Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
hi Theo, On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Why don't you start by asking those questions to WMF, then WMDE then WMUK and any other chapter filing a budget with FDC. This organization just had the bare minimum personnel spending it needed to accomplish the goals at the time, but as the Dylan song went, things have changed my personal view is that at some stage of development staff indeed does add value and is necessary for more complex operations. From this point of view, it is clear that international collaboration, best practices sharing, cross-border initiatives, etc. (all primarily within the scope of interest of WCA or any other organization addressing it) do or soon will need some structure and probably staff support. So, all in all, the question is not whether in our movement as a whole we can rely only and exclusively on volunteers - we know in some things we can't, and in some it creates more challenges than savings. The question is whether the problems WCA is going to address can be addressed by already existing structures (e.g. by relying on one of the already existing chapters - after all, WCA could be a subproject in an existing budget, and still be managed by the council for all practical purposes, the issue of incorporation is a matter of bureaucracy rather than of actual initiatives fulfillment). If the new structures need to be created (and I understand there has been quite a bit of thought given to the issue and legal, accounting and incorporating costs are considered inevitable), the community at large should probably be given a strong, plausible and persuasive rationale for this, and also consulted in a typically wikimedic manner. Instead, the serious wide discussion on WCA starts only now, after the Board's statement. The way I understood WCA idea the first time I heard about it was, among others, reducing bureaucracy, and increasing openness and transparency of actions. So far, at least on the surface level, the structures dominate over the actual serving the community (there is a council, there's been a long process of choosing a place to incorporate supported by professional consultant(s), there is a secretary general being hired; but there is no roadmap of what is going to be actually done yet). It may be just a passing stage, but this is how it looks for now and possibly casts a shadow over the whole project. Also, the openness and transparency are probably not the strongest points of the initiative. There is a closed mailing list for discussions, decision-making is not fully conducted with the input of the community at large. I understand there may be good reasons for keeping your strategy closed. I also understand that WCA council/managing board feels empowered to represent the participating chapter representatives, the chapter representatives do feel empowered to represent the chapters, and the chapters feel empowered to represent the local communities they serve. But all this, while typical for regular organizations, is not so usual in Wikimedia movement. Three layers of representation distance the initiative from regular editors - even more it is needed to consult and discuss the actions and decisions with the community. I know that WMF was often criticized in the past for being too distant from the community in its planning, too hierarchical, or too bureaucratic - perhaps this could be a lesson that all stakeholders in Wikimedia movement could learn from, and actively oppose the detachment in their own business. Openness, minimal hierarchy, flexibility, goals before structures - these are the values I'd typically associate with Wikimedia. Well, 25000 (USD or CAN) might actually be close to minimum wage for Belgium or Switzerland but ok. But it's not for you to decide what is appropriate. There can be 100 different opinions about this matter and all be right at the same time. Here's the thing: it is difficult to relate to this argumentation when the community at large has not been offered a possibility to discuss the place of incorporation, right? Even in Europe there is plenty of countries where the minimum wage from Switzerland (not existing, AFAIK, but nevermind) may be way more than enough to cover the exact same expenses and leave quite a lot for the others. Why Belgium or Switzerland and not Hungary, Czech Republic, or Bulgaria? You don't even have to have a strong Wikimedia chapter in a given country to start operating, what you may need though is reducing costs whenever possible without a loss to quality, and also to a lesser extent sending the right message (reaching out across borders, etc.). Again, I totally understand that Belgium or Switzerland have been chosen after careful consideration, but the process has not been transparent and you cannot expect the outcome to be widely accepted and unquestioned just on the face value. Just saying that it's not for you to decide what is appropriate will not win
