Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Asaf Bartov]

Thank you, Kat.  That was very informative, and of course, my sharing my
frustrating experience was merely an attempt to use this chance to draw
attention to that issue (not the person, but what you described as type 4),
not an attempt to provide the full context you just did. :)

(and your e-mail reminded me of Ms. Hagemann's being (er, having been) on
our AB, and gives me a chance to amend my earlier statement; she is an
example of a fantastically valuable ally whom I, too, had a chance to
benefit from, in several impromptu conversations, most recently a few
months ago, in Delhi.)

   A.

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Kat Walsh  wrote:

> The advisory board basically never gets used as a group (and IMO it
> wouldn't really make sense to). In my experience, people named to the
> list fill one of a few functions:
>
> 1. Big Names who don't have the time to commit to being on the board
> or are otherwise unsuited to being one of the main decision-makers,
> but whose formal association with the project makes sense and is
> beneficial. (I think of Clay Shirky as one of these: he is busy with
> his existing work, but he is a great champion of the projects; he's
> given presentations and press mentions that were helpful, consults on
> some issues, and has offered his university's resources.)
>
> 2. People who are prominent in some area relevant to the projects and
> whose work touches on it, who offer their expertise in their
> particular domain and may be all but invisible to others. (Melissa
> Hagemann is an example--she is prominent in open access and the people
> working in that domain have worked with her, but people outside of it
> may not see her work.)
>
> 3. People who have held high-level formal roles within WMF and whose
> continued connection is recognized through being named an advisor. In
> an organization with Senior Fellows, this is probably what we would be
> called; it basically recognizes that although these people no longer
> hold their roles, they continue to be supporters and advisors and
> would like to continue to be available to offer their input and
> expertise. I fall into this role, for example, and the structure of
> having the formal connection makes it easier for current board and
> staff to call on me. (FWIW, I was named to the advisory board by a
> resolution after my term ended, though I see the page is poorly-enough
> maintained that I'm not listed.)
>
> 4. People we hoped would fall into one of these roles, but who have
> not actually kept up the relationship or whose guidance turned out not
> to meet our needs.
>
> It is useful to have a formal structure to call on people for their
> help; most of the help the AB members provided in my experience was
> through 1-on-1 consultation (more by Sue than by myself). But I think
> there are more people in category 4 than there ought to be. The
> renewal mechanism was intended to make it easier to graceully remove
> people who fell into that category without making it feel like they
> were "fired", but as it turns out if you renew some but not others,
> people will feel that way no matter how gracefully you try to do it,
> and probably not wrongly--and since they are all people who were
> originally named because of a desire to strengthen the relationship,
> souring it by ending their terms is a very difficult thing to do,
> especially when it is easy to keep them.
>
> Yes, the advisory board is invited to Wikimania with travel expenses
> covered, though of the few members who come, some pay their own way
> anyhow; the financial cost is relatively small. (I would say I made a
> principled stand to pay my own way last year, but really I just
> waffled over it for a while until it was late enough that I'd have
> been embarrassed to submit receipts.)
>
> In my tenure the advisory board was considered a few times, but it was
> just never a high-priority item; I am aware of it having been
> considered again last year but not sure if anything came of it. The
> main drawback I think of is that people tend to forget it exists until
> too late in a decision process, and many who could usefully consult
> them don't even know who is on the advisory board, what their
> backgrounds are, and how receptive they are to messages, so it is hard
> to use them effectively.
>
> -Kat
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Tanvir Rahman 
> wrote:
> > As far as I heard, the WMF employees and Board use the advisory board
> > according to their need. Sometimes they are share their thoughts as a
> team,
> > sometimes individually, according to their expertise.
> >
> > I have mentioned to an adviser once that it would be better to have a
> group
> > submission from the Wikimedia advisory board in the Wikimania to fill-in
> > the community about their work and need. How do they work/collaborate and
> > so on. It does not need to share anything confidential or something, but
> it
> > helps the community a lot how this mechanism functions.
> >
> > T.
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Anthony Cole]

Thanks, Kat, for that very clear explanation.

On Friday, 29 January 2016, Kat Walsh  wrote:

