Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF transfers $8.7 million to "Wikimedia Knowledge Equity Fund"

2021-01-01 Thread rupert THURNER
hi lisa,

have a good start into the new year everybody! should not, ideally, the
legal team of amanda keton be able to tell if fundting something is legal?
or is this a liability issue, so tides would be liable for misconduct, and
not a person within wikimedia foundation?

rupert


On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:18 PM Lisa Gruwell 
wrote:

> Hi Mike-
>
> Thanks for the question.  The review and oversight that we will get from
> Tides is nothing like the FDC review.  They will be looking at, for
> example, "Is this grant supporting activity that is legal for a 501c3 to
> fund?"  It is in no way a replacement for the work that the FDC or the
> Global Council would do regarding grants.
>
> Best,
> Lisa
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:55 PM Michael Peel  wrote:
>
>> Hi Lisa,
>>
>> Isn’t this the oversight work that the WMF wanted to be able to do when
>> it changed from Wikimedia affiliates being able to fundraise directly to
>> the FDC process? Why has WMF chosen to outsource this to Tides rather than
>> continuing to do it in-house? And why does Tides now get to approve such
>> grants, rather than a community appointed committee?
>>
>> FDC was a process that worked extremely well, and was discontinued for
>> obscure reasons. The Global Council approach that the strategy was heading
>> towards looked like it might be a good replacement. Outsourcing it to Tides
>> seems really bad.
>>
>> Boldly creating a new fund for fellow organisations looks nice, but
>> without community involvement it’s a controversy in development.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
>>
>> On 14 Dec 2020, at 20:11, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chris-
>>
>> I am happy to answer your questions about Tides.  No, Tides is not
>> picking the grantees.  The docket of grantees and the specific of the
>> grants comes from us.  Tides provides legal and administrative review of
>> the grants,  approves them, and processes the grants(i.e. wires the funding
>> to the grantees).  It is rare that there is ever a problem, but if Tides
>> were to see one, we actually appreciate the outside review and would be
>> open to hearing their reasons.  There is no change for the reporting and
>> transparency requirements for APG grants. Tides will also not be making
>> recommendations for the grants for the Knowledge Equity Fund.  They will
>> play a similar role as I described for the APG grants. Again, I know there
>> will be more info on the Knowledge Equity Fund in the new year.  I ask your
>> patience for the folks initiating this and trust that they will share more
>> soon.
>>
>> Best,
>> Lisa
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:18 AM Chris Keating <
>> chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Lisa. That statement makes a lot of sense, though I do have some
>>> questions still.
>>>

 Our first priority was to ensure that we had enough funding to support
 community grants. We transferred the full amount for Annual Plan Grants
 (APG) for FY20-21 over to Tides to ensure that all funding for
 affiliates for this year was secured, regardless of how fundraising
 performed. It also gives staff at affiliates and the Foundation more time
 to work together to make thoughtful grants, instead of an end-of-year rush.
 All affiliates who will be receiving funding through Tides were informed of
 the arrangement last summer. All other grantmaking (Community Grants,
 Rapid Grants, Project Grants) are still being funded through WMF directly,
 as usual. There is a round of APG grants set to go out via Tides this week.

>>>
>>> Are Tides simply administering these funds at the WMF's direction, or
>>> will Tides start to take over decisions about who gets these grants and
>>> what amount different entities are eligible for? Has there been any change
>>> to the reporting and transparency requirements that go with the APG grants?
>>> What is the intention about how APG grants will work, since the FDC was
>>> abolished a couple of years ago and there is unlikely to be any
>>> community-driven replacement for it until at least a year or two's work has
>>> gone into the implementation of the strategy?
>>>
>>>
 As of now, this is a one-time commitment of approximately $4.5 million.
 We are still working on the specific initial objectives of the fund and how
 it will operate. As a pilot initiative, we’ll be learning and adapting as
 we go.

>>>
>>> Funding knowledge equity sounds like a great idea, but I have not
>>> previously heard of an organisation making an irrecoverable $4.5 million
>>> transfer without knowing what that money will be used to fund. Is there
>>> anything more that can be shared apart from "it'll be used to fund
>>> knowledge equity somehow"? And as above - is this going to be a WMF-led
>>> process (maybe even involving the community), or will Tides be actually
>>> making recommendations about who and what is funded? If the latter, how are
>>> Tides going to adjust to the Wikimedia community's expectations 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid API?

2020-07-22 Thread rupert THURNER
victoria, discussions to monetize the wikipedia content in one or the other
way are as old as wikipedia. some people say "why should i continue editing
and supporting wikipedia in my free time, or donate money, attracted by the
vision to make it available to all, without condition, when WMF starts
selling parts of it?" while the others feel that wikipedia relying on
donations only keeps them at a shoestring budget, which meanwhile grew to
100 million USD a year. up to now the discussion always ended with a
similar result: wikipedia would loose more than it would gain, and the
initiative stopped. why this time it would be different? even more so as
this API idea was already there when sue gardner joined 10 or more years
ago. but maybe it becomes a good idea over time if it is brought up often
enough and the environment changes. in 20 years or so, when the wikipedia
content is auto-generated, auto-translated and WMF has no employees any
more and no need of voluntary work this for sure would work.

rupert


On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 9:19 PM Victoria Coleman <
vstavridoucole...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 Kunal! The WMF Cloud Services team can totally provide the needed
> support. The Foundation would have to invest them to build up the team
> which is over stretched but that should easily pay for itself as revenue
> starts flowing in from the paid API.
>
> Victoria
>
> > On Jul 9, 2020, at 1:38 PM, Kunal Mehta  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2020-07-09 13:15, Dan Garry (Deskana) wrote:
> >> Which cloud provider would you recommend?
> >
> > Wikimedia Cloud Services, which incidentally, has the fastest network
> > connection to Wikimedia sites by virtue of it being hosted *inside* the
> > cluster.
> >
> > -- Legoktm
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> 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 Tech: New Format for 2020 Wishlist Survey

2019-10-03 Thread rupert THURNER
Extremely cool move, thank you!

Rupert


On Thu, Oct 3, 2019, 18:31 Ilana Fried  wrote:

> Hello, everyone!
>
> My name is Ilana, and I'm the product manager for the Community Tech team.
> We’re excited to share an update on the Community Tech 2020 Wishlist Survey
> . This
> will
> be our fifth annual Community Wishlist Survey, and for this year, we’ve
> decided to take a different approach. In the past, we've invited people to
> write proposals for any features or fixes that they'd like to see, and the
> Community Tech team has addressed the top ten wishes with the most support
> votes. This year, we're just going to focus on the *non-Wikipedia content
> projects* (i.e. Wikibooks, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Commons, Wikisource,
> Wikiversity, Wikispecies, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, and Wikinews), and we're
> only going to address the top five wishes from this survey. This is a big
> departure from the typical process. In the following year (2021), we’ll
> probably return to the traditional structure.
>
> So, why this change? We’ve been following the same format for years — and,
> generally, it has lots of benefits. We build great tools, provide useful
> improvements, and have an impact on diverse communities. However, the
> nature of the format tends to prioritize the largest project (Wikipedia).
> This makes it harder to serve smaller projects, and many of their wishes
> never make it onto the wishlist. As a community-focused team, we want to
> support *all* projects. Thus, for 2020, we want to shine a light on
> non-Wikipedia projects.
>
> Furthermore, we’ll be accepting five wishes. Over the years, we’ve taken on
> larger wishes (like Global Preferences
>  or Who
> Wrote That
> ),
> which are awesome projects. At the same time, they tend to be lengthy
> endeavors, requiring extra time for research and development. When we
> looked at the 2019 wishlist, there were still many unresolved wishes.
> Meanwhile, we wanted to make room for the new 2020 wishes. For this reason,
> we’ve decided to take on a shortened list, so we can address as many wishes
> (new and remaining 2019 wishes
> )
> as possible.
>
> Overall, we look forward to this year’s survey. We worked with lots of
> folks (engineering, product management, and others) to think about how we
> could support underserved projects, all while preserving the dynamic and
> open nature of the wishlist. *Please let us know your thoughts
> *
> related
> to this change. In addition, we’ll begin thinking about the guidelines for
> this new process, so *we want your feedback
> * (on
> what sorts of processes/rules we may want to consider). Thank you, and
> we’re very curious to see the wishes in November!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ilana Fried
>
> Product Manager, Community Tech
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> 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] Universal forced HTTPS backdoor in Kazakhstan

2019-07-22 Thread rupert THURNER
displaying a warning that there is a MITM which reads all passwords and
banking information sounds nice, yuri. there even seems to be ways to
detect this client-server side:
https://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/7ldypq/is_it_possible_to_detect_mitm_by_javascript_in_a/
-
you mean something like this would do, yury?

george, the trusted root certificates would be configurable, usually, like
for chrome here:
https://support.securly.com/hc/en-us/articles/206081828-How-to-manually-install-the-Securly-SSL-certificate-in-Chrome
companies pay money to get into this list, so they can easier sell their
website certificates. closing down the list for sure leads to some
anti-trust legal action in other countries.

btw, recently there was a blog post from a developer in iran, saying the
same :
https://shahinsorkh.ir/2019/07/20/how-is-it-like-to-be-a-dev-in-iran

this had an even more surprising aspect - not only would the country block
access to some site - but sites itself decided to remove users having a
relationship with that country:
"Slack team, decided to join the sanctions. They simply deleted every
single user who they found out is Iranian! With no real prior notices! Many
people has lost their data on Slack and no one was going to do anything!"

rupert


On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:05 PM George Herbert 
wrote:

> Browser vendors could revoke the root that Kazakh authorities are using for
> the scheme.
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 5:35 AM Yuri Astrakhan 
> wrote:
>
> > I don't think browser vendors will block the ability to install a custom
> > root certificate because some corp clients may use it for exactly the
> same
> > reason -- creating an HTTPS proxy with fake certs in order to analyze
> > internal traffic (in the name of monitoring/security).
> >
> > Browser vendors could make it more difficult to install, so that it would
> > require the corp IT department to do some magic, or even release two
> > versions of the browser - corp and general (with blocked uncertified root
> > certs), but at the end of the day those could be worked around.
> >
> > The biggest deterrent in my opinion is to educating the users of the
> > dangers such certs would do (i.e. all your passwords and bank info will
> be
> > viewable by ISPs) - thus it would be social rather than purely technical
> > solution.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 1:33 PM Steinsplitter Wiki <
> > steinsplit...@wikipedia.de> wrote:
> >
> > > That's shocking...
> > >
> > > >> I think this has serious implications for Wikipedia & Wikimedia, as
> > not
> > > >> only they would be easily able to see which articles people read,
> but
> > > >> also steal login credentials, depseudonymize people and even hijack
> > > >> admin accounts.
> > >
> > > Yes, they can de-crypt the traffic. Hopefully browser vendors will
> > > disallow the root certificate.
> > > IMHO there isn't much WP can do, expect showing a warning if somebody
> is
> > > trying to login
> > > from the country in question.
> > >
> > > --Steinsplitter
> > >
> > > 
> > > Von: Wikimedia-l  im Auftrag
> > von
> > > Yury Bulka 
> > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 21. Juli 2019 12:36
> > > An: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > > Betreff: [Wikimedia-l] Universal forced HTTPS backdoor in Kazakhstan
> > >
> > > I'm sure many have heard about this:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://thehackernews.com/2019/07/kazakhstan-https-security-certificate.html
> > >
> > > Essentially, the government in Kazakhstan started forcing citizens into
> > > installing a root TLS certificate on their devices that would allow the
> > > government to intercept, decrypt and manipulate all HTTPS traffic.
> > >
> > > Without the centificate, it seems, citizens can't access HTTPS pages
> (at
> > > least on some ISPs).
> > >
> > > I think this has serious implications for Wikipedia & Wikimedia, as not
> > > only they would be easily able to see which articles people read, but
> > > also steal login credentials, depseudonymize people and even hijack
> > > admin accounts.
> > >
> > > Another danger is that if this effort by Kazakhstan will succeed, other
> > > governments may start doing the same.
> > >
> > > I wonder if WMF has any position on this yet?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Yury.
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > 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] Open Letter to Affiliations Committee : Wikimedia India's Demand For A Fair And Transparent Hearing

2019-07-16 Thread rupert THURNER
abhinav,

i read that the membership fee is 100 INR, which is the price of a beer.
that sounds fair. how many members do you currently have? do you use the
annual fundraising page to let people know that they can become members
like e.g. wikimedia deutschland (WMDE) does? WMDE, by using this simple
strategy, were able to get 70'000 members with a population of 80 mio,
which makes them one of the biggest clubs in germany.

rupert


On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 2:14 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:

> +1 Lodewijk -- I was thinking the same thing.
> Abhinav and Kirill: thanks each for sharing these public updates.
>
> On Mon., Jul. 15, 2019, 4:29 p.m. effe iets anders, <
> effeietsand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I think it would be at the very least helpful to the wider community to
> > better understand that component. Could you spell out in a bit more
> detail
> > what those capacity concerns were, and what other findings may have
> > existed? This may especially be helpful to the India community, as it
> would
> > be especially hard to address the issues without a full understanding.
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> > Warmly,
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 3:03 AM Kirill Lokshin  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Wikimedia-l readers,
> > >
> > >
> > > AffCom understands the complexity and sensitivity of the circumstances
> > > surrounding the decision to de-recognize Wikimedia India as a chapter,
> > and
> > > we would like to share more information around it. This decision was
> not
> > > taken lightly, and only came after consistent warnings, including
> > > suspensions of the chapter, and continued attempts by AffCom to bring
> the
> > > chapter’s activities in line with the requirements for chapter status.
> We
> > > understand that volunteers would like more information about this
> > decision
> > > and past actions that influenced its outcome. We will attempt to
> provide
> > an
> > > overview of the factors and history that led to this decision.
> > >
> > > Wikimedia India has been given ample time to address their lack of
> > > compliance with minimum chapter expectations since their initial signs
> of
> > > non-compliance in 2015 and concerns presented to them during their 2015
> > > site visits, initial 2016 suspension, and most recent 2018 suspension
> > last
> > > November. The Wikimedia India Executive Committee (EC) has repeatedly
> > > failed to respond in a timely and complete manner to call requests,
> > annual
> > > reporting timelines, and remediation deadlines for demonstrating
> > > compliance.
> > >
> > > It is worth noting that there may be issues related to incomplete
> > > information regarding the current relationship between WMIN and AffCom.
> > > Abhinav is a current WMIN representative, but he was recently appointed
> > to
> > > the EC on June 14, 2019 [1] following the EC’s receipt of the final
> > > revocation notice sent on June 13, 2019. He was not informed of, nor
> did
> > he
> > > participate in, our communications regarding the current suspension
> > process
> > > before that time, so he has had to rely on second-hand knowledge of the
> > > situation. The remaining four members of the EC appear to have fully
> > > abdicated their responsibility for communications leadership and as
> such
> > > further confirm the chapter’s lack of capacity at this time.
> > >
> > > Suspension notices give explicit requirements for what and how to
> > > communicate with respect to a chapter’s capacity and provide a timeline
> > for
> > > addressing gaps to meet requirements. We’re providing a table
> reflecting
> > > the most recent suspension notice, the requirements included, and the
> > date
> > > they were to be delivered below for the community’s context:
> > >
> > > According to the suspension notice, Wikimedia India was to:
> > >
> > > Status
> > >
> > > Submit an Action Plan. By January 15, 2019, the chapter was to submit
> an
> > > updated Action Plan including a timeline with dates for completing the
> > > tasks outlined.
> > >
> > > Submitted past deadline.
> > >
> > > Received on March 4, 2019.
> > >
> > > Insufficient response; awaiting new action plan for potential
> > > reorganization as outlined in April call.
> > >
> > > Complete and submit the required overdue chapter activities and
> financial
> > > reporting. The chapter was to submit the reporting by December 1, 2018.
> > >
> > > Submitted past deadline.
> > >
> > > Received Activities Report on December 3, 2018 and Financial Report on
> > > December 22, 2018.
> > >
> > > Develop a strategy and timeline for addressing the following potential
> > gaps
> > > in meeting the basic criteria for chapter status in terms of Legal
> > > Structure, Open Governance, Active Contributor Involvement, and
> Capacity.
> > > By
> > > January 15, 2019, the chapter was to submit a plan, via email or posted
> > > online, demonstrating how the chapter meets the specific chapter
> > > requirements outlined. If the chapter does not currently meet 

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

2019-04-18 Thread rupert THURNER
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 7:33 PM James Heilman  wrote:

> With respect to popularity per Alexa:
>
> Wikipedia is 5th
> Wikimedia is 276 (includes both Commons and Wikispecies)
> Wiktionary is 432
> Wikibooks is 1,892
> Wikisource is 2,790
> Wikiquote is 3,953
> Wikidata is 8,848
> Wikiversity is 9,372 (includes Wiki Journals)
> Wikivoyage is 14,850
> Wikinews is 60,829
>
> There are 644 million websites. That means all our sites are doing fairly
> well relatively. Wiki Journals are hoping to split off to become their own
> sister site. The Wiki Journals accept primary research and than subject it
> to peer review. Might make sense to merge Wikinews into such a site. Of
> course would require consensus.
>

hey what brilliant idea! i'd support merging wikinews into a something like
wikijournal. besides the more traditional ways like preprint server or
mail, i'd find it especially charming if one option of peer review is the
wiki-way, via "tag the quality and the type", maybe even allow different
groups to set such tags. and not (only) the wikinews way, or, ironically,
the nupedia way, where an editor decides "publish or not", and articles get
stuck into a "preprint", "private", "sandbox" namespace. is this something
which you think might work?

rupert
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] Farewell, Erik!

2019-02-07 Thread rupert THURNER
Many thanks erik and all the best!! One sentence in eriks blog post cited i
found surprising. What type of modesty you guys were talking about?

"At Wikimania London (2014) I talked about how we should err on the side of
modesty. That message never came across. I started to have a discussion on
this within WMF but failed to bring this to fruition. My bad."



On Wed, Feb 6, 2019, 22:18 Dario Taraborelli  “[R]ecent revisions of an article can be peeled off to reveal older layers,
> which are still meaningful for historians. Even graffiti applied by vandals
> can by its sheer informality convey meaningful information, just like
> historians learned a lot from graffiti on walls of classic Pompei. Likewise
> view patterns can tell future historians a lot about what was hot and what
> wasn’t in our times. Reason why these raw view data are meant to be
> preserved for a long time.”
>
> Erik Zachte wrote these lines in a blog post
> <
> https://web.archive.org/web/20171018194720/http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/07/michael-jackson/
> >
> almost
> ten years ago, and I cannot find better words to describe the gift he gave
> us. Erik retired  this
> past Friday, leaving behind an immense legacy. I had the honor to work with
> him for several years, and I hosted this morning an intimate, tearful
> celebration of what Erik has represented for the Wikimedia movement.
>
> His Wikistats project —with his signature
> pale yellow background we've known and loved since the mid 2000s
>  >—has
> been much more than an "analytics platform". It's been an individual
> attempt he initiated, and grew over time, to try and comprehend and make
> sense of the largest open collaboration project in human history, driven by
> curiosity and by an insatiable desire to serve data to the communities that
> most needed it.
>
> Through this project, Erik has created a live record of data describing the
> growth and reach of all Wikimedia communities, across languages and
> projects, putting multi-lingualism and smaller communities at the very
> center of his attention. He coined metrics such as "active editors" that
> defined the benchmark for volunteers, the Wikimedia Foundation, and the
> academic community to understand some of the growing pains and editor
> retention issues
> <
> https://web.archive.org/web/20110608214507/http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/12/new-editors-are-joining-english-wikipedia-in-droves/
> >
> the movement has faced. He created countless reports—that predate by nearly
> a decade modern visualizations of online attention—to understand what
> Wikipedia traffic means in the context of current events like elections
> <
> https://web.archive.org/web/20160405055621/http://infodisiac.com/blog/2008/09/sarah-palin/
> >
> or public health crises
> <
> https://web.archive.org/web/20090708011216/http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/05/h1n1-flu-or-new-flu-or/
> >.
> He has created countless
>  visualizations
> <
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/10/27/new-interactive-visualization-wikipedia/
> >
> that show the enormous gaps in local language content and representation
> that, as a movement, we face in our efforts to build an encyclopedia for
> and about everyone. He has also made extensive use of pie charts
> <
> https://web.archive.org/web/20141222073751/http://infodisiac.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/piechartscorrected.png
> >,
> which—as friends—we are ready to turn a blind eye towards.
>
> Most importantly, the data Erik has brougth to life has been cited over
> 1,000 times
> <
> https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en_sdt=0%2C5=stats.wikimedia.org
> >
> in the scholarly literature. If we gave credit to open data creators in the
> same way as we credit authors of scholarly papers, Erik would be one of the
> most influential authors in the field, and I don't think it is much of a
> stretch to say that the massive trove of data and metrics Erik has made
> available had a direct causal role in the birth and growth of the academic
> field of Wikimedia research, and more broadly, scholarship of online
> collaboration.
>
> Like I said this morning, Erik -- you have been not only an invaluable
> colleague and a steward for the movement, but also a very decent human
> being, and I am grateful we shared some of this journey together.
>
> Please join me in celebrating Erik on his well-deserved retirement, read
> his statement  to learn
> what he's planning to do next, or check this lovely portrait
>  Wired published a
> while back about "the Stats Master Making Sense of Wikipedia's Massive Data
> Trove".
>
> Dario
>
>
> --
> *Dario Taraborelli  *Director, Head of Research, Wikimedia Foundation
> research.wikimedia.org • 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] August 2018 "Community Metrics and Activities Meeting"

2018-08-05 Thread rupert THURNER
pine, i find the lack of feedback a pity, so let me give at least my
personal impression. "activities and metrics" sounded bureaucratic, and it
sounded like work, not rewarding. the opposite of fun. not sure if a
regular meetup would work better? a hangout? same time all the time. no
matter how many persons are there, maybe once a month? one would need to
think a little about the fun though.

On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Pine W  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Given the lack of interest and lack of suggestions, I'm going to cancel the
> meeting. However, if other people would like to be bold in organizing a
> meeting like this, they are welcome to do so.
>
> I would like to encourage interpersonal and social connections among
> good-faith Wikimedia content contributors and grassroots project
> organizers, and I'd be glad to see suggestions and initiatives which do
> this.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 8:36 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The number of people who have participated in the Doodle poll is very
> low.
> > Before I give up on the idea of having a community metrics and activities
> > meeting, would anyone like to make a suggestion about how a meeting like
> > this could be more interesting or useful?
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 3:11 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> >
> >> I am attempting this one more time, with more advance notice and some
> >> alterations to the agenda.
> >>
> >> Here is a Doodle poll with options for scheduling:
> >> https://doodle.com/poll/iycrgia2wqune63g.
> >>
> >> I have created a page on Meta where people who want to include an agenda
> >> item can do so: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Community_Metrics_and_Activities_Meeting
> >>
> >> This is an experiment. I hope that a meeting like this can facilitate
> and
> >> nurture international connections, and I hope that people will be
> >> interested enough to participate.
> >>
> >> The meeting platform will be Zoom .
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


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

2018-07-01 Thread rupert THURNER
On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 3:36 PM James Salsman  wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:15 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> > WMF APs consistently fail to meet my expectations
>
> Pine do you have a list of specific flaws somewhere? You have good
> advice, but I've lost track of much of it.
>

ha, yes, me too. i particularly love measurements like "Wikipedia is
meaningful to 1 billion women", or "The number of English Wikipedia
administrators who report having the skills and tools to intervene in cases
of harassment increases by 25%". my first thought WMF wants to fire
somebody and assign measuring the two to this person :) but this cannot be,
there must be something i do not know behind it.

the 25% growth in budget is impressive, from 76 mio to 93 mio. the global
economy gows by 3.1 % [r1]. currently 5-10 pages are viewed per person [r2]
- to me a penetration hard to beat without offering additional content. i'd
be really interested about the reasoning behind this growth target.

[r1]
http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/06/05/global-economy-to-expand-by-3-1-percent-in-2018-slower-growth-seen-ahead
having
[r2] every person views 10 pages a month:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/WiViVI_panel_breakdown_by_country_for_GlobalNorth.png


rupert

> From: Katherine Maher  Date: 6/29/18  5:43 PM
(GMT-08:00) To: Wikimedia Mailing List ,
Funds Dissemination Committee List , "Staff (All)"
, wikimediaannounce-l <
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The
Wikimedia Foundation's FY18-19 Annual Plan is
> on Meta-wiki
> The Wikimedia Foundation is pleased to announce that our final FY18-19
> Annual Plan[1] is now available on Meta.

> [1]
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2018-2019/Final
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] WMFR financials, 1.2 mio budget, team of 15 FTE

2017-10-14 Thread rupert THURNER
the linkedin page of emeric says that WMFR has 1.2 Mio Eur budget, 15 FTE
employees. which year was this?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/evallespi/

DirectorCompany NameWikimédia FranceDates EmployedDec 2012 – Sep 2017
Employment
Duration4 yrs 10 mosLocationMontpellier | Paris


- June 2017 to present : Board of trustees member
- May 2016 to may 2017 : Chairman / President
- October 2014 to April 2016: Vice-chair
- December 2012 to September 2014: Deputy treasurer

Wikimedia France is a non-profit organization (based on "the Association
act of 1901" in France) which promotes and supports 14 projects, the best
known is Wikipedia. The 3 main missions are:
- Increase contents on this projects (quality and quantity) ;
- Facilitation of interested communities ;
- Action on the environment (economic, legal, technical) to make it
favorable to our movement.

Budget: € 1,200,000
Team (Full Time Equivalent) : 15

Main skills: strategy, volunteers & staff management, dyarchical
governance, international relationships, financial and accounting analysis,
internal control, human resources, labour law, press and media
relationships, public policy, lobbying, internal and external communication.

rupert
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

2017-08-28 Thread rupert THURNER
i do agree with john erling blad, peter southwood and others. this list is
15 years old, and has less traffic nowadays. see
https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html. years ago it had
between 400 and 600 mails a month, nowadays it is approaching half of it,

imo a list admin should make a list attracting and interesting. this means
i would find guidelines on how to write good emails, how often to write,
how much time it takes to write one, how to communicate effectively would
be something i'd love to see. why can we not revert to a positive way of
dealing with mails, picking out real life examples, dissect them and make
the community grow around them? how to handle new members vs old members?
when to repeat what without leaving the old ones annoyed, and the new ones
clueless?

instead of having a childish discussion about posting limits to be honest
...

rupert

On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 11:45 PM, John Erling Blad  wrote:

> I've seen this in other forums, but note that correlation isn't causality.
> Still trying to throttle a forum because someone think it has to much
> postings (it is to popular) is dangerous. It can be to quiet… ;)
>
> But hey, I have only a "45" on the popularity rank! [1] I have a long way
> to go! =D
>
> [1] https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html
>
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Asaf Bartov 
> wrote:
>
> > Your thesis implies admin actions made this list unpopular. I think it is
> > plain to see this *wasn't* the case with this list. Indeed, some opinions
> > voiced in this thread indicate people want *more* admin action.
> >
> >A.
> >
> > On Aug 26, 2017 6:30 PM, "John Erling Blad"  wrote:
> >
> > 1. The list gets popular
> > 2. The list attracts people
> > 3. The people sends emails
> > 4. Other people reads emails with opinions
> > 5. Other people don't want to read about other peoples opinions
> > 6. Other people want to limit other peoples opinions
> > 7. Admins starts to wonder how to limit emails
> > 8. Admins starts to limit people
> > 9. Admins makes list unpopular
> >
> > …
> >
> > This has no simple solution, and it can easily turn a living forum into a
> > dead forum.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 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] Mailing list usability: Observations about Mailman 3

2017-08-17 Thread rupert THURNER
Interesting thanks for the pointer. Compared to the options listed there a
mailman upgrade looks rather straight forward and, personally I d really
appreciate if it could be done, for the benefits Eric listed.

