I agree with Pine's comments. Lots of good things happening and great content, and that should not be minimized in all this. If I left that impression then my apologies to the content creators and annual report staff on those points.
-george Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 2, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > Speaking generally, I think that telling stories about Wikimedia content > and platforms, and how content is created, delivered, or used, are all > likely to be compatible with WMF's mission when the stories are written in > an NPOV way. I must have missed the link to Andreas' arctic photography, > but I can imagine how a story about a Wikimedian's work taking photos of > icebergs and arctic wildlife could be written in such a way as to be > compatible with the WMF mission to share knowledge of factual information > (as opposed to analyses of that information or advocacy to take political > action based on that information). Similarly, a story about the use of > Wikimedia resources to assist refugees could likely be written in a way > that is NPOV and compatible with the mission to share knowledge. > > WMF, the affiliates, and the communities do good work that is not advocacy, > and informs discussions of public interest, and contributes to the public > good. I think that sharing those stories can likely be done in a way that > is compatible with the WMF mission. > > Pine > > >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Erik Moeller <eloque...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Stuart Prior >> <stuart.pr...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote: >> >>> As an example, anthropogenic climate change is a politically sensitive >>> issue, but how can a consensus-driven movement not take into account that >>> 97% of climate scientists acknowledge its existence >>> ? >>>  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change> >>> Accepting a scientific consensus just isn’t a political position. >> >> It isn't, but I think it's still worth thinking about context and >> presentation. There are organizations whose job it is to directly >> communicate facts, both journalistic orgs like ProPublica and >> fact-checkers like Snopes/Politifact. In contrast, WMF's job is to >> enable many communities to collect and develop educational content. >> >> If the scientific consensus on climate change suddenly starts to >> shift, we expect our projects to reflect that, and we expect that the >> organization doesn't get involved in those community processes to >> promote a specific outcome. The more WMF directly communicates facts >> about the world (especially politicized ones), rather than >> communicating _about_ facts, the more people (editors and readers >> alike) may question whether the organization is appropriately >> conservative about its own role. >> >> I haven't done an extensive survey, but I suspect all the major >> Wikipedia languages largely agree in their presentation on climate >> change. If so, that is itself a notable fact, given the amount of >> politicization of the topic. Many readers/donors may be curious how >> such agreement comes about in the absence of top-down editorial >> control. Speaking about the remarkable process by which Wikipedia >> tackles contentious topics may be a less potentially divisive way for >> WMF to speak about what's happening in the real world. >> >> I do think stories like the refugee phrasebook and Andreas' arctic >> photography are amazing and worth telling. I'm curious whether folks >> like Risker, George, Pine, Chris, and others who've expressed concern >> about the report agree with that. If so, how would you tell those >> stories in the context of, e.g., an Annual Report? >> >> Erik >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.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 and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>