Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 23/02/16 22:34, SarahSV wrote: > ​Brian, I'd be interested to hear how volunteers could be cultivated and > supported. We felt under attack by the Foundation until Lila arrived, and I > think a lot of editors are grateful to her for having improved that > relationship. But not feeling attacked

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

The KPIS is not only quantitave measures. For instance an anonymous survey may measure the level of satisfaction of people and it's more qualitative. The simplicity of KPIS is to agree (all parties) about the indicators and to cut off discussions about success/insuccess. Something can be a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Hi, in my opinion there is no need to differentiate and to clarify what "high-tech" means. The real problem is to define the KPIs (key performance indicators) and a balanced relation of those indicators. A corporation can be a high-tech corporation and take care of the comfort of all

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Brion, Thanks. Our mails crossed, and this answers some of the questions I had. Please be assured that I wasn't expecting you to "defend" anything – I'm merely curious. Regardless, I think the issues Lila summarised in her mail last month[1], when we were discussing charging for API usage, bear

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

If that's the limit of your bespoke work for for-profits, I see no problem. I'm curious about Andreas's other point. Does the WMF have any formal or informal agreements with for-profits that aren't yet on the public record? I realise this is probably a question for the board or chiefs. On

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 28 February 2016 at 13:07, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > > What originally triggered my curiosity was this: I noticed a couple of > weeks ago that the Kindle offered a Wikipedia look-up function. I couldn't > recall -- and cannot find -- any corresponding WMF announcement. So, how

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

If a tech task is relatively cheap and will expand the spread of free knowledge then no one would object to you spending a little bit of donor mony, I'm sure. But don't you see a point where it becomes sensible to expect the for-profit/s who are expanding their profits thanks to such work to pay

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Somewhat off-topic comment: Andreas, the way you are formatting your messages (especially with that ---o0o--- symbol), it's pretty much impossible to differentiate what you're saying and what you're quoting from someone else. Could you please be much more clear on this? Risker/Anne On 28

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: > > What non-hypothetical work are you referring to? > > {{cn}} > > -- brion > Brion, You tell me. :) For what it's worth, Jimmy Wales has said in this thread today, ---o0o--- On the very specific topic of donor

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Feb 28, 2016 12:29 PM, "Anthony Cole" wrote: > > Brion, are you aware of any WMF tech work aimed specifically at helping > large for-profits engage with our projects? Andreas mentioned a > side-project for Amazon. As far as I know, Wikipedia lookups via Apple's Siri and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

If statements are hard to answer in real life. I don't think this issue is as black-and-white as you paint it to be. The question is about impact for your bucks. If it requires a relatively small investment from WMF for Wikimedia content to be spread among more people, to reach a wider audience,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Brion, are you aware of any WMF tech work aimed specifically at helping large for-profits engage with our projects? Andreas mentioned a side-project for Amazon. Regardless of specific instances, in principle, would that be a reasonable place to invest general donation revenue, or should we get

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Sunday, February 28, 2016, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > Jimmy, > > I think the first step is for the Foundation to be more open and > transparent about what work it is actually doing for commercial re-users, > and to announce such work proactively to both donors and the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 28 February 2016 at 07:31, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > > The relocation does not have to happen overnight. It can easily take > several years (which is likely longer than the average time a WMF employee > spends in the organization). But I think discussing this as a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Jimmy, I think the first step is for the Foundation to be more open and transparent about what work it is actually doing for commercial re-users, and to announce such work proactively to both donors and the community. There should be a dedicated space where such information is collected and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On the very specific topic of donor funding going to help commercial re-users, we've had some interesting but inconclusive board discussions about this topic. Despite that he takes every opportunity to attack me, and surely it will disappoint him to know, but my general view is 100% in agreement

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Le 27/02/16 22:41, SarahSV a écrit : 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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: We COULD outsource most of our tech (I'm not supporting this, I'm just > giving perspective). > One thing I've been wondering about of late is how much donor-funded the work the WMF is doing that is primarily

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 2016-02-28 16:24, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: A direct consequence would be that one should think again whether San Francisco is the best location for the WMF office, rather than a place better known for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > Actually, in the facebook discussion which was earlier referenced on this > list someone noticed (unfortunately, without much impact) that WMF is not a > business company and not a high-tech company, but more like a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 2016-02-28 16:10, Guettarda wrote: On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Gnangarra wrote: ​ technology is our tool not our purpose This should be printed on a banner and hung on the wall every time the Board meets. Actually, in the facebook discussion which was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Yes, thanks Florence. That's about my understanding too. There's editing and there's imposing policy. I can see that WMF, obviously, can't take on an editorial oversight role (and the entailed responsibility) because it can't possibly vet every edit. But it seems to me they can impose editorial

