How about a study on the adverse effects on the systemic bias given to
English Wikipedia? It gets less than 50% of our traffic more than 50% of
the funds are raised from English Wikipedia and it gets way more attention
than what could be expected because of said traffic. For projects like
I second that. Thank you Lisa you and your team's amazing work :-)
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Anders Wennersten wrote:
> Thanks for this info and decision!
> And very many thanks to you and your team making such a marvellous job
> with the fundraising.
Christophe Henner wrote:
>Basically it's making the legal team life's easier when they need to do
>small and/or quick changes. They don't have to go through the whole
>resolution process to change a comma.
>We're still informed and are talking with staff about those changes.
I was very glad that the Foundation decided to extend the fundraiser.
I think adding projects outside of the lengthy, formulaic,
overly-committee laden, but necessary in part FDC funding process and
getting a head start on the endowment is essential for retaining the
soul of the Foundation's
I'm afraid that does not answer my question. If it changes absolutely
nothing, it would be an unnecessary resolution. So surely there is
*something* that changes (and that doesn't have to be a bad thing), such as
improved clarity or legal certainty. But probably you're right - and
It seems that the Chairman of the Board "fail[s] to see what community
input could have brought" to its decision to "delegate the authority to
adopt, alter, and revoke policies to the Executive Director," the purpose
of which was "making the legal team life's easier when they need to dosmall
Just a quick update on this: We concluded the English-language banner
campaign on Monday (12/19) – at the three week point of the campaign. This
is the shortest campaign in recent memory. We were able to reach the goal
and raise some extra funds for these initiatives and the endowment
Thanks for this info and decision!
And very many thanks to you and your team making such a marvellous job
with the fundraising. We are not only reaching our goal in record time,
but also getting very good press for the professionalism for the the
campaign and its messages
We just published our year-in-review video,
If you can, please
To translate, copy this
then go here and pick your language
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Victor Grigas
Hello, everyone. :)
The winter holiday season is upon us, and the Foundation office will be
closed from 24 December to 2 January, returning 3 January. We will, of
course, be maintaining essential services, but we're encouraging staff to
take this time to rest and prepare for the work of the
Personally I'd argue that WMF should only spend their (and everyone's) time
and energy on consultation when it's a substantive issue.
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Lodewijk
> Hi Christophe,
> I'm afraid that does not answer my question. If it
On 21 December 2016 at 02:53, Newyorkbrad wrote:
> I think it might be useful to focus on how any of the proposed changes
> to the law would affect Wikipedia/Wikimedia specifically, apart from
> the broader philosophical discussion. Is there a good link for
> exactly what
I'd argue instead that we should strive to a consultation model or
structure so that it doesn't cost so much time and energy, that we limit it
to huge and obvious issues.
This is a very broadly phrased resolution, that I cannot out of hand
oversee the consequences of. The core of the
Interestingly Australia is looking at going towards developing a safe
harbour process within its copyright laws, expand the access of fair use,
make orphan works more accessible along with making it possible for
collection agencies(GLAMs) to use copyrighted works
Mail list logo