Well, I am a former Fellow e.g. there is no chance that I'll get another Fellowship and I have no connection to the research but wholehartedly agree with thses programmes continuation.
And your theory of "give us, [insert you definiton here] more money" completely breaks down on the Global South support - they don't participate in this discussion, because they have more important thing to do such as earning a living in very harsh conditions. Regards Victoria On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Denny Vrandečić < [email protected]> wrote: > Just a comment on the discussion: > > I would find it refreshing if people were not defending funds that > apply mostly to themselves. I saw, in discussions of the essay, > arguments by researchers saying that more money should go to > researchers, by fellows and want-to-be fellows that the fellowship > program should not be cut, by chapter associated that funding for > supporting the chapters should not be cut, and by people who have been > to Wikimania that the money for supporting Wikimania should not be > cut. > > If we remove all arguments of "I am an X, and money supporting X > should not be cut" this discussion would become rather short as of > now. > > One of my favorite 20th century philosophers, a specialist on justice > and fairness, has described an interesting concept, and I would very > strongly recommend to adopt it during policy and strategic discussions > like this: > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance> > > Cheers, > Denny > > > 2012/10/26 David Goodman <[email protected]>: > > I owe a number of good people an apology. I have worked for several > > self-protecting bureaucracies myself, and it > > is possible, though not easy, , for individuals to do good work there. > > I never intended to imply that everyone there is incompetent, though > > it is certainly my opinion that some of the people assigned to some of > > the programs I have been involved in have been. I admit that my anger > > is an inappropriate reflection of my frustration at my inability to > > work with those in one particular program. > > > > On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 8:54 PM, David Goodman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> One obvious possibility for support is the chapters and the thematic > >> organizations; even if the WMF continues these fellowships as it > >> should, the other bodies in the movement should supplement them--it is > >> good to have more than one source of funds and more than one body > >> deciding on requests. But whether their work can be actually > >> implemented at those levels is another matter. > >> > >> The proposal at meta says "the Wikimedia Foundation was never able to > >> resource the fellowships to the point where they could achieve > >> significant impact: " I don't think the resource at issue is primarily > >> money, considering that in all recent years we have had not only > >> surpluses, but greater than expected surpluses. The resource which is > >> lacking is sufficient qualified people at the Foundation to work with > >> the fellows and help implement their projects. Rather than get such > >> people--which admittedly would require a change in WMF culture--the > >> WMF staff finds the easiest thing is to not even attempt to make the > >> improvements; it is too troublesome to deal with the good ideas of the > >> community, so the reaction is what one expects of self-protecting > >> incompetent bureaucracies: diminish the flow of good ideas. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Steven Zhang <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> In my opinion, the value of fellowships in my opinion is huge, and I > feel that ceasing to support projects like the Teahouse would be a real > shame. That said, I do feel there are other ways that individual editors > could get the support they need to work on critical projects. As long as > this remains in some capacity, then I think that could work too. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> > >>> Steve Zhang > >>> > >>> Sent from my iPhone > >>> > >>> On 22/10/2012, at 10:25 AM, Jacob Orlowitz <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> A letter in support of the Community Fellowship program from past, > >>>> current, and prospective Fellows, > >>>> > >>>> The WMF has expanded profoundly over the past decade, and especially > >>>> in the last few years. Recently initiatives to streamline and focus > >>>> the WMF have been undertaken; while these efforts are worthy in spirit > >>>> and necessary at some level, one useful if not vital program has been > >>>> caught in that process: The Community Fellowship program. We would > >>>> like to express our strong support of this valuable and important > >>>> program. > >>>> > >>>> The Fellowship program is first and foremost a community-based > >>>> program. It selects editors to work on projects -- those which are > >>>> novel and have yet to be tried, those that have been tried but have > >>>> not been rigorously developed or tested, and those otherwise that need > >>>> financial, technical and institutional backing