Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Chris Keating
> > Here's a fundamental source of disagreement. It gets at something I'm not > sure the strategy process is properly addressing. Does the WMF lead and > direct the Wikimedia movement? Personally, I don't think the WMF knows the answer to this, either in practice, or what they want. We are in a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
What is that "strategic direction", and where was it agreed? Paulo Peter Southwood escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019 à(s) 08:20: > " Previously a strategic direction has been agreed." > Not by that many. It is so vague that it can be interpreted to mean > whatever the WMF want it to mean and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Peter Southwood
" Previously a strategic direction has been agreed." Not by that many. It is so vague that it can be interpreted to mean whatever the WMF want it to mean and used as a justification for a wide range of policies and actions that were not obviously specifically discussed. This was mentioned at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-17 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
I went ahead and offered my time to participate in the strategy process. My offer was rejected.. I do not think I will ever do it again. I an afraid WMF is up to some surprises when they publish the 2030 Strategy which was not in any way coordinated with the communities, and then see that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-16 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Ask yourself why you do not get it as you describe them as "noisy". There is a photo of a presentation at the London Wikimania going round that describes it well. It is a long time coming and the chickens have come home to roost. Indeed they are not learning the appropriate lessons but they

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-16 Thread Nathan
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 5:03 PM Ad Huikeshoven wrote: > > > The Wikimedia Foundation took a bold step in banning Fram for a year. They > have the authority to do so. They are not obliged to give reasons. > > Here's a fundamental source of disagreement. It gets at something I'm not sure the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Health, Roles & Responsibilities

2019-06-16 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
How is banning an user for 1 year for secrete reasons a "bold step"? What's the educative value of it? How does it advance any of those strategic objectives you mention there? Paulo Ad Huikeshoven escreveu no dia domingo, 16/06/2019 à(s) 22:03: > We are in a turbulent episode on this mailing