Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF has lost its path

It's worth pointing out that the Board *are* responsible, even if they aren't involved in the actual decision-making - as they are ultimately responsible for everything WMF does. Personally I think the present solution is better than no solution, as cross-project disruption is not something the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF has lost its path

My point is that reducing the number of anti WMF people in senior positions on commons by one they might have converted some pro WMF people in senior positions on commons to anti WMF people, producing more damage for themselves than they hoped to create good. I think if you're looking at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF has lost its path

My point is that reducing the number of anti WMF people in senior positions on commons by one they might have converted some pro WMF people in senior positions on commons to anti WMF people, producing more damage for themselves than they hoped to create good. I think if you're looking

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Thanks for the details Siko! Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no good reason. However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent grantmaking is being

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia charity chairman resigns after pornography row

As people have said - repeatedly - a bunch of trolls have set up a google group mailing list that appears to be Wikimedia-l and subscribed lots of people to it. If you're subscribed then unsubscribe yourself and report it to Google. There are instructions in other messages. However, please

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:09 PM, FRED BAUDER fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:29:57 +0100 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing why it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

Hi there, That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so long as it's relevant and factual. Who is to decide what is relevant and factual (or indeed, the other editorial judgements we make in writing aricles)? If the only people doing that are white North American and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

Curious question, by the way: how controversial would you expect this move to be domestically? From e.g. a Swedish perspective, the NSA is an intelligence agency of a foreign power and the other mentioned organizations are either largely uncontroversial and seen in a positive light (Amnesty,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships

I find the term Advancement Department has a somewhat Orwellian ring. It's quite a normal term in the USA. For instance, the Council for Advancement and Support of Education is the (global, but US-dominated) professional body for university fundraisers. Chris

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Not all pixels are created equals: introducing brand new Wikimedia France's metrics

I give this project FF out of a possible FF. On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Christophe Henner christophe.hen...@gmail.com wrote: They are not free pixels. Only real free pixels deserve to be counted. Le 1 avr. 2015 23:00, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com a écrit : As

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

Congratulations to the new Board members - I am sure you will do a great job. And commiserations to those who will be leaving the Board - thank you for all your hard work over many years. Also it is good to see a much higher turnout in this year's elections than in 2013 - well done to those

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

I basically agree with the whole of Risker's post but want to expand in this bit: On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: There are not very many systems, though, that are specifically designed to give multiple winners when one of the conditions is that they *not*

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy largely blocked by WMF fundraising

I can definitely understand your frustration, Romaine. However, if there is a strong operational reason why the Fundraising team can't move the activity they have planned for Italy in September, then I can't really see what resolution there can be except for sharing the banner space. Normally

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy largely blocked by WMF fundraising

Hi Romaine, And the outcome is ridiculous. This is not a compromise. The Italian WLM team has been crashed under the weight and preponderance of the Wikimedia Foundation. Well - it *is* a compromise. It isn't what you want and I think I understand your reasons for thinking it will have a very

Re: [Wikimedia-l] On toxic communities

Really interesting - thanks for sharing! On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić wrote: > Very interesting read (via Brandon Harris): > > > http://recode.net/2015/07/07/doing-something-about-the-impossible-problem-of-abuse-in-online-games/ > > "the vast majority

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing the Wikimedia Affiliates mailing list

Since October 27th there have been 3 threads, all started by the same person, with a total of 5 posts . None of which said anything at all confidential. :) Chris On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Laurentius wrote: > At the end, is that mailing list currently active? >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect is gone

Yay! Great news about Superprotect's scrapping, also really good to hear the direction of travel on the development process. Chris On 5 Nov 2015 17:36, "Quim Gil" wrote: > Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a > product development

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing the Wikimedia Affiliates mailing list

Looking at the current (private) chapters' list, for at least a year 90%+ of the traffic has been announcements that were cross-posted to Wikimedia-l. The other 10% is invitations and requests addressed to "chapters people" that might be boring to most people on wikimedia-l but could have been

