Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Fæ]

I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF
employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid
Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services
guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not
employees know how to go get some money from their hobby.

To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I
been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an
active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and
if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly.

Fae

On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride  wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk
>
> As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors
> to track their hours. (Right?)
>
> But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a hybrid
> of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm
> still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you can
> post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does
> anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services?
>
> Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page
> saying "I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no
> exception" and expressing his "usual principled objections to such
> things in the strongest possible terms."
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131
>
> I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular
> examples.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 



-- 
fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm
Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Odesk is the way the WMF pays people who do not live in the USA. What is
expected of a contractor or employee is to register the time worked for the
WMF and the contractor is paid through Odesk. This has all kinds of legal
reasons.

When an employee / contractor wants to use Odesk in addition to work done
for the WMF, they can as long as the contract with WMF does not require
exclusivity. Typically people working through Odesk work in the area of
software development.
Thanks,
 Gerard


On 8 January 2014 09:04, Fæ  wrote:

> I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF
> employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid
> Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services
> guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not
> employees know how to go get some money from their hobby.
>
> To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I
> been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an
> active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and
> if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly.
>
> Fae
>
> On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride  wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk
> >
> > As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors
> > to track their hours. (Right?)
> >
> > But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a
> hybrid
> > of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm
> > still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you
> can
> > post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does
> > anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services?
> >
> > Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page
> > saying "I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no
> > exception" and expressing his "usual principled objections to such
> > things in the strongest possible terms."
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131
> >
> > I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular
> > examples.
> >
> > MZMcBride
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm
> Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Gryllida]

Thought paid editing is prohibited. It could be nice to find ways to enforce 
that.

On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, at 21:50, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> Odesk is the way the WMF pays people who do not live in the USA. What is
> expected of a contractor or employee is to register the time worked for the
> WMF and the contractor is paid through Odesk. This has all kinds of legal
> reasons.
> 
> When an employee / contractor wants to use Odesk in addition to work done
> for the WMF, they can as long as the contract with WMF does not require
> exclusivity. Typically people working through Odesk work in the area of
> software development.
> Thanks,
>  Gerard
> 
> 
> On 8 January 2014 09:04, Fæ  wrote:
> 
> > I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF
> > employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid
> > Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services
> > guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not
> > employees know how to go get some money from their hobby.
> >
> > To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I
> > been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an
> > active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and
> > if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride  wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk
> > >
> > > As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors
> > > to track their hours. (Right?)
> > >
> > > But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a
> > hybrid
> > > of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm
> > > still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you
> > can
> > > post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does
> > > anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services?
> > >
> > > Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page
> > > saying "I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no
> > > exception" and expressing his "usual principled objections to such
> > > things in the strongest possible terms."
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131
> > >
> > > I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular
> > > examples.
> > >
> > > MZMcBride
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm
> > Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Andre Engels]

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Gryllida  wrote:

> Thought paid editing is prohibited. It could be nice to find ways to
> enforce that.
>

I don't think it's expressly forbidden, 'frowned upon' would be the words
I'd use. Apart from that, I have a feeling this whole thread is a storm in
less than a glass of water. Odesk is a system where people can offer or
take jobs. Wikimedia uses it (though in a somewhat different way). How on
Earth do those two facts imply "Odesk is probably used for paid editing"?

-- 
André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[David Gerard]

On 8 January 2014 12:12, Andre Engels  wrote:

> I don't think it's expressly forbidden, 'frowned upon' would be the words
> I'd use. Apart from that, I have a feeling this whole thread is a storm in
> less than a glass of water. Odesk is a system where people can offer or
> take jobs. Wikimedia uses it (though in a somewhat different way). How on
> Earth do those two facts imply "Odesk is probably used for paid editing"?



Because it's "feed the trolls" week, obviously.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Fæ]

On 8 January 2014 12:14, David Gerard  wrote:
> Because it's "feed the trolls" week, obviously.

Here David, have a cookie.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Amir E. Aharoni]

Hi,

Is there any plan to allow using the "Thanks" feature to thank anonymous
Wikimedia users?

A Hebrew Wikipedia user asked me about this, saying that it may be even
more useful to thank anons than logged-in users.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Yaroslav M. Blanter]

On 08.01.2014 15:22, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:

Hi,

Is there any plan to allow using the "Thanks" feature to thank 
anonymous

Wikimedia users?

A Hebrew Wikipedia user asked me about this, saying that it may be 
even

more useful to thank anons than logged-in users.



How would they know someone thanked them?

Cheers
Yaroslav

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Amir E. Aharoni]

Something like the "new message" orange bar :)

I guess that designers and Growth people may know an answer, but all
thoughts are welcome.


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬


2014/1/8 Yaroslav M. Blanter 

> On 08.01.2014 15:22, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there any plan to allow using the "Thanks" feature to thank anonymous
>> Wikimedia users?
>>
>> A Hebrew Wikipedia user asked me about this, saying that it may be even
>> more useful to thank anons than logged-in users.
>>
>>
> How would they know someone thanked them?
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Nathan]

We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the fundraiser.
I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
drives, even though editing is really the core way for people to donate to
Wikimedia.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Amir E. Aharoni, 08/01/2014 15:32:

Something like the "new message" orange bar :)


Yeah, orange bar be blessed.