Rupert


On Aug 16, 2017 00:54, "Niharika Kohli"  wrote:

> A somewhat related ticket about trying to unify our discussion platforms
> was discussed in a session at Wikimania:
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T155678
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > The topic of list usability has come up here a few times in the past,
> > and efforts have been made over the years to pilot alternative forum
> > systems like Discourse, or to redirect more conversations to talk
> > pages.  Yet the mailing lists continue to be used for a significant
> > share of long-form Wikimedia discussions and announcements (see stats
> > at [1]).
> >
> > There's a Phabricator ticket [2], currently marked as stalled, for
> > upgrading Wikimedia's mailing list software, Mailman, to the newest
> > version. Mailman 3 is a complete rewrite, and this upgrade would
> > unquestionably be a major team-level effort. I've recently set up a
> > Mailman 3 install [3] (without archive migration) and wanted to share
> > some observations that may help with a decision to stay on the Mailman
> > 2 line or attempt an upgrade. Sent to wikimedia-l because I think this
> > discussion deserves a bit more mind-share beyond the developer
> > community.
> >
> > To see an active Mailman 3 community, check out the Fedora project's:
> >
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/
> >
> > == The good ==
> >
> > You can make a user account (including with third party providers,
> > opening the door for Wikimedia account integration), which makes
> > managing your subscriptions a bit easier. You don't have to sign up to
> > subscribe.
> >
> > You can post through the web. This is a pretty big deal, as it opens
> > up list participation to folks who don't want to use email for this
> > purpose. It makes the whole experience more forum-like for those who
> > prefer that.
> >
> > The interface is responsive and mobile-friendly. It uses the
> > widespread "Bootstrap" theme which is a bit generic but pleasing
> > enough.
> >
> > You can search the archives.
> >
> > There are some nice forum-like activity indicators in the web
> > interface and (sure to be controversial) upvote/downvote buttons for
> > posts, though the latter seem to largely be ignored in real-world
> > installations.
> >
> > While setting the software up was difficult (easier if you have prior
> > familiarity with Django), I did not encounter any showstopper bugs.
> >
> > == The bad ==
> >
> > The web interface does not degrade gracefully to users without
> > JavaScript: important features just stop working.
> >
> > The list administration tool has some new features, but it has also
> > lost old features. For example, while Mailman 2 lets you easily change
> > per-user moderation from the the "held messages" interface, this is
> > still an open task in Mailman 3. [4]
> >
> > The more modular approach in Mailman 3 means that features don't
> > always play together. For example, you can delete a list, but deleting
> > the archives requires manual execution of an un-official Python code
> > snippet. [5]
> >
> > This modularity also means some defaults are unhelpful. For example,
> > the default emails generated by the software do not link to the web
> > interface, because the web interface is a separate module that may not
> > be installed.
> >
> > == The ugly ==
> >
> > The platform is not yet ready for translation, and the interface is in
> > English only. Quoth the project leader in response to whether it is
> > possible to change the UI language: [6]
> >
> > > Unfortunately no. We've never gotten much traction for fully
> > > translating Mailman 3. We've had some interest but what we really
> > > need is a champion to drive the initiative. One of our biggest blockers
> > > is choosing a translation platform that's compatible with our free
> > software
> > > constraints, but also requiring a minimal amount of ongoing
> > infrastructure
> > > support from us.
> >
> > (Hey, I think I know such a platform.)
> >
> > Faithful migration will likely also require some level of custom
> > development. Quoth the docs: [7]
> >
> > > The short version is that as of now, upgrading from Mailman 2.1
> > > to Mailman 3.1 is buggy.
> > >
> > > Now the long version. Because of the changes in Database Schema,
> > > migrating from Mailman 2.1 to Mailman 3.1 is not very easy, though it
> > > can be done with some scripting. We are working on it and it should be
> > > working soon, we don’t have an exact timeline on it though.
> > >
> > > Archives however can be imported into Hyperkitty easily, however URLs
> > > to attachments are going to break because the URL paths are different
> > > in Hyperkitty. Although, You 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What's making you happy this week? (Week of 25 June 2017)

2017-07-01 Thread rupert THURNER
katherine maher already made 4 edits in 6 monts:
https://tools.wmflabs.org/guc/?user=Maherkr
(not counting bureaucratic pages like talk, meta, as nobody gives
money for them)

if 2 billion persons with internet capability on this planet would do
like here wikipedia would ahve 8 billtion edits  in 6 months:)

rupert

On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 6:27 AM, James Heilman  wrote:
> If it is from UNESCO does that mean it is under a Wikimedia compatible
> license? One could put it on Wikisource :-)
>
> James
>
> On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Gerard Meijssen 
> wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> I found a complete history of Africa that is available in PDF format from
>> UNESCO.. It is in eight parts and I am happy that it exists.. I added the
>> data in Wikidata but this is the link for the English version.. There are
>> versions in other languages as well :)
>> Thanks,
>>  GerardM
>>
>> http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/
>> themes/general-history-of-africa/volumes/
>>
>> On 27 June 2017 at 05:18, Pine W  wrote:
>>
>> > I like a tool for Wikidata that Hay created which is called VizQuery.
>> More
>> > information about it is below.
>> >
>> > What's making you happy this week?
>> >
>> > Pine
>> >
>> > -- Forwarded message --
>> > From: Hay (Husky) 
>> > Date: Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 4:10 PM
>> > Subject: [Wikidata] A visual way to query Wikidata
>> > To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." <
>> > wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> >
>> >
>> > Hey everyone,
>> > i've made a tool that allows you to query Wikidata in a visual way
>> > without using SPARQL. It's called VizQuery:
>> >
>> > http://tools.wmflabs.org/hay/vizquery/
>> >
>> > The possibilities of using Wikidata to do interesting queries are
>> > endless, and the current query service allows for very powerful
>> > queries indeed. However, i feel that for the general public,
>> > especially those who are not that technical, it might be a bit
>> > overwhelming and difficult for them to learn a complex language such
>> > as SPARQL. To make people familiar with the concept of queries i
>> > believe a somewhat less intimidating approach might be useful, hence
>> > this tool.
>> >
>> > VizQuery is only capable of doing a subset of possible queries. It's
>> > basically simple triples, variables (prefixed with '?') and literals
>> > (between "quotes"). You can do pretty powerful queries with only those
>> > things though. For example, here's a query with vegetarians who are
>> > married to a vegetarian:
>> >
>> > http://bit.ly/2sydpmW
>> >
>> > Under the hood VizQuery uses Ruben Verborgh's SPARQL.js library to
>> > convert between JSON and SPARQL, so theoretically every SPARQL query
>> > you could do in the regular query service can be done in VizQuery.
>> > However, many queries won't work because the visual interface only
>> > supports a subset of options: it's pretty hard to create user-friendly
>> > GUI representations of many of the complex SPARQL features. :)
>> >
>> > Anyway, i'd like to hear what you think. Bugs, feature request and
>> > pull requests are also welcome on my Github page:
>> > https://github.com/hay/wiki-tools
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> > -- Hay
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Wikidata mailing list
>> > wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 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,
>> 
>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> 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] Funds Dissemination Committee Recommendations - Round 2 of 2016-17

2017-05-17 Thread rupert THURNER
To be clear I did only suggest to list a number for the activities the fdc
gives a comment. I e. Fill out the first column and put a not applicable in
the recommended money column.

On May 17, 2017 04:25, "Pine W" <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> For what it's worth, there has been previous discussions of having external
> reviews of WMF spending, such as a peer review from a similar institution.
> I think that this is a good idea. This also fits in with my long-standing
> hope that WMF will become more transparent with its financial expenditures.
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 16 May 2017 at 11:52, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Why the amount is missing for the WMF?
> > >
> > > Rupert
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Hello Rupert -
> >
> > The Funds Dissemination Committee is not tasked with recommending funding
> > for the Wikimedia Foundation; the committee only reviews and provides
> > feedback on the draft annual plan.
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 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] Funds Dissemination Committee Recommendations - Round 2 of 2016-17

2017-05-16 Thread rupert THURNER
Why the amount is missing for the WMF?

Rupert


On May 15, 2017 12:21 PM, "Risker"  wrote:

> Dear Wikimedians,
>
>
> The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a year to make
> recommendations about how to effectively allocate movement funds to achieve
> the Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy.  This is now the
> 9th round of allocations made by the FDC, and we met in person from May
> 12-14, 2017 in Warsaw to deliberate on 4 proposals submitted this round, as
> well as to provide feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation draft Annual Plan.
> We would like to thank all of the participating organizations for the hard
> work they put into this round’s proposals.
>
>
> Our recommendations for Round 2 2016-2017 on the annual plan grants to the
> Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees have now been posted on Meta.[1] The
> Board will review our deliberations and make a decision by July 1, 2017.
>
>
> We received grant requests for approximately USD 1,430,000 this round.
> Before we met, committee members reviewed all of the proposals and
> documents submitted.  We were assisted in this review with input from the
> FDC staff assessments which included analysis on impact, finances, and
> programs, as well as community comments on the proposals.
>
>
> As you may know, there is a formal process to submit complaints or appeals
> about these recommendations. Here are the steps for both:
>
>
> Any organization that would like to submit an appeal on the FDC’s Round 1
> recommendation should submit it to the Board representatives to the FDC by
> 23:59 UTC on 8 June 2017 in accord with the appeal process outlined in the
> FDC Framework [2]. A formal appeal to challenge the FDC’s recommendation
> should be in the form of a 500-or-fewer word summary directed to the two
> non-voting WMF Board representatives to the FDC, Dariusz Jemielniak and
> Christophe Henner. The appeal should be submitted on-wiki, and must be
> submitted by the Board Chair of a funding-seeking applicant. The Wikimedia
> Foundation Board will publish its decision on this and all recommendations
> by July 1, 2017.
>
>
> Anyone can file a complaint about the FDC process [3] with the Ombudsperson
> at any time. The complaint should be submitted on wiki, as well. The
> Ombudsperson will publicly document the complaint, and investigate as
> needed.
>
>
>
> On behalf of the FDC,
>
>
> Anne Clin / Risker
>
> FDC Chair
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_recommendations/2016-2017_
> round_2
>
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Appeals_to_
> the_Board_on_the_
> recommendations_of_the_FDC
>
> [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Complaints_
> about_the_FDC_process
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 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] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

2017-03-25 Thread rupert THURNER
i got two further links in private mails which seem helpful in this
area. first, a page on commons which suggests to split commons in
"safe" and "not safe". besides putting the license info and
attribution into the picture this would be my personal favourite, as
it can be easy explained to users:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/NonFreeWiki

and second, steinsplitter noted that cc-by-sa 4 contains a clause in
section 6 where the license reinstates in case it is fixed after a
notification:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode

what gergő says, that this hurts the reputation and morale, and
andreas kolbes remark that what people see on wikipedia is giving a
wrong example - mere mortals do not get such subtleties. while i fully
agree with yann that it is not pleasant that a political party uses an
image, i do not think you did upload to commons to make money, isn't
it? so if you get 500 or 5000 it does not matter too much?

james case is very different. there somebody deliberately breaks the
license for years. i contacted amazon and the process to report
copyright violations is tedios. only the person whose copyright is
violated can do it, and single cases need to be reported. not funny if
*thousands* of books are concerned. as far as i know james is in
contact with the wikimedia foundation legal team. stephen, any news
here?

best
rupert

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Lilburne  wrote:
> It probably isn't fair. But then again without actually contacting the
> copyright holder the CC licenses are nothing more than a indicator that
> reuse may be OK. Then when you get into chains of derivatives you are in a
> world of pain. Websites are particularly prone to fouling up the licenses.
> Flickr does not allow people to upload CC licensed images from other people
> because the attributions will be wrong. Suppose Jane Doe uploads an CC image
> from Joe Blow, everywhere the site displays the image it will end up being
> credited to Jane Doe not Joe Blow. Accreditation becomes very hard if Joe
> Blow's image is actually a derivative that contains parts of images from
> multiple other people.
>
> When those on Commons start cloning out watermarks on images they create a
> liability for down stream reusers.
>
>
>
> On 07/03/2017 03:13, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
>>
>> People usually encounter images in Wikipedia, and Wikipedia does not
>> comply
>> with the CC licence requirements either, the way downstream re-users are
>> expected to comply with them. That's a problem.
>>
>> For example, the CC BY 3.0 licence requires re-users to name the image's
>> author, and much else besides. But when a CC BY 3.0 image is used in
>> Wikipedia, or indeed on a content page in Commons, none of that
>> information
>> is present. All Wikipedia does provide is a link to the image's Commons
>> page.[1]
>>
>> Wikipedia is advertised as the free encyclopedia. This includes people
>> being free to re-use any part of it, even for commercial purposes. So why
>> shouldn't people think that they are allowed to use an image in exactly
>> the
>> same way Wikipedia is using it?
>>
>> If a user sees an image in Wikipedia, it is quite natural for them, given
>> what they have been told, to right-click on it and select copy, without
>> even going to the Commons page with the detailed licence info. But if they
>> do what Wikipedia does, i.e. only providing a link to the source, they can
>> get slapped with a bill for several thousand dollars or euros.
>>
>> One recent press article[2] gave the example of a single mum on benefits
>> who received a demand for 7,500 euro (nearly 8,000 dollars) from a
>> Wikipedian because of two images she had used without giving the required
>> attribution.
>>
>> It doesn't seem fair.
>>
>>
>> [1] Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cercospora_capsici
>> [2]
>>
>> https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Wikipedia-beraet-ueber-Distanzierung-von-Fotolizenz-Abzockern-3630842.html?seite=2
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Gergő Tisza  wrote:
>>
>>> I can read some German and looked into a similar case the last time this
>>> came up (the thread was called "harald bischoff advertising to make
>>> images
>>> "for the wikimedia foundation" and then suing users"). It involved
>>> (amongst
>>> others) an amateur news blog which took an image from the Wikipedia
>>> article
>>> of some politician and credited it to "Wikipedia" (with link to the image
>>> description page; but no author or license), and was slapped with a
>>> ~$1000
>>> fee. These kind of predatory tactics hurt the reputation and moral
>>> standing
>>> of the movement IMO.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] Announcing the Hardware donation program

2017-03-17 Thread rupert THURNER
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Asaf Bartov  wrote:
> We currently have approximately 20 laptops ready to be donated.
> Applications are welcome.

asaf, you mind loose a word about the spec or brand of these laptops?
fyi, in CH we work with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labdoo for such
occasions, adding e.g. offline en:wp, fr:wp and kiwix to what labdoo
puts on.

rupert

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] Draft Code of Conduct for Technical Spaces

2017-03-07 Thread rupert THURNER
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 7:09 AM, Gerard Meijssen
 wrote:
> On 8 March 2017 at 06:45, MZMcBride  wrote:
>> Risker wrote:
>> >I am very curious. Why is it that there seems to be so much resistance to
>> >this draft code of conduct?
>>
>> You may find these links helpful:
>>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-
>> February/086595.html
>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct#Summary_of_criticisms
> With all respect, the summary is not a summary. Wading through long, long
> more of the same is not helpful. We have had more of the same here on this
> list.
risker asked if it is process or contents. as far as i was able to
follow: both. isarra hits it so much on the spot, with "When designing
anything - processes, software, architecture - you need to know your
use cases in order to properly address them."  from process
perspective it is driven by WMF employees. (nearly) no input from
volunteers, and if there was input, it was "WMF, please let the
volunteers run making policies for volunteers". from a content
perspective, the policy is bloated, does not remove something else. no
case was shown where the pre-existing or common sense is not good
enough. the WMF persons driving it seemed to be fine with ignoring
these inputs - or mainly the "no-input". at the end of the day if you
have 1000 pages of policies, or 1050, what is the big difference? what
is the difference of having 40 committees or 41? one. or, maybe 42 for
the douglas adams fans.

sometimes i feel a mentality of "less is more" would be a benefit.
1050 pages of policies sounds like a harassment by itself. but would i
invest time to address it? no way - i is not fun and makes tired. if
we want less policies or more efficient ones, WMF could pay less
persons, they would then have no time any more to produce texts like
this. or WFM could pay a person to delete pages, instead of paying a
person to add pages. kind of paying a fitness trainer to loose weight
i guess.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

2017-03-05 Thread rupert THURNER
case 1:
daniel pugge has a single person enterprise, and a blog. out of
wordpress he linked to the "juice plus" wikipedia article with marco
almbauers picture on it. the wordpress preview showing the thumbnail
of the linked article. marco then used the services of kurt kulac,
former president of wikimedia austria, to send a cease and desist
letter to daniel. reason: cc-by-sa-4.0, "license not stated directly
adjacent or within the picture". daniels conclusion "don't use
wikipedia commons" is not what the movement mission is:
* 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Juice_Plus=revision=708489448=707955254
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VSf12T37fY
* cost: this one the cheap version, 524 euro,
https://www.jurablogs.com/go/abmahnung-marco-almbauer, daniels lawyer
not included
* http://danielpugge.de/impressum/
this case i find highly disturbing - i thought he cc license is fixed
now that dummy linking by dummy persons is not dangerous any more.

case 2:
kai copied a foto, medium resolution from commons to his own
webserver. he linked to it, attributing properly. afterwards he
deleted the website including the attribution, but left the picture on
the server. it still could be found by the search indixers. from the
cc germany mailing list, getting the helpful answer in the lines of
"if you are that stupid you deserve to pay":
* http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-de/2017-January/001138.html

to give other examples of edits the vote tried to ban from de:wp are
ones of 10 or so authors considered to create a trap. e.g. change the
foto of rijksmuseum amsterdam to his own, or berlin cathedral,
sometimes including an edit war between the two camps:
* 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rijksmuseum=prev=728651441
* 
https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Berliner_Dom=next=163030993
* reporting for vandalism:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalismusmeldung/Archiv/2017/02/26#Artikel_Berliner_Dom_.28erl..29

to name a couple of other persons if you want to google for
"abmahnfalle wikipedia" (cease and desist trap wikipedia):
Harald Bischoff, Martina Nolte, Ralf Roletschek, Alexander Savin,
Wladyslaw Sojka, Sven Teschke, Dirk Vorderstraße, Thomas Wolf.

personally i favor a technical solution, as i find it pointless to put
people on some pillory for doing what the law allows them to do. like
separating into two commons - one save for reuse, one to be used if
you know a lawyer. or to built into wikipedias infrastructure to
include the license and author within the picture, fix wordpress,
etcetc. besides of course fixing the CC license in case it still is
not ready for proper online usage.

rupert

On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Lodewijk  wrote:
> I've run into one or two people on OTRS that were reusing the materials in
> good faith, but that got a letter from such a photographer that wanted to
> see money (and that is just spillover from Germany to the Netherlands).
> Examples linked in the discussion include this warning and bill
> 
> of
> hundreds of euros for a foundation that did not specify the author name or 
> this
> website that was asked  to
> pay over a thousand euro. The discussion on the German WIkipedia may
> contain more links, and the linked blogs are insightful on how this
> behaviour is being perceived. Just google for "abmahnung bild wikipedia" to
> find more examples and stories.
>
> Hope that clarifies. German Wikipedians may have better examples.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2017-03-04 12:47 GMT+01:00 David Gerard :
>
>> This thread is notably long on hypothetical and meta-level discussions
>> and very short on concrete examples of the supposedly problematic
>> uploads under discussion. What are the generally accepted examples of
>> what we're actually talking about here?
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-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] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

2017-03-04 Thread rupert THURNER
that i find not acceptable to be honest, james. is there a list of
such books which can be passed on? i contacted amazon asking them why
they sell such books. their support is very welcoming - but its easier
for them with links.

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 3:47 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We have a publisher who have created a few hundred thousand books based on
> Wikipedia text. Here is an example of one of many
> https://books.google.ca/books?id=aQPMAwAAQBAJ=PT100
>
> They do not attribute Wikipedia and they do not release the content under a
> CC BY SA 3.0 license. They claim copyright to the material themselves and
> are selling it / misleading the people who by the books. I have reached out
> to them and they refuse to comply with our license even after being asked.
>
> Should we take legal action against them? IMO yes we should. While we
> should ask people to follow our license before taking action, if they
> refuse than we should follow through with enforcement.
>
> James
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:50 AM, Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The CC-BY-SA license asks for a basic courtesy: You give an acknowledgement
>> to the person who graciously let you use their work totally free.
>>
>> It takes all of five seconds to add "Photo by ___" to a caption. It
>> takes very little more to add a note that the photo is CC licensed. I can
>> see why people are a bit put out when someone won't do these very minimal
>> things in exchange for a rich library of free (as in speech and beer)
>> material.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Mar 1, 2017 10:44 PM, "rupert THURNER" <rupert.thur...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > on the german wikipedia there was a poll to ban images of users who
>> > send cease and desist letters, triggered by a recent case of thomas
>> > wolf trying to charge 1200 euro out of a tiny non-profit which
>> > improperly reused one of his images [1]. thomas article work includs
>> > "improving text deserts, and changing bad images to (often his own)
>> > better quality images"[2]. there is a broad majority against people
>> > who use cease and desist letters as a business model. anyway a small
>> > number of persons do have such a business model, some of them even
>> > administrators on commons, like alexander savin [3][4].
>> >
>> > but the topic of course is much more subtle than described above, the
>> > discussion was heated, and the result close - as always in the last 10
>> > years. a digital divide between persons supporting the original
>> > mindset of wikipedia which sees every additional reuse, unrestricted,
>> > as success, and the ones who think it is not desired to incorrectly
>> > reference, or feel that others should not make money out of their
>> > work.
>> >
>> > as both are viable opinions would it be possible to split commons in
>> > two, for every opinion? the new commons would include safe licenses
>> > like cc-4.0 and users who are friendly to update their licenses to
>> > better ones in future. the old commons would just stay as it is. a
>> > user of wikipedia can easy distinguish if she wants to include both
>> > sources, or only one of them? there is only one goal: make cease and
>> > desist letters as business model not interesting any more,
>> > technically, while keeping the morale of contributors high, both
>> > sides.
>> >
>> > [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/
>> > keine_Bilder_in_Artikelnamensraum_von_direkt_abmahnenden_Fotografen
>> > [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Der_Wolf_im_Wald
>> > [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:A.Savin
>> > [4] https://tarnkappe.info/ausgesprochen-peinlich-abmahnfalle-wikipedia-
>> > interview-mit-simplicius/
>> >
>> > best
>> > rupert
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 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/
>> wi

[Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

2017-03-01 Thread rupert THURNER
on the german wikipedia there was a poll to ban images of users who
send cease and desist letters, triggered by a recent case of thomas
wolf trying to charge 1200 euro out of a tiny non-profit which
improperly reused one of his images [1]. thomas article work includs
"improving text deserts, and changing bad images to (often his own)
better quality images"[2]. there is a broad majority against people
who use cease and desist letters as a business model. anyway a small
number of persons do have such a business model, some of them even
administrators on commons, like alexander savin [3][4].

but the topic of course is much more subtle than described above, the
discussion was heated, and the result close - as always in the last 10
years. a digital divide between persons supporting the original
mindset of wikipedia which sees every additional reuse, unrestricted,
as success, and the ones who think it is not desired to incorrectly
reference, or feel that others should not make money out of their
work.

as both are viable opinions would it be possible to split commons in
two, for every opinion? the new commons would include safe licenses
like cc-4.0 and users who are friendly to update their licenses to
better ones in future. the old commons would just stay as it is. a
user of wikipedia can easy distinguish if she wants to include both
sources, or only one of them? there is only one goal: make cease and
desist letters as business model not interesting any more,
technically, while keeping the morale of contributors high, both
sides.

[1] 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/keine_Bilder_in_Artikelnamensraum_von_direkt_abmahnenden_Fotografen
[2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Der_Wolf_im_Wald
[3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:A.Savin
[4] 
https://tarnkappe.info/ausgesprochen-peinlich-abmahnfalle-wikipedia-interview-mit-simplicius/

best
rupert

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] Moderation notice

2017-02-11 Thread rupert THURNER
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Asaf Bartov  wrote:
> Hello, everyone.
>
> I share the opinion that moderation actions should be transparent. So:
>
> I have now placed Gerard Meijssen on moderation.  He has been posting very
> frequently to the list, far exceeding the requested "soft limit" of 30
> posts per month, and has exhibited disrespectful discourse.
>
> I encourage Gerard to revise his approach to communicating on this list.
> He will be unmoderated next month.

asaf, you are one of the most respected dinosaurs in this universe,
and you need to use moderation instead of a private word? i have a
hard time believing my eyes.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
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] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

2017-01-10 Thread rupert THURNER
Rogol, a good start into 2017! I have difficulties understanding your
question, especially why you are asking it now. This topic was discussed
quite often and for a long time to justify putting money behind talking at
least imo.

you are unhappy a restricted grant was received without community consensus
on commons to have such a technology included? Or you are unhappy that WMF
builds up a Wikidata team when wikimedia Deutschland has already one? You
are unhappy that WMF cuts the money for WMDE and at the same time increases
spending in the same area of technology? Or you are unhappy that there will
be another technical lead while at WMDE there is a lot of experience which
you consider waste and unnecessary bureaucracy? Or you want to discuss how
it will be implemented? Or, to put it in other words, what input would you
give or expect if a document like you are requesting would exist?

Best Rupert



On Jan 10, 2017 11:28 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors"  wrote:

Dear Wes

Thank you for yet another prompt response.  It seems almost churlish to say
that unfortunately that is not what I have been asking for -- I must be
very bad at expressing myself to have given so many different people so
many different mistaken impressions of my request.  To me a product roadmap
would be a quite high-level view of the new products and major deveopments
and their linkages looking out on a time scale significantly in excess of a
single year, and at a level of detail significantly less than the
aggregation of all the teams' quarterly plans.  The roadmap would have the
level of abstraction, interconnection and timscale that allows you to say
that a three-year project such as the one you have just announced will
expedite features on your roadmap and that the grant enabled accelerating
the already started work on Structured Commons into a quicker three-year
time frame: so a roadmap on which you can locate a project with a time
frame that was previously beyond three years let alone one.  It is also
known that there are long-term projects such as parser unification, new
editors and discussion systems which look out well beyond the current
year.  Are there others -- we do not (yet) know.

So again, my request is that you share this higher-level, longer-term, if
not completely definitve roadmap with the community in the interests of
transparency not only as an abstract  objective but in order to maximise
the benefits of early engagement, discussion and co-creation.

