Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
Hoi, In reply to theo10011, I am happy to inform you that there has been an awesome project where 10 universities in Jakarta competed this year. This competition was wildly successful, the number of editors doubled during the run of the competition. If anything, it is sad that the Indonesian chapter does not have the funding to build upon the success and make it a continuing and national project where universities use Wikipedia as a place where they can express their knowledge and ability. In reply to Anna Shyrokova, as the WMF functions both as a worldwide organisation and as a USA chapter there is no obvious distinction between the two. When there is funding for a targeted project like the US policy project, there would be little or no objection when it is run by a USA chapter. Now you have a worldwide organisation that runs a project that impacts the notion of what public policy is and allows it to have a USA point of view. In reply to Steven Walling, perfection is the enemy of the good. But projects are run first in the USA or are targeted towards English. I doubt very much that a bot will be allowed that will create a stub for every Indian town, village or hamlet. As there are no examples of a WMF project that runs first in another country or language, the question is not about perfection but about the good i.e. the even-handedness of a global organisation. This would not be as much of an issue if there was an USA chapter. In rely to Noein, this thread started with Barry informing us about a new function related to chapters. If there is an issue with understanding the role of chapters and the WMF itself there can be no firm expectation of what the person who will be fulfilling this role will actually do. Without an USA chapter it will be "everywhere but in America". This is highly undesirable. I do agree with what you wrote and the issue is now very practical. Someone may get this job and it is best when there is clarity about the roles of chapters and the role of the WMF. Thanks, GerardM ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 If I understand correctly the situation, the USA community currently interact with Wikipedia through the Foundation or the en. chapter, which are not necessarily representative of their interests. The point of view that a chapter should represent the USA community depends strongly of what is a chapter. I still don't know if it is a geopolitical, a cultural, a social or a linguistic entity... Anyway, there's the concern that a community deprived of proper identity and voice is easily ignored. As for the Foundation, I'm still not sure what role people are expecting from it. Some comments now and then make me believe that a significant share think of it as a leading, decision-making, representing and executing role. Other think the foundation should only play a pragmatic, executive auxiliary role, implementing the will and decisions of the communities, USA community included. I believe the separation of powers to be healthy. As for the global and international concerns... Cultural centrism or insularism cannot be at the core of the big goal of an universal access to knowledge: they're a certain path to failure. The latest conflicts about censorship and NPOV have shown, IMHO, that they cannot be solved without distinguishing the few principles aimed to the sharing and collective building of knowledge from the cultural values - the western ones included. Yet, the en.wikipedia is much more developed than the others and seems to be progressing faster. Like a sun with a few satellites orbiting. The "motor" doesn't distribute its energy to everybody, it mainly benefits itself because it is not decentralized. Thus, it creates a cultural inequality and domination. I wonder if this tendency can be smoothed. I wonder also how this is perceived by the rest of the world. The english and american imperialisms are strongly present in their minds. Wikipedia should avoid to look like yet another tool of cultural domination. Thus, to favor the emergent chapters the USA community should have its own chapter. It should have no more power of decision than the others and certainly not a privileged relationship with the Foundation. The Foundation should aim to be less insular and a clear separation from the national concerns would help. On 23/08/2010 12:55, theo10011 wrote: > I do agree with some of what Mr. Meijssen said in the last email but not all > of it. Yes, there might be a bias with some of the new projects being > undertaken in the US specifically, but outside of Europe there are very few > chapters who would be in a position to take on university collaborated > projects without some sort of experience and help from the foundation. > > The Idea that it is expensive to undertake projects in the US compared to > the rest of the world in illusory, the costs incurred in lets say the UK or > Germany might be higher than the US, simply because of the foundation is > located across the Atlantic, their would be much higher travel cost and more > paperwork involved when dealing with large institutions, not to mention a > language barrier which might be prohibitive in the rest of the EU. > > With that said I do agree with Mr. Meijssen that the foundation might mix > national and international priorities at some occasions. A wider > representation using one of the EU chapters could easily be achieved > especially in the case of the recent university projects. > > Regards > > Salmaan > > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Gerard Meijssen > wrote: > >> Hoi, >> The USA is a sizeable country. But it is not unique in that. Russia is >> certainly bigger and India is certainly more populous. Both Russia and >> India >> have one chapter. >> >> When the Wikimedia Foundation runs a project, it should be obvious that >> such >> a project can be easily understood from its perspective. For me the WMF is >> a >> worldwide organisation and consequently its actions should be