I guess that designers and Growth people may know an answer, but all
thoughts are welcome.


As long as the orange bar works (it doesn't on mobile, beware), you can 
just use a variant of the many {{thanks}} templates and post them on 
their talk pages with some JavaScript mimicking the "thanks" button.


Nemo

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Bjoern Hoehrmann]

* Nathan wrote:
>We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the fundraiser.
>I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
>drives, even though editing is really the core way for people to donate to
>Wikimedia.

That would make many editors very annoyed and angry and drive them away.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Nathan]

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann  wrote:

> * Nathan wrote:
> >We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the
> fundraiser.
> >I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
> >drives, even though editing is really the core way for people to donate to
> >Wikimedia.
>
> That would make many editors very annoyed and angry and drive them away.


I very seriously doubt that is the case, and if they object to efforts to
publicly attract new editors to Wikimedia projects... Banners irritate
people, but anyone with a sincere interest in contributing to Wikimedia
should be able to accept the necessity of maintaining both the financial
and human resources of the movement.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Ting Chen]

Hello dear all,

I won't impose my standard to other people, I just want to tell you what 
is the standard I setup for myself, and I will also tell you why.


I won't accept payment or gift exceeding a certain amount (means > 20 
Euro) or search for payment for my volunteer's work that is however 
related to Wikimedia. Especially when I was on my travel reject gift may 
be considered as unfriendly or even insulting, this is the ONLY reason 
why I do accept small gifts. And by larger gift, like a quite expansive 
looking image band I received in Kazakhstan I brought it to the office 
and left it there.


There are a few reasons for this:

At first a very personal one: I made the experience in my life again and 
again that I lost my fun and my interest on something as soon as I got 
paid for it. Get paid = in debt of = duty = no fun.


Second is a philosophical one: I believe that getting paid do have a 
desruptive effect on the free and collaboratory character of our 
projects. The philosophical background is that I believe knowledge and 
education is something like air, it is the basics of human live and 
humanity and should not be charged. But well, I know, not all people, 
(maybe most people) don't share this view point.


Third is a practical one: And this especially for people who occupy a 
position in the movement, be it an employee of one of the organizations, 
or be it a volunteer board member or a committee member: If you need to 
fend off an accusation (most probably conflict of interest, or misuse of 
power), you are in a bad position. It is in this case unimportant if the 
accusation is true or not, battling against rumors and emotions is a 
hard battle. And the limbo of being stained will always be with you. 
Sadly, I have seen this too often by people inside of the movement and 
outside of the movement (mainly in the politics) that I actually wonder 
why people still fall into these pitfalls again and again. So try to 
stay in a position in which you will not be confronted with such a 
battle. It is simply like in the medicine: prophylax is better than 
antibiotics.



A few words to my view on paid edition: I think this is something that 
we cannot avoid happening. Prohibition just drives them into secrecy. As 
such, I prefer it to be done openly instead of in secrecy. My personal 
aversion against paid edition should be quite obvious from the above 
account, just I don't feel I can (or should) enforce it upon other people.


Greetings
Ting


Am 1/8/2014 9:04 AM, schrieb Fæ:

I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF
employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid
Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services
guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not
employees know how to go get some money from their hobby.

To date, I have never be paid for my volunteer work, neither have I
been an employee of the WMF or a Chapter, but my activities as an
active batch uploader and bot-writer for Commons might be fungible and
if so, I would like to sell my services ethically and openly.

Fae

On 8 January 2014 07:30, MZMcBride  wrote:

Hi.

Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/oDesk

As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation uses oDesk with contractors
to track their hours. (Right?)

But it also appears to be a job board of some kind. It seems like a hybrid
of LinkedIn and Craigslist, though I haven't looked carefully and I'm
still lightly poking around. It seems like the kind of place where you can
post Wikipedia paid editing services. If this is part of oDesk, does
anyone know roughly how many people offer or buy these services?

Regarding paid editing, Jimmy reiterated his stance on his talk page
saying "I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no
exception" and expressing his "usual principled objections to such
things in the strongest possible terms."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/589723131

I think the underlying issue deserves a discussion, apart from particular
examples.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 







___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Fæ]

+1 to Ting's philosophy. Best WMF trustee ever. ;-)

It may be worth illustrating how I might draw the line between my
unpaid volunteer work and taking payment for some tasks. To date I
have uploaded something like 160,000+ images to Commons and never been
paid anything for my time. My work has been in fits and starts and my
attention wanders from one project to the next, like most unpaid
volunteers. :-D

The sort of task that I would like to get some remuneration for, would
be where an archive or GLAM wanted me to work closely with them to
achieve their public access objectives, rather than leaving it to me
just to upload the best bits in ways that I thought were most
appropriate.

