Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Foundation ED search steering group created

[geni]

On 20 April 2016 at 00:05, Pine W  wrote:
> Ironholds, I think that you're taking a negative interpretation. It seems
> to me that any ED candidate is going to want to know what they're getting
> into before agreeing to take the job, and if forks are on the horizon

They aren't. Its an incredibly bad idea to the point where people of
significance aren't even going to bother engaging with it.

-- 
geni

___
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] Fwd: Wikimedia Foundation ED search steering group created

[Anna Stillwell]

Hello Alice,

Thank you for this clear update and the opportunity to provide input. I
really appreciate it.

May the force be with you!

Warmly,
/a

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Alice Wiegand 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Finding the next Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director is a clear
> priority for the Board. To address this challenge, the Board has created a
> steering group tasked with crafting the actual job description, planning
> and conducting the search, and finding ways to include community
> perspectives. This steering group will be regularly consulting with the
> Board throughout the search process.
>
> Please see the ED transition team page on meta [1] to find more information
> about the steering group, and get the latest updates. We have also included
> three questions on the participation page to help us start forming a better
> understanding of the community’s various opinions and expectations.
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Executive_Director_Transition_Team/2016
>
> Alice.
>
>
> --
> Alice Wiegand
> Board of Trustees
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
> ___
> 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,
> 




-- 
Anna Stillwell
Director of Culture and Collaboration
Wikimedia Foundation
415.806.1536
*www.wikimediafoundation.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] Fwd: Wikimedia Foundation ED search steering group created

[Oliver Keyes]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> Ironholds, I think that you're taking a negative interpretation. It seems
> to me that any ED candidate is going to want to know what they're getting
> into before agreeing to take the job, and if forks are on the horizon --
> whether planned or only under consideration -- then this is something that
> they should know about. It also seems to me that the target skill set and
> experience that WMF is seeking should take these issues into consideration.

The interpretation I'm taking is that you're asking for complexities
and slowdowns in an already slow and complex process. Is that
incorrect?

Yes, the ED candidate should know what they're getting into, but one
mailing list discussion does not a probability or even a plausible
possibility make. If we informed the candidates about everything that
had ever been discussed on the mailing lists, they'd die of old age
before we'd finished.

It would be nice if the ED candidate had skills that could be applied
to fork or delegate creation, sure, because it's always nice to find
candidates who are overqualified. But that doesn't mean we hire for
"must have skill at forking". That's not how skills work. We hire for
judgment and experience governing similar organisations, and then we
trust.

The old job description does not include "must be capable of suing the
NSA" - yet we managed to pull it off. Because what the old JD did call
for was an awareness and interest in public policy, and sound judgment
about what public policy issues put the movement and its goals at
risk. We hire for broad areas, not narrow. The broad areas for forking
would, presumably, be a desire to empower people at the lowest
possible level, which is already part of the process - because however
flawed we are at it sometimes (a lot of the time, really) that is
inherently part of the movement's goals and principles.

>
> Andy, as far as I know there have been periodic mentions of this idea off
> and on for years, but I'm unaware if the WMF Board is actively pondering
> this issue.

You're unaware of if the WMF Board is actively pondering this issue.
None of us are. In fact, the only commentary we have on this issue at
all recently is a single mailing list thread.

Yes, it's been debated on and off for years. It's the very definition
of a perennial proposal. And for what it's worth, I'm actually a fan
of delegating elements of the organisation's activities or creating
spinoffs! But that doesn't mean it's worth throwing in a job
description or factoring into the hiring process for an executive
director of an organisation that spent 18 months on ED hiring _before_
it was systemically traumatised.

> I'm revising my thinking as we continue this conversation and I appreciate the
> questions.
>

Well, I for one won't *be* continuing this conversation. What I said
to you was "that sounds non-trivial, please consider the disruption
and misery drawing this process out is likely to cause people". And
beyond saythat it's easier than it sounds - without, actually,
providing any evidence that it's easier than it sounds - you've done
none of that.

As a community member, as a former staffer, as a human being, I am
tired of conversations which, while polite on the surface, simply
gloss over or ignore the actual human cost of decisions that might be
reached, or the cost of even participating in the conversations in the
first place. I asked you to factor these costs in. I'm not seeing that
done. I'm not interested in engaging in discussions which lack that
consideration, any more. Our limited time on this tiny blue ball is
far too valuable for that.

___
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] Fwd: Wikimedia Foundation ED search steering group created

[Pine W]

Ironholds, I think that you're taking a negative interpretation. It seems
to me that any ED candidate is going to want to know what they're getting
into before agreeing to take the job, and if forks are on the horizon --
whether planned or only under consideration -- then this is something that
they should know about. It also seems to me that the target skill set and
experience that WMF is seeking should take these issues into consideration.
This can be done with less disruption at this stage than might first appear
(and as I think further about this issue I would in hindsight revise some
of my earlier statements for better alignment with the existing timeline
and thought process of the search committee), and it seems to me that it's
wise to think ahead now, while the search committee is actively interested
in comments about plans and can make adjustments most easily.