acceptable >> from that perspective. When the WMF runs a "pilot" project like the current >> public policy project, it should therefore conform with its global >> perspective. Given that it is about SUBJECT MATTER whose appreciation >> differs from country to country it is weird that no "foreign" universities >> are part of this project. It is also easy to argue that from a cost point >> of >> view, this project requires less funding when it is run in many other >> countries. The fact that it is run only in the USA also has NPOV >> implications. >> >> The issue is that when there is an USA chapter and this project was run by >> the chapter, such reservations would not be as potent. Mixing national and >> international priorities is not appropriate. >> Thanks, >> GerardM >> >> On 23 August 2010 08:56, Keegan Peterzell wrote: >> >>> I have to chime in to echo that the size of the USA and the fact that it >> is >>> populated throughout is an issue for a general USA chapter. I attended a >>> meetup in Nashvi
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 07:32:17 -0700, Steven Walling wrote: > When the Wikimedia Foundation runs a project, it should be obvious that > such > a project can be easily understood from its perspective. For me the WMF is > a > worldwide organisation and consequently its actions should be acceptable > from that perspective. When the WMF runs a "pilot" project like the current > public policy project, it should therefore conform with its global > perspective. Given that it is about SUBJECT MATTER whose appreciation > differs from country to country it is weird that no "foreign" universities > are part of this project. It is also easy to argue that from a cost point > of > view, this project requires less funding when it is run in many other > countries. The fact that it is run only in the USA also has NPOV > implications. > I raised similar objections on this list when the project has been announced, and I received a reply that the choice of four US universities was somehow related to the conditions on which the grant was extended. I find this explanation to be fair enough. Cheers Yaroslav ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
When the Wikimedia Foundation runs a project, it should be obvious that such a project can be easily understood from its perspective. For me the WMF is a worldwide organisation and consequently its actions should be acceptable from that perspective. When the WMF runs a "pilot" project like the current public policy project, it should therefore conform with its global perspective. Given that it is about SUBJECT MATTER whose appreciation differs from country to country it is weird that no "foreign" universities are part of this project. It is also easy to argue that from a cost point of view, this project requires less funding when it is run in many other countries. The fact that it is run only in the USA also has NPOV implications. Ever heard the expression, the perfect is the enemy of the good? I assume you're referring to the public policy project in the passage above. Everything you say is true. The program should be extended to universities outside the U.S. for a long list of reasons. But it is just a beginning and no group of people, whether it's the Foundation or volunteers, can do everything at once. Let's not let perfectionism get in the way of trying something useful that could later be expanded and refined to work at scale and internationally. Steven Walling On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The USA is a sizeable country. But it is not unique in that. Russia is > certainly bigger and India is certainly more populous. Both Russia and > India > have one chapter. > > When the Wikimedia Foundation runs a project, it should be obvious that > such > a project can be easily understood from its perspective. For me the WMF is > a > worldwide organisation and consequently its actions should be acceptable > from that perspective. When the WMF runs a "pilot" project like the current > public policy project, it should therefore conform with its global > perspective. Given that it is about SUBJECT MATTER whose appreciation > differs from country to country it is weird that no "foreign" universities > are part of this project. It is also easy to argue that from a cost point > of > view, this project requires less funding when it is run in many other > countries. The fact that it is run only in the USA also has NPOV > implications. > > The issue is that when there is an USA chapter and this project was run by > the chapter, such reservations would not be as potent. Mixing national and > international priorities is not appropriate. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 23 August 2010 08:56, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > > > I have to chime in to echo that the size of the USA and the fact that it > is > > populated throughout is an issue for a general USA chapter. I attended a > > meetup in Nashville, Tennessee, which had people from five states and it > > was > > a seven hour drive for me, and I was in a state next to it. Going to DC > in > > January was equally interesting, I had to fly in to visit and that's not > > even half a country away. The US is a different creature, I have no > advice > > on chapter organization here. > > > > > > -- > > ~Keegan > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan > > ___ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