Re: [Wikimedia-l] help needed - Arkansas

Have forwarded on to the GLAM outreach mailing list as there seems to be a public library service behind this. (I would observe that edit count and ability to do outreach don't necessarily correlate that well - someone with a few hundred edits can be a great contact point for a cultural

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

Yes, I also thought that was interesting. To invert the presentation of the statistics, 33% of users did mind the banners and 45% were irritated by them. These are actually quite high numbers in my view. (Not to say that the decision to proceed with these banners is wrong, which is a much more

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

ree, 18% had no opinion > > Thank you, > Lisa > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > Yes, I also thought that was interesting. To invert the presentation of > the > > statistics, 33% of users did

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comments invited 2016 Affiliate Selected Board Seats process

that holds things up. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Affiliate-selected_Board_seats#Provisional_timeline Please do continue to discuss on Meta. :) Chris On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > It is only a few month

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sick of the subject "(no subject)"

Possibly now is the time to draw a line under this conversation, as nothing productive is likely to come of it. On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Rjd0060 wrote: > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:50 AM, K. Peachey wrote: > > > Each to their own I guess. > > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are we so boring?

Most Wikimedians are very interesting people. However Milos has hit the nail on the head when he says the most interesting things happening at Wikimedia events are 1-1 conversations. In my view we don't have a "personality" problem (and if we did, we couldn't fix it). What we have, at least in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On 1 Jan 2016 21:56, "Joseph Fox" wrote: > > I imagine it would take something quite extraordinary for the board to > reject the community election result outright, as it happens. I would > assume the "nomination v selection" differential is to allow the board to > remove

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thank you, Jan-Bart and Stu

I just wanted to add my thanks as well as both Jan-Bart and Stu have served the movement with a huge amount of dedication and commitment for many years and helped steer the WMF through many challenges. It has been a real pleasure to work with both of you. Thank you both for everything you have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google

ng all the emails Dariusz has said the Board is looking into the situation with Arnnon, which they were clearly not aware of - that is what needs to happen and yet more emails on this list won't mean that happens any more quickly. Regards, Chris K

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On 29 Dec 2015 01:17, "Todd Allen" wrote: > > Even if there are legal reasons that disclosure is not possible, a simple > statement to that effect ("For legal reasons, we cannot provide additional > information") should be at the very least forthcoming. > > If the removal

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

> > BTW, it's more "community selected" than "community representative". There's an important distinction there. > Quite - all WMF trustees have identical responsibilities, regardless of which method of selection resulted in them being on the board. For instance Alice and Phoebe both served on

[Wikimedia-l] Comments invited 2016 Affiliate Selected Board Seats process

Hello, It is only a few months until someone will need to organise the 2016 Affiliate Selected Board Seats process. Thinking about the process last time I have set up a discussion here:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

On 25 Nov 2015 03:53, "Risker" wrote: > > Thank you, Nikki. Yes, about 70% of the costs were broken down, more or > less. But almost 30% - totalling over US$635,000 - is undifferentiated > "floating capacity" and "administrative costs". Those two amounts, which > are not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

I wondered if anyone from FDC is going to respond to this? On 26 Nov 2015 17:04, "Nicola Zeuner" wrote: > Thanks everyone - WMDE welcomes and follows with interest community > discussions about our proposal, the relevance of Wikidata and the use of > community funds.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Conference 2016: Program Design Process and next steps

Thanks Nicole! Very glad to see a further increase in the level of focus of the Wikimedia Conference and in the streamlining of the planning process Chris On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Nicole Ebber wrote: > Dear Wikimedia friends, > > Following Christian’s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Conflict of Interest Policy

rring to discussions related to a resolution. The executive > session of each board meeting is secret. > > On Monday, January 11, 2016, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I am concerned that Denny may not have been recusin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Offlist Re: In Support of Community

