Re: [Wikimedia-l] Technical issues of Wikimedia [was: Particular interests and common ground]

2016-02-20 Thread Milos Rancic
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Amir Ladsgroup wrote: > You talked about things that I'm in no place to comment but I want to > emphasize on this part of your email: > "For the last 8 years, just two things have been working without > problems in WMF: Money and tech

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Chris Keating
On 19 Feb 2016 23:49, "Denny Vrandecic" wrote > # The alternative is to allow every member of the Board to engage > individually as they like. This will mean that there are much more > individual conversations going on, things can be better explained. But this > also means that the individual

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikisource-l] Vote for Google OCR-Wikisource integration in 2015 community wishlist

2016-02-20 Thread billinghurst
Anyone have any suggestions to this issue raised on the Wikisource-L mailing list? -- Forwarded message -- From: Bodhisattwa Mandal Date: Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 4:02 AM Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Vote for Google OCR-Wikisource integration in 2015 community wishlist To: "discussion

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Milos Rancic
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Denny Vrandecic wrote: > Whereas I do not agree with everything you say (but I think those are > discussions for another time), I wholeheartedly agree with your insight > that the Board as a whole is dumber than its member on average.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT (Olatunde Isaa)

2016-02-20 Thread reachout2isaac
The BoT have made some mistakes in the past few days, in the ways they've handled information, silent on critical situation that requires urgent clarification, and how they kept the community in the dark about certain decision. This is painful and that was a poor decision on their part. We have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Ilario Valdelli
I like this email of Chris and what seems to me strange is that there is an evident lack of control of the board. I have read the emails of resignation without being shocked. They were expected. It's sufficient to use Mr.google and to reach Glassdoor to read the anonymous comments of former

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your questions about KE.

2016-02-20 Thread Theo10011
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016, Bence Damokos wrote: > > Just as a courtesy to those who follow the topic here on the mailing list, > can you please send an update to this list whenever there is new content on > the page, or at least when there are significant changes? This seemed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread
+1 Get on with positive action! Less chest beating, poetry, misdirection and encrypted messaging please. Fae On 20 Feb 2016 11:37, "Milos Rancic" wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Denny Vrandecic > wrote: > > Whereas I do not agree with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Facebook marketing inside pt.wikipedia

2016-02-20 Thread Ricordisamoa
Couldn't resist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_M0SDk3ZaM=PLiOgVo8_i0Q-XgloSLhzJ64XwC5kGoQUF Il 19/02/2016 10:39, Tomasz Ganicz ha scritto: Nikola - but does it bring any added value to Wikipedia? Does number of active editors in Bulgarian Wikipedia increased because of it? Can you see it in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your questions about KE.

2016-02-20 Thread Austin Hair
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Theo10011 wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016, Bence Damokos wrote: >> >> Just as a courtesy to those who follow the topic here on the mailing list, >> can you please send an update to this list whenever there is new content on

[Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread James Heilman
I agree having all board members engage with the community in their own voice is likely the best way forwards. All of us will take your statements as representing whatever fraction of the board you are unless you state otherwise. There is nothing wrong with a board that disagrees with each other,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Delphine Ménard
Hello Denny, I am not sure I can find any explanation "why" the board acts as it does in your email, to be honest. Which reinforces my long-time observation that the board is dysfunctional, as it has been for years now. One thing I do read between the lines though, is some kind of "fear" of doing

[Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Sri Lanka

2016-02-20 Thread Carlos M. Colina
Dear all, It is my pleasure to announce, on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, the recognition of a new Wikimedia User Group: Wikimedia Community User Group Sri Lanka [1]. Among the goals are increasing the awareness of the different Wikimedia Projects in Sri Lanka and empowering people

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Sri Lanka

2016-02-20 Thread Chris "Jethro" Schilling
Fantastic news. Thanks for sharing with us, Carlos. It's exciting to read over some of the group's future plans to do some institutional engagement with museums, archives, and with local universities. : ) Chris "Jethro" Schilling I JethroBT (WMF)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
Delphine, this was possibly the strongest email of the last four months or so of this mind-numbing nonsense. The Board. I never really understood it. I did feel that it's supposed to lead the editors and the staff in _some_ way, but, being both a staff member and a volunteer editor, I never felt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Amir E. Aharoni < amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote: > Delphine, this was possibly the strongest email of the last four months or > so of this mind-numbing nonsense. > > The Board. I never really understood it. I did feel that it's supposed to > lead the editors

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Anthony Cole
James, regarding "Long term strategy should not be determined by the ED and a couple of board members", why do you say, "a couple of board members"? There are ten board members. Are you saying a couple of them have inordinate influence? Yes, the board and ED should heed input from the volunteers

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Brion Vibber
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > * The Community Resources Team is in place - it surveyed the community and > discussed with them their technical priorities, and tailored their Idea Lab > Campaign accordingly. > FYI, the head of that team is one of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Anthony Cole
I know. Anthony Cole On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:17 AM, Brion Vibber wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > > > * The Community Resources Team is in place - it surveyed the community > and > > discussed with them their

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread James Alexander
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > It is important to do things in good timing, but it is even more important > to do things right (not just in decision-making - remember the VIsual > Editor?), not get easily swayed or lead by a crowd, think

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Technical issues of Wikimedia [was: Particular interests and common ground]

2016-02-20 Thread Sam Klein
Amir, this email is so quotable it hurts. > "There is a cool project called Knowledge Engine but we don't have money for it, > We can just give you a space to put your source code and test it, and running it." Please to launch all future projects this way. > I asked my life partner and he said

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread James Alexander
It is probably best for me not to get into a long count/counterpoint here but I couldn't avoid not responding at all. As Ori hinted at I hope that everyone can reflect on the idea of causation vs correlation . The fact that good

