I like the idea of a strategic plan for the movement and one for the Foundation. I think that is a good idea. /a
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Pete Forsyth <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you for the reflections, Yaroslav, Specific replies inline below. > > Pine, thank you for the invitation; actually, this video was done in > preparation for my panel session at the Wikipedia 15 celebration, which > will also be live-streamed later in the day. Eugene will be one of my > panelists, and we will certainly dig into these issues! Please bring your > own reflections and questions (and feel free to send them ahead of time so > I can try to incorporate them into the main panel discussion). > > To Yaroslav's points: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On 2016-01-12 04:21, Pete Forsyth wrote: > > > >> And beyond this video -- what do those who participated in the last > round > >> (or those who have observed it) think the important lessons are? How > >> should > >> we be moving foward? > >> > > > > I did not watch the video, but I did participate in the community process > > and still have an iron barnstar sent by Philippe - my children are still > > impressed. > > > > Very cool -- I hope the barnstar becomes a treasured family heirloom :) It > sounds like it was well deserved. And I hope you do watch the video -- > based on your comments below I believe you will find Eugene's design goals > and reflections very interesting. > > 1) It was good that the process was structured from the very beginning: > > there was a pre-process which helped to shape the task forces. > > > > Agreed > > 2) There was little to not at all coordination between different task > > forces. Not sure it was necessary, since it was pure brainstorming, but > > still wanted to mention. > > > > It seems to me (and Eugene or Philippe might correct me here) that the > expectation was that "coordination" would happen somewhat organically, > since it was hosted on a wiki. I did browse a number of the task forces at > the time, and commented on a few, and some others were doing so as well. > Perhaps there could/should have been a more focused effort to get > cross-pollination, though? > > 3) It was not clear (at least not to me) what would happen beyond the task > > force round. I tried to ask around but never got a satisfactory answer. > May > > be I just asked wrong people. > > > > Again from my own, somewhat limited perspective: I believe the intention > was for volunteers to play a stronger and more central role in the > synthesis of the Task Force outcomes into a final Strategic Plan. Since > this was the first time this was attempted, it's not surprising to me that > this wasn't fully realized. I think a second iteration of this could be > much more successful, as it could be informed by what worked well and what > didn't the last time. > > 4) There was a bit too much noise (compared to signal), and organization in > > the task forces was a bit chaotic - for example, in the task force I was > > mainly active at somebody was (or claimed she was) appointed the task > force > > coordinator, but she disappeared after a week and never came back, so > that > > I took on the coordination myself and delivered some summary to the > second > > round - but nobody ever talked to me about this. > > > > Ah, noise vs. signal -- always an issue in a community that values openness > and inclusion! But again, perhaps there are ways to improve on the process > so that it's easier to navigate toward the "signal." > > 5) It is good that Liquid Threads died. They should not be ever used again > > for such process. > > > > I'll leave my opinion on LT (and Flow) aside for the moment, but I do agree > that using a discussion technology that was unfamiliar to a core set of > constituents led to some confusion, and may have discouraged participation. > (However, it's also possible that it encouraged some participation by those > who were NOT familiar with wiki page discussion, and may have found > threaded discussion a little easier to deal with.) > > 6) Despite some deficiencies I listed above it was definitely fun to work > > on the strategic plan, and also I had an impression we are really shaping > > things up, not merely rubber-stumping some pre-determined ideas. And that > > was indeed a community-driven process, and I mean the whole community, > not > > just the English Wikipedia. > > > I agree strongly with this, and am especially glad to hear that it was fun! > > Speaking for my own perspective, I started working for WMF during the > process, and because of that I did not participate deeply -- I was in a > transitional state between "volunteer" and "staff" and lacked a clear > perspective in that time on how to appropriately use my voice. But I > observed the process very closely, and talked a lot with Eugene and others > about it. I do think it was a valuable exercise in helping both the WMF and > community members see across languages, country borders, and project > borders, and in learning to listen better to one another and develop a > fuller understanding of the big picture. I believe the resulting plan was > strongly reflective of common sentiments within our community; and even if > imperfect, it's the first (and maybe only) time a document has really > attempted to do that, and I think it did an admirable job. > > I remain hopeful that some day we will see a "Strategic Planning 2.0" > effort that draws heavily on these lessons. I am increasingly of the > opinion that volunteers should lead the effort to make that happen; and it > might make sense to fully separate two ideas: > * A strategic plan for the movement > * A strategic plan for the Wikimedia Foundation > > -Pete > [[User:Peteforsyth]] > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > -- Anna Stillwell Major Gifts Officer Wikimedia Foundation 415.806.1536 *www.wikimediafoundation.org <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