Ok, spot the idiot who can't send an offlist email offlist. On 13 Jan 2016 09:38, "Chris Keating" <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote: > That's what the Googleplex wants you to think! > On 13 Jan 2016 00:56, "Asaf Bartov" <abar...@wikimedia.org> wrote: &

[Wikimedia-l] Offlist Re: In Support of Community

That's what the Googleplex wants you to think! On 13 Jan 2016 00:56, "Asaf Bartov" wrote: > (perhaps it would be nice to stop wasting everyone's time with this.) > >A. > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Nathan wrote: > > > I've written a guess on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] In Support of Community

> > I hope this helps. :) > > Hi Damon - not really, it doesn't. If there is anything that you feel you can and should say publically (bearing in mind whatever confidentiality you have agreed to respect, or feel you should respect ) - then please say it. If there isn't - then please don't hint

[Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on WMF Governance reviews

wer WMF trustees I would think that an external governance review was a very helpful step in making sure that the Board was working as effectively as possible. Regards, Chris Keating ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on WMF Governance reviews

> governance consultants are very unlikely to recommend >> or support (say) live-streaming board meetings to increase transparency, >> or >> making community-elected trustees unsackable without a referendum of some >> kind >> > > Most of what you said is valuable, but I have to point out that you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Conflict of Interest Policy

> I am concerned that Denny may not have been recusing from discussions and > decisions affecting Google. This strikes me as exceptional, and that the > board doesn't find it so troubles me, and hints that you may all have > something to gain from independent advice. Out of interest, do you know

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

> > > I have some one question for you. > > I am having a very hard time wrapping my head around how the grant > information you posted lead to WMF BoT voting James Heilman of the board in > a vote of no-confidence. > Ruslan - what makes you think the two issues are connected? I have heard

[Wikimedia-l] Call for Candidates - Affiliate Selected members of the WMF Board

/2016 There is also a selection FAQ here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats_election_FAQ Many thanks, Chris Keating Lorenzo Losa Lane Rasberry - Election Facilitators ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimania-l] Outcomes from the Consultation on Wikimedia movement conferences/Wikimania

> The communications failure and lack of any public consultation before > throwing away the community driven bidding process, was a very good > moment to appoint a new Chair of the Wikimania Committee. The > suggestion at the time was ignored.[1] How can the community force > real changes, if the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outcomes from the Consultation on Wikimedia movement conferences/Wikimania

Just to add my thoughts on this. I think the whole discussion is quite a novel situation in WMF-Community relations, as we have never dealt with an issue quite like this before. Firstly the good (and even though this section is shorter, it's just as significant): 1) The WMF is consulting and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board meeting January 30

> I am sure the agenda was prepared well in advance and before the events of > the last 48 hours; however, it should be noted that there are now *two* > open board seats (one community-selected, one Board-appointed). > Since the agenda is on Meta, I have been bold and changed "seat" to "seats"

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of María Sefidari to Wikimedia Foundation Board

Hi Ziko, The advantages and disadvantages are articulated here, though I have to say I wasn't aware of it until Patricio posted it just now.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why take grants? (was: Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?)

> > > You raise a valid question: how many sources of funding does the Wikimedia > Foundation need? > The Bridgespan Group is a consultancy firm specialized in non-profits. They > have been hired > in the past by the Wikimedia Foundtion, for example in the period of > strategy formation that > led

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting formula was Appointment of María Sefidari to Wikimedia Foundation Board

It would be good if the voting system was built to give a clear next best option in these circumstances. Simple positive voting, single transferable vote, and proportional Schulze would all do that. I wonder if there's any movement on the idea of a standing election committee to consider now

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

> > Throughout the discussion about the appointment of Arnnon Geshuri to the > Board of Trustees, the Board has carefully listened to you and discussed > internally. Earlier today, Arnnon decided to step down from the Board. To > paraphrase his words, he doesn't want to be a distraction for the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Timeline of recent events at the Wikimedia Foundation