I can see how people may be concerned that the development of a U.S. chapter may be impeded because the WMF is already involved in projects like the universities project. But, it is important to consider that the WMF is scheduled to finish the project in about a year. What may actually be a problem is that there will not be anyone to take over the relationships with local universities and academic institutions if and when the WMF shifts focus to more international projects. A U.S. chapter would be great in that regard. - Anya On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 6:55 AM, theo10011 wrote: > I do agree with some of what Mr. Meijssen said in the last email but not > all > of it. Yes, there might be a bias with some of the new projects being > undertaken in the US specifically, but outside of Europe there are very few > chapters who would be in a position to take on university collaborated > projects without some sort of experience and help from the foundation. > > The Idea that it is expensive to undertake projects in the US compared to > the rest of the world in illusory, the costs incurred in lets say the UK or > Germany might be higher than the US, simply because of the foundation is > located across the Atlantic, their would be much higher travel cost and > more > paperwork involved when dealing with large institutions, not to mention a > language barrier which might be prohibitive in the rest of the EU. > > With that said I do agree with Mr. Meijssen that the foundation might mix > national and international priorities at some occasions. A wider > representation using one of the EU chapters could easily be achieved > especially in the case of the recent university projects. > > Regards > > Salmaan > > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Gerard Meijssen < > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hoi, > > The USA is a sizeable country. But it is not unique in that. Russia is > > certainly bigger and India is certainly more populous. Both Russia and > > India > > have one chapter. > > > > When the Wikimedia Foundation runs a project, it should be obvious that > > such > > a project can be easily understood from its perspective. For me the WMF > is > > a > > worldwide organisation and consequently its actions should be acceptable > > from that perspective. When the WMF runs a "pilot" project like the > current > > public policy project, it should therefore conform with its global > > perspective. Given that it is about SUBJECT MATTER whose appreciation > > differs from country to country it is weird that no "foreign" > universities > > are part of this project. It is also easy to argue that from a cost point > > of > > view, this project requires less funding when it is run in many other > > countries. The fact that it is run only in the USA also has NPOV > > implications. > > > > The issue is that when there is an USA chapter and this project was run > by > > the chapter, such reservations would not be as potent. Mixing national > and > > international priorities is not appropriate. > > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > > On 23 August 2010 08:56, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > > > > > I have to chime in to echo that the size of the USA and the fact that > it > > is > > > populated throughout is an issue for a general USA chapter. I attended > a > > > meetup in Nashville, Tennessee, which had people from five states and > it > > > was > > > a seven hour drive for me, and I was in a state next to it. Going to > DC > > in > > > January was equally interesting, I had to fly in to visit and that's > not > > > even half a country away. The US is a different creature, I have no > > advice > > > on chapter organization here. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ~Keegan > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan > > > ___ > > > foundation-l mailing list > > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > > > ___ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
I do agree with some of what Mr. Meijssen said in the last email but not all of it. Yes, there might be a bias with some of the new projects being undertaken in the US specifically, but outside of Europe there are very few chapters who would be in a position to take on university collaborated projects without some sort of experience and help from the foundation. The Idea that it is expensive to undertake projects in the US compared to the rest of the world in illusory, the costs incurred in lets say the UK or Germany might be higher than the US, simply because of the foundation is located across the Atlantic, their would be much higher travel cost and more paperwork involved when dealing with large institutions, not to mention a language barrier which might be prohibitive in the rest of the EU. With that said I do agree with Mr. Meijssen that the foundation might mix national and international priorities at some occasions. A wider representation using one of the EU chapters could easily be achieved especially in the case of the recent university projects. Regards Salmaan On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The USA is a sizeable country. But it is not unique in that. Russia is > certainly bigger and India is certainly more populous. Both Russia and > India > have one chapter. > > When the Wikimedia Foundation runs a project, it should be obvious that > such > a project can be easily understood from its perspective. For me the WMF is > a > worldwide organisation and consequently its actions should be acceptable > from that perspective. When the WMF runs a "pilot" project like the current > public policy project, it should therefore conform with its global > perspective. Given that it is about SUBJECT MATTER whose appreciation > differs from country to country it is weird that no "foreign" universities > are part of this project. It is also easy to argue that from a cost point > of > view, this project requires less funding when it is run in many other > countries. The fact that it is run only in the USA also has NPOV > implications. > > The issue is that when there is an USA chapter and this project was run by > the chapter, such reservations would not be as potent. Mixing national and > international priorities is not appropriate. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 23 August 2010 08:56, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > > > I have to chime in to echo that the size of the USA and the fact that it > is > > populated throughout is an issue for a general USA chapter. I attended a > > meetup in Nashville, Tennessee, which had people from five states and it > > was > > a seven hour drive for me, and I was in a state next to it. Going to DC > in > > January was equally interesting, I had to fly in to visit and that's not > > even half a country away. The US is a different creature, I have no > advice > > on chapter organization here. > > > > > > -- > > ~Keegan > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan > > ___ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