Spending significant time helping paid staff to run public volunteer
events, process their in-house metadata, choose what to scan, video or
record, decide how to release it online (either on Commons or
elsewhere), what licence to choose, and help with writing code for
tools like pywikipediabot or reprocessing to open media formats, seems
a perfectly reasonable thing to charge for, particularly if they would
like me to do this to satisfy their schedule rather than leaving it to
me to stick it on my ever lengthening back-burner of interesting
stuff.

Cheers,
Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?

The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as
freelancer.com and its ilk.  The foundation is simply a client, and uses
it only to pay its contractors and (most of)* their non-US workforce;
and AFAIK never just contract out from postings.

Contractors input work hours, WMF pays oDesk, oDesk sends monies to
contractor.  The system itself is a little shitty and quite a bit
expensive, but considerably less so than it would be to set up legal
entities able to directly pay people outside the US as local employees
(including the horrible mess that it actually /is/ to have employees in
other countries rather than contract out).

-- Marc

* some staffers instead work for a business entity that /itself/
contracts out to the WMF in which case it works a bit differently
because then oDesk is no longer necessary as a middle man.


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Chad Horohoe]

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:

> On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> > Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
>
> The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as
> freelancer.com and its ilk.  The foundation is simply a client, and uses
> it only to pay its contractors and (most of)* their non-US workforce;
> and AFAIK never just contract out from postings.
>
> Contractors input work hours, WMF pays oDesk, oDesk sends monies to
> contractor.  The system itself is a little shitty and quite a bit
> expensive, but considerably less so than it would be to set up legal
> entities able to directly pay people outside the US as local employees
> (including the horrible mess that it actually /is/ to have employees in
> other countries rather than contract out).
>
> -- Marc
>
> * some staffers instead work for a business entity that /itself/
> contracts out to the WMF in which case it works a bit differently
> because then oDesk is no longer necessary as a middle man.
>
>
Marc said everything I was going to say. This was my experience with
oDesk as a US-based contractor as well. The contracting process was
done like the normal hiring process and completely apart from oDesk.
oDesk was simply used to input hours and receive payment.

-Chad
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 01/08/2014 11:07 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> The system itself is a little [suboptimal]

It should go without saying (but may be worth clarifying) that this is
my personal opinion from having suffered oDesk for a year and not that
of the Foundation.  :-)

-- Marc



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Samuel Klein]

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Nathan  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann 
> wrote:
>
> > * Nathan wrote:
> > >We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the
> > fundraiser.
> >
> > That would make many editors very annoyed and angry and drive them away.
>
> I very seriously doubt that is the case Banners irritate
> people, but anyone with a sincere interest in contributing to Wikimedia
> should be able to accept the necessity of maintaining both the financial
> and human resources of the movement.
>

This is just what I was going to say.  That would be charming; we could
ensure that each IP only sees it once per year.  SJ
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2014 scholarship now accepting application

[Katie Chan]

Hi all,

Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2014 in London are now being 
accepted. Applications are open until the end of the day UTC on 17 February.


Wikimania 2014 scholarships is an award given to an individual to enable 
them to attend Wikimania in London from 6-10 August, 2014.


Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia 
Foundation for Wikimania 2014. A Wikimedia Foundation scholarship will 
cover the cost of an individual's round-trip travel costs as arranged by 
the Wikimedia Foundation travel agency, shared accommodation as arranged 
by the Wikimedia Foundation, and registration for Wikimania.


Applicants will be rated using a pre-determined selection process and 
selection criteria by the Scholarship Committee, who will determine 
which are successful. To learn more about Wikimania 2014 scholarships, 
please visit .


To apply for a scholarship, fill out the application form on 
. It is highly recommended that 
applicants review all of the material on the Scholarships page and the 
associated FAQ before submitting an application.


If you have any question, please contact 
 or leave a message on 
.


Katie Chan
Chair, Scholarship Committee

--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author 
and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the author is 
associated with or employed by.


Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
 - Heinrich Heine


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2014 scholarship now accepting application

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
> Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
> Foundation for Wikimania 2014.

I rather liked the idea of partial scholarships in past years since it
would allow more people to attend on the same budget when practical.

Can I ask why this was decided against this year?

-- Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2014 scholarship now accepting application

[Katie Chan]

On 08/01/2014 17:39, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:

On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:

Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
Foundation for Wikimania 2014.

I rather liked the idea of partial scholarships in past years since it
would allow more people to attend on the same budget when practical.

Can I ask why this was decided against this year?



Per the FAQ[1]:

"The low acceptance rate of partial scholarships and overhead in 
reimbursing for partial scholarships for Wikimania 2013 
 made it apparent 
that the funds would be better spent in offering more full scholarships."


I hope that helps.

KTC


[1]: https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships/FAQ

--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author 
and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the author is 
associated with or employed by.


Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
 - Heinrich Heine


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Fwd: [Wikimania-l] Wikimania 2014 scholarship now accepting application

[Katie Chan]

Hi all,

Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2014 in London are now being
accepted. Applications are open until the end of the day UTC on 17 February.

Wikimania 2014 scholarships is an award given to an individual to enable
them to attend Wikimania in London from 6-10 August, 2014.

Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
Foundation for Wikimania 2014. A Wikimedia Foundation scholarship will
cover the cost of an individual's round-trip travel costs as arranged by
the Wikimedia Foundation travel agency, shared accommodation as arranged
by the Wikimedia Foundation, and registration for Wikimania.

Applicants will be rated using a pre-determined selection process and
selection criteria by the Scholarship Committee, who will determine
which are successful. To learn more about Wikimania 2014 scholarships,
please visit .

To apply for a scholarship, fill out the application form on
. It is highly recommended that
applicants review all of the material on the Scholarships page and the
associated FAQ before submitting an application.

If you have any question, please contact
 or leave a message on
.

Katie Chan
Chair, Scholarship Committee

--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author 
and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the author is 
associated with or employed by.


Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
  - Heinrich Heine


___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposed bylaws amendment

[Chris Keating]

Thanks Alice.

For those interested in this, you might like to note that James Hare has
started a discussion about the method used to select these Board members,
here; - it reflects the likelihood that thematic orgs will be part of the
decision not just chapters.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chapter-selected_Board_seats/2014_resolution

Regards,

Chris



On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Alice Wiegand wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> In 2013 the WMF Board of Trustees started to publish proposed bylaw changes
> on Meta for consultation with the community. As we want to continue with
> this new tradition you find a proposed change at
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_bylaws/January_2014_-_Amendment_for_Trustees_selected_by_Chapters_and_Thematic_Organizations
>
> The Board Governance Committee (BGC) was commissioned by the Board to
> prepare the resolution and the BGC present it to the Board at the same time
> we publish it on Meta. Now a 10 day discussion phase starts after which the
> Board starts voting.
>
> I'm happy to invite you to review and discuss the resolution draft. Please
> share your comments on the talk page.
>
> Regards,
> Alice.
>
>
> --
> Alice Wiegand
> Board of Trustees
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2014 scholarship now accepting application

[Andrew Gray]

Note, though, that this is WMF, and presumably doesn't stop the
individual chapters offering partial scholarships if they want to...

Andrew.

On 8 January 2014 17:50, Katie Chan  wrote:
> On 08/01/2014 17:39, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>>
>> On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
>>>
>>> Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
>>> Foundation for Wikimania 2014.
>>
>> I rather liked the idea of partial scholarships in past years since it
>> would allow more people to attend on the same budget when practical.
>>
>> Can I ask why this was decided against this year?
>>
>
> Per the FAQ[1]:
>
> "The low acceptance rate of partial scholarships and overhead in reimbursing
> for partial scholarships for Wikimania 2013
>  made it apparent that
> the funds would be better spent in offering more full scholarships."
>
> I hope that helps.
>
> KTC
>
>
> [1]: https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships/FAQ
>
>
> --
> Katie Chan
> Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the
> author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the
> author is associated with or employed by.
>
>
> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
>  - Heinrich Heine
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2014 scholarship now accepting application

[Risker]

On 8 January 2014 12:50, Katie Chan  wrote:

> On 08/01/2014 17:39, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>
>> On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
>>
>>> Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
>>> Foundation for Wikimania 2014.
>>>
>> I rather liked the idea of partial scholarships in past years since it
>> would allow more people to attend on the same budget when practical.
>>
>> Can I ask why this was decided against this year?
>>
>>
> Per the FAQ[1]:
>
> "The low acceptance rate of partial scholarships and overhead in
> reimbursing for partial scholarships for Wikimania 2013 <
> https://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_page> made it apparent that
> the funds would be better spent in offering more full scholarships."
>
> I hope that helps.
>
> KTC
>
>
> [1]: https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships/FAQ
>
>
>
>

I too am sorry to see that partial scholarships will not be entertained
this year by the Wikimania Committee.  They were a reasonable interim point
for people who wanted to attend but didn't have the budget to handle both
expensive flights and expensive rooms, but at the same time were unwilling
or unable to handle staying in shared dormitory accommodation that is the
expected standard for full scholarships.

There should be only a marginally higher overhead in managing partial
scholarships; both types required the same amount of effort to send
reimbursement for airfare.

Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2014 scholarship now accepting application

[Katie Chan]

@Andrew,

Yes, of course. Or for that matter thematic organization, namely Amical 
Wikimedia.


On 08/01/2014 19:57, Risker wrote:


I too am sorry to see that partial scholarships will not be entertained
this year by the Wikimania Committee.


For the record, the type of scholarships on offer is up to the 
individual funding body, in this case the Wikimedia Foundation.


Regards,

KTC

--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the 
author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the 
author is associated with or employed by.



Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Israel report for September – November 2013

[Chen Davidi]

Hey,

Here is Wikimedia Israel report for September – November 2013:

Wiki Loves Monuments –


On October 15, WLM Israel has finally ended.