> The advisory board basically never gets used as a group (and IMO it
> wouldn't really make sense to). In my experience, people named to the
> list fill one of a few functions:
>
> 1. Big Names who don't have the time to commit to being on the board
> or are otherwise unsuited to being one of the main decision-makers,
> but whose formal association with the project makes sense and is
> beneficial. (I think of Clay Shirky as one of these: he is busy with
> his existing work, but he is a great champion of the projects; he's
> given presentations and press mentions that were helpful, consults on
> some issues, and has offered his university's resources.)
>
> 2. People who are prominent in some area relevant to the projects and
> whose work touches on it, who offer their expertise in their
> particular domain and may be all but invisible to others. (Melissa
> Hagemann is an example--she is prominent in open access and the people
> working in that domain have worked with her, but people outside of it
> may not see her work.)
>
> 3. People who have held high-level formal roles within WMF and whose
> continued connection is recognized through being named an advisor. In
> an organization with Senior Fellows, this is probably what we would be
> called; it basically recognizes that although these people no longer
> hold their roles, they continue to be supporters and advisors and
> would like to continue to be available to offer their input and
> expertise. I fall into this role, for example, and the structure of
> having the formal connection makes it easier for current board and
> staff to call on me. (FWIW, I was named to the advisory board by a
> resolution after my term ended, though I see the page is poorly-enough
> maintained that I'm not listed.)
>
> 4. People we hoped would fall into one of these roles, but who have
> not actually kept up the relationship or whose guidance turned out not
> to meet our needs.
>
> It is useful to have a formal structure to call on people for their
> help; most of the help the AB members provided in my experience was
> through 1-on-1 consultation (more by Sue than by myself). But I think
> there are more people in category 4 than there ought to be. The
> renewal mechanism was intended to make it easier to graceully remove
> people who fell into that category without making it feel like they
> were "fired", but as it turns out if you renew some but not others,
> people will feel that way no matter how gracefully you try to do it,
> and probably not wrongly--and since they are all people who were
> originally named because of a desire to strengthen the relationship,
> souring it by ending their terms is a very difficult thing to do,
> especially when it is easy to keep them.
>
> Yes, the advisory board is invited to Wikimania with travel expenses
> covered, though of the few members who come, some pay their own way
> anyhow; the financial cost is relatively small. (I would say I made a
> principled stand to pay my own way last year, but really I just
> waffled over it for a while until it was late enough that I'd have
> been embarrassed to submit receipts.)
>
> In my tenure the advisory board was considered a few times, but it was
> just never a high-priority item; I am aware of it having been
> considered again last year but not sure if anything came of it. The
> main drawback I think of is that people tend to forget it exists until
> too late in a decision process, and many who could usefully consult
> them don't even know who is on the advisory board, what their
> backgrounds are, and how receptive they are to messages, so it is hard
> to use them effectively.
>
> -Kat
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Tanvir Rahman  > wrote:
> > As far as I heard, the WMF employees and Board use the advisory board
> > according to their need. Sometimes they are share their thoughts as a
> team,
> > sometimes individually, according to their expertise.
> >
> > I have mentioned to an adviser once that it would be better to have a
> group
> > submission from the Wikimedia advisory board in the Wikimania to fill-in
> > the community about their work and need. How do they work/collaborate and
> > so on. It does not need to share anything confidential or something, but
> it
> > helps the community a lot how this mechanism functions.
> >
> > T.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>  ?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Kat Walsh]

The advisory board basically never gets used as a group (and IMO it
wouldn't really make sense to). In my experience, people named to the
list fill one of a few functions:

1. Big Names who don't have the time to commit to being on the board
or are otherwise unsuited to being one of the main decision-makers,
but whose formal association with the project makes sense and is
beneficial. (I think of Clay Shirky as one of these: he is busy with
his existing work, but he is a great champion of the projects; he's
given presentations and press mentions that were helpful, consults on
some issues, and has offered his university's resources.)

2. People who are prominent in some area relevant to the projects and
whose work touches on it, who offer their expertise in their
particular domain and may be all but invisible to others. (Melissa
Hagemann is an example--she is prominent in open access and the people
working in that domain have worked with her, but people outside of it
may not see her work.)

3. People who have held high-level formal roles within WMF and whose
continued connection is recognized through being named an advisor. In
an organization with Senior Fellows, this is probably what we would be
called; it basically recognizes that although these people no longer
hold their roles, they continue to be supporters and advisors and
would like to continue to be available to offer their input and
expertise. I fall into this role, for example, and the structure of
having the formal connection makes it easier for current board and
staff to call on me. (FWIW, I was named to the advisory board by a
resolution after my term ended, though I see the page is poorly-enough
maintained that I'm not listed.)

4. People we hoped would fall into one of these roles, but who have
not actually kept up the relationship or whose guidance turned out not
to meet our needs.

It is useful to have a formal structure to call on people for their
help; most of the help the AB members provided in my experience was
through 1-on-1 consultation (more by Sue than by myself). But I think
there are more people in category 4 than there ought to be. The
renewal mechanism was intended to make it easier to graceully remove
people who fell into that category without making it feel like they
were "fired", but as it turns out if you renew some but not others,
people will feel that way no matter how gracefully you try to do it,
and probably not wrongly--and since they are all people who were
originally named because of a desire to strengthen the relationship,
souring it by ending their terms is a very difficult thing to do,
especially when it is easy to keep them.

Yes, the advisory board is invited to Wikimania with travel expenses
covered, though of the few members who come, some pay their own way
anyhow; the financial cost is relatively small. (I would say I made a
principled stand to pay my own way last year, but really I just
waffled over it for a while until it was late enough that I'd have
been embarrassed to submit receipts.)

In my tenure the advisory board was considered a few times, but it was
just never a high-priority item; I am aware of it having been
considered again last year but not sure if anything came of it. The
main drawback I think of is that people tend to forget it exists until
too late in a decision process, and many who could usefully consult
them don't even know who is on the advisory board, what their
backgrounds are, and how receptive they are to messages, so it is hard
to use them effectively.

-Kat


On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Tanvir Rahman  wrote:
> As far as I heard, the WMF employees and Board use the advisory board
> according to their need. Sometimes they are share their thoughts as a team,
> sometimes individually, according to their expertise.
>
> I have mentioned to an adviser once that it would be better to have a group
> submission from the Wikimedia advisory board in the Wikimania to fill-in
> the community about their work and need. How do they work/collaborate and
> so on. It does not need to share anything confidential or something, but it
> helps the community a lot how this mechanism functions.
>
> T.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Tanvir Rahman]

Asaf, thank you for sharing your experience.

Your input to this discussion is certainly valuable. And it is not actually
what I expected. I believe it would remind the current ED or anyone who is
in charge of making a change to this advisory board system. Surely, we need
to be more transparent and public about this. It already seems from this
discussion that there is a significant lack of information about this body.

T.

--
Tanvir Rahman
Wikitanvir on Wikimedia
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Asaf Bartov]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Tanvir Rahman 
wrote:

> As far as I heard, the WMF employees and Board use the advisory board
> according to their need. Sometimes they are share their thoughts as a team,
> sometimes individually, according to their expertise.
>

Perhaps they do, and I would certainly not be in the loop for all the
occasions on which one might choose to do so.