Yours
"Rogol"

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Wes Moran  wrote:

> Hello Rogol,
>
> Thanks for the question.  The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
> community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1]. We
> update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as they
> may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
> specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation, discussion
or
> connection through those pathways and directly with the feature teams [3].
>
> Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams
have
> specific objectives and goals in this years annual plan.
>
> Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
> discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].
>
> Thanks,
> Wes
>
> Wes Moran
> Vice President of Product
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
> [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
> [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
> [4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors  >
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further replies.  I assume that
> > the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
> > various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by the
> > phrase product roadmap.  "A single document" would be nice, but whatever
> it
> > is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Rogol,
> > >
> > > that is why I pointed you to the links in that document, which go all
> the
> > > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further
discussions
> > > over the years. These pretty much establish for me that this item has
> > been
> > > a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> > > misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation of
> the
> > > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes
the
> > > Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Denny
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Passing of User:Danveg, and reminder about people in distress

2017-01-04 Thread rupert THURNER
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:34 AM, James Alexander 
wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:16 PM Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > Maybe we should invite the affiliates to put together and maintain a
> > resource page on Meta with contact details for such organisations so that
> > everyone has access to necessary local details regardless of where they
> be
> >
>
> Great minds think alike :) We're putting together a curated list of
> resources on meta
>  Mental_health_resources>
> for resources like this you can find right now. If anyone has additional
> resources (especially for countries not currently listed) we'd love more!
> We're trying to look into each resource before listing (and keep the list
> short and usable for each country) so the talk page is best for additions.
> Right now we have it set up to both list all of the countries we have
> information for and list YOUR country (based on your IP) first to make
> usable information easiest to find.
>
> it looks good, i wanted to add  for switzerland. but touching a page which
is from the foundation by the foundation, and the main support page even
stating "serves the foundation"? i do not even have a right to edit there?
and i always thought foundation stuff is on the foundation wiki *wonder*

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

2016-11-21 Thread rupert THURNER
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:47 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you could
> argue that a technical code of conduct is needed. When you consider the
> actual context, however, it becomes pretty clear that this is unnecessary
> bureaucracy. The repeated concerns about outsized influence by
> Wikimedia Foundation employees have largely gone ignored.
>
i think so too. common sense replaces a lot of rules and policies :) donors
money is imo better invested in writing good software supporting the
mission than making policies. we have enough policies and rules of all
kind, being a burden when contriuting, especially to newbies. i get a
chicken skin of fright when i read the collaboration teams plans of putting
bureaucracy into software, talking about "the largest wikis have the most
complex workflows". the most complex and stable workflow i know is in
wikinews, and we all know that wikinews died. i would really love if
"collaboration" would be the main topic, not "process" and "rule". this is
just so against the basic "wiki" idea, our core value.

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor safety and anonymity: ending IP address exposure?

2016-11-18 Thread rupert THURNER
On Nov 18, 2016 05:09, "Gergo Tisza"  wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Brion Vibber 
> wrote:
>
> > 1) Eliminate IP address exposure for non-logged-in editors. Those
editors
> > should be either given a random, truly anonymous identifier, or
required to
> > create a pseudonym as a login.
> >
>
> I filed https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T133452 for that a while ago
(but
> then never got around to expand it). It >
I am thrilled about this proposal thank you brion and get-go.

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apple Pay donations

2016-11-16 Thread rupert THURNER
Ah, I saw https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Pay now, which says it
takes a part of the credit card fees, 0.15 % in the US. Lower in the
European Union as fees for credit cards must be lower than 0.3 %.

This would mean a normal credit card payment fee applies, isn't it?

Rupert

On Nov 16, 2016 09:11, "Kevin Payravi" <kevinpayr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Rupert,
>
> The 30% you're referring to is the cut Apple takes for in-app purchases.
> Apple Pay is a different platform; neither consumer, merchant, or in this
> case, donor and receiver, are charged a fee.
>
> Kevin Payravi
> W: www.kevinpayravi.com
> E: kevinpayr...@gmail.com
> P: (330) 554 - 3397
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:06 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Apple takes their usual 30 % on such donations ?
> >
> > On Nov 15, 2016 02:12, "Steven Walling" <steven.wall...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > Today Apple announced a bunch of 501(c)3 partners which now can use
> Apple
> > > Pay to make instant donations. Announcement at:
> > > http://www.apple.com/newsroom/2016/11/a-touch-of-giving-
> > > with-apple-pay.html
> > >
> > > Does WMF fundraising have plans to integrate with Apple Pay, especially
> > on
> > > mobile devices? I understand that right now it's limited to the US and
> > the
> > > team has been focusing a ton on international payment providers (which
> is
> > > great). Given that payments on mobile are such a huge headache and
> > > declining desktop traffic to Wikimedia properties, it might be an
> > > interesting pilot to explore nonetheless.
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter to the new CTO

2016-11-11 Thread rupert THURNER
On Nov 9, 2016 20:26, "C. Scott Ananian"  wrote:
>
> I'm going to take the bait and respond in part, to defend the teams and
> projects I work with:
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
> wrote:
>
> > they are summarised by the four words
> >  *under-ambitious,
> > under-resourced, under-managed and under-performing*. The
VE/Parsoid/Flow
> > complex suffers from scope mismatch. As a vehicle for delivering a
WYSIWYG
> > editor and discussion board it is over-complex,
>
>
> I'll stop here.  I think it is poorly understood in the community how
> complex wikitext markup has been allowed to grow over the decades it has
> been under development.  There *is no specification for wikitext*.  We
have
> informal guides which omit most of the interesting corner cases, like,
say,
> priority between conflicting markup.  Take a look at
> http://spec.commonmark.org/ to see what a precise specification for a
*much
> simpler* markup language would look like.  As you read through the cases
in
> that spec, consider that if you translated most of the examples into
> wikitext, *literally no one knows what the expected output would be*.  The

To make the long story short I would really love and support any well
specified markup. If it is only for a part of the content and there is a
note on top which syntax the text follows I d love it too.

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 - 2016 Fundraising Report just published

2016-10-19 Thread rupert THURNER
Joseph would you be able to elaborate on "privacy and other legal reasons"
statement?

Best,
Rupert

On Oct 18, 2016 19:25, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:

> Hey both,
>
>
> Apologies for the delay in responding,I have been meaning to respond to
> this.
>
>
> Lucas: So one of the biggest changes in Latin American was that the
> fundraising tech team integrated a new payment processor to accept both
> local currency and payment methods in a number of Latin America countries.
> This new integration was key to offering a convenient way to donate and
> what ultimately led to the success of the Latin America campaign. Out of
> all the Latin America countries Brazil as you might expect had the biggest
> gains from this improved payments flow being the largest in size both in
> terms of: total contributions; the numbers of donors; and its large
> population size in comparison to its neighbours.
>
>
> Lodewijk: So just as last year, fundraising totals have been posted by
> region but there is currently no public data for donations from each
> country. It's felt that the regional breakdown at least provides a
> compromise between providing a semi-decent view of where our donations come
> from while at the same time respecting privacy and other legal reasons that
> is associated with releasing country level data.
>
> Seddon
>
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Lucas Teles  wrote:
>
> > Wow... the increasing donation on Latin America is really impressive!
> >
> > Is there any specific country that helped more on that?
> >
> > Teles
> >
> > Em sexta-feira, 30 de setembro de 2016, Samuel Patton <
> > spat...@wikimedia.org>
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > My name is Sam and I'm part of the online fundraising team. I'm writing
> > to
> > > let you know that we just published our 2015 - 2016 Fundraising Report,
> > and
> > > would love for you to check it out.
> > >
> > > Link here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2015-2016_
> > > Fundraising_Report
> > >
> > > I've been a happy and small part of the fundraising team for almost two
> > > years. And I think I speak for everyone when I say *thank you* for the
> > time
> > > and energy you put into making the Wikimedia projects the vibrant,
> > > priceless resources that they are for millions of people around the
> > planet.
> > > It's a joy to help share your work with the world.
> > >
> > > Let us know what you think and what we can clarify.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Sam
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Steward for Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator at Portuguese Wikipedia
> and
> > Wikimedia Commons.
> > Sent from mobile. Please, excuse my brevity.
> >
> > +55 (71) 99707 6409
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
> *Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Discussing Creative Commons 4.0

2016-10-05 Thread rupert THURNER
thank you very much, it's about time this happens! It might be an idea to
detail the exact license differences a little bit more prominent?

Rupert

On Oct 5, 2016 22:13, "Stephen LaPorte"  wrote:

Hello all,

Today we opened a discussion asking for community input
 on a
proposed change to the Wikimedia Terms of Use to upgrade to Creative
Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license
. The new license is
easier to read and more internationally friendly, so we hope it will ensure
that people can easily and freely share or remix Wikimedia content. The
amendment to our Terms of Use is currently available in German, French,
Spanish, Russian, Arabic, and we welcome further translations and
discussion in any language.

For your review, you may find the proposed amendment and background
information here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use/Creative_
Commons_4.0/Legal_note

Please join the discussion on the talk page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Talk:Terms_of_use/Creative_Commons_4.0

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and comments.

Best,
Stephen

-- 
Stephen LaPorte
Senior Legal Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation

*NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you
have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the
mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and ethical
reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
.*

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Suggesting moderation

2016-07-27 Thread rupert THURNER
there are guidelines for mailing lists here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Nathan  wrote:

> I find Trillium's denied e-mail to be off-topic but hardly so objectionable
> that a moderator reviewing it should deny it. If it is the case that a
> moderator suggested minor stylistic changes (couple days to couple of
> days), that seems a bit distasteful and probably not what list members
> would imagine a moderator doing.
>
> Delays in processing moderated posts causing them to become untimely is
> something that I think is unavoidable, and the solution of course is to not
> cause yourself to be put on moderation. The mods are volunteers and have
> historically hardly been careless about placing people on moderation willy
> nilly.
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 4:56 AM, Trillium Corsage  >
> wrote:
>
> > I've been placed in "moderate" status on this list (I criticize the
> reason
> > but it would be a distraction to get into that right now). It's often
> > frustrating to receive the "rejected" notice which comes often without
> > explanation at all, and sometimes with unexplained explanation if you'll
> > tolerate the phrase i.e. "a moderator has found your email would not be
> > helpful" (why?).
> >
> > Once the moderators took like three days to disapprove my email, and
> > actually gave the reason that "the conversation has now moved on from
> that
> > point."
> >
> > Let me discuss the most recent example from last week which was
> > frustrating to me. For the sake of discussion I'll copy-paste my email in
> > question (it's at least non-offensive in any reasonable sense, and it'd
> be
> > a stretch to call it even disagreeable) at the very end of this email,
> and
> > tell you what happened.
> >
> > The email was rejected on the following bases:
> >
> > A) "I may approve this email if you change the subject to reflect the
> > content." Now, it was a response to Brigham's farewell message asking
> that
> > he answer about a matter that occurred during his tenure. Yeah, I guess I
> > could break up the email chain with a fresh header (so could the
> moderator)
> > but is this truly grounds to moderate? And as I said in the email to the
> > moderator, there was a timing issue. By the time I got the rejection
> > message, Brigham had packed his desk and exited the WMF HQ no doubt. Note
> > also that the moderator says he "may" approve if I do that. Or he may
> not.
> > So he's setting up an iterative process.
> >
> > B) The moderator then gave me two suggestions on improving my phrasing
> > within the email. For example I said "Mr. Brigham leaves in a couple
> days"
> > but the moderator preferred "couple *of* days." Is this truly basis for
> > moderation?! Minute preferences of writing style?
> >
> > C) Then came the insult. The moderator suggested I was "baiting the WMF,"
> > and copied his fellow moderators to chime in. So he's now set up my email
> > for a "consensus" style of approval. All the moderators must agree it's
> > okay. It doesn't move on one or the other them, everybody has to sign
> off.
> > My email (you can read it down below as I said) is not "baiting" (or
> > trolling which I'd argue he really meant) it describes things, makes my
> > point, refers in detail to past efforts I made to get an answer, and is
> > generally polite.
> >
> > All for your perusal on the Wikimedia-l moderation question. Anyhow, I
> did
> > feel aggravated at the time, and it turned me off to the list in general.
> > This email itself will likely be rejected, if it is I'll consider sending
> > it direct to the list participants that have commented.
> >
> > Trillium Corsage
> >
> > 26.07.2016, 14:58, "Brill Lyle" :
> > >  I was on a very active music mailing list for over 10 years and I was
> > >  grateful it was not moderated. Moderation can inhibit discussion, even
> > when
> > >  there are disruptors, and it also requires moderators donate a lot of
> > >  volunteer hours. Which I think within the Wikimedia family community
> is
> > >  already being required of many of us. So I would vote against
> > moderation.
> > >
> > >  If an argument / shift was towards moderation, maybe it could be based
> > on
> > >  edit count and/or contributions? But that seems a bit extreme and
> awful.
> > >
> > >  - Erika
> > >
> > >  *Erika Herzog*
> > >  Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle
> > >*
> > >
> > >  On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:26 AM, Asaf Bartov 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >>   A meta-question: I am wondering whether, if one thinks a user on
> this
> > list
> > >>   should be moderated, it is better to discuss it privately with the
> > list
> > >>   admins (who, if convinced, could announce the moderation publicly,
> or
> > not),
> > >>   or publicly on this list (explicitly inviting more opinions, being
> > >>   transparent about my position 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How to communicate compassionately with non-native English speakers

2016-07-07 Thread rupert THURNER
Lol Peter you hullarious, I thought this thread is exactly about how you
could put the style Gerard writes his emails into his cultural context :)

Rupert
On Jul 7, 2016 15:19, "Peter Southwood" 
wrote:

> Gerard,
> Since you appear to have little time for compassion, I will bluntly tell
> you what many people here have appeared to be trying to get through to you
> in more diplomatic language, and have made allowances for the fact that
> English is not apparently your home language.
> I/We find you unnecessarily blunt, rude and abrasive in your
> communication. I don’t know if this is intentional, but gentle hints do not
> seem to get through. We tolerate your language most of the time because we
> value your input, but we do not like it.
> I am not going to ask you to change your ways as it may not be possible,
> or you may not want to do so. It is your choice.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: Thursday, 07 July 2016 10:00 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] How to communicate compassionately with
> non-native English speakers
>
> Hoi,
> You forget the other part that is so vital. Compassion is for the weak, it
> puts you in a superior position. The problem is much more in the
> understanding of what someone else has to say. It is not only about
> sending, it is as much about receiving. Listening, understanding is where
> we have a problem. Not so much in the choice of words.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On 7 July 2016 at 09:50, Michael Jahn  wrote:
>
> > "it is not so much
> > the words that are used but it is understanding what points are made
> > and how they challenge the status quo."
> >
> > --> This may be true, and what we should strive for as a movement. But
> > --> you
> > still need words to make those points, and while one may fail to
> > understand what points are being made, even if all the words are
> > understood properly, the opposite makes the difference. If you _don't_
> > understand the words in the first place, i. e. attribute a different
> > meaning than the speaker/author had intended, you _cannot_ be in a
> > position to understand the points.
> > So, thanks Nick, for sharing! I like your post very much.
> > Michael
> > Am 07.07.2016 9:35 vorm. schrieb "Gerard Meijssen" <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > I have been thinking about what you say. The problem I see is that
> > > your attitude is one where you have to be compassionate for the
> > > benefit of people for whom English is a second language. What this
> > > means is that you see yourself as superior because your English is
> > > so great and they have a problem with English or Anglo culture.The
> > > logical conclusion is probably that English and Angloism has to be
> central to what we do.
> > >
> > > This is the Wikimedia list and when you follow this list, it is
> > > people
> > from
> > > all over the world that subscribe and comment. It is highly biased
> > > by
> > group
> > > think and I have observed that there is little willingness to
> > > consider notions that do not fit in well with the group think.The
> > > biggest problem
> > in
> > > this is not language but an unwillingness to consider arguments.
> > >
> > > It is easy to say "we have to be compassionate" and because of that
> > > we
> > have
> > > to choose our words well. It is tough to consider that it is not so
> > > much the words that are used but it is understanding what points are
> > > made and how they challenge the status quo.
> > > Thanks,
> > >   GerardM
> > >
> > > On 5 July 2016 at 21:59, Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://medium.com/@mollyclare/taming-the-steamroller-how-to-communica
> > te-compassionately-with-non-native-english-speakers-d95d8d1845a0
> > > > A good essay.
> > > >
> > > > TL;DR: Some detailed examples of how to improve communication and
> > > > interactions, for the benefit of anyone who uses English as a
> > > > second language.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Excerpts, to whet [sharpen or stimulate] your appetite:
> > > >
> > > > > Phrasal verbs in English can be particularly hard to master.
> > > > > Just
> > think
> > > > about “cut off” vs. “cut up” vs. “cut over” vs. “cut in” vs. “cut
> out”
> > > vs.
> > > > “cut down” vs. “cut back” and you’ll see how confusing it can be
> > > > when
> > you
> > > > recommend “cutting back” on something, or asking someone to “cut
> > > > it
> > out”.
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > Make your message very clear, especially your request. This is
> > > > > doubly
> > > > true for me, because I work with Germans, who are famously direct.
> > > > The American habit of softening and burying a request is just
> > > > confusing and pointless to them.
> > > >
> > > > > The last thing you and I want to do 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2014-2015 now on-wiki

2016-06-29 Thread rupert THURNER
This site
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Chief_Executive_Officer_(CEO)/Salary
States that a US American CEO salary would be from 70k up to 420k a year,
for Ngo 83k less. You are asking where and why the wmf executive director
is in this range Lodewijk?

Rupert
On May 31, 2016 10:21, "Lodewijk"  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Unfortunately I haven't seen an answer to my questions. Could you please
> acknowledge the receipt of the question if you're investigating? Or could
> you just say it is a ridiculous question and that you refuse to answer, if
> you think so? From the more elaborate answer on the Signpost questions, I
> understand that the role continues to this day - which makes it probably
> more relevant.
>
> Please don't retreat in silence again.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2016-05-25 14:39 GMT+02:00 Lodewijk :
>
> > Thanks Greg for the responses.
> >
> > As for the ED team, that answers part of my question. That Sue was
> > appointed as special advisor, was indeed public knowledge - but for what
> > duration was that? And was that a full time position (or anything near
> full
> > time), given that her compensation was as high as that of the ED herself?
> > People suggested that this included compensation for earlier years - was
> > that the case? That would explain again a bit more.
> >
> > Also part of the question was why the raise was so steep - was this
> simply
> > matching the reality of the current job market, or was there something
> else
> > behind it (i.e. a bonus mechanism etc).
> >
> > It would be great if you could clarify! Thanks!
> >
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > 2016-05-25 12:45 GMT+02:00 John Mark Vandenberg :
> >
> >> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Gregory Varnum 
> >> wrote:
> >> > Greetings,
> >> >
> >> > Thank you to everyone for your questions and thoughts regarding the
> >> Wikimedia Foundation's Form 990.
> >> >
> >> > Regarding Lodewijk's first question about the legal services
> (totalling
> >> US$1.7M) which were conducted by Jones Day (page 61 - Part VII): As our
> >> global reach has grown over time, we felt it was important to strengthen
> >> the trademark portfolio and solidify the protection of Wikimedia’s marks
> >> globally. In December 2013, we began working with Jones Day on our
> global
> >> trademark filings, registrations, and oppositions. During the 2014-2015
> >> fiscal year we filed 1,500+ new trademark applications for 35 different
> >> trademarks in 100+ countries. A significant portion of the legal
> services
> >> expenses in 2014-2015 went toward the mandatory government trademark
> >> application filing fees.
> >> >
> >> > These new trademark applications contained expanded coverage and
> >> revised descriptions to ensure better protection of Wikimedia's marks
> and
> >> projects, including countries where readership was growing through
> targeted
> >> programs or distribution (such as Wikipedia Zero and mobile readership).
> >> Going forward, we anticipate (and are beginning to realize) a decrease
> in
> >> trademark expenses year over year, now that we have this initial
> foundation
> >> is in place. This investment immediately benefits Wikimedia and its
> >> communities by ensuring that our trademark portfolio reflects the
> maturity
> >> and breadth of the Wikimedia movement, and protects us against certain
> >> forms of infringement or misuse.
> >>
> >> Hi Gregory,
> >> Just to confirm, the stated US$1.7M stated on page p.61 includes
> >> filing and other fees paid by Jones Day to relevant government bodies
> >> around the world?
> >> If so, any chance you can separate it into such fees paid *through*
> >> Jones Day, vs the consultation fees of Jones Day.
> >> You say it was a 'significant portion', but that is very vague
> >> terminology, meaning very different things to different people; it
> >> would be nice to have a ball park figure.
> >>
> >> Also there was a USD ~5.2 M investment in Europe listed on p. 35 as
> >> not being program services.  I didn't see any reference to it in the
> >> FAQ; apologies if I missed it (It would be lovely if the source
> >> document was posted on meta for easier navigation, etc.).  Could we
> >> have a little more info about this line item?
> >>
> >> --
> >> John Vandenberg
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> >>
> >
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community survey to support the WMF ED search starts right now

2016-06-18 Thread rupert THURNER
hi,

2011 A T Kearney published a study saying that hiring a homegrown CEO let a
company outperform other companies. also price waterhouse coopers Strategy&
and RHR international come to similar conclusions:
*
https://www.atkearney.com/documents/10192/529727/Home-Grown_CEO.pdf/bbba713e-1a54-421f-81f9-4299faad42aa
* http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news-archive/17975.html
*
http://www.rhrinternational.com/sites/default/files/V25N1-CEO-Succession-Makin_1.pdf
* (de)
http://www.finews.ch/themen/karriere/23186-korn-ferry-stefan-steger-ceo-nachfolge-wechsel-pwc-strategy?xing_share=news
hiring an outsider CEO has the following effects:
* higher compensation
* greater risk profile
* wrong expectations about business area and its specifics

best
rupert


On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> Thank you! Hopefully there will be a good range of viewpoints!
>
> I look forward to reading a summary of the feedback!
>
> Fae
>
> On 16 June 2016 at 11:25, Alice Wiegand  wrote:
> > Update: The survey is still open!
> > In order to hear from more people, the search team decided to hold the ED
> > search survey [1] open until Friday, June 17. If you haven’t already,
> > please take a few minutes to fill it out before then.
> >
> > Thank you for your participation!
> >
> > [1] - ED Search Survey:
> > https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5hVS2mJTcJNCxBX
> >
> > Alice.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Nikola Kalchev <
> nikola.kalc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> As a patroller on my homewiki I can say that 15 of the 50 most active
> >> editors according to stats.wikimedia.org would be capable of answering
> the
> >> questions in one of the ten languages. Those are the people who
> translate
> >> articles from the ten languages of the survey (13 from English, 2 from
> >> Russian). Ask a few more patrollers from other communities, multiply by
> the
> >> number of very active editors on those wikis and divide by the number of
> >> asked patrollers :). It is not impossible to get a rough estimate.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> User:Lord Bumbury / Nikola Kalchev
> >> Wikimedians of Bulgaria, a Wikimedia CEE Spring international organiser
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Nikola Kalchev <
> nikola.kalc...@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Dariusz, thank you for your clarification. I understand that
> >> translations
> >> >> take time.
> >> >>
> >> >> Would you please elaborate on the assumption that the most important
> >> >> principle of the ED search committee was speed and not, e.g.
> >> participation
> >> >> of a larger part of the community? What would the bad effects of a 2
> >> months
> >> >> longer search on the WMF be?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > The assumption is that any organization under an interim leader is
> >> > basically frozen. An interim leader is unlikely to make any change.
> Also,
> >> > one of the gripes of the past was a long (way over a year) process of
> ED
> >> > searching. The ED search team wants to avoid repeating this.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I fear that user groups will be underrepresented again (another
> notable
> >> >> example is the number of representatives at the WMCON with chapters
> >> having
> >> >> up to four participants and user groups exactly one). There are 59
> user
> >> >> groups and (as well as I could count) only 10 of them will be able to
> >> >> participate at the survey in their own language. Why was the opinion
> of
> >> 49
> >> >> user groups considered less worth that a delay of two months?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I think the main assumption may have been that there will be
> decreasing
> >> > differences - that is, the differences between the views expressed in
> the
> >> > 10 major languages will not be big in general. Of course, we will see
> >> > whether there are significant differences within these 10.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter  >
> >> >  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Whereas I fully understand and partially share the sentiment, may I
> >> >> please repeat the question I asked on this list in relation to a
> similar
> >> >> topic some time ago. Could we estimate a number of active community
> >> members
> >> >> (whom we would reasonably expect to participate in the survey) who do
> >> not
> >> >> speak any of the languages to which the survey was translated, to the
> >> point
> >> >> that their ability to fill in the survey would depend on the others?
> If
> >> >> this is a considerable number, or if it is less significant but
> >> >> considerably compromises on the representation, which languages do
> these
> >> >> community members speak?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> > Yaroslav's question is a good one - I don't know from the top of my
> head
> >> > how to estimate this easily. However, let me repeat: we are 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] wikinews has a NPOV policy derived from wikipedia, mamamia ...

2016-05-01 Thread rupert THURNER
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Tilman Bayer <tba...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:42 PM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> hi jimmy,
>>
>> i asked on the facebook group wikipeda weekly if joe/ed could publish
>> an upcoming blog post on wikinews. joe sutherland mentioned ".. I
>> simply cannot get my head around its attitude to news coverage". which
>> i find frightening. an editor for 10 years, tens of thousands
>> contributions, thousands of pages created, degree in journalism,
>> dissertation about news on wikipedia, administrator.[1]
>>
>> jimmy, as wikinews refers an old mail of you from 2003 as the holy
>> grail of NPOV, could you please clarify once and for all that your
>> NPOV statemant you sent to wikien-l was valid for wikipedia. and not
>> for wikisource, wikiquote, wikinews. best on the wikinews talk page
>> concerning NPOV [2][4]. i understand of course that certain publishing
>> standards might apply - but NPOV, and "sourced" in the sense of
>> published somewhere else cannot be amongst them [3].
>>
>> just as a note, i hate that the blog [5] opens 20 times slower than
>> wikinews on my mobile phone,
>
> The blog is hosted by Automattic (known for Wordpress.com) in the same
> environment as high traffic sites like time.com or fivethirtyeight.com.
> You can file technical issues on Phabricator:
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/328/ or contact the blog
> team (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Blog/Guidelines ).
>
> that it is not in different languages,
>>
> It does support multilingual posts, e.g.
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/18/wikimedia-server-switch/ is available
> in 23 languages.

asaf and others were so kind to point me to the statistics of
wikinews, only SIX persons contributing. this a nice private wiki now
- nobody would notice if it is set read only :)
https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikinews/EN/SummaryEN.htm

still i think it benefits the movements software if you as WMF
communications team eat our own dogfood and publish on mediawiki.
wikinews might fit nicely as its target of publishing original texts
is closest - but anyway wiknews would need a policy change and the
bureaucrat(s) changed to allow such kinds of texts. if this policy
change revives its contributor base good. if not i'd agree with asaf
and others to just let it formally die, as it is already de facto
dead.

>> that i do not have the "usual mediawiki features". i hate that
>> signpost [7] cannot be read on mobiles because of formatting. i hate
>> the glam newsletter [6] for the same reason, despite beeig again on a
>> different wiki, no "read in different languages". which is the main
>> reason i write this mail ... and asked joe why not using wikinews. and
>> i hate that wikinews does not use mediawiki features to properly
>> classify what quality an article has, e.g. "blog", "npov", etc.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Foxj=en.wikipedia.org
>> [2]
>> https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_talk:Neutral_point_of_view#raphael_honigstein_and_outreach_blog_on_wikinews.3F
>> [3] https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Pillars_of_Wikinews_writing
>> [4]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008096.html
>> [5] blog:
>> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/22/ted-wikimedia-collaboration/
>> [6] glam newletter: https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter
>> [7] signpost: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost

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

[Wikimedia-l] wikinews has a NPOV policy derived from wikipedia, mamamia ...

