Hoi,
In the metrics meeting, a presentation was given that showed that mobile
editing is really starting to happen. It is happening to the extend where
new editors are predominantly mobile editors.

When I asked my question "do we need to keep you happy" I specifically
targeted the vitriolic parts of our community. In my experience it it the
part that is conservative, not willing to listen, not open to change and
not willing to consider what is important to others.At Wikimania one of the
presenters indicated that he was willing to contribute to Wikidata. This
was not accepted because "someone in the community is really involved in
this subject and he had to have a say". This was one major person probably
walking away for ever who is hugely important in science and open data. The
user interface for selecting fonts is abysmal because the "community"
decided that what was implemented looked cluttered. Only seven percent of
the world population is dyslexic and they do NOT find Wikipedia easier to
read as a result.

Really, what is important to some people in the "community" is not
necessarily beneficial at all. The lack of conversation the ease of making
demands and not appreciating that our aim is to "share in the sum of all
knowledge" means that many retarded points of view abound.

Erik indicated that he is willing to talk and come to a workable
compromise. However, we do need change and we need it badly. When this is
not understood, I am sorry to say, those who fail to understand this are a
problem, a problem that is increasingly cancelling out their future value.
Thanks,
    Gerard


On 24 August 2014 12:49, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote:

> hi,
>
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> >
> > Now what do we aim to achieve? Keeping you happy or making sure we have a
> > public ???
> >
>
> simply put: both. We need readers just as much as we need the free labor of
> editors/volunteers.
>
> I don't think it makes any sense to have a discussion about the "wasted
> millions". First, in software development there is always some inevitable
> waste, just because of the nature of this endeavor. Second, many projects
> which start with mixed reception are getting better (and I have high hope
> that the visual editor is one of them!). Third, for an IT organization of
> this caliber and traffic, as well as the budget, there are impressive
> results in many areas (including, but not limited to, mobile website - at
> least for viewers, as editing is a different story).
>
> The real problem here, in my view, is creating an organizational framework
> that will allow to incorporate the community much more into planning, early
> development, alpha and beta testing, and finally implementation of all new
> features and tools (in a way which does not rely on IT schedules only, but
> also on feedback from the communities). It is up to WMF to create and
> provide such framework, as our community as a whole does not have any
> institutionalized representation or voice (which is part of the issue; one
> the one hand it is easy to discard whatever people from the community say,
> as they are random individuals, and on the other it must be deeply
> frustrating to never be sure what the community reaction will be). Some
> people are suggesting stewards as the good group to start with - I'm afraid
> stewards are not the best ones to go to. Stewards act mainly as highly
> trusted, experienced individuals. They do not represent their local
> communities in any way. Also, they do not necessarily have the best skills
> for the task, and they do not form a cooperating team, in general.
>
> One of the unbearable signs of bureaucracy is setting up committees, but
> here a volunteer-driven, democratic task force could actually make some
> sense, perhaps. Look at it this way - we elect admins, crats, checkusers,
> oversighters, stewards. All these roles are only technical. Perhaps at some
> point we should think of community representation as well (and not in the
> sense of leadership, but in the sense of liaisons, testers, people
> responsible for smoother communication).
>
> My experience within the FDC has shown that volunteer-driven bodies are
> quite effective at such tasks, when provided with necessary organizational
> support.
>
> best,
>
> dariusz "pundit"
>
>
>
> --
>
> __________________________
> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
> i centrum badawczego CROW
> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
> http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl
>
> członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Nauk
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to