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:04 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: BTW that entire rag tag group of amateurs doing something amazing, doesn't hold very true indefinitely We were doing something amazing when we started, but we're really not amateurs anymore. The editing community is still isolated from some of the recent spending and support but it has only been increasing and increasing for the last decade. Look at the recent budgets, look at the spending, the chapter spending, the programs, the infrastructure- while its not as close to a typical top 10 nternet property, it's not exactly a rag tag bunch of amateurs either. The more people are paid, the more editors we lose (or the fewer we attract), in part because they wonder why they're writing for free for an organization that pays people to do other things. So I agree with Doc James that it would be great if the focus on payment could be reversed a little. Or else spread some money around the editing community in ways that won't cause COI problems. But as things stand, we ought to assume that the growth of the paid bureaucracy and the shrinking of the volunteer editor community might be connected. +1. A key issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Intrinsic_and_extrinsic_motivation This is also an issue in the context of paid editing, which Dirk Franke (Benutzer:Southpark) is currently looking at as part of his own (paid) project on paid editing. Related discussions: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:WikiProjekt_Umgang_mit_bezahltem_Schreiben While paid editing is a slightly different topic from a paid bureaucracy, there are some elements in common. If gravy trains are allowed to develop, this will cost the movement dearly in terms of genuine volunteers' dedication (James being a prime example). It's profoundly demotivating. It makes you feel alienated, like a dupe. (If we have to pay anyone from donations, I would rather see micropayments made to editors and content contributors.) Minderbinder, one of the contributors to discussions around Dirk's project, created a really great graphic to illustrate the motivation problem in the context of paid editing, which I wanted to share here. In English looks like this: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vicious_circle_of_paid_editing.jpg [image: File:Vicious circle of paid editing.jpg] Personally I am pessimistic as to the chances the movement has of avoiding the pitfalls of paid editing, paid consultancy, and paid bureaucracy. My feeling is that people will increasingly seek to monetise their involvement, or stop contributing. Andreas ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Yes, thank you, Markus. A little note on the draft by Delphine (I believe it is that one referred to on the talk page): she sent it to the lists shortly before the Council meeting in Washington. I myself found that it contained a lot of reasonable items, but that at the moment it was not quite suitable for the young Association. In the meeting itself, we briefly mentioned it, but the Council did not even vote. So, to be absolutely correct, the Council also did not 'reject' it. Kind regards Ziko 2013/2/7 Fae fae...@gmail.com: Thank you for putting it so well Markus. I have now emphasised the existing word REJECTED in bold and red on that second table too. Thanks, Fae -- Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae...@gmail.com Chapters Association Council Chair http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae Personal and confidential. Unless otherwise stated, do not copy, quote or forward this email for any reason without permission. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ Wikimedia Nederland Postbus 167 3500 AD Utrecht --- ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Hello Ziko van Dijk, Could you provide some links to documents which would enable a mere mortal like me to have some context information? As it is, I don't understand what's talked here. Kind regards, mathieu -- Association Culture-Libre http://www.culture-libre.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Mathieu Stumpf, 06/02/2013 10:03: Hello Ziko van Dijk, Could you provide some links to documents which would enable a mere mortal like me to have some context information? As it is, I don't understand what's talked here. He refers to the previous thread in this list alias https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Chapters_Association It's hundreds KB, sorry. Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Hello Itzik Edri, Before reading me, please keep in mind I'm not familiar with all the WMF bureaucracy, I'm following sparsely this list for one month or two, so take care to interpret my sentences with the trunked view which is available to me. Le 2013-02-05 22:22, Itzik Edri a écrit : Let's face it - how much support to really establish the WCA the foundation gave until now? How much support do we need? That's the question which really bother me. Even with no support from WMF, organizing local chapters is a good way to spread and make sustainable the willingness to share knowledge and build great things together. What disappointment is the lack of constructive response. How the board think he could help and change? How he may ask the foundation the chapters to try find a way to change (and change is indeed need). Or if they going to lead a process to find other solution to support the chapters (as they say themselves is needed, according to approving Sue narrow focus recommendations). Real leadership is to help, not just to reject. Personally, I'm not seeking for some leader. I don't contribute wikimedia projects because I trust some leader, but because I think that's a way to improve the world for all of us. So, I don't think you need a leader, but if you need some help for a project which goes in the same way as wikimedia ones do, surely I would be proud to help you if I can. May I help you ? -- Association Culture-Libre http://www.culture-libre.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