Hoi, The USA is a sizeable country. But it is not unique in that. Russia is certainly bigger and India is certainly more populous. Both Russia and India have one chapter. When the Wikimedia Foundation runs a project, it should be obvious that such a project can be easily understood from its perspective. For me the WMF is a worldwide organisation and consequently its actions should be acceptable from that perspective. When the WMF runs a "pilot" project like the current public policy project, it should therefore conform with its global perspective. Given that it is about SUBJECT MATTER whose appreciation differs from country to country it is weird that no "foreign" universities are part of this project. It is also easy to argue that from a cost point of view, this project requires less funding when it is run in many other countries. The fact that it is run only in the USA also has NPOV implications. The issue is that when there is an USA chapter and this project was run by the chapter, such reservations would not be as potent. Mixing national and international priorities is not appropriate. Thanks, GerardM On 23 August 2010 08:56, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > I have to chime in to echo that the size of the USA and the fact that it is > populated throughout is an issue for a general USA chapter. I attended a > meetup in Nashville, Tennessee, which had people from five states and it > was > a seven hour drive for me, and I was in a state next to it. Going to DC in > January was equally interesting, I had to fly in to visit and that's not > even half a country away. The US is a different creature, I have no advice > on chapter organization here. > > > -- > ~Keegan > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
I have to chime in to echo that the size of the USA and the fact that it is populated throughout is an issue for a general USA chapter. I attended a meetup in Nashville, Tennessee, which had people from five states and it was a seven hour drive for me, and I was in a state next to it. Going to DC in January was equally interesting, I had to fly in to visit and that's not even half a country away. The US is a different creature, I have no advice on chapter organization here. -- ~Keegan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
Hi everyone I just wanted to step in and remind everyone of the enormity of the task thats lying ahead for the Foundation. As Mr. Davis and Horning have pointed out that US already has a very good representation, its the Headquarter and the base for the foundation. The point of having chapters is to present a decentralized structure and proper representation for all the communities, US I think is well covered in that regard. There could be Local, State-level organization if there is an interest by the community, but should the focus be on US states or entire countries or even continents that have no representation right now. Now, compare the current situation to lets say India for example- you are talking about more than a billion people and the size of a sub-continent not being represented at all (the chapter formation is underway) and even once completed, a single chapter will represent more than a billion people same could be argued on different levels for Brazil or the Middle-east for that matter. The entire country of Russia has just one chapter, not to mention that there is currently no representation from the entire Continent of South Africa, a meeting in Johannesburg recently took the first steps towards changing that but its still a far way from Northern and Southern California divide. Even in terms of North America, Canada and mexico have no representation right now even while having large Wikimedian communities present. I think that US representation should be the least of the concern for the foundation, a PR campaign to clarify and promote would always be helpful especially with all the recent misunderstandings but with all the university collaborations and outreach projects and research related to Wikipedia going on in the US, I don't think representation is an issue. Regards Salmaan On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 4:20 AM, Jon Davis wrote: > If I remember my reading from the recent strategy documents, the Foundation > wants to create more awareness amongst the less internet prevalent > countries. Here in the USA, you could poll several dozen random people on > the street, and likely not find a single person that doesn't know about > Wikipedia (maybe 1, depending on your location and luck). > > In fact, it is so prevalent here than anything with the world "Wiki" in it, > is presumed to be Wikipedia. I know I'm not the only one recently who has > had family/friends ask about WikiLeaks relation to Wikipedia (due to the > major media blitz about their document release). So, if the Foundation > needs to do something in the USA, it is a PR campaign to clarify such > misunderstandings - but this thread isn't about that. > > According to Meta [1] "Wikimedia chapters are independent organizations > founded to support and promote the Wikimedia projects within a specified > geographical region (country)." Since the Foundation is USA based, and a > majority of editors speak English... promotion in a country in which most > of > the population are already aware of what Wikipedia is... doesn't seem > terribly high priority (At least to me). Chapters are supposed to > support/promote in their areas because they'll have a MUCH better > understanding of the cultures, and that really is