2016-04-22 Thread rupert THURNER
hi jimmy,

i asked on the facebook group wikipeda weekly if joe/ed could publish
an upcoming blog post on wikinews. joe sutherland mentioned ".. I
simply cannot get my head around its attitude to news coverage". which
i find frightening. an editor for 10 years, tens of thousands
contributions, thousands of pages created, degree in journalism,
dissertation about news on wikipedia, administrator.[1]

jimmy, as wikinews refers an old mail of you from 2003 as the holy
grail of NPOV, could you please clarify once and for all that your
NPOV statemant you sent to wikien-l was valid for wikipedia. and not
for wikisource, wikiquote, wikinews. best on the wikinews talk page
concerning NPOV [2][4]. i understand of course that certain publishing
standards might apply - but NPOV, and "sourced" in the sense of
published somewhere else cannot be amongst them [3].

just as a note, i hate that the blog [5] opens 20 times slower than
wikinews on my mobile phone, that it is not in different languages,
that i do not have the "usual mediawiki features". i hate that
signpost [7] cannot be read on mobiles because of formatting. i hate
the glam newsletter [6] for the same reason, despite beeig again on a
different wiki, no "read in different languages". which is the main
reason i write this mail ... and asked joe why not using wikinews. and
i hate that wikinews does not use mediawiki features to properly
classify what quality an article has, e.g. "blog", "npov", etc.

[1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Foxj=en.wikipedia.org
[2] 
https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_talk:Neutral_point_of_view#raphael_honigstein_and_outreach_blog_on_wikinews.3F
[3] https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Pillars_of_Wikinews_writing
[4] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008096.html
[5] blog: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/22/ted-wikimedia-collaboration/
[6] glam newletter: https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter
[7] signpost: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost

best,
rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Updated dates: Reimagining WMF grants consultation

2016-04-16 Thread rupert THURNER
how much budget do the differing programs have, alex?

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Alex Wang  wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We've pushed back the dates a bit for launching the new grants programs.
> Please see the updated dates below:
>
> 16 May: Launch Rapid Grants
> *30 June:* Last day to apply for a grant under the current Project & Event
> Grants program
> 1 July: Open call for Project Grants and launch of Conference Support
> Program
> 2 August: Round 1 Project Grant applications due
>
> More details can be found on the Implementation page here:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Reimagining_WMF_grants/Implementation
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Alex Wang  wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> In August, we asked for community feedback on a proposal to change the
>>
>> structure of WMF grant programs.
>>
>> Next steps for implementing changes based on the consultation are now
>> available:
>>
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Reimagining_WMF_grants/Implementation
>> 
>>
>> Important dates to note:
>>
>> 1 May: Rapid Grants launch; submission forms available for new Project
>> Grants program
>>
>> 30 May: Last day to apply for a grant under the current Project & Event
>> Grants program
>>
>> 1 July: Project Grants and Conference Support launch
>>
>> Come read about the timeline and next steps for implementing changes based
>> on your feedback. Your questions and comments are welcome on the
>> discussion page.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> --
>> Alexandra Wang
>> Program Officer
>> Project & Event Grants
>> Wikimedia Foundation 
>> +1 415-839-6885
>> Skype: alexvwang
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alexandra Wang
> Program Officer
> Community Resources
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> +1 415-839-6885
> Skype: alexvwang
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] help, how much money goes to volunteers?

2016-04-15 Thread rupert THURNER
hi fae,

i do not think the level of detail you describe below will be of any
help, it might cause only work without benefit. IMO it would be
sufficient if every organization tells open how much money goes to
volunteers. for a starter, how much was IEG in 2015 ?

rupert

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I cannot answer your question, but I am unsure if numbers would mean
> much unless large changes (like more than 20%) are indicated. Here's
> why -
>
> The key problem with working out how much of a volunteer fund goes to
> volunteers, is that reports rarely separate out the money that is
> nominally spent on 'volunteer projects' from the money that directly
> funds a volunteer activity.
>
> Based on past discussions and the experience of real cases, this means that:
>
> 1. Employees or contractors of the WMF or affiliated organizations may
> use volunteer budgets for expenses, travel or scholarships if they
> want to identify themselves as a volunteer in that context. For
> example, many people funded as Wikimedians in Residence may have no
> travel funding and will rely on a volunteer grant, or chapters may not
> provide funds for employees to travel and contribute to events not
> directly within their scope of employment.
>
> 2. A grant for a volunteer project may require reporting of outcomes
> and specific evidence of some expenses, but there is a cost of
> administering the grant before it gets granted, there are costs of
> proposing the grant that may or may not be funded from other grants,
> and there are costs of administration of the money and reporting on
> it, while the project runs. In cases where this can be analysed, the
> overhead costs are in the order of 20% to 50%. In some cases, the
> end-to-end costs of administering a grant from the WMF, to a local
> organization, and then to a specific project means that less than half
> of the money going to a volunteer project was actually used by
> volunteers to deliver a planned outcome.
>
> It's a problem, and unclear reporting of administrative overheads
> really does not help. Changes over the last couple of years to the way
> the WMF and chapters work, means that overhead costs invariably move
> from a central overhead charge, to being absorbed into project
> budgets, making the end-to-end overhead/admin costs almost impossible
> to deduce, unless detailed project time accounting and individual
> expenses are made public (which is never going to happen). The end
> result is that we cannot judge whether reports of reduced
> administration costs, are due to a smart accounting change, or the
> result of hard won meaningful improvements.
>
> Fae
>
> On 14 April 2016 at 10:48, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> hi,
>>
>> on the question how much money will go to volunteers next year,
>> katherine stated that the 2016 grants budget is 5.8 mio, out of 63 mio
>> [1]. my guess was that between 1 and 2 mio would go to volunteers.
>>
>> i have a little difficulty to calculate the number. i saw the 2016 fdc
>> numbers [2], 5.5 mio. WMDE writes that the annual fundraising gives 84
>> mio usd (i.e. 75 mio eur) [3]. on the grants page i do not see numbers
>> [4]. the german community budget page does not list numbers. [5]. WMDE
>> writes that it pays 6 mio a year to WMF [6]. at the same time it gets
>> 1.3 mio via FDC from WMF [7]. there is some indication about money to
>> volunteers in the FDC split up from WMDE [8].
>>
>> my guess was that 0.5 mio usd are support for wikimania travel
>> including funds to make wikimania cheaper in genaral, and 0.5-1.5 mio
>> via various community projects (e.g. the one of WMDE), individual
>> engagement grants to volunteers, summing up to <2 mio usd a year
>> beeing paid to cover volunteers expenses.
>>
>> can somebody please chime in here with better guesses, or real
>> numbers, maybe directly at [1]?
>>
>> [1] 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2016-2017/draft#money_distribution_to_volunteers
>> [2] 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_2016-17_FDC_budget_recommendation
>> [3] https://wikimedia.de/wiki/Factsheet#Daten.2C_Zahlen.2C_Fakten
>> [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start
>> [5] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community-Budget
>> [6] 
>> https://www.wikimedia.de/w/images.homepage/a/ad/Wmde_jb_2014_engl_web_RZ.pdf
>> [7] 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round_1
>> [8] 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2015-2016_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Proposal_form

[Wikimedia-l] help, how much money goes to volunteers?

2016-04-14 Thread rupert THURNER
hi,

on the question how much money will go to volunteers next year,
katherine stated that the 2016 grants budget is 5.8 mio, out of 63 mio
[1]. my guess was that between 1 and 2 mio would go to volunteers.

i have a little difficulty to calculate the number. i saw the 2016 fdc
numbers [2], 5.5 mio. WMDE writes that the annual fundraising gives 84
mio usd (i.e. 75 mio eur) [3]. on the grants page i do not see numbers
[4]. the german community budget page does not list numbers. [5]. WMDE
writes that it pays 6 mio a year to WMF [6]. at the same time it gets
1.3 mio via FDC from WMF [7]. there is some indication about money to
volunteers in the FDC split up from WMDE [8].

my guess was that 0.5 mio usd are support for wikimania travel
including funds to make wikimania cheaper in genaral, and 0.5-1.5 mio
via various community projects (e.g. the one of WMDE), individual
engagement grants to volunteers, summing up to <2 mio usd a year
beeing paid to cover volunteers expenses.

can somebody please chime in here with better guesses, or real
numbers, maybe directly at [1]?

[1] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2016-2017/draft#money_distribution_to_volunteers
[2] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_2016-17_FDC_budget_recommendation
[3] https://wikimedia.de/wiki/Factsheet#Daten.2C_Zahlen.2C_Fakten
[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start
[5] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community-Budget
[6] https://www.wikimedia.de/w/images.homepage/a/ad/Wmde_jb_2014_engl_web_RZ.pdf
[7] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round_1
[8] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2015-2016_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Proposal_form

best
rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [recent changes]

2016-04-11 Thread rupert THURNER
For denny I see the situation simple and I am only able to write it as I
read his clear email.

First he is able to influence projects and general direction with his
judgement and expertise.

Second he has the expertise to get projects done.

While I find it a real pity that we have less of first when he resigns I
must admit that I consider second even more important. Choosing amongst
proposals is easier than properly proposing. Especially if nobody steps up
for something he feels should get done. For my part, I trust his expertise.

I admire and find exemplary denny showing backbone here, something we see
not enough. Deciding on this trade off should be possible at any time
appropriate,  I do consequently *not* see something went awry with denny,
nor a problem with the process.

One hole in the process seems to be there though. Should a replacement be
voted now or just the old result be taken. As the situation is new for
every participant I tend to favour a vote.

Rupert
On Apr 11, 2016 07:56, "jytdog"  wrote:

> Here is a response to Denny's resignation; his email has been sticking to
> me.   To provide some context for what follows, I work a lot on COI and
> advocacy issues in Wikipedia, and worked on COI issues professionally at a
> university for the past 15 years.
>
> The limitations created by managing or eliminating Denny's various
> conflicts of interest, appear to have been surprising to Denny, and were
> definitely frustrating for him.
>
> Surprising and frustrating.  This is perhaps the result of a lack of
> process.
>
> The WMF might want to consider putting in place a system of disclosing and
> managing conflicts of interest for Trustees, before they actually join the
> board, so that conflict management issues are both clear and acceptable to
> the new Trustee and the Board at the start.
>
> The process could be the same as it is in many sectors -  a confidential
> disclosure of relevant interests, identification of possible and perceived
> conflicts between those interests and the obligations of a Trustee, and
> then creation of a plan to manage those conflicts (and identification of
> areas where the conflicts can't be managed but need to be eliminated by
> recusal).  All done before the person actually joins the board.
>
> Once the person joins, the relevant external interests could be disclosed
> at the board member's profile on the WMF board webpage.  The additional
> step of publishing an outline of the management plan (at the same location)
> would be something very useful in light of the high value that WMF staff
> and the movement places on transparency.
>
> Please consider that.  And please pardon me if this is already done, but
> something went awry with Denny.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Denny Vrandecic 
> wrote:
>
> > I exchanged a walk on part in the war for a lead role in the cage.
> >
> > I find myself tied and limited in my actions and projects. In order to
> > avoid the perception or potential for Conflict of Interests I have to act
> > extremely carefully in far too many parts of my life. Instead of being
> able
> > to pursue my projects or some projects at work - which I think would
> align
> > very well with our mission - I found myself trapped between too many
> > constraints. I feel like I cannot offer my thoughts and my considerations
> > openly, since they might easily be perceived as expressions of interests
> -
> > regarding my previous work, regarding my friends, regarding my current
> > employment.
> >
> > This hit home strongly during the FDC deliberations, where I had to deal
> > with the situation of people deliberating a proposal written by my Best
> > Man, around a project that has consumed the best part of the previous
> > decade of my life. Obviously, I explained the conflicts in this case, and
> > refrained from participating in the discussion, as agreed with the FDC.
> >
> > This hit home every time there was a topic that might be perceived as a
> > potential conflict of interest between Wikimedia and my employer, and
> even
> > though I might have been in a unique position to provide insight, I had
> to
> > refrain from doing so in order not to exert influence.
> >
> > There were constant and continuous attacks against me, as being merely
> > Google’s mole on the Board, even of the election being bought by Google.
> I
> > would not have minded these attacks so much - if I would have had the
> > feeling that my input to the Board, based on my skills and experiences,
> > would have been particularly valuable, or if I would have had the feeling
> > of getting anything done while being on the Board. As it is, neither was
> > the case.
> >
> > I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not
> appropriate
> > to pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice,
> > but it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
> >
> > As some of you might know, 

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

2016-03-21 Thread rupert THURNER
How many orders are handled by this shop?

Rupert
On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:

> In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully wikimedia
> hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
> But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining an
> ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> movement as I am sure you would agree.
>
> Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
> making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and money.
> Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
> keep it as efficient as possible.
>
> As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the frameworks
> that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1] and
> I would encourage you to take a look.
>
> With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is hosted
> by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
>  wrote:
> > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> >>
> >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for
> a
> >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >>
> >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
> >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
> >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> >>
> >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
> >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or
> even
> >> adequate ones.
> >>
> >> -- Coren / Marc
> >>
> >
> > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
> the
> > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> > browse and purchase?
>
> I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
>
> > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
>
> IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
>
> Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> of use and privacy policy.
>
> If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Case for Federation: Should Parts of WMF Be Spun Off?

2016-03-19 Thread rupert THURNER
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Erik Moeller  wrote:

> the notion that WMF might be a more effective
> organization if it limited its own size in favor of focused spin-off
> organizations and affiliates.

> I can see three potential benefits from a more federated model:
>
> 1) Resilience. If any one organization experiences a crisis, other
> independent organizations suffer to a lesser degree than departments
> within that organization.
>
> 2) Focus. Wikimedia’s mission is very broad, and an organization with
> a clearly defined mandate is less likely to be pulled in many
> different directions -- at every level.
>
> 3) Accountability. Within a less centralized federation, it is easier
> to ensure that funding flows to those who do work the movement wants
> them to do.
>
> My experience is that growth tends to be self-reinforcing in budgetary
> processes if there are now clear ceilings established. I think that’s
> true in almost any organization. There’s always lots of work to do,
> and new teams will discover new gaps and areas into which they would
> like to expand. Hence, I would argue for the following:
>
> a) To establish 150 as the provisional ceiling for Wikimedia movement
> organizations. This is Dunbar’s number, and it has been used
> (sometimes intentionally, sometimes organically) as a limiting number
> for religious groups, military companies, corporate divisions, tax
> offices, and other human endeavors.  [3][4] This is very specifically
> because it makes organizational units more manageable and
> understandable for those who work there.
>
> b) To slowly, gradually identify parts of the WMF which would benefit
> from being spun off into independent organizations, and to launch such
> spin-offs, narrowing WMF's focus in the process.
>
> c) To aim to more clearly separate funding and evaluation
> responsibilities from programmatic work within the movement -- whether
> that work is keeping websites running, building software, or doing
> GLAM work.

> == Where to go from here? ==
>
> There are lots of open questions in all of this. Should all site-wide
> fundraising remain inside WMF, for example, with funds being
> transferred to a movement entity? What’s the dividing line between
> "development for third parties" (MWF) and "development for Wikimedia"
> (WMF)? How would staff transition to new organizations? Where should
> those organizations be based? Should they be distributed, have
> offices?
>
> An important thing to remember here (a lesson I’ve had to learn
> painfully) is that big changes are best made in small steps, with room
> for trial and error.
>
> Implementing this strategy is, I think, a matter of first committing
> to it as an idea, and then creating coherent proposals for each step,
> publicly with broad input. First, if there is support for the general
> idea, I would recommend kicking it around: Are these the right kinds
> of spin-offs? What are the risks and how should existing affiliates be
> involved in the process? And so on.

that all sounds quite reasonable. also what erik writes about
organisations is to be expected. at the end it all boils down to
money. spending all money available and wanting more money never has
been a problem. if there is dissent it was always about who has the
say what the money is spent on, and where it is spent. i am convinced
if we get the responsibilities right, the dissent will stop, and the
output will be better.

sizing organizations and distributing responsibilities on a global
scale seems to be a very difficult task, close to the soviet empire's
task to plan its next 5 years. one could argue to resolve it via
setting a financial targets, just as multinational companies do. two
simple long term key performance indicators might already do the trick
for the wikimedia movement: first "maximum 50% of the money is spent
on persons whose life depend financially on the movement", which is
employees, or long term contracting persons, organizations,
foundations, enterprises. and second, "50% of the money stays in the
country where it is donated." the rest will auto-organize, and
auto-change. finding intelligent spending for the rest of the 50%
should not be a too difficult task, there is sufficient universities
and students around the world who would be happy to compete for this
money. the success, means and outcome will change over time, in areas
and ways nobody can predict today. the 50% are a made up number, a
little bit influenced by public spending of 40% - 50% in many
industrialized countries nowadays. it seems people accept such a
ratio.

whatever the target is, getting acceptance is not simple. currently
the WMF at the same time controls the domain and with it money inflow.
at the same time WMF spends 90% of the total money, preferably to its
own employees. "growth" is such a natural target, no matter in what
area that WMF tries to even increase this percentage. from a WMF
perspective it is not bad at all. 

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

2016-03-15 Thread rupert THURNER
On Mar 14, 2016 23:47, "Fæ"  wrote:
>
> On 14 March 2016 at 22:12, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
> > On 16-03-14 05:01 PM, Vi to wrote:
> >> Ignoring a wide community
> >> consensus is *always* a mistake.
> >
> > It is.  I never advocated otherwise.
> >
> > That old RfC, however, does not show a wide community consensus, let
> > alone a consensus of the actually impacted community.
> >
> > -- Coren / Marc
>
> You could walk in the shoes of others, as Jimbo advocates, and you
> could create an RFC to show whether users prefer it, rather than
> putting the burden of proof onto a community that has already
> established what it wanted.

Marc just look at the German Wikipedia which recently voted for the switch
on of visual editor. It was community driven and caused no stir.

I really fail to understand that you guys always go down a confrontational
path instead of inventing a solution so all users have the option to
choose. Maybe a media tab or similar.

Rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: A conversation?

2016-03-10 Thread rupert THURNER
On Mar 10, 2016 07:19, "Erik Moeller"  wrote:
>
> 2016-03-09 16:56 GMT-08:00 Pete Forsyth :
>
> > I feel this message can provide important insight into the dynamics
> > surrounding James H.'s dismissal, and various people have expressed
> > interest in seeing it, so I'm forwarding it to the list. (For what it's
> > worth, I did check with James H.; he had no objection to my sharing it.)
>
> Pete, regardless of Jimmy's words in this email, like others, I fail
> to see how it's okay to share a private email to this list. I can
> think of a few instances where this might be ethically defensible --
> like actual fraud being committed -- but this is not one of them. It's
> totally fair for people to ask Jimmy to clear the air on stuff
> himself, but this crosses the line, at least from my point of view.
>
> This comes down to giving a person you're corresponding with an
> honest, open channel by which they can apologize, clarify, and make
> things right. By violating that private channel you're making it
> implicitly impossible to have that kind of conversation.

I share this opinion.

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


[Wikimedia-l] feature: prevent overwork, statistics was: What it means to be a high-tech organization

2016-02-28 Thread rupert THURNER
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 10:41 PM, SarahSV  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Florence Devouard 
> wrote:
>
>
>> Removing a COI is not the only issue at stake Sarah.
>>
>> Would WMF get involved into such a process, it would also possibly change
>> its legal reponsibility. Right now, WMF does not get involved in the
>> editorial process, which allows to claim WMF is only hosting the content.
>> If WMF is somewhat involved in an editorial process which results in
>> paying the authors, then WMF might lose the "host" status.
>>
>> Flo
>>
>>
>> Hi Flo, I've heard so many contradictory positions about that over the
> years that I have no idea what the implications would be.
>
> Moving away from the very complex issue of paid editing, Brion opened the
> thread with different views of what a high-tech organization is, one of
> which involves lack of diversity, overemphasis on engineering, and
> exploitation of staff and users at the cost of their physical and emotional
> health. He argued that the WMF should instead cultivate and support staff
> and volunteers.
>
> So what can we do to move the WMF away from the bad aspects of high-tech
> organizations and toward a position where the health of the paid and unpaid
> workforces is actively nurtured?
>
> I've made a small start by suggesting software [1] that asks editors how
> long they want to spend on the site when they log in, along with options to
> be logged out automatically and not logged in again for a set time
> (following a suggestion from a former Google engineer in the *New York
> Review of Books*). [2]
>
> I would love to see the WMF agree never again to discuss trapping editors
> in feedback loops intended to keep them editing, but instead to help them
> plan and monitor their interactions with Wikimedia sites. Another idea is
> for opt-in software that asks how you're feeling every few hours – "Are you
> feeling angry? Is it time for a break?" – or when you log out: "How did
> your interactions today make you feel?" Questions could be asked that would
> be useful to the WMF in its gender-gap, anti-harassment and other
> initiatives (once the data is anonymized).

many thanks sarah for making a suggestion i like the restrict yourself
and see how you do compared to others, so i created
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T128320

best,
rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why we changed

2016-02-21 Thread rupert THURNER
brion,

there is 10'000 km between you and me so i only read mails on this
list. would you mind detailing what you expect from your CEO to
trigger "she benefits me"?

best,
rupert


On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Brion Vibber  wrote:
> Lila, a few notes.
>
> First, many staff members feel that the accomplishments you claim under
> "we" are not attributable to you.
>
> Complaints about lack of strategy and confusing management have come from
> all levels of the staff; the implication that people who failed to be
> promoted might be behind discontent seems not to hold water.
>
> As to shutting down pet projects to improve focus, it's unclear what
> projects you refer to.
>
> Fundamentally we agree that we must improve tech. But the tech side of the
> organization, based on my conversations with other employees including
> managers, does not seem to have benefited from your tenure -- ops laregely
> manages itself, while the other sections get occasionally surprised by a
> reorg. We've still not fully recovered from the 2015 reorg and Damon's
> appearance and disappearance.
>
> If your contention is that tech supports you as a silent majority, I have
> strong doubts that this is the case.
>
> -- brion
>
> On Feb 21, 2016 4:22 PM, "Lila Tretikov"  wrote:
>>
>> Why we’ve changed
>>
>>
>> I want to address some of the many questions that are coming up in this
>> forum. From the general to the very concrete, they all touch on the fact
>> that many things about the WMF have been changing. We are in the thick of
>> transformation, and you all have the right to know more about how and why
>> this is occurring. This is not a statement of strategy, which will come
> out
>> of the community consultation next week. This is the ED’s perspective
> only.
>>
>>
>> After 15 years since the birth of Wikipedia, the WMF needs to rethink
>> itself to ensure our editor work expands into the next decade. Recently we
>> kicked-off some initiatives to this end, including aligning community
>> support functions, focus on mobile and innovative technology, seeding the
>> Wikimedia Endowment, re-organizing our internal structure, exploring
>> partnerships and focusing on the most critical aspects of our mission:
>> community and technology. We started this transformation, but as we move
>> forward we are facing a crisis that is rooted in our choice of direction.
>>
>>
>> The choice in front the WMF is that of our core identity. Our mission can
>> be served in many ways, but we cannot do them all. We could either fully
>> focus on building our content and educational programs. Or we can get
> great
>> at technology as the force multiplier for our movement. I believe the the
>> former belongs to our volunteers and affiliates and that the role of the
>> WMF is in providing global support and coordination of this work. I
> believe
>> in -- and the board hired me to -- focus on the latter. To transform our
>> organization into a high-tech NGO, focused on the needs of our editors and
>> readers and rapidly moving to update our aged technology to support those
>> needs. To this end we have made many significant changes. But the
> challenge
>> in front of us is hard to underestimate: technology moves faster than any
>> other field and meeting expectations of editors and readers  will require
>> undistracted focus.
>>
>>
>> What changed?
>>
>>
>> When Jimmy started Wikipedia, the early editors took a century-old
>> encyclopedia page and allowed anyone to create or edit its content. At the
>> time when creating knowledge was still limited to the chosen few, openly
>> collaborating online gave us power to create and update knowledge at a
> much
>> faster rate than anyone else. This was our innovation.
>>
>>
>> As we matured, we encountered two fundamental, existential challenges. One
>> is of our own doing: driving away those who would otherwise join our
>> mission through complex policies, confusing user experiences, and a
> caustic
>> community culture. The other is external and is emerging from our own
> value
>> of freely licensed content: Many companies copy our knowledge into their
>> own databases and present it inside their interfaces. While this supports
>> wider dissemination, it also separates our readers from our community.
>> Wikipedia
>> is more than the raw content, repurposed by anyone as they like. It is a
>> platform for knowledge and learning, but if we don't meet the needs of
>> users, we will lose them and ultimately fail in our mission.
>>
>>
>> Meanwhile, in the last 15 years revolutionary changes have taken hold. The
>> rate of knowledge creation around the world is unprecedented and is
> increasing
>> exponentially .
> User
>> interfaces are becoming more adaptive to how users learn. This means we
>> have a huge opportunity to accelerate human understanding. But to do so
>> requires some significant change in technology and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "9 annoying nonprofit trends that need to die"

2016-02-07 Thread rupert THURNER
lol  This is why “Nonprofit: The Musical” will have, as one of its
characters, a consultant robot, whose only job is to repeat exactly
what an internal staff or board member says; the difference is that
the robot actually gets listened to.

On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> I think that a number of us may appreciate this article, specifically
> people who are involved with Wikimedia affiliates, grant committees, and
> WMF Community Engagement including CR and PC
>
> http://nonprofitwithballs.com/2015/06/9-annoying-nonprofit-trends-that-need-to-die/
>
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


[Wikimedia-l] how big the foundation should be, was: Why take grants?

2016-02-04 Thread rupert THURNER
ha, i read the thread and i did not notice the core question :) lets
start from the annual plan then:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2015-16

there are 280 persons working for the WMF, all departments are
growing. money given to somebody else is shrinking below 10%. the word
"fun" is mentioned zero time, and innovation gets one important
sentence:
"We will create spaces for future community-led innovations and new
knowledge creation."
and after that innovation is mentioned in the *legal* and
*communications* paragraph. but - there is no money attached to it.
except maybe paying employees.

one could strive to allocate money differently, in the line of "30%
goes into grants to improve or develop new technology". making sure
that the innovation money is going to all regions of this planet
should be self evident. or one could clearly define that community
money is spent through local organisations, not central. one could
also suppose community money goes to members of the community, not
employees taking care about the community. this btw is also a major
fundraising problem - people have no problem to give money to
community members. but they have a problem if such money is spent on
employees.

to play the devils advocate, this increasing money spent not within
the WMF from <10% to 50% means, in reverse, WMF needs to shrink from
280 persons to 180 persons. one could even advocate for an upper limit
of 200 persons for central functions no matter of the income. as food
for thought, FIFA has a staff of 300. there are 250 million people
playing association football worldwide.

best,
rupert


On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:33 PM, Lodewijk  wrote:
> Potato potato - availability can be interpreted in many different ways.
> Thanks to the free license, we've covered a big part of that by design.
>
> What activities the WMF should be doing wasn't quite the core of the
> discussion though, but rather how big the WMF should be.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Tim Landscheidt 
> wrote:
>
>> (anonymous) wrote:
>>
>> > […]
>>
>> > But 'getting big' is maybe not the most important thing in the world.
>> > Working on our mission, is. And part of that, is security. The WMF is not
>> > in this world to play the odds, but rather to ensure that knowledge is
>> > freed, and stays free - most specifically by securing Wikipedia's
>> continued
>> > availability (at least, that is what our deck of cards looks like now).
>>
>> > Fully focussing on one sigle stream of money may indeed allow you to get
>> > more out of it. But the question here is rather, how to you tackle the
>> > situation when that stream dries up? And for that question,
>> diversification
>> > is actually key.
>>
>> > […]
>>
>> I don't agree with that.  From the Library of Alexandria to
>> the Duchess Anna Amalia Library it has always been a mistake
>> to keep knowledge in one place and try really hard to keep
>> it from falling apart.  The biggest advancement in that
>> field probably came from Gutenberg's press which allowed
>> knowledge to be spread around and resist attempts of censor-
>> ship.
>>
>> When cinema and television came along, the ancient pattern
>> repeated: Cultural goods are lost today because the broad-
>> casters put them in one vault and then did not maintain the
>> fire alarm properly.
>>
>> We have the same issue now with streaming services: During
>> dictatorships, you could hide books and jazz records.  Net-
>> flix or YouTube just stops serving videos some entity does
>> not like, and Amazon can wipe your Kindle clean of anything.
>>
>> So the diversification for the purpose of the advancement of
>> knowledge should not lie in making WMF immortal, but ensur-
>> ing that it survives WMF's death.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why take grants? (was: Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?)