I think the failure of the WCA process thus far has shown an enormous lack of connection between chapter bureaucracy and what editors actually care about. Wikimedians have a rightful distaste for off-wiki bureaucracy. The distinct lack of formal bureaucracy and organisation (we, of course, create our own bureaucracy - see http://enwp.org/WP:WTF ) is one of the chief things about Wikimedia projects that a lot of us like. I've sat on far too many committees in my life. I have kept a small eye on the WCA discussions and have yet to see compelling reasons to think that it would do anything to actually directly help the projects. I'm sure if I pulled 10 random admins from English Wikipedia and asked them what the WCA is, they wouldn't be able to tell me, or they'd give me a cynical answer like it's an empire-building project for political players in chapters. Whether that's right or wrong, the WCA hasn't made a case to the people who actually matter: the people who hit 'edit' every day on the projects. The same will be true for other thematic organizations and so on. These organisations will exist in political limbo - supported by chapter bureaucrats and the Foundation - until their importance and worth is actually sold to editors. Sell us, the editors, on why these things are necessary, and the process of getting approval from the WMF Board will be easy because the political winds will shift in your favour. What exactly are Chapters trying to do now that they are failing at that necessitates the creation of the WCA? -- Tom Morris http://tommorris.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 13:52, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: Sell us, the editors, on why these things are necessary, and the process of getting approval from the WMF Board will be easy because the political winds will shift in your favour. What exactly are Chapters trying to do now that they are failing at that necessitates the creation of the WCA? My pick list of things we know that some chapters are failing at, and that having an Association will help with - off the top of my head: * Shared processes and requirements for good governance * Shared (Chapter) best practices (such as financial reporting, activity reporting, records and reporting) * Peer review * Benchmark independent review and assessment * Managing effective boards * Effective and efficient programme management * Holding senior management to account * Credible public reporting on funding outcomes * Transparency Of course, I am personally happy to help chapters with this sort of thing, but I'm only one man with a few scars from painful experience; so having an Association helps folks like me to help others. PS Tom, knowing you as long as I have, I would not dream of trying to sell you anything. ;-) Cheers, Fae -- Chapters Association Council Chair http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 13:52, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: I think the failure of the WCA process thus far has shown an enormous lack of connection between chapter bureaucracy and what editors actually care about. Pretty much everything the WMF and chapters do is stuff editors don't care about. If editors cared about it, they would do it themselves and they would be WMF and chapter people not editors (some people manage to be both, although it is too great a challenge for most of us!). Different people in the movement are involved in different things, all of which are required for the projects to be as big a success as they can be. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
2013/2/6 Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org: I think the failure of the WCA process thus far has shown an enormous lack of connection between chapter bureaucracy and what editors actually care about. Wikimedians have a rightful distaste for off-wiki bureaucracy. The distinct lack of formal bureaucracy and organisation (we, of course, create our own bureaucracy - see http://enwp.org/WP:WTF ) is one of the chief things about Wikimedia projects that a lot of us like. I've sat on far too many committees in my life. I have kept a small eye on the WCA discussions and have yet to see compelling reasons to think that it would do anything to actually directly help the projects. I'm sure if I pulled 10 random admins from English Wikipedia and asked them what the WCA is, they wouldn't be able to tell me, or they'd give me a cynical answer like it's an empire-building project for political players in chapters. Well, I think your division of wikimedians bureaucrats and editors is a bit weird, at least regarding WCA members and very en-Wikipedia centered. Actually vast majority of WCA members are active editors of various Wikimedia projects. Probably you can't find to many edits of them on English Wikipedia, but take a look (at least sometimes) on other Wikimedia projects. Wikipedias in other languages, Wikimedia Commons, Books, News etc.. See for example Ziko edit history in Wikimedia Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ziko Take 10 random English Wikipedia admins and ask them what the FDC is - I guess the result will be similar to the question regarding WCA. Or ask them what is the difference between Human Resources Administrator and Director of Human Resources, and what these people are actually doing which benefit directly Wikimedia projects... -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
