On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:31 PM, James Alexander wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Philippe Beaudette <
> pbeaude...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Sure. There are about a bajillion use cases for it. :)
> >
> > pb
> >
> >
> >
> The foundation just likes to spy on us ;) dirt for late
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Philippe Beaudette <
pbeaude...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>
> Sure. There are about a bajillion use cases for it. :)
>
> pb
>
>
>
The foundation just likes to spy on us ;) dirt for later on if
we won't protect that page!
James [redacted for protection]
james.[re
>>
>> I had understood that another use-case for such a database is when an
> external organisation (e.g. a local library in some city where there
> is no
> Chapter presence) asks for a local Wikimedian to come and give a
> presentation or advice on how to get involved. Such a database
> (IIRC)
On 15 July 2010 22:35, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> Hiya -
>
> I asked Danese, who is currently buried under about 20 pounds of stuff
> after coming back from Wikimania, to further describe the stakeholder
> database. Her response is:
>
> Sue has a vision for a single master database that tracks
Hiya -
I asked Danese, who is currently buried under about 20 pounds of stuff
after coming back from Wikimania, to further describe the stakeholder
database. Her response is:
Sue has a vision for a single master database that tracks our
interactions with movement participants. It is inten
I have gone trough the report, and immediately noted the extremely strong
growth of the foundation in terms of personal (Nearly doubling the amount
two years in a row). Generally i am not a fan of such fast growth as it
often leads to bloating; but seeing the the rest of the plan looks fine i
presu
Now if we only had some kind of mobile device which could be given to such
institutions containing a copy! :P.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> Samuel Klein wrote:
> >
> > Every national and regional library should have a local copy of
> Wikimedia.
> >
> >
>
> With
Samuel Klein wrote:
>
> Every national and regional library should have a local copy of Wikimedia.
>
>
With a full history dump?
;-)
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https:/
Hi Samuel,
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Samuel J Klein wrote:
> One can always keep increasing operational spending. Reserves or
> long-term funds should grow in tandem with those increases --
> otherwise as we come to rely on this new spending, there is additional
> risk that efforts may c
Hello,
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 4:58 AM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> One of the reasons, for many the only reason for giving a\t the annual
> fundraising drive is exactly to provide money to maintain our
> infrastructure. Take that away and you take away the reason to give.
That's a bit like the old
Hoi,
I agree that donors are happy to provide to these other goals as well. The
issue is however that they go together with the essential goal of keeping
our infra structure running. Take away the essentials from the equation,
give the impression that there are plenty of reserves and the need can n
Hi Gerard,
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> Hoi,
> One of the reasons, for many the only reason for giving a\t the annual
> fundraising drive is exactly to provide money to maintain our
> infrastructure. Take that away and you take away the reason to give. Once
> people g
Hoi,
One of the reasons, for many the only reason for giving a\t the annual
fundraising drive is exactly to provide money to maintain our
infrastructure. Take that away and you take away the reason to give. Once
people get it in their mind that we have reserves to pay for our
infrastructure, they w
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> When we are frugal and build reserves, this will be appreciated. When we build
> reserves that have no immediate goals, we will lose acceptance as an
> organisation
> that actually needs the money.
I agree we should have specific goals for
Hoi,
I am afraid that a drive to have funding for the next fifty years will be
extremely counter productive. It is this kind of arguments that has turned
off many of the people who contribute to charities in the Netherlands. The
notion that we should have reserves for the next fifty years assumes t
On 3 July 2010 18:53, Noein wrote:
> If something of similar consequences as the kill switch [1] were
> triggered against the WMF in USA, would it still be accessible for the
> rest of the world?
The "kill switch" idea, as I understand it, is about killing the
internet entirely, not one site. If
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
If something of similar consequences as the kill switch [1] were
triggered against the WMF in USA, would it still be accessible for the
rest of the world?
[1]:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/obama-internet-kill-switch-proposed-20100
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>
> When Bomis was hosting it, it was just a handful of servers.
> Volunteers wouldn't be able to fork the site and keep things going at
> anywhere near the level they are at now - if the WMF doesn't have the
> funds, neither will the community.
On 3 July 2010 18:29, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> Hm, well, I think this gets back to David Goodman's point, one which I agree
> with.
>
> Yes, the only absolute commitment the WMF has in the grand scheme of things
> is to provide the physical resource to host the projects. However, this all
> bega
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Samuel Klein wrote:
>
> For instance, a clear commitment to maintaining the physical operation
> of the projects for the next 50 years, even if all sources of funding
> were to dry up. Or a commitment to maintaining this with
> infrastructure distributed across mu
On 3 July 2010 17:35, Samuel Klein wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:49 AM, Birgitte SB wrote:
> David Gerard writes:
>> http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2007/04/10/disaster-recovery-planning/
>> Can we reasonably say that everything else on the list there is a
>> solved problem we don't have to w
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:49 AM, Birgitte SB wrote:
> The endowment is not about just about funding, I think it is probably also
> symbolic of endurance to many people.
