> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <pute...@mccme.ru>wrote: > >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 19:19:59 +0300, Dan Rosenthal wrote: >> >>> I too have to say that while I agree with a narrowing focus, I disagree >>> with the tabling of Fellowships. Not only have they brought a lot of great >>> talent into the foundation (as I saw when I worked there, as well as >>> after), but more than anything the WMF is an agent of disruptive >>> innovation, and I feel strongly that encouraging Fellows to explore things >>> that might not be viable for the rest of the staff (whether due to >>> resources or interest) serves that innovation, and thus the foundation >>> itself. I believe at one point there was a Fellow working on studying ways >>> to improve en.wp's internal governance. After witnessing the utter debacle >>> that is going on in the clarifications on Malleus' ban, I'm more convinced >>> than ever that such a review is critical and that the WMF should actually >>> be devoting MORE resources to this. Editor engagement comes not just >>> through things like Visual Editor (which is awesome), but also creating a >>> conducive environment for new editors from a policy standpoint. I'm afraid >>> we're going to lose that in a narrowing focus. >>> >>> Dan Rosenthal >>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list >>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >>> Unsubscribe: >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wik >>> imedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l> >>> >> >> >> Hi Dan, >> >> whereas I can agree or disagree with you on your points, I fail to see the >> connection to the Malleus's ban debate. Could you please elaborate? I am >> not sure I would like to see WMF involved there, if this is your point >> (probably not). >> >> Cheers >> Yaroslav >> >> >> >> on 10/21/12 5:29 PM, Dan Rosenthal at swatjes...@gmail.com wrote: > > The connection is that it is an example of the significantly more > negative/hostile environment and failure of en.wp's governance structure > that harms editor retention; this is something that could have been studied > and reported on by the Fellowship program. Basically, it's a specific > example of a broader problem that would be perfect for Fellows to look at, > were the program to continue. I was not advocating that the WMF be involved > in Malleus's specific debate. > While I agree completely with what you say, Dan, I think it would be a good idea to start the discussion with a coherent definition and/or description of the English Wikipedia's "governance structure".
And, a discussion of the work environment of the Project is very much worth it's own thread. Marc Riddell _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l