On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:22 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
(Responding just on the general issue, not on the specific case.)
> Paid editing is not the same as paid advocacy (editing). This is a very
> important point.
I agree it's an important distinction. I personally think it could be
worthwhile to thi
On Jan 9, 2014 11:38 AM, "Matthew Walker" wrote:
>
> I will probably regret saying this[1] -- but the figure we like to throw
> around here in fundraising tech is that a new payments gateway [2] is not
> even worth considering unless it is likely to make us at least 500K USD a
> year[3].
Thanks f
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Matthew Walker wrote:
> It is a significant undertaking to integrate a new gateway with our current
> code (think several man months of time related to coding, code review,
> donor services preparation, and testing; not including contract negotiation
> and legal rev
I will probably regret saying this[1] -- but the figure we like to throw
around here in fundraising tech is that a new payments gateway [2] is not
even worth considering unless it is likely to make us at least 500K USD a
year[3]. Or, in the case that it is not an immediate payoff, if it is
strategi
Thanks Erik for a well written overview.
Would it be possible for the WMF to give an estimate on what it would cost
to build and/or what the threshold of annual bitcoin donations would make
it worthwhile building. Someone might be interested in donating
specifically to have this built, or we could
Thank you very much for raising this distinction MZ. It's a very important
one and, in the recriminations about this particular event, I would hate
for the 'baby to get thrown out with the bathwater' by losing this
distinction.
-Liam / Wittylama
wittylama.com
Peace, love & metadata
On 9 January
Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
>> Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
>
>The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as
>freelancer.com and its ilk. The foundation is simply a client, and uses
>it only to pay
Frank Schulenburg wrote:
>[...] it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many in the
>editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation.
No.
Paid editing is not the same as paid advocacy (editing). This is a very
important point.
Suggested reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling
wrote:
> In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting
> bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange --
> it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that
> naturally appreciates i
You know what, I think this outcome is not just disappointing, it's
positively astounding. I have a lot that I could say about it, but I can't
imagine what the point of saying it could possibly be. Chalk one up for the
trolls.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Andre Engels wrote:
>oDesk is a system where people can offer or take jobs. Wikimedia uses it
>(though in a somewhat different way). How on Earth do those two facts
>imply "oDesk is probably used for paid editing"?
I'm not sure "probably" is necessary. The evidence strongly suggests that
it _is_ u
Dear all,
I'm writing to let you know that Sarah Stierch is no longer an employee of the
Wikimedia Foundation.
The Wikimedia Foundation has recently learned that Sarah has been editing
Wikipedia on behalf of paying clients, as recently as a few weeks ago. She did
that even though it is widel
Agreed.
It's nice to feel the community behind Wikipedia (well, when it doesn't
bite you)
and the feeling that somebody noticed you fixed a typo is even nicer.
Aubrey
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Nathan wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014
Hey,
Here is Wikimedia Israel report for September – November 2013:
Wiki Loves Monuments –
On October 15, WLM Israel has finally ended.
-
7000 images of nearly 700 heritage sites and 100 artworks that are
publicly accessible were uploaded to WikiCommons.
-
Over 400 people to
@Andrew,
Yes, of course. Or for that matter thematic organization, namely Amical
Wikimedia.
On 08/01/2014 19:57, Risker wrote:
I too am sorry to see that partial scholarships will not be entertained
this year by the Wikimania Committee.
For the record, the type of scholarships on offer is
On 8 January 2014 12:50, Katie Chan wrote:
> On 08/01/2014 17:39, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>
>> On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
>>
>>> Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
>>> Foundation for Wikimania 2014.
>>>
>> I rather liked the idea of partial scho
Note, though, that this is WMF, and presumably doesn't stop the
individual chapters offering partial scholarships if they want to...
Andrew.
On 8 January 2014 17:50, Katie Chan wrote:
> On 08/01/2014 17:39, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>>
>> On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
>>>
>>> Only a s
Thanks Alice.
For those interested in this, you might like to note that James Hare has
started a discussion about the method used to select these Board members,
here; - it reflects the likelihood that thematic orgs will be part of the
decision not just chapters.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ch
Hi all,
Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2014 in London are now being
accepted. Applications are open until the end of the day UTC on 17 February.
Wikimania 2014 scholarships is an award given to an individual to enable
them to attend Wikimania in London from 6-10 August, 2014.
Only a sin
On 08/01/2014 17:39, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
Foundation for Wikimania 2014.
I rather liked the idea of partial scholarships in past years since it
would allow more people to attend
On 01/08/2014 12:37 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
> Only a single type of scholarship will be available from the Wikimedia
> Foundation for Wikimania 2014.