For my part, FWIW, the extent of my experience with the Advisory Board
involves just one longtime member, and is frustratingly unilateral:

I have on two occasions attempted, years ago, to benefit from the
experience of a member of the Advisory Board on a matter very pertinent to
their background, but could not get a single response.  Politely repeated
(and politely worded) inquiries were never answered; two(!) reminders
face-to-face at two consecutive Wikimanias (which the member attended at
WMF's expense) also failed to get that person to respond to my e-mail (if
only to say "I can't help you").  Nonetheless, that particular member
(please understand I do not mean to malign *any* other member; indeed, I
appreciate and admire some of the members past and present[?] of the
Advisory Board) continued to take WMF up on its offer to fly to Wikimania.

I found it very frustrating, and on two occasions (both back in Sue's day
as ED) brought it up, suggesting that we should probably review the
membership of that board and perhaps refresh expectations a bit.  It was
acknowledged as an issue, but as far as I can tell, was never acted on.

It seems to be one of those issues that are never urgent enough or damaging
enough to get to the ED's or the board's always-full agenda. :-/   Perhaps
the AB did auto-expire.  If it did, let's not offer Wikimania tickets to
the last existing AB out of careless inertia!

(It would be interesting to hear some better experiences: ways in which our
AB has been useful over the years.)

   A.
-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Anthony Cole]

OK. I see "Advisory Board members will be appointed for a term commencing
on the day of appointment until the conclusion of the first in-person Board
meeting in the following year, unless otherwise declined, revoked or
renewed." [1] and no advisory board appointments were made in 2015. [2] So,
there is no advisory board. Would someone with rights please update the
relevant WMF site page? [3]

1.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Amending_the_Term_of_Advisory_Board_Members
2. https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolutions
3. https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board

On Friday, 29 January 2016, Tanvir Rahman  wrote:

> As far as I heard, the WMF employees and Board use the advisory board
> according to their need. Sometimes they are share their thoughts as a team,
> sometimes individually, according to their expertise.
>
> I have mentioned to an adviser once that it would be better to have a group
> submission from the Wikimedia advisory board in the Wikimania to fill-in
> the community about their work and need. How do they work/collaborate and
> so on. It does not need to share anything confidential or something, but it
> helps the community a lot how this mechanism functions.
>
> T.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>  ?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
Anthony Cole
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Tanvir Rahman]

As far as I heard, the WMF employees and Board use the advisory board
according to their need. Sometimes they are share their thoughts as a team,
sometimes individually, according to their expertise.

I have mentioned to an adviser once that it would be better to have a group
submission from the Wikimedia advisory board in the Wikimania to fill-in
the community about their work and need. How do they work/collaborate and
so on. It does not need to share anything confidential or something, but it
helps the community a lot how this mechanism functions.

T.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Lodewijk]

There was a while back actually a question whether it still exists - given
that no reappointments have taken place.

But from what I heard, the appropriate response would probably be something
like "with extreme moderation".

Lodewijk

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Anthony Cole  wrote:

> How (and how much) does the WMF board of trustees use its advisory board?
>
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board
>
>
> --
> Anthony Cole
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] WMF Advisory board

[Anthony Cole]

How (and how much) does the WMF board of trustees use its advisory board?

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board


-- 
Anthony Cole
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Italia recognized as OpenStreetMap chapter

[Risker]

Well done, all!  It is really impressive to see such excellent
collaboration between free knowledge open source communities.  Everyone
should take a bow.

Risker/Anne

On 28 January 2016 at 23:16, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Congratulations. :)
>
> On 29 January 2016 at 09:12, Katy Love  wrote:
>
> > Congrats to WMI and Simone! Glad to hear of your recognition and will be
> > excited to see what comes next.
> >
> > Katy
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Lodewijk 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations Lorenzo, congratulations Wikimedia Italia. It was
> indeed
> > a
> > > long process, and I recall that this question came up - was it more
> than
> > > five years ago? I'm curious what the coming years will bring, and I
> trust
> > > that you will report back about whether it is a satisfying construction
> > or
> > > not.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Lodewijk
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Laurentius <
> laurentius.w...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear all,
> > > > after a long process, today Wikimedia Italia has been officially
> > > > recognized as the Italian OpenStreetMap chapter!
> > > >
> > > > OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project that shares the same value
> as
> > > > the Wikimedia movement. It's not based on a wiki software and it's
> not
> > > > in the Wikimedia family, but from many points of views, it's the
> > project
> > > > that is more similar to the Wikimedia ones; indeed, many wikipedians
> > are
> > > > mappers also, and viceversa.
> > > >
> > > > Similarly to Wikimedia, there is an OpenStreetMap Foundation (based
> in
> > > > the UK) and there are national OpenStreetMap chapters. In Italy, the
> > > > OpenStreetMap community has been talking for years about the creation
> > of
> > > > a chapter. Most people felt that it was important, but also that
> > > > founding yet another association was pointless. Associations are not
> > > > built only on projects, but also, and mainly, on common values and
> on a
> > > > common vision: Wikimedia and OpenStreetMap share both, and it's just
> > > > natural to work together.
> > > >
> > > > Wikimedia Italy officially started the process of becoming an
> > > > OpenStreetMap chapter in 2013 [1]. The association has supported
> > > > OpenStreetMap even before that (e.g., supporting the Italian
> > > > OpenStreetMap conference), and in the last two years, thanks also to
> > the
> > > > work of many OpenStreetMap users that became members (and among them,
> > > > Simone Cortesi, OpenStreetMap volunteer since the beginning and WMI's
> > > > vicepresident), we have increased our efforts (as described also in
> > > > WMI's annual plan [2]). The recognition process has been quite long,
> > but
> > > > today we've signed the chapters agreement, and now Italy is the
> second
> > > > country (after Iceland) to have an official OpenStreetMap chapter!
> (but
> > > > there are actually other unofficial chapters besides these two)
> > > >
> > > > Lorenzo
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-July/127304.html
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015_round2/Wikimedia_Italia/Proposal_form#OpenStreetMap
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Italia recognized as OpenStreetMap chapter