I said this in Berlin, and I will repeat here: Why the chapters do not apply the Wiki model in the offline world? Why organizations are hierarchical and bureaucratic as if they came from a horizontal and free group? It is clear that the WCA is going down a wrong path, if the intent is collaboration between chapters, should not have bureaucracies hindering the process. And it is obvious that the editors will not do things offline, the organizational model is the opposite of what they are accustomed. On 6 February 2013 12:27, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/2/6 Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org: I think the failure of the WCA process thus far has shown an enormous lack of connection between chapter bureaucracy and what editors actually care about. Wikimedians have a rightful distaste for off-wiki bureaucracy. The distinct lack of formal bureaucracy and organisation (we, of course, create our own bureaucracy - see http://enwp.org/WP:WTF ) is one of the chief things about Wikimedia projects that a lot of us like. I've sat on far too many committees in my life. I have kept a small eye on the WCA discussions and have yet to see compelling reasons to think that it would do anything to actually directly help the projects. I'm sure if I pulled 10 random admins from English Wikipedia and asked them what the WCA is, they wouldn't be able to tell me, or they'd give me a cynical answer like it's an empire-building project for political players in chapters. Well, I think your division of wikimedians bureaucrats and editors is a bit weird, at least regarding WCA members and very en-Wikipedia centered. Actually vast majority of WCA members are active editors of various Wikimedia projects. Probably you can't find to many edits of them on English Wikipedia, but take a look (at least sometimes) on other Wikimedia projects. Wikipedias in other languages, Wikimedia Commons, Books, News etc.. See for example Ziko edit history in Wikimedia Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ziko Take 10 random English Wikipedia admins and ask them what the FDC is - I guess the result will be similar to the question regarding WCA. Or ask them what is the difference between Human Resources Administrator and Director of Human Resources, and what these people are actually doing which benefit directly Wikimedia projects... -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 14:44, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: I said this in Berlin, and I will repeat here: Why the chapters do not apply the Wiki model in the offline world? Because different problems require different solutions. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? On 6 February 2013 12:51, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2013 14:44, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: I said this in Berlin, and I will repeat here: Why the chapters do not apply the Wiki model in the offline world? Because different problems require different solutions. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On Wed, 6 Feb 2013 14:18:34 +, Thomas Dalton wrote: Pretty much everything the WMF and chapters do is stuff editors don't care about. If editors cared about it, they would do it themselves and they would be WMF and chapter people not editors (some people manage to be both, although it is too great a challenge for most of us!). Different people in the movement are involved in different things, all of which are required for the projects to be as big a success as they can be. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l I do not think it is actually correct. It is true that many editors might not care about any particular initiative - same way as they do not care for example about arbcom elections. However, if we take Wiki Loves Monuments as an example of a chapter-initiated activity - well, many editors liked it and actively participated, and may had strong feelings - positive or negative - about organization and results. Cheers Yaroslav ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
I do not see big difference between what you call wiki model and an association like the chapters association. Every individual has the same right, for specific purpose both model need to elect a guy that took the responsibility. ___ I use this email for mailing list only. Charles ANDRES, Chairman Wikimedia CH – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch Le 6 févr. 2013 à 15:55, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com a écrit : So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? On 6 February 2013 12:51, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2013 14:44, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: I said this in Berlin, and I will repeat here: Why the chapters do not apply the Wiki model in the offline world? Because different problems require different solutions. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Administrators are just volunteers with tools that do what the community demands, has no decision-making powers, is not a statutory position. Furthermore, anyone can volunteer in Wikis, but is not anyone who may be a member of WCA... And there are a lot of other differences that I'll let you think. On 6 February 2013 13:12, Charles Andrès charles.andres.w...@gmail.comwrote: I do not see big difference between what you call wiki model and an association like the chapters association. Every individual has the same right, for specific purpose both model need to elect a guy that took the responsibility. ___ I use this email for mailing list only. Charles ANDRES, Chairman Wikimedia CH – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch Le 6 févr. 2013 à 15:55, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com a écrit : So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? On 6 February 2013 12:51, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2013 14:44, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: I said this in Berlin, and I will repeat here: Why the chapters do not apply the Wiki model in the offline world? Because different problems require different solutions. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 14:55, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? It may be useful in other situations, but there is no reason to assume that just because it's a good way to write an encyclopaedia that it is going to be a good way to run a chapter. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
