Dear Rogol, When I check out your profile, you are retired. Maybe you do not know any more but the WMF has been pretty consistent in the way that it operates over the years. So in details things change and arguably it could be different for all kinds of reasons. But as the WMF is not actively going for grants it would not surprise me that it is exact the consistency in its actions that gives grant-giving bodies the assurances that they need.
The question to you is what is it to you. Why are you not satisfied with your answers and where would satisfactory answers lead us to? My problem with the WMF and its community that is that it is stuck too much in things we could improve upon. I am actively engaged in getting towards a vision that I share in mailing lists and on my blog. What is your vision, what is it that you want? Thanks, On 12 January 2017 at 23:20, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Fæ, Surely no grant-giving body would even talk to the Foundation if it > could not show them a plan for the medium to long term. For some reason, > the Foundation is consistently unwilling to share this plan with the > Community (its biggest donor in terms both of money and surplus value). I > wonder why that would be? > > "Rogol" > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > No need, it's on webarchive: > > http://web.archive.org/web/20170112103412/https://upload. > > wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/d/dd/Education_and_WGIG.pdf > > > > Unlike Wikimedia projects, Webarchive has a long term plan that one > > would expect of a digital archive, so it's a much safer space for > > historical documents. > > > > I stopped asking about an equivalent realistic Wikimedia 100 year plan > > a couple of years back. The $100m endowment thingy controlled by Jimmy > > does not have this as a goal either, as far as I can tell. > > > > Fae > > > > On 12 January 2017 at 00:41, Newyorkbrad <newyorkb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > If it is decided not to host these materials on a wiki, whether for > > > copyright or any other reasons, then someone (either in the Office or > > > a volunteer) should be designated to retain a copy privately. That > > > way, he or she will be able to upload it later if the copyright status > > > or policy changes in the future, or to make it available offline for > > > research use or consultation by historians or other researchers who > > > could make good use of it. > > > > > > Newyorkbrad/IBM > > > > > > On 1/11/17, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Thank you for bringing this up, Yann. Some relevant context is that > Meta > > >> Wiki users considered permitting such files on Meta Wiki a year and a > > half > > >> ago, and decided not to. The electorate was not very big (14 votes, > > total), > > >> but it was carefully considered, with compelling arguments made on > both > > >> sides.[1] > > >> > > >> In my opinion, the best outcome would be that Meta Wiki should have an > > >> Exemption Doctrine Policy (the board's name for a project's local > policy > > >> that would permit copyrighted files under specific circumstances)[2] I > > >> think the Meta Wiki decision should be revisited and considered in > more > > >> depth, with more participation, and probably reversed (with some > careful > > >> work on defining the proper circumstances for an exemption). > > >> > > >> But of course, that's not an easy task. I have no ready answer, but am > > >> interested to see what ideas others have. > > >> -Pete > > >> [[User:Peteforsyth]] > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Babel&; > > diff=prev&oldid=13362698#General_discussion_on_ > allowing_or_rejecting_fair_ > > use_at_Meta > > >> [2] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy > > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Yann Forget <yan...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi, > > >>> > > >>> I would like to get more opinions about what to do with files such as > > >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Education_and_WGIG.pdf > > >>> > > >>> This is a draft from a United Nations conference which mentions > > Wikipedia > > >>> (the first and only AFAIK), and as such, an important historical > > document. > > >>> > > >>> It doesn't have a formal license, but there is no real copyright > issue. > > >>> > > >>> Where and how should we keep such files? > > >>> > > >>> Regards, > > >>> > > >>> Yann Forget > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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>
