Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

Keegan and Oliver (again), I've communicated a bit with Keegan off list, and I appreciate the feedback from both of you. I intended to say something conciliatory, I didn't put much thought into how I put it, and I achieved the opposite effect. I'm sorry. I should have known better. For whatever

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

+1 to Keegan. I am glad you have spoken to staffers, Pete. I promise I can identify at least 300 other people that fall into that category too. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Pete Forsyth

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

> On Feb 26, 2016, at 6:17 PM, Risker wrote: > > No, I think we've actually done a very superficial identification of the > problems. Some of them are so obvious that they are overwhelming the less > obvious but equally serious issues. > > Honestly, "we need a new

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: > Still, my list is very much influenced by what I > have heard from staff, board, etc. over many months -- so it's not like > your seat is getting cold without you. :) > My seat without me in it would be the very

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

Or perhaps a key problem is the recruitment process to the Board . Fort the community elected seats, wanted criteria were identified by the Board and clearly communicated (non-western, non English speakers) but was in practice ignores by the voters and where 3 out of the five getting most

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Risker wrote: > > Honestly, "we need a new board" is probably not an issue. Risker, perhaps you missed this in my original message -- I did not express that we need a new board. Item #3 on my list was entirely under the heading: "The Board

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

No, I think we've actually done a very superficial identification of the problems. Some of them are so obvious that they are overwhelming the less obvious but equally serious issues. Honestly, "we need a new board" is probably not an issue. 40% of the board has been seated for less than a year,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

Risker and Brion: I very much agree with the principles you're stating, and am coming to realize I should have framed my message differently. There has actually been quite a lot of discussion of what the problems are, and I am basing my suggestions on the ones that I've personally seen a lot of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

Strong +1 to Risker. Collecting ideas to work more on as we move forward: YES. Keeping the constructive attitude and opened comm channels I've seen here and and among staff internally: YES. But let's be deliberate, and considerate. We do have to learn and process before we implement anything.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

I think in fairness that it is not just staff who are feeling this is all moving too fast. The overwhelming majority of community members, and in particular community members who don't read and speak English fluently, are likely to be pretty overwhelmed right now too. I am concerned that what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Pete Forsyth wrote: > > However, I'm not trying to push things forward at a pace that's comfortable > *for me*, I'm trying to focus on things that will impact *what it's > possible to do*. > Oh absolutely, forge ahead. My message was in no

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

To Oliver and Keegan -- I hear you guys loud and clear, and I am very aware that the trauma of the last few months has taken this kind of toll. Although there is of course much I don't know, I have been talking with a number of staff, board, etc. for many months now about this. So to whatever

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

+1. It's difficult without breaking fifteen NDAs to underscore exactly how shellshocked and traumatised staff are right now, dealing with all of this for 8 hours a day for 3-18 months, depending on the nature of their concerns. As the people most impacted by negative or positive changes to the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

(slightly indirect to the topic, but not worth its own thread) Hey Pete, Thanks for your time and reflection, and that extend to everyone else, with this and related topics over the past month. Wikimedia-l has actually been a refreshing kind of place, where cautious respect and rational

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

Thank you Yaroslav for this very important addition. Yes, let's call it #6 (even if it should be higher :) In terms of specific next steps, Anthony Cole offered a very compelling point about transparency on Meta Wiki:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What should happen next? My 5 ideas

On 2016-02-26 21:20, Pete Forsyth wrote: All: Now that Wikimedia's Executive Director is leaving, a central point of contention has been resolved. But as many have said, the "real work" of getting back on track comes next. I have been thinking about what the next specific steps should be, and