[Tito Dutta]

Congratulations. :)

On 29 January 2016 at 09:12, Katy Love  wrote:

> Congrats to WMI and Simone! Glad to hear of your recognition and will be
> excited to see what comes next.
>
> Katy
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Lodewijk 
> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations Lorenzo, congratulations Wikimedia Italia. It was indeed
> a
> > long process, and I recall that this question came up - was it more than
> > five years ago? I'm curious what the coming years will bring, and I trust
> > that you will report back about whether it is a satisfying construction
> or
> > not.
> >
> > Best,
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Laurentius 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > > after a long process, today Wikimedia Italia has been officially
> > > recognized as the Italian OpenStreetMap chapter!
> > >
> > > OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project that shares the same value as
> > > the Wikimedia movement. It's not based on a wiki software and it's not
> > > in the Wikimedia family, but from many points of views, it's the
> project
> > > that is more similar to the Wikimedia ones; indeed, many wikipedians
> are
> > > mappers also, and viceversa.
> > >
> > > Similarly to Wikimedia, there is an OpenStreetMap Foundation (based in
> > > the UK) and there are national OpenStreetMap chapters. In Italy, the
> > > OpenStreetMap community has been talking for years about the creation
> of
> > > a chapter. Most people felt that it was important, but also that
> > > founding yet another association was pointless. Associations are not
> > > built only on projects, but also, and mainly, on common values and on a
> > > common vision: Wikimedia and OpenStreetMap share both, and it's just
> > > natural to work together.
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Italy officially started the process of becoming an
> > > OpenStreetMap chapter in 2013 [1]. The association has supported
> > > OpenStreetMap even before that (e.g., supporting the Italian
> > > OpenStreetMap conference), and in the last two years, thanks also to
> the
> > > work of many OpenStreetMap users that became members (and among them,
> > > Simone Cortesi, OpenStreetMap volunteer since the beginning and WMI's
> > > vicepresident), we have increased our efforts (as described also in
> > > WMI's annual plan [2]). The recognition process has been quite long,
> but
> > > today we've signed the chapters agreement, and now Italy is the second
> > > country (after Iceland) to have an official OpenStreetMap chapter! (but
> > > there are actually other unofficial chapters besides these two)
> > >
> > > Lorenzo
> > >
> > > [1]
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-July/127304.html
> > > [2]
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015_round2/Wikimedia_Italia/Proposal_form#OpenStreetMap
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Italia recognized as OpenStreetMap chapter

[Katy Love]

Congrats to WMI and Simone! Glad to hear of your recognition and will be
excited to see what comes next.

Katy

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Lodewijk 
wrote:

> Congratulations Lorenzo, congratulations Wikimedia Italia. It was indeed a
> long process, and I recall that this question came up - was it more than
> five years ago? I'm curious what the coming years will bring, and I trust
> that you will report back about whether it is a satisfying construction or
> not.
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Laurentius 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> > after a long process, today Wikimedia Italia has been officially
> > recognized as the Italian OpenStreetMap chapter!
> >
> > OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project that shares the same value as
> > the Wikimedia movement. It's not based on a wiki software and it's not
> > in the Wikimedia family, but from many points of views, it's the project
> > that is more similar to the Wikimedia ones; indeed, many wikipedians are
> > mappers also, and viceversa.
> >
> > Similarly to Wikimedia, there is an OpenStreetMap Foundation (based in
> > the UK) and there are national OpenStreetMap chapters. In Italy, the
> > OpenStreetMap community has been talking for years about the creation of
> > a chapter. Most people felt that it was important, but also that
> > founding yet another association was pointless. Associations are not
> > built only on projects, but also, and mainly, on common values and on a
> > common vision: Wikimedia and OpenStreetMap share both, and it's just
> > natural to work together.
> >
> > Wikimedia Italy officially started the process of becoming an
> > OpenStreetMap chapter in 2013 [1]. The association has supported
> > OpenStreetMap even before that (e.g., supporting the Italian
> > OpenStreetMap conference), and in the last two years, thanks also to the
> > work of many OpenStreetMap users that became members (and among them,
> > Simone Cortesi, OpenStreetMap volunteer since the beginning and WMI's
> > vicepresident), we have increased our efforts (as described also in
> > WMI's annual plan [2]). The recognition process has been quite long, but
> > today we've signed the chapters agreement, and now Italy is the second
> > country (after Iceland) to have an official OpenStreetMap chapter! (but
> > there are actually other unofficial chapters besides these two)
> >
> > Lorenzo
> >
> > [1]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-July/127304.html
> > [2]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015_round2/Wikimedia_Italia/Proposal_form#OpenStreetMap
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

[Pete Forsyth]

MZMcBride, that is an *excellent* find -- I had forgotten that it was
articulated as a formal policy. I have now updated my blog post on the
topic with a link to that email:
http://wikistrategies.net/grant-transparency/

Perhaps Lisa can tell us whether that policy was ever rescinded?

