day you would be
subject to a false accusation by the WMF, without even knowing it, and
having no way to defend yourself appeal.

Everything is easy to talk about and have opinions while it is only
happening to the others. Unfortunately it is not my case, and I know in
first person how flawed the system is.

Apart from the details of the case described by the OP, the almost total
lack of due process is extremely worrying, especially to those who already
experimented it failing in first hand.

Best,
Paulo



A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 14:43, Robert Fernandez 
escreveu:

> At some point we have to decide who this movement and community is
> for.  Is it for popular individuals to act out in any way they please
> and be awarded maximum freedom and lack of accountability?  Or is it
> so we can insure a friendly space for everyone, including those who
> are not popular, who are not loud voices on community forums, who do
> not want to be harassed or leered at or made uncomfortable?
>
> Everything is a tradeoff, and based on what I've seen I'll take the
> lack of "due process" from trained and responsible professionals over
> the popularity contests of the mob any day.
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:56 AM Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
> >
> > Taking everything and their dog as "harassment", without due process to
> > verify it, and issuing punishments one can't appeal based on that,
> creates
> > a feeling of fear and insecurity in the events; and provides a tool easy
> to
> > abuse by clever persons who understood how to game the system, as a
> vehicle
> > for severe harassment itself.
> >
> > This creates an unsafe and unfriendly space in the events,and should
> really
> > be looked at.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 06:57, Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l <
> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> escreveu:
> >
> > > First of all I don’t know the context of this conversation. I know
> that I
> > > personnally find that the actions of  Trust& Safety  very valuable and
> > > wise. I totally support and trust their judgement.
> > >
> > > I am tired of seing their work criticized, and do not appreciate
> official
> > > chapter representants and employees publicly supporting alleged
> offenders,
> > > showing no aknowledgement of the fact that this is very toxic for
> alleged
> > > victims, and does not help to change attitude towards issues of
> > > harrassment.
> > >
> > > How can we feel safe in the movement if the decisions of T are
> > > questionned by official members of our movement?
> > >
> > > Nattes à chat
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le 21 juin 2019 à 01:04, Chris Keating  a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > >>
> > > >> It is extremely disappointing, and *extremely typical* of the
> Wikimedia
> > > >> movement, to see an entire thread like this dedicated to supporting
> > > someone
> > > >> who Trust & Safety has found to have acted in such a way that they
> had
> > > to
> > > >> intervene. It is even more disappointing to see a person who was
> > > affected
> > > >> by his actions told "this is not your story" and "it may help you
> when
> > > you
> > > >> grow some sensitivity and respect this experience, the
> > > >> feelings of others."
> > > >>
> > > >> If you're wondering why women leave the Wikimedia movement, and why
> > > >> Wikimedia has such a bad harassment problem in general, just
> reflect on
> > > >> this thread.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you, Molly, for expressing what I was just trying to summon the
> > > > energy to write.
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > > ___
> > > > 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] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-21 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Taking everything and their dog as "harassment", without due process to
verify it, and issuing punishments one can't appeal based on that, creates
a feeling of fear and insecurity in the events; and provides a tool easy to
abuse by clever persons who understood how to game the system, as a vehicle
for severe harassment itself.

This creates an unsafe and unfriendly space in the events,and should really
be looked at.

Best,
Paulo





A sexta, 21 de jun de 2019, 06:57, Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> escreveu:

> First of all I don’t know the context of this conversation. I know that I
> personnally find that the actions of  Trust& Safety  very valuable and
> wise. I totally support and trust their judgement.
>
> I am tired of seing their work criticized, and do not appreciate official
> chapter representants and employees publicly supporting alleged offenders,
> showing no aknowledgement of the fact that this is very toxic for alleged
> victims, and does not help to change attitude towards issues of
> harrassment.
>
> How can we feel safe in the movement if the decisions of T are
> questionned by official members of our movement?
>
> Nattes à chat
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 21 juin 2019 à 01:04, Chris Keating  a
> écrit :
>
> >>
> >> It is extremely disappointing, and *extremely typical* of the Wikimedia
> >> movement, to see an entire thread like this dedicated to supporting
> someone
> >> who Trust & Safety has found to have acted in such a way that they had
> to
> >> intervene. It is even more disappointing to see a person who was
> affected
> >> by his actions told "this is not your story" and "it may help you when
> you
> >> grow some sensitivity and respect this experience, the
> >> feelings of others."
> >>
> >> If you're wondering why women leave the Wikimedia movement, and why
> >> Wikimedia has such a bad harassment problem in general, just reflect on
> >> this thread.
> >
> >
> > Thank you, Molly, for expressing what I was just trying to summon the
> > energy to write.
> >
> > Chris
> > ___
> > 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] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-20 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I am very sad and depressed with this outcome, especially with someone as
Romaine, which I am quite lucky to know personally.

And it is very true that now one has to have eyes in their back and be
extra careful when going to WMF run events, as the risk of abuse of T is
quite real.

Dangerous times.

Paulo

Romaine Wiki  escreveu no dia quinta, 20/06/2019
à(s) 12:15:

>  Dear community,
>
> First I need to mention that the message I sent a few days ago had too
> limited information regarding the context of the message. The e-mail was
> written by me personally alone, written from my perspective. The email
> contained an overview what has happened, written based on e-mails and
> eyewitnesses. So if anyone would say it is not true, please add {{Citation
> needed}} to that person's saying.
>
>
>
>
> About a month ago I have decided that I will indefinitely no longer attend
> any WMF funded events as result of bullying, attempts to silence me,
> intimidation and treats against me. This has resulted in that I feel
> extremely unsafe as the result of the behaviour of only a few individuals.
>
> This has lead that since the start of this occurring about 18 months ago I
> have been over a dozen of times very ill, while I was in the 10 years
> before only twice that ill.
>
> I see no indication that the issues addressed are taken seriously, so I see
> no safe space for me to be present. In my childhood I was bullied for being
> different, I am not interested in a second episode now.
>
>
>
>
> From my parents I have learned to lend others always a helping hand where I
> can. As such I was happy to be able to help the organisers of various
> conferences and I always tried to make it a comfortable place for everyone.
>
> To my regret I have been informed that some people have indicated that I
> have given them an unpleasant feeling. You must know that I never ever had
> such intention (also still largely unsure what of me has given you this
> emotion) and I am feeling bad that I gave you such feeling. My apologies!
>
>
> Some people have indicated with last year's conference that they had an
> impression of me while I never ever had intended as such. In the past
> period I have been thinking about it what would make some people think that
> I gave that impression. This includes that some people think that I was
> flirting or something with other people, while I actually had no interest
> in the other.
>
> I suspect it might have something to do that I almost never really
> introduced myself as I always thought that widely diverse people in our
> movement would respect me in my diversity.
>
>
> Perhaps it is good to create some clarity. Traditionally looking, I
> understand people expect me as "man" to fall on women, but I do not fall on
> the women present at the conferences, as well as that I have a different
> gender identification. In other words: LGBT+   Also I am autistic, having
> aspergers, having sensory overloads, being claustrophobic, having a hearing
> problem, avoiding touching, having an eidetic memory (photographic memory),
> etc, being divergent in comparison to many others, I am feeling a bit
> socially clumsy.
>
> The first 8 years in the wiki world I was not feeling safe to meet anyone.
> In 2011 I visited the first wiki event when Wikipedia celebrated its 10th
> birthday. I felt more and more safe and joined more events. You might have
> seen me with my large enthusiasm as I feel by providing knowledge to the
> world, we make the world a better place for anyone. Now 8 years later I am
> leaving as I am not feeling safe again.
>
> But please, do not get me wrong. I live in a country that would probably
> win the world championships in complaining. I believe everyone has the
> right to complain, as that I see as part of the basic rights of freedom of
> expression and thought. It matters however what happens next with
> complaints. Every complaint should be judged by independent individuals,
> with impartiality, without also any *appearance* of partiality, with taking
> into account *all* information, with care and respect to all individuals
> involved. (etc) Also anyone has the right to defend themselves against
> allegations *before* conclusions are drawn and before decisions are made.
> Among other things, three times a conclusion was drawn without talking with
> me, with as excuse "we know how he thinks", sorry, but that is a heavy
> insult to me.
>
> Behind the scenes I have been trying to address the issues with dialogues,
> as well as various other people, who have indicated their concerns, offered
> help, offered (actual) solutions, tried to intermediate, etc etc, zero
> results, zero self reflection.
>
> There is a limit of what a human being can bear, my limit is here.
>
>
>
> In the world, people have been discriminated for their religion, political
> beliefs, the colour of their skin, because of their gender, because of a
> different gender identity, how they look like, ..., or just 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi Dariusz,