to succeed. It > >>>> represents a direct line of support from the WMF to > >>>> community-organized, community-driven, and community-maintained > >>>> projects. > >>>> > >>>> We strongly believe that the Fellowship program is a great way to jump > >>>> start many projects cheaply, efficiently, and with low-risk. Most > >>>> importantly, because Fellowship projects are community-organized, > >>>> there is high potential for their broad community support. > >>>> > >>>> We recognize that the Wikimedia Foundation’s allocation of funding > >>>> must reflect the priorities of the Foundation’s annual and strategic > >>>> plans, and we understand that the future of the Fellowship program is > >>>> at risk under the justification that it does not fit within those > >>>> plans. > >>>> > >>>> The Fellowship program of course has a cost, but it is one we believe > >>>> is well justified by its impact. The following reasons explain why we > >>>> think the program is a worthwhile asset to the WMF and one that will > >>>> ultimately help it succeed in its strategic goals: > >>>> > >>>> 1) The program has a track record of producing successful projects, > >>>> with promising upcoming efforts that would be interrupted by a loss of > >>>> funding. Most recently a new-editor community called the Teahouse was > >>>> developed directly through the Fellowship program. The Teahouse, as > >>>> well as other projects have targeted goals which often match up with > >>>> those identified by the Foundation as urgent, such as new editor > >>>> engagement and editor retention. Other projects besides the Teahouse > >>>> have worked on improving our dispute resolution processes, our small > >>>> language wiki development, improving the usability of help > >>>> documentation, and facilitating cross-wiki translation efforts. > >>>> GLAM/Wikipedian-in-Residence positions were pioneered under the > >>>> Fellowship program as were studies in long term editor trends through > >>>> Wikimedia Summer of Research. (See the full list of past projects). > >>>> These projects are of great value and exist in areas that the > >>>> community had or has not made sufficient advances in on its own. > >>>> > >>>> In the works are projects to create a sense of community around the > >>>> sorely lacking female demographic, to build a game which would ease > >>>> new editors through the maze of skills needed to be effective, a > >>>> Wikipedia Library initiative which would outfit our most experienced > >>>> editors with access to high quality resources through a single sign-on > >>>> portal, and a Badges experiment to employ a proven approach to > >>>> recognizing, motivating, and rewarding the efforts of our users. > >>>> Without the Community Fellowship program, those efforts may stall or > >>>> collapse. > >>>> > >>>> 2) The Fellowship program's core strength is as a laboratory of agile, > >>>> community-driven creativity and innovation. The program has nurtured > >>>> projects that require more investment and organization than the > >>>> community alone can support, but that innovate in areas of importance > >>>> to both the community and the Foundation. The Fellowship program has > >>>> the asset of targeted flexibility and cost-effective implementation. > >>>> Fellowship projects require few if any development resources, > >>>> substantially reducing their burden on the Foundation. Through its > >>>> varied portfolio of projects the Fellowship program can address any > >>>> number of key goals, and do so in a lightweight but meaningful way. > >>>> > >>>> 3) The Fellowship program is committed to demonstrating results and > >>>> making data-driven recommendations that help meet Foundation targets. > >>>> Fellowship research projects have set and maintained a high standard > >>>> for reporting results and making actionable recommendations. The > >>>> Teahouse pilot reports and metrics reports, the dispute resolution > >>>> survey results, and the template A/B testing projects are excellent > >>>> examples of this commitment to transparency and accountability. The > >>>> Foundation has benefitted from these data: results from fellowship > >>>> projects have been featured at Wikimania. Deputy Director Eric > >>>> Moeller’s presentation on supporting Wikiprojects drew extensively on > >>>> Fellowship project findings, and E3’s template testing presentation > >>>> was based substantially on Fellowship research. Fellowship research > >>>> has been a frequent feature on the Wikimedia blog, and has generated > >>>> good press for the Foundation. > >>>> > >>>> 4) The Fellowship program been instrumental to our understanding of > >>>> the editor decline, and how to stop it. Fellowship projects have > >>>> yielded many valuable & actionable insights into the editor decline: > >>>> such as the negative impact of the gradual increase in newcomer > >>>> warnings and newcomer reverts, and the recent decline in participation > >>>> in community processes by newer groups of editors. Fellowship > >>>> research has also refuted several prominent decline theories, such as > >>>> the theory that the quality of new editors has decreased over time, or > >>>> that