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Sam Klein
Thanks Denny for contributing here; very much appreciated. Milos: > After you reset the culture of denial, you should now start thinking > how to boot the system again. Forget everything previous, forget the > common excuses for avoiding responsibility. This is fair advice. The Board is looked

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread SarahSV
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:16 PM, James Alexander wrote: It is probably best for me not to get into a long count/counterpoint here but I couldn't avoid not responding at all. James, several staffers have talked about feeling unappreciated and demoralized.​ ​But that's how

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Joseph Seddon
SarahSV, the rabbit whole goes far far beyond "mistaken ideas about the Knowledge Engine". Seddon On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:36 AM, SarahSV wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:16 PM, James Alexander > wrote: > It is probably best for me not to get

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Joseph Seddon
In fact the rabbit whole goes far far deeper down the rabbit hole :P Seddon On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Joseph Seddon wrote: > SarahSV, the rabbit whole goes far far beyond "mistaken ideas about the > Knowledge Engine". > > Seddon > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:36

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Brion Vibber
On Feb 20, 2016 3:18 PM, "Anthony Cole" wrote: > > I know. I suppose I should be clearer: it is my contention that it is largely the people advocating for and implementing the improvements you cite that we are losing due to the management crisis. -- brion > > Anthony Cole

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Anthony Cole
Thanks James. I'm not on staff, nor am I part of the inner circle of volunteers in constant touch with staff or the board. From the perspective of the wider community, though, this all looks very dodgy. Lila's arrival marked for us a revolution in the relationship. There is probably nothing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Danny Horn
You know, it's possible that the people who work for the Foundation might understand the situation in a more nuanced way than you do. I know it doesn't seem likely, but dare to dream. On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > Thanks James. > > I'm not on staff,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Brandon Harris
Danny, don't kid yourself! The folks at Wikipediocracy know everything about everything that's happened at the Foundation and about everything that will EVER happen. They've never been wrong, ever! I don't understand why we're still talking about this! > On Feb 20, 2016, at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Anthony Cole
Ah, Brandon. Thanks for writing me off as "the folks at Wikipediocracy." I'm also the folks at en.Wikipedia and the folks on the board of WikiProject Med Foundation. And I give a shit about Wikipedia. This push for the removal of the ED is coming from staff. And failed staff. If you want support

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Risker
This is a difficult time for everyone. Staff, particularly staff who work out of the San Francisco office, have seen and been through things that are not well known or understood outside of that small group; even "highly involved" volunteers aren't entirely in the loop. Former staff continue to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Lila Tretikov
Hi Risker, Information asymmetry is a big issue. For example, in my role there is a lot I cannot say, I have responsibilities to protect people in the organization both current and former. So, for example, if someone is fired, even for cause, I would not say anything about this person that may

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 2016-02-20 10:36 PM, Lila Tretikov wrote: Information asymmetry is a big issue. For example, in my role there is a lot I cannot say, I have responsibilities to protect people in the organization both current and former. So, for example, if someone is fired, even for cause, I would not say

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Oliver Keyes
Just staff and former staff? Huh. You must be reading wikimedia-that-doesn't-include-liam-fae-former-board-members-or-almost-anyone-else-l. What's it like there? To Risker's point; "don't beat up on people who have less information than you" is a good principle. But so is "don't call people

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Anders Wennersten
Reading an following this thread makes me feel profoundly sad. And the symptoms indicates for me that there is indeed something "rotten" going on. I feel deep sympathy for staff whose pain is seems to go very deep, and I would really want to help out to to ease the problems if it was in my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Asaf Bartov
Despite everything, Anders, it is inappropriate for staff to publicly prosecute Lila. The board is aware of the many issues, quite a few not yet public on any forum. And it is for the board to solve. A. On Feb 20, 2016 8:20 PM, "Anders Wennersten" wrote: > Reading

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread SarahSV
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Asaf Bartov wrote: > Despite everything, Anders, it is inappropriate for staff to publicly > prosecute Lila. The board is aware of the many issues, quite a few not yet > public on any forum. And it is for the board to solve. > > Asaf, I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Gergő Tisza
Okay, this is stepping over several lines. Can we stick to basic human decency if nothing else? :( No one is helped by making vicious personal attacks over assumed interpretations. Let's try to represent the movement's values (including civility, and, if not the assumption of good faith, then at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Milos Rancic
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:43 AM, SarahSV wrote: > This isn't about how much people know. It's obvious that the KE was just a > flashpoint. It's about how to move forward without further casualties. I > don't believe that that isn't possible. From the point of person who

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread SarahSV
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:43 AM, SarahSV wrote: > > This isn't about how much people know. It's obvious that the KE was just > a > > flashpoint. It's about how to move forward without further

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Risker
On 21 February 2016 at 00:43, SarahSV wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 5:43 AM, SarahSV wrote: > > > This isn't about how much people know. It's obvious that the KE

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Anthony Cole wrote: > Lila should have taken the community along with her as the Knowledge Engine > project was evolving. I don't know what was behind her reticence. I presume > an element was unwillingness to announce a thing while the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Lila Tretikov
Andreas, I am happy to talk to Signpost on-record about anything that has been happening under my watch to minimize misinterpretations of second-hand reports or further conjectures. Lila On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:56

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Pete Forsyth
An unusually immediate comment from Wikimedia leadership following Andreas' admittedly speculative comments. It's not about the relevance to the movement. It's not about the relevance to the organization. It's about an individual's role. This just got fascinating (and a little more depressing).

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-20 Thread Lila Tretikov
Hi Pete, I proposed an interview to Andreas this morning in a private email, actually. Also, I want to explain myself as a human being, not only as an ED. Without filters. L On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: > An unusually immediate comment from