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 5:24 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> MZMcBride wrote:
> >Wes and Katherine: do you know what steps need to be taken in order to
> >release the documents surrounding this Knight Foundation grant? Or do you
> >know who at the Wikimedia Foundation would be the best/most appropriate
> >contact to figure this out? Geoff and the legal team? One of the
> >grants-related staff such as Janice? Any help would be appreciated!
>
> Remembering that similar questions about grant agreements have come
> previously, I just dug through my e-mail archives and found a 2011 e-mail
> from Lisa Gruwell. In the e-mail, she's very supportive of the idea of
> putting grants documents on Meta-Wiki. Copying her as well on this thread
> as she's still working with the Wikimedia Foundation, though it's not
> clear to me whether her role has shifted to other focuses.
>
> In case anyone is curious, here is Sue's response from October 2011:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2011-October/116339.html
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

[MZMcBride]

MZMcBride wrote:
>Wes and Katherine: do you know what steps need to be taken in order to
>release the documents surrounding this Knight Foundation grant? Or do you
>know who at the Wikimedia Foundation would be the best/most appropriate
>contact to figure this out? Geoff and the legal team? One of the
>grants-related staff such as Janice? Any help would be appreciated!

Remembering that similar questions about grant agreements have come
previously, I just dug through my e-mail archives and found a 2011 e-mail
from Lisa Gruwell. In the e-mail, she's very supportive of the idea of
putting grants documents on Meta-Wiki. Copying her as well on this thread
as she's still working with the Wikimedia Foundation, though it's not
clear to me whether her role has shifted to other focuses.

In case anyone is curious, here is Sue's response from October 2011:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2011-October/116339.html

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

[MZMcBride]

My guess is that the first step here is to identify who would have access
to the Knight Foundation grant application and grant offer paperwork. It's
not immediately clear to me who to even ask about this.

I'm copying Wes Moran and Katherine Maher of the Wikimedia Foundation on
this reply, as he sent the initial wikimedia-l announcement e-mail about
this grant and she is listed as the contact in the press release:
.

Wes and Katherine: do you know what steps need to be taken in order to
release the documents surrounding this Knight Foundation grant? Or do you
know who at the Wikimedia Foundation would be the best/most appropriate
contact to figure this out? Geoff and the legal team? One of the
grants-related staff such as Janice? Any help would be appreciated!

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

[Comet styles]

Since Jimmy is now also on the board for 'The Guardian', maybe its
about time he stepped down from the WMF board? And regarding James, it
honestly no longer matters why he was 'fired', its obvious the board
is filling up its stocks in google employees (lol) and it won't likely
change even after the VoNC on Geshuri and I think we all can expect
more 'ridiculous' hirings  in the future as well..

Regarding the Knight grant application/letter, the question isn't why
the community needs a reason to see the application/letter, the
question is why the community cannotit again goes back to the old
question..who is serving who?

On 1/29/16, Fæ  wrote:
> On 28 January 2016 at 16:12, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
> ...
>> So, what does it actually mean when Jimmy Wales says something like this
>> to
>> the community in response to criticism?
>>
>> Do people think this is good governance, secretly admire the Machiavellian
>> chutzpah, or what?
>
> Jimmy Wales has defended his use of *"Utter fucking bullshit"* when
> abusing James Heilman.[1][2] In a hostile environment where "founders
> rights" appear to mean that Wales can push his colleagues around like
> a childish bully, in a way that anyone else would have their account
> blocked from Wikimedia projects, we cannot expect to hold this WMF
> trustee to account for their actions as we cannot even properly hold
> him to account against the WMF terms of use.
>
> In other charitable organisations, abusing volunteers or employees
> with variations of "fuck" and being incapable of recognising that is a
> problem, would make you entirely unsuitable to be a trustee. It's a
> shame that the WMF board have no higher standards for civility or
> leadership than this. It's an all time low.
>
> Links:
> 1.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=701673700&oldid=701673178
> 2.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=701942197&oldid=701941999
>
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 


-- 
Cometstyles

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Was the Wikimedia Foundation's removal of membership in 2006 legal?

[Adam Wight]

Hi Florence,

Thanks for jumping into this conversation and sharing your illuminating
perspective as an "old timer" :-)  I wanted to take a moment to also thank
you for your initiatives at the time, it's thrilling to imagine what might
have happened if more people had taken an interest in your "less easy
way"[1] of developing membership into a concrete governance model like the
Apache Software Foundation[2].  Without the open, constructive letters you
were writing at the time to communicate between the Board and Wikimedians,
we couldn't be having this conversation now.

I'd love to hear any more thoughts about how we might have, or still could,
work around the Florida recordkeeping requirements,[3] Alex Roshuk for
example suggested that our database may have been an adequate membership
roster, because "names and addresses" could possibly be interpreted to
allow for pseudonyms and email addresses or a WMF P.O. box, as long as
there was no intent to defraud.[4]  Brad Patrick's input on this would be
invaluable as well, thank you for pinging him.  It seems like he might have
recognized that this was uncharted legal territory, and pushed for a
conservative revision of the bylaws to reduce risks and eliminate the open
questions?

Adam
[[mw:User:Adamw]]

[1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2006-June/067648.html
[2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_membership_controversy#Recordkeeping_requirements
[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:The_Thadman/Give_Back_Our_Membership#A_few_clarifications
"You seem to think that there is something irreconcilable with pseudonymous
contributions and membership"

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:

> Le 27/01/16 19:30, SarahSV a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Florence Devouard 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I read you Sarah. Good point. Hmmm.
>>
>>> But ianal...
>>>
>>> I am sure it was discussed back then, but I forgot the details.
>>>
>>> I contacted Brad on Facebook to suggest him to read the list. Perhaps he
>>> might be willing to comment on this ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Flo
>>>
>>> ​Hi Flo, thanks for doing that.
>>>
>>
>> There's another reference to this in the 22 October 2004 board meeting,
>> where you agreed certain changes to the bylaws, including "​A volunteer
>> member is not required to complete or sign and send any form to the
>> Foundation." [1]
>>
>> Sarah
>>
>> 1. https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Meetings/October_22,_2004
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>>
> Not unsurprisingly. I wanted to make sure that all community members would
> have a say... not only those who happened to sign a document, disclosed
> their identities and perhaps paid a fee. This was my wish.
>
> Further investigating on that matter later on showed that things were not
> so simple.
>
> Of course, in a perfect world, we would have had full legal advice before
> agreeing on bylaws changes, PR advice on how to announce changes, assistant
> support to polish board meeting notes, and so on. We had none of that. I am
> amazed each time I see how much we changed :)
>
> Thinking of "signing a document", the nearest thing we have at the moment
> is the signature system for OTRS agent on Phabricator.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information/How_to_sign
>
>
>
> Thanks Sarah
>
> Florence
>
> PS: I am
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>