I understand Caroline wanted to add that she was finding difficult that
Romain was not aware of her stress or unease on a specific situation
vaguely described there (without any mention to her at all). And that later
they have talked about it, and she accepted his apologies for that in
private. I can't find the least evidence of her being forced to step up and
expose herself just to clarify that there. As far as I know, it never was
in question that some people felt uneasy with some behavior there. They
talked about it, apologies were presented, end of story. Or would have been
end of story, if not for the T interference.

Paulo



Dariusz Jemielniak  escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019
à(s) 16:04:

> Hi Paulo,
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:54 PM Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> " I'm referring to message from Caroline" - How have you jumped from
> Caroline wanting to further clarify something, to the conclusion that the
> OP was  "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward"?
>
> I'm specifically referring to this sentence " I really do not appreciate
> having this particular incident discussed here and being forced to step up
> like that."
>
> Yes, she claims to have been "forced to step up", but were you able to
> find any evidence for that in the OP? Any accusation is automatically true?
>
> I believe that the person who voluntarily identified herself as the one
> requesting T support is not randomly lying about that. I don't think it
> was an accusation, it was an expression of the personal urge to set the
> record straight.
>
> Again, please note that I'm not referring to what did or did not happen a
> year ago. I've been trying to express my frustration with discussing
> personal details and stories on a public list. I've clearly failed.
>
> best,
>
> dj
>
>
> ___
> 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] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" I'm referring to message from Caroline" - How have you jumped from
Caroline wanting to further clarify something, to the conclusion that the
OP was  "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward"?
Yes, she claims to have been "forced to step up", but were you able to find
any evidence for that in the OP? Any accusation is automatically true?

Paulo

Dariusz Jemielniak  escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019
à(s) 15:48:

>
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:26 PM Michel Vuijlsteke  <mailto:wikipe...@zog.org>> wrote:
> In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a
> rumour about them?
>
> My understanding is that noone was banned from an event.
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:28 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com<mailto:paulospern...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I've read and reread the WMBE message, and have not found anything near
> "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward".
>
> I'm referring to message from Caroline.
>
>
> I also do not understand why you're addressing WMBE as "Romaine" (begging
> the question?).
>
> Can you please clarify?
>
> The message was sent from romaine.w...@gmail.com romaine.w...@gmail.com> account and I assumed that addressing the sender
> as "Romaine" is appropriate.
>
> best,
>
> dj
> ___
> 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] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I'm comparing it to a case where spreading of rumors led to the
condemnation of presumably innocent people without due process, in a kind
of "precautionary principle".
The punishment in question is immaterial to this case. Or will you argue
that an episode is only worth of attention if people are killed or
physically hurt?

Paulo

Amir Sarabadani  escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019
à(s) 15:36:

> Are you comparing banning someone to participate at conference(s) with
> hanging innocent people?
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:34 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > " In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a
> > rumour about them" - that's Wikimedia version of the Salem witch trials.
> > Unbelievable that this sort of thing is coming from one of the WMF
> > trustees, even as a personal opinion.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Michel Vuijlsteke  escreveu no dia segunda,
> 17/06/2019
> > à(s) 15:26:
> >
> > > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 16:12, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> > > wrote:
> > > >If there are rumors about physical violence, unbelievable as they may
> > > seem,
> > > >the bottom line common sense is to approach the alleged would-be
> > attacker
> > > and
> > > >request politely that they stay away, to deescalate even just a
> > > potentially tense situation.
> > >
> > > In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a
> > > rumour about them?
> > >
> > > >I personally believe this fork of the discussion threat deserves a
> quick
> > > EOT and salting.
> > >
> > > I personally don't.
> > >
> > > Michel
> > > ___
> > > 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>
>
>
>
> --
> 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,
> <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] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
" In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a
rumour about them" - that's Wikimedia version of the Salem witch trials.
Unbelievable that this sort of thing is coming from one of the WMF
trustees, even as a personal opinion.

Paulo

Michel Vuijlsteke  escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019
à(s) 15:26:

> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 16:12, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> wrote:
> >If there are rumors about physical violence, unbelievable as they may
> seem,
> >the bottom line common sense is to approach the alleged would-be attacker
> and
> >request politely that they stay away, to deescalate even just a
> potentially tense situation.
>
> In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a
> rumour about them?
>
> >I personally believe this fork of the discussion threat deserves a quick
> EOT and salting.
>
> I personally don't.
>
> Michel
> ___
> 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 board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Dariusz,

I've read and reread the WMBE message, and have not found anything near
"pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward".
I also do not understand why you're addressing WMBE as "Romaine" (begging
the question?).

Can you please clarify?

Paulo

Dariusz Jemielniak  escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019
à(s) 15:12:

> whoa!
>
> pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward is not ok
> at all. I do not honestly understand why the story from nearly a year ago
> has emerged, with personal details.
>
> It is not unusual for people who caused distress to not have done it
> intentionally, and to genuinely believe they did nothing wrong. It is
> nevertheless the role of the safety team to react to any reports they
> receive.
>
> Romaine, you're describing "a rumor that WMBE's treasurer was planning to
> attack that grants person" and are surprised that the safety team acted
> upon this rumor. I hope it is clear that they did exactly what they should
> have done. If there are rumors about physical violence, unbelievable as
> they may seem, the bottom line common sense is to approach the alleged
> would-be attacker and request politely that they stay away, to deescalate
> even just a potentially tense situation.
>
> I personally believe this fork of the discussion threat deserves a quick
> EOT and salting.
>
> Dariusz "pundit" (replying in my absolutely personal, and hastily
> expressed opinion)
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
What is that "strategic direction", and where was it agreed?

