Short answer: sounds good. Will reply more extensively by the end of
Saturday.

Pine
On Dec 10, 2014 11:31 AM, "Jason Moore" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Some feedback from Top Level Design:
>
> When ready, and with 30 days notice (for procedural purposes), CWUG should
> request the domain from TLD. TLD will transfer the domain, allowing CWUG to
> host as the group wishes. TLD can also provide hosting at no cost for one
> year. At any time after one year, TLD can request that the domain be
> transferred such that CWUG can take over both the domain and hosting. TLD
> is likely to continue hosting for a very long time, but the company should
> (understandably) have the right to no longer provide free hosting if it
> wishes (i.e., the arrangement is somehow problematic).
>
> I think this is very reasonable for both parties. It gives control of the
> domain to CWUG, allows free hosting for CWUG for a minimum of a year and
> possibly much longer, and allows CWUG to focus its efforts elsewhere. Even
> *IF* TLD decided to stop offering free hosting after a year (which I
> don't expect it will), all this would mean is that WCUG would need to
> subscribe to a hosting service with another company. Really, this is
> something that any group should expect to budget for anyway. But again, TLD
> would like to offer hosting for longer, but should have the right to back
> out if it wishes. Please don't interpret this as bait and switch or a free
> trial of sorts...
>
> I've been a part of the Wikimedia movement for 7 years and my boss has
> also been a long-time supporter of wiki communities. I assure you we are
> acting in good faith and just want to help, but I also recognize that both
> parties should be able to back out of the agreement if need be. The year
> clause seems appropriate for both parties, IMO.
>
> TLD would not place advertising on Cascadia.wiki, but it would be nice if
> the company were somehow recognized for its support, whether it be a link
> on the sidebar or another form of corporate recognition. (Again, this is
> something we should expect any contributing company to request.) For an
> example of a sidebar link, I share ICANNWiki and invite you to look at the
> bottom of the sidebar. Again, this is NOT required, or the wording can be
> changed, or whatever. Just sharing an example of what has worked elsewhere.
>
> Two more things:
> 1) TLD wants to know if CWUG is a legal entity and who the company would
> be making this agreement with specifically... in other words, who would the
> domain actually be transferred to?
> 2) Rather than drafting an extensive contract under a specific license,
> can I (on behalf of TLD) just outline the company's offer at Meta, which is
> public-facing and makes the company accountable for its actions? This to me
> seems better than spending a lot of time going back and forth drafting a
> contract. I don't think it needs to be so complicated.
>
> Thanks, and please feel free to voice your questions or concerns.
>
> Jason
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Sounds good.
>>
>> I think I would advocate for more content than only a redirect. I think
>> there should be a placeholder with contact info, and a link to meta. We can
>> keep it simple and maintainable for now, with links to discussions on Meta.
>> Perhaps we could eventually have the externally-oriented information like
>> email signups, blogs and social media info on cascadia.wiki, while having
>> relatively internal discussion on Meta? Jason, you're our social media
>> person anyway, and if you want to maintain social media and communications
>> info on cascadia.wiki, I think that might work well.
>>
>> Thanks a lot for working on this.
>>
>> Pine
>> On Dec 9, 2014 10:24 PM, "Jason Moore" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for your feedback, Lane and Peaceray.
>>>
>>> I do recognize Lane's concerns with moving outside of Meta and
>>> Wikipedia. Building a community at Cascadia.wiki and having to maintain the
>>> site will have its challenges. However, like Peacray mentioned, asking
>>> someone to visit Meta-Wiki and find the Cascadia Wikimedians page, or even
>>> asking someone to go to Wikipedia to find a theoretical project page for
>>> Cascadia Wikimedians has its own challenges.
>>>
>>> If we are to be seen as a group organizing "real life" activities and
>>> event, I think we need to have a website with the standard info we find
>>> online about other organizations: "about us", goals, bios for board members
>>> and volunteers/staff, calendar of upcoming events, grant requests and
>>> reports, contact info, etc.) Even if we organized our activities mostly
>>> using Meta-Wiki or English Wikipedia, I can still see benefits to having an
>>> external wiki... Possibly as an information/reporting repository moreso
>>> than a hub for organizing projects. Really, we would just have to see what
>>> happens organically.
>>>
>>> Having our own website will also mean we have the opportunity to brand
>>> ourselves a bit, to have a hub for social media links, signing up for an
>>> email mailing list, etc. Essentially, having an online presence and
>>> appearing more professional, like Lane mentioned.
>>>
>>> As for a redirect, I can speak with my colleagues, but I think it should
>>> not come as a surprise that a company donating a domain and hosting
>>> services might expect the domain to be used (I am speaking personally and
>>> independently of my employer). I'll try to start work on an agreement b/w
>>> TLD and WCUG, while also recognizing that this is an ongoing conversation
>>> re: both .wiki and even the use of an external website for the group.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Raymond Leonard <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everybody,
>>>>
>>>> I really like the idea of Cascadia.wiki. I agree with some of the
>>>> sentiments about having it initially be a redirect to a Wikimedia project
>>>> page even if we decide to eventually be separate from the WMF web
>>>> properties. I think that the ability to tell people to go to Cascadia.wiki
>>>> will be much simpler and so much more direct than having people go to
>>>> meta.wikimedia.org then search for Cascadia Wikimedians or Wikimedia
>>>> Cascadia. The casual user is probably unaware of meta.wikimedia.org;
>>>> Cascadia.wiki is just easy to remember.
