I am interested to sign up and learn more about the process
On 19 July 2013 09:57, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote:
*bump*
(thank you for the folks who have stepped up so far!)
A.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Hello, everyone.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Alex Peek alexpe...@gmail.com wrote:
I am interested to sign up and learn more about the process
Ok, go ahead, then. :)
A.
--
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org
Imagine a world in which every single human being
*bump*
(thank you for the folks who have stepped up so far!)
A.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hello, everyone.
We could use some fresh b--- er, volunteers! -- in the Grant Advisory
Committee (GAC). As you may know, the GAC are community
Hi, Rupert.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I'm not quite sure I follow your
thinking though. With that in mind, I'll offer some statements from my
perspective:
1. I don't think we expect anyone to be perfect. _We_ certainly aren't
perfect...
2. I don't think we incentivize complete
hi,
many thanks for that great invitation! i'd really consider this, if
the GAC process would be less work and would target imperfect people.
the grants incentive should imo be changed to get more for the bucks.
what do i mean with this:
1. if the GAC decides to grant money to somebody, it
2013/7/13 rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com:
i used imperfect people, core wikipedia people and typical
content providing person in the last paragraphs, which probably needs
a little explanation. wikipedia is built traditionally by imperfect
volunteers, error-prone, partially educated,
Hello, everyone.
We could use some fresh b--- er, volunteers! -- in the Grant Advisory
Committee (GAC). As you may know, the GAC are community volunteers who are
explicitly invited[1] to review and evaluate grant proposals made in the
Wikimedia Foundation Grants Program[2], and offer advice to