Andy, as far as I know there have been periodic mentions of this idea off
and on for years, but I'm unaware if the WMF Board is actively pondering
this issue. At this point I'm not thinking that it's necessary to make a
final decision about moving forward with a forking process, so much as it's
necessary that if a fork is likely to happen or likely to be seriously
considered any time in the near future then this issue should be under
consideration both by the search committee and by the ED candidates. I'm
revising my thinking as we continue this conversation and I appreciate the
questions.

Thanks,
Pine
___
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] The WMAR's ad about Wikipedia

[Pine W]

Hola Anna,

Me gusta el video! Además de la conciencia pública, ¿cuáles son sus
objetivos para la campaña de publicidad?

Pine

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Anna Torres  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> After launching our documentary film about our community and editors,
> Wikimedia Argentina is now launching an ad to reach new public and position
> the organization in he mass media.
>
> Hope you all like it! You can find it here
> <
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Spot_%22Soy_Wikipedista%22_WMAR.webm
> >
> .
>
> Hugs!
>
> --
> Anna Torres Adell
> Directora Ejecutiva
> *A.C. Wikimedia Argentina*
> ___
> 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] The WMAR's ad about Wikipedia

[Anna Torres]

Dear all,

After launching our documentary film about our community and editors,
Wikimedia Argentina is now launching an ad to reach new public and position
the organization in he mass media.

Hope you all like it! You can find it here

.

Hugs!

-- 
Anna Torres Adell
Directora Ejecutiva
*A.C. Wikimedia Argentina*
___
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] Reminder: Legal IRC Office Hour starts in about three hours.

[James Alexander]

For those that weren't able to attend or want to re re-read the logs have
been posted on meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours/Office_hours_2016-04-19

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Jan Gerlach  wrote:

> TLDR:
>
> What: IRC chat with members of Wikimedia Foundation legal
>
> Topic: Freedom of panorama
>
> When: Tuesday, April 19 at 11:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time / 18:00 UTC
>
> Reminder: We can’t do legal advice.
>
> Hi all,
>
> We'd like to remind you of the return of Legal Team IRC office hours,
> starting today, April 19 at 11:00 AM PDT / 18:00 UTC! We’re planning to
> host these once every 3 months or so going forward.
>
> IRC office hours provide an opportunity for members of the Wikimedia
> communities to chat directly with members of the Wikimedia Foundation legal
> team on topics of interest including public policy, legal issues facing the
> Wikimedia movement, and what you can do to get involved. Please keep in
> mind that under California law we can’t give out legal advice, so rather
> than giving out legal advice, we will talk about the Wikimedia Foundation’s
> stance on issues.
>
> For this format, we’ll begin at 11:00 by doing a brief introduction and
> then start taking questions from everyone that’s present. We’ll aim to have
> a few people on at the same time to be able to respond faster and to
> discuss different aspects of the issues.
>
> For our first office hour, we’re planning to discuss the freedom of
> panorama (FoP). With the recent decision in Sweden
> ,
> holding that Wikimedia Sweden's website/database was in violation of
> Swedish copyright law for making available on the internet photographs of
> artwork permanently situated in public areas, FoP has become more pressing
> than ever. We believe that the ability for members of the public to
> photograph public monuments and landscapes is a fundamental part of free
> expression. We plan to raise this issue to the European Commission this
> summer, and need your help to let them know that it’s important. This first
> one of a series of IRC office hours will be a great opportunity to exchange
> thoughts about it.
>
> If you have questions that you would like to discuss during the office
> hour,
> you can add them on Meta Wiki here
> .
> ___
> 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] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

[Nathan]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Oliver Keyes  wrote:

>
>
> Also, no, the United States is explicitly not a democracy. It's a republic.
> And no, the Wikimedia movement is not a democracy - but it's *also* not a
> dictatorship or a banana republic with a President For Life. Senior
> movement figures with zero substantive accountability is a recipe for
> madness.
>

This "republic" vs "democracy" business is a fallacy I wish people would
stop repeating as if it means something - it doesn't. No one anywhere on
earth hears "democracy" and thinks "ancient Athenian direct democracy" is
what is meant.


>
> On Monday, 18 April 2016, Gerard Meijssen 
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Many may request democratic processes but I prefer a greater deal of
> > transparency. When you talk about accountability, it is not so much to
> > people but more related to the extend we achieve what we aim for. When
> you
> > consider where people are and where we have our audience, I find that our
> > results are lukewarm, maybe improving. There are some stellar projects
> and
> > there are some that are in need of an overhaul. The good thing of our
> > movement is that up to a point people can work towards solutions and
> make a
> > high impact without getting sidetracked by "democracy".
> >
>

What people have demanded is transparency. Failing transparency they turn
to democracy as the only way to rein in the non-transparent exercise of
control and influence. The principle of affording the participants of a
group or effort the power to select their leaders is one that transcends
government and is meaningful in most contexts, including Wikimedia.