Paulo

Peter Southwood  escreveu no dia segunda,
17/06/2019 à(s) 08:20:

> " Previously a strategic direction has been agreed."
> Not by that many. It is so vague that it can be interpreted to mean
> whatever the WMF want it to mean and used as a justification for a wide
> range of policies and actions that were not obviously specifically
> discussed. This was mentioned at the time and we were told that this would
> not happen. Maybe it is already happening.
> Cheers,
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Ad Huikeshoven
> Sent: 16 June 2019 23:03
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities
>
> We are in a turbulent episode on this mailing list and en.wp. I don't claim
> to speak for the community. I wish everybody can speak for themselves.
>
> Some people don't like the Wikimedia Foundation stepping in and banning an
> user for a specific project for a year. Most people don't react, while some
> are vocal.
>
> Some people comment on a more general level than this specific case. That
> can be separated from the case. There is an ongoing strategy discussion on
> meta and elsewhere about Wikimedia 2030.
>
> There are working groups for Community Health. There are working groups for
> Roles and Responsibilities in the movement. They do ask for input. People
> who want to influence the roles and responsibilities of project communities
> versus for example the Wikimedia Foundation board and paid staff, go ahead,
> and find your way to participate.[1] Or just fill out the survey.[2]
>
> Previously a strategic direction has been agreed. Something with diversity,
> inclusion and something about underrepresented voices, and communities that
> have been left out by structures of power and privilege. It goes as far as
> "We will break down the social, political, and technical barriers
> preventing people from accessing and contributing to free knowledge."
>
> 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.
>
> The Community Health group guiding questions inter alia are "How can we
> ensure that our communities are places that people want to be part of and
> participate in, and how can we make people stay? How do we engage and
> support people that have been left out by structures of power and
> privilege?"
>
> Those last two questions are interesting questions. I'ḿ curious to learn
> answers from people who strongly oppose interventions by WMF staff. and
> from others as well.
>
> I'm looking forward to have conversations about the recommendations of the
> working groups in the Wikimedia 2030 process at Wikimania Stockholm. I hope
> to see a lot of you there.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Ad Huikeshoven
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Participate
> [2] https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_d718KRfJ5W3OVYV
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.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, 


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

2019-06-16 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
How is banning an user for 1 year for secrete reasons a "bold step"?
What's the educative value of it? How does it advance any of those
strategic objectives you mention there?

Paulo

Ad Huikeshoven  escreveu no dia domingo, 16/06/2019
à(s) 22:03:

> We are in a turbulent episode on this mailing list and en.wp. I don't claim
> to speak for the community. I wish everybody can speak for themselves.
>
> Some people don't like the Wikimedia Foundation stepping in and banning an
> user for a specific project for a year. Most people don't react, while some
> are vocal.
>
> Some people comment on a more general level than this specific case. That
> can be separated from the case. There is an ongoing strategy discussion on
> meta and elsewhere about Wikimedia 2030.
>
> There are working groups for Community Health. There are working groups for
> Roles and Responsibilities in the movement. They do ask for input. People
> who want to influence the roles and responsibilities of project communities
> versus for example the Wikimedia Foundation board and paid staff, go ahead,
> and find your way to participate.[1] Or just fill out the survey.[2]
>
> Previously a strategic direction has been agreed. Something with diversity,
> inclusion and something about underrepresented voices, and communities that
> have been left out by structures of power and privilege. It goes as far as
> "We will break down the social, political, and technical barriers
> preventing people from accessing and contributing to free knowledge."
>
> 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.
>
> The Community Health group guiding questions inter alia are "How can we
> ensure that our communities are places that people want to be part of and
> participate in, and how can we make people stay? How do we engage and
> support people that have been left out by structures of power and
> privilege?"
>
> Those last two questions are interesting questions. I'ḿ curious to learn
> answers from people who strongly oppose interventions by WMF staff. and
> from others as well.
>
> I'm looking forward to have conversations about the recommendations of the
> working groups in the Wikimedia 2030 process at Wikimania Stockholm. I hope
> to see a lot of you there.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Ad Huikeshoven
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Participate
> [2] https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_d718KRfJ5W3OVYV
> ___
> 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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
"someone getting banned from a website over bad conduct issue" - Since the
WMF has not clarified what that "bad conduct" has been, I wonder what was
the educative value of that. Seems to have been only purely disruptive, and
opened the door for all kinds of assumptions, and offwiki harassment of all
"guilty parts" of anyone's choice.

Of the parts purportedly involved in this: One editor banned for one year,
another editor not contributing to the project since the scandal began; and
the Wikimedia flagship project in severe disruption - that's what this
absolutely disastrous WMF intervention managed to achieve.

And "secret trials punishing people who don't even know they're being
accused, not of what they are being accused" is not hyperbole, is fact. And
I don't need this recent issue with Fram to state that. I've personally
dealt with at least two situations which were factually that.

Best,
Paulo

Dan Rosenthal  escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019
à(s) 20:32:

> I didn't put my words in your mouth -- I quoted your own words precisely,
> and the implication you were trying to make is obvious; so respectfully,
> please refrain from gaslighting here. I simply suggested dropping the
> hyperbole of  "star chambers and kangaroo courts", "secret trials punishing
> people who don't know they're being accused' and "very basic principle[s]
> of Human Rights and dignity" over someone getting banned from a website
> over bad conduct issues.  You need not reply -- I'm done with this portion
> of the conversation.
>
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have never said that this is a human rights violation, so please don't
> > put your words on my mouth.
> >
> > I have said that the general principles of equality, right to fair trial,
> > not having ones honor damaged by baseless accusations, etc. which are
> > present at the UDHR are being forgotten here.
> >
> > Of course you may argue that since the WMF is a private organization,
> they
> > are free to engage in this kind of secret trials, star chambers and
> > kangaroo courts at will. As others already stated, the matter here is not
> > if they can, but if they should be engaging on those schemes, as they are
> > now.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> >
> > A sábado, 15 de jun de 2019, 18:39, Dan Rosenthal 
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > There is no "very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity" to be
> free
> > > from the presumption of guilt by others.  You may be confusing Article
> 11
> > > of the UHDR, but this applies explicitly only to "penal offenses."
> > Unless
> > > Fram is getting locked up in prison for his actions, let's drop the
> > absurd
> > > hyperbole that this is somehow a human rights violation.
> > >
> > >
> > > Dan Rosenthal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 11:35 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > People shouldn't be going with any random option, but rather presume
> > the
> > > > innocence of others unless guilt is proven by some legit process.
> > > > It seems that this very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity
> is
> > > > being forgotten.
> > > > There is not the least appearance of due process happening there, but
> > > that
> > > > has not stopped people from finding themselves their guilty part of
> > > > election, using their own bias to evaluate the case.
> > > > Including some Wikipedia related social network accounts that should
> be
> > > > acting more responsible and wiser than joining the rabble in the
> > offwiki
> > > > harassment of their guilty part of choice.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Paulo
> > > >
> > > > geni  escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019 à(s)
> > 17:15:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 00:04, David Gerard 
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even
> > plausible,
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What you are calling Fram's framing appears to be a the WMF's
> version
> > > > > of events as told to fram. The WMF does look slightly better if you
> > > > > remember that T arw trying to improve behaviour through threat of
> > > > > blocks not file a diff heavy arbcom case.
&g

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

2019-06-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I have never said that this is a human rights violation, so please don't
put your words on my mouth.

I have said that the general principles of equality, right to fair trial,
not having ones honor damaged by baseless accusations, etc. which are
present at the UDHR are being forgotten here.

Of course you may argue that since the WMF is a private organization, they
are free to engage in this kind of secret trials, star chambers and
kangaroo courts at will. As others already stated, the matter here is not
if they can, but if they should be engaging on those schemes, as they are
now.

Best,
Paulo



A sábado, 15 de jun de 2019, 18:39, Dan Rosenthal 
escreveu:

> There is no "very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity" to be free
> from the presumption of guilt by others.  You may be confusing Article 11
> of the UHDR, but this applies explicitly only to "penal offenses."  Unless
> Fram is getting locked up in prison for his actions, let's drop the absurd
> hyperbole that this is somehow a human rights violation.
>
>
> Dan Rosenthal
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 11:35 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > People shouldn't be going with any random option, but rather presume the
> > innocence of others unless guilt is proven by some legit process.
> > It seems that this very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity is
> > being forgotten.
> > There is not the least appearance of due process happening there, but
> that
> > has not stopped people from finding themselves their guilty part of
> > election, using their own bias to evaluate the case.
> > Including some Wikipedia related social network accounts that should be
> > acting more responsible and wiser than joining the rabble in the offwiki
> > harassment of their guilty part of choice.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > geni  escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019 à(s) 17:15:
> >
> > > On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 00:04, David Gerard  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> > > >
> > >
> > > What you are calling Fram's framing appears to be a the WMF's version
> > > of events as told to fram. The WMF does look slightly better if you
> > > remember that T arw trying to improve behaviour through threat of
> > > blocks not file a diff heavy arbcom case.
> > >
> > >
> > >  >let alone the story
> > >
> > > Given that the other versions of "the story" are T's PR waffle or
> > > conspiracy theories it understandable that people are going to go with
> > > the option that at least gives them something to work from.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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>
> ___
> 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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
People shouldn't be going with any random option, but rather presume the
innocence of others unless guilt is proven by some legit process.
It seems that this very basic principle of Human Rights and dignity is
being forgotten.
There is not the least appearance of due process happening there, but that
has not stopped people from finding themselves their guilty part of
election, using their own bias to evaluate the case.
Including some Wikipedia related social network accounts that should be
acting more responsible and wiser than joining the rabble in the offwiki
harassment of their guilty part of choice.

