Just also wanted to share a more moderate sound here: I think this is, even while not perfect, a practical implementation of what FDC has been asked to do. I haven't hear any alternatives that would really be /better/ and good to implement at this moment.
But maybe things could be different next year. I suggest that people who have good ideas for alternative organizations bring that up with that in mind for next year (in a few months or so, when the FDC is less swamped with work). Lodewijk 2014-04-27 23:51 GMT+02:00 Risker <risker...@gmail.com>: > On 27 April 2014 17:23, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Nemo, my position is that it shouldn't be being done at all because the > > > request is outside of the FDC's scope, and that assessment is done, > then > > > community assessment will be more useful than a quasi-official, partial > > > assessment by a conflicted group that isn't "staff", has no experience > > > using the analytical metrics, and doesn't have the wherewithal to do a > > > complete the full assessment. The FDC does not have its own staff; it > > has > > > WMF staff appointed to assist them by creating staff assessments, in > > accord > > > with the FDC structure approved by the Board. The FDC doesn't get to > > pick > > > who does the assessments. > > > > > > > Risker, I understand your view. However, we believe that there is value > in > > having a spectrum of views, and also in not putting WMF staff in a > position > > where they assess a project which includes their own department. WMDE > staff > > has a lot of experience in using different metrics, and understands our > > movement. The FDC can request any the movement stakeholders specifically > > for comments, and so it did. > > > > best, > > > > dariusz "pundit" > > > > > > > > There is a huge difference between a request to any of the movement > stakeholders specifically for comment and asking a specific stakeholder - > one that has a lot to gain if the role of the WMF itself is diminished - > to usurp the role of staff analysis. I'm really sad that you can't see > that, Dariusz. You're better off having the staff do the analysis of > everything except grantmaking - which you shouldn't be reviewing anyway as > it is a complete conflict of interest for the FDC. > > Risker/Anne > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>