HEHHEHEHE, okay, okay So... do you not believe? I find it odd organizations that promote free collaborative construction, do not to believe in their own model, do not use the model itself and talk that should be the model to be used ... blacksmith's house, wooden skewer(casa de ferreiro, espeto de pau) [1] I will not prolong, I just think that you are wasting your capacity. Peace. [1]http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casa_de_ferreiro,_espeto_de_pau On 6 February 2013 13:18, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2013 14:55, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? It may be useful in other situations, but there is no reason to assume that just because it's a good way to write an encyclopaedia that it is going to be a good way to run a chapter. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 15:31, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: HEHHEHEHE, okay, okay So... do you not believe? I find it odd organizations that promote free collaborative construction, do not to believe in their own model, do not use the model itself and talk that should be the model to be used ... blacksmith's house, wooden skewer(casa de ferreiro, espeto de pau) [1] I will not prolong, I just think that you are wasting your capacity. I believe it's a very good way to write an encyclopaedia... ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
It's quite easy to leave the discussion when people do not agree without, nobody forced you to change the way you are working, we all respect the way you choose. just let's respect the way other can choose. And by the way, a sarcastic analysis of the wiki model is that is working only if the majority of editors have minimal interaction with the other and than only a minority of editors are really acting together at the meta level, you really think it's a magic model? thanks ___ I use this email for mailing list only. Charles ANDRES, Chairman Wikimedia CH – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch Le 6 févr. 2013 à 16:31, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com a écrit : HEHHEHEHE, okay, okay So... do you not believe? I find it odd organizations that promote free collaborative construction, do not to believe in their own model, do not use the model itself and talk that should be the model to be used ... blacksmith's house, wooden skewer(casa de ferreiro, espeto de pau) [1] I will not prolong, I just think that you are wasting your capacity. Peace. [1]http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casa_de_ferreiro,_espeto_de_pau On 6 February 2013 13:18, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2013 14:55, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? It may be useful in other situations, but there is no reason to assume that just because it's a good way to write an encyclopaedia that it is going to be a good way to run a chapter. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
In the WCA model the decision making power is held by the council, it means by the assembly of all chapters, there is no high power statutory position. And any chapter can be a member of the Chapter association. charles ___ I use this email for mailing list only. Charles ANDRES, Chairman Wikimedia CH – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch Le 6 févr. 2013 à 16:18, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com a écrit : Administrators are just volunteers with tools that do what the community demands, has no decision-making powers, is not a statutory position. Furthermore, anyone can volunteer in Wikis, but is not anyone who may be a member of WCA... And there are a lot of other differences that I'll let you think. On 6 February 2013 13:12, Charles Andrès charles.andres.w...@gmail.comwrote: I do not see big difference between what you call wiki model and an association like the chapters association. Every individual has the same right, for specific purpose both model need to elect a guy that took the responsibility. ___ I use this email for mailing list only. Charles ANDRES, Chairman Wikimedia CH – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch Le 6 févr. 2013 à 15:55, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com a écrit : So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? On 6 February 2013 12:51, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2013 14:44, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: I said this in Berlin, and I will repeat here: Why the chapters do not apply the Wiki model in the offline world? Because different problems require different solutions. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
