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

Spinning off comes with issues, as we will encounter issues like we currently have with the QRpedia coding as thats now under the control of WMUK all of the data being collected is sbject to UK provacy issues that resulted in all the reporting functions being shut down... We also add to the issue

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

2016-03-21 13:53 GMT-07:00 Mark A. Hershberger : > We've since held three meetings[3][4][5] and have planned two more. > During the meeting planned for about six weeks from now[6], we intend > to have a format that allows us to respond to questions or concerns from > the larger

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

2016-03-24 3:35 GMT-07:00 Andre Engels : >> Since the "Mediawiki" trademark was lost to WMF the day you and >> Anthere placed the logo into public domain [1], how can the WMF now >> spin-off this new organization ?. > That's incorrect, putting something in the public

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

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:48 AM, David Emrany wrote: > Since the "Mediawiki" trademark was lost to WMF the day you and > Anthere placed the logo into public domain [1], how can the WMF now > spin-off this new organization ?. That's incorrect, putting something in the

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

Hi Eloquence Since the "Mediawiki" trademark was lost to WMF the day you and Anthere placed the logo into public domain [1], how can the WMF now spin-off this new organization ?. Am I correct in assuming the Mediawiki software can be forked by anybody interested along with attribution ?

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

Hi! On 03/17/2016 07:22 PM, Erik Moeller wrote: > 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)

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

> On Mar 19, 2016, at 8:23 PM, Gnangarra wrote: > > in breaking up (spinning parts off) the WMF we run the risk of creating > silos of information, knowledge and disconnecting one speciality from > another preventing cross pollination of ideas and innovation. It also >

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

Erik Moeller writes: > == Potential test case: MediaWiki Foundation == > > A "MediaWiki Foundation" has been proposed a few times and I > suspect continues to have some currency within WMF. This past January at the Developer Summit[1], there was an unconference session for a meeting between the

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

in breaking up (spinning parts off) the WMF we run the risk of creating silos of information, knowledge and disconnecting one speciality from another preventing cross pollination of ideas and innovation. It also breaks the collaborative core of the projects which has created what we enjoy and at

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

2016-03-17 22:54 GMT-07:00 Pine W : > I agree that these options should be explored. I'm wondering what the best > way would be to facilitate this conversation. > > Perhaps, Erik, would you be willing to set up a page on Meta for discussion? Hi Pine, Thanks for the comments!

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

Hello Erik, hello Gerard, hello all, while Erik raised a very important topic and I will go into some of the aspects I agree with him later in this mail I want at first say that Gerard also mentioned some very important points that I strongly agree. Splitting WMF has merits but also has

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

> On Mar 19, 2016, at 7:41 AM, rupert THURNER wrote: > > 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

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

Hoi, Organising our movement in the format of a federation will not necessarily do what you describe. As you assume that money flows to the places where money is spend, you will not have a federation. A federation is based on equal terms and when money is what keeps everone in line it is not a

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

On 2016-03-18 07:56, Erik Moeller wrote: 2016-03-17 22:54 GMT-07:00 Pine W : I agree that these options should be explored. I'm wondering what the best way would be to facilitate this conversation. Perhaps, Erik, would you be willing to set up a page on Meta for

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

Erik, thank you for framing this discussion, I think your "Resilience, Focus, Accountability" formula hits on some of the most important ways in which the Wikimedia Foundation has failed. I share the concerns of Sydney and Gerard however, and would like to ask some questions about how a real

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

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: > >

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

*WikiEd Foundation Dashboard On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Edward Galvez wrote: > > Hi Itzik - a question for you > > The Education Foundation is also a good example - I spoke a lot with the >> WMF's education team about the great EDUFund's dashboard and how we can >>

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

2016-03-18 9:01 GMT-07:00 Sydney Poore : Hi Sydney! > Right now the central hub of the global movement is WMF. Despite other > recent problems. The WMF is doing a great job of regularly communicating > about the world wide movement. > > There needs to be a successful

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

Hi Itzik - a question for you The Education Foundation is also a good example - I spoke a lot with the > WMF's education team about the great EDUFund's dashboard and how we can use > it around the world, not only in the US. It is a powerful tool that the WMF > is not even close or plans to offer

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

Hi folks, Now that the dust has settled a bit, I would like to expand on an idea that’s been touched on a few times (most recently, in an editorial by William Beutler [1]): the notion that WMF might be a more effective organization if it limited its own size in favor of focused spin-off

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

Yes Edward, I referred to the WikiEd foundation dashboard. I may gave them another nickname by mistake;) *Regards,Itzik Edri* Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all

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

Hi Erik, thanks for your post, I was thinking of bringing this up as I was part of that very discussion in August / September 2011 when the Wikimedia overall governance model was discussed. The idea that cristalized back then and which I still find very appealing was to split today's WMF into

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

Hi Erik, Those are great ideas, and I'm think I can support most of them. MediaWiki is indeed something we need to invest on much more. Or even re-built it from scratch. It's the base to all our work and the future or our projects. The idea of having an organization that this is 100% of his

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

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel < it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote: > Yes Edward, I referred to the WikiEd foundation dashboard. I may gave them > another nickname by mistake;) > Well then - It's a good time to share that our team (Program Capacity & Learning), with the

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

Hello Erik, I don't disagree with the premise of your argument that an alternative structure of the wikimedia movement would let some parts of the wikimedia movement grow stronger and more effective in delivering a focused impact. There is no doubt that North America could be self sustaining

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

I think these are interesting discussions. My first feedback - Let's get as granular as possible about describing activities undertaken now. Leave out the "by who" and org structure for the moment. For example, I can even see five tech organization activities. Internal IT, website ops, back

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

I agree that these options should be explored. I'm wondering what the best way would be to facilitate this conversation. Perhaps, Erik, would you be willing to set up a page on Meta for discussion? Also, I think it would be good to have an office hour, or more likely a series of office hours

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

Hi all, I'd like to add some thoughts to the discussion about the potential pros and cons of spinning parts of the Wikimedia Foundation off. I’m writing this in my personal capacity and this email might not represent the views of the Wiki Education Foundation. This is a comparably long note; the