Gregory Maxwell: > The reason "how we have not reached large parts of the world yet" is
> because access to Wikipedia is significantly influenced by things > outside of Wikimedia's control and scope. > I think a reasonable argument can be made that Wikimedia's actions > could not produce a statistically significant improvement in the > penetration vs population metric; simply because the causative factors > outside of our ability to influence are so large. Here we totally disagree, and I hope and expect the outcomes of the strategy process will prove you wrong over time. I am not saying it is easy to reach out where we have not done so yet, but we overcame more hurdles. > but perhaps I did not state this bluntly enough: You usually have no problems with being blunt (and obfuscating your posts with rather pointless sarcasms) That was me being blunt BTW > Failure to consider this leads to bizarre conclusions like "the lower > birth rates in the developed world compared to the developing world > decrease Wikimedia's success over time". QED > Surely someone must have a respectable count of internet users by > language that we could use for comparison? Thanks in advance for pointing me there. > If we had a goal to double the number of articles in some reasonable > period of time we could do it. If we had a goal to double the > penetration, ... well, unless the WMF changes its mission nothing it > could do would get us there. Please check mission statement Erik Zachte _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