Best,
Paulo

geni  escreveu no dia sábado, 15/06/2019 à(s) 17:15:

> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 00:04, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> >
>
> What you are calling Fram's framing appears to be a the WMF's version
> of events as told to fram. The WMF does look slightly better if you
> remember that T arw trying to improve behaviour through threat of
> blocks not file a diff heavy arbcom case.
>
>
>  >let alone the story
>
> Given that the other versions of "the story" are T's PR waffle or
> conspiracy theories it understandable that people are going to go with
> the option that at least gives them something to work from.
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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,
> 
___
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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-15 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Both systems are horrible. Secret trials punishing people who don't even
know they are being accused, and of what they are being accused, without
any chance to appeal afterwards, are nothing short of horrible and
inhumane. That, yes, is plain harassment against the victims of those
secret trials.

As far as I know, Arbcom is not doing that, but the WMF is.

Paulo


A sábado, 15 de jun de 2019, 15:37, Robert Fernandez 
escreveu:

> Far better that editors deal with unfairness from secret proceedings
> by untrained and unqualified volunteers of varying degrees of
> incompetence elected in a popularity contest.
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:32 PM David Goodman  wrote:
> >  the probability of unfairness from secret proceeding by
> > anonymous paid staff is by far the worse, and I see it as in direct
> > opposition to the principles underlying the entire wikipedia effort.
>
> ___
> 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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-14 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
At this point, it certainly looks like that. That, and the "f*** Arbcom"
thing. If you know otherwise, please explain.

Paulo

David Gerard  escreveu no dia sexta, 14/06/2019 à(s)
11:37:

> and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for
> doing only what you describe?
>
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:32, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> > The only case of "harassment" apparently cited here was "I kept writing
> > garbage articles, and someone kept flagging them as garbage! Harassment!
> > Bad!"
> >
> > If you don't want your articles to be flagged as garbage, FIND YOUR
> SOURCES
> > PRIOR TO WRITING THEM, AND CITE THEM. That's rather a requirement anyway.
> > The editor in question repeatedly failed to do that, repeatedly had her
> > articles flagged for failure to do that, and regarded that as
> "harassment"
> > rather than her own failure to follow the English Wikipedia's policies.
> > Next time, she needs to find the sources first, and write the article
> only
> > after she has them in hand.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:14 AM Robert Fernandez <
> wikigamal...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If someone is able to harass someone for years and nothing is done then
> > > clearly community procedures are not “perfectly adequate”
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 11:36 AM Fæ  wrote:
> > >
> > > > This misses the point, as others have highlighted already.
> > > >
> > > > The WMF can and /should/ globally and permanently ban paedophiles,
> > > > terrorists, system hackers and people making multiple cross-wiki
> death
> > > > threats or threats of suicide. There are perfectly good and
> > > > understandable reasons as to why the evidence behind these attacks
> and
> > > > threats would be kept unpublished, it's seriously personal or
> criminal
> > > > stuff.
> > > >
> > > > The WMF making topic bans, interaction bans and limited project
> > > > specific bans against Wikipedians is a brand new invention, which
> goes
> > > > against the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > > > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > > > banning bad behaviour on our projects. Once full time WMF employees
> > > > start doing in parallel what volunteer administrators already do,
> then
> > > > we should question why we do not *pay* volunteers administrators the
> > > > same hourly rate and we are likely to see a mass exodus of
> > > > administrators. After all, would you, say, deliver the post for free
> > > > in your area for fun, but thereby take away decent full time
> > > > employment with a guaranteed pension for your local postie?
> > > >
> > > > If the reason for the WMF stepping in to ban Fram for a year is
> > > > because the WMF do not trust Wikipedia administrators or Wikipedia's
> > > > Arbcom to take sensible action in harassment cases, then they should
> > > > be raising that honestly and openly with Arbcom. If the English
> > > > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > > > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion than whether
> > > > Fram did something so terrible it cannot be named, but oddly was not
> > > > worth a global ban but only the equivalent of a 12 month block on
> > > > Wikipedia while they are free to do whatever they feel like on other
> > > > Wikimedia projects.
> > > >
> > > > Fae
> > > > --
> > > > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 15:35, John Erling Blad 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > When you bad mouth other users there should be, and will be,
> > > > consequences.
> > > > > An admin got desysoped and banned after repeated warnings? So
> what? The
> > > > > only ting to be learned is that some people believe they can do
> > > whatever
> > > > > they want and it has no consequences, and other people goes
> ballistic
> > > > when
> > > > > consequences happen.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would have given desysoped fram and 14 days to cool off, and if
> that
> > > > did
> > > > > not work out repeated with one month. Banning someone for one year
> is
> > > > like
> > > > > telling them to leave and don't come back. Someone at WMF is
> clearly
> > > > overly
> > > > > sensitive, but not reacting would also be wrong.
> > > > > ___
> > > > > 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: 

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

2019-06-14 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
olvement from WMF, although we might want to ask WMF for technical
> support if needed for a system that we design or agree to implement.
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
> P.S. I need to stop posting in this thread so that I do not exceed my limit
> of Wikimedia-l posts for the month, but my silence does not indicate lack
> of interest.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 16:24 Paulo Santos Perneta 
> wrote:
>
> > No idea what could be the relation with GamerGate and the current issue
> > onwiki at wiki en. Would you care to elaborate?
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 19:53, David Gerard 
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > I think the problem is that the pathological people, having been
> > > called out on being pathological, decided to double down on the
> > > original complainant. See also: Gamergate, a clearly apt and apposite
> > > comparison.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 19:48, Pine W  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm sad to hear that. I would not want a victim to go with a request
> > for
> > > > help to WMF, local functionaries, an arbitration committee, or anyone
> > > else,
> > > > and have the situation end up worse rather than better. I don't know
> > what
> > > > to recommend. Perhaps you could ask the stewards what they think.
> > > >
> > > > I am also sad to hear about the difficulties regarding the situation
> in
> > > > which you think that someone was at risk of self-harm. I think that
> the
> > > > situation you described is probably appropriate for review by the
> > > > management of WMF Trust and Safety so that they can take a second
> > look. I
> > > > encourage you to contact them.
> > > >
> > > > I am finding this conversation to be rather depressing, but I am glad
> > > that
> > > > we are having it, because this is one way of developing solutions.
> > > >
> > > > 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,
> > > <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>
___
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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-13 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
No idea what could be the relation with GamerGate and the current issue
onwiki at wiki en. Would you care to elaborate?