2016-02-02 Thread rupert THURNER
sam, i am not so convinced that what you write is true in too many
countries, namely that you think wikimedia gets too little of its funding
from other foundations. but i think it is fair enough that WMF tries to get
foundations funding on its home turf which it knows best. there are many US
based foundations like the knight foundation with principles like "Knight
primarily funds U.S.-based organizations." what i personally do not
appreciate is that WMF tries to get others into such a model as well, which
turns out to be a spiral of death. WMF e.g. tries to make chapters look for
other financial sources. i am aware of three effects:

first, it generates pressure within WMCH for getting other income. this
pressure leads to generating income on the shoulders of volunteers. on one
hand they are charged. when i edit i should join WMCH and pay membership
fee. i should visit conferences and pay for it. on the other hand persons
should then acquire money from foundations,  or the government.  often in
europe getting money from sources close to the government is attached with
"you get 50% of the money, 50% you pay yourself" disturbing the budget of a
small organisation completely. a very "un-wikipedia" task, at the end of
the day not very funny for a typical wikipedia person. wikipedia typically
deals with crowd-sourcing people and money. the result is: less volunteers.

second, wikipedia is perceived as competition. in switzerland, and in
europe in general, NGOs, clubs, foundations depend much more on individual
donors money and government. wikipedia has the most prominent website
amongst all of them. if somebody from wikipedia asks the government or asks
foundations for money it for sure triggers a "competion feeling".
like-minded organisations want to have money as well. and like-minded
organisations usually have people behind. and them feeling competition is
causing a no-partnership, a rivalry. the result is: less volunteers.

third, there is no connection between money spent in switzerland and money
given in switzerland. there is no direct "i gave it to you and you are
thankful" feeling. in many countries it i do not even known how much money
was given for the wikimedia cause. the result is: less people talking about
it, means less persons being close to the cause, and less money given. i
calculate it simple: an average person knows 400 persons. if we have 1000
volunteers, a maximum of 400'000 persons would, in an ideal world, know
about the money flow.

to sum it up - i do think that maintaining the volunteer base is the most
difficult task. it is much more difficult then getting money. this
discussion shows to me only that many persons in our movement still believe
otherwise, that scratching out additional cents from every resource we can
find is task number one. unfortunately without considering collateral
damage, and motivation of volunteers: as a volunteer i want to have fun,
and i do not want to pay (too much) for my hobby.

best,
rupert

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Sam Klein  wrote:

> Thanks Scott, this is important context.  I think Wikimedia gets rather too
> little of its funding from other foundations, through cooperations with
> like-minded organizations, and from national/international initiatives to
> educate and to preserve culture & knowledge.
>
>
> Scott writes:
>
> > MZMcBride wrote:
> >
> > > Why ask for and take the money? The Wikimedia Foundation can raise
> > > $250,000 in a few days (maybe hours) by placing ads on a few large
> > > Wikipedias soliciting donations. Why take on a restricted grant, with
> its
> > > necessary reporting overhead and other administrative costs?
> >
> >
> > Responding just to this small portion of MZMcBride's email:
> >
> > Sue explained to me that the goal was to have WMF's budget be roughly 50%
> > grants and 50% user contributions to guard against unexpected fragility
> > with either of these funding sources.  There is/was the continuing
> concern
> > that folks accessing wikimedia content through non-traditional sources
> > (google snippets, mobile apps, etc) will not see or respond to a banner
> > campaign, so that sooner or later one of our banner campaigns will come
> up
> > very short.  Further, a reliance on banners for funding creates perverse
> > incentives that discourage us from fully embracing potential users of our
> > content who may bypass the "official" clients and their banner ads.
> >
>
> It also makes for a very inward-focused and narrow sort of strategy: "How
> can we make our few banner projects work better / attract more people"
> rather than "how can we make knowledge more accessible to everyone in the
> world, including by supporting and enhancing other excellent projects".
>
> If you start with funders and organizations whose missions are similar to
> Wikimedia's, working with them on a grant is a way of making them part of
> the community: a successful engagement results in them learning more about
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strategic planning

2016-01-12 Thread rupert THURNER
On Jan 12, 2016 16:51, "Yaroslav M. Blanter"  wrote:
>
> On 2016-01-12 04:21, Pete Forsyth wrote:
>>
>> All:
>>
>>
>>
>> And beyond this video -- what do those who participated in the last round
>> (or those who have observed it) think the important lessons are? How
should
>> we be moving foward?
>>
>> -Pete
>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>
>
> I did not watch the video, but I did participate in the community process
and still have an iron barnstar sent by Philippe - my children are still
impressed.
>
> Concerning the process itself:
>
> 1) It was good that the process was structured from the very beginning:
there was a pre-process which helped to shape the task forces.
>
> 2) There was little to not at all coordination between different task
forces. Not sure it was necessary, since it was pure brainstorming, but
still wanted to mention.
>
> 3) It was not clear (at least not to me) what would happen beyond the
task force round. I tried to ask around but never got a satisfactory
answer. May be I just asked wrong people.
>
> 4) There was a bit too much noise (compared to signal), and organization
in the task forces was a bit chaotic - for example, in the task force I was
mainly active at somebody was (or claimed she was) appointed the task force
coordinator, but she disappeared after a week and never came back, so that
I took on the coordination myself and delivered some summary to the second
round - but nobody ever talked to me about this.
>
> 5) It is good that Liquid Threads died. They should not be ever used
again for such process.
>
> 6) Despite some deficiencies I listed above it was definitely fun to work
on the strategic plan, and also I had an impression we are really shaping
things up, not merely rubber-stumping some pre-determined ideas. And that
was indeed a community-driven process, and I mean the whole community, not
just the English Wikipedia.

Interesting summary,  what are the three major outcomes of this plan, and
one example what should not have gone into the plan?

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thank you, Jan-Bart and Stu

2016-01-06 Thread rupert THURNER
thank you both. i enjoyed seeing jan-bart beeing the movements best man in
many situations. and i appreciated money talks and croissant with stu, who
was open to globalize the movement in a financial aspect while always
paying attention that it does not become FIFA. some videos from sunny haifa
and netherlands:
* stu, mr decentralization: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ULO0ppoxBs8=2951
* jan-bart, mr 1 mio $$, and stu, mr 100 years:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ULO0ppoxBs8=3912
* jan-bart, mr stroupwaffel: https://youtu.be/5C0aNWfwaaw?t=835
* jan-bart, mr hiring sue gardner: https://youtu.be/eCrMJMh4gX0?t=25

best,
rupert


On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:

> Thank you for this message Lodewijk !
>
> I would like to join the messages already posted to thank both Stu and
> Jan-Bart. I was on the board when we ask them to join us and I have no
> memory of ever regretting that decision ;)
>
> I wish you both the best !
> JB, can we expect to see you in Italy next summer ? I sure hope so...
>
> Anthere
>
>  Le 06/01/16 08:10, Lodewijk a écrit :
>
> While we have long discussions on this list about board composition, we
>> seem to almost ignore the fact that two long time veterans are leaving the
>> Wikimedia Foundation board, as scheduled. Jan-Bart de Vreede and Stu West
>> have been around longer than many regular editors nowadays, and I think
>> there are not many people who can recall the days that the board didn't
>> have them on it. I have never had the pleasure to serve on the board with
>> them, but a little thank-you from our community side, would seem in place.
>>
>> Stu joined the board already in 2008 (filling Michael Davis' seat), and
>> has
>> been a solid power on the board's audit responsibilities (I believe he
>> chaired the audit committee for quite a while) and was a force behind the
>> accountability of movement affiliates. While we often strongly disagreed
>> on
>> affiliate issues, I appreciate the fact that he always remained
>> constructive and wanted to think about solutions rather than problems. He
>> served both as treasurer and vice chair.
>>
>> Jan-Bart was on the board even longer, since early 2007, and I recall
>> already working with him through Kennisnet (a Dutch foundation for
>> education and IT) before that. Jan-Bart is one of those rare people who
>> went to ALL wikimania conferences, and can be easily recognised there with
>> his big smile. I can't remember a theme Jan-Bart didn't work on in the
>> past
>> years (Affiliates, HR, searching a new Executive Director) and he served
>> the board in many positions, including as chair.
>>
>> I'm sure that the WMF communications staff and/or board has a nice
>> thankyou
>> coming up - with a more accurate description of the awesome work they did,
>> that I now made up from the top of my head. But in the mean time, I'd like
>> to do it myself: Thank you Jan-Bart and Stu for all the time, energy and
>> effort that you poured into our movement. I know that not all of us
>> appreciate this as much as we perhaps should, and sometimes you may even
>> have perceived us as hostile. I do sincerely hope that you had fun with us
>> though, and I'm confident that you made a big dent in our impossible
>> mission of sharing the sum of all knowledge with everyone.
>>
>> I hope to meet you again soon, at least in Italy at Wikimania, and I hope
>> to see you around in our movement in many different ways.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Lodewijk
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

2015-12-31 Thread rupert THURNER
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Anthony Cole  wrote:
> Matt, here
> ,
> Jimmy says this was a removal for cause.
>
> Anthony Cole 
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Flaschen <
> matthew.flasc...@gatech.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 12/29/2015 07:19 AM, Gnangarra wrote:
>>
>>> there are bigger questions than why like;
>>>
>>> - how can this take place
>>> - how can the community ensure its representatives independence in the
>>> future,
>>> - what effect will this have on other elected representatives on the
>>> board
>>>
>>>   The Florida statute(
>>> https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808 ) referred
>>> to earlier says that If a director is elected by a class, chapter, or
>>> other
>>> organizational unit, or by region or other geographic grouping, the
>>> director may be removed only by the members of that class, chapter, unit,
>>> or grouping.
>>>
>>
>> IANAL, but I believe that clause does not apply.  There are no "members of
>> that class, chapter, unit, or grouping." because there are no members at
>> all (https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws#ARTICLE_III_-_MEMBERSHIP).
>> It is also under "2. A majority of all votes of the members, if the
>> director was elected or appointed by the members." which also does not
>> apply for the same reason.
>>
>> To be clear, I believe the board's action was legal, but I believe that
>> ethically they should state whether it was for cause, and if at all
>> possible why he was removed.

do the clauses from 617.0808 apply at all - as the bylaws explicitly
specify removal? "Trustees .. are understood to act as fiduciaries
with regard to the Foundation". "The Board will approve candidates who
receive the most votes". " Trustee may be removed, with or without
cause, by a majority vote of the Trustees".  the election page states
it like this: "Members of the Wikimedia community have the opportunity
to elect three candidates to a two-year term which will expire in
2017." the community is a class in the sense of 617.0808, and would
apply if the bylaws do not specify removal, isn't it?

jimmy wales btw wrote on his talk page "... this was a removal for
cause" and "I do not support any changes to the bylaws around the
composition of the board at this time. There is a very unhealthy and
plainly false view among some in the community that elected board
members are more supportive of the community than appointed. It
actually doesn't turn out that way in practice, and with good reason.
All board members have a fiduciary duty to the organization, which
means that caring about the community - the lifeblood of the
organization - comes naturally to everyone." :
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJimbo_Wales=revision=697407275=697403591

the whole story reminds me on what josh wrote in the ny times months ago:
The election — a record 5,000 voters turned out, nearly three times
the number from the previous election — was a rebuke to the status
quo; all three incumbents up for re-election were defeated, replaced
by critics of the superprotect measures. Two other members will leave
the 10-member board at the end of this year.
http://nytimes.com/2015/06/21/opinion/can-wikipedia-survive.html

rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

2015-12-29 Thread rupert THURNER
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 4:00 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> issue here. This is hardly unusual. Regarding the removal itself, at least
> in the United States, it's fairly common for members of a body to be able
> to remove/expel one of their own. The Wikimedia Foundation Board of
> Trustees bylaws explicitly allow for removal of a member, with or without
> cause. Unlike in older Board resolutions, there's a clear public
> accounting of how each of the Board members voted (as opposed to simple
> numeric totals). James posted that he will work with Patricio to provide

like others on this thread i think the WMF bylaws are broken in this
respect. not legally broken, but morally. i'd love to vote for a
trustee, and i'd love to reverse my decision in case a sufficient
party is not happy. if in this case james does not want to have a
public discussion he is free to resign. if the board thinks it cannot
work with james anymore, and is able to remove him without him beeing
ok with it, without public discussion, then i do not find it
transparent.

best,
rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update from the Wikimedia Performance Team

2015-12-08 Thread rupert THURNER
I appreciate a ton what you guys achieve, many thanks!!

Rupert
On Dec 7, 2015 23:28, "Gilles Dubuc"  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> This is the monthly report from the Wikimedia Performance team.
>
> ## Our progress ##
>
> * Availability. We've done a major overhaul of the ObjectCache interfaces.
> Many
> factory methods were deprecated or removed, reducing it to just four simple
> entry points. New docs at
>
> https://doc.wikimedia.org/mediawiki-core/master/php/classObjectCache.html#details
>
> We've written a new IExpiringStore interface for convenient TTL constants,
> e.g. $cache::TTL_WEEK. See
>
> https://doc.wikimedia.org/mediawiki-core/master/php/interfaceIExpiringStore.html
>
> We've migrated most use of wfGetMainCache() to WANObjectCache. Work
> continued on the librarization of BagOStuff, Memcached, and other object
> cache classes.
>
> * Performance testing infrastructure. We've created dedicated dashboards
> for portals:
>
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/dashboard/db/webpagetest-portals
>
> And for mobile:
>
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/dashboard/db/mobile-webpagetest
>
> We now test one page using real 3G connections (from San Francisco and
> Bangalore) and test other pages using the following physical devices:
> iPhone 6, iPad mini 2 and Moto G.
>
> * Media stack. We've extended Thumbor with 12 small plugins to meet our
> needs and match our existing thumbnailing feature set. This includes
> support for all the file formats in use on Commons. The Thumbor Vagrant
> stack is now very close to having all the moving parts needed in
> production, with basic Vagrant roles for Varnish and Swift having been
> written to that end. Our objective is to finish the work on VM by the
> holidays and have it ready to be showcased and discussed collectively at
> the developer summit in a breakout session.
>
> * ResourceLoader. We've written a new mw.requestIdleCallback API for
> scheduling deferred tasks. We've removed usage of the  msg_resource_links
> DB table. We now use message config from the module registry directly.
> We've migrated MessageBlobStore msg_resource DB table to an object cache
> (to be deployed in January 2016):
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T113092
>
> ## How are we doing? ##
>
> Client-side performance has remained stable over the past month. Save
> Timing
> has also remained stable, around the 1s median mark.
>
> The job queue's health improved greatly after adding a new server to the
> pool, with the job queue size dropping drastically and the 99th percentile
> job processing time going from one day to one hour:
>
> * https://grafana.wikimedia.org/dashboard/db/job-queue-health
>
> There was a small scare about a sudden increase of the SpeedIndex value
> across the board:
>
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/dashboard/db/webpagetest
>
> But it was entirely explained by the fundraising banner, which doesn't
> appear immediately on pageload. SpeedIndex measures the time it takes for
> the above-the-fold area to "settle" visually. The banner appears late and
> pushes the content down, which delays the time when visual changes stop
> happening for the above-the-fold area.
>
> Until next time,
> Aaron, Gilles, Peter, Timo, and Ori.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are we so boring?

2015-12-08 Thread rupert THURNER
was it fun?

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Mardetanha  wrote:
> I also concur that best part of wikimania is get to know other wikimedians
> and fascinating stories , but nevertheless the workshops are also very
> useful. in each wikimania we enjoy both. I learnt a lot from them all.
>
> Mardetanha
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 12:51 AM, Chris Keating 
> wrote:
>
>> Most Wikimedians are very interesting people. However Milos has hit the
>> nail on the head when he says the most interesting things happening at
>> Wikimedia events are 1-1 conversations.
>>
>> In my view we don't have a "personality" problem (and if we did, we
>> couldn't fix it).
>>
>> What we have, at least in the offline space, is an *event management* and
>> *meeting skills" problem.
>>
>> We do not set up events to make anything *apart* from 1-1 conversations
>> effective. Events typically lack goals and focused programmes. Where issues
>> are being discussed, they lack common agreement about what problems are
>> trying to be solved and what voices need to be represented in the
>> solutions. Where skills are being shared, they lack a definition of what it
>> is people need to know and how to teach it to them effectively. And more or
>> less throughout, we have a low level of presentation and/or facilitation
>> skills as we don't actively train people in these.
>>
>> We are groping towards success in a couple of areas I'm familiar with, e.g.
>> the Wikimedia Conference is more clearly focused year on year. But there is
>> still a long way to go!
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 7:39 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>>
>> > I think the term that I would use is "serious". Of course we're serious
>> > about the quality of our product. However that can involve plenty of
>> stress
>> > and burn-out. We deal with a lot of serious issues: conflicts of
>> interest,
>> > harassment, finances, legal compliance, reliability, privacy, safety, and
>> > more. My personal experience is that there's little gratitude for good
>> > work, and lots of complaints when things go awry. I would like to see us
>> > foster an emotional environment that's a bit on the brighter side, and
>> > would be interested in others' thoughts about how we can do that.
>> >
>> > Pine
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>> >
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

2015-12-03 Thread rupert THURNER
One feedback I got today is to not display the banner any more if the
person donated.
On Dec 3, 2015 16:37, "Liam Wyatt"  wrote:

> TL;DR - we've reached "peak banner", how do we change the fundraising
> model to be about working smarter, not just pushing harder. This needs
> to be part of a broader process that involves strategic planning
> transparency, endowment discussions, editor-recruitment, etc. Not just
> about fullscreen advertising.
>
> I, along with many here, am dismayed that the banners are now at the
> stage of being fullscreen. However, as others have mentioned, the
> actual text of the request has been adjusted following a reasonably
> collaborative process to identify text that is both effective and
> acceptable to the community. Also, the fundraising team have been
> placed in the difficult position of being told to raise a LOT more
> money without being given more methods to do so.[1] Naturally then,
> there is a point where the existing methods reach their maximum
> effectiveness, and capacity is stretched to the point where awkward
> mistakes happen.[2]
>
> At this point, I suspect we've reached "peak banner".
>
> Rather like "peak oil" - after drilling the same oil reserve for a
> long time, you have to pump exponentially harder to maintain a steady
> flow.[2] Furthermore, the harder you pump today, the more difficult it
> will be tomorrow. I think we've reached that point with the
> fundraising advertising and emails. We know that the donation amounts
> are decreasing, but the budget is increasing. There are many suggested
> reasons for the decreased supply (relevant parables for this include
> "killing the goose that laid the golden egg" and "the boy who cried
> wolf"). So it's now time to talk about pumping smarter, not harder.
>
> An important part of that shift is the recently-opened (but longtime
> mooted) discussion about an endowment. I commend Lisa's essay[3] as an
> excellent start to formulating a long-term plan. There are many
> important questions that would need to be answered as part of that
> strategy. People interested in this really ought to read her thoughts
> on creating a "growing endowment" and the advantages/challenges this
> would bring. Carefully and consultatively addressing the challenges in
> creating an endowment would also go a long way towards fixing other
> related concerns:
>
> - Improving the transparency of the WMF strategy and the way decisions
> are made (see also the discussion about the FDC recommendations[4])
> - Having the global community, especially the Chapters which have
> local fundraising capacity, involved in the fundraising process -
> rather than being held at arms length. The community should be seen as
> the fundraiser's biggest asset, not the pageview numbers.
> - culturally sensitive communication (to avoid things like the email
> saying "let's end this" being translated into French as the
> *equivalent* of "I challenge you to a fight to the death")
> - Integrating the activities of fundraising as "part of the movement"
> rather than as something that is held/holds itself apart. The WMF
> donor database, for example, has tens of thousands of people who would
> be interested in learning to edit. Why have we never tried to create a
> [privacy-policy-compliant] way of introducing those people to their
> local communities/chapters to help address the other strategic
> challenge of "editor recruitment and retention".
> - Addressing some of the inequities of how money is
> raised/disseminated across our movement which are based on rules
> "grandfathered in" from chapter-fundraising rules prior to the "Haifa
> letter".
> - movement calendars (to avoid things like this year's fundraising
> clash with WikiLovesMonuments)
>
> Some people say that the fundraising goal is too high. Perhaps, but we
> also have a long list of fixes-needed and wanted-features. We can't do
> a lot more with a lot less, although we can certainly increase the
> efficiency/transparency of how the existing WMF budget is spent!
> However, with the increased total budget, also comes a increased
> expectation of results. I think that a lot of my own frustration comes
> from this - I could probably be supportive of a fullscreen banner IF I
> felt the results justified it. But, for just one example, as Andrea
> described today[5], Wikisource has NEVER received any dedicated
> support despite years of that community begging for it.
>
> I've probably written too much now... sorry!
>
> -Liam
>
> [1] Side note: If you'd like to apply for what is think is probably
> the hardest (and therefore very important) job in Wikimedia, WMF
> Fundraising is hiring a community-liaison role:
> https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/113040?t=26r71l
> [2] like saying "A year ago, you gave 0.00 € to keep Wikipedia online
> and ad-free." https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120214
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil Yes, I realise the metaphor
> isn't perfect. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

2015-11-25 Thread rupert THURNER
Anne, do you imagine to publish income per person that way?
On Nov 25, 2015 04:53, "Risker"  wrote:

> Thank you, Nikki.  Yes, about 70% of the costs were broken down, more or
> less.  But almost 30% - totalling over US$635,000 - is undifferentiated
> "floating capacity" and "administrative costs".  Those two amounts, which
> are not broken down by program, total more than any other Wikimedia
> movement entity except WMDE has received in the past three rounds.
>
> User:Risker - FDC member
>
>
>
> On 24 November 2015 at 10:13, Nicola Zeuner 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Risker, Gerard et al.,
> >
> > Just a quick correction:
> >
> > WMDE did indeed provide a detailed cost breakdown for Wikidata costs as
> > well as other software development costs, down to the activity level, in
> > table 6b, in the financial section
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2015-2016_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Proposal_form#Financials:_upcoming_year.27s_annual_plan
> > >
> > of
> > the WMDE proposal.
> >
> > When first FDC member Risker
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Proposals/2015-2016_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Proposal_form#Questions_from_Risker
> > >
> >  and then FDC staff
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Proposals/2015-2016_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Proposal_form#budget_.26_finances
> > >
> > asked
> > about a separation of costs, our response referred them to table 6b, and
> > clarified that the first *eight* line items cover core Wikidata
> development
> > work (the remaining five items cover closely related development and
> > community activities that support Wikidata).
> >
> > Hope this helps to inform this discussion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nikki Zeuner (WMDE)
> >
> >
> > Nikki Zeuner
> > Partnerships and Development
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 260
> > Mobil: 0172 547 1261
> > US: 1 (520) 743-6801
> > www.wikimedia.de
> >
> > Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
> > Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> > http://spenden.wikimedia.de/
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter
> > der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
> > 
> >
> > 2015-11-24 14:47 GMT+01:00 Risker :
> >
> > > Hello Gerard -
> > >
> > > The recommended grant for Wikimedia Deutschland is larger than ever,
> and
> > > represents a 42% increase from last year's grant.  This is a massive
> > > increase.  Please don't confuse the fact that WMDE did not get
> everything
> > > it wanted with whether or not Wikidata is underfunded.  Remember, the
> > > request was not just for Wikidata funding, and despite many attempts by
> > the
> > > FDC to get precise data on the actual planned expenses for Wikidata,
> the
> > > committee was not provided with this information.  While the funds
> > provided
> > > are restricted (in that they can only be spent on the projects WMDE
> > applied
> > > for), WMDE can spend the entire amount on Wikidata if it wants to.
> > Perhaps
> > > that is where you might want to turn your attention.
> > >
> > > User:Risker - FDC member
> > >
> > > On 24 November 2015 at 04:02, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > So in essence one of the most relevant development project -
> Wikidata -
> > > > that is arguably already underfunded will be even more underfunded
> and
> > we
> > > > have to say thank you for doing a good job? Ok.. I thank Wikimedia
> > > Germany
> > > > for doing a stellar job. It is an acknowledged source for inspiration
> > > and I
> > > > have been really happy in all the contacts that I have had with them
> > over
> > > > the years.
> > > >
> > > > It is not up to me to doubt the sincere efforts of the FDC but I am
> > > > saddened that while WMF has more cash than that it can spend
> important
> > > work
> > > > is curtailed .. for what? Other development projects are not treated
> in
> > > > this way and a great opportunity to do even more is missed as a
> result.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >  GerardM
> > > >
> > > > On 24 November 2015 at 03:04, Pine W  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thank you FDC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this
> round.
> > > > That
> > > > > is nice to see.
> > > > >
> > > > > I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more
> > > problems
> > > > > the FDC  seemed to find with the org's budget and performance
> > > management
> > > > > practices. One would expect the larger organizations to have mature
> > and
> > > > > robust practices in these areas. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Branislav Jovanovic, User:BraneJ in critical condition

2015-11-23 Thread rupert THURNER
All the best brane!!
On Nov 23, 2015 18:43, "Samir Elsharbaty"  wrote:

> Brane,
>
> I didn't have the pleasure of meeting you but I heard a lot of nice
> stories, so, please get well soon because I would like to have this
> pleasure!
>
> --
> Samir Elsharbaty,
> Wikipedia Education Program
> Wikimedia Foundation
> +20.100.944.3478
> education.wikimedia.org
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Brane,
> > Good wishes and get well soon.
> > Regards.
> >
> > On 22 November 2015 at 06:18, Asaf Bartov  wrote:
> >
> > > I have had the pleasure of meeting and talking to Brane at some length,
> > in
> > > Belgrade, in Hong Kong, and perhaps elsewhere too.  He is thoughtful
> and
> > > dedicated, and as Milos said, has played a huge part in building up
> > Serbian
> > > Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia.
> > >
> > > Brane, I wish you a full recovery, and hope to have the chance to see
> you
> > > again, somewhere in the world or around the wikis.
> > >
> > > Regards from the Wikisource gathering in Vienna,
> > >
> > > Asaf
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Milos Rancic 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Pine asked me a good question: Where to express support? I think
> > > > whatever you think is the most appropriate. This thread works, as
> > > > well. His email is bra...@gmail.com. You have the link to his
> Facebook
> > > > page via WMRS photo. He is using Twitter, as well @branej.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Milos Rancic 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > At some point of time, the best you could do is to reach for a
> > > > > superstition and hope it will work. It doesn't matter how it will
> be
> > > > > explained after, but at this point of time, it's only that
> > > > > superstition which matters.
> > > > >
> > > > > My particular superstition is that Brane would be able to see his
> > > > > eulogy and that we'll be able to laugh together. You know, it's a
> > rare
> > > > > opportunity to see how your eulogy would look like, so I hope I am
> > > > > giving it to him.
> > > > >
> > > > > An hour ago I heard that he is in critical condition. At first, I
> was
> > > > > thinking what should I write after he dies. Then, I realized that I
> > > > > should write it now and post it after. Then, it's come into my mind
> > > > > that I should send it immediately as, at least, I could think about
> > > > > reading with him this eulogy and your comments after he recovers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since August 2014 he is struggling with bone cancer. His curse is
> > that
> > > > > his body is so strong, that chemotherapy is not working yet.
> > > > > Paradoxically, we hope that his body is weak enough now that it
> will
> > > > > finally accept chemotherapy. Monday would be crucial day for him.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is one of those "invisible" Wikimedians who actually contributed
> > > > > significantly to our movement. Some of you, mostly those who
> visited
> > > > > Belgrade, know him.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is one of the founders of Wikimedia Serbia. It's a pity that he
> is
> > > > > in this condition while WMRS is preparing to celebrate its 10th
> > > > > anniversary. Here is our photo from the founding assembly [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > Presently, he is a board member of Wikimedia Serbia.
> > > > >
> > > > > His epic fight for copyright correctness on Serbian Wikipedia
> created
> > > > > the foundations of the present day strict copyright rules. It's a
> > > > > great achievement for a project of such size and it was possible
> just
> > > > > because of him.
> > > > >
> > > > > While he was active editor, he was highly trusted Wikipedian and he
> > > > > was administrator, bureaucrat and checkuser on Serbian Wikipedia,
> as
> > > > > well as on a number of of other projects in Serbian language.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alpha software for transliteration between Cyrillic and Latin
> scripts
> > > > > of Serbian language in MediaWiki was his work. That was the basis
> for
> > > > > the future implementation. It was the first software of that kind
> > > > > implemented in one web engine.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is my close friend. Besides a lot of things which he did, which
> > > > > will be mentioned at appropriate time, I want to say that many
> things
> > > > > which I did wouldn't be possible without his contribution.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is now very exhausted and he won't be able to read this today or
> > > > > tomorrow. However, I am sure he will be able to read it on Monday,
> > > > > after he recovers a bit. So, your support matters, no matter of my
> > > > > superstitious reasons for sending this email.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.facebook.com/wikimedia.rs/photos/a.826279217387658.1073741828.294923960523189/1198903920125184/
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel

2015-11-23 Thread rupert THURNER
Lila, would you be able to somehow contact the Russian government?
On Nov 23, 2015 18:25, "Samir Elsharbaty"  wrote:

> Some suggestions of things we can do:
>
> 1. The list of signatories on the amnesty international website does not
> include the WMF, the Wikimedia community, any of our affiliations or any
> representation from the Wikimedia movement. I wonder if we can contact them
> and request adding any of the above mentioned?
>
> 2. Use our SM channels to retweet the WMF blog post [1] about him with the
> news that he is sentenced to death.
>
> 3. We all try to share supporting tweets on the #FreeBassel hashtag.
>
> [1] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/10/08/bassel-missing-syria/
>
> Thanks,
>
> Samir
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
>
> > Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's
> family.
> > I still hope this is not true.
> >
> > If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
> > Lila
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I
> > read
> > > it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in
> > the
> > > past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
> > >
> > > Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making information
> > > available about Palmyra.
> > >
> > > If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
> > > Thanks,
> > >   GerardM
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.html
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Analytics] On toxic communities

2015-11-14 Thread rupert THURNER
interesting. i read 90% male, 85% between 16 and 30 years of age, 12
mio players a day, 1 bio hours played a month (2012). they had a
tribunal which is switched off since a year. the market is 54 mio usd
a month for multiplayer online battle arena (moba) in the united
states. league of legends earns 120 mio usd per month, out of a
monthly player base of over 60 mio, which is 3 times more player than
dota2, and 6 times more income than dota2 (beginning of 2015).

