FYI making main stream media

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-15/wikimedia-foundation-aims-to-take-on-google-in-search/7168840

On 14 February 2016 at 00:49, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Anne, we're talking about almost the same thing, but not exactly. I say
> "advised" you say "consulted". "Consulted" implies soliciting or expecting
> some kind of response or engagement - probably
> approval/disapproval/critique/input. "Advised" means they got the memo. I
> think "advised" is enough, and if the board wants more engagement, they can
> initiate it - presuming the notification is clear and comprehensive, of
> course.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, I'm not sure about that, Anthony.  By "consulted", I would mean
> > something to the effect of "We're looking at applying to XX for a grant
> of
> > $YYY to do ZZZ" and asking the Board if they would be likely to agree to
> > accept such a grant if the application is successful.  The grant
> > application, evaluation and approval process is costly in both time and
> > resources, and for both the applicant and the grantmaker.  Being informed
> > that a grant has been approved sounds more like a fait accompli situation
> > for the Board - they look petty and ungrateful if they say no, even if
> they
> > don't think it was a reasonable grant application.  In this case, we're
> > only dealing with $250,000.  What if this was $1 million?  $10 million?
> >
> > I think it is healthier for everyone if the Board is properly consulted
> > before the application is submitted.  (And again, I note that we don't
> know
> > how much was actually requested in this case, only what was granted.)
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> >
> > On 12 February 2016 at 21:23, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Anne, regarding:
> > >
> > > "Since the Board must approve acceptance of any donations over $100,000
> > > USD, it seems to be obvious that they should be consulted and possibly
> > > should actively approve any grant applications where the dollar value
> > > sought is higher than that amount."
> > >
> > > I'm not sure that the board should be *consulted* ahead of such
> > > applications' or should prior-approve all such applications. That
> seems a
> > > bit like micromanagement. But it makes sense to me for the board to be
> > > *advised
> > > *of such applications and when they're being actively contemplated or
> > > prepared.
> > >
> > > Anthony Cole
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm sorry to hear that you feel this way, Gerard. I personally would
> > like
> > > > to feel more assured that the WMF is looking into the longer future
> and
> > > > actively plannning for the day that donations no longer support a
> large
> > > > staff doing lots of things.
> > > >
> > > > I am concerned today that the team specifically tasked to work
> closely
> > > with
> > > > so many elements of the community has lost 7% of its staff, and 30%
> of
> > > its
> > > > leaders, in a single week. This should be a concern in any
> > organization.
> > > >
> > > > With respect to the Knight grant - I know that many times grant
> > > > applications are made for considerably more than is given, and I am
> > > > interested to know how much the WMF requested in the first place.  I
> > > would
> > > > also like to know whether or not the Board was formally advised of
> the
> > > > request before it was submitted.  Since the Board must approve
> > acceptance
> > > > of any donations over $100,000 USD, it seems to be obvious that they
> > > should
> > > > be consulted and possibly should actively approve any grant
> > applications
> > > > where the dollar value sought is higher than that amount.  I don't
> > > believe
> > > > the current policies require advance approval or even advance
> > > notification,
> > > > though.
> > > >
> > > > Risker/Anne
> > > >
> > > > On 12 February 2016 at 03:54, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > I am not complaining. I point out that all this huha does not get
> us
> > > > > anywhere. I am not afraid to give an opinion and I am not afraid to
> > be
> > > a
> > > > > contrarian when I think it makes sense. Yes, things happened that
> > were
> > > > not
> > > > > beautiful. They are not what upset me. What upsets me is that
> people
> > > like
> > > > > Siko and Anna are leaving. Because they are part of "my" Wikimedia
> > > > > Foundation. What upsets me is that I routinely use Magnus's tool
> and
> > > > > process hundreds of thousands of records and am to understand that
> > > > official
> > > > > query is stunted and does not allow for this "because it was not in
> > the
> > > > > design" and it is then pointed out that it takes money to solve
> > this...
> > > > >
> > > > > My point is that baying for blood is not what helps us forward.
> What
> > I
> > > do
> > > > > know is that when sheer negativity is not coupled with an ability
> to
> > > stop
> > > > > and move forward, we will get in a downward spiral. I fault Pine
> for
> > > not
> > > > > being able to stop. What I wish for is for people like Anna and
> Siko
> > > and
> > > > > money for our environment and not for an endowment.
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >       GerardM
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:35, Michel Vuijlsteke <wikipe...@zog.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Gerard,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was waiting for this mail. For me personally, your complaining
> is
> > > > > > achieving exactly the opposite of what you think.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It sounds as if you'd much rather prefer to stick your head in
> the
> > > sand
> > > > > and
> > > > > > hope things will blow over. "Move along, nothing to see here --
> oh
> > > > look!