Paulo

A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 19:53, David Gerard 
escreveu:

> I think the problem is that the pathological people, having been
> called out on being pathological, decided to double down on the
> original complainant. See also: Gamergate, a clearly apt and apposite
> comparison.
>
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 19:48, Pine W  wrote:
> >
> > I'm sad to hear that. I would not want a victim to go with a request for
> > help to WMF, local functionaries, an arbitration committee, or anyone
> else,
> > and have the situation end up worse rather than better. I don't know what
> > to recommend. Perhaps you could ask the stewards what they think.
> >
> > I am also sad to hear about the difficulties regarding the situation in
> > which you think that someone was at risk of self-harm. I think that the
> > situation you described is probably appropriate for review by the
> > management of WMF Trust and Safety so that they can take a second look. I
> > encourage you to contact them.
> >
> > I am finding this conversation to be rather depressing, but I am glad
> that
> > we are having it, because this is one way of developing solutions.
> >
> > 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, 


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

2019-06-13 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The inapposite and totally inapt intervention of the WMF, a la bull in a
china shop, caused a Streisand effect on the alleged harassment that is
stated to have take place. I do not knew the editor which has been pointed
as the source of the denounce, or if she has made any denounce at all, but
I certainly would not want to be in her shoes right now. She seems to have
become the target of secere harassment off wiki, and at minimum a lot of
pressure on wiki. She completely stopped editing since this case began. If
the idea was to combat and prevent harassment, I must say WMF has failed
completely and miserably, on all accounts. And God save me of being
"protected" this way, if I ever find myself in a situation that I have to
appeal to the WMF for protection.

I absolutely agree that something has to be done to fight onwiki
harassment, including this kind of picking some victim and going after all
their editions tagging, reverting, copyediting, so that the person feels
constantly under vigilance. I personally know of a case very much like this
at the Portuguese Wikipedia happening right now, and going on for years,
also with a woman as a victim of victim . The community systematically
tolerates and protects the harassers (a group of 3 or 4 "umblockables") ,
and stops short of banning the victim. She constantly contacts me and other
editors asking for help, and I sincerely don't know what to do. Last time I
and others requested the intervention of the WMF (T) at Wikipedia, in a
rampage of cases of harassment and even blackmail, the result was
absolutely disastrous, with public exposure of the victims, destruction of
the editors involved in denouncing the situation, and an actual empowerment
of the aggressors.

I do not know what the solution is, and I really would like to know to
where one could appeal on such situation. WMF does not seem to be a good
option, as they have a solid record of making the problem way worse than
what it already is.

I also would like to know what means to T "risk of harm to himself", as
the last time a fellow editor confidenced to me they were about to kill
themselves, I felt completely lost with the answer I have received from the
official T account, and ended up dealing with the situation myself the
best I could. Fortunately the person is alive.

Paulo



A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 17:27, Bence Damokos 
escreveu:

> I think it is important that the WMF is taking the question of harassment
> seriously.
> If the community processes are not adequate, it is not an incorrect
> response to take direct action to protect the individuals that are being
> harassed. Ideally, community processes should be improved and WMF can give
> a hint, but it would be too much to expect the victim to continue to be
> harassed while the long discussion around changing community processes
> takes place.
>
> As I understand, community health is an important element of the on-going
> strategy work and WMF has repeatedly drawn attention to solving the issue
> of harassment on wiki[1], so it is not like they have not told the
> communities that this is an issue that should be dealt with or that the
> community discussions needed to empower the communities to do so are not
> happening at all.
>
> Best regards,
> Bence
>
> [1] https://blog.wikimedia.org/tag/harassment/
>
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 17:36, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > This misses the point, as others have highlighted already.
> >
> > The WMF can and /should/ globally and permanently ban paedophiles,
> > terrorists, system hackers and people making multiple cross-wiki death
> > threats or threats of suicide. There are perfectly good and
> > understandable reasons as to why the evidence behind these attacks and
> > threats would be kept unpublished, it's seriously personal or criminal
> > stuff.
> >
> > The WMF making topic bans, interaction bans and limited project
> > specific bans against Wikipedians is a brand new invention, which goes
> > against the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > banning bad behaviour on our projects. Once full time WMF employees
> > start doing in parallel what volunteer administrators already do, then
> > we should question why we do not *pay* volunteers administrators the
> > same hourly rate and we are likely to see a mass exodus of
> > administrators. After all, would you, say, deliver the post for free
> > in your area for fun, but thereby take away decent full time
> > employment with a guaranteed pension for your local postie?
> >
> > If the reason for the WMF stepping in to ban Fram for a year is
> > because the WMF do not trust Wikipedia administrators or Wikipedia's
> > Arbcom to take sensible action in harassment cases, then they should
> > be raising that honestly and openly with Arbcom. If the English
> > Wikipedia's policies are not fit for purpose, or implementation of
> > policy is incompetent, we need a much bigger discussion 

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

2019-06-13 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I do not doubt that, but dismissing the current issue of project autonomy
as GamerGate stuff without providing any evidence to support it does not
seem helpful at all.

Paulo

A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 13:10, Robert Fernandez 
escreveu:

> A number of people in our community literally are Gamergaters,
> including editors with tools.
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 3:15 AM Chris Keating
>  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:48 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate
> kind
> > > of stuff, what was she expecting, really.
> > >
> > >
> > Maybe she was expecting people to read what she actually said, and engage
> > with it, rather than twist her words so they're easy to dismiss?
> >
> > Maybe she was hoping people might think about whether there WAS some
> sexist
> > harrassment happening, and whether parts of our community were actually
> > behaving a bit like Gamergaters?
> > ___
> > 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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-13 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
What is the point of addressing and lecturing an onwiki community about
harassment happening offwiki, and then using that to imply all happening on
that situation onwiki was about sexism and GamerGate stuff?

Really, going into an already very escalated situation and making such
baseless and inflammatory comments does not seem like the wisest thing to
do.

Paulo

A quinta, 13 de jun de 2019, 08:15, Chris Keating <
chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> escreveu:

> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:48 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate
> kind
> > of stuff, what was she expecting, really.
> >
> >
> Maybe she was expecting people to read what she actually said, and engage
> with it, rather than twist her words so they're easy to dismiss?
>
> Maybe she was hoping people might think about whether there WAS some sexist
> harrassment happening, and whether parts of our community were actually
> behaving a bit like Gamergaters?
> ___
> 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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-12 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Going there dismissing the whole issue as a sexist mob doing GamerGate kind
of stuff, what was she expecting, really.

Paulo

A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 22:39, Chris Keating <
chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> escreveu:

> >
> > So, pretty much every discussion is decided by those who choose to
> > participate in it. I don't know any way around that; we can't force
> people
> > to participate. At some point, if you don't stick your hand up, you don't
> > get counted.
> >
> >
> Well, Maria Sefidari (Raystorm) showed up and ended up being faced with a
> torrent of abuse.
>
> If you don't stick your hand up, your views are invalid. If you do stick
> your hand up, people will shout at you about how invalid your views are.
> Particularly if you're a woman.
>
> I don't know what lesson we're all supposed to draw from this
> ___
> 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] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

2019-06-12 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
The board does not even has a proper contact or way to get to them. Only
way seems to try to reach the few members of the board who disclosed their
personal emails. And even if we manage to reach them, it is not an appeal
in the least, as it continues not following any proper procedure, and is
entirely dependent on the good will of the particular board member we
manage to get to, if any at all.

This is not acceptable in the least for an organization like WMF. We may
live with this state of affairs, but it is clearly not a trustworthy
organization, at least at this point in time. I don't like all the
aggressiveness I am seeing at wiki.en,but I can understand the revolt. I do
hope things improve.