the workload of vandal fighters has increased. In short, > >>>> Fellowship research allows Wikimedia to prioritize promising work and > >>>> make decisions about which decline theories to address based on actual > >>>> data, rather than anecdotes, accepted wisdom, or intuition. > >>>> > >>>> 5) The Fellowship program builds good will between the WMF and the > >>>> community by spotlighting and bootstrapping community-driven > >>>> initiatives. Fellowships are devised by community members, endorsed > >>>> by community members, implemented with community involvement--and the > >>>> community reaps the benefits of those initiatives. The Foundation > >>>> gets to play the vital role of supporting projects that otherwise may > >>>> have floundered, sat idle, or been ignored completely. The community > >>>> appreciates this and recognizes the Foundation’s pivotal part in > >>>> making these projects happen. Also, not continuing the program would > >>>> mean not just removing funding from the recipients of Fellowships and > >>>> their projects, but also losing the community infrastructure and > >>>> networks that have been developed as a result. The Foundation is the > >>>> keystone to continuing this progress. > >>>> > >>>> 6) The Fellowship program gives the Wikimedia Foundation one of the > >>>> only channels to directly fund individual editors. And not just any > >>>> editors but some of the most active, engaged, driven, and enthusiastic > >>>> editors Wikipedia has. Funding those editors directly enables them to > >>>> devote a degree of focus and commitment to Wikipedia that they might > >>>> not otherwise be able to balance while meeting other constraints in > >>>> their lives. The Foundation has become a recipient of a great amount > >>>> of donations, but much of that financial support is unavailable to > >>>> individual editors. There is not yet a grant-making process which > >>>> doesn't run through Chapters. The Fellowship program is one lifeline > >>>> to those editors, and it is a good one. > >>>> > >>>> 7) The Fellowship program provides a pipeline of trusted and > >>>> knowledgeable editors to contribute to the Foundation's efforts. Many > >>>> of those editors would be ideal candidates for positions within the > >>>> Foundation, and the Fellowship program is a great way to identify, > >>>> enlist, and onboard those individuals. Maryana Pinchuck and Steven > >>>> Walling were Fellows, as were Liam Wyatt, Lennart Guldbrandsson, > >>>> Stuart Geiger, Diederik van Liere, Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, Melanie > >>>> Kill, Aaron Halfaker, Achal Prabhala, Jonathan Morgan, and James > >>>> Alexander. While being a training ground for future Foundation > >>>> staffers, advisors, or researchers is not the stated purpose of the > >>>> Fellowship program, it is nonetheless a positive side-effect. > >>>> > >>>> 8) The Fellowship program partners with and complements other WMF > >>>> initiatives. The fellowship program enhances programs such as Editor > >>>> Engagement Experiments by experimenting with community features rather > >>>> than just interface features. Creating new spaces for new editors to > >>>> find help and build community, identifying pain-points in existing > >>>> community processes by surveying editors, and organizing cross-wiki > >>>> translation efforts are excellent ways of improving the editor > >>>> experience on Wikipedia. Fellowship projects have also benefitted > >>>> existing WMF initiatives by providing necessary services: for > >>>> instance, the Teahouse has served the needs of students enrolled in > >>>> Global Education programs that do not have access to Classroom > >>>> Ambassadors. The impact of the Fellowship program scales and exceeds > >>>> the scope of the individual projects to numerous other forums and > >>>> facets of the community. > >>>> > >>>> For these reasons, we urge the Wikimedia Foundation to reevaluate the > >>>> worth of the Community Fellowship program and to continue it in its > >>>> original or a similar capacity. The Fellowship program is an > >>>> impactful, flexible laboratory of creativity which connects the > >>>> Foundation and the community's best and most passionate editors. > >>>> Having it has been a huge gain, and losing it would be a significant > >>>> loss. > >>>> > >>>> Sincerely, > >>>> > >>>> * Anya Shyrokova User:Anyashy, prospective Fellow > >>>> * Jake Orlowitz User:Ocaasi, prospective Fellow > >>>> * Jon Harald Søby User:Jon Harald Søby, former Community Fellow > >>>> * Jonathan Morgan User:Jtmorgan, former Research Fellow > >>>> * Liam Wyatt User:Wittylama, former Cultural Partnerships Fellow > >>>> * R. Stuart Geiger User:Staeiou, former Wikimedia Research Fellow > >>>> * Peter Coombe User:The wub, Community Fellow > >>>> * Steven Zhang User:Steven Zhang, Community Fellow > >>>> * Tanvir Rahman User:Tanvir Rahman, Community Fellow > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> David Goodman > >> > >> DGG at the enWP > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG > > > > > > > > -- > > David Goodman > > > > DGG at the enWP > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
