Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strategy Report Released: Wikimedia 2030: Wikimedia’s role in shaping the future of the information commons

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Nina Simon wrote a blog post [1] that I think has a lot of merit for what
we could do to gain relevance. Nina is big in the GLAM world and the museum
she works for has an approach that will have a big effect when we consider
it carefully and implement it in the best way we can.
Thanks,
  GerardM

[1]
http://museumtwo.blogspot.nl/2018/02/are-participant-demographics-most.html

On 19 February 2018 at 01:26, Pine W  wrote:

> Caitlin, thanks for sharing this.
>
> My general thoughts are below. These are not directed at Caitlin or anyone
> else in particular.
>
> I think that the document does a generally good job of outlining trends and
> asking questions. I think that I agree with about 95% of what's in the
> document. I agree especially strongly that there should be more emphasis on
> improving the user experience for those who wish to contribute content
> using mobile devices.
>
> My most significant concern is with the question that the document asks
> staff: "How will the Wikimedia Foundation assert and balance leadership of
> the Wikimedia movement with its role fostering a robust volunteer culture?"
> WMF's role is that of a public service organization, not a central
> management agency, and "assert(ing)" leadership is the opposite of what WMF
> should do. Wikimedia's culture is collective rather than monarchical. Staff
> and Board members should be trained to understand that their role is to
> serve the public interest, and not to manage or supervise the community.
>
> Leadership of individual projects, initiatives, and teams happens in many
> ways inside and outside of WMF, and leadership skills are important.
> However, I believe that leadership of the entire movement is not and should
> not be WMF's role. WMF can be the facilitator, but should not be the
> manager. In the recent past we had a vivid demonstration of what happens
> when there are governance problems in WMF.
>
> I think that good questions would be:
>
> 1. How can WMF better align its internal priorities with those of the
> community? There has been progress on this during the past few years, and I
> would like to see continued progress.
>
> 2. How can WMF evolve such that if WMF became dysfunctional or inoperable,
> the remaining organizations and people in the Wikimedia ecosystem could
> continue to thrive?
>
> I also would like to see questions about the governance and financial
> transparency of the Wikimedia Foundation, for example by asking questions
> such as "Should WMF decentralize some of its current functions?", "Should
> WMF become a membership organization?", and "Should WMF increase its
> financial transparency?"
>
> After reading the document, I'm left wondering how to make progress on some
> of the issues that the document outlines. We've known about some of these
> issues for years, and in a number of cases WMF has funded efforts to
> address them, but in multiple cases we have had limited success.
>
> Even when we have agreement about the nature of challenges and that we'd
> like to address them, we don't necessarily know how to address them
> effectively. I think that the document does a good job of asking us
> questions that we should explore, and probably will continue to explore for
> many years.
>
> We need considerably more human resources than we have now on many fronts,
> including more contributors in diverse languages, contributors with the
> skills and tools improve the visual experience of Wikimedia content, and
> contributors who can protect the sites from interference from people who
> harm the integrity of the information on Wikimedia sites. I am not sure how
> we make that happen, or that it will happen. I fear that it will only
> happen after AI takes over a considerable number of jobs that humans do
> today, so that there is a significant increase of global unemployment and
> under-employment of people who have the skills and the will to contribute
> to Wikimedia. I hope that I'm wrong.
>
> I realize that this email sounds a bit pessimistic. I think that there are
> numerous significant challenges for us. I am hoping for the best. In the
> short term we are doing okay, and we continue to numerous incremental
> successes. In the long term, I am worried.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strategy Report Released: Wikimedia 2030: Wikimedia’s role in shaping the future of the information commons

[Pine W]

Caitlin, thanks for sharing this.

My general thoughts are below. These are not directed at Caitlin or anyone
else in particular.

I think that the document does a generally good job of outlining trends and
asking questions. I think that I agree with about 95% of what's in the
document. I agree especially strongly that there should be more emphasis on
improving the user experience for those who wish to contribute content
using mobile devices.