Paulo

A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 18:47, Robert Fernandez 
escreveu:

> The board, including its community representatives.
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:38 PM Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
> >
> > If the WMF is protecting us, who is protecting us from WMF when due
> process is not followed, and false accusations and arbitrary punishments
> start being issued by them?
> >
> > To who /what can we appeal?
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 17:35, Robert Fernandez <
> wikigamal...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> >>
> >> Of course it doesn't belong to the WMF.  It belongs to everyone, and
> >> that includes the victims of harassment who have no one to turn to
> >> except the WMF.  I am not aware of the circumstances of this office
> >> action, but I am of a couple of the others, and there was nothing
> >> involving the star chamber hyperbole you describe.  Transparency is
> >> key to the project in terms of policy making and article creation, but
> >> the project cannot ethically demand transparency as you define it in
> >> private matters involving things like (for example) off wiki
> >> harassment and sexual abuse.  This process involves multiple layers of
> >> investigation and approval.  The only thing it lacks is the ability
> >> for you to pore over salacious details of someone's victimization.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 12:07 PM Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Robert,
> >> >
> >> > These two aren't mutually exclusive. Yes, Wikipedia belongs to
> everyone. Specifically, a place in the community of Wikipedia editors is
> open to anyone who would like to join. Those of us here have already done
> that. But it is natural in any community or organization to give more
> weight to respected, long-term members than those who just joined up
> yesterday. They've learned the ropes and demonstrated a commitment to it.
> >> >
> >> > However, the project categorically does not belong to the WMF. The
> WMF exists to serve and assist Wikimedia projects, not lord it over and
> rule them. And since "Wikipedia belongs to everyone", we certainly
> shouldn't be throwing people out in secret Star Chamber-style proceedings,
> where apparently even the accused is not permitted to know all the evidence
> against them. That is utterly antithetical to the open, community-run ethos
> of the project.
> >> >
> >> > Todd
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 8:09 AM Robert Fernandez <
> wikigamal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up,
> and find that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
> >> >>
> >> >> This is part of the problem right here.  This isn't our project and
> we
> >> >> shouldn't be trying to exclude people from our community.  Wikipedia
> >> >> belongs to everyone.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:53 AM Peter Southwood
> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thrapostibongles,
> >> >> > I am not familiar with your name on enwiki, so I looked you up,
> and find that you have a grand total of 11 edits on all projects since 2015.
> >> >> > While it is possible that you have a long and distinguished edit
> history under a previous name or as an IP editor, it leads me to wonder
> just how familiar you are with the customs and culture of enwiki, which I
> freely agree are non-optimal, but have evolved to sort of work in an
> environment which was predicted to be impossible. Yet here we are,
> dysfunctionally surviving when we are theoretically long extinct. Our
> dysfunctional mores function as they do and evolve through surviving and
> occasional modification by consensus of those who care enou

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

2019-06-12 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
gt; >> >
> >> > I think it's reasonably clear that the English Wikipedia community
> and its
> >> > community structures, such as its Arbitration Committee, and
> processes are
> >> > not capable of maintaining a productive, harassment-free environment
> for
> >> > the volunteer workers.  For example, they have consistently failed,
> after
> >> > several attempts, to handle the case of a volunteer who used the word
> >> > "Cxxx" about a fellow worker, and the community has agreed that
> telling
> >> > others to "Fxxx off" is acceptable.  These are symptoms of a
> dysfunctional
> >> > community, which tolerates behaviour that is unacceptable in any
> collegial
> >> > working environment, and it is right that the Foundation should step
> in.
> >> >
> >> > Thrapostibongles
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:56 PM Yaroslav Blanter 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or
> should
> >> > > not be banned, but that the process in this case should have
> followed the
> >> > > standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case
> should
> >> > > have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members
> did sign
> >> > > the non-disclosure agreement.
> >> > >
> >> > > This is different from the past cases when users were banned by
> WMF, since
> >> > > in this case it was made clear the case is based on on-wiki open
> activity
> >> > > of Fram (and, specifically, only on the English Wikipedia). The
> on-wiki
> >> > > activity is subject to the community policies.
> >> > >
> >> > > To be clear, I am not a friend of Fram, and in the past supported
> desysop
> >> > > on a number of occasions.
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers
> >> > > Yaroslav
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:46 PM Amir Sarabadani <
> ladsgr...@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and
> things Fram
> >> > > has
> >> > > > done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see
> how fast
> >> > > > people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I
> personally,
> >> > > > don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the
> ban. As
> >> > > > simple as that.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > So what should be done IMO. If enwiki wants to know more, a
> community
> >> > > body
> >> > > > can ask for more information, if body satisfy two things:
> >> > > >  - They had signed NDA not to disclose the case
> >> > > >  - They are trusted by the community
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I think the only body can sorta work with this is stewards but
> not sure
> >> > > > (Does ArbCom NDA'ed?)
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> >> > > > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
> >> > > > > I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?)
> based on a
> >> > > > > false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm
> waiting
> >> > > > for
> >> > > > > an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't
> surprise
> >> > > > me
> >> > > > > at all.
> >> > > > > It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this
> kind of
> >> > > > > medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia
> >> > > Movement.
> >> > > > > Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Best,
> >> > > > > Paulo
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Benjamin Ikuta  escreveu no dia terça,
> >> > > > 11/06/2019
> >> > > > > à(s) 05:45:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > 

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

2019-06-12 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I agree that they look like a very aggressive community, but why should an
entity so disconnected from everything there and immersed on a culture of
obscurantism and secretiveness be the one appropriate to intervene?
Especially skipping due process, with a very shady ban, as seems to have
been the case there.

Paulo

A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 14:51, Robert Fernandez 
escreveu:

> Because the English Wikipedia community is a garbage fire, and is
> hellbent on demonstrating that this week.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:16 AM Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
> >
> > And why do you think the WMF would be the proper entity to step in on
> > community issues related to the English Wikipedia?
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 13:46, Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > thrapostibong...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> >
> > > Yaroslav,
> > >
> > > I think it's reasonably clear that the English Wikipedia community and
> its
> > > community structures, such as its Arbitration Committee, and processes
> are
> > > not capable of maintaining a productive, harassment-free environment
> for
> > > the volunteer workers.  For example, they have consistently failed,
> after
> > > several attempts, to handle the case of a volunteer who used the word
> > > "Cxxx" about a fellow worker, and the community has agreed that telling
> > > others to "Fxxx off" is acceptable.  These are symptoms of a
> dysfunctional
> > > community, which tolerates behaviour that is unacceptable in any
> collegial
> > > working environment, and it is right that the Foundation should step
> in.
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:56 PM Yaroslav Blanter 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or
> should
> > > > not be banned, but that the process in this case should have
> followed the
> > > > standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case
> should
> > > > have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members
> did
> > > sign
> > > > the non-disclosure agreement.
> > > >
> > > > This is different from the past cases when users were banned by WMF,
> > > since
> > > > in this case it was made clear the case is based on on-wiki open
> activity
> > > > of Fram (and, specifically, only on the English Wikipedia). The
> on-wiki
> > > > activity is subject to the community policies.
> > > >
> > > > To be clear, I am not a friend of Fram, and in the past supported
> desysop
> > > > on a number of occasions.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Yaroslav
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:46 PM Amir Sarabadani  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and things
> Fram
> > > > has
> > > > > done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see
> how
> > > fast
> > > > > people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I
> personally,
> > > > > don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the
> ban. As
> > > > > simple as that.
> > > > >
> > > > > So what should be done IMO. If enwiki wants to know more, a
> community
> > > > body
> > > > > can ask for more information, if body satisfy two things:
> > > > >  - They had signed NDA not to disclose the case
> > > > >  - They are trusted by the community
> > > > >
> > > > > I think the only body can sorta work with this is stewards but not
> sure
> > > > > (Does ArbCom NDA'ed?)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > > > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
> > > > > > I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?)
> based
> > > on a
> > > > > > false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm
> > > waiting
> > > > > for
> > > > > > an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't
> > > surprise
> > > > > me
> > > > > > at all.
> > > > 

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

2019-06-12 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
And why do you think the WMF would be the proper entity to step in on
community issues related to the English Wikipedia?

