If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived from all
the demonstrable facts, perhaps the community should now respond with
a completely unambiguous RFC on meta so there can be no doubt?

Something along the lines of:
"The WMF have employed Wolff Olins for rebranding advice, and they
recommend that Wikimedia rebrands itself around the word "Wikipedia"
and projects like Wikimedia Commons are renamed to "Wikicommons" to
ensure marketing of the projects can easily be delivered by the WMF.
Do you support or oppose this rebranding programme?"

With a straightforward RFC to keep on linking to in every discussion
on every venue, we might then have tangible evidence of whether "There
is considerable support for the branding proposal" or "There is
considerable opposition for the branding proposal" is factual. Rather
than drifting along for months with the debate and unhappiness that
comes from arguing both sides of a mostly political case without
firmly verifiable evidence available or relying on complex and less
credible stats from surveys that are likely to suffer from embedded
bias, especially considering the already banked investment in
consultancy that drives the need to change something, to prove the
spent money had impact and "value".

P.S. Zack and others, it's best to avoid the word "collaboration" when
communicating with an international group. It has unfortunate history
and gives the impression that you are quoting views from collaborators
rather than holding open collegial discussion.

Thanks,
Fae

On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 17:19, Diane Ranville <dranville-...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I agree with Pine.
> There is a majority of people who actually oppose the rebranding
> proposition.
> I don't quite understand why this is still going forward (except that it is
> difficult to acknowledge a mistake and take steps backwards - but it is
> sometimes necessary).
> Have other options even been considered?
>
> -speaking in my own name here-
>
> Diane
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello Zack,
> >
> > Thank you for the report on Meta.
> >
> > I am troubled by your statement in this email that "There is considerable
> > support for the brand proposal and general appetite to improve our
> > movement’s branding system." What that statement appears to omit is that,
> > according to the report on Meta, there is also considerable opposition to
> > the rebranding proposal.
> >
> >
> > Can you explain why you characterized the proposal as having "considerable
> > support" without in the same sentence acknowledging what appears to be
> > considerable opposition?
> >
> >
> > Of the three top-level metrics that the report on Meta displays that
> > measure community and affiliate support or opposition regarding the
> > rebranding proposal, one of the three metrics is in favor and two of the
> > three metrics are opposed. If this was an RfC, and I was using those
> > measures of sentiment to evaluate support and opposition regarding the RfC,
> > I would probably close the current rebranding proposal as declined.
> >
> > Pine
> >
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019, 20:49 Zack McCune <zmcc...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > > *Summary* - We want your help with a voluntary, OPT-IN design process for
> > > movement branding.  Please join the in-depth discussion group, or watch
> > for
> > > updates on Meta-Wiki.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > After 4 months of community consultation, spanning dozens of affiliates,
> > > several mailing lists, community conferences, and Meta-Wiki, I am pleased
> > > to share a summary of feedback on the proposed 2030 movement brand
> > strategy
> > > [1].
> > >
> > > From more than 319 comments, representing 150 individual contributors and
> > > 63 affiliates, we assessed 6 major themes in feedback:
> > >
> > >    1.
> > >
> > >    Reducing confusion
> > >    2.
> > >
> > >    Protecting reputation
> > >    3.
> > >
> > >    Supporting sister projects
> > >    4.
> > >
> > >    Addressing (legal, governmental) risks
> > >    5.
> > >
> > >    Supporting movement growth
> > >    6.
> > >
> > >    The process of change
> > >
> > > Please visit our feedback summary page to learn more [2]. You will see
> > > examples of comments within each section, along with a rough indication
> > of
> > > how many of the comments that we received were related to each theme.
> > >
> > > The comments sometimes contradict one another, showing that across our
> > wide
> > > movement’s experience, different points of view are common (and a sign of
> > > health!). To visualize these tensions, we have created “polarity maps”
> > > which are used to help visualize how different arguments coexist in
> > tension
> > > with each other.
> > >
> > > Ultimately, the comments provided from you all are very thoughtful and
> > > useful guidance on what is needed to make our movement’s branding
> > > successful. One can read the 6 themes above as “criteria” for assessing
> > > branding systems.
> > >
> > > == Thanks ==
> > >
> > > I would like to thank the organizers of Iberoconf, Wikipedia Education
> > > Summit, and the Wikimedia Summit for inviting us to hold discussions
> > during
> > > their sessions. I would also like to thank my colleagues Elena Lappen,
> > > Samir Elsharbaty, and Blanca Flores who conducted extensive parts of this
> > > consultation. To the hundreds of people, and dozens of affiliates
> > > commenting, thank you for reviewing the proposal and offering your
> > > perspectives and insights.
> > >
> > >
> > > == Next steps and staying involved ==
> > >
> > > There is considerable support for the brand proposal and general appetite
> > > to improve our movement’s branding system. Further, we believe that
> > > critical feedback on the proposal offers direct guidance for precisely
> > what
> > > branding must do to be successful for our movement. We have shared these
> > > insights and our proposed continuance with the Board of Trustees, who
> > > approved continuing these efforts.
> > >
> > > Acting on community insights, we will be collaborating on formal brand
> > > naming, visual identity, and brand system design that will use
> > “Wikipedia”
> > > as the central reference point. The resulting system will be OPT-IN for
> > > affiliates.
> > >
> > > This design process will be guided by a “brand network” – a group of
> > > volunteers who would like to continue advising on brand during this
> > > consultation. Dozens of people have already volunteered, and we invite
> > you
> > > to join the group. We will use a group on Wikimedia Space to host this
> > > discussion and the group will be closed to allow candid discussions and
> > > room for iterations. EVERYONE IS INVITED TO JOIN [3]. If you do not want
> > to
> > > commit to the in-depth, longer term discussions that will be happening
> > > within the brand network group, we will still be tracking comments left
> > on
> > > the project’s Meta-Wiki page [4]. Furthermore, all important ideas and
> > > updates originating from the brand network discussion will be shared
> > > publicly to mailing lists and Meta-Wiki.
> > >
> > > The development of this proposed identity system will take approximately
> > 6
> > > months. As stated, regular updates will be shared to mailing lists,
> > > Wikimedia Space, and Meta-Wiki [4]. Please engage us where you are most
> > > comfortable! Once complete, community groups will have the power to
> > decide
> > > if/when they opt in to using the new system.
> > >
> > > Yours,
> > >
> > >  Zack
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> > https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/02/26/leading-with-wikipedia-a-brand-proposal-for-2030/
> > >
> > >
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review/results
> > >
> > >
> > > [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/g/brand-network and click the gray
> > > "Request" button. When your request is approved, you will be able to see
> > > and access the brand network discussion category on the Discuss Space
> > main
> > > page.
> > >
> > > [4]
> > >
> > >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Zack McCune (he/him)
> > >
> > > Director of Brand
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>



-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.

_______________________________________________
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>

Reply via email to