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Gnangarra wrote: > ​ > technology is our tool not our purpose > > This should be printed on a banner and hung on the wall every time the Board meets. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

I am not a lawyer so would not have the correct legal words to explain this. But roughly... the legal responsibility is not the same when you are simply "hosting" content published by others, as opposed to "publishing with an editorial role". For example, when you are simply a host provider,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Another thread thats digressed from its original question but right through the discussion not one person raised the concept that that the WMF is a charity (An organization, the objective of which is to carry out a charitable purpose) our purpose is to share the sum of all knowledge, think about

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 27 February 2016 at 16:41, SarahSV wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Florence Devouard > wrote: > > > I would love to see the WMF agree never again to discuss trapping editors > in feedback loops intended to keep them editing, > I've

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

I am appalled that anybody is seriously suggesting "paid editing" be institutionalized. The real issue to be addressed are the large number of trustees, staff, Arbcom members, and administrators who are undisclosed paid editors and who ensure that uninterested editors are driven away. What do

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Florence, can you explain to me the actual risk the foundation would be exposed to if ir got involved in editorial decisions, please? Perhaps some hypothetical examples would help. Anthony Cole On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Florence Devouard wrote: > Le 27/02/16

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization Hoi, If we want to make a difference, a real difference, we enable refugees in refugee camps to edit Wikipedia. They have nothing to do, they are often well educated. It is wonderful when they can because it not only gives them

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

I loved the healthcare idea, sounded like such a positive thing. Until I thought about implementation details. Inevitably, there would have to be some connection to how active the editor was, otherwise we would have to get healthcare for millions of users. So then, even worse, if someone fell

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Le 27/02/16 00:37, SarahSV a écrit : On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: However, if the core interest (as Sarah suggests) is to create paid opportunities for those who excel at Wikipedia writing and editing, those opportunities exist, and are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: > > However, if the core interest (as Sarah suggests) is to create paid > opportunities for those who excel at Wikipedia writing and editing, those > opportunities exist, and are increasingly available. The money

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 2/25/16 2:16 AM, Risker wrote: > And I'll say that if I was going to favour paying anyone, it would be paying > qualified translators to > support smaller projects... I'd find a pilot project to do something like this very exciting. ___

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Regarding the Wikimedia Foundation paying editors, brokering paid editing to displace the role of PR agencies, etc.: Since 2009, my full time work has centered on this area, in providing solid advice to companies and other organizations on how to engage ethically and effectively with Wikipedia.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

This classic science fiction novel comes to mind... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Canticle_for_Leibowitz And a shout-out to User:Daniel The Monk, our resident NYC Monastapedian :) Thanks, Pharos On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Ed Saperia wrote: > A Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

We could help them by making Wikipedia pages about registration agencies, European immigration laws, and/or uploading sample forms that they could translate into their own languages. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > If we want to make

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Hoi, If we want to make a difference, a real difference, we enable refugees in refugee camps to edit Wikipedia. They have nothing to do, they are often well educated. It is wonderful when they can because it not only gives them something to do, it gives them a sense of self-worth and this prevents

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On > Behalf Of Ed Saperia > Sent: Friday, 26 February 2016 10:51 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization > > A Wikimedia monastery! ^_^ > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On 26 Feb 2016, at 08:39, David Cuenc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

With vows of civility and NPOV -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Ed Saperia Sent: Friday, 26 February 2016 10:51 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Healthcare!!! On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:39 AM, David Cuenca Tudela wrote: > I think there are more ways of supporting volunteers than just paying them > cash. For instance another option could be to offer them a place to stay, > food and healthcare. That is how many volunteer

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

A Wikimedia monastery! ^_^ Sent from my iPhone > On 26 Feb 2016, at 08:39, David Cuenca Tudela wrote: > > I think there are more ways of supporting volunteers than just paying them > cash. For instance another option could be to offer them a place to stay, > food and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