Paulo

A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 13:46, Mister Thrapostibongles <
thrapostibong...@gmail.com> escreveu:

> Yaroslav,
>
> I think it's reasonably clear that the English Wikipedia community and its
> community structures, such as its Arbitration Committee, and processes are
> not capable of maintaining a productive, harassment-free environment for
> the volunteer workers.  For example, they have consistently failed, after
> several attempts, to handle the case of a volunteer who used the word
> "Cxxx" about a fellow worker, and the community has agreed that telling
> others to "Fxxx off" is acceptable.  These are symptoms of a dysfunctional
> community, which tolerates behaviour that is unacceptable in any collegial
> working environment, and it is right that the Foundation should step in.
>
> Thrapostibongles
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:56 PM Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>
> > The point made by pretty much everyone is not that Fram should or should
> > not be banned, but that the process in this case should have followed the
> > standard dispute resolution avenues, More specifically, the case should
> > have been communicated to the Arbitration Committee, whose members did
> sign
> > the non-disclosure agreement.
> >
> > This is different from the past cases when users were banned by WMF,
> since
> > in this case it was made clear the case is based on on-wiki open activity
> > of Fram (and, specifically, only on the English Wikipedia). The on-wiki
> > activity is subject to the community policies.
> >
> > To be clear, I am not a friend of Fram, and in the past supported desysop
> > on a number of occasions.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:46 PM Amir Sarabadani 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > People who oppose the ban: Are you aware of all aspects and things Fram
> > has
> > > done? Do you have the full picture? It's really saddening to see how
> fast
> > > people jump to conclusion in page mentioned in the email. I personally,
> > > don't know what happened so I neither can support or oppose the ban. As
> > > simple as that.
> > >
> > > So what should be done IMO. If enwiki wants to know more, a community
> > body
> > > can ask for more information, if body satisfy two things:
> > >  - They had signed NDA not to disclose the case
> > >  - They are trusted by the community
> > >
> > > I think the only body can sorta work with this is stewards but not sure
> > > (Does ArbCom NDA'ed?)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
> > > > I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?) based
> on a
> > > > false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm
> waiting
> > > for
> > > > an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't
> surprise
> > > me
> > > > at all.
> > > > It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this kind
> of
> > > > medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia
> > Movement.
> > > > Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Paulo
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Benjamin Ikuta  escreveu no dia terça,
> > > 11/06/2019
> > > > à(s) 05:45:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for this.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm glad to see I'm not the only one dismayed by the unilateralism
> > and
> > > > > lack of transparency.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 8:25 PM, Techman224 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Forwarding to WIkimedia-l since WikiEN-l is relatively dead.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since this message, an Arbcom member (SilkTork) stated that they
> > > > weren't
> > > > > consulted, nor did this action was the result of Arbcom forwarding
> a
> > > > > concern to the office. [1]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The only non-response excuse from the WMF [2] was 

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

2019-06-12 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Well, in my own case I can confirm the decision was completely secret,
issued by some unstated entity inside the WMF, and when I knew about it by
a third party , the reason presented was blatantly false. I have requested
an appeal, with no success till the moment. So, at this point, I am not so
prone to consider WMF attitude on this case above suspicion. The WMF has a
long history of using its culture of medieval obscurity as an excuse for
not having to explain what is perceived as abuse.

Best,
Paulo

A quarta, 12 de jun de 2019, 13:45, Isaac Olatunde 
escreveu:

> It seems the English Wikipedia community is concern with whether WMF has
> jurisdiction to ban a user in a single project with active arbitration
> committee and if they may do so without any obligation to notify the
> project Arbitration committee or the community.
>
> Well, I don't know the specifics of this particular ban but I believe WMF
> took the best decision in banning Fram considering the Foundation has acted
> approximately in dealing with similar issues in the past.
>
> Regards,
>
> Isaac
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 2:58 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> > Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
> > I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?) based on a
> > false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm waiting
> for
> > an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't surprise
> me
> > at all.
> > It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this kind of
> > medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia Movement.
> > Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> > Benjamin Ikuta  escreveu no dia terça,
> 11/06/2019
> > à(s) 05:45:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for this.
> > >
> > > I'm glad to see I'm not the only one dismayed by the unilateralism and
> > > lack of transparency.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 8:25 PM, Techman224 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Forwarding to WIkimedia-l since WikiEN-l is relatively dead.
> > > >
> > > > Since this message, an Arbcom member (SilkTork) stated that they
> > weren't
> > > consulted, nor did this action was the result of Arbcom forwarding a
> > > concern to the office. [1]
> > > >
> > > > The only non-response excuse from the WMF [2] was that "local
> > > communities consistently struggle to uphold not just their own
> autonomous
> > > rules but the Terms of Use, too.” even though there were no complaints
> > > on-wiki nor to Arbcom privately.
> > > >
> > > > The on-wiki discussion is taking place at the Bureaucrats and the
> > Arbcom
> > > noticeboards.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#User:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard#User:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Request_for_ArbCom_to_comment_publicly_on_Fram's_ban
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard=prev=901300528
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard=prev=901300528
> > > >
> > > > [2]
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#Statement_from_the_WMF_Trust_&_Safety_Team
> > > >
> > > > Techman224
> > > >
> > > >> Begin forwarded message:
> > > >>
> > > >> From: George Herbert 
> > > >> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> > > >> Date: June 10, 2019 at 8:54:34 PM CDT
> > > >> To: English Wikipedia 
> > > >> Reply-To: English Wikipedia 
> > > >>
> > > >> In case you're not following on-wiki - Office S blocked English
> > > Wikipedia
> > > >> user / administrator Fram for a year and desysopped, for unspecified
> > > >> reasons in the Office purview.  There was a brief statement here
> from
> > > >> Office regarding it which gave

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

2019-06-11 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Lack of transparency from the WMF, whatelse is new.
I'm currently under a funding ban secretly decided (by who?) based on a
false accusation, without providing any evidence. Until now I'm waiting for
an explanation from the WMF. So, this sort of attitude doesn't surprise me
at all.
It is very unfortunate that the WMF apparently thrives in this kind of
medieval obscurity, the opposite of the values of the Wikimedia Movement.
Matter for Roles & Reponsibilities.

Best,
Paulo


Benjamin Ikuta  escreveu no dia terça, 11/06/2019
à(s) 05:45:

>
>
>
> Thanks for this.
>
> I'm glad to see I'm not the only one dismayed by the unilateralism and
> lack of transparency.
>
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2019, at 8:25 PM, Techman224  wrote:
>
> > Forwarding to WIkimedia-l since WikiEN-l is relatively dead.
> >
> > Since this message, an Arbcom member (SilkTork) stated that they weren't
> consulted, nor did this action was the result of Arbcom forwarding a
> concern to the office. [1]
> >
> > The only non-response excuse from the WMF [2] was that "local
> communities consistently struggle to uphold not just their own autonomous
> rules but the Terms of Use, too.” even though there were no complaints
> on-wiki nor to Arbcom privately.
> >
> > The on-wiki discussion is taking place at the Bureaucrats and the Arbcom
> noticeboards.
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#User:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> <
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard#User:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Request_for_ArbCom_to_comment_publicly_on_Fram's_ban
> >
> > [1]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard=prev=901300528
> <
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard=prev=901300528
> >
> > [2]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#Statement_from_the_WMF_Trust_&_Safety_Team
> >
> > Techman224
> >
> >> Begin forwarded message:
> >>
> >> From: George Herbert 
> >> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> >> Date: June 10, 2019 at 8:54:34 PM CDT
> >> To: English Wikipedia 
> >> Reply-To: English Wikipedia 
> >>
> >> In case you're not following on-wiki - Office S blocked English
> Wikipedia
> >> user / administrator Fram for a year and desysopped, for unspecified
> >> reasons in the Office purview.  There was a brief statement here from
> >> Office regarding it which gave no details other than that normal policy
> and
> >> procedures for Office actions were followed, which under normal
> >> circumstances preclude public comments.
> >>
> >>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#User:Fram_banned_for_1_year_by_WMF_office
> >>
> >> Several people on Arbcom and board have commented they're making private
> >> inquiries under normal reporting and communication channels, due to the
> >> oddity and essentially uniqueness of the action.
> >>
> >> There was an initial surge of dismay which has mellowed IMHO into "Ok,
> >> responsible people following up".
> >>
> >> I understand the sensitivity of some of the topics under Office actions,
> >> having done OTRS and other various had-to-stay-private stuff myself at
> >> times in the past.  A high profile investigation target is most unusual
> but
> >> not unheard of.
> >>
> >> I did send email to Fram earlier today asking if they had any public
> >> comment, no reply as yet.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> -george william herbert
> >> george.herb...@gmail.com
> >> ___
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-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 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki Movimento Brasil