>>>>
>>>> I trust both Another Believer's / Jason's company & the company that
>>>> hosts SeaFOSS on your (plural) recommendations. Thus, it seems to be
>>>> basically a matter of logistics. I just think that we need to hash it out
>>>> via a face-to-face whether that is in the same room or via Skype  or Google
>>>> Hangouts.
>>>>
>>>> Yours,
>>>> Peaceray
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Lane Rasberry <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I support the use of a .wiki endorsement. I would support affiliation
>>>>> with Top Level Design, Jason's company, because I feel that anyone using
>>>>> wikis in any context is a benefit to the entire Wikimedia project, and
>>>>> because I feel like the favoritism given to the registrar for this domain
>>>>> is not significantly different as compared to favoritism given to someone
>>>>> doing a .com or .org registration. Also I feel that an affiliation with
>>>>> that company is an ideal partnership, because their very existence is
>>>>> premised on the past and future success of Wikimedia projects and the
>>>>> strength of any community groups in the region.
>>>>>
>>>>> Having a website off the Wikimedia projects might look professional
>>>>> but without multiple people to manage it then I am not convinced this is a
>>>>> priority. There is no Wikimedia group which has built community around
>>>>> their off-wiki website in the English language, and I doubt there is one 
>>>>> at
>>>>> all. Off-wiki websites can be present past achieves to impress people who
>>>>> do project review, perhaps as part of a grant evaluation. Going off wiki
>>>>> typically means going off watchlists and out of touch with the Wikimedia
>>>>> community. In my opinion, staying in Wikimedia projects, perhaps with a
>>>>> .wiki redirect to a project page, is the most natural choice until there 
>>>>> is
>>>>> a volunteer labor surplus and the organization navigates past its first
>>>>> cycle of grant requesting and reporting. Setting up a website achieves no
>>>>> stated early goal that I recognize. Content on Wikipedia could always be
>>>>> migrated to another website at a later time.
>>>>>
>>>>> yours,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi, as of right now the board hasn't delegated any of its authority,
>>>>>> which is an issue that will be addressed when we have bylaws so that a
>>>>>> board vote isn't necessary for every decision. We may also pass some
>>>>>> resolutions for temporary delegation of responsibility until the bylaws 
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> finalized. For now, though, we'll need a board vote to approve obtaining
>>>>>> property. Our Meta talk page would be a good place to do this for matters
>>>>>> that aren't confidential. Jason, I suggest that you ask the relevant 
>>>>>> person
>>>>>> in your org to draft a contract that specifies that Cascadia Wikimedians
>>>>>> User Group will be donated ownership of the cascadia.wiki domain, and
>>>>>> specifies how hosting arrangements and costs will be arranged (no cost is
>>>>>> great), and the procedure for transferring hosting of the domain if we
>>>>>> decide to host elsewhere. After we get a copyof the proposal, our board 
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> review it, and discuss and vote on our Meta talk page. It would be nice 
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> the agreement is produced under a Commons-compatible license so it can be
>>>>>> reviewed by the public on Commons and potentially reused by others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pine
>>>>>> On Dec 8, 2014 5:03 PM, "Jason Moore" <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And transferring ownership of the domain may be fine with the
>>>>>>> company, too. I'm not sure if/how domain registrations differ between
>>>>>>> individuals and organizations (not my area of expertise), but again I am
>>>>>>> happy to continue liaising between CWUG and the company and answer any
>>>>>>> specific questions re: registration and hosting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've not heard any resistance to the domain cascadia.wiki for our
>>>>>>> group, so shall we continue moving forward with this plan or do we need 
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> raise the question with other board members or at meta?
>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Benj. Mako Hill <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <quote who="Jason Moore" date="Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:14:00PM
>>>>>>>> -0800">
>>>>>>>> > Cascadia.wiki is currently being reserved and could be made
>>>>>>>> available at my
>>>>>>>> > request despite being considered a "premium" name.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Got it. :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > That being said, if the group is more comfortable with tasking
>>>>>>>> > someone to accept transfer of the domain and maintain
>>>>>>>> > hosting/renewals under his/her own name, we can help with those
>>>>>>>> > arrangements, too. I am not sure what additional detail is needed,
>>>>>>>> > but if you have specific questions or concerns, I'd be happy to
>>>>>>>> > respond.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that our long term plan should to have the domain ownership
>>>>>>>> transfered to our organization. I don't mind if the technical
>>>>>>>> contact,
>>>>>>>> registration fees, and hosting is donated (in fact, that sounds
>>>>>>>> wonderful!) but I think it is wise that our organization and its
>>>>>>>> board
>>>>>>>> have ownership and ultimate over the domain that people use to find
>>>>>>>> us.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thank you so much for offering to organize this!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Mako
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Benjamin Mako Hill
>>>>>>>> http://mako.cc/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far
>>>>>>>> as society is free to use the results. --GNU Manifesto
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Lane Rasberry
>>>>> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
>>>>> 206.801.0814
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>
>>>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia

Reply via email to