the critical component. > If you can get local people > > Also, as someone involved with the proposed Wikimedia California [2] > chapter, there is an issue of Geography. We (volunteers) in Northern Cali > have had trouble working with SoCal simply because of size (amongst other > reasons). SoCal is less interested in what we are up to when it is an 8 > hour drive for them to attend. California the state is larger than the > entire country Germany (by about 20% more). Granted California is one of > the larger states, but my point is that a USA chapter formed just like > every > other countries...may not work. If proper state level groups were > established first, then it would have a much better chance. > > Not saying it isn't possible, just a lot of work for currently little > return > (as I see it). > > [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters > > [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_California > -Jon > > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 14:51, Steven Walling >wrote: > > > Gerard, > > > > As a Wikimedia from the United States, I think I can speak to concern > about > > a lack of a U.S. chapter. > > > > There are many factors that have thus far held back the formation of a > > chapter in my country, some of which are unique because of the history of > > the movement, and some of which we share with other large, developed > > nations > > with high levels of Internet penetration. > > > > I can go into them at length if you like, but suffice it to say that I > > don't > > think the lack of the U.S. chapter in any way devalues Wikimedia's focus > on > > chapter development outside the U.S., Barry's work, or the prospective > hire > > at the Foundation. > > > > Steven Walling > > > > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 2
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
If I remember my reading from the recent strategy documents, the Foundation wants to create more awareness amongst the less internet prevalent countries. Here in the USA, you could poll several dozen random people on the street, and likely not find a single person that doesn't know about Wikipedia (maybe 1, depending on your location and luck). In fact, it is so prevalent here than anything with the world "Wiki" in it, is presumed to be Wikipedia. I know I'm not the only one recently who has had family/friends ask about WikiLeaks relation to Wikipedia (due to the major media blitz about their document release). So, if the Foundation needs to do something in the USA, it is a PR campaign to clarify such misunderstandings - but this thread isn't about that. According to Meta [1] "Wikimedia chapters are independent organizations founded to support and promote the Wikimedia projects within a specified geographical region (country)." Since the Foundation is USA based, and a majority of editors speak English... promotion in a country in which most of the population are already aware of what Wikipedia is... doesn't seem terribly high priority (At least to me). Chapters are supposed to support/promote in their areas because they'll have a MUCH better understanding of the cultures, and that really is the critical component. If you can get local people Also, as someone involved with the proposed Wikimedia California [2] chapter, there is an issue of Geography. We (volunteers) in Northern Cali have had trouble working with SoCal simply because of size (amongst other reasons). SoCal is less interested in what we are up to when it is an 8 hour drive for them to attend. California the state is larger than the entire country Germany (by about 20% more). Granted California is one of the larger states, but my point is that a USA chapter formed just like every other countries...may not work. If proper state level groups were established first, then it would have a much better chance. Not saying it isn't possible, just a lot of work for currently little return (as I see it). [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_California -Jon On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 14:51, Steven Walling wrote: > Gerard, > > As a Wikimedia from the United States, I think I can speak to concern about > a lack of a U.S. chapter. > > There are many factors that have thus far held back the formation of a > chapter in my country, some of which are unique because of the history of > the movement, and some of which we share with other large, developed > nations > with high levels of Internet penetration. > > I can go into them at length if you like, but suffice it to say that I > don't > think the lack of the U.S. chapter in any way devalues Wikimedia's focus on > chapter development outside the U.S., Barry's work, or the prospective hire > at the Foundation. > > Steven Walling > > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Gerard Meijssen > wrote: > > > Hoi, > > The reality of chapters in the WMF is that the most obvious chapter does > > not > > exist. Not only does it not exist the WMF itself confuses the issue by > > functionaing in effect as both the worldwide organisation and the USA > > chapter. > > > > The consequence is that it is not possible to appreciate when the WMF > > functions as one or as the other and also it is perfectly possible to > > accuse > > the WMF of spending money where it has the least effect. It is equally > > problematic to learn if and how the WMF actually appreciated the recent > > Indonesian contest. I do argue that the new USA outreach project will > spend > > much more and will not have an equal effect. This may depend on what > > metrics > > are chosen, I refer to the metrics chosen for the Indonesian contest. > > > > I truly wonder how you can believe in an organisation that relies on > > chapters without an USA chapter. > > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > > > > > > On 18 August 2010 21:01, Barry Newstead wrote: > > > > > I am pleased to share the position description for the new Chapter > > > Development Director position [1] with the Wikimedia Foundation. We are > > now > > > open for applications and aim to fill this position with an outstanding > > > candidate by November. Thank you to those who shared perspectives on > the > > > Chapter Development role on the Meta page [2] that was set up a few > weeks > > > back. The process of defining ways for chapters and WMF to work > together > > > effectively is an ongoing one that I look forward to continuing with > all > > of > > > you and with our new staff member. Please do forward on the posting and > > > suggest candidates. It would be great to find candidates from within > the > > > Wikimedia movement. > > > > > > The position description draws from the input received on Meta as well > > as > > > informal discussions and input received from various sources. [3] The > > > description provides a window int