On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:49 AM Florence Devouard 
wrote:

> Le 27/01/16 19:30, SarahSV a écrit :
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Florence Devouard 
> > wrote:
> >
> > I read you Sarah. Good point. Hmmm.
> >> But ianal...
> >>
> >> I am sure it was discussed back then, but I forgot the details.
> >>
> >> I contacted Brad on Facebook to suggest him to read the list. Perhaps he
> >> might be willing to comment on this ?
> >>
> >>
> >> Flo
> >>
> >> ​Hi Flo, thanks for doing that.
> >
> > There's another reference to this in the 22 October 2004 board meeting,
> > where you agreed certain changes to the bylaws, including "​A volunteer
> > member is not required to complete or sign and send any form to the
> > Foundation." [1]
> >
> > Sarah
> >
> > 1. https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Meetings/October_22,_2004
> > ___
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Italia recognized as OpenStreetMap chapter

[Lodewijk]

Congratulations Lorenzo, congratulations Wikimedia Italia. It was indeed a
long process, and I recall that this question came up - was it more than
five years ago? I'm curious what the coming years will bring, and I trust
that you will report back about whether it is a satisfying construction or
not.

Best,
Lodewijk

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Laurentius 
wrote:

> Dear all,
> after a long process, today Wikimedia Italia has been officially
> recognized as the Italian OpenStreetMap chapter!
>
> OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project that shares the same value as
> the Wikimedia movement. It's not based on a wiki software and it's not
> in the Wikimedia family, but from many points of views, it's the project
> that is more similar to the Wikimedia ones; indeed, many wikipedians are
> mappers also, and viceversa.
>
> Similarly to Wikimedia, there is an OpenStreetMap Foundation (based in
> the UK) and there are national OpenStreetMap chapters. In Italy, the
> OpenStreetMap community has been talking for years about the creation of
> a chapter. Most people felt that it was important, but also that
> founding yet another association was pointless. Associations are not
> built only on projects, but also, and mainly, on common values and on a
> common vision: Wikimedia and OpenStreetMap share both, and it's just
> natural to work together.
>
> Wikimedia Italy officially started the process of becoming an
> OpenStreetMap chapter in 2013 [1]. The association has supported
> OpenStreetMap even before that (e.g., supporting the Italian
> OpenStreetMap conference), and in the last two years, thanks also to the
> work of many OpenStreetMap users that became members (and among them,
> Simone Cortesi, OpenStreetMap volunteer since the beginning and WMI's
> vicepresident), we have increased our efforts (as described also in
> WMI's annual plan [2]). The recognition process has been quite long, but
> today we've signed the chapters agreement, and now Italy is the second
> country (after Iceland) to have an official OpenStreetMap chapter! (but
> there are actually other unofficial chapters besides these two)
>
> Lorenzo
>
> [1]https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-July/127304.html
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015_round2/Wikimedia_Italia/Proposal_form#OpenStreetMap
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Italia recognized as OpenStreetMap chapter

[Laurentius]

Dear all,
after a long process, today Wikimedia Italia has been officially
recognized as the Italian OpenStreetMap chapter!

OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project that shares the same value as
the Wikimedia movement. It's not based on a wiki software and it's not
in the Wikimedia family, but from many points of views, it's the project
that is more similar to the Wikimedia ones; indeed, many wikipedians are
mappers also, and viceversa.

Similarly to Wikimedia, there is an OpenStreetMap Foundation (based in
the UK) and there are national OpenStreetMap chapters. In Italy, the
OpenStreetMap community has been talking for years about the creation of
a chapter. Most people felt that it was important, but also that
founding yet another association was pointless. Associations are not
built only on projects, but also, and mainly, on common values and on a
common vision: Wikimedia and OpenStreetMap share both, and it's just
natural to work together.

Wikimedia Italy officially started the process of becoming an
OpenStreetMap chapter in 2013 [1]. The association has supported
OpenStreetMap even before that (e.g., supporting the Italian
OpenStreetMap conference), and in the last two years, thanks also to the
work of many OpenStreetMap users that became members (and among them,
Simone Cortesi, OpenStreetMap volunteer since the beginning and WMI's
vicepresident), we have increased our efforts (as described also in
WMI's annual plan [2]). The recognition process has been quite long, but
today we've signed the chapters agreement, and now Italy is the second
country (after Iceland) to have an official OpenStreetMap chapter! (but
there are actually other unofficial chapters besides these two)

Lorenzo

[1]https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-July/127304.html
[2]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015_round2/Wikimedia_Italia/Proposal_form#OpenStreetMap



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

[Kurt Kulac]

+1

Am 28.01.2016 um 13:04 schrieb Josh Lim:

Thank you, Patricio, for the heads-up.  I’m sure that it must’ve been difficult 
for everyone, especially those on the Board.

It was very honorable of Arnnon to step down in deference to the community, and 
I hope that while we may be indignant at his past actions, we can continue to 
find places for people in our community who may show an interest in what we do 
but to who we don’t always see eye-to-eye on our values.  While I still think 
that this episode will generate a whole lot of lessons for us to learn from, I 
hope that Arnnon will continue to engage with the movement in a meaningful way 
even though he is no longer a part of the Board.  Thank you for taking heed of 
the community, and I hope that despite what may be a rude awakening, that you 
will find your place among us, somehow, somewhere in the movement.

