Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Basics

In Mexico Virgin Mobile is offering since December 11 this service and of course Wikipedia is announced as a part of the offer. With an intentional way, in my opinion, because although our free licenses that allow reuse of the Wikipedia contents, communication of this criticized service seems to be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On 12/29/2015 07:19 AM, Gnangarra wrote: there are bigger questions than why like; - how can this take place - how can the community ensure its representatives independence in the future, - what effect will this have on other elected representatives on the board The Florid

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Mailing List Barnstar? (for Pine?)

And he is well under the soft limit! https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html Happy New Year, Richard. On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Tito Dutta wrote: > Just now I was talking to User:Pine on-wiki and I informed him that I > thoroughly enjoyed some of his posts on this mailing

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Mailing List Barnstar?

Just now I was talking to User:Pine on-wiki and I informed him that I thoroughly enjoyed some of his posts on this mailing list. I also thought to give him a barnstar for this. But, we do not have any "Wikimedia Mailing list barnstar" Should we create one? What do you think? If it sounds okay, som

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Basics

Free Basics campaign is both confusing and misleading, They are posting ads around India "What net neutrality activists won’t tell you” etc. There are a number of good articles on the web. This one is one of my favourite: http://www.catchnews.com/tech-news/should-facebook-become-internet-s-gatekeep

[Wikimedia-l] We need to talk about the WMF Board Pledge of personal commitment

Hi all, This discussion is somewhat inspired by what recently happened with WMF Board of Trustees[1]. Please note that I was to respect the request from the board (and James himself) to have some more time to review the situation before providing more details about the recent resolution. In some

[Wikimedia-l] Free Basics

Today I've learned about it. And I think WMF is the perfect prey for such initiative. I hope nobody sane is taking that seriously. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Given the timing (less than a month after the last Board Meeting), and some of the comments at Jimbo's talk, it seems likely that a special meeting was called with the question of dismissing James from the Board as a major (and perhaps only) topic. However, no one has explicitly said if this was a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

James, We’ve never spoken. I don’t know you personally, but I do know your reputation throughout the movement. It is stellar. You are reported to be a man of coherent and consistent principles. I am writing to thank you for your years of service and your amazing contributions to the projects thu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

"For cause" can mean a lot of things - everything from getting drunk and plowing in to a crowd to embezzling money, to simply holding consistently different opinions than the rest of the board and continually voicing them. We won't know much more until the board statement (although, again, I'm surp

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Jimbo, on his talk page, says this was a removal "for cause", and that he expects the whole Board will provide a further statement. -Robert Rohde On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Kevin Gorman wrote: > As far as I can tell, no one alleges Doc James did anything wrong - if > there were serious a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

As far as I can tell, no one alleges Doc James did anything wrong - if there were serious allegations of wrongdoing then, for one thing, I have trouble seeing Dariusz as having supported James staying on the board. The board *can* remove members for any reason, but if you're removing one member el

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 3:25 PM, olatunde isaac wrote: > I'm very disappointed to know that the board meeting was still ongoing as > at the time James revealed that he was ejected from the board. It is a > silly idea! Perhaps he felt the community can stop the meeting or override > the decision o

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I don't think it's a "silly idea" to immediately notify 1800+ voters that they've been overruled by 8 people. I think it's something the Board should've been prepared to do at once, with a full and complete rationale. Instead, we keep hearing patronizing "Oh, we'll give you more information sometim

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Argentina Memorial 2015

Hola Anna, Gracias por el hermoso informe! ¿Qué software usaste para crearlo? Por favor, ¿me puede decir dónde voy a encontrar su informe financiero? Gracias, Pine On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Anna Torres wrote: > Dear all, > > Even though is in spanish, please find in the following link

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I'm very disappointed to know that the board meeting was still ongoing as at the time James revealed that he was ejected from the board. It is a silly idea! Perhaps he felt the community can stop the meeting or override the decision of the board of trustee. The WMF BoT is not a parliament where

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Yes, we don't know yet what it was that James allegedly did. James may have been very much in the wrong. However, we can also look at what the Board and James are saying in public, and so far I am disappointed in how the follow-up is being done. I hope that a joint statement from James and the rema

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I think that your 'lessons' are quite premature. We still don't know the what, the why and the how. We don't know the context of everything that happened. It may very well be that the process as it is, worked perfectly. It may also be that it was disastrous. transparency and good communication don

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Depending on what all we learn as this goes forward, some action items that may emerge from this situation as it seems to be evolving so far: (1) the board may need to work on its communication strategies (2) this may be an opportunity for another discussion about Board composition and structure,

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Argentina Memorial 2015

Dear all, Even though is in spanish, please find in the following link the Anual Memorial 2015 regarding WMAR programs and activities. In there, you can find activities' descripctions and results for our main programs and actions taken during 2015. Hope yo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

@Jimmy Wales: The problem is not that James was too fast to publish the fact that he was ejected. I'm pretty sure if the Board decided to boot you out, you would have posted something, too. And that's absolutely natural. The problem is merely that the Board is too slow to publish the reasons for t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I'm sure that board members would have preferred for the WMF Chairperson to make a statement, rather Jimmy publishing personal opinions as "facts". The comments about James are disappointing for many reasons, but should be given appropriate weight... probably a lot less weight than James' own comm

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

"Well, tell that to James. He's the one who went public without warning in the middle of the meeting. You are 100% wrong that this is a decision *against* the community. I know why I voted the way I did - and it has to do with my strong belief in the values of this community and the responsibilitie

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I think the expectation is that, unless this truly was an emergency that required immediate and unforeseen action, planning would have been done in advance for the possible outcomes. That wouldn't be making it a foregone conclusion, as Jimmy said. There should have been plans for how to communicat

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote: > On Dec 30, 2015 12:33 AM, "Craig Franklin" > wrote: > > but also for why there was seemingly not any planning for how to deal > > with the fallout of that decision. > > That, at least, was addressed in the text from Jimbo that you qu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Dec 30, 2015 12:33 AM, "Craig Franklin" wrote: > but also for why there was seemingly not any planning for how to deal > with the fallout of that decision. That, at least, was addressed in the text from Jimbo that you quoted: > > Why didn't that happen? Because James chose to post > > about

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

Hoi, "He who is without sin, throws the first stone". I read this article [1] in Wired and it seems to me that Wikipedians, English Wikipedians at that have plenty to do to get their own house in order. The topic was quality particularly in Wikidata and it degenerated in a conversation that include

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Congratulations to the first four organizations to receive Simple Annual Plan Grants!

Thank you Winifred for your words. I remember a discussion with Katy Love in Mexico City and she shared with me that an APG needs very hard work. After seeing a simple APG process I can say, yes, she was right. This king of new grants is a new oportunity for groups that want to apply for their

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I do think though that the longer the promised statement takes, the more it'll look like spin rather than truth. I agree that "rushed" is bad, but "prompt" should still be a goal. I suppose it doesn't help that potentially some of the folks at WMF Legal are relaxing on a proverbial beach on a Chr