I rather liked the idea of partial scholarships in past years since it
would allow more people to attend on the same budget when practical.
Can I ask
Hi all,
Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2014 in London are now being
accepted. Applications are open until the end of the day UTC on 17 February.
Wikimania 2014 scholarships is an award given to an individual to enable
them to attend Wikimania in London from 6-10 August, 2014.
Only a
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Nathan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann
> wrote:
>
> > * Nathan wrote:
> > >We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the
> > fundraiser.
> >
> > That would make many editors very annoyed and angry and drive them away.
On 01/08/2014 11:07 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> The system itself is a little [suboptimal]
It should go without saying (but may be worth clarifying) that this is
my personal opinion from having suffered oDesk for a year and not that
of the Foundation. :-)
-- Marc
__
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> > Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
>
> The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as
> freelancer.com and its ilk. The foundation is simp
On 01/08/2014 02:30 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> Can anyone explain the relationship between Wikimedia and oDesk?
The short of it: oDesk is indeed roughly the same kind of job board as
freelancer.com and its ilk. The foundation is simply a client, and uses
it only to pay its contractors and (most of)*
+1 to Ting's philosophy. Best WMF trustee ever. ;-)
It may be worth illustrating how I might draw the line between my
unpaid volunteer work and taking payment for some tasks. To date I
have uploaded something like 160,000+ images to Commons and never been
paid anything for my time. My work has bee
Hello dear all,
I won't impose my standard to other people, I just want to tell you what
is the standard I setup for myself, and I will also tell you why.
I won't accept payment or gift exceeding a certain amount (means > 20
Euro) or search for payment for my volunteer's work that is however
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * Nathan wrote:
> >We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the
> fundraiser.
> >I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
> >drives, even though editing is really the core way for peopl
* Nathan wrote:
>We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the fundraiser.
>I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
>drives, even though editing is really the core way for people to donate to
>Wikimedia.
That would make many editors very annoyed
Amir E. Aharoni, 08/01/2014 15:32:
Something like the "new message" orange bar :)
Yeah, orange bar be blessed.
I guess that designers and Growth people may know an answer, but all
thoughts are welcome.
As long as the orange bar works (it doesn't on mobile, beware), you can
just use a vari
We should thank them for editing using a major banner, a la the fundraiser.
I don't know why we do huge fundraising drives but seem to neglect editing
drives, even though editing is really the core way for people to donate to
Wikimedia.
___
Wikimedia-l ma
Something like the "new message" orange bar :)
I guess that designers and Growth people may know an answer, but all
thoughts are welcome.
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
2014/1/8 Y
On 08.01.2014 15:22, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
Hi,
Is there any plan to allow using the "Thanks" feature to thank
anonymous
Wikimedia users?
A Hebrew Wikipedia user asked me about this, saying that it may be
even
more useful to thank anons than logged-in users.
How would they know someone t
Hi,
Is there any plan to allow using the "Thanks" feature to thank anonymous
Wikimedia users?
A Hebrew Wikipedia user asked me about this, saying that it may be even
more useful to thank anons than logged-in users.
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
On 8 January 2014 12:14, David Gerard wrote:
> Because it's "feed the trolls" week, obviously.
Here David, have a cookie.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On 8 January 2014 12:12, Andre Engels wrote:
> I don't think it's expressly forbidden, 'frowned upon' would be the words
> I'd use. Apart from that, I have a feeling this whole thread is a storm in
> less than a glass of water. Odesk is a system where people can offer or
> take jobs. Wikimedia us
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Gryllida wrote:
> Thought paid editing is prohibited. It could be nice to find ways to
> enforce that.
>
I don't think it's expressly forbidden, 'frowned upon' would be the words
I'd use. Apart from that, I have a feeling this whole thread is a storm in
less than
Thought paid editing is prohibited. It could be nice to find ways to enforce
that.
On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, at 21:50, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> Odesk is the way the WMF pays people who do not live in the USA. What is
> expected of a contractor or employee is to register the time worked for the
>
Hoi,
Odesk is the way the WMF pays people who do not live in the USA. What is
expected of a contractor or employee is to register the time worked for the
WMF and the contractor is paid through Odesk. This has all kinds of legal
reasons.
When an employee / contractor wants to use Odesk in addition
I have not used it but would like to know more. If WMF
employees/contractors are free to sell their services as paid
Wikipedia editors on oDesk, I think that a how-to-sell-your-services
guide would be helpful so that active unpaid volunteers who are not
employees know how to go get some money from
41 matches
Mail list logo