   -

   7000 images of nearly  700 heritage sites and 100 artworks that are
   publicly accessible were uploaded to WikiCommons.
   -

   Over 400 people took part in more than 30 tours and photography
   workshops initiated by Wikimedia Israel in collaboration with the Society
   for Preservation of Israel Heritage Sites.
   -

   40 articles were published on the Israeli media (TV, Radio, Newspappers
   and Internet). See
summary(pdf)
   -

   Tens of thousands people viewed  the tens’ winning photographs exhibit
   that were placed in one of the bussiest shopping centers in Israel.
   -

   Thanks to the Israeli public who participated in the competition, Israel
   has maintained the 15th position in the ranking of international
   competition number of uploaded images.
   -

   We published a blog post related at the Wikimedia Foundation Blog and
   you can watch it
here.




Program activities

GLAM

   - November 13, part of the EVA MINERVA 2013 Jerusalem Conference on the
   Digitisation of Cultural Heritage, a panel discussing the subject: Fashion
   Heritage On-line: Europeana Fashion & the GLAM-Wiki Community Worldwide - a
   Case Study.

   - As part of the Europeana Fashion
ProjectCollaborating
with the
   
GLAM-wiki,
   a two part  edit-a-thon were held at the Design Faculty, Holon Institute of
   Technology  (November 14, 21). During the edit-a-thon a lecture held by
   Marco Rendina, Technical Coordinator at Europeana Fashion.

GLAM: The National Library

   -

   September - October - Sixteen sound
filesof
Jewish prayers were released on the occasion of the Jewish New Year.
   -

   Also, the articles " Notes on the Jewish
Temple",
   " De-Pierre Map ", "Nolin
   Map " and more, was translated
   and the entire
manuscriptwas
Uploaded on to WikiCommons.
   -

   November - About 150 texts was selected from a collection of Hebrew
   manuscripts of the digital library, and was uploaded to Wikipedia.
   -

   Hundreds of new files, including: books, photographs and audio files of
   jewish festival were released and uploaded to Wikicommons and Wikipedia
   and other wiki projects with the assistance of the National Library.

Lectures and Editing Workshops

   -

   Middle-school teachers heard a lecture on Wikipedia as part of teacher
   training course dealing with the use of technology tools in the classroom.
   The lecture was filmed and can be seen
here
   .
   -

   November 4 - A lecture on Wikipedia was given to the faculty members and
   lecturers at the Department of Conservation of sites and monuments at
   Western Galilee College.
   -

   November  5 – Following "Wiki Loves Monuments" contest, a special
   editing workshop was held for employees of the department of conservation
   of the Municipal Museum of History in Kiryat
Ata,
   a city in north district of Israel.
   -

   November 11 - Two lectures about Wikipedia were conducted in the
   Department of Public Administration, The School of Government and Social
   Policy, at Beit Berl College.
   -

   November 12 - Another preface Lecture “What is Wikipedia?” was given at
   the The Hebrew University of Jerusalmen, to MA students at the Department
   of Archaeology and Ancient History.
   -

   November 21 – Even in the Faculty of Medicine in
Zefat- Bar Ilan University, they
asked for  a lecture a about Wikipedia.

Educational and Academic Collaborations

   -

   October 24 - a lecture and an editing workshop was held for the Faculty
   and MA students at the  NCJW Women and Gender Studies Program Tel Aviv
   University, as part of an ongoing cooperation.
   -

   October 28 – a Wiki lecture and an editing wor

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Andrea Zanni]

Agreed.
It's nice to feel the community behind Wikipedia (well, when it doesn't
bite you)
and the feeling that somebody noticed you fixed a typo is even nicer.

Aubrey


On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Nathan  wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > * Nathan wrote:
> > > >We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the
> > > fundraiser.
> > >
> > > That would make many editors very annoyed and angry and drive them
> away.
> >
> > I very seriously doubt that is the case Banners irritate
> > people, but anyone with a sincere interest in contributing to Wikimedia
> > should be able to accept the necessity of maintaining both the financial
> > and human resources of the movement.
> >
>
> This is just what I was going to say.  That would be charming; we could
> ensure that each IP only sees it once per year.  SJ
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch

[Frank Schulenburg]

Dear all,

I'm writing to let you know that Sarah Stierch is no longer an employee of the 
Wikimedia Foundation.  

The Wikimedia Foundation has recently learned that Sarah has been editing 
Wikipedia on behalf of paying clients, as recently as a few weeks ago. She did 
that even though it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many 
in the editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation.

The Wikimedia Foundation values Sarah a great deal. She has been an active 
Wikipedian since 2006. She is committed to increasing dialogue between cultural 
institutions and our projects. She has worked hard to increase the presence and 
voices of women and other minorities in our projects, and she is a warm 
welcomer of new Wikipedians. Her work in Program Evaluation has been important 
and necessary. She is a good friend of many of us.

Everybody makes mistakes, and I would like to believe that the Wikimedia 
movement is a place of forgiveness and compassion. And so I ask you to respect 
Sarah's privacy at what is surely a difficult time for her, and to join me in 
wishing her every future success.

I sincerely hope that Sarah will continue her important work as a Wikipedian 
and member of the GLAM community, and I thank her for the commitment and energy 
and thoughtfulness she has brought to her work at the Foundation. 

