Yes and no. Considering that I've been waiting for months for answers to
questions about the WMF Annual Plan, I would say that there is much room
for improvement in communications.

On the other hand, the WMF Comms department itself seems to more or less
ok, and I personally think we'll of WMF's chief communications officer.

So, some good points, and some room to improve. I agree that the status quo
has been this way for awhile and it would be good to see across-the-board
communications SLAs.

On Oct 4, 2015 12:18 AM, "Mathias Damour" <>

> Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
>> I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community"
>> seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet there
>> doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see here.
>> A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated is
>> clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at all.
> I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty
> professional.
> It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the
> greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the projets
> themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that
> are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
> --
> Mathias Damour
> [[User:Astirmays]]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> Unsubscribe:,
> <>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Reply via email to