My most significant concern is with the question that the document asks
staff: "How will the Wikimedia Foundation assert and balance leadership of
the Wikimedia movement with its role fostering a robust volunteer culture?"
WMF's role is that of a public service organization, not a central
management agency, and "assert(ing)" leadership is the opposite of what WMF
should do. Wikimedia's culture is collective rather than monarchical. Staff
and Board members should be trained to understand that their role is to
serve the public interest, and not to manage or supervise the community.

Leadership of individual projects, initiatives, and teams happens in many
ways inside and outside of WMF, and leadership skills are important.
However, I believe that leadership of the entire movement is not and should
not be WMF's role. WMF can be the facilitator, but should not be the
manager. In the recent past we had a vivid demonstration of what happens
when there are governance problems in WMF.

I think that good questions would be:

1. How can WMF better align its internal priorities with those of the
community? There has been progress on this during the past few years, and I
would like to see continued progress.

2. How can WMF evolve such that if WMF became dysfunctional or inoperable,
the remaining organizations and people in the Wikimedia ecosystem could
continue to thrive?

I also would like to see questions about the governance and financial
transparency of the Wikimedia Foundation, for example by asking questions
such as "Should WMF decentralize some of its current functions?", "Should
WMF become a membership organization?", and "Should WMF increase its
financial transparency?"

After reading the document, I'm left wondering how to make progress on some
of the issues that the document outlines. We've known about some of these
issues for years, and in a number of cases WMF has funded efforts to
address them, but in multiple cases we have had limited success.

Even when we have agreement about the nature of challenges and that we'd
like to address them, we don't necessarily know how to address them
effectively. I think that the document does a good job of asking us
questions that we should explore, and probably will continue to explore for
many years.

We need considerably more human resources than we have now on many fronts,
including more contributors in diverse languages, contributors with the
skills and tools improve the visual experience of Wikimedia content, and
contributors who can protect the sites from interference from people who
harm the integrity of the information on Wikimedia sites. I am not sure how
we make that happen, or that it will happen. I fear that it will only
happen after AI takes over a considerable number of jobs that humans do
today, so that there is a significant increase of global unemployment and
under-employment of people who have the skills and the will to contribute
to Wikimedia. I hope that I'm wrong.

I realize that this email sounds a bit pessimistic. I think that there are
numerous significant challenges for us. I am hoping for the best. In the
short term we are doing okay, and we continue to numerous incremental
successes. In the long term, I am worried.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strategy Report Released: Wikimedia 2030: Wikimedia’s role in shaping the future of the information commons

[Leinonen Teemu]

On 15 Feb 2018, at 19.36, Adam Wight 
> wrote:
Punk rock!  These consultants seem to actually understand what we’re about, and 
the report is a great collaboration all around.  The heavy use of actual 
Wikimedians’ quotes lets us tell our own story.  The recommendations on page 31 
look right to me personally, and are “actionable”.

The recommendations are very good. Lately, however,

I have been thinking that maybe we in the Wikimedia movement should take even 
greater role in the attempt to protect free access to knowledge? I am not sure 
if this is clear in our current 2030 strategy.

For instance, we could invest in and increase the visibility of some other 
successful Wikimedia projects, than the Wikipedia (and Wikidata).

Wiktionary is one of these. It is not very well known although widely used, 
especially as a source for other services. This is simply because we do not 
have a easy to use UI to the service. Webxicon.org [1] is 
and example of a third party service using the Wiktionary data. No doubt, it is 
more user friendly than our own Wiktionary [2]. Designing new UI and promoting 
Wiktionary would also emphasise our global nature and respect of different 
cultures and languages.

Another field were we could play a bigger role is the Open Educational 
Resources (OER). Wikipedia is the world largest OER repository but there is 
also a need for free and open digital school materials (previously known as 
textbooks) in all the languages of the world. We have Wikibooks and Wikiversity 
to develop these, but again, because of their poor usability they have not 
become THE places to create learning materials in large scale. Services to 
create and share free and open educational materials, that are replacing 
textbooks, could be one area to improved our products.