I have not talked to use, said it's weird, and that's all. Alias, we never spoke for you to use, but you always forced us to use a different model, not ours, so that today we could not enter the club. And even now that we adapt our model to model your model, you have not approved us. And this is one of the points, if we're not as think as you do, we can not be part of the WCA, and not just any volunteer who can opine, are two per chapter representing an entire community, and sometimes the chapter does not represent the Movement Wikimedia of the country in its entirety, with a gap between the publishing community and the offline community, the first one, in this model, would never be represented. On 6 February 2013 13:52, Charles Andrès charles.andres.w...@gmail.comwrote: In the WCA model the decision making power is held by the council, it means by the assembly of all chapters, there is no high power statutory position. And any chapter can be a member of the Chapter association. charles ___ I use this email for mailing list only. Charles ANDRES, Chairman Wikimedia CH – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch Le 6 févr. 2013 à 16:18, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com a écrit : Administrators are just volunteers with tools that do what the community demands, has no decision-making powers, is not a statutory position. Furthermore, anyone can volunteer in Wikis, but is not anyone who may be a member of WCA... And there are a lot of other differences that I'll let you think. On 6 February 2013 13:12, Charles Andrès charles.andres.w...@gmail.com wrote: I do not see big difference between what you call wiki model and an association like the chapters association. Every individual has the same right, for specific purpose both model need to elect a guy that took the responsibility. ___ I use this email for mailing list only. Charles ANDRES, Chairman Wikimedia CH – Association for the advancement of free knowledge – www.wikimedia.ch Skype: charles.andres.wmch IRC://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-ch Le 6 févr. 2013 à 15:55, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com a écrit : So ... you not believes in the model Wiki, and also not believes that he can be used in other locations, unless in building a encyclopedia? On 6 February 2013 12:51, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2013 14:44, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: I said this in Berlin, and I will repeat here: Why the chapters do not apply the Wiki model in the offline world? Because different problems require different solutions. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 97 97 18 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 21:33, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: *They represent the chapters. * That terrifies me... You are terrified by people appointed by the chapters as their representatives representing the chapters? I'm afraid you really aren't making any sense... ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 22:17, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: I think the concern regarding the WCA primarily arises from the proposed paying of people who will be leading it. If these people are equivalent to the editors of content on Wikipedia (ie volunteers) and work from a virtual office than most concerns will disappear. So are the leaders of the WCA paid or not? While the office be virtual or not? The WCA is lead by the council, who are all volunteers. They will be supported by staff, but the council are in charge. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On 6 February 2013 23:31, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: The WCA is lead by the council, who are all volunteers. They will be supported by staff, but the council are in charge. I would love to have my Wikipedia work supported by staff too. It is... who do you think keeps the servers you use running? Who is paying for said staff? How much are they projected to cost? In fact I would simply like some of the travel costs and accommodations for those involved in my Wikipedia projects covered. I am happy to cover my own costs. There are plenty of grants programmes operated by the WMF and chapters that will fund travel and accommodation for Wikimedians. Go ahead and apply... As for who will pay for the WCA staff, that is very much up in the air at the moment... it was thought they might be funded through the FDC, but that seems unlikely now. So I guess the funds will come from the chapters in some way or another. We have a second draft budget here http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Draft_budget_2012-2013 at more than $300,000 That is also not an approved budget and, from what I can tell, is just the idea of one person and is not intended to be representative of the views of the council. It's been sitting there for 6 months without having been approved, so I think you can interpret that as implicitly rejected. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Hi James, I added REJECTED several times to that page yesterday, just to make the situation clear. Based on your email, I have now made that word big and red so there can be no mistake by anyone when they land on the page. Doing an analysis and lambasting the Chapters Association for a concept document that the majority of the Council Members quickly rejected, is a bit of a waste of your time. Certainly I have absolutely no interest in defending this document, as I was personally unconvinced by it (though grateful for the volunteers that worked on it in good faith), and spent hardly any time reviewing it when it was presented. Thanks, Fae -- Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae...@gmail.com Chapters Association Council Chair http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
