On Feb 28, 2016 7:23 PM, "David Emrany" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Brion > > When you refer to patches with other movements / affiliates, are you > proposing that WMF sponsors more Gibraltrapedias ?
Never heard of it, so can't comment. -- brion > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibraltarpedia > > Have we forgotten so soon the adverse media publicity about these > stealth PR campaigns > > "Once Wikipedia becomes a pay-to-play platform in any sense, it's no > longer a balanced, universal wellspring of information. It's just > another commercial website, with a particularly insidious brand of > camouflaged advertising. Any company with a sly enough PR person could > promote ostensibly fascinating facts about its products" [1] > > "payment of money to Wikipedia editors represented "the greatest > threat the [Wikipedia] brand has seen to date" [2]. > > Lila had taken the first technical / automation /AI steps to identify > / weed out the paid editing claques which rule the roost. That she was > eased out in this way shows that WMF is in terminal disrepair, and I > resent Flo's attempt to deflect this thread away from the numerous > paid editing controversies which have dogged the projects since the > very beginning and systematically driven away all competent potential > long-term contributors. > > At the risk of being unpopular, I suggest the long-term health of our > projects require that its not about empowering our volunteers but > about regulating them. > > David > > [1] http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/09/20/roger_bamkin_gibraltor_s_repeated_appearance_on_did_you_know_provkes_existential_crisis_for_wikipedia_.html > > [2] http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/20/wikimedia_uk_scandal/ > > On 2/29/16, Brion Vibber <[email protected]> wrote: > > Two distinct issues, I think: > > > > 1) about improving community representation in power structures, I think we > > have to think more about what representation we want and what structures > > would accomplish it. I have no answers but think we should consider looking > > beyond WMF alone: > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082703.html > > > > 2) about support for volunteers to get stuff done effectively: I'll have > > mostly tech-focused thoughts on that because that's where my expertise is, > > so you need to hear from other people who interact with a wider set of > > volunteers than patch contributors and the people who manage to figure out > > our feedback systems. :) whether that should be funded by / staffed within > > WMF or our other movement orgs or both is an open question. > > > > -- brion > > On Feb 28, 2016 11:51 AM, "David Cuenca Tudela" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Brion, > >> so far in the discussions I have seen more weight to the idea of the WMF > >> as > >> a tech provider for the community, and not so much conversation about > >> other > >> roles that the organization could fulfill besides of tech / grant making. > >> So when you see that we are agreeing, do you mean that there should be > >> more > >> power transferred to the communities and that there should be a greater > >> focus in empowering volunteers? > >> How would you increase the participation of volunteers in the direction of > >> the movement? And how to offer volunteers the opportunity to become more > >> dedicated without paying them directly? > >> > >> Cheers > >> Micru > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