Frank Schulenburg


-- 


Frank Schulenburg
Senior Director of Programs
Wikimedia Foundation

Cell: +1 (415) 517-0453
Email: fr...@wikimedia.org

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum 
of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[MZMcBride]

Andre Engels wrote:
>oDesk is a system where people can offer or take jobs. Wikimedia uses it
>(though in a somewhat different way). How on Earth do those two facts
>imply "oDesk is probably used for paid editing"?

I'm not sure "probably" is necessary. The evidence strongly suggests that
it _is_ used for paid editing. Whether it's used for paid advocacy is
another matter, of course.

https://www.odesk.com/o/profiles/browse/?q=wikipedia

I think oDesk serves multiple functions. The Wikimedia Foundation is
apparently a client, but individual Wikimedians have also apparently been
posting "hire me to write an article for you" entries.

That said, either oDesk's search functionality is terrible or the practice
doesn't seem to be particularly common. I've only found a few "Wikipedia
Expert" or "Wikipedia Writer" listings off-hand.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement Sarah Stierch

[Nathan]

You know what, I think this outcome is not just disappointing, it's
positively astounding. I have a lot that I could say about it, but I can't
imagine what the point of saying it could possibly be. Chalk one up for the
trolls.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method

[Erik Moeller]

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling
 wrote:

> In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting
> bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange --
> it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that
> naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying
> gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent
> financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start
> taking on more risk now.

While this is true, a more pragmatic view is that, as long as BTC has
value to some people, there's no harm in accepting it and transferring
it to USD the moment we receive any, provided legal/financial issues
can be addressed with reasonable effort.

The strongest counter-argument is that we might not actually get a
donation total that makes this worth our time. The Internet Archive
has a single-use Bitcoin address that's received a total of <$30K at
current (insanely high) exchange rates.

But for me, the main reason not do this sooner is that it would have
significantly fueled the Bitcoin speculative bubble, and WMF should
remain neutral on the utility of Bitcoin. At this point though,
whatever WMF does or doesn't do is just a small drop in the bucket of
the overall Bitcoin mania, so I'm personally fine with a decision
being made on pragmatic grounds alone.

My own view is that Bitcoin has significant design flaws (built-in
economic inequality, most rational actors will hoard rather than
spend, doubtful long-term scalability, questionable value as an actual
currency due to crazy volatility, tendency to centralize power with
miners, rampant security attacks against BTC holders, etc.), but as
long as no more severe technical flaws are discovered/exploited, at
least some value will likely attach to BTC for some time to come, even
if it's dramatically less than the current exchange rate.

With that said, I fully defer to our fundraising team on this since
it's a decision that should be made purely on cost/benefit grounds,
perhaps by also comparing with other currencies that see relatively
little use.

The one unambiguous positive that I see coming out of Bitcoin mania is
a renewed interest in peer-to-peer networks; the last time that
happened was about 12 years ago, and it resulted in technologies like
BitTorrent, Tor, various file sharing networks and many others being
developed. Experimenting is, overall, a good thing, and no matter how
this one plays out (and how exhausting a topic it can be given the
idiocy of coverage about it), I'm optimistic that we will see positive
ripple effects for the free culture movement.

Erik

[1] https://blockchain.info/address/1Archive1n2C579dMsAu3iC6tWzuQJz8dN
-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)

[MZMcBride]

Frank Schulenburg wrote:
>[...] it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many in the
>editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation.

No.

Paid editing is not the same as paid advocacy (editing). This is a very
important point.

Suggested reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dominic/FAQ
https://blog.wikimedia.org/?p=25830

N.B. an example of paid editing that few would likely have an issue with
in the first link and Sue's careful and correct wording in the second link.

If we're going to have such a fine distinction, we should probably better
document it to avoid misunderstandings.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk

[MZMcBride]

Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
>> Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
>
>The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as
>freelancer.com and its ilk.  The foundation is simply a client, and uses
>it only to pay its contractors and (most of)* their non-US workforce;
>and AFAIK never just contract out from postings.
>
>Contractors input work hours, WMF pays oDesk, oDesk sends monies to
>contractor.  The system itself is a little shitty and quite a bit
>expensive, but considerably less so than it would be to set up legal
>entities able to directly pay people outside the US as local employees
>(including the horrible mess that it actually /is/ to have employees in
>other countries rather than contract out).

Thank you for this. It helped me better understand the business
relationship between the Wikimedia Foundation and oDesk.

Clarifying whether it's appropriate for anyone, Wikimedia Foundation
employee or otherwise, to engage with oDesk's... other services seems like
a pretty high priority. And, in general, there needs to be clarification
about the distinction between paid editing versus paid advocacy editing,
especially if it's going to be treated as a bright line.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)

[Liam Wyatt]

Thank you very much for raising this distinction MZ. It's a very important
one and, in the recriminations about this particular event, I would hate
for the 'baby to get thrown out with the bathwater' by losing this
distinction.