2019-06-08 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hey,

The affiliate was originally formed in 2008 as the wannabe chapter
Wikimedia Brasil, and made its life as a chapter until 2010 when it was
noticed that it was not incorporated nor had any intention of becoming
incorporated, and the whole thing was canceled.

Some of its members and new volunteers in Brazil then immediately joined
together to form the chapter again, and there even is a resolution in
Wikimania Haifa 2011 about that. The negotiations with affcom took an awful
lot of time and bureaucracy, and by 2013 they had already incorporated but
were still waiting to have the chapter approved. They eventually managed to
be approved as an user group by tlsummer 2013, which is the one that was
reapproved now.

Paulo

A sexta, 7 de jun de 2019, 23:50, Nathan  escreveu:

> 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:
> 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] Recognition of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki Movimento Brasil

2019-05-31 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
As a volunteer who was never involved in that strife, but who felt and
observed it onwiki, I sincerely expect that, above all, AffCom would be
more careful and responsible than what they have been in the past when
approving overlapping affiliates. Especially when a public outcry against
the new proposed affiliate is already there, as was the case of Brazil.

Best,
Paulo



Joseph Seddon  escreveu no dia sexta, 31/05/2019
à(s) 11:43:

> Asking as a volunteer with a broad interest in affiliate matters rather
> than as a staff member:
>
> What steps is the Brazilian community taking to ensure there isn't a repeat
> of past breakdowns in community cooperation?
>
> Kind regards
>
> Seddon
>
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:50 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > I would like to correct myself, as since October 2018 there is one more
> > Wikimedia affiliate with Portuguese as its official language, our very
> good
> > friends "Muj(lh)eres latinoamericanas en Wikimedia", who have been doing
> > quite a notable work in LATAM:
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Muj(lh)eres_latinoamericanas_en_Wikimedia
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > 30/05/2019 à(s) 15:40:
> >
> > > Wonderful news!
> > > Brazil has been for long one of the world leaders in Wikimedia
> > educational
> > > projects, with an excellent work on GLAMs, often in line with the
> > > educational projects, and generally with full Wikidata integration.
> > > It is very rewarding to see the group recognized again as a full-right
> > > Wikimedia affiliate.
> > > It also happens to be the only other Portuguese speaking affiliate,
> > > besides Wikimedia Portugal. Still a long way to go for one of the most
> > > spoken native languages in the globe, but that's a great improvement.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Rajeeb Dutta  escreveu no dia quinta, 30/05/2019
> > > à(s) 13:24:
> > >
> > >> Congratulations to the entire team of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki
> > >> Movimento Brasil!!
> > >>
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> Rajeeb Dutta.
> > >> (Marajozkee).
> > >> Wikimedia India.
> > >>
> > >> > On 30-May-2019, at 5:40 PM, Shani Evenstein 
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > What excellent news!
> > >> > This group has been doing amazing and innovative work, so it's a joy
> > to
> > >> see
> > >> > this community finally re-recognized as an affiliate.
> > >> > As it should be. :)
> > >> >
> > >> > Best of luck to all of you with your future projects. I'll keep
> > >> following
> > >> > your work with excitement.
> > >> >
> > >> > 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.
> > >> > * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
> > >> > <https://education.tau.ac.il/node/3495> on Technology,
> > >> Internationalization
> > >> > and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv University
> > >> > <https://education.tau.ac.il/node/3495>.
> > >> > * Chairperson, WikiProject Medicine Foundation
> > >> > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Project_Med>.
> > >> > * Chairperson, Wikipedia & Education User Group
> > >> > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_%26_Education_User_Group
> >.
> > >> > * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
> > >> > <http://www.israelgives.org/amuta/580428621>.
> > >> > * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda <http://bybe.benyehuda.org>.
> > >> > +972-525640648
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 2:33 PM Kirill Lokshin <
> > >> kirill.loks...@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Hi everyone!
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I'm very ha

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

2019-05-31 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi!

I would like to correct myself, as since October 2018 there is one more
Wikimedia affiliate with Portuguese as its official language, our very good
friends "Muj(lh)eres latinoamericanas en Wikimedia", who have been doing
quite a notable work in LATAM:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Muj(lh)eres_latinoamericanas_en_Wikimedia

Best,
Paulo

Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu no dia quinta,
30/05/2019 à(s) 15:40:

> Wonderful news!
> Brazil has been for long one of the world leaders in Wikimedia educational
> projects, with an excellent work on GLAMs, often in line with the
> educational projects, and generally with full Wikidata integration.
> It is very rewarding to see the group recognized again as a full-right
> Wikimedia affiliate.
> It also happens to be the only other Portuguese speaking affiliate,
> besides Wikimedia Portugal. Still a long way to go for one of the most
> spoken native languages in the globe, but that's a great improvement.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> Rajeeb Dutta  escreveu no dia quinta, 30/05/2019
> à(s) 13:24:
>
>> Congratulations to the entire team of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki
>> Movimento Brasil!!
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Rajeeb Dutta.
>> (Marajozkee).
>> Wikimedia India.
>>
>> > On 30-May-2019, at 5:40 PM, Shani Evenstein 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > What excellent news!
>> > This group has been doing amazing and innovative work, so it's a joy to
>> see
>> > this community finally re-recognized as an affiliate.
>> > As it should be. :)
>> >
>> > Best of luck to all of you with your future projects. I'll keep
>> following
>> > your work with excitement.
>> >
>> > 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.
>> > * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
>> > <https://education.tau.ac.il/node/3495> on Technology,
>> Internationalization
>> > and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv University
>> > <https://education.tau.ac.il/node/3495>.
>> > * Chairperson, WikiProject Medicine Foundation
>> > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Project_Med>.
>> > * Chairperson, Wikipedia & Education User Group
>> > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_%26_Education_User_Group>.
>> > * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
>> > <http://www.israelgives.org/amuta/580428621>.
>> > * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda <http://bybe.benyehuda.org>.
>> > +972-525640648
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 2:33 PM Kirill Lokshin <
>> kirill.loks...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi everyone!
>> >>
>> >> I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>> recognized
>> >> [1] the Grupo de Usuários Wiki Movimento Brasil [2] as a Wikimedia User
>> >> Group. The group aims to bring together the active members of the
>> Wikimedia
>> >> movement in Brazil, supporting the organization of the Brazilian
>> Wikimedia
>> >> community as well as the promotion of and participation on the
>> Wikimedia
>> >> projects.
>> >>
>> >> Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Kirill Lokshin
>> >> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>> >>
>> >> [1]
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Grupo_de_Usuários_Wiki_Movimento_Brasil
>> >> [2]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Brasil
>> >> ___
>> >> 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.w

  1   2   3   >