Yes - very handy - thanks GorillaWarfare! On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Steven Crossin wrote: > Thank you Molly. This is indeed helpful? > > *Steven Crossin* > *cro0...@gmail.com * > > On 22 February 2016 at 23:20, GorillaWarfare < >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership - Board Reform

> > I have to register disagreement with the idea that the WMF board is > duty-bound to serve the Foundation over the Wikimedia movement. > I still feel this is more a semantic issue than a practical one. In UK law trustees are required to put the interests of their charity first when making

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition plans for WMF leadership - Board Reform

Can I suggest that it would be really good to document some of this discussion about the WMF board composition and so on on Meta - that way it will be more apparent in future when people are thinking about this issue. A good place might be to re-open this page:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliate-selected Board seats] Christophe Henner candidacy

Hello all, Also, if there are questions you would like to see all candidates answering, please could you put them on this page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016/Questions Thanks, Chris (Election facilitator) On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Christophe Henner

Re: [Wikimedia-l] I am going to San Francisco

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 2:58 PM, James Heilman wrote: > > Regarding to Oliver's comment: "My concern is that when staff reached out > > the Board replied with a letter indicating they had full and

[Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on WMF-Community dynamics

I've put some of my thoughts about the dynamics of the WMF-Community relationship into an essay on Meta, entitled "Why do They always get It wrong?" I thought I'd share it here. Hope it's useful! https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:The_Land/Why_do_They_always_do_It_wrong (It's not specifically

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outcomes from the Consultation on Wikimedia movement conferences/Wikimania

is response I made to a similar question on the > discussion page,[2] but I can elaborate more on this if you'd like. > > With thanks, > > Jethro > > [1] < > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania#What_is_the_problem_you.27re_trying_t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outcomes from the Consultation on Wikimedia movement conferences/Wikimania

Hello Chris (or Jethro)! Thanks for taking time to reply. > Is it the WMF's view that Wikimania in its current form is > > > broken and change is needed - if so who represents that view to the > > community? (Or if not, what *is* the WMF's view?) > > > It is fair to say that our team does view

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

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] Affiliate-selected Board seats update

is also much appreciated. (For more details about this process, please see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016 ) Many thanks, Chris Keating (one of the election facilitators) ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Affiliate-selected Board seats update

< it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > How and where the chapter will vote? > I offered to do it privately, in order to avoid current votes to influence > others chapters. > > Itzik > > - Sent from mobile > On Mar 10, 2016 15:35, "Chris Keating" <

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

A few reflections on this subject: 1) I would however endorse the idea of publishing more papers / presentations, and fuller notes of discussions in minutes. These give a lot of context to what is going on, and often it's lack of context that makes people concerned about what is actually going

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

> > > That does NOT take 3 weeks. I would also suggest if the Board are too busy > to provide input on the minutes of Board business then they need to either > reduce their commitments, or they need to step away from the Board. They > have responsibilities that they committed to when they accepted

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

> > Why would minutes be written after the fact instead of during the meeting > by the designated note taker(s)? Because the notes you take as you go along aren't in a fit state to serve as minutes? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

> A few reflections on this subject: > (snip) I forgot one. Herewith: 4) Minutes while helpful aren't a substitute for proactive communication. Having just written about this subject at length* I won't go into it again. But when the WMF Board simply makes a controversial decision and putting

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

> > > > Sent from my iPhone > On 3 Mar 2016, at 11:22 PM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Out of interest, Chris, have you ever served on a nonprofit board? > > Nope. > > If you ever do, I think you will end up with a very

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Oh the irony

I'm really glad that Guy is able to bring this kind of insight to the Board HR committee. ... OK, in possibly good news and trying to be fair to Guy, it looks like the @guykawasaki bears very little relationship to what Guy Kawasaki the person is actually thinking or doing. His twitter feed is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia is basically just another giant bureaucracy

Is it just me that notices an irony when someone posts a message about Wikipedia being a bureaucracy, and there follows a discussion about whether the message was sent to the correct mailing list or not? ;) ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2014-2015 now on-wiki

