On 9 August 2011 05:13, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote:
This is all very true, and very insightful; but what does it have to do with
chapters?
That the message from WMF is about a decentralisation not working from
their perspective, so recentralising fundraising.
Having followed the recent discussions from the sidelines (and
speaking as a longtime volunteer), I found the various appeals to
principles such as decentralization and subsidiarity somewhat
abstract.
Of course BirgitteSB is absolutely correct in that there is a strong
consensus that content
On Aug 8, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:39 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
Decentralization isn't some random choice that somehow was attached to this
movement; it is the only way the program functions at all. WMF
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:43 AM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
You are right that this decentralization doesn't neccessarily have to be
anything like chapters. But chapters happened for whatever reason and
no-one is trying to be rid of them. The validity of the argument that
chapters aren't
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:43 AM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
Funding chapters by grants from WMF so that they all use the money in the
same WMF approved way is a systematically bad idea in the same way sending
shoes to Africa is a bad idea. Redefining the chapters who participated in a
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 3:43 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
Redefining the chapters who participated in a joint fundraiser with WMF as
WMF's payment processors is straight-up insulting.
Just on this particular point. I thought the same, but after a round
of explanations, I now understand
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, let's be clear here: in what sense are the chapters participating in
the fundraiser, rather than merely being its beneficiaries? The underlying
fundraising work -- the actual solicitation of donations, in
2011/8/9 Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com
wrote:
Well, let's be clear here: in what sense are the chapters participating
in
the fundraiser, rather than merely being its beneficiaries? The
underlying
fundraising
Wow, this is a gross misrepresentation of the reality.
While Foundation staff has provided an invaluable support to make the
fundraiser a success, it probably wouldn't have been such a success
hadn't there been dozens of volunteers, among which _many_ chapter
board members and simple
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not suggesting that the success of the fundraiser isn't due in large
part to broad community involvement; my assertion is that this community
involvement would take place whether or not a formal chapter was
On Aug 9, 2011, at 12:51 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote:
Nor does off-wiki collaboration require that a formal entity be in
existence. Off-wiki activities -- whether social meetups or more formal
outreach efforts to GLAM institutions and elsewhere -- are no less
effective
Hi all,
this year I had the honour of presenting an overview of some of the
Wikimedia Chapters' coolest and most interesting/inspiring activities. This
is not only about big budget projects, but can also be meetups in a city.
The video of my presentation should be up in a few days on
On Tue, 9 Aug 2011 10:11:49 -0500, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
And just to add to the argument, the projects are divided by language,
and
not by jurisdiction. Whereas in many cases it may be unimportant (for
instance, we can safely assume that most of the activbities of the
Swedish
chapter
On Aug 9, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote:
Writing about ethical concerns while at same time being blind to anything
that does not maximize donations is laughable. The obvious solution to the
stated concern that is being raised is returning to the split
Indeed, chapters have no jurisdiction over the content of the projects
whatsoever - and they dont want that either. I dont think any chapter would
be crazy enough to actually draft such a resolution in any binding tone.
It is true however that many chapters do important work for the local
Funding chapters by grants from WMF so that they all use the money in the
same WMF approved way is a systematically bad idea in the same way
sending
shoes to Africa is a bad idea. Redefining the chapters who participated
in
a joint fundraiser with WMF as WMF's payment processors is
It is true however that many chapters do important work for the local
projects, and serve their local needs in the sense of activities, press
contacts and fundraising in a more effective way (less culturally
challanging, more sensitive to what works locally and better in touch
with
other
On 8/8/2011 6:24 PM, foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
fwiw, the Wikisource portal lists all languages, inc. the languages in
the Wikisource incubator.
http://www.wikisource.org/
That's actually a good shortcut and it appears amongst the Wikimedia
buttons at the bottom of the
*in fact, I even want to help the Dutch chapter with the project on taking
pictures of State Monuments - it would be very helpful if someone mails me
offlist or indicates on my Wiki page if there is any information on what is
needed
*
The Wiki page:
The Wiki page:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2011
The Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/WikiLovesMonuments
And the Website: http://wikilovesmonuments.eu
But as you can see, is not only the Dutch people.
_
*Béria Lima*
On 9 August 2011 16:36, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.com wrote:
So I simply do not accept that the right thing for the movement is for
donations to be received by the Foundation and then passed on to the
chapters. Chapters in my view have an important role to play in maximising
the
On 9 August 2011 08:18, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2011 05:13, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote:
This is all very true, and very insightful; but what does it have to do with
chapters?
That the message from WMF is about a decentralisation not working from
On 9 August 2011 18:29, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2011 08:18, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2011 05:13, Kirill Lokshin kirill.loks...@gmail.com wrote:
This is all very true, and very insightful; but what does it have to do with
chapters?
That the message
During these discussions we must keep in mind the laws of the
countries involved. I am not a lawyer and thus will leave the
specifics to the legal counsel of my chapter (Wikimedia Canada) and
the WMF. But from my lay understanding a Canadian chapter is not
allowed to just funnel tax deductible
Thank you, Lodewijk -- this is awesome.
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Chapters_-_Wikimania_2011.pdf
-
unfortunately Wikimedia Commons still doesn't accept any presentation format
(.ppt, .pptx,
- Original Message -
From: Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2011 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
It is true however that many chapters do important work for
A few points about Kyrill's statement, and a proposal.
Firstly the idea that the work done by the chapters could just as
easily be done by the WMF as well, and likely at lower cost. Cost
isn't everything, and I suspect the chapters are more likely to be
able to adapt things to their local
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:43 PM, WereSpielChequers
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
A few points about Kyrill's statement, and a proposal.
Firstly the idea that the work done by the chapters could just as
easily be done by the WMF as well, and likely at lower cost. Cost
isn't everything, and
Thinking loudly: I think that something like like button for edits
would give more reasons to continue with editing. Those who like would
have to go to diffs, which would leave the button to more engaged
editors and thus almost strictly internal community issue. Could be
discussed more about
Dear all,
Are the Wikimania 2011 video on YouTube aviliable on Wikimedia Commons? Where
is the link? Thanks.
HW@zhwp
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
I don't understand why we need a Like button at all; it's open to personal
interpretation and therefore can be in contravention of many policies,
particularly NPOV. It's a bad idea, and should be strangled at birth.
Feedback is much more sensibly achieved through more subtle means.
Milos
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 04:02, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
I don't understand why we need a Like button at all; it's open to personal
interpretation and therefore can be in contravention of many policies,
particularly NPOV. It's a bad idea, and should be strangled at birth.
Most reputable translators of literary texts do not aim at a literal
translation, but one that replicate the meaning, the emotional affect
as far as possible, and ideally some of the linguistic subtleties.
Even in translating prose texts, a literal translation is usually not
produced unless it is
On 8/9/2011 1:43 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote:
One possible way to decentralise whilst maintaining or even improving
fiscal accountability would be to replace the Audit committee with a
group audit committee. I'm familiar with this model here in the UK in
our not for profit housing sector -
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote:
It is not so much that I believe chapters should lead the movement as that
I am certain WMF cannot successfully lead the movement.
It seems to me that these changes are about making chapters more into
franchises. Which
One of his tasks is archiving. Since archiving is done 'on Meta', how can he
archive while blocked? Concerning that his activities are not urgent to deserve
immediate response, why can't he request a non-blocked member of LangCom to
perform desired actions on Meta?
Teles
Hoi,
Because nobody else is interested in doing this. He is a full member of the
language committee he does import data from Incubator into new projects. It
is known that he has been framed multiple times and it is proven
conclusively for the last time when this was attempted
For more
37 matches
Mail list logo