* 
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/10/15/riot-games-releases-awesome-league-of-legends-infographic
* 
http://www.kitguru.net/gaming/development/jon-martindale/league-of-legends-tribunal-to-return-soon/
* 
http://www.polygon.com/2014/5/27/5723446/women-in-esports-professional-gaming-riot-games-blizzard-starcraft-lol
* 
http://venturebeat.com/2015/03/24/dota-2-makes-18m-per-month-for-valve-but-league-of-legends-makes-that-much-every-5-days/


On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Ryan Kaldari  wrote:
> I was skeptical of even reading this article, but it actually seems pretty
> insightful. It also seems more relevant to Wikipedia than I was expecting:
> "The answer had to be community-wide reform of cultural norms. We had to
> change how people thought about online society and change their
> expectations of what was acceptable How do you introduce structure and
> governance into a society that didn’t have one before?"
>
> It has some interesting ideas about using science to change the social
> dynamics of online communities and leveraging the work of academics who
> want to work on these problems. Some of the techniques they used remind me
> of Aaron's revision scoring. I wonder if there's any chance we could talk
> with them or some of their researchers.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić 
> wrote:
>
>> Very interesting read (via Brandon Harris):
>>
>>
>> http://recode.net/2015/07/07/doing-something-about-the-impossible-problem-of-abuse-in-online-games/
>>
>> "the vast majority of negative behavior ... did not originate from the
>> persistently negative online citizens; in fact, 87 percent of online
>> toxicity came from the neutral and positive citizens just having a bad day
>> here or there."
>>
>> "... incidences of homophobia, sexism and racism ... have fallen to a
>> combined 2 percent of all games. Verbal abuse has dropped by more than 40
>> percent, and 91.6 percent of negative players change their act and never
>> commit another offense after just one reported penalty."
>>
>> I have plenty of ideas how to apply this to Wikipedia, but I am sure Dario
>> and his team as well :) - and some opportunity for the communities to use
>> such results.

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advertising in Central notice?

2015-11-08 Thread rupert THURNER
On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 1:26 AM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
>> It's normal, when you hire a company for a survey, you mention the
>> company, for various reasons.
>>
>
> Ziko,
>
> This is true, of course; but it does not address what is under discussion
> here.
>
> It is also normal for partnership agreements to include specifications of
> how those mentions are carried out to meet certain objectives, while also
> avoiding problems for both parties. With nearly every one of my clients,
> this is specified by either an informal or a formal contract, prior to the
> announcement or commencement of the project.
>
> Regrettably, it is also rather normal for the Wikimedia Foundation to pay
> insufficient attention to such arrangements. This leaves volunteers in the
> position of cleaning up the mess, and sometimes, of playing the role of the
> "bad guy" whose image suffers from telling somebody that they can't have
> what they want.

since when wikipedia needs to use some arbitrary 3rd party company to
conduct a simple survey? i'd consider it a core competency of a social
website like wikipedia to allow finding out the opinion and a
consensus of contributors and readers, anonymous and not anonymous.

rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TPP - copyright

2015-11-06 Thread rupert THURNER
Europe harmonized it's copyright as well to 70 yrs for everything. It did
not change an existing copyright state at the time when it is ratified by a
countries law makers.

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] I'll be moving on

2015-10-08 Thread rupert THURNER
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Jan Ainali  wrote:
> All,
>
> For the last three years I have been the Executive Director for Wikimedia
> Sverige. Before that I have been Chairman, Treasurer and Secretary of the
> board (at different times) and have been involved since the founding of the
> chapter in 2007. It is perhaps even an understatement to say that the
> chapter has been a big part of my life. I have had the opportunity to be
> part of a fantastic journey from starting the first chapter’s activities to
> today, with stable strategic activities, seven people in the office, and a
> diversified board. It has been an awesome time in my life and I have met
> and worked with some truly wonderful persons along the way, and I am
> thankful to all of you that have made it so inspiring. But now, as my
> contract is about to come to an end, I feel that it is time for me to move
> on to new endeavours. I am confident that the chapter is already in good
> hands, with a professional board and an office with experienced staff
> members and functional processes, but I’ll be around until at least the
> beginning of January to make it a smooth transition.
>
> I will obviously always be a wikimedian at heart and probably pick up on my
> editing again and I will also stay subscribed to most mailing lists. If not
> earlier, I’ll see you in Esino Lario.

i always enjoyed reading your stuff and getting your viewpoint. short,
and clear ...

rupert

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy largely blocked by WMF fundraising

2015-08-29 Thread rupert THURNER
dear board,

allow me to directly ask you to stop these fundraising persons to spoil
wiki loves monuments because of less than intelligent KPIs. WMF cannot and
should not behave like an elephant in the porcelain shop. there is a simple
technical solution to the problem below, to have a combined banner for WLM
and donation. it is impossible that more money at stake as is covered by
the reserves, isn't it? i am really lacking words here ... the only ones i
could find would not be compliant with the friendly space policy. if we as
movement do not follow through the volunteer first rule than it is better
to dissolve WMF, or split it in two parts, one holding the rights to the
web URLs, i.e. right to banner, the other one employing all the people
doing some work.

best,
rupert


On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hello everyone.
 Sorry for the long mail but we wanted to explain the situation for
 Wikimedia Italia.
 The conversation is going on and it's better to clear some important
 points.

 In the second week of August Wikimedia Italia has been contacted by
 Kalliope Tsouroupidou and later by Jessica Robell, who explained that the
 Wikimedia Foundation was planning to have a fundraising campaign in Italy
 in September.
 We have been surprised by that, since Wiki Loves Monuments is well-known to
 run in September, and it has been like that for years.
 Moreover, there has been a similar clash in 2014:  we discussed for several
 days, and in the end we reached a compromise, and the FR banners went live
 just for the last days.
 It was not perfect, but we had WLM banners for almost all September.
 This year the clash is on the whole month of September. Given the history,
 and the very fact that Wikimedia Italia has planned WLM and written so in
 the FDC application, we feel that WMIT has not been negligible in matters
 of
 communication.
 We are not *happy* with the situation,
 the very existence of the clash, the fact that all this appeared in the
 middle of August, while we were all on holiday and just few weeks before
 the beginning of WLM.
 We just decided not to pick up a fight, as we believe in constructive
 conversation and negotiation.
 The agreement we reached is very painful for WMIT and WLM: it's just better
 than not having the banners at all, or to have them for just a few days in
 the middle of September.
 Conversations with the FR team has been firm, but polite: this does not
 mean that we are happy about what is happening.
 Moreover, we will have to discuss with FDC to renegotiate expected results
 for WLM in 2015.

 Having the fundraising campaign in September in Italy has a clear negative
 impact on Wiki Loves Monuments, the largest project of Wikimedia Italia.
 This will not only likely reduce the number of participants and uploaded
 pictures, but will also put us in a difficult position in front of our
 sponsors and partners, including 200+ municipalities, 100+ cultural
 institutions, and some major partners, like FIAF (the Federation of Italian
 photographers' associations), ICOM (the International Council of Museums),
 the Toscana Foto Festival (a major photo festival), Touring Club Italiano
 (the largest Italian touristic association), and others. WMIT spends
 thousands of euros in WLM each year - not because we waste money, but
 because we have higher stakes.

 This year, we will have in the Italian Jury international renowned
 photographers like (prabably: yet to be confirmed) Steve McCurry (
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_McCurry) and Franco Fontana (
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco_Fontana).
 This year, in June, we were received by several politicians from the
 Italian Parliament for an official meeting regarding the law we are
 fighting
 as WMIT.

 Because of the specific challenges we face, WLM in Italy goes beyond being
 a photographic competition and is also an opportunity to create
 relationships and advocate for the freedom of taking pictures of monuments.

 Italy does not have freedom of panorama.
 Worst, Italy does not have freedom of panorama for any kind of monuments,
 even if copyright has expired.
 We need to ask for permission to make pictures of monuments. For. Every.
 Monument.
 We have to create lists of monuments to be photographed. There is no
 official list of monuments in Italy.

 There is *extensive* documentation here:

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

 This is very important to know to put in perspective WLM Italy stats:
 http://stats.wikilovesmonuments.cl/italy. As an example, it is the reason
 why we have so many participants who contribute for few pics each. In 2014
 alone, we had 1038 uploaders, but we were only 6th in terms of number of
 photos.

 The global fundraising is essential to our movement.
 It funds Wikipedia operations, software development, the Wikimedia
 Foundation, many chapters and affiliates, and, of course, also Wiki Loves
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Media handling is difficult

2015-08-03 Thread rupert THURNER
James you are sure not to be late to the party when cameras like Samsung
Galaxy or better with Android os are available?
http://m.distrelec.ch/en/galaxy-gc200-digital-camera-black-samsung-ek-gc200zkaaut/p/30002970?channel=B2Cgclid=CL2hxpOgjccCFS7KtAodl8cDBA

Rupert
On Aug 1, 2015 2:34 AM, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On 31 July 2015 at 06:48, Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Hi,
 
  I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs
 on
  Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could
 it
  be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors =
  VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to
  contribute. That removes one of the technological barriers and it looks
 its
  a priority for WMF.
 
  While part of contributing to Wikipedia is still contributing by images.
 I
  am from Wikimedia Czech republic. We run many projects based on media
  harvest or organizing *low barrier media harvest activities* to bring new
  users to Wikipedia.
 
 
  As our newbies are not technologically skilled and not native English
  speakers, there is a big technology block to contribute to Wikipedia with
  ease:
 
  1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload
 

 ​I don't think having a custom mobile app for uploading files is really the
 key problem.

 The quality of media capture on non-specialist mobile devices, and
 especially the general pattern of use for them, is not so good that
 encouraging people in general to upload them for use in Wikipedia articles
 is a good idea. Yes, you *can* take good, educational, useful photos with a
 mobile device, but in general people do not, and when we enabled uploads on
 the mobile desktop we got a lot of very low-value photos, almost all of
 which were deleted (and the users understandably didn't stay around). The
 old tickets at
 https://wikimedia.mingle.thoughtworks.com/projects/mobile/cards/920 and
 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T53559 for example have some off-handed
 comments about this being the Selfie Apocalypse.

 The hard thing is not grabbing the media file from the user's device, but
 helping users understand what media is appropriate, what is expected, what
 is good, and what won't get immediately deleted by the wiki's community. We
 don't just want to trap people into making a one-off upload contribution –
 we want to encourage people to join the community and stay, taking several
 photos, not just one. :-) I've got some ideas about how we can gently coax
 people into understanding this without scaring them away, but I'm sure
 others have better plans.


 2) newbies are lost, when they click on Upload image and they are
  transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons
 
  3) Wikimedia Commons is in English - foreign language for our
 participants



 5) Wikimedia Commons environment is still pretty techy


  6) Insert metadata, takes a long time:
 
  e.g.: you have an image of a cathedral in Des Moines, IW. 3 or 4 times
 you
  have to insert same information: a) to file name (*Des Moines,
  cathedral.jpg*), b) to file description (*en:** Cathedral in Des Moines,
  Iowa, USA*/*es:* *La catedral de XY en Des Moines, Iowa, EEUU*) and c) to
  the category (*category:Des Moines* or *Churches in Des Moines*,
  *category:Cathedrals
  in Iowa*).


 ​[Answering these three together.]

 ​
 ​Yup, that's why our main work in Multimedia right now is making it
 possible to upload a media file from whichever wiki you're on
 ​, and do so whilst you're editing. We're looking to make adding the
 information as simple and painless as possible, without letting people
 upload files without enough information for the community to triage and
 ensure are as high quality as possible.

 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91717
 ​
 ​
 ​
 ​

 ​is the overall work, and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T40030 will be
 the integration into VisualEditor (we'll do it for users writing in
 wikitext as well, of course)​.




  4) biggest language barrier are categories, which are in English only, we
  need to insert name of the category in our mother tongue
 

 ​That is true. The long-term hope in this area is using Wikibase (the
 software behind Wikidata) to add proper structured data to Commons. This
 would mean that we could replace categories named in a single language with
 'tags' named in all languages, which would make it both easier to
 contribute to Commons and better to find existing media already on Commons
 for the majority of our readers and editors who do not speak English.

 You can see some thoughts on this at:
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Multichill/Commons_Wikidata_roadmap


 Could we do something for those, who contributes with their media to
  Wikipedia? Could we do it in one or two years?
 

 ​Absolutely. Or, at least, I hope so. :-)

 ​Yours,
 --
 James D. Forrester
 Lead Product Manager, Editing
 Wikimedia Foundation, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does Foundation have 3rd party standing against Harald Bischoff?

2015-07-31 Thread rupert THURNER
On Jul 27, 2015 5:33 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

  snip

 This still leaves me
  wondering if WMF Legal could be involved in the legal defense of the
  reusers if they acted in good faith in attempting to comply with the
  license terms as they understood them on Commons.

 snip
 

 Acting in good faith will, at best, mitigate against damages.  It isn't
 actually a defense against liability.  If people are getting sued after
 doing absolutely everything right, then I could maybe imagine getting
 involved.  However, in many licensing disputes there is a legitimate case
 that the reuser violated the terms of the license (e.g. by neglecting
 details regarding authorship / attribution / etc.), often due to ignorance
 of what the license requires.  In many such cases, the reuser may well
face
 a likelihood of losing if the case ever made it to court.  In a world of
 good faith we might expect that reusers who made mistakes out of
 ignorance to be treated kindly, but the legal system isn't exactly geared
 towards kindness.

 I think that we (the community + the WMF) should do more to help ensure
 license compliance and educate reusers about appropriate attribution, etc.
 However, I don't think that WMF Legal should get involved in cases where
 someone wanted to do the right thing but failed.  There is no need to
waste
 our resources on third-party cases where there is a significant risk of
 losing.

Robert, and Jan Bart,  what the lawyer did in harald Bischof s Name is
something common. There might be hundreds or thousands of cases, and there
are maybe the same number of images concerned. Google reveals that lawyers
did this on behalf of at least 4 authors in the last 10 years or so. There
is no sign that this will stop in future.

Therefor allow me come back to my original question which I d love to have
an answer from the wmf legal department, and cc-by expert readers:
independent of this case, is there a technical possibility to put amateur
reusers in future on a safe ground. Without the need of education. By
automatically adding author and license info into the metadata of the
image. If this is not enough attribution we should strive to have this kind
of attribution accepted in a future version cc license.

Best
Rupert
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Harald bischoff advertising to make images for the wikimedia foundation and then suing users

2015-07-28 Thread rupert THURNER
On Jul 28, 2015 9:37 AM, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com
wrote:
 It isn't clear to me at present whether he is:

 1 insisting on his undisputed licence rights
 2 strictly enforcing licence rights which we acknowledge on at least one
Wikimedia project and don't ourselves breach as a movement
 3 enforcing licence rights which we acknowledge on at least one Wikimedia
project but breach on another.

Could you please give an example for the three, to make easier for people
not so acquainted with nuances of the English language?

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] harald bischoff advertising to make images for the wikimedia foundation and then suing users

2015-07-21 Thread rupert THURNER
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 11:46 PM, Lilburne lilbu...@tygers-of-wrath.net wrote:
 On 20/07/2015 19:38, Andy Mabbett wrote:

 On 20 July 2015 at 18:09, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote:

 it is also hard for me to get behind the
 notion of punishing someone for demanding that reusers due the things
 that
 Commons actually recommends that they do.

 It's not a question of punishment, but of protecting Commons'
 reputation (from being brought into disrepute, as it might be
 termed)


 If you start deleting the images from Commons you put all re-users
 absolutely at risk who have linked to Commons.

 Why?

 Because you will now have removed the link to the attributions and license
 that they were relying on. This is why anyone that links like that is a
 fool. It is one thing to link to a page containing attribution/license on
 your site. Quite another to link to some other site you have no control over
 for the attribution/license.

the link is good enough imo, commons does not throw away the record
that the foto was there and everything can be reconstructed in case of
trouble. but - i'd love that this gets solved on a technical level.
every media file in commons either contains the author, or it is set
by wikipedia software into the metadata. resizing and storing retains
this information. after a while all toolchains will retain such
information and the problem of wikipedia as cause of cease and desist
letters (german: abmahnung) [0] will cease to exist. even for offline
wikipedia (kiwix, and similar) and direct links to media. there was a
non-wikipedia case a while ago [1], where the court says even in
direct links to the image you should be able to see the author and
license. it was dragged on to a higher instance but i could not find
what the final judgement was.

another challenge in this context are user defined licenses. those
were used by lawyers cease and desist letters bearing a 600-1500 eur
price tag. there seems to be even a business in fighting such letters,
naming wikipedia authors [2][3]. just as example, one of the mentioned
users images has Permission={{User:Ralf Roletschek/Autor2}} as foto
license. [4]. different author, same strategy, outcome You must
attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor
for a cc-by-sa 3.0 foto [5]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abmahnung
[1] 
http://www.chip.de/news/LG-Koeln-Copyright-Urteil-schafft-neue-Abmahn-Falle_66923908.html
[2] 
http://www.abmahnung.de/abmahnung-rechtsanwalt-dr-iur-hans-g-muesse-im-auftrag-eines-rechteinhabers.html
[3] 
http://www.obladen-gaessler.de/wikipedia-abmahnung-durch-ra-dr-hans-g-muesse-fuer-alexander-savin/
[4] 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Farmer_plowing_in_Fahrenwalde,_Mecklenburg-Vorpommern,_Germany.jpg
[5] 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2013-06-08_Projekt_Hei%C3%9Fluftballon_-_Highflyer_DSCF7768.jpg

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

[Wikimedia-l] harald bischoff advertising to make images for the wikimedia foundation and then suing users

2015-07-20 Thread rupert THURNER
hi,

may i propose to fix the attribution problem for the one common use
case do it like wikipedia does. somebody who refers to images from
commons like wikipedia does it should be on legal safe grounds.

there is a recent incident of non-wiki-love where user harald bischoff
states comes into situations where pictures for the WMF are created,
here:

https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benutzer:Haraldbischoffdiff=prevoldid=143679802
komme ich regelmässig in Situationen in denen auch das eine oder
andere Foto für die wikimedia-foundation

harald bischoff then uploads these pictures with cc-by-sa-3.0 license,
and sues users who use such fotos. the complaint here from a blogger
who paid 900 euro, who used a foto, with backlink to commons, and
attributing in mouseover:
http://diefreiheitsliebe.de/politik/in-eigener-sache-fast-900-euro-verlust-die-freiheitsliebe-wurde-abgemahnt/

what i would really love to see is that wikipedia is the role model,
i.e. wikipedia refers the pictures as they should be referred by any
website. the distinction because wikipedia is owned by wmf we refer
differently to commons than anybody else needs to go away imo. be it
only for the educational effect. personally i do not understand why a
link to the works is not good enough as attribution. i thought
cc-by-sa 4.0 fixes this problem anyway?

to summarize, i propose to legalize the use case do it as wikipedia
does when attributing images. to make the site look good anyway we
should either fix the software, or the license.

best,
rupert

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

[Wikimedia-l] press edit in facebook to edit wikipedia, how many?

2015-07-19 Thread rupert THURNER
hi,

for the first time i tried pressing edit in facebook and came out in
the wiki-text editor. are there statistics available how many persons
come along this way?

best,
rupert

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 400 days of lila tretikov and 60 million dollars spent - where is mobile editing?

2015-07-19 Thread rupert THURNER
i created two tasks in phabricator for it, hope that is ok like this:
* https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T106266
* https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T106267

i did not find the correct project though?

best,
rupert


On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 11:02 PM, rupert THURNER
rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
 hi dan,

 many thanks for the quick reaction! i need to make a correction as
 well, i was redirected to
 https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheit
 which was opened with the android chrome browser, so not the wikipedia
 app. i did not find any support in the mobile skin to do basic edits,
 e.g. add a link with reference, and sign. it is the first contact
 function for many people. i am sorry that this  made me explode as it
 is still not fixed despite it was hinted from numerous persons
 multiple times, for quite some time.

 i tried the app as well now, but i did not find any application
 support for signature or link ? so i have to know the syntax and
 type it?

 best,
 rupert


 On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 Hi Rupert,

 I was the product owner
 https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Team/Roles_and_responsibilities#Product_owner
 for the Wikipedia app from before it launch until April last year, so I can
 answer your question. Editing is supported on the native mobile apps, and
 has been since their launch last year (June 2014 for Android, July 2014 for
 iOS). The reason it did not work for you in this case is because of a
 formatting error in the wikitext of that specific page. I fixed the problem
 in the wikitext
 https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheitdiff=143559219oldid=143559146,
 and successfully added my signature as a test
 https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheitdiff=prevoldid=143559243
 (which
 I then reverted since I don't want to interfere in the discussion). You
 should be able to add your signature now. (I skipped over the exact details
 of what the issue was, let me know if you want hear them)

 As an aside, I would note that the way you communicated this question was
 suboptimal and unnecessarily combative. The title of your email is
 provocative, and makes unnecessary, exaggerated, and incorrect
 implications. It would be nice if you avoided doing this in the future, as
 people will be more willing to involve themselves in a discussion if they
 do not feel like they are being attacked.

 Thanks,
 Dan

 On 28 June 2015 at 03:44, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:

 hi,

 now we are approaching 400 days of lila tretikov at the helm of the
 wikimedia foundation, and 60 million us dollars spent, i was not able
 to sign a simple wikipedia page via the mobile app. i think something
 is going seriously wrong here :(

 what was the use case? the european union wants to harmonize the
 freedom of panorama:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama#European_Union. the
 german wikipedia had a wikipedia banner to sign a petition, and also
 wrote mails about it. which i thought is a nice idea. i am reading
 mails on the phone following links to wikipedia, i tried it this time
 as well, and i was not able to accomplish the most simple task of
 contribution - to add my signature at the bottom of a list. earlier in
 the year i already tried to add a link and i could not do it - but i
 admit that is a much more difficult task in the mobile app.

 the german links:
 * sign here:
 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheit
 *
 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Initiative_f%C3%BCr_die_Panoramafreiheit

 just as a side note, up to know this page collected close to 4'000
 signatures.

 best,
 rupert


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Ending discrimination by language

2015-06-28 Thread rupert THURNER
Wikimedia's current structure makes us vulnerable for beeing labelled as
u.s. american monopoly by jeanmarie cavada, French member of the European
Parliament:
http://jeanmariecavada.eu/ma-position-sur-le-droit-de-panorama/

Best
Rupert
 On Jun 28, 2015 5:42 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hoi,
 I did not talk about language discrimination. I talked about preference for
 USA activities. That is what chapters are about.
 Thanks.
  GerardM

 On 28 June 2015 at 14:18, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

  GerardM,
 
  Which do you think would end more language discrimination: a WMF
  co-headquarters in Belgium, moving the WEF to Germany, or a Simple
 language
  Wikipedia for the top-25 languages?
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] 400 days of lila tretikov and 60 million dollars spent - where is mobile editing?

2015-06-28 Thread rupert THURNER
hi,

now we are approaching 400 days of lila tretikov at the helm of the
wikimedia foundation, and 60 million us dollars spent, i was not able
to sign a simple wikipedia page via the mobile app. i think something
is going seriously wrong here :(

what was the use case? the european union wants to harmonize the
freedom of panorama:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama#European_Union. the
german wikipedia had a wikipedia banner to sign a petition, and also
wrote mails about it. which i thought is a nice idea. i am reading
mails on the phone following links to wikipedia, i tried it this time
as well, and i was not able to accomplish the most simple task of
contribution - to add my signature at the bottom of a list. earlier in
the year i already tried to add a link and i could not do it - but i
admit that is a much more difficult task in the mobile app.

the german links:
* sign here: 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheit
* 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Initiative_f%C3%BCr_die_Panoramafreiheit

just as a side note, up to know this page collected close to 4'000 signatures.

best,
rupert

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 400 days of lila tretikov and 60 million dollars spent - where is mobile editing?