Hopefully, now that this episode has come to a close, we can finally begin the 
process of healing and figuring out what went wrong.  There’s still a lot of 
things left unaccounted for, and I hope that after this, the Board will 
continue to build on that momentum by doing the right thing and helping the 
community understand what on Earth happened over the last few weeks so we can 
finally move forward.

Josh


Wiadomość napisana przez Patricio Lorente  w dniu 
28.01.2016, o godz. 04:52:

Dear All,

Throughout the discussion about the appointment of Arnnon Geshuri to the
Board of Trustees, the Board has carefully listened to you and discussed
internally. Earlier today, Arnnon decided to step down from the Board. To
paraphrase his words, he doesn't want to be a distraction for the important
discussions that the community and the Foundation need to face in the times
to come. We want to thank Arnnon for his ongoing commitment and for helping
us to move forward.

The Board Governance Committee is working to improve and update our
selection processes before we fill the vacancy left by Arnnon’s departure.
We are sorry for the distress and confusion this has caused to some in our
community, and also to Arnnon.

Patricio and Alice



Patricio Lorente
Chair, Board of Trustees

Alice Wiegand
Vice Chair, Board of Trustees
--
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines

jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com  | +63 (915) 321-7582
Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
http://about.me/josh.lim 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

[Fæ]

On 28 January 2016 at 16:12, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
...
> So, what does it actually mean when Jimmy Wales says something like this to
> the community in response to criticism?
>
> Do people think this is good governance, secretly admire the Machiavellian
> chutzpah, or what?

Jimmy Wales has defended his use of *"Utter fucking bullshit"* when
abusing James Heilman.[1][2] In a hostile environment where "founders
rights" appear to mean that Wales can push his colleagues around like
a childish bully, in a way that anyone else would have their account
blocked from Wikimedia projects, we cannot expect to hold this WMF
trustee to account for their actions as we cannot even properly hold
him to account against the WMF terms of use.

In other charitable organisations, abusing volunteers or employees
with variations of "fuck" and being incapable of recognising that is a
problem, would make you entirely unsuitable to be a trustee. It's a
shame that the WMF board have no higher standards for civility or
leadership than this. It's an all time low.

Links:
1. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=701673700&oldid=701673178
2. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=701942197&oldid=701941999

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

[Andreas Kolbe]

Thanks, Anthony. As can be seen from the diff, the discussion at the time
went like this:

---o0o---

Given the history, but also the absolute bungling mess and total lack of
professionalism that the board has shown since these events, you will find,
Jimbo, that there is a significant proportion of the people who voted for
James who are unwilling to believe a single word of what the board
continues to try not to say. This comes on top of a long list of disasters
that others have summarized above. As for your claim to be a bigger
champion for transparency, please back it up with the details on the
restricted grant from the Knight foundation immediately. *Talk is cheap,
actions speak volumes.* MLauba (Talk) 18:02, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

What sort of details do you want? I'll have to talk to others to make sure
there are no contractural reasons not to do so, but in my opinion the grant
letter should be published on meta. *The Knight Grant is a red herring
here, so it would be best to clear the air around that completely as soon
as possible*.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 18:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

---o0o---

I have seen Jimmy Wales make statements like this many times, as a sort of
exercise in crowd control. It calms frayed tempers.

It introduces some reasonable-sounding explanation why people can't have
what they demand right now, along with a strongly worded, almost
over-the-top assurance that not only are they right to demand it, but that
Jimmy Wales actually wants the very same thing himself.

And then everybody goes away, and nothing happens.

So, what does it actually mean when Jimmy Wales says something like this to
the community in response to criticism?

Do people think this is good governance, secretly admire the Machiavellian
chutzpah, or what?

Andreas

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Anthony Cole  wrote:

> Just copying part of Andreas's comment from another thread:
>
> "...can the board now please come to a decision on whether the Knight
> Foundation grant letter and grant application documents will be posted on
> Meta, and if not, provide an explanation to the community why they cannot
> be made public?
>
> "To recap, Jimmy Wales said over two weeks ago on his talk page[1] that in
> his opinion the documentation should be posted on Meta, to clear the air
> around this issue. However, nothing appears to have happened since then."
>
> [1]
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJimbo_Wales&diff=698861097&oldid=698860874
>
> Anthony Cole
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

[Josh Lim]

Thank you, Patricio, for the heads-up.  I’m sure that it must’ve been difficult 
for everyone, especially those on the Board.

It was very honorable of Arnnon to step down in deference to the community, and 
I hope that while we may be indignant at his past actions, we can continue to 
find places for people in our community who may show an interest in what we do 
but to who we don’t always see eye-to-eye on our values.  While I still think 
that this episode will generate a whole lot of lessons for us to learn from, I 
hope that Arnnon will continue to engage with the movement in a meaningful way 
even though he is no longer a part of the Board.  Thank you for taking heed of 
the community, and I hope that despite what may be a rude awakening, that you 
will find your place among us, somehow, somewhere in the movement.

Hopefully, now that this episode has come to a close, we can finally begin the 
process of healing and figuring out what went wrong.  There’s still a lot of 
things left unaccounted for, and I hope that after this, the Board will 
continue to build on that momentum by doing the right thing and helping the 
community understand what on Earth happened over the last few weeks so we can 
finally move forward.

