Hi David, Well, I did not reply because I disagree but in my experience having long arguments with people one disagrees with usually does not lead to agreement and is also very tiring. You gave your opinion, I gave mine, it is up to other readers to decide whose arguments are stronger. I really hate this "last word" game. If Natacha did not raise exactly the same argument again, I would not even respond.
Concerning people who do the job and do not feel appreciated - I absolutely agree with you that they should be rewarded. The appreciation can come from both the community and the WMF (and possibly sometimes from the external parties). I just disagree that this appreciation should be monetary. There are many ways to reward people and at the same to avoid introducing additional factors which I believe are harmful for the community. Concerning the premise that the existed model does not work anymore - I just disagree with the premise. Indeed, we have for example burnout of volunteers - I myself resigned the admin tools in the English Wikipedia in January, and stopped editing for a month in February, after the community failed to do anything about long-term harassment of a certain user directed at me - but this unfortunately happened before and will happen later. Specifically concerning the administrator issue, in the English Wikipedia I would still like to see any evidence that there is work which requires an admin attention and does not get it. All backlogs I am aware of originate not because administrators are lazy or there are too few of them, but because things are being asked are not submitted to a right place - such as for example someone asking to resolve a long-standing content dispute claiming it is vandalism. Cheers Yaroslav On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:21 PM, David Cuenca Tudela <dacu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yaroslav, > > Yes, you already made your point earlier, and I addressed it here [1] and > also in the draft proposal to enable some volunteers to receive donations > for their work [2]. The fact that you neither commented on my reply to your > initial concern, nor on the proposal suggests me several possibilities. The > first one is that you are not listening to me [3], because you are not > interacting with the proposals that could counter your fears, and you are > not asking questions about them. The second one is that you don't trust > your own capacity to listen to other people even when money is involved. > That could also be, because people with the biggest fear that others do not > listen to them are indeed not well equiped to listen to other people. And > the third one could be that you are a victim of your own observations, you > might be so used to see white swans (people being paid not listening) in > your life that the mere idea that black swans (people being paid who > listen) exist might seem inconceibable for you. It could also be that you > find something wrong or that could be done better in my proposal or that > you have a better one, but since you haven't voiced your opinion, I don't > know what. > > Concerning time and motivation, I consider that the people who are > contributing during their official working hours without explicit permision > to do so are effectively STEALING resources from their employer. This is of > course a partial view, because who owns actually the planetary resources? > And who is there to say that it is not reasonable to invest some in > Wikimedia projects? Although I understand and I feel empathy for the > volunteers that Bodhisattwa mentions, I feel that what Aubrey said before > holds true here: "You can't do good if there's no "you" in the first > place". So if I ever meet people like that I will tell them: you are not > doing any good here, because you are not putting yourself first. > > You say that "we indeed have a lot of people who shout loud, do very > little, and get all kinds of credits for the work others have done". But we > also have many people who speak quietly, do very much, and get no credit > for what they are doing, and I do not see harm in recognizing their work > with donations, specially if they commit to improve themselves and to > listen. You don't explain why you don't like people who listen and who get > donations. Tbh, I do not like to have slaves in our movement, and I think > we should free them from this kind of ungrateful slavery that many seem to > be very happy about. At least slaves got some food, and a place to sleep. > > And also listen to what Anders is saying, our model is not working any more > (it was not sustainable to start with), we have reached the limit, and now > it is time to reinvent ourselves. And as far as I know most of us here are > "bottom", so we are building "bottom-up". > > @Aubrey: Thanks for your long answer :) I'll address it later on, to write > this email took me at least 5h of coming to the keyboard and leaving to > manage the stress. I hope a reply to your email takes me a bit less... > > Regards, > Micru > > [1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-May/090365.html > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Micru/Draft_RFC > [3] > https://www.csh.umn.edu/education/focus-areas/whole- > systems-healing/leadership/deep-listening > _______________________________________________ > 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: 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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>