2015-06-28 Thread rupert THURNER
hi dan,

many thanks for the quick reaction! i need to make a correction as
well, i was redirected to
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheit
which was opened with the android chrome browser, so not the wikipedia
app. i did not find any support in the mobile skin to do basic edits,
e.g. add a link with reference, and sign. it is the first contact
function for many people. i am sorry that this  made me explode as it
is still not fixed despite it was hinted from numerous persons
multiple times, for quite some time.

i tried the app as well now, but i did not find any application
support for signature or link ? so i have to know the syntax and
type it?

best,
rupert


On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 Hi Rupert,

 I was the product owner
 https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Team/Roles_and_responsibilities#Product_owner
 for the Wikipedia app from before it launch until April last year, so I can
 answer your question. Editing is supported on the native mobile apps, and
 has been since their launch last year (June 2014 for Android, July 2014 for
 iOS). The reason it did not work for you in this case is because of a
 formatting error in the wikitext of that specific page. I fixed the problem
 in the wikitext
 https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheitdiff=143559219oldid=143559146,
 and successfully added my signature as a test
 https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheitdiff=prevoldid=143559243
 (which
 I then reverted since I don't want to interfere in the discussion). You
 should be able to add your signature now. (I skipped over the exact details
 of what the issue was, let me know if you want hear them)

 As an aside, I would note that the way you communicated this question was
 suboptimal and unnecessarily combative. The title of your email is
 provocative, and makes unnecessary, exaggerated, and incorrect
 implications. It would be nice if you avoided doing this in the future, as
 people will be more willing to involve themselves in a discussion if they
 do not feel like they are being attacked.

 Thanks,
 Dan

 On 28 June 2015 at 03:44, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:

 hi,

 now we are approaching 400 days of lila tretikov at the helm of the
 wikimedia foundation, and 60 million us dollars spent, i was not able
 to sign a simple wikipedia page via the mobile app. i think something
 is going seriously wrong here :(

 what was the use case? the european union wants to harmonize the
 freedom of panorama:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama#European_Union. the
 german wikipedia had a wikipedia banner to sign a petition, and also
 wrote mails about it. which i thought is a nice idea. i am reading
 mails on the phone following links to wikipedia, i tried it this time
 as well, and i was not able to accomplish the most simple task of
 contribution - to add my signature at the bottom of a list. earlier in
 the year i already tried to add a link and i could not do it - but i
 admit that is a much more difficult task in the mobile app.

 the german links:
 * sign here:
 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Offener_Brief_an_die_Mitglieder_des_Europ%C3%A4ischen_Parlaments_zur_Erhaltung_der_Panoramafreiheit
 *
 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Initiative_f%C3%BCr_die_Panoramafreiheit

 just as a side note, up to know this page collected close to 4'000
 signatures.

 best,
 rupert


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Bylaw proposal on term limits

2015-06-23 Thread rupert THURNER
Hi, while all this sounds not bad I am wondering what the reasoning behind
the extention of the time serving would be, as well if one wants to limit
the number of terms what good a waiting time would do to break this limit
again.

Rupert
 On Jun 23, 2015 2:51 AM, Samuel Klein s...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Thank you, Stephen.

 Some context: the Board recently discussed ways to update its composition
 and selection processes.  In March, there was a Meta discussion about this:

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees/Thinking_about_the_WMF_Board_composition

 Topics discussed and agreed upon by the board in recent months:
 * Changing term lengths to 3 years
 * Setting a term limit of 6 consecutive years

 Topics still under consideration:
 * Changing board size to 9 or 11 members
 * Selection processes: including the process for appointments  a standing
 election committee

 Many of these will involve a change to the Bylaws, such as the one below.

 Sam

 On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Stephen LaPorte slapo...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:

  Hi all,
 
  The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is considering an amendment to
  the Bylaws to add term limits and adjust the term lengths. You can see
 the
  proposed change here:
 
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_bylaws/June_2015_-_Term_Limits
 
  Please share your comments on the talk page. The proposal will be
 available
  for two weeks before the Board votes on the amendment.
 
  Best,
  Stephen
 
  --
  Stephen LaPorte
  Legal Counsel
  Wikimedia Foundation
 
  *NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and
 ethical
  reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for,
 community
  members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For
 more
  on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.*
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
 
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




 --
 Samuel Klein  w:user:sj  @metasj  +1 617 529 4266
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can Wikipedia Survive? op-ed

2015-06-23 Thread rupert THURNER
I like this idea a lot. If mediawiki and toolchain would additionally
support paragraphs as primary unit it would allow to activate translated
paragraphs. This might as well facilitate book creation, links to Wikidata
etc. The granularity of articles is differing between languages I.e. What
would be described in 2 articles in English often is packed into one in
German.

Rupert
On Jun 22, 2015 7:28 PM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote:

 What we need to figure out is how to allow translation of articles
 through micro contributions via cellphones.

 Maybe send out sentences one by one for translation from one language
 to another. Just start with the leads of articles that are deemed to
 be of good quality. Than when the lead is all translated join it back
 together and add it to that language. This would of course only apply
 to articles which are non existent in the target language.

 Maybe Amir's content translation tool could do this eventually
 https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Content_translation

 --
 James Heilman
 MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

 Starting July 2015 I am a board member of the Wikimedia Foundation
 My emails; however, do not represent the official position of the WMF

 The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
 www.opentextbookofmedicine.com

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2015-06-08 Thread rupert THURNER
On Jun 8, 2015 8:53 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Michael,

 Thanks for this report.

 I was hoping to see information in the report about the financial costs of
 applying for and reporting about WMF grants; even better would be an
 estimate of time spent including volunteer hours, including FDC and GAC
 volunteer and staff hours. These costs are among my biggest pain points at
 the moment in Cascadia Wikimedians and I have heard similar comments from
 much larger affiliates and FDC volunteers as well. Is this information
 available anywhere in the report, and if not, is there a place where we
 might be able to get it?

_that_ would be something to achieve...

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

2015-06-07 Thread rupert THURNER
On Jun 7, 2015 9:31 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 9:02 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
  # We use S/N/O for many other kinds of votes, including FDC, steward,
  Arbitration Committee, and featured content votes. I have not heard
  disagreement with it until now, which suggests that generally there is
  consensus for this system.
  ...
  # One of the best features of S/N/O is that it works to favor candidates
  who have consensus for them, i.e. have both a good quantity of
supporters
  and have few people who oppose their election. If someone has many
support
  votes and many oppose votes, this suggests that the person is relatively
  controversial, which probably makes them a less optimal choice for roles
  like FDC, Steward, Arbitration Committee, and WMF Board roles.

 From my perspective, and I don't think it's unique, those elections
 are quite different:

 * FDC: Realistically, just people from chapters and thematic
 organizations are interested in this. And if I am a Board member of a
 chapter, my rational approach would be to approach other chapters and
 make a deal with them who should be elected. Basically, that
 population decides anyway. Besides the fact that a lot of us don't
 feel comfortable to make political decision for expert seats, while we
 don't have precise clue what we should require from the candidates.
 It's not the duty of *every* member of the community to be an expert
 in hiring grantmaking staff.

 * English Wikipedia ArbCom: At some point of time I was very active on
 en.wp, but I was never interested in en.wp governance (not even to
 become an admin). I think that the majority of non-native English
 speakers have such approach to en.wp. On the other side, I would note
 that being a member of en.wp's ArbCom is highly stressful position and
 I don't think that there are many of long-term ArbCom members (in
 comparison to, let's say, WMF Board). I am sure that one of the most
 important reasons are negative votes, exactly. You can't do good job
 if you want to be reelected.

 * Stewards are the third category and this system is actually perfect
 for their elections: both public and requiring 80% of support.
 Stewards are not going to reelections. Other stewards review their
 work, while openness of the group is guarantied by constant elections.

 * Negative votes tend to make the whole atmosphere much more tense,
 stressful for both the community and Board members. Besides the
 reasons I (and others) have given into the previous emails.


Just to put into perspective what risker said about neutral votes: it is
technical because one needs to click something. There is no way to remove a
radio button, and neutral was the default. I find therefore the naming
confusing or the user interface.

But for the results I am happy. I fully agree with others already noting
that controversial candidates are and imo should not be favoured. There
must be a reason Maria last time was elected and got an impressive number
of counter votes this time. It might be that denny really did awesome stuff
in the last years and one did not hear a lot from Maria the last years. For
phoebe it might have been a diversity vote, as there are already a lot of
persons from the US in the board.

Diversity can imo best reached when more candidates can be elected. I think
this would also work with experience in needed areas, not only continents,
language groups or gender.

If we have quotas or whatever to get diversity we approach a FIFA system.
Which would maybe work if we have organisations and elections for the
diverse groups.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Listen Button

2015-05-29 Thread rupert THURNER
You mean these persons suggested to remove the catches?

Rupert
On May 28, 2015 11:58 AM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:

 Sorry if I continue this discussion of January but it may be interesting to
 share my experience had yesterday because I attended to a presentation of a
 young programmer suffering from low vision and color-blind and usual
 participant in http://globalaccessibilityawarenessday.org/gaad.html.

 It has been interesting because we experienced how is the life of a person
 studying and working in computer science but almost blind and we had the
 opportunity to be in his shoes.

 The first lesson learned is that blind (or almost blind) people use always
 a software of speech synthesis with a speed that makes the audio
 almost unintelligible
 for not experienced people. The operating system provides several tools for
 that including mobile OS.

 The second lesson is that this software of speech synthesis is crucial for
 them and they would set and control it. So forget the normal speed of audio
 that everyone of us is experienced to use.

 The third lesson is that a lot of them in general hears music with headset
 and have the speech synthesis always on, if there is a third vocal
 synthesis for them is more a problem than an advantage.

 The fourth lesson learned is that Wikipedia is for them a well done web
 site because the content is structured. It means that the Table of Content
 at the start (so neglected by some graphical reasons) is fundamental for
 them because they can easily jump in the section they need.

 No one knew that I am from a Wikimedia chapter except the organizers and I
 did several questions about Wikipedia because (I did not know it) it was
 presented as good example of website for speech synthesis.

 What can be improved, in my opinion it's only the semantic aspect of the
 Wikipedia, so pushing more the attention on the structure of the page, and
 the awareness that images are not useful for them. We must be aware that
 some tools used in Wikipedia, like Captcha, are a real obstacle for blind
 people, like stairs for people with wheelchairs.

 Regards



 On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:55 AM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote:

  I guess I see this as making it easier for people to generate files to
 put
  on their ipod or for those with a limited ability to read who might not
  have figured out more complicated solutions. Those who are blind have
  likely already figured out good solutions. It is those of us who are
  sighted that need the help.
 
  I know that I personally would find such a button helpful. But through a
  great many steps I could likely figure out a work around. People prefer
  stuff that is simple.
 
  --
  James Heilman
  MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
 
  The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
  www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 



 --
 Ilario Valdelli
 Wikimedia CH
 Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
 Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
 Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
 Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
 Wikipedia: Ilario https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario
 Skype: valdelli
 Facebook: Ilario Valdelli https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli
 Twitter: Ilario Valdelli https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli
 Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469
 
 Tel: +41764821371
 http://www.wikimedia.ch
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Indonesia 2014 Financial Statements

2015-05-10 Thread rupert THURNER
Many thanks for sharing this. Especially interesting I find that you are
able to manage very different amounts of money over time. Especially wmf
and fdc do not always seem convinced this might be possible.

Rupert
 On May 9, 2015 6:45 AM, Isabella Apriyana 
isabella.apriy...@wikimedia.or.id wrote:

 Hi all,

 Wikimedia Indonesia is proud to publish our financial statements for the
 year 2014. Please find it in the following link:
 http://wikimedia.or.id/wiki/Laporan_keuangan_2014

 Wikimedia Indonesia would like to thank all board of executives and
 trustees for their support and assistance in preparation of the financial
 statements.


 Best regards,

 --
 *Isabella Apriyana*
 *Sekretaris Jendral (**Secretary General)*
 *Wikimedia Indonesia*
 Seluler +6281213700084
 Surel isabella.apriy...@wikimedia.or.id

 Dukung upaya kami membebaskan pengetahuan!
 http://wikimedia.or.id/wiki/Wikimedia_Indonesia:Donasi

 Support us to free the knowledge!
 http://wikimedia.or.id/wiki/Wikimedia_Indonesia:Donasi
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

2015-04-29 Thread rupert THURNER
Hi James, is there any good reason to keep the exception? Imo it is a wrong
signal we send out. At the end of the day all good governance rules suggest
to minimize administrative tasks. And by definition everything which a
client  does not see,  I.e
Content or software, is administrative.

Rupert
On Apr 28, 2015 9:08 PM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

  On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, James Alexander 
 jalexan...@wikimedia.org
  
  wrote:
 
   On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
   it...@wikimedia.org.il wrote:
  
Any response or input from the Election Committee?
   
   
  
   I think Greg said it relatively well earlier as the coordinator for the
   committee (I am it's staff advisor). At this point the committee has
   decided on the voting requirements and it is highly unlikely to change
  for
   the current election cycle. They did have serious discussions about
   everything mentioned in this thread both on their list and during the
  first
   committee meeting but in the end decided that they did not believe
 there
   was a strong need for change right now. When this conversation came
 back
  up
   it was broached whether we wanted to revisit and no one said expressed
 a
   desire to.
  
   Also as Greg said I think this is a good topic for a permanent election
   committee which I very much think should exist.
  
   James Alexander
   Community Advocacy
   Wikimedia Foundation
   (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
 
 
  This is a weakness in the process. Itzik raised an issue and was told it
  was too early to discuss. He raised it again when the elections
 approached,
  and is being told its too late. Obviously the committee conducted its
  deliberations on this question in secret, which is a strange approach
  considering there have been requests and a desire for open discussion
 from
  the community.
 

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



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

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

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


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

 James Alexander
 Community Advocacy
 Wikimedia Foundation
 (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF office location and remodel

2015-04-16 Thread rupert THURNER
Hi Garfield,  many thanks for your answer!
On Apr 9, 2015 5:35 PM, Garfield Byrd gb...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hi Pine,

 I have answered your questions in your email.

 Regards,

 Garfield

 On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 12:38 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

  Hi Garfield,
 
  Ok, follow up questions:
 
  * Does WMF have a plan to keep the Foundation and its essential
functions
  operational if, say, the San Francisco main building all SF staff are
  completely offline and unreachable by phone for a week after an
earthquake?
 
 Yes, we have a plan in place in case the building in San Francisco is
 unavailable.  All San Francisco staff will not be offline for a week after
 an earthquake.  Not all staff live in San Francisco, and Loma Prieta
showed
 that even a major earthquake does not take the entire San Francisco Bay
 Area offline.  So essential functions will continue even after an
 earthquake.

 In addition, even though many of our staff are in San Francisco, we do
have
 staff in many other states and 18 countries.

 * Would there be worthwhile advantages to establishing a second main
office
 in someplace like the US east coast or Europe?

 We have tried to setup a center of activity in other states and it did not
 prove to be worthwhile, as staff preferred to work from home or other
 locations.  So it was an an additional cost with any additional benefit.
It
 is my understanding that having an office outside the United States
creates
 complications for Wikipedia and the other Wiki projects in the area of
 content protection.

To create less headaches about this would it not be better to split up wmf
in two, one doing the software at any convenient location, while the other
one would own the domains,  hosting and money?

  Thanks, and please reply when it's convenient for you.
 
  I'll follow up offline with HR about talent pool questions.
 
  Thanks,
 
  Pine
  On Apr 8, 2015 5:16 PM, Garfield Byrd gb...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
  Hi Pine,
 
  If the Foundation decides to move, the cost of making the space usable
  for our staff is not a recoverable cost from the building owner.
 
  At this point, WMF is not planning on moving out of the San Francisco
  market area.  We will be doing our best to manage cost when we renew
our
  lease or move. The advantages of having good access to talented people
and
  organizations WMF interacts with far outweigh any advantages to moving
to a
  lower cost location outside of the San Francisco market area.
 
  Regards,
 
  Garfield
 
  On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Hi Garfield,
 
  I'm asking this on Wikimedia-l because a number of Wikimedians have
  noted the expensiveness of the San Francisco area including its high
cost
  of living for staff, employer competition for engineering talent, and
  associated high salaries for WMF employees.
 
  I see on
 
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/8/8a/RFP_for_Real_Estate_Services.pdf
  that WMF is considering relocating its offices when its current main
office
  lease expires.
 
  Questions:
 
  What happens to the remodel expenses that WMF is paying for at its
  current location? If WMF vacates the premesis, will it be compensated
for
  the remodel by the building owner?
 
  I hope that WMF is contemplating fully exiting the San Francisco
market
  area in order to economize, get better value for our donors' funds,
have
  less competition for talent, and lower costs of living for staff. Is
this
  being considered?
 
  Thanks very much,
 
  Pine
 
 
 
 
  --
  Garfield Byrd
  Chief of Finance and Administration
  Wikimedia Foundation
  415.839.6885 ext 6787
  415.882.0495 (fax)
  www.wikimediafoundation.org
 
  Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
  the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
 
  *https://donate.wikimedia.org https://donate.wikimedia.org/*
 
 


 --
 Garfield Byrd
 Chief of Finance and Administration
 Wikimedia Foundation
 415.839.6885 ext 6787
 415.882.0495 (fax)
 www.wikimediafoundation.org

 Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
 the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!

 *https://donate.wikimedia.org https://donate.wikimedia.org/*
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships

2015-04-04 Thread rupert THURNER
hi mike,

while i love irony, and value your opinion a lot, i find the tone of this
email a little harsh, not to call it unfair. net neutrality targets
censorship in some countries, but price to access internet in most
countries, which is antitrust or competition law. You are well known for
free speech advocacy, and beeing libertarian.  Per definition of this you
are one of the last persons on this globe I d seek advise for antitrust law
and net neutrality. But at the same time you d be one of the first persons
I d love to discuss this matter with.

BTW, the U.S. federal communications achievement for this can be judged
according the price the U.S. american clients pay for mobile internet
services and its quality. they can write as many and as lengthy documents
as they want, what they reached up to now is a shame for the country which
created the internet, if what is written by the ITU is true [0]. as i am
not a professional in this business and surely lack global knowledge i
would love to get a different angle on that as well. with a lot of joy i am
looking forward to your article.

my personal impression is that the price is ok when 3 factors are given:
first, at least four competitors in the market having to cover the whole
area, two, net neutrality, and three, appropriate connection to the
internet. i base this assumption from comparing austria and switzerland,
both mountainous, land locked, 8 mio people, switzerland having half he
surface of austria, and three times more expensive mobile data rates.
austria had four competitors (now only three and prices rising),
switzerland three. i cannot judge what happens in asia where indonesia
looks better positioned than philippines, and africa, where eg ghana has 5
competitors, nigeria four [1][2][3] which both look in a better position
than others.

a couple of links:
[0]
http://gizmodo.com/the-price-of-500mb-of-mobile-data-across-the-world-1442047579
[1] e.g. p 100 on
https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/publications/mis2013/MIS2013_without_Annex_4.pdf
[2]
http://technologytimes.ng/again-glo-wins-lead-over-airtel-in-telecoms-market-share-duel/
[3] http://www.nca.org.gh/40/105/Market-Share-Statistics.html

rupert

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:54 AM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:
 Andreas writes:

 Prominent organisations campaigning for a free and open web very
 strongly disagree with your view.

 I said there are no facts, and you responded by citing opinion pieces.
 That's cool, but opinions are not themselves facts.

 Furthermore, in some circles, I've been considered from time to time
 to be someone prominent whose entire career has been dedicated to a
 free and open web. If you're suggesting that everyone -- or even
 everyone prominent -- who believes in a free and open web very
 strongly disagrees with me, then you are misinformed. There is an
 honest difference of opinion about what the developing world needs
 first. And, in my experience, it is only individuals in developed,
 industrialized countries with very little direct knowledge about the
 infrastructural and access challenges in developing countries who
 imagine that zero-rated services are categorically a threat to a free
 and open web.

 I've actually written about this issue at length, and will be
 publishing another article on the issue next week. I'll post the link
 here when I have it.

 Whether the U.S. government's Federal Communications is not itself a
 prominent organization that has committed itself to a free and open
 web is a proposition worth challenging is, of course, up to you. But
 I hope you don't expect such a challenge to be taken seriously. I know
 the FCC's new Report and Order on net neutrality is a very long
 (400-page) document, and there is of course no requirement that you
 actually have read it (much less some appreciable fraction of the
 comments that led to it). But I've done so. The FCC expressly refused
 to adopt the categorical, simplistic, binary approach you have posted
 here.

 My friends and colleagues at EFF, Access Now, and elsewhere -- as well
 as individual scholars and commentators like Marvin Ammori -- know me,
 and they know why I differ with them about this stuff. What I have
 explained to them is that my experiences of working with in-country
 NGOs in the developing world (who don't, in fact, disagree with me
 about this) have shaped my opinion. If your own experience in working
 on access issues in (say) Africa or Southeast Asia is stronger than my
 own, I'd be more likely to be persuaded by your, uh, original
 research than by your effort to selectively adduce footnotes in
 support of your assertions. At least that's my inclination after a
 quarter of a century of working for internet freedom. (I was the first
 employee at EFF, where I worked for nine years.)

 The Access Now editorial, in particular, was drafted by someone who
 had not been open to discussing why it doesn't make sense to describe
 Wikipedia Zero as having forged 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships

2015-04-01 Thread rupert THURNER
On Apr 1, 2015 6:03 PM, Josh Lim jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com wrote:

 Hi Jens,

 In the absence of any meaningful alternative, what should we do then?
Close down Wikipedia Zero and let the developing world languish in the
dark?  We talk of a more sustainable way to bring free knowledge (which is
far more than Wikipedia)”, yet we’re not seeing anything coming out of this
discussion.


Imo the most sustainable solution would be to strive for XXX MB
unrestricted free data for Wikipedia users. I am of course aware that this
poses additional administrative burden to telcos. And therefore is not so
easy to negotiate.

 I will be brutally honest to everyone in this mailing list: this entire
discussion about Wikipedia Zero and net neutrality has become very
patronizing against us in the developing world who benefit from the
program.  The fact that we’re having this discussion without developing
world voices (other than myself) is already troubling in itself since, so
far, every discussion about Wikipedia Zero that I’ve seen only includes
those white, privileged and well-educated people” who you defend.

 And yet you guys talk as if you know what’s best for the developing
world.  That’s the tone that I’ve been sensing in this entire discussion
thus far, and I’m sorry, but it’s not helpful.  Please don’t speak as if
you guys know what it’s like on the ground in Asia or Africa.

 I’ve had to swallow my own pride just to accept the fact that net
neutrality has to take the back burner to bringing more information out
there to people.  I have always believed in net neutrality as a means of
ensuring a free and open Internet to everybody.  But if you’re in a country
like the Philippines where the majority of people don’t even have the
luxury of going online (and if you do, it’s bloody expensive), then having
access to some information—even if that information is imperfect—is still
better than none at all, since at least we can still correct any
misinformation that may arise.  And as Wikipedians, we are in a position to
do just that through ensuring that our content is well-monitored, neutral
and comprehensive so that at least there’s a multitude of viewpoints
present even if the information is coming from a single source.

 We should make people in the developing world aware of net neutrality,
yes, but we must also be careful to consider the existing socio-economic
conditions of the countries where this program has been deployed.  I am all
for the sharing of knowledge and the free exchange of information for the
greatest benefit, but we cannot have that discussion if people are not able
to have access to the Internet in the first place.  We cannot afford at
this point to put the cart before the horse, and as I’ve mentioned earlier,
in the absence of a meaningful alternative, this is the best we can do so
far.

 Also, just so you know: Wikipedia Zero, at least in this country, is
being implemented by a local telecom with no discernible link to the big
players like Orange or T-Mobile or Telenor.  They view it so far as good
CSR and not as a means of controlling the flow of information or wanting to
make a profit.  So yeah, at least for us it’s been good so far.  If it
happens though that things turn sour, then expect us to fight for our
principles.

 Thanks,

 Josh

  Wiadomość napisana przez Jens Best best.j...@gmail.com w dniu 31 mar
2015, o godz. 15:27:
 
  Dear Gerard,
 
  your arguments are just emotional rhetorics. Saying that white,
privileged
  and well educated people aren't allowed to critize ways how
  first-world-led telecoms (like Orange, Telenor) are spreading a wrong,
  non-open internet in developing countries is just plain emotional
  rhetoric far away from any fact.
 
  Wikipedia Zero is NOT bringing the free knowledge of the world to the
  people, it's bringing Wikipedia to the people, not more, not less. Also,
  zero-rating is helping to establish user habits which are used to have
  different prices for different kinds of data - That is the clearest
  violation of net neutrality and therefore of an open and free web.
 
  Ignoring this is just helping the (first-world-led) Telecoms to
establish
  NOT a free internet which also helped to create something like
Wikipedia,
  but a walled garden system where you pay for different data of even (as
it
  is the case e.g. in some parts of India) different websites. I think
that
  it is ignorant to profit only short-term by bringing a Walled Wikipedia
to
  the people and having Wikipedia in this exclusive deal in comparison to
  establish a sustainable way to bring free knowledge (which is far more
than
  Wikipedia) to the people.
 
  There must be another way to work for the value of free knowledge for
the
  people but to destroy net neutrality and the experience of an open web
in
  the very beginning at the same time. It is the duty of WMF to take care
  also of the framework which enabled Wikipedia in the start. Ignoring
this
  and being proud of having a 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Not all pixels are created equals: introducing brand new Wikimedia France's metrics

2015-04-01 Thread rupert THURNER
Lol j aime pierre selim!!
On Apr 1, 2015 11:52 PM, Katherine Casey fluffernutter.w...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Everybody always tries to get rid of the content pixels because they beat
 up the other pixels, but I tell you what, if you don't give those content
 creator pixels what they want they're going to take their RGB and go home
 and THEN where will your silly little projects be without any content
 pixels, hmm?

 On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Aleksey Bilogur aleksey.bilo...@gmail.com
 
 wrote:

  I love today.
  On Apr 1, 2015 5:28 PM, quiddity pandiculat...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
   wrote:
On 15-04-01 03:58 PM, Pierre-Selim wrote:
This is only the beginning: next step is the measurement of cute
  pixels,
encyclopedic pixels and amazing pixels.
   
That metric is all wrong, because it presumes that all pixels are
equally valuable.  Surely, you should be also assigning weights to
pixels depending on how much information they carry - background
 pixels
out of the FOV aren't worth as much!
   
  
   I assume you mean assigning *mass* to the pixels. Weight is so
   Earth-centric!
  
   I would like to join the kawaii-pixel WikiProject. Please let me know
   when we start debating the relative merits of various color models,
   and naming conventions, and kawaii-challenged accessibility tools.
   Thanks!
  
   -- quiddity
  
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] IEG page on mobile

2015-03-30 Thread rupert THURNER
Hi,

I was just wondering if any of you looked at the IEG page on a mobile phone:
http://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG

For me this experience looks rather broken.

Best,
Rupert
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who are the nicest people on our projects ?