While I have said for years that Wikimedia is not a governance experiment,
having an accountable leadership is not experimental. If you support
transparency, and can see that folks asking for it have been given the
silent treatment for months on end, then I fail to see why you argue
against using the one lever of control that remains to demand that the
desire for transparency be heard.
___
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] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

[Oliver Keyes]

Yes, Jimmy is effective in his board role - unfortunately, well, have you
seen the threads about his behaviour in that role? If you instead mean he
is only valuable as an icon or media figure because of it you'll need a
better argument than a statement as if the claim is fact.

Also, no, the United States is explicitly not a democracy. It's a republic.
And no, the Wikimedia movement is not a democracy - but it's *also* not a
dictatorship or a banana republic with a President For Life. Senior
movement figures with zero substantive accountability is a recipe for
madness.

But thank you for making the good faith claim that anyone who disagrees
with you on this is just making a power play. What was it you were saying
about taking an approach that achieves turmoil, again? ;)

On Monday, 18 April 2016, Gerard Meijssen  wrote:

> Hoi,
> Do you really think that democratic processes produce a best result? Do you
> really think that the Wikimedia Foundation or the United States deserve
> that label?
>
> Many may request democratic processes but I prefer a greater deal of
> transparency. When you talk about accountability, it is not so much to
> people but more related to the extend we achieve what we aim for. When you
> consider where people are and where we have our audience, I find that our
> results are lukewarm, maybe improving. There are some stellar projects and
> there are some that are in need of an overhaul. The good thing of our
> movement is that up to a point people can work towards solutions and make a
> high impact without getting sidetracked by "democracy".
>
> What our movement needs is more recognition for what works. More room for
> experimentation helps. More trust in the good intentions of the people that
> make things work helps.We need less Wikipedia think and more result think.
> It is a travesty for instance that the great work in Wikisource is not
> recognised as a generator of traffic. That is what they do in India and it
> is why I as a non elected member of a committee have a deviant idea: in my
> strong opinion we need both more wikisources as a tool to generate content
> and a platform to bring that content to a world audience. I am thrilled
> that Wikidata will improve the functionality of red links in Wikipedia even
> though it is only a subset of what is possible. There will be a small
> conference on sources and quality and that is something I applaud.
>
> I have found that consistently this noisy crowd clamoring for "democracy"
> is not really interested in results. It feels too much like a power
> game.that is being played.
>
> Finally; Jimmy is effective. Removing him from the board will disable his
> ability to function. Think about it in terms of what we aim to achieve and
> forget all the self serving rhetoric about democracy. Democracy is
> secondary.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On 18 April 2016 at 20:28, James Heilman >
> wrote:
>
> > If Jimmy was to stand for community election and not be elected it will
> not
> > decrease his ability to be an ambassador for the movement one bit. If he
> > stands for election and wins it will increase his legitimacy.
> >
> > What I think many are requesting is democratic processes and
> > accountability. Our movement does not need anyone sitting on the board
> for
> > life. Our current situation is a disheartening for many within the
> > movement.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Gordon Joly  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 17/04/16 20:55, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> > > >  Arguably the latest
> > > > crop of board members have shown how hard it is in the first place to
> > > make
> > > > a meaningful contribution.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >GerardM
> > >
> > >
> > > In particular?
> > >
> > > Gordo
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> >
> > The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> > ___
> > 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] Reminder: Legal IRC Office Hour starts in about three hours.

[Jan Gerlach]

TLDR:

What: IRC chat with members of Wikimedia Foundation legal

Topic: Freedom of panorama

When: Tuesday, April 19 at 11:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time / 18:00 UTC

Reminder: We can’t do legal advice.

Hi all,

We'd like to remind you of the return of Legal Team IRC office hours,
starting today, April 19 at 11:00 AM PDT / 18:00 UTC! We’re planning to
host these once every 3 months or so going forward.

IRC office hours provide an opportunity for members of the Wikimedia
communities to chat directly with members of the Wikimedia Foundation legal
team on topics of interest including public policy, legal issues facing the
Wikimedia movement, and what you can do to get involved. Please keep in
mind that under California law we can’t give out legal advice, so rather
than giving out legal advice, we will talk about the Wikimedia Foundation’s
stance on issues.

For this format, we’ll begin at 11:00 by doing a brief introduction and
then start taking questions from everyone that’s present. We’ll aim to have
a few people on at the same time to be able to respond faster and to
discuss different aspects of the issues.

For our first office hour, we’re planning to discuss the freedom of
panorama (FoP). With the recent decision in Sweden
,
holding that Wikimedia Sweden's website/database was in violation of
Swedish copyright law for making available on the internet photographs of
artwork permanently situated in public areas, FoP has become more pressing
than ever. We believe that the ability for members of the public to
photograph public monuments and landscapes is a fundamental part of free
expression. We plan to raise this issue to the European Commission this
summer, and need your help to let them know that it’s important. This first
one of a series of IRC office hours will be a great opportunity to exchange
thoughts about it.

If you have questions that you would like to discuss during the office hour,
you can add them on Meta Wiki here
.
___
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,