Hi Lila,

Thank you for the update and the pointer.

As you probably noted, there have been several 'incidents' quickly
following each other, which worry me, and probably you too. You're saying
that you welcome feedback and discussion, and that you're having internal
conversations on how to improve communication.

When problems continue like this in governments, you often see (well, this
probably depends on the country) that a committee is appointed to
investigate what is really the problem, and to come with some general
recommendations for structural improvements.

I'm not sure if this is the most effective method, but it might be an
effective way to gain back a bit of trust. Why not appoint a small
committee of a few trusted community members, that can get a bit more
information (also when that has to remain confidential) and make some
structural recommendations with regards to communicating with the
community? Normally I'd expect the Board to take such role, but given
recent events, I don't have the feeling the Board is best placed to do so.

Just thinking out loud, maybe there are better ideas to approach this in a
way that builds trust again.


On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Lila Tretikov <l...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> As promised, here is the blog post we published earlier today:
> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/02/16/wikimedia-search-future/ . We are
> also
> having internal conversations on how we can improve communication and
> transparency to increase collaboration on ideation with all of you going
> forward.
> I hope this helps contextualize the grant agreement and our broader efforts
> while addressing some of the confusion around this topic. As always, I
> welcome your feedback and discussion and look forward to our ongoing
> discussion.
> Lila
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to