The one I am referring to is labeled Second draft. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Am 07.02.2013 00:50, schrieb Thomas Dalton: The first draft was rejected - James is talking about Theo's draft. Was that also explicitly rejected? Let's put it that way: it was not considered for approval by the WCA Council. That says nothing about the quality of Theo's draft, though. We decided to focus on the place of incorporation first. While I personally did not think that's the top priority, it was considered to be by a lot of Council members. The order of issues to decide on was: place of incorporation, SG, budget. We had indication that the income side was secured enough to employ an SG and develop a budget together with her/him within the first half year. Best, Markus -- Markus Glaser WCA Council Member (WMDE) Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Hey Nathan On Thu, Feb 7, 2013, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: I'm more inclined to criticize the budget and spending priorities of the WMF, to tell the truth. The various budgets for the WCA primarily went wrong in assuming that the WMF itself would provide the cash, a truly odd plan given the role the WCA's boosters saw for it. My own opinion is that it was that intermediary, adversary role (which one person recently compared to a union opposing corporate interests) that doomed the WCA. But there is a good point to make about the envisioned support role. It's difficult to understand how a single lawyer, or a single firm, was intended to provide legal support of any utility to chapters in 40 countries. And pitching the WCA's level of professionalism at a degree to where it could help out the largest chapters seems like an odd strategy, when it's the smallest and newest that would need the kind of help the WCA could provide. Your evaluation might be correct about the time. But initially even the spending was expected to come from the chapter budget, then some changes happened, others got involved, FDC was also created and direct support became the only revenue source. I believe Sebmol and I might have discussed it to be an x%(nominal close to 2 or 4%) of a chapter revenue on our singular IRC talk. I'm sure that in the last year a sizable chunk of the budget has been burnt through, that could/should have gone to actually creating this organization. As you may read a single law firm was only supposed to be the initial amount. Based on my proximity with chapter affairs at the time, my judgement was that most issues, would not require a lot of billable hours. And I only saw 4 or 5 chapters have any of those minor issues in a given year. That amount was never supposed to cover 40 organizations in the first year, but at least have someone on the ground to support. Any professional organization would be expected to have insurance, legal compliance, external support and lastly bankruptcy protection laws at its disposal. It was for the smaller organizations that might need someone to occasionally inform them about their rights or just correspond with WMF's legal dept. for them. If you would take a look at the draft again, there was someone else helping out with translation services on staff, combined with our local contacts - I thought it could offer a first line of defense or a safety-net in case WMF chose not to get involved and risk its own exposure. Then there was someone envisioned for accounting who would follow up on chapter reports and spending, and make sure there is full compliance. This alone might justify the required cost-saving WMF would have, for the back-office support it does for chapters and the compliance requirements by law. This was a big concern at the time when I met Stu and talked with some of the board members. There were a lot of great ideas floating around. Asia, more specifically India has had a lot of issues, but the highest concentration of chapters is in europe but there is no one with local expertise available - little co-ordination. One of the ideas at the time (might have been from John Vandenberg) was to support chapters by region, the requirements for Asian chapters would never mix with those of europeans (not to mention everyone just loved the Iberocoop chapters, and it was a good model to follow). Considering WMF has tried and prob. spent 10 times the proposed WCA budget in India alone, and MENA region might be nearing half or more - a future strategy might have been to focus on regional growth, rather than direct involvement or more offices. As a lot of other people have said, there is clearly a role out there for a support organization that helps chapters develop. But I don't think the WCA, as it has been modeled, is the right organization for that role. I don't know if it is the people who were involved at various points, or the environment in the movement at the time a formal body was proposed, but the attitude and approach for the WCA has been wrong for a long time and the WMF is right to not support the current incarnation. Agreed. That is a fair assessment. I'm just explaining what it was originally supposed to be, it is far from that now. Regards Theo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: The more people are paid, the more editors we lose (or the fewer we attract), in part because they wonder why they're writing for free for an organization that pays people to do other things. I don' think anyone has been paid by WMF to edit..yet? There might be a correlation in there somewhere, but it might also be a small factor when you consider some of the research WMF repeatedly generates. There is also the divide between reader and editors, things like conversion ratio, plus the older community came up at a different time. I think the argument these days is, WMF pays so editors don't have to do those other things- either way, not my argument to make. This was just about being a responsible parent organization and looking after those that carry its name, rather than about individual editors. So I agree with Doc James that it would be great if the focus on payment