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
On 08/22/2010 03:51 PM, Steven Walling wrote: > Gerard, > > As a Wikimedia from the United States, I think I can speak to concern about > a lack of a U.S. chapter. > > There are many factors that have thus far held back the formation of a > chapter in my country, some of which are unique because of the history of > the movement, and some of which we share with other large, developed nations > with high levels of Internet penetration. > > I can go into them at length if you like, but suffice it to say that I don't > think the lack of the U.S. chapter in any way devalues Wikimedia's focus on > chapter development outside the U.S., Barry's work, or the prospective hire > at the Foundation. > > Steven Walling > > One of the things that removes the dire need of a Wikimedia Chapter in America is the fact that the WMF itself already collect money as a "charitable organziation", so the fundraising aspect isn't nearly so big of a deal to further the cause of Wikimedia projects. It is also a huge country where trying to organize on a national basis is a bit more difficult. Consider this as if there was an "European Union" chapter encompassing all EU countries simultaneously. There have been efforts for more local nature such as Wikimedia Pennsylvania and Wikimedia New York. If there ought to be some kind of focus for an organizational effort with Wikimedia volunteers on a geographical basis, more organizations of this nature ought to be encouraged and developed. Indeed I would strongly suggest that state or regional chapters ought to be treated as co-equals with Wikimedia chapters in other countries. By regional I also could see separate chapters for Austin and San Antonio Texas, or for some multi-state chapters in some areas where appropriate. If there is some need to organize on a "national" basis in the USA, it ought to be after these local chapters are formed and perhaps as a support network to encourage other local chapters to be developed within America. Then again, on that basis it might be useful to just go ahead and simply organize on a continental or large scale regional basis instead. I've toyed around with the idea of starting one of those chapters on a local basis near where I live, but I've put it off due to other activities in my life that has drawn off my attention lately. Robert Horning Get Free Email with Video Mail & Video Chat! http://www.netzero.net/freeemail?refcd=NZTAGOUT1FREM0210 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
Gerard, As a Wikimedia from the United States, I think I can speak to concern about a lack of a U.S. chapter. There are many factors that have thus far held back the formation of a chapter in my country, some of which are unique because of the history of the movement, and some of which we share with other large, developed nations with high levels of Internet penetration. I can go into them at length if you like, but suffice it to say that I don't think the lack of the U.S. chapter in any way devalues Wikimedia's focus on chapter development outside the U.S., Barry's work, or the prospective hire at the Foundation. Steven Walling On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The reality of chapters in the WMF is that the most obvious chapter does > not > exist. Not only does it not exist the WMF itself confuses the issue by > functionaing in effect as both the worldwide organisation and the USA > chapter. > > The consequence is that it is not possible to appreciate when the WMF > functions as one or as the other and also it is perfectly possible to > accuse > the WMF of spending money where it has the least effect. It is equally > problematic to learn if and how the WMF actually appreciated the recent > Indonesian contest. I do argue that the new USA outreach project will spend > much more and will not have an equal effect. This may depend on what > metrics > are chosen, I refer to the metrics chosen for the Indonesian contest. > > I truly wonder how you can believe in an organisation that relies on > chapters without an USA chapter. > Thanks, > GerardM > > > > On 18 August 2010 21:01, Barry Newstead wrote: > > > I am pleased to share the position description for the new Chapter > > Development Director position [1] with the Wikimedia Foundation. We are > now > > open for applications and aim to fill this position with an outstanding > > candidate by November. Thank you to those who shared perspectives on the > > Chapter Development role on the Meta page [2] that was set up a few weeks > > back. The process of defining ways for chapters and WMF to work together > > effectively is an ongoing one that I look forward to continuing with all > of > > you and with our new staff member. Please do forward on the posting and > > suggest candidates. It would be great to find candidates from within the > > Wikimedia movement. > > > > The position description draws from the input received on Meta as well > as > > informal discussions and input received from various sources. [3] The > > description provides a window into how I am thinking about the > relationship > > between chapters and WMF. Let me share some of my thoughts in the > interest > > of openness