Re: [Wikimediauk-l] IWF issues and Wiki UK Ltd
2008/12/15 Andrew Cates and...@soschildren.org: In my view yes. The WMF's legitimate role in representing the community is equally derived from its (semi) democratic nature. You do not derive your right to speak only from their democratic legitimacy but also from your own. You will not be able to speak on behalf of them (unless specifically mandated), but you are already able to speak on behalf of us for which you require no blessing from them (especially given the blessing is in the post). The problem with that is that no-one is going to care what Wiki UK Ltd. has to say on the issues. They would have to appear as Wikipedia volunteer just as David does, since there is nothing else relevant they could be called. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] IWF issues and Wiki UK Ltd
What about calling themselves elected community representatives of UK wikipedia editors? A On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:21 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2008/12/15 Andrew Cates and...@soschildren.org: In my view yes. The WMF's legitimate role in representing the community is equally derived from its (semi) democratic nature. You do not derive your right to speak only from their democratic legitimacy but also from your own. You will not be able to speak on behalf of them (unless specifically mandated), but you are already able to speak on behalf of us for which you require no blessing from them (especially given the blessing is in the post). The problem with that is that no-one is going to care what Wiki UK Ltd. has to say on the issues. They would have to appear as Wikipedia volunteer just as David does, since there is nothing else relevant they could be called. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] IWF issues and Wiki UK Ltd
2008/12/15 Andrew Cates and...@soschildren.org: What about calling themselves elected community representatives of UK wikipedia editors? That won't fit in the caption. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] IWF issues and Wiki UK Ltd
2008/12/14 AndrewRT ratur...@yahoo.co.uk: The general consensus among the Board was that we shouldn't really get involved as we didn't yet have chapter status. Individuals were encouraged to do what they could but the Board decided to stay stum itself and leave David and others to take the lead. Is everyone comfortable that that was the right decision? FWIW, I emphasised to everyone I spoke to (and it mostly was clear in press articles and Today show - not C4) that I was speaking as a volunteer and not officially. In cases like this that can be very important ... Presumably once Wiki UK is recognised as the chapter you would expect it to take more of a lead? It would be the organisation to speak to. e.g. While WMUK quite definitely does not control or publish the content on Wikipedia, we nevertheless find the censorship of encyclopedia text a worrying development for education and informing people in the UK would be a perfect hypothetical comment, for example. You *can* comment on freedom to educate and inform in the UK without crossing any streams, I should think. - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] IWF issues and Wiki UK Ltd
2008/12/14 AndrewRT ratur...@yahoo.co.uk: I just wanted to hear everyone's views about the role Wiki UK Ltd played in responding to the IWF issues. The general consensus among the Board was that we shouldn't really get involved as we didn't yet have chapter status. Individuals were encouraged to do what they could but the Board decided to stay stum itself and leave David and others to take the lead. Is everyone comfortable that that was the right decision? Yes, no doubt about it. Presumably once Wiki UK is recognised as the chapter you would expect it to take more of a lead? Probably. Details need to be decided on a case by case basis, but I think part of WMUK's role is to represent the UK community. That includes speaking for the community (although not the WMF, of course) in these kind of matters. I think WMUK would say the same kind of things as David did, just with a more official looking caption on the screen. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] IWF issues and Wiki UK Ltd
I would not have bothered to vote if I did not feel the board in some way represented the community of which I am part. There is an organization where I am a member for pragmatic reasons but hate every proclamation they make (the AA: I want breakdown cover, not rabid pro-polluting lobbying), but for this kind of thing I think you should feel we want you to speak and we'll let you know if we disagree. BozMo On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2008/12/14 AndrewRT ratur...@yahoo.co.uk: I just wanted to hear everyone's views about the role Wiki UK Ltd played in responding to the IWF issues. The general consensus among the Board was that we shouldn't really get involved as we didn't yet have chapter status. Individuals were encouraged to do what they could but the Board decided to stay stum itself and leave David and others to take the lead. Is everyone comfortable that that was the right decision? Yes, no doubt about it. Presumably once Wiki UK is recognised as the chapter you would expect it to take more of a lead? Probably. Details need to be decided on a case by case basis, but I think part of WMUK's role is to represent the UK community. That includes speaking for the community (although not the WMF, of course) in these kind of matters. I think WMUK would say the same kind of things as David did, just with a more official looking caption on the screen. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] IWF issues and Wiki UK Ltd
On Dec 14, 9:32 pm, Andrew Cates and...@soschildren.org wrote: ... for this kind of thing I think you should feel we want you to speak and we'll let you know if we disagree. Even before we're officially a WMF chapter? Andrew ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