> > > > > > something positive over there!" is not going to solve anything.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Michel
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:24, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > Pine as you are talking about "self inflicting wounds" I take
> it
> > > you
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > not talking in your personal capacity. When is it enough for
> you?
> > > > When
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > you going to talk about positive things, things that will move
> us
> > > > > > forward.
> > > > > > > Why ask for blood and more blood? What is it that you hope to
> > > > achieve?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Who do you represent in this unending litany of negativity and
> > what
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > you achieved in this way? When Lila was engaged in her role,
> she
> > > was
> > > > to
> > > > > > > direct in a different direction and she is doing that. You may
> > not
> > > > like
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > and that is ok.
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > >        GerardM
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 08:43, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dariusz, thanks for continuing to engage here. Besides the
> good
> > > > > > questions
> > > > > > > > that others have asked, I'll add a few:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. If the Knowledge Engine is such an important project, why
> is
> > > it
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > > mentioned in
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2015-16
> > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. I realize that as a percentage of the WMF budget, $250k
> is a
> > > > > > > relatively
> > > > > > > > small number. As others have said, this is not a reason for
> > > opacity
> > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > it, nor a reason for not having a conversation with the
> > community
> > > > > about
> > > > > > > > something so strategically important as a decision to explore
> > the
> > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > of "Would users go to Wikipedia if it were an open channel
> > beyond
> > > > an
> > > > > > > > encyclopedia?" It's one thing to have a blue-sky exercise
> > > thinking
> > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > possibilities, and another thing to take a $250k step in that
> > > > > > direction,
> > > > > > > > especially without consulting the community.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3. I am getting tired about seeing bad news in general about
> > WMF
> > > > > > > > governance, planning, and turnover. I am curious how you plan
> > to
> > > > > > address
> > > > > > > > those issues. Like you, I would rather that we be talking
> about
> > > our
> > > > > > > > movement plans for the next 10 years. However, it's difficult
> > to
> > > > have
> > > > > > > those
> > > > > > > > conversations when WMF is making so many self-inflicted
> wounds.
> > > The
> > > > > > > recent
> > > > > > > > round of resignations is of respectable people from the WMF
> > staff
> > > > is
> > > > > > > making
> > > > > > > > the situation that much more concerning and that much more
> > > > difficult
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > recover from. It seems to me that WMF leadership has lost
> > control
> > > > of
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > situation, and I'd like to hear what the recovery plan is.
> > > > > Personally,
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > feel that we need leadership that can build good
> relationships
> > > with
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > staff and community, is transparent by default, and is
> capable
> > of
> > > > > > > restoring
> > > > > > > > the credibility of the organization's planning, execution,
> and
> > > > > > goodwill.
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > think that we may need new leadership to make that happen. I
> am
> > > > > > > interested
> > > > > > > > to hear your thoughts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Pine
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak <
> > > > > dar...@alk.edu.pl
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 11.02.2016 10:23 PM "SarahSV" <sarahsv.w...@gmail.com>
> > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > ​Hi ​
> > > > > > > > > > Dariusz,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ​T​
> > > > > > > > > > he grant application doesn't restrict the search engine
> to
> > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > projects. It says that the "Knowledge Engine by Wikipedia
> [is
> > > a]
> > > > > > system
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > discovering reliable and trustworthy public information on
> > the
> > > > > > > Internet.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My understanding is that the top range could potentially be
> > all
> > > > > > > > open/public
> > > > > > > > > resources, but this is the far stretched total goal, and
> > still
> > > > not
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > general search engine of all content including commercial
> > one.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And a rrasonable realistic outcome can be just improving
> our
> > > > > searches
> > > > > > > > > across projects.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I can't comment on the initial ideas or goals, as I was not
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > > > Board
> > > > > > > > > before August 2015, but this is what I understand we build
> > now.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The document says the "Search Engine by Wikipedia" budget
> > for
> > > > > > > 2015–2016
> > > > > > > > > ($2.4 million) was approved by the ​board. Can you point us
> > to
> > > > > which
> > > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > meeting approved it and what was discussed there?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I dont recall this specifically, and I'm going to elude
> this
> > > > > question
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > going to sleep (and hoping someone better informed may
> pick).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Good night!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dj
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > New messages to: 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
> > > > > > > > New messages to: 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
> > > > > > > New messages to: 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
> > > > > > New messages to: 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
> > > > > New messages to: 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
> > > > New messages to: 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
> > > New messages to: 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
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: 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