-Liam / Wittylama

wittylama.com
Peace, love & metadata


On 9 January 2014 13:22, MZMcBride  wrote:

> Frank Schulenburg wrote:
> >[...] it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many in the
> >editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
> No.
>
> Paid editing is not the same as paid advocacy (editing). This is a very
> important point.
>
> Suggested reading:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dominic/FAQ
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/?p=25830
>
> N.B. an example of paid editing that few would likely have an issue with
> in the first link and Sue's careful and correct wording in the second link.
>
> If we're going to have such a fine distinction, we should probably better
> document it to avoid misunderstandings.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method

[John Vandenberg]

Thanks Erik for a well written overview.

Would it be possible for the WMF to give an estimate on what it would cost
to build and/or what the threshold of annual bitcoin donations would make
it worthwhile building. Someone might be interested in donating
specifically to have this built, or we could obtain pledges to donate to
see if the threshold can be reached.
On Jan 9, 2014 9:06 AM, "Erik Moeller"  wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling
>  wrote:
>
> > In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting
> > bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange
> --
> > it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that
> > naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying
> > gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent
> > financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start
> > taking on more risk now.
>
> While this is true, a more pragmatic view is that, as long as BTC has
> value to some people, there's no harm in accepting it and transferring
> it to USD the moment we receive any, provided legal/financial issues
> can be addressed with reasonable effort.
>
> The strongest counter-argument is that we might not actually get a
> donation total that makes this worth our time. The Internet Archive
> has a single-use Bitcoin address that's received a total of <$30K at
> current (insanely high) exchange rates.
>
> But for me, the main reason not do this sooner is that it would have
> significantly fueled the Bitcoin speculative bubble, and WMF should
> remain neutral on the utility of Bitcoin. At this point though,
> whatever WMF does or doesn't do is just a small drop in the bucket of
> the overall Bitcoin mania, so I'm personally fine with a decision
> being made on pragmatic grounds alone.
>
> My own view is that Bitcoin has significant design flaws (built-in
> economic inequality, most rational actors will hoard rather than
> spend, doubtful long-term scalability, questionable value as an actual
> currency due to crazy volatility, tendency to centralize power with
> miners, rampant security attacks against BTC holders, etc.), but as
> long as no more severe technical flaws are discovered/exploited, at
> least some value will likely attach to BTC for some time to come, even
> if it's dramatically less than the current exchange rate.
>
> With that said, I fully defer to our fundraising team on this since
> it's a decision that should be made purely on cost/benefit grounds,
> perhaps by also comparing with other currencies that see relatively
> little use.
>
> The one unambiguous positive that I see coming out of Bitcoin mania is
> a renewed interest in peer-to-peer networks; the last time that
> happened was about 12 years ago, and it resulted in technologies like
> BitTorrent, Tor, various file sharing networks and many others being
> developed. Experimenting is, overall, a good thing, and no matter how
> this one plays out (and how exhausting a topic it can be given the
> idiocy of coverage about it), I'm optimistic that we will see positive
> ripple effects for the free culture movement.
>
> Erik
>
> [1] https://blockchain.info/address/1Archive1n2C579dMsAu3iC6tWzuQJz8dN
> --
> Erik Möller
> VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method

[Matthew Walker]

I will probably regret saying this[1] -- but the figure we like to throw
around here in fundraising tech is that a new payments gateway [2] is not
even worth considering unless it is likely to make us at least 500K USD a
year[3]. Or, in the case that it is not an immediate payoff, if it is
strategically relevant for the future of our income stream (think our
recent forays into mobile). It's also worth stating that at this time we
only use four gateways (we get the hundreds of currencies through gateways
that serve multiple methods and countries.)

It is a significant undertaking to integrate a new gateway with our current
code (think several man months of time related to coding, code review,
donor services preparation, and testing; not including contract negotiation
and legal review.) In addition, every gateway incurs additional
maintenance, auditing, and troubleshooting costs on an ongoing basis.
Because of these costs, we have only four gateways (Adyen, Amazon,
GlobalCollect, and PayPal); with active plans to add another (already
determined) gateway this year for common methods and regions we don't
already serve.

Formally the dept has not conducted a cost/benefit analysis of accepting
bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency. Nor have we asked the legal dept to
look into it from a compliance point of view. I have been attempting to
gather data for an informal blog post on the topic and I have found no
indication that if we were to conduct such a study formally that it would
come out positively.

I will state again the contents of our FAQ: "We do, however, strive to
provide as many methods of donating as possible and continue to monitor
Bitcoin with interest and may revisit this position should circumstances
change." I would encourage those who are put off by the Wikimedia
Foundation's non acceptance of cryptocurrency donations to consider
alternative methods of donation and promoting of free knowledge; namely by
becoming active editors.

[1] 
The bitcoin community should be aware that their persistent and often times
aggressive, rude, and vulgar messaging towards me and my fellow coworkers
is not appreciated; nor does it help their cause. If the goals of the
cryptocurrency movement include shedding the world of fiscal dictators,
centralized control, and autocracy; then perhaps it is time for some
introspection. From my standpoint the actions of the movement (or at least
the actions of a significant number who are public on the internet that I
have read) are scarily similar to those whom the moment stands to replace.