and transparency. These are just preliminary thoughts and I > > welcome ongoing feedback about where I'm on point and where I might be > > off-base. > > > > Let me start by saying that I am very committed to the chapter mission > to > > "empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop > > educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to > > disseminate it effectively and globally"[4] In my analysis (and I think > > most > > share this conclusion), we are still a long way from realizing this > > mission, > > even in our largest chapters. We, in the Global Development team, are > > investing in Chapter Development roles (we plan to add to the team in the > > future) to support the realization of the mission. > > > > For me, success in five years would be to be in a position where 75% of > > chapters would be rated “effective” and over 50% would be rated “very > > effective” based on an objective set of mission-focused metrics I would > > like > > to develop collaboratively with chapters over the next year. In addition, > I > > would like there to be at least 60 chapters that are reasonably [5] > > representative of the global population. It would be great if we generate > > some shared goals in the coming months. > > > > I have designed the WMF role as articulated in the position description > > with success metrics in mind and with an orientation toward mutual > > cooperation and a strong respect for the fact that virtually all of the > > chapter participants today are volunteers and that our future strength > will > > remain in the initiative, commitment and creativity of volunteers, even > as > > we add staff and spend money in chapters and at WMF. I expect that the > WMF > > staff (as well as capacity building support on organizational > development) > > will help make voluntary action easier, more scalable and more > sustainable, > > particularly for the leaders who have expressed a certain level of > fatigue > > in carrying the full weight of their chapters. > > > > It is important to be clear that I see the Foundation and chapters as > > independent organizations who are both ultimately accountable to the > > Wikimedia movement. In my team's work, I would like to earn our role by > >
Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
Hoi, The reality of chapters in the WMF is that the most obvious chapter does not exist. Not only does it not exist the WMF itself confuses the issue by functionaing in effect as both the worldwide organisation and the USA chapter. The consequence is that it is not possible to appreciate when the WMF functions as one or as the other and also it is perfectly possible to accuse the WMF of spending money where it has the least effect. It is equally problematic to learn if and how the WMF actually appreciated the recent Indonesian contest. I do argue that the new USA outreach project will spend much more and will not have an equal effect. This may depend on what metrics are chosen, I refer to the metrics chosen for the Indonesian contest. I truly wonder how you can believe in an organisation that relies on chapters without an USA chapter. Thanks, GerardM On 18 August 2010 21:01, Barry Newstead wrote: > I am pleased to share the position description for the new Chapter > Development Director position [1] with the Wikimedia Foundation. We are now > open for applications and aim to fill this position with an outstanding > candidate by November. Thank you to those who shared perspectives on the > Chapter Development role on the Meta page [2] that was set up a few weeks > back. The process of defining ways for chapters and WMF to work together > effectively is an ongoing one that I look forward to continuing with all of > you and with our new staff member. Please do forward on the posting and > suggest candidates. It would be great to find candidates from within the > Wikimedia movement. > > The position description draws from the input received on Meta as well as > informal discussions and input received from various sources. [3] The > description provides a window into how I am thinking about the relationship > between chapters and WMF. Let me share some of my thoughts in the interest > of openness and transparency. These are just preliminary thoughts and I > welcome ongoing feedback about where I'm on point and where I might be > off-base. > > Let me start by saying that I am very committed to the chapter mission to > "empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop > educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to > disseminate it effectively and globally"[4] In my analysis (and I think > most > share this conclusion), we are still a long way from realizing this > mission, > even in our largest chapters. We, in the Global Development team, are > investing in Chapter Development roles (we plan to add to the team in the > future) to support the realization of the mission. > > For me, success in five years would be to be in a position where 75% of > chapters would be rated “effective” and over 50% would be rated “very > effective” based on an objective set of mission-focused metrics I would > like > to develop collaboratively with chapters over the next year. In addition, I > would like there to be at least 60 chapters that are reasonably [5] > representative of the global population. It would be great if we generate > some shared goals in the coming months. > > I have designed the WMF role as articulated in the position description > with success metrics in mind and with an orientation toward mutual > cooperation and a strong respect for the fact that virtually all of the > chapter participants today are volunteers and that our future strength will > remain in the initiative, commitment and creativity of volunteers, even as > we add staff and spend money in chapters and at WMF. I expect that the WMF > staff (as well as capacity building support on organizational development) > will help make voluntary action easier, more scalable and more sustainable, > particularly for the