Hoi, Thank you for your sense of superiority.. the views on this list are "easy to have"and "not the big, difficult questions".
These are some big difficult questions I can come up with: - how will we deal with the existing bias that is Anglo-American.. - how will we deal with the existing bias that is articles in Wikipedia, our aim is to share in the sum of all knowledge.. - how will we deal with the 6% error rates that is in Wikipedia lists There are more issues but, hey you should not overload one email and deal with multiple issues.. So lets focus on what *you* consider the big difficult questions making this rebranding issue not so relevant.. Thanks, GerardM On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 10:53, Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> wrote: > In many ways yes - not that branding isnt important, but these two > conversations are a great example of people engaging with the narrow > questions that are easy to have a view on, and not the big, difficult > questions. > > (Though also, there is nothing more interesting on the working group email > lists - the summaries are high level and the documents are high level > because that's where we're at....) > > On Mon, 15 Apr 2019, 21:09 James Salsman, <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I withdraw any opinions and suggestions about the branding discussion, > > and don't intend to continue participating in it. Instead, I would > > like to have a more substantive discussion: > > > > (1) I ask that the CTO search team please publish their search and > > requirement criteria, including the CTO job description and any and > > all goals for the CTO position whether in current planning documents > > or unpublished drafts of planning materials. > > > > (2) Why are the Strategy Working Group lists not on > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo ? I recall several people > > involved with the strategy process as saying it is "open" and asking > > at length for additional participation (e.g. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxCFzA3PEaQ&t=23m and > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxCFzA3PEaQ&t=30m et seq.) To be > > honest, there doesn't seem to be much community engagement from > > working groups or strategy process facilitators on meta, and the > > meeting summaries are very abstract and difficult to understand. If > > there is a need for private strategy working group communications, can > > people use off-list emails instead? > > > > Best regards, > > Jim > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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>