2015-02-25 Thread rupert THURNER
Hi, an outcome of the old milgram experiments suggests that not always nice
people do oppress others less:

http://m.mic.com/articles/92479/psychologists-have-uncovered-a-troubling-feature-of-people-who-seem-nice-all-the-time

Rupert
On Feb 25, 2015 8:31 AM, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org
wrote:

 Thanks Fæ, those reports are very interesting from my perspective.
 However, even though the number of thanks received may be more reliable
 than the usual edit count, none of them could ever measure the invaluable
 impact of our contributors :-)

 Il 23/02/2015 16:57, Fæ ha scritto:

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Faebot/thanks

 I have now set up a monthly report of the top 10 thankers /
 thankees with an index to the different project reports on the above
 link. These have been generated retrospectively for 2014 and I will
 shortly set this up on WMF labs to run at the beginning of each month
 to add last month's results.*

 Rather than running this automatically for several hundred projects, I
 am happy to add projects on request (so long as the thanks extension
 is being regularly used by more than 10 people!). Just drop a note on
 my meta talk page to request the addition. I have haphazardly picked 6
 of the busiest projects to get started on, mainly as a multi-language
 test, not because I favour one language Wikipedia over another. :-)

 Time for someone to create a thank you barnstar of super thanks ?

 This is one of many ad-hoc reports run as Faebot, but if it becomes
 especially useful or critical to outreach projects I'll consider
 moving a stable version to a special bot account or similar.

 * - At the time of writing, the tables for 2014 are being generated.
 This may take the rest of the day to complete! If your project has
 recently been added, the reports might have to wait for the next
 monthly run depending on how much free wiki-time I have.

 Fae

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



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia wins Erasmusprize 2015

2015-01-15 Thread rupert THURNER
150'000 eur for the wikipedia community? How they will pay that ;)
On Jan 15, 2015 7:32 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote:

 http://www.erasmusprijs.org/?page=Erasmusprijs

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erasmus_Prize
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

2015-01-07 Thread rupert THURNER
Maybe the carrot is the site notice to advertise it, and the fear is that
too many projects are being proposed? Which is good. But I am with lodewijk
that this is not the way to go. It only exposes the main weakness of the
current grant making process. It is global, central and has a lot of
administrative overhead attached to it,  mainly driven by Anglo American
policies difficult to understand in the rest of the world why they would be
necessary at all.  it leads to a bottleneck not necessary.

The sitenotice is nice. But it could be used better if grantmaking is
distributed like all the other content and community work, imo.

Rupert
On Jan 7, 2015 5:56 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 7 January 2015 at 00:06, Siko Bouterse sboute...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
  On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:17 PM, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com
  wrote:
 
   Sorry if this was already answered and I overlooked it, but will there
 be
   something like a special form of advertising this campaign in order
 to
   attract many requests that propose to do something about the Gender
 Gap?
  
 
  Great question. Current thinking is to do the usual announcing on mailing
  lists, blog/social media, village pumps, etc, as well as experimenting
 with
  running Central Notice banners. Would like to attract folks from various
  wikis who have interest in this theme and ability to lead a project in
  their community, beyond the usual (relatively small) slice who regularly
  participate in lists like these or in the usual grantmaking discussions
 on
  meta-wiki. And although outside media could help bring total newbies to
  contribute ideas, discussion, and other forms of participation, it is
  pretty darn important to have at least 1 experienced Wikimedian on a
 funded
  team in order to lead and execute a useful community project, so
  in-movement (particularly on-wiki) promotion is a priority. Any
  thoughts/suggestions would be welcome!
 

 TL:DR I see the stick, but where is the carrot? [1]

 I understand from the explanations that the reason for not accepting
 any non-gender-gap focused grants for several months is because of the
 expected workload on the staff in reviewing applications and
 supporting the projects that do get funded.

 However, what I don't understand is what added incentive there is for
 people to submit grant applications on the chosen topic (in this
 instance it is gender-gap, but it could be other topics in the
 future)? Since it is already possible to submit a gender-gap focused
 grant, how does the refusal to accept other kinds of project
 submissions increase the number/quality/variety of gender-gap grants?
 I can see the unfortunate possibility for:
 -  some grants to be re-written with a false veneer of gender-gap
 focus (pink-washing) simply to access the money
 - valid (but non gender-gap focused) grant applications having to wait
 until after the 3-month project, and potentially having to cancel
 altogether depending on the volunteer's availability.

 I think this is what Lodewijk was referring to when he called it a
 negative campaign - there is a DISincentive for other kinds of grant
 applications, but no apparent specific incentive for the desired type
 of application.

 I see the stick, but where is the carrot?
 Am I missing something?

 -Liam
 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot_and_stick

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia India Chapter Announcements:Executive Committee for 2014-15 takes charge

2014-12-17 Thread rupert THURNER
Congratulations!  How many members and active members does the chapter have
currently?

Rupert
On Dec 16, 2014 8:25 PM, Jayanta Nath jaya...@wikimedia.in wrote:

 Dear Wikimedia India Chapter members and other interested stakeholders in
 the list,

 Dear members,

 At the outset, on behalf of Wikimedia India Executive Committee for
 2013-14, I would like to thank you all for the support for the Chapter
 during the past year, as we strive hard to complete the difficult phase of
 the Chapter. I am glad to report that the huddle phase is now complete, as
 the Chapter is financially healthy, staffed and has conducted AGM and
 Elections for EC of six vacancies successfully. I would like to place on
 record my thanks to all co-founders and EC team members,volunteers from
 members and community, , WMF staff,WMF board members and partners and
 consultants for all the contributions and support towards reaching this
 important milestone.

 Last weekend we had inducted the newly elected EC members with an EC
 induction program at Bangalore. As part of it, we have completed the office
 bearer elections for the 2014-15. I would like to introduce the new team
 that has taken charge.

 The results of the  office bearer elections are as follows:

- Dr. Abhiraj Suryawanshi : President
- Jayanta Nath : Secretary
- Sanket Oswal  : Treasurer
- Priyanka Tiwari  : Member
- Yohann Varun Thomas  : Member
- Dr. Ekbal Bappukunju  : Member
- Nikhil Kawale  : Member

 We are confident that under the new EC's leadership Wikimedia Movement and
 Chapter in India will grow to greater heights in the year to come. We
 request you all to extend the support and actively engage with Wikimedia
 India to achieve the vision of sharing free knowledge with every one for
 building a Knowledge Society.

 Please join me in wishing the new team all success.
 Cheers
 Jayanta Nath
 Secretary,Wikimedia India
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism

2014-12-12 Thread rupert THURNER
Hi luis, I could understand liams mail, and the links russavia sent. Could
you match the this somehow from a legal standpoint?

Rupert
On Dec 11, 2014 5:55 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Steven,
 
  Quite seriously, if you can't understand the concept of copyright and
  derivative works, then perhaps this is not the project for you.
 

 I understand the concept of copyright and derivative works, and I think
 Stephen has a lot of valid points (even if I don't agree with all of them).
 If you want to argue with the substance of what Stephen has to say, please
 do.

 In the meantime, your email is just an example of the kind of toxic
 behavior Jimmy spoke out against at Wikimania this year — and correctly
 received loud, sustained applause for.

 Luis

 --
 Luis Villa
 Deputy General Counsel
 Wikimedia Foundation
 415.839.6885 ext. 6810

 *This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have
 received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the
 mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical
 reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
 members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
 on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.*
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community engagement - Product Survey

2014-12-05 Thread rupert THURNER
Many thanks for this! It needs to be c
On Dec 5, 2014 12:51 AM, Rachel diCerbo rdic...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:

  This!
 
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_(Product)/Product_Surveys
 
  Thank you to the WMF Community Engagement team for trialling this new way
  of prioritising improvements to tools - by asking the community for some
  structured feedback.
  As the page says:
 
  The *Product Roadmap survey* intends to offer a lightweight,
  data-informed way for communities across the entire Wikimedia movement
 to
  contribute ideas the Wikimedia Foundation's (WMF) product roadmap.
  The question we are currently wanting to answer is: If the communities
  were to collectively decide on a gadget or tool which could be expanded
  into an extension for use across all Wikimedia-supported projects, what
  would it be?
 
 
  I saw this today as a Watchlist notification.
  The survey has just over 20 ideas which the user is asked to rank in a
  series of paired comparisons. A simple, easy, and intuitive way to get
 some
  genuine feedback from the editing community about the improvements that
 we
  believe would be of most use to us. [it would be nice if there were more
  options to compare in this survey]
 
  As the FAQ section explains - this is an experimental process and not a
  promise that the 'winner' will be built - and that's perfectly fair. One
  reason I particularly like this is that I think that if the WMF would
  regularly invest in building tools that were prioritised by the so-called
  power users, that would help ease the tension that can occur when the
 WMF
  builds tools that focus on the needs of new editors (but which also
 change
  the existing-editors' workflows).
 
  The Page Curation https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Curation
 system
  was a step in that direction - a genuine effort to make the work of
  new-page-patrollers easier, in recognition that tools for power-users
  help decrease their stress levels which indirectly helps to decrease the
  likelihood of good-faith newbies being unintentionally bitten. From
 what
  I can see, the product survey idea is a more formalised approach in
 that
  same general direction. So, thank you. I hope this pilot project is a
  success.
 
  -Liam
 
 
 Thank you for your feedback, Liam! Very appreciated. Keep in mind that
 anyone can submit an idea as well as the ones that are already entered (we
 pre-loaded the survey, but there are certainly gadgets and tools in
 existence which communities may want to see improved which we have not yet
 entered). We're beginning to go through feedback that has been submitted
 and are also still getting the es.wp survey off the ground. We also welcome
 feedback about what works and what might not work on the discussion page
 (for example, some of the character limitations allowing for feedback is
 restrictive, so that is something we already know :)

 cheers,
 -rachel

 --

 Rachel diCerbo
 Director of Community Engagement (Product)
 Wikimedia Foundation
 Rdicerb (WMF) https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29
 
 @a_rachel https://twitter.com/a_rachel
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community engagement - Product Survey

2014-12-05 Thread rupert THURNER
Many thanks for this! It needs to be clear that one does not get feedback
of new users especially not of disappointed ones. E.g. of users suffering
some bandwidth or speed problems.

Rupert


 On Dec 5, 2014 12:51 AM, Rachel diCerbo rdic...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:

  This!
 
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_(Product)/Product_Surveys
 
  Thank you to the WMF Community Engagement team for trialling this new
way
  of prioritising improvements to tools - by asking the community for
some
  structured feedback.
  As the page says:
 
  The *Product Roadmap survey* intends to offer a lightweight,
  data-informed way for communities across the entire Wikimedia
movement to
  contribute ideas the Wikimedia Foundation's (WMF) product roadmap.
  The question we are currently wanting to answer is: If the communities
  were to collectively decide on a gadget or tool which could be
expanded
  into an extension for use across all Wikimedia-supported projects,
what
  would it be?
 
 
  I saw this today as a Watchlist notification.
  The survey has just over 20 ideas which the user is asked to rank in a
  series of paired comparisons. A simple, easy, and intuitive way to get
some
  genuine feedback from the editing community about the improvements
that we
  believe would be of most use to us. [it would be nice if there were
more
  options to compare in this survey]
 
  As the FAQ section explains - this is an experimental process and not a
  promise that the 'winner' will be built - and that's perfectly fair.
One
  reason I particularly like this is that I think that if the WMF would
  regularly invest in building tools that were prioritised by the
so-called
  power users, that would help ease the tension that can occur when
the WMF
  builds tools that focus on the needs of new editors (but which also
change
  the existing-editors' workflows).
 
  The Page Curation https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Curation
system
  was a step in that direction - a genuine effort to make the work of
  new-page-patrollers easier, in recognition that tools for power-users
  help decrease their stress levels which indirectly helps to decrease
the
  likelihood of good-faith newbies being unintentionally bitten. From
what
  I can see, the product survey idea is a more formalised approach in
that
  same general direction. So, thank you. I hope this pilot project is a
  success.
 
  -Liam
 
 
 Thank you for your feedback, Liam! Very appreciated. Keep in mind that
 anyone can submit an idea as well as the ones that are already entered
(we
 pre-loaded the survey, but there are certainly gadgets and tools in
 existence which communities may want to see improved which we have not
yet
 entered). We're beginning to go through feedback that has been submitted
 and are also still getting the es.wp survey off the ground. We also
welcome
 feedback about what works and what might not work on the discussion page
 (for example, some of the character limitations allowing for feedback is
 restrictive, so that is something we already know :)

 cheers,
 -rachel

 --

 Rachel diCerbo
 Director of Community Engagement (Product)
 Wikimedia Foundation
 Rdicerb (WMF) 
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29
 @a_rachel https://twitter.com/a_rachel
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia and Ebola

2014-12-04 Thread rupert THURNER
Excellent,  James!
On Dec 4, 2014 3:43 PM, Jens Best jens.b...@wikimedia.de wrote:

 Hi James,

 thanks for sharing.

 This shows exemplary the success of Wikipedia for being a trusted spot for
 information. It also shows its growing responsibilities. News like this are
 encouraging on so many levels.

 Best regards

 Jens Best
 Am 04.12.2014 15:34 schrieb James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com:

  Hey All
 
  I would like to share the following:
 
  “Wikipedia has been the most widely used single source of information
 about
  Ebola in the most affected countries, among people who searched for
  information through Bing. The use of Wikipedia was greater than that of
  either CNN, the World Health Organization, or the Center for Disease
  Control during the time periods examined. The countries in question
  include: Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea.
 
  I have been collaborating with a researcher from microsoft by the name of
  Elad Yom-Tom who has provided this interesting data. We are looking at
  submitting something to a peer reviewed journal soon. Journal will of
  course need to be Open Access, PLoS Medicine or Open BMJ interested?  :-)
 
  I think this is a real accomplishment for all the amazing individuals and
  organizations that have made Wikipedia what it is today including the
 many
  dedicated Wikipedians, the Wikimedia Foundation, our collaborators at
  Translators Without Borders, the Cochrane Collaboration, and the
 University
  of California San Francisco College of Medicine among others. I hope this
  is also encouragement for organizations such as the World Health
  Organisation among others that are not currently engaging with Wikipedia
 as
  a platform for knowledge sharing to do so.
 
  --
  James Heilman
  MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
 
  The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
  www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WaPo Wikipedia's 'complicated; relationship with net neutrality

2014-12-04 Thread rupert THURNER
Hi mike,

That pipes are dumb is fundamental for having cheap Internet access. Most
contracts for Wikipedia zero are done with telcos which either want to
catch up in getting more reach in the population, or those which have a
higher price for data. Not allowing them to use wikipedia to influence
competition and justify higher prices is helping to bridge the digital
divide. I do not find it fair that people in financially less favored
countries have to pay more per gigabyte traffic in USD than people in rich
countries. This gets even worse if one compares percentage of income spent
for a gigabyte.

The only well balanced answer out of Wmf I saw up to now clearly showing
the conflict this offering is in is the excellent WOP statement from gale.

it is easy to design a solution which is compliant to net neutrality: if a
person is reading wikipedia 200 MB traffic are free, any content. I d
consider it a fundamental failure of the wmf legal department, especially
yana, that they are not capable or willing to negotiate such contracts.

Rupert
On Dec 1, 2014 4:14 PM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote:

 Tim Landscheidt writes:

  I think on the contrary Wikipedia Zero illustrates nicely
  why net neutrality is so important: Wikipedia Zero favours
  solely Wikipedia (und sister projects), while contradicting
  or simply other opinions and resources bite the dust.

 I'm not following your reasoning here. I don't see any sense in which
 Wikipedia Zero is contradicting other opinions or resulting in
 resources that bite the dust. Wikipedia Zero is not rivalrous in any
 economic sense that I'm aware of.

  This mainstreaming, forming a monopolistic cabal on all
  things information is why I am a strong proponent of net
  neutrality.  The ease with which information can be shared
  nowadays should be used so that more people provide their
  views, not more people consume one view.

 So, you'd rather have users pay by the bit for Wikipedia on their
 mobile devices? This does not serve Wikipedia or its users in the
 developing world. The chart I use here shows you what the cost of
 broadband access is in the developing world, which relies primarily on
 mobile platforms.

 https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/article/20141201000351-209165-wikipedia-zero-will-serve-net-neutrality

  And I have severe doubts that Wikipedia Zero fulfils actual
  needs from the perspective of sustainable development.

 But you haven't said what those severe doubts are. Having spent the
 last couple of years working on access projects in the developing
 world, I haven't encountered an alternative model that doesn't result
 in higher prices for subscribers. As the chart I reproduce indicates,
 in some places in the developing world, the annual cost of broadband
 access exceeds the average per capita income. I do not see how it
 serves Wikipedia's mission to require individual users to pay so much
 for Wikipedia access.


 --Mike

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WaPo Wikipedia's 'complicated; relationship with net neutrality

2014-11-30 Thread rupert THURNER
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote:
 Kim Bruning kim@... writes:



 Washington post article

 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-complicated-relationship-with-net-neutrality/


 The response to this is embarrassing and lacking. Wikipedia Zero is an
 amazing program (and is one of the only excellent non-engineering things the
 foundation has done). Providing free access to Wikipedia doesn't violate the
 concept of net neutrality. Access to Wikimedia is being subsidized by the
 mobile companies. Access to other sources of information isn't being slowed.
 There's no extra charge to access other sources of information.

 My biggest wonder here is: why in the world is the HR director for the
 foundation speaking with the press about this on behalf of the foundation
 (and the movement)? This seems like the kind of thing the communications
 department, or the ED (or DD) should be doing.

i find this article very good. and also gale gives a quite balanced
and reasonable statement. ryan, the sentence from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality is:
... should treat all data on the Internet equally...
if you could elaborate a little how paying for one source, and not
paying for another is equal?

rupert

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why is bank transfer no longer possible?

2014-11-30 Thread rupert THURNER
hi mz,

you are right, the whole wikipedia is built by volunteer time and
could have not been built otherwise. so volunteer time clearly is
worth significantly more. i sometimes feel ripped off as a volunteer.
first i donate my time, and then people approach me to addtionally
spend money for a conference, like last year in geneva 250eur for an
open knowledge conference. or i want to meet a person who is not
wealthy enough to pay her trip to london within the UK, and there is
no way to get her a 100 gbp, as happend last year. wmf is not capable
- i should have planned this a year in advance. wmch would be flexible
enough but a different country and punished by WMF for beeing
flexible. wmuk does not have a budget for such a strange thing, and it
should have known it in advance as well.

so where should this money come from? the easiest and cheapest is:
take the money from the website. coupled with a more flexible,
localised spending scheme. so WMCH or WMUK could pay this without
headache. but WMF does not want this. out of 60 mio usd income, 52 mio
or 86% is spent by the wikimedia foundation, yearly increasing. and
most of it is spent in the united states.

some time in future even wmf persons will recognize that if i would be
perfectly organized and most intelligent person in the world i would
use zero time for wikipedia. i'd instead sell my time as expensive as
possible, and i'd be rich as bill gates. the foundation, and even some
chapters, give the impression only perfect persons are good enough for
them. or, even worse, treat them deliberatly like cattle. the core of
its movement with it turns away, as those people are not good enough.
and as bill gates and the other perfect persons will not contribute,
nobody will. so we are back on field one, nupedia. jimbo has his
personal foundation which will honor him even when he is dead,
financed by one of the worlds largest websites. the foundation pays
1000 persons to keep it running. no volunteers necessary.

rupert

On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 3:36 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
 Wikimedia always accepts donations. If the Wikimedia Foundation can't
 figure out a way to easily accept monetary donations from Dutch
 Wikimedians, why not simply focus efforts on non-monetary donations?
 Edits and other wiki contributions are far more valuable, in my opinion.
 Wikimedia Nederland seems to already be doing a lot of great work
 encouraging these types of contributions (e.g., Wiki Loves [X]). :-)

 For the past few years I've seen it as fairly low-hanging fruit to create
 a tongue-in-cheek don't donate to Wikipedia or donate time instead or
 similar campaign. Or even register DonateToWikipedia.org and send
 visitors to the edit form of an article that needs love. When people ask
 me in real-life about donating to Wikipedia (nobody knows what Wikimedia
 is), I typically suggest making a few edits instead of donating money
 directly. I don't think the Wikimedia Foundation really needs the money
 and I think volunteer time is worth significantly more.

 MZMcBride



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

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why is bank transfer no longer possible?

2014-11-27 Thread rupert THURNER
The day before yesterday I was presented a fundraising banner in
Switzerland which redirects to the donation page of Wmf, contrary the
chapters page.

Rupert
On Nov 26, 2014 3:18 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:

 Just following up,

 Has WMNL now received the sought information?

 sincerely,
 Kim Bruning


 On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 08:42:01AM +0100, Lodewijk wrote:
  It seems everyone agrees it is an important method (although I'm not 100%
  sure that the US based people running the fundraiser fully comprehend - I
  am assuming this is the case), but there seems to be some reason why the
  WMF chooses to not make this option easily available. A reason they
 choose
  not to disclose, but to be fuzzy about. I'm very sorry about this, and as
  Liam says, this fits in a trend with the Russian people no longer being
  allowed to donate. Maybe the two are connected, but this is all
  speculation.
 
  I'm sorry to see these steps back from the more open attitude there was a
  few years back. It feels very much that we are, as a community, being fed
  canned press answers. But then, maybe there's a real need for that and
  there's a huge legal threat to making it easy to donate through bank
  transfer that cannot be disclosed...
 
  Best,
  Lodewijk
 
  On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl
 wrote:
 
  
   To amplify:
  
   Paying (business) taxes in The Netherlands now pretty much requires
   electronic payment to an IBAN Account; a.k.a. it is (now) the standard,
   default, baseline way to make payments at all.
  
   After registering a business, the very next action is to open an (IBAN)
   account. All extant dutch accounts that predate IBAN have been
 converted
   to IBAN. All administration systems (must(!)) support IBAN.
  
   If you want to do business in the Netherlands, you need to support
 IBAN.
  
   Note that many (most?) dutch citizens do not have credit cards or
 paypal
   accounts.
  
   Further, IBAN is standardized throughout the euro-zone.
  
   iDEAL is nice to have and important. IBAN is a minimal baseline
   requirement.
  
   sincerely,
   Kim
  
  
  
   On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:42:31PM +0100, Walter Vermeir wrote:
Op 17-11-14 om 20:28 schreef Lodewijk:
   
 you back to the credit card page) or even via regular bank transfer
   (using
 an IBAN) in the Netherlands. The donation page
   
Historically the structure of bank account numbers are very different
from country to country. And making transfers from one bank account
 to
an other bank account, especially internationally, are/where complex
 and
expensive.
   
There is still a lot of room of improvement but nevertheless it has
never been so easy and cheap to do international transfers as now.
   
The IBAN system - International Bank Account Number - is active in a
fair chunk of the globe.
   
   
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bank_Account_Number#Adoption
   
Inside the EURO-zone , 19 countries, ?? 337 million Europeans ,
 people
can make a bank transfer to an EURO-zone IBAN bank account without
additional expenses.
   
Many more outside the EURO-zone can easy make international payments
 to
an IBAN bank account. That is not free ... but paypal is certainly
 not
free also. The costs are just deducted from your donation.
   
   
The WMF has always has been a huge fan of payment by credit cards.
Understandable, the WMF is founded in the country of the Credit card.
   
But that can make you blind to the fact that other people are used to
total other payment systems.
   
A couple of years ago I discovered that there where still people
 using
cheques in France. That came as a total surprise to me. I remember my
dad using cheques 30 years ago. I never came in to contact with a
 cheque
since then. To my knowledge cheques where long gone. History.
 Extinct.
   
But ... when you have the financial business concept of the WMF -
 when
you need money beg for it - the donation channel should be tailer
 made
for the specific common way of payment used by the person who is so
 good
to be willing to make an donation.
   
Walter
   
   
   
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  
  
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  
  ___
  

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC funds allocation recommendation is up

2014-11-23 Thread rupert THURNER
Anders, what are the comparable numbers out of Sweden? Not generated by
bots. What is the link for this?

Rupert
 On Nov 23, 2014 2:59 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se
wrote:

 I beleive you can find part of what you ask for in the staff assessment
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/
 2014-2015_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Staff_proposal_assessment


 The decline in editors are among the steepest of any community
 *Editors*   *Country*   *Wikipedia* *1 October 2012**1
 October 2013* *1 October 2014*
 All editors Deutschland German  14,740  13,484  12,720
 Active (5+/mo)  5,290   4,661   4,301

 WMDE is continuing its expensive community support work that has not
 demonstrated past impact and in its current design does not seem likely to
 generate significant future impact commensurate with costs.
 WMDE's budget is disproportionally focused on its community support
 program, which does not have commensurate impact.

 Anders


 pajz skrev den 2014-11-23 14:43:

 Hi Dariusz,

 On 23 November 2014 at 14:04, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 wrote:

  the current framework ONLY allows to make across the board cuts. Sadly.
 We
 would very much rather have a possibility to recommend some projects to
 be
 funded or not, but these are unrestricted funds.

  While the latter may be true, I do not see why that would be a
 requirement
 to what I suggested. It is nonetheless possible to lay down transparently
 why an entity's proposed budget was considered too big and which parts of
 it you do not find worth funding. As far as I can see, this is not by any
 means affected by the Committee's inability to impose binding restrictions
 on the use of allocated funds.

 My point is this: What I think the Committee currently provides is a) a
 list of things that the FDC members like, b) a list of things that the FDC
 members don't like, and c) some recommended amount of money. What's
 missing
 is a link between a)/b) and c). If I were to vandalize the page tonight
 and
 reduce WMDE's the recommended amount by EUR 300,000, would anybody notice
 a
 discrepancy? I don't think so. I'm not saying, by the way, that the FDC
 should only be able to make cuts to specific items in the budget. This is
 sometimes not possible, and that's fine. But I do think that this should
 be
 made explicit (We reduced the total amount by 10% due to concerns about
 governance.) At the same time, there are arguments that only seem to
 jusitfy item-specific cuts. When you say that a certain programme doesn't
 generate sufficient results or is for other reasons not something you feel
 comfortable funding, then I could imagine something like We do not think
 that programme xy should be funded, so we reduced the recommended amount
 by
 that amount.

 Finally, I would argue that this is also an important issue of
 accountability. If you think it through, the way you present these cuts
 make it effectively impossible to appeal a decision by the FDC. If you
 give
 six reasons why a chapter should get EUR 360,000 less than requested,
 without putting numbers to it or even making a priorization, how is the
 chapter supposed to appeal that decision? If they say Well, your third
 argument isn't really correct, you can always say But look, there a five
 others!.

 Best wishes,
 Patrik
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
 wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-21 Thread rupert THURNER
While this might sound attracting at a first glance the effect might be
exactly the opposite what is desired.

First, The wikimedia movement is not multinational like coca Cola which
just buys what it needs. Wikimedia depends on volunteers. I would never
donate money if it is not spent on the people sweating for Wikipedia. So
behaving like a cold money hungry multinational driven by quarterly reports
poses a reputational risk.

Second, The goal is to target as much money as possible to the mission.
Invent some non-core effort and then shifting it to a paid resource is
killing such a goal. The effort should ideally disappear, not being
outsourced.

And, at the end of the day established (reporting ) standards should be
easy to follow for everybody, without the need of a translator . Just
like we know well from laws and other standards.

Rupert
Hmm...I would love to *outsource *financial reporting to WMF together with
a couple of other tasks as well (program evaluation for example).

Imo the best would be to contact our (that is WM Hungary) accountant
directly so they can get the data organized as wanted, on time, with
explanations requested, etc.

In long terms I would love to see a global contract with KPMG (as WMF is
using them, or another of the big four) where KPMG (or an alternative firm
if not present there) would take this task over from local chapters.

That would ensure that the data is collected the exact same way (with same
definitions and methodology used) in every single country, without delays
or errors in reporting and on the best dates for WMF.

Not to mention that it would decrease the workload of the chapters what I
think barely if ever happened yet.

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

  1   2   >