Hoi, > First, there's an overview of 'highest paid contractors' (for reading > along: page 61) and the top one is a law firm for 1.7 Million USD. Which is > quite a big sum of money. I'd like to second this question - 1.7M is a very significant sum and I am surprised that WMF has reason to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Richard Symonds < richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > > I wonder if that's the time to end the thread now (which is on a very > public list) and let people reach out privately. Discussion of this sort of > topic, especially when a specific person

Re: [Wikimedia-l] governance improvements

Hoi, Thanks for this update Dariusz. Good to see (reading this along with the March minutes) that the Board is moving forward on some of these important areas. A couple of clarifying questions; * Does your discussion on Monday include the Code of Conduct and Confidentiality Agreement mentioned

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

> I'd like to ask about *who* this "professional fact finding" process talked > to? I'm not asking to "name specific names" but more about which groups of > people. > I also wonder about this - I am sort of assuming that the people who were coming forward to raise grievances were included in the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

> > >> Such an issue should have been addressed and resolved during the > eliligbilty process, not after the fact . > There are actually no eligibility criteria for this election, except that candidates have received at least one endorsement from a Wikimedia chapter or Thematic Organisation.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

> > A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is it > the same as for the three community board seats, where the community > members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that the > sitting board is free to accept or reject? > As with the community

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

ar, at least! > > > > Andrew. > > > > On 6 May 2016 at 15:32, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Just an update on this: > > > > > > Currently 26 of the eligible affiliates have voted. A further 9 have > > eith

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Just an update on this: Currently 26 of the eligible affiliates have voted. A further 9 have either confirmed they are planning to vote, or have engaged substantively in the process (e.g. by nominating someone or participating in the Wikimedia Conference session on the subject). I'd expect most

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should the board do *now*? [was Re: Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal]

> tl;dr: the board did not effectively perform one of their most important > roles (managing the ED); the board (and board candidates) should be talking > about how they will fix that. > Thanks Luis for the very thoughtful email. Managing a Chief Executive / ED isn't an easy task (ask anyone

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

> Second, the Board needs to resolve never to remove a community trustee > except by a successful recall referendum to the community. The Board should > never, under any circumstances, remove a community trustee without consent > of the community that elected them. Are you sure about this?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

> > Nevertheless, I still believe that any functioning body as our Board has to > have the right to expel a person, whom they feel like not being able to > work with. > > If a majority of my fellow Board members cannot stand me for whatever > reason (including the ones I'd find absurd), that's

[Wikimedia-l] Affiliate Selected Board Seats - Result

candidates brought very valuable perspectives to the work of the WMF. Regards, Chris Keating, Lorenzo Losa, Lane Rasberry Election Facilitators ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

> ends", > > I'm read it like as "the end of the world is near", because we will cast > > our vote tonight. > > > > Regards! > > > > El vie., 6 de may. de 2016 a la(s) 11:59, Chris Keating < > > chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> escribió:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] APG Progress Report: Learn about Wikidata and community-oriented software development

Thanks Nicole and everyone at WMDE for a very thorough report. One question - you say that 2017 funding for Wikidata has not been agreed with WMF. I wondered if anyone could let us know what's happening with this - is there a conversation progressing about it? Many thanks, Chris On 27 Jul 2016

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Elections Committee

Great news! Congratulations to the incoming Standing Election Committee and many thanks to the outgoing (non-standing; sitting?) one. (I will save the lengthy explanation of my favoured voting system for another occasion ;) ) Chris On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Direction] WMF Board of Trustees 2016 priorities

Thanks Christophe! Just a quick question... > > The HR committee[2] will work toward that end, and the Board as whole is > ready to take any steps necessary to provide her, and the staff, with the > best environment possible. > [2] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/HR_Committee Has the HR

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimania - annually, with South Africa in 2018?