leaders who have expressed a certain level of fatigue > in carrying the full weight of their chapters. > > It is important to be clear that I see the Foundation and chapters as > independent organizations who are both ultimately accountable to the > Wikimedia movement. In my team's work, I would like to earn our role by > demonstrating our value. We do and should have clear agreements about the > work we do together along with our financial relationships. These may > require some trade-offs; however, these should lay out mutual expectations > that encourage positive, productive work that supports the Wikimedia > mission. As such, I would expect that we are able to negotiate and abide by > contractual agreements that help us all do our work. > > A final word on openness. This note is an attempt to be open about how I'm > thinking now. I want my team's (and our) work to be open and transparent to > the movement. We should share publicly our thinking, reports on our > activities, evaluations of our successes and failures and a standard report > card of our effectiveness. I don't see this as a mechanism for reward or > punishment, but as a way to open us up to the movement at large and
[Foundation-l] WMF Chapter Development Director job posting
I am pleased to share the position description for the new Chapter Development Director position [1] with the Wikimedia Foundation. We are now open for applications and aim to fill this position with an outstanding candidate by November. Thank you to those who shared perspectives on the Chapter Development role on the Meta page [2] that was set up a few weeks back. The process of defining ways for chapters and WMF to work together effectively is an ongoing one that I look forward to continuing with all of you and with our new staff member. Please do forward on the posting and suggest candidates. It would be great to find candidates from within the Wikimedia movement. The position description draws from the input received on Meta as well as informal discussions and input received from various sources. [3] The description provides a window into how I am thinking about the relationship between chapters and WMF. Let me share some of my thoughts in the interest of openness and transparency. These are just preliminary thoughts and I welcome ongoing feedback about where I'm on point and where I might be off-base. Let me start by saying that I am very committed to the chapter mission to "empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally"[4] In my analysis (and I think most share this conclusion), we are still a long way from realizing this mission, even in our largest chapters. We, in the Global Development team, are investing in Chapter Development roles (we plan to add to the team in the future) to support the realization of the mission. For me, success in five years would be to be in a position where 75% of chapters would be rated “effective” and over 50% would be rated “very effective” based on an objective set of mission-focused metrics I would like to develop collaboratively with chapters over the next year. In addition, I would like there to be at least 60 chapters that are reasonably [5] representative of the global population. It would be great if we generate some shared goals in the coming months. I have designed the WMF role as articulated in the position description with success metrics in mind and with an orientation toward mutual cooperation and a strong respect for the fact that virtually all of the chapter participants today are volunteers and that our future strength will remain in the initiative, commitment and creativity of volunteers, even as we add staff and spend money in chapters and at WMF. I expect that the WMF staff (as well as capacity building support on organizational development) will help make voluntary action easier, more scalable and more sustainable, particularly for the leaders who have expressed a certain level of fatigue in carrying the full weight of their chapters. It is important to be clear that I see the Foundation and chapters as independent organizations who are both ultimately accountable to the Wikimedia movement. In my team's work, I would like to earn our role by demonstrating our value. We do and should have clear agreements about the work we do together along with our financial relationships. These may require some trade-offs; however, these should lay out mutual expectations that encourage positive, productive work that supports the Wikimedia mission. As such, I would expect that we are able to negotiate and abide by contractual agreements that help us all do our work. A final word on openness. This note is an attempt to be open about how I'm thinking now. I want my team's (and our) work to be open and transparent to the movement. We should share publicly our thinking, reports on our activities, evaluations of our successes and failures and a standard report card of our effectiveness. I don't see this as a mechanism for reward or punishment, but as a way to open us up to the movement at large and most importantly to enable us to be a learning community where we can critically assess our work and adapt. I hope this note is a reasonable start. I look forward to working with you all, to having your feedback and to bringing a strong Chapter Development Director on board soon. Barry [1] See http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Job_openings/Chapter_Development_Director [2] See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chapter_development [3] Berlin Chapters meeting discussions, strategy project, Wikimania discussions, generous proactive input from Delphine Menard reflecting on her prior experience, thoughts provided by Sebastian Moleski and an email exchange with Bence Domokos [4] See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters [5] Added “Reasonably” caveat as we might not be in a position to have chapters in places such as the People's Republic of China for policy reasons ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/l
