where would you suggeest to document the state of cooperation talks with
e.g. zurich university library? would the archive of the executive ml be
sufficient?
rupert
On Jan 22, 2012 4:52 PM, "Manuel Schneider"
wrote:
> On 01/22/2012 04:42 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> > The WM CH have to communica
Le 22 janv. 2012 à 16:52, Manuel Schneider a écrit :
> On 01/22/2012 04:42 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
>> The WM CH have to communicate with the world and with the press, with
>> the members, with WMF, with other chapters/communities, with the owners
>> of the projects.
>>
>> Two wikis are not
On 01/22/2012 04:42 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> The WM CH have to communicate with the world and with the press, with
> the members, with WMF, with other chapters/communities, with the owners
> of the projects.
>
> Two wikis are not sufficient.
It's two wikis (board + members), website, Meta Wik
On 22.01.2012 16:07, Manuel Schneider wrote:
Something else came into my mind, speaking of empirical results of
closed vs. open platforms:
The Wikimedia CH members wiki, which has been our website for a while,
actually started as a members wiki!
For around two or three years we had a Wordpress
On 22.01.2012 15:46, Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
Sorry Ilario. Are you kidding? This is simply ridiculous. Why not making
the WMCH Board wiki and ML publicly available then?
In the board wiki there are only the votes, the private data, not
official financial data and the accesses in various syst
Something else came into my mind, speaking of empirical results of
closed vs. open platforms:
The Wikimedia CH members wiki, which has been our website for a while,
actually started as a members wiki!
For around two or three years we had a Wordpress website + the members
wiki which was closed and
On 01/22/2012 03:46 PM, Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
> On 22/01/2012 15:09, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> Sorry Ilario. Are you kidding? This is simply ridiculous. Why not making
> the WMCH Board wiki and ML publicly available then?
That's the only ressort which should not be public. But the outcome of
t
On 01/22/2012 03:09 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> Except some opinions, the private data and some financial data,
> everything may be public.
Financial data should always be public, the only thing that should be
secret are salaries - and they should be secret for members as well.
This is a board-on
On 22/01/2012 15:09, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> On 22.01.2012 14:21, Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
>> Everyone engaged in WMCH (and on WMCH side) project should have access
>> to this wiki - only a few exceptions should be necessary because those
>> people are members. If not, we should ask ourself why t
On 22.01.2012 14:21, Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
Everyone engaged in WMCH (and on WMCH side) project should have access
to this wiki - only a few exceptions should be necessary because those
people are members. If not, we should ask ourself why they are not!
For people who need feedbacks about suc
On 22/01/2012 13:57, Manuel Schneider wrote:
> * I have yet never had a reason for anything within our projects to be
> confidential. Neither with WMCH, nor openZIM, nor WMAT.
Everything what is or should neither be official or public:
- members related information (tel, email, name, ...) if they
Actually this is possible, but two notes:
* I have yet never had a reason for anything within our projects to be
confidential. Neither with WMCH, nor openZIM, nor WMAT.
The only thing that always has to be confidential is human ressources,
and that's part of board and thus will be dealt with in th
On 22.01.2012 12:10, Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
On 22/01/2012 12:07, charles andrès wrote:
Good idea,
The members wiki has been kept as former website mirror to be sure have had a
backup plan during the last fundraising. And it has been useful! :-D
I think now we could move forward and reborn
On 22/01/2012 12:07, charles andrès wrote:
> Good idea,
>
> The members wiki has been kept as former website mirror to be sure have had
> a backup plan during the last fundraising. And it has been useful! :-D
>
> I think now we could move forward and reborn the members wiki as a working
> spac
Good idea,
The members wiki has been kept as former website mirror to be sure have had a
backup plan during the last fundraising. And it has been useful! :-D
I think now we could move forward and reborn the members wiki as a working
space.
Sincerely
Charles
___
No problem.
The real emergency is to keep all track of changes, mostly in the
bylaws (who can assure that the bylaws has not been changed without
approval of general Assembly) to assure the transparency?.
The history may be helpful for that.
So I agree to close more the access but I would keep a
Es ist doch immer wieder lustig, die Vereinsmitteilungen zu lesen, um zu
wissen, wie es hinter den Kulissen der Wikipedia zu und her geht...
Man könnte doch gleich auch die Wikipedia nur Mitgliedern zugänglich
machen.
Edi
Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
__
17 matches
Mail list logo