I think there are more ways of supporting volunteers than just paying them cash. For instance another option could be to offer them a place to stay, food and healthcare. That is how many volunteer programs work, like workaway or woofing, and I don't see anything wrong with it. Would it be an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Involving the foundation as a broker would corrupt the Foundation altogether. It would in essence turn it into an advertising agency. We're supposed to be different from Google. Google earns money by letting itself be used as a medium for advertising. It at least hopes to achieve this by while

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: - Possibly POV will be compromised in paid articles. > - Unhealthy situation within the editing community. In the debates with > WMF staff when we disagreed, I always felt awkward, because they were paid > arguing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 2016-02-25 03:09, SarahSV wrote: On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:20 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: The Foundation could pay that number of workers, especially if it found imaginative ways to do it. For example, it could set up a department that accepts contracts from

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Yeah, so, my ultimate point remains: we're talking about hundreds of Wikimedia projects and how they interact with paid editors, and not just how a few handle it. LIke everything, it's complicated beyond local instances ;) -- ~Keegan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan This is my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 9:51 PM, Dan Andreescu > wrote: > >> I'm very new to this concept of paid editing. But from what I understood >> paid editing is allowed, as long as the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:24 AM, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > ​Different wikis have different policies on paid editing, most have no > policy. There ​is no global policy. > > That's not exactly true. All Wikimedia projects are beholden to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 9:51 PM, Dan Andreescu wrote: > I'm very new to this concept of paid editing. But from what I understood > paid editing is allowed, as long as the editors disclose who they are paid > by on their talk page or in edit summaries. I understood

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

I'm very new to this concept of paid editing. But from what I understood paid editing is allowed, as long as the editors disclose who they are paid by on their talk page or in edit summaries. I understood this to be roughly the idea of the Wikipedian in Residence title. I didn't look this up on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On 24 February 2016 at 21:16, Risker wrote: > Well, Sarah, after all of these years I didn't think you'd come up with > anything that would surprise me. I was wrong, And I'll say that if I was > going to favour paying anyone, it would be paying qualified translators to >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Well, Sarah, after all of these years I didn't think you'd come up with anything that would surprise me. I was wrong, And I'll say that if I was going to favour paying anyone, it would be paying qualified translators to support smaller projects, and Wikisourcers, and people who may have the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:20 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: > > And here I thought you were going to suggest giving each editor a pool > of $$ to assign to their favorite skunkworks projects. > > If we divide the current WMF budget ($58M) by the current number of > monthly active

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:20 PM, pajz wrote: > Well, we all know about the problems of giving monetary compensation to > editors. Just thinking aloud here, but I guess if you want to reward > editors in some way, but don't want to pay them directly, there's some > middle

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Thanks for writing this email Brion. I agree that the movement needs to invest more in people and the processes that support people. One of the largest challenges facing the wikimedia movement, including WMF, is creating good models for how people in the movement can successfully engage with each

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Sarah, thank you and Brion for some really insightful e-mails. I'll just add one thought to one of your points. On 24 February 2016 at 00:41, SarahSV wrote: > Should the Foundation be paying for that kind of work > and thinking in those ways? I would say not. [...] 4.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Sorry, http://mediawiki.org/wiki/Accuracy_review On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 4:59 PM, James Salsman wrote: > SarahSV wrote: >> >>... how does a tech organization nurture and support its unpaid >> workforce of mostly writers and researchers? > > I remain convinced that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

SarahSV wrote: > >... how does a tech organization nurture and support its unpaid > workforce of mostly writers and researchers? I remain convinced that http://wikimedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_review can solve this problem through a new spinoff such as WikiEd Foundation, but that's still probably at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

Thanks for the thoughtful response; you've raised some excellent points that strongly warrant further discussion. Some more recent initiatives like the Community Tech team have been specifically meant to help "power users" get stuff done; I hope that's working out and helping, and that the focus

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: > > > I think first we have to ask: why did many people feel attacked or in > unwanted adversarial positions before (both among volunteers, and among > staff)? What sort of interactions and behavior were seen as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 2:34 PM, SarahSV wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Brion Vibber > wrote: > > > > > I believe a high-tech organization should invest in smart people creating > > unique technology. But I also think it should invest in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: > > I believe a high-tech organization should invest in smart people creating > unique technology. But I also think it should invest in people, period. > Staff and volunteers must be cultivated and supported -- that's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a high-tech organization

As a humanities person myself, I did read into Lila's post that the non-engineering aspects of Wikimedia would take a back seat... perhaps a far back seat to all the shiny new things happening in Silicon Valley. This may not be the case, but if it is, I can understand it as to an engineer,