Hoi, I was interested to read the minutes of the most recent Wikimania Committee meeting, which decided that Wikimania will be held annually from now on, and that it will be in sub-Saharan Africa (effectively meaning South Africa) in 2018.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania - annually, with South Africa in 2018?

that the programme design process needs to be improved * There is in fact some dialogue between the Wikimania Committe, the WMF board, WMF staff, and the chapters Have I got that right? Thanks, Chris On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hoi, > > I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2014-2015 now on-wiki

> > Was the investment in pound sterling? > The pound has been going down steadily over the last year. > And now we have a steep drop due to Brexit. Am not speaking from a position of particular knowledge on this, but the way I read original the email was simply that income was held in some kind

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Hong Kong

Thanks to everyone who's participated in WMHK and in particular everyone involved in Wikimania 2013! Thank you for your efforts and best wishes to those aiming to move things forwards again. On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Wong Rover wrote: > Hi all, > > On behalf of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What is our impact and how do we measure it?

Hi James, This paper suggests that Wikipedia has become more influential than a large > proportion of the peer reviewed literature: > > http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~xshuai/papers/jcdl240-shuai.pdf I am not sure that is the correct conclusion from the paper you mention. To quote the conclusion:

[Wikimedia-l] What is our impact and how do we measure it?

Hi all, For a while now I've been thinking about different ways to define and measure the Wikimedia movement's impact. This started for me with various conversations about different iterations of the WMF's Global Metrics and different rounds of FDC bids, but it turns out to be wider than that.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria

> > To me the first thing that should change is rather than focusing on how to > bring down chapters we should be focusing on how to further improve and > promote the affiliate network, its as simple as saying Affcom can provide > x,y,z to help support the expansion of chapters, it also has a,b,c

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria

status to know what they are meant to be working towards. Regards, Chris Keating User:The Land ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Uns

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria) + opening WUG applications for Chapter and ThOrgs

Thanks Carlos - that seems a very clear explanation of where we are to me. Regards, Chris On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Carlos M. Colina wrote: > Hello Rogol, > > Let me try to clarify that. When the AffCom discussed with the board > liaisons whether we needed a new

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Personal Update

you take the very expansive definition of conflict of interest that you suggest. Chris On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris Keating wrote: "Fortunately the Board isn't required to consider > whether hypothetically infuture some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board: Vacant appointed seats and Turnover (Was: Personal Update)

I think I agree with Dariusz's proposed solution. I also hope that several of Dariusz, Maria, Alice and Guy are willing / able to be re-appointed or re-elected - the easiest solution to Board stability is people getting second terms on the Board. Chris On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 2:31 PM, James

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Personal Update

Fortunately the Board isn't required to consider whether hypothetically in future some other organisation's interests might conflict with the Foundation's: only whether in practice they do. (By the way, I am not surprised people read your original email as calling for Kelly to resign - it was the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community review for the 9th round of APG applications - we need your input!

For anyone interested in the continuing conversation about "how to define impact in the Wikimedia movement", I have pulled together a table of the different metrics that APG requestors are proposing for their programmes. this is the first year that organisations have been asked to submit their own

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 - 2016 Fundraising Report just published

I can understand that if there are countries with very small numbers of donors you wouldn't want to give country-by-country breakdowns. But national charities report on how much money they raise all the time without any legal barriers, so I doubt there can be barriers to WMF reporting by country

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Agenda for the November 13, 2016 Board Meeting

Since the board meeting has just happened, is now the right time to mention minutes? :) In the past the idea's been floated that something could be published shortly after the meeting - be it draft minutes, or informal notes, or some of the presentations. It would be really helpful to see

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 - 2016 Fundraising Report just published

, as I just received an appeal email with a link to a form that was not really optimised to do either (generally speaking if someone is being asked for a £10 one-off gift, asking them for a £10 monthly gift doesn't get many monthly gifts) Chris On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Chris Keating

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Store - Important Update

> > Fulfillment partner: We will be migrating to a new fulfillment partner in > January. I wish the Wikimedia Store a safe flight and great success in its warm winter mating grounds! Chris ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

  1   2   3   4   >