could be reversed a little. Or else spread some money around the editing community in ways that won't cause COI problems. Completely agreed. This just isn't the way, I'm always surprised how the most active part of our community is completely insulated from the majority of governance issues and most of the direct spending. I think there was an idea to start micro-grants and support some tool developments directly by community members (faster, smarter bots!), maybe more grants and scholarships related to editing work rather than reflecting a diverse or an international base, but I digress. But as things stand, we ought to assume that the growth of the paid bureaucracy and the shrinking of the volunteer editor community might be connected. I hope not. Just for the record, I have no idea what WCA is now in its current incarnation. It is definitely too bureaucratic for me. Regards Theo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
Hello Kate, Originally I wrote an inline comment about nearly every phrase of this WMF board statement concerning the WCA. But then, the statement was published before I could send the comment to you. Here a summary of my original text as reply. In general, the WMF board statement raises more questions than it answers; it is uncomprehensible to me why such a bold and judgemental statement was found necessary, at this moment, and for what reason. During the entire year 2012, we heard from the WMF (board and staff) many positive signals about the establishment of a Wikimedia Chapters Association. So I find it very strange to read that in the 'early stages' the WMF board was optimistic but now suddenly fails to 'envision' a positive development. When I asked WMF vice director Erik Moeller on March 12th, 2012 about the name Wikimedia Chapters Association, he was perfectly okay with it. He even copied for me this sentence from a chapters agreement: The Chapter is obliged to utilize the Wikimedia logo and name in all their related activities and is hereby authorized to do so by the Foundation. All in a sudden, in late December 2012, a message from the WMF Legal Counsel Geoff Brigham admonished that the WCA has to follow the usual steps for recognition as a Wikimedia affiliate. - How came that during roughly nine months the WMF did not think about this? We were given the impression that this was rather a formality. WCA Council Members did have many, many conversations with the WMF (board and staff), and chapter people. How can anyone say that there has not been enough 'consulting'? Concerning movement resources - the WCA hasn't spend much money so far, and intends just to have one employee in the nearby future. Considering that the WMF has more than 140 employees, the WMF board statement's remark about movement resources for the WCA looks very disproportional. Our plan, encouraged by the FDC, that in future the WCA would request WMF grants or FDC funds, and at that point the WCA request would have been considered the same way as any other request. It is true that the developments in the WCA are some months slower than everybody expected in July 2012 in Washington. But in comparison to the early years of the WMF itself, or of many chapters, or of many other organizations, the developments are not particularly slow. Just recently we sent out the Secretary General job offer (which can not have been a surprise to the WMF) and have the final discussions about the incorporation. Please keep in mind that democratic processes take longer than deliberating within a small group. It was the will of more than 20 chapters representing several thousand Wikimedians to establish a Wikimedia Chapters Association, which of course still exists, even if the WMF withdraws the name Wikimedia. Especially in the recent development, with a number of new movement entities, this is a strange, surprising and more than premature decision. It would be in the interest of the whole movement to come to a trustful and cooperative relationship between the WMF and the chapters. The last months we have seen so many positive signals, such as the FDC Round 1. The WMF board statement concerning the WCA insinuates that it has to protect the movement and the trademarks from harm but leaves it unclear exactly how and why the WCA is harmful. Why this attitude of distrust regarding the WCA and the chapters, with no clear justification? I, personally, have so often defended the WMF, I have assumed good faith where many others were suspicious. The WMF board statement makes now undue assumptions about an organization that is not even one year old. After such a statement, I honestly ask myself what should be my assumptions about the WMF board and its true intentions. Yours sincerely, Ziko van Dijk Deputy Chairman of the WCA Council Wikipedia editor since 2003 --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ Wikimedia Nederland Postbus 167 3500 AD Utrecht --- ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:22 PM, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: I can write a long mail to response the board statement, but past shown me – it will be waste of time. Mean less time for my work, my chapter, and my personal life. Cause when the WMF and the Board deciding on something, this is last and final decision. They discussion is just for the record. So what It worth? But I can't avoid shares my disappointment from the board (sadly again) and ours elected community and chapters trustee… I have to disagree with you. From my experience, it is possible to change Board's decision. If you are a patient, hardworking and flamboyant pain in the ass. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