[2] A payments gateway can be simply thought of as a collection of APIs,
coupled into DonationInterface, our backend CRM, and financial software,
that can accept payments and remit them in an auditable way to the
Wikimedia Foundation in one of our working currencies.

[3] This number isn't set in stone and should not be considered a formal
estimate, but consider that the Wikimedia Foundation's yearly budget is
~$50M. As fundraisers ideally we want to focus effort on things that can
provide a significant portion of that. We also do not wish to spend money
on things that would increase our useful spending to overhead spending
ratio.

~Matt Walker
Wikimedia Foundation
Fundraising Technology Team


On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 7:05 PM, John Vandenberg  wrote:

> Thanks Erik for a well written overview.
>
> Would it be possible for the WMF to give an estimate on what it would cost
> to build and/or what the threshold of annual bitcoin donations would make
> it worthwhile building. Someone might be interested in donating
> specifically to have this built, or we could obtain pledges to donate to
> see if the threshold can be reached.
> On Jan 9, 2014 9:06 AM, "Erik Moeller"  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting
> > > bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange
> > --
> > > it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that
> > > naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying
> > > gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very
> competent
> > > financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start
> > > taking on more risk now.
> >
> > While this is true, a more pragmatic view is that, as long as BTC has
> > value to some people, there's no harm in accepting it and transferring
> > it to USD the moment we receive any, provided legal/financial issues
> > can be addressed with reasonable effort.
> >
> > The strongest counter-argument is that we might not actually get a
> > donation total that makes this worth our time. The Internet Archive
> > has a single-use Bitcoin address that's received a total of <$30K at
> > current (insanely high) exchange rates.
> >
> > But for me, the main reason not do this sooner is that it would have
> > significantly fueled the Bitcoin speculative bubble, and WMF s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method

[Erik Moeller]

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Matthew Walker  wrote:
> It is a significant undertaking to integrate a new gateway with our current
> code (think several man months of time related to coding, code review,
> donor services preparation, and testing; not including contract negotiation
> and legal review.)

That makes perfect sense, Matt. It's easy to forget that because BTC
is so novel, none of the existing payment gateways we have implemented
support it, so comparing to existing currencies is really misleading.
So you're left with either the DIY approach the Internet Archive is
taking [1], or the technical effort of properly integrating something
like Bitpay.

> The bitcoin community should be aware that their persistent and often times
> aggressive, rude, and vulgar messaging towards me and my fellow coworkers
> is not appreciated;

Indeed. Unfortunately the incentive structure of Bitcoin's bubble
economy turns ordinary people into obnoxious hucksters.

Erik

[1] Srsly! Just one example:
http://blog.archive.org/2013/03/05/bitcoin-to-cash-converter-box/


-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method

[John Vandenberg]

On Jan 9, 2014 11:38 AM, "Matthew Walker"  wrote:
>
> I will probably regret saying this[1] -- but the figure we like to throw
> around here in fundraising tech is that a new payments gateway [2] is not
> even worth considering unless it is likely to make us at least 500K USD a
> year[3].

Thanks for putting a number on the table.

It is a tad higher than I expected, being more than several very highly
paid person years, but it is a starting point.

In case an enthuiast who can code is reading this thread, which repository
needs bitcoin support?

--
John
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)

[Erik Moeller]

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:22 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:

(Responding just on the general issue, not on the specific case.)

> Paid editing is not the same as paid advocacy (editing). This is a very
> important point.

I agree it's an important distinction. I personally think it could be
worthwhile to think about a separate non-profit organization which
receives payments and manages contracts to systematically expand
Wikipedia coverage, with payment entirely or largely decoupled from
specific articles (at most coupled to specific domains) and the
organization's policies being developed transparently in partnership
with the community. I suspect such an org could receive significant
grants and public support in its own right.

Supporting free content isn't evil - there's stuff like
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1699256938/the-vanamo-online-game-museum
which is totally awesome. It's COI and disclosure issues that raise
red flags, and more significant violations of policies that sometimes
go along with that.

It's been suggested many times through the years that WMF should
directly pay editors in some way. I don't think that's a good idea,
though I would like to see more grants in support of expenses related
to article writing (there are quite a few programs around that
already, many of them chapter-run).

*dims lights, stirs logs in fireplace*

Back in the early years, I had a little statement on my userpage
encouraging people to donate money to me if they liked my work and
wanted me to do more on Wikipedia. (Nobody took me up on it, of
course. Cheap bastards.) This was at a time when a lot of us online
community nerds were thinking about donation-based funding models for
communities. PayPal was just becoming a really big deal back then,
because it suddenly made these early community funding experiments
possible. Blender, Penny Arcade, Kuro5hin and others were among the
true pioneers of what's now called crowdfunding.

Axel Boldt deserves credit for this experiment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiMoney . I still have a
WikiMoney bank balance of ψ18. Maybe I can convert it to a
cryptocurrency one day. :)

I'd love to see more experiments that are conducted in full awareness
of the ethical issues involved, both with funding models for free
content, and with other incentive structures. WikiMoney was actually
quite popular for a short while, considering how much of a pain it was
to actually administer!

Erik
-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,