Josh

> Wiadomość napisana przez Patricio Lorente  w dniu 
> 28.01.2016, o godz. 04:52:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> Throughout the discussion about the appointment of Arnnon Geshuri to the
> Board of Trustees, the Board has carefully listened to you and discussed
> internally. Earlier today, Arnnon decided to step down from the Board. To
> paraphrase his words, he doesn't want to be a distraction for the important
> discussions that the community and the Foundation need to face in the times
> to come. We want to thank Arnnon for his ongoing commitment and for helping
> us to move forward.
> 
> The Board Governance Committee is working to improve and update our
> selection processes before we fill the vacancy left by Arnnon’s departure.
> We are sorry for the distress and confusion this has caused to some in our
> community, and also to Arnnon.
> 
> Patricio and Alice
> 
> 
> 
> Patricio Lorente
> Chair, Board of Trustees
> 
> Alice Wiegand
> Vice Chair, Board of Trustees
> --
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines

jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com  | +63 (915) 321-7582
Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
http://about.me/josh.lim 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

[Florence Devouard]

Le 28/01/16 07:18, Michael Snow a écrit :

On 1/27/2016 1:44 PM, Kat Walsh wrote:

Thank you, Patricio.

And thank you, Arnnon. I am sure this must have been difficult for
you, that you had every intention of bringing your best work to the
role, and that your considerable experience and skills would have been
valuable. I appreciate your willingness to step up to the task, which
is not a small thing to ask of anyone, and now in light of the
challenges and complications it would bring, your willingness to step
down.

-Kat

If Kat can echo me, then I can echo Kat. Thank you to the Board, and
Arnnon in particular.

--Michael Snow

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,



Echo echo echo.

Thank you Arnnon and Board.

Anthere






___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Was the Wikimedia Foundation's removal of membership in 2006 legal?

[Florence Devouard]

Le 27/01/16 19:30, SarahSV a écrit :

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:

I read you Sarah. Good point. Hmmm.

But ianal...

I am sure it was discussed back then, but I forgot the details.

I contacted Brad on Facebook to suggest him to read the list. Perhaps he
might be willing to comment on this ?


Flo

​Hi Flo, thanks for doing that.


There's another reference to this in the 22 October 2004 board meeting,
where you agreed certain changes to the bylaws, including "​A volunteer
member is not required to complete or sign and send any form to the
Foundation." [1]

Sarah

1. https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Meetings/October_22,_2004
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




Not unsurprisingly. I wanted to make sure that all community members 
would have a say... not only those who happened to sign a document, 
disclosed their identities and perhaps paid a fee. This was my wish.


Further investigating on that matter later on showed that things were 
not so simple.


Of course, in a perfect world, we would have had full legal advice 
before agreeing on bylaws changes, PR advice on how to announce changes, 
assistant support to polish board meeting notes, and so on. We had none 
of that. I am amazed each time I see how much we changed :)


Thinking of "signing a document", the nearest thing we have at the 
moment is the signature system for OTRS agent on Phabricator.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information/How_to_sign 





Thanks Sarah

Florence

PS: I am




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

[Michael Maggs]

Thank you. This was the right thing to do in the circumstances.

Michael
(writing in my personal capacity)


Patricio Lorente wrote:

Dear All,

Throughout the discussion about the appointment of Arnnon Geshuri to the
Board of Trustees, the Board has carefully listened to you and discussed
internally. Earlier today, Arnnon decided to step down from the Board. To
paraphrase his words, he doesn't want to be a distraction for the important
discussions that the community and the Foundation need to face in the times
to come. We want to thank Arnnon for his ongoing commitment and for helping
us to move forward.

The Board Governance Committee is working to improve and update our
selection processes before we fill the vacancy left by Arnnon’s departure.
We are sorry for the distress and confusion this has caused to some in our
community, and also to Arnnon.

Patricio and Alice



Patricio Lorente
Chair, Board of Trustees

Alice Wiegand
Vice Chair, Board of Trustees
--
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

[Pete Forsyth]

+1
On Jan 27, 2016 10:18 PM, "Michael Snow"  wrote:

> On 1/27/2016 1:44 PM, Kat Walsh wrote:
>
>> Thank you, Patricio.
>>
>> And thank you, Arnnon. I am sure this must have been difficult for
>> you, that you had every intention of bringing your best work to the
>> role, and that your considerable experience and skills would have been
>> valuable. I appreciate your willingness to step up to the task, which
>> is not a small thing to ask of anyone, and now in light of the
>> challenges and complications it would bring, your willingness to step
>> down.
>>
>> -Kat
>>
> If Kat can echo me, then I can echo Kat. Thank you to the Board, and
> Arnnon in particular.
>
> --Michael Snow
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

[philippe]

I believe Kat says it well.

--
Philippe Beaudette


> On Jan 27, 2016, at 1:44 PM, Kat Walsh  wrote:
> 
> Thank you, Patricio.
> 
> And thank you, Arnnon. I am sure this must have been difficult for
> you, that you had every intention of bringing your best work to the
> role, and that your considerable experience and skills would have been
> valuable. I appreciate your willingness to step up to the task, which
> is not a small thing to ask of anyone, and now in light of the
> challenges and complications it would bring, your willingness to step
> down.
> 
> -Kat
> 
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Patricio Lorente
>  wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> Throughout the discussion about the appointment of Arnnon Geshuri to the
>> Board of Trustees, the Board has carefully listened to you and discussed
>> internally. Earlier today, Arnnon decided to step down from the Board. To
>> paraphrase his words, he doesn't want to be a distraction for the important
>> discussions that the community and the Foundation need to face in the times
>> to come. We want to thank Arnnon for his ongoing commitment and for helping
>> us to move forward.
>> 
>> The Board Governance Committee is working to improve and update our
>> selection processes before we fill the vacancy left by Arnnon’s departure.
>> We are sorry for the distress and confusion this has caused to some in our
>> community, and also to Arnnon.
>> 
>> Patricio and Alice
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Patricio Lorente
>> Chair, Board of Trustees
>> 
>> Alice Wiegand
>> Vice Chair, Board of Trustees
>> --
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
>> 
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,