I am afraid that in the future there is more work to do in the field of free 
and open knowledge, than what we are able to imagine today. Therefore, I think 
we should rather expand than to focus on a single encyclopaedia — in practice 
to have more (great) products.

- Teemu

[1] http://webxicon.org
[2] https://en.wiktionary.org/
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strategy Report Released: Wikimedia 2030: Wikimedia’s role in shaping the future of the information commons

[Adam Wight]

Punk rock!  These consultants seem to actually understand what we’re about, and 
the report is a great collaboration all around.  The heavy use of actual 
Wikimedians’ quotes lets us tell our own story.  The recommendations on page 31 
look right to me personally, and are “actionable”.

Thanks for sharing <3

-Adam
[[mw:User:Adamw]]

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 8:20 PM, Caitlin Virtue  wrote:
> 
> (Apologies for the formatting issues in the previous email.)
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> On Thursday, we released an extensive research report [1] about Wikimedia’s
> role in shaping the future of the information commons. The report was
> created as part of the Wikimedia 2030 strategy process, as the Foundation
> engaged research teams to examine awareness and usage of Wikimedia projects
> and evolving information consumption habits. The consulting teams conducted
> desk research and spoke both with people familiar with and involved in the
> Wikimedia movement and expert observers who could inform the strategy
> process but who are not directly involved today. In one-on-one interviews,
> experts in geographic areas where the projects are most heavily used were
> asked to think about future trends in their fields and how the trends might
> apply to the Wikimedia movement’s strategy. This particular research
> focused on six broad topics that seemed most likely to further or frustrate
> the vision for growth that the Foundation embraces.
> 
> In this report, the Foundation’s staff and its consulting teams present
> top-level insights from this global process. Perspectives from interviewees
> around the world are also provided with context about their region and area
> of expertise. The report draws from six comprehensive research briefs,[2]
> published on Wikimedia’s strategy website, which address these topics:
> 
> - Demographics: Who is in the world in 2030? The report outlines global
> population trends, which project the highest population growth in places
> where Wikimedia has significant room to expand.
> 
> - Emerging platforms: How will people around the world be using
> communications technologies to find, create, and share information? The
> report considers future technologies, from the imminent to the speculative,
> and examines what range of new hardware, software, and content production
> capabilities might mean for content creation and user access.
> 
> - Misinformation: How will people find trustworthy sources of knowledge
> and information? The report explores how content creators and technologists
> can ensure that knowledge is trustworthy and also identifies threats to
> these efforts.
> 
> - Literacy: How will the world learn in the future? The report forecasts
> that technology will transform learning and educational settings as well as
> expand the requirements for literacy beyond text and images.
> 
> - Open knowledge: How will we share culture, ideas, and information? The
> report documents the global trend toward opening collections and archives
> to the public and making them freely available online, and explores ways
> the Wikimedia movement might partner with people and organizations to
> accelerate this sharing.
> 
> - Expect the unexpected: How can we know what the world will look like in
> 2030 — and what the Wikimedia movement’s role will be in it?
> 
> The report proposes that a study of trends can never be truly predictive
> and introduces alternative visionary tools such as scenario planning and
> speculative social science fiction.
> 
> The consulting team published an additional research brief on the future of
> the digital commons,[3] examining the political and commercial forces that
> could lead to the contraction or expansion of the open web. Looking at the
> constellation of issues most important to the Wikimedia community, this
> brief identifies access, censorship, privacy, copyright, and intermediary
> liability as active battlefronts.
> 
> The fate of the digital commons is the single subject that rises above and
> intersects with each of the other areas of research. The commons of the
> future will shape the environment that ultimately fosters or blocks all of
> the Wikimedia projects’ work. Thus, this report weaves research findings
> about the future of the commons throughout.
> 
> Specifically, the report highlights growing concerns across civil society
> about the quality of and access to open knowledge online, as well as
> compounding threats to the Wikimedia movement and its open knowledge
> allies. Between now and 2030, open knowledge advocates face headwinds that
> include censorship by governments and corporations, internet shutdowns,
> surveillance of users, information monopolies, and troubling developments
> such as the arrests of scholars and journalists operating in closed
> societies.
> 
> The Wikimedia movement is positioned to work toward potential solutions to
> these threats. Despite the trend toward a “darkening globe,” some leaders
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strategy Report Released: Wikimedia 2030: Wikimedia’s role in shaping the future of the information commons

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi Caitlin,

Thank you for this email, and thank to everybody implicated for the 
creation of this report.


