AGK wrote:
> On 6 Jun 2010, at 22:54, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
>
>> Let's start a meta page where people can
>> register thoughts/complaints/grievances/joy/sorry to WMF staff. If
>> it is a
>> serious concern, the staff can respond after someone consults with
>> them and
>> receive either a
On 6 Jun 2010, at 22:54, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> Let's start a meta page where people can
> register thoughts/complaints/grievances/joy/sorry to WMF staff. If
> it is a
> serious concern, the staff can respond after someone consults with
> them and
> receive either a you can handle it or I
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
>
> I would suggest that instead of a wall between the community
> and the foundation, there should be built a bridge. A form
> of consultation by a small group of "wise heads" from the
> communities, who know how they work; not as a deci
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 3:24 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
> > Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> >> Okay, so from my perspective, here's where we are:
> >>
> >> The WMF staff cares about the projects and we respect the work that they
> do [snip]
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Keegan Peterzell wrote:
>> Okay, so from my perspective, here's where we are:
>>
>> The WMF staff cares about the projects and we respect the work that they do
>> [snip] but this is what a thread
>> like the ones we've had recently f
Sorry, I was using an idiom for good idea, let's get started :)
On Jun 6, 2010 10:26 AM, "Jussi-Ville Heiskanen"
wrote:
Keegan Peterzell wrote: > On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville
Heiskanen > > I am sorry, I just can't parse what you are suggesting here. >> This
doesn't correspond to a
James Heilman wrote:
> I think most of us contribute as we feel that this is our encyclopedia.
> This is especially true for those not being paid but I am sure it also
> applies to those on staff as well. An us versus them mentality does not add
> anything. We are all here for one main purpose "
Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
>
>
>> I am sorry, I just can't parse what you are suggesting here.
>> This doesn't correspond to anything real in the past
>> or anything hypothetically in our future.
>>
>> There has never been a "Get off
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
>
> I would suggest that instead of a wall between the community
> and the foundation, there should be built a bridge. A form
> of consultation by a small group of "wise heads" from the
> communities, who know how they work; not as a deci
I think most of us contribute as we feel that this is our encyclopedia.
This is especially true for those not being paid but I am sure it also
applies to those on staff as well. An us versus them mentality does not add
anything. We are all here for one main purpose " to write the best
encyclopedi
Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> Okay, so from my perspective, here's where we are:
>
> The WMF staff cares about the projects and we respect the work that they do.
> Additionally, they do a much better job than the other top...well, one
> hundred websites in the world in communicating with their volunte
Okay, so from my perspective, here's where we are:
The WMF staff cares about the projects and we respect the work that they do.
Additionally, they do a much better job than the other top...well, one
hundred websites in the world in communicating with their volunteers and
their userbase. The flip
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thank you for your opinions. I'd like to clarify my criticism. What Mike
has done and is doing is honorable; he's dedicating efforts and patience
to the community. He has nothing to do with my questioning.
What I see is that WMF doesn't always publis
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
> I think if you look at what we did with regard to the Gallimard takedowns...
Going back to the original issue regarding communication, the
appearance of Mike on this thread shows me that this mailing list is
one good way to get the Board's att
Hello,
2010/6/5 Mike Godwin :
> Nathan writes:
>
> When the WMF makes a
>> decision to intervene in the projects, full and informative
>> communication isn't just a nice-if-you-can-get-it side benefit of
>> dealing with a small company - it's essential to maintaining the
>> fabric of a massively p
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Nathan wrote:
> You can argue, and have argued, that participants should know
> this already or can easily discover the relevant information with some
> digging. But why not spare them the effort? It's fully possible that
> the folks most interested in the specifi
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Mike Godwin wrote:
> I think if you look at what we did with regard to the Gallimard takedowns --
>
> 1) Consulting with French legal experts before taking any action
> 2) Compelling Gallimard to narrow and specify their takedown demands
> 3) Enlisting community me
Nathan writes:
When the WMF makes a
> decision to intervene in the projects, full and informative
> communication isn't just a nice-if-you-can-get-it side benefit of
> dealing with a small company - it's essential to maintaining the
> fabric of a massively participatory and cooperative endeavor.
>
Bod Notbod wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Noein wrote:
>
>
>> I've been watching the dialogues between the WMF and this mailing list
>> for a while now and most of the conflicts are the same: bad
>> communication. This is apparently not due to individuals but institutional.
>>
>
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Bod Notbod wrote:
>
> I think you're wrong.
>
> Try to get any sense out of the upper echelons of your phone company,
> your gas providers, whoever gives you your electricity.
>
> The Wikimedia community is huge. The staff relatively small. It's
> unthinkable you'd
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Noein wrote:
> I've been watching the dialogues between the WMF and this mailing list
> for a while now and most of the conflicts are the same: bad
> communication. This is apparently not due to individuals but institutional.
I think you're wrong.
Try to get any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thank you Phoebe, you've been of a great help. I'll ponder your answers
for a while.
On 03/06/2010 07:21, phoebe ayers wrote:
> Hi Noein,
>
> With no comment on the issue you were interested in, you raise good
> questions about internal communication
Hi Noein,
With no comment on the issue you were interested in, you raise good
questions about internal communication, which has indeed been chaotic
for as long as I've been around, but is -- if you can imagine --
better than it used to be!
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Noein wrote:
> -BEGI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've been watching the dialogues between the WMF and this mailing list
for a while now and most of the conflicts are the same: bad
communication. This is apparently not due to individuals but institutional.
I'm still ignorant of many aspects of the i
24 matches
Mail list logo