> There is a worry about the content remaining available in the long term. If
> there is not an endowment to donate towards,
> I
Hudong comes maybe the nearest. And Hudong is doing a lot of
mobilization works in China. A few days ago there were rumours in
Chinese chatrooms about an expansion of Hudong direction Australia.
Greetings
Ting
geni wrote:
> On 1 July 2010 09:58, John Vandenberg wrote:
>
>
>> Who is WMF comp
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:58 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 4:06 AM, David Goodman wrote:
>>> We are secure because of the volunteers, not the funding. If the
>>> foundation were to disappear, the project could continue.
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:52 PM, geni wrote:
> On 1 July 2010 09:58, John Vandenberg wrote:
>
>> Who is WMF competing with?
>>
>
> Hudong
>
Or maybe Knol. Anyone remember Knol?
-Chad
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsub
I blogged a range of disaster scenarios a few years ago:
http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2007/04/10/disaster-recovery-planning/
The WMF looked a lot less solid then than it does now.
At least we have a full history dump from en: now. Probably.
Can we reasonably say that everything else on the li
--- On Thu, 7/1/10, David Goodman wrote:
>
> The basic reason why doing things by staff rather than
> volunteers is
> wrong is that it decreases one of the motivations for
> volunteering--the knowledge that one can participate
> significantly in
> not just the work but the decisions, and beco
On 1 July 2010 09:58, John Vandenberg wrote:
> Who is WMF competing with?
>
Hudong
--
geni
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I would say the biggest reason why Wikipedia is still top dog would probably be
"anyone can edit" combined with timing.
From: Thomas Dalton
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Sent: Thu, July 1, 2010 9:01:47 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] 2010
On 1 July 2010 16:57, David Goodman wrote:
> Citizendium is perhaps most valuable for having
> showed us a path we should not follow--elaborate bureaucracy and
> expert editing--but in a more positive sense did highlight the need
> for us to improve article quality.
Citizendium's bureaucracy and
We are not competing with any other web site, or organization, and
there is no reason for us to think of it that way. We are part of the
capitalist world only in the sense that our physical operations must
exist within it.
We are trying to build a particular project for a common purpose--not
to r
On 1 July 2010 10:37, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:58 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
>>> Who is WMF competing with?
>>
>> User attention.
>
> Sorry, misread "who" with "what".
>
> Presently, with top ~20 sites for user attent
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:58 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
>> Who is WMF competing with?
>
> User attention.
Sorry, misread "who" with "what".
Presently, with top ~20 sites for user attention.
___
f
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 4:06 AM, David Goodman wrote:
>> We are secure because of the volunteers, not the funding. If the
>> foundation were to disappear, the project could continue. The only
>> funding actually necessary is for the physical op
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 4:06 AM, David Goodman wrote:
> We are secure because of the volunteers, not the funding. If the
> foundation were to disappear, the project could continue. The only
> funding actually necessary is for the physical operation of the
> project.
While it seems as the the most
s! Excellent insight, David.
Marc Riddell
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Birgitte SB wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- On Wed, 6/30/10, Veronique Kessler wrote:
>>
>>> From: Veronique Kessler
>>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] 2010-11 Annual Plan Now Pos
Veronique Kessler wrote:
>
>> From: Veronique Kessler
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] 2010-11 Annual Plan Now Posted to
>> FoundationWebsite
>> To: susanpgard...@gmail.com, "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
>>
>> Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2010, 3:5
--- On Wed, 6/30/10, Veronique Kessler wrote:
> From: Veronique Kessler
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] 2010-11 Annual Plan Now Posted to
> FoundationWebsite
> To: susanpgard...@gmail.com, "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
>
> Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2010, 3
Thanks Veronique & Eugene for your comprehensive & thoughtful replies
re: this issue. It seems clear that an endowment (if there is ever one
developed) and good fundraising is not an either/or proposition.
There is also additional discussion going on about related topics on
this talk page:
http://
Thanks everyone for your comments thus far (and for the thank yous too :)).
As we progress through accomplishing the goals of the strategic plan, we
will have a better idea of what level our operating budget will need to
be to make everything happen and be sustainable. We will have done some
e
Thanks Eugene! This is essentially what I would've written, had I gotten there
first. So thank you.
I will just add: everyone wants an endowment campaign -- the issue is not
whether to do it; the issue is when to do it. We're still developing our pool
of donors (especially the chapters, who are
41 matches
Mail list logo