Could we put a version on meta and make it translatable? Or am I alone 
to think it would make sense?


Cheers

Le 13/02/2018 à 02:20, Caitlin Virtue a écrit :

(Apologies for the formatting issues in the previous email.)

Hi Everyone,

On Thursday, we released an extensive research report [1] about Wikimedia’s
role in shaping the future of the information commons. The report was
created as part of the Wikimedia 2030 strategy process, as the Foundation
engaged research teams to examine awareness and usage of Wikimedia projects
and evolving information consumption habits. The consulting teams conducted
desk research and spoke both with people familiar with and involved in the
Wikimedia movement and expert observers who could inform the strategy
process but who are not directly involved today. In one-on-one interviews,
experts in geographic areas where the projects are most heavily used were
asked to think about future trends in their fields and how the trends might
apply to the Wikimedia movement’s strategy. This particular research
focused on six broad topics that seemed most likely to further or frustrate
the vision for growth that the Foundation embraces.

In this report, the Foundation’s staff and its consulting teams present
top-level insights from this global process. Perspectives from interviewees
around the world are also provided with context about their region and area
of expertise. The report draws from six comprehensive research briefs,[2]
published on Wikimedia’s strategy website, which address these topics:

  - Demographics: Who is in the world in 2030? The report outlines global
population trends, which project the highest population growth in places
where Wikimedia has significant room to expand.

  - Emerging platforms: How will people around the world be using
communications technologies to find, create, and share information? The
report considers future technologies, from the imminent to the speculative,
and examines what range of new hardware, software, and content production
capabilities might mean for content creation and user access.

  - Misinformation: How will people find trustworthy sources of knowledge
and information? The report explores how content creators and technologists
can ensure that knowledge is trustworthy and also identifies threats to
these efforts.

  - Literacy: How will the world learn in the future? The report forecasts
that technology will transform learning and educational settings as well as
expand the requirements for literacy beyond text and images.

  - Open knowledge: How will we share culture, ideas, and information? The
report documents the global trend toward opening collections and archives
to the public and making them freely available online, and explores ways
the Wikimedia movement might partner with people and organizations to
accelerate this sharing.

  - Expect the unexpected: How can we know what the world will look like in
2030 — and what the Wikimedia movement’s role will be in it?

The report proposes that a study of trends can never be truly predictive
and introduces alternative visionary tools such as scenario planning and
speculative social science fiction.

The consulting team published an additional research brief on the future of
the digital commons,[3] examining the political and commercial forces that
could lead to the contraction or expansion of the open web. Looking at the
constellation of issues most important to the Wikimedia community, this
brief identifies access, censorship, privacy, copyright, and intermediary
liability as active battlefronts.

The fate of the digital commons is the single subject that rises above and
intersects with each of the other areas of research. The commons of the
future will shape the environment that ultimately fosters or blocks all of
the Wikimedia projects’ work. Thus, this report weaves research findings
about the future of the commons throughout.

Specifically, the report highlights growing concerns across civil society
about the quality of and access to open knowledge online, as well as
compounding threats to the Wikimedia movement and its open knowledge
allies. Between now and 2030, open knowledge advocates face headwinds that
include censorship by governments and corporations, internet shutdowns,
surveillance of users, information monopolies, and troubling developments
such as the arrests of scholars and journalists operating in closed
societies.

The Wikimedia movement is positioned to work toward potential solutions to
these threats. Despite the trend toward a “darkening globe,” some leaders
see the Wikimedia movement as among the brightest hopes and most inspiring
exemplars of the global digital commons.

The Wikimedia movement has immediate internal challenges to address,
including adapting to an increasingly mobile internet, recruiting a new
generation of volunteers, and