Mailing List Archive

I assume that independent contractors do not count as paid staff of
the Wikimedia Foundation, correct?

-Dan
On Apr 30, 2008, at 2:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote:

> From: "Delphine Ménard" <notafishz@gmail.com>
>>
>> Just as a matter of clarity. Can the 50 edits be spread across
>> different projects?
>> Do internal wikis count?
>>
>> I'm just afraid I'm not gonna have the required number of edits on
>> any
>> one wiki. And I consider myself kind of "up to date" to be allowed to
>> vote.
>>
>>
>> Delphine
>
>
> Hi Delphine:
>
> Edits can not be combined from several wikis, they must be on a
> single wiki.
>
> The following exceptions exist; these people may vote regardless:
> * Wikimedia server administrators with shell access;
> * paid staff of the Wikimedia Foundation who started working at the
> office before 01 March 2008;
> * current or former members of the Board of Trustees.
>
> Philippe
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the Foundation
had any independent contractors. If that's a situation that is actual, then
I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking hypothetically,
or are there actually some that we need to think about?

Philippe


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Dan Rosenthal" <swatjester@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 1:58 PM
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Election rules modification
regardingsuffrageissues raised on this list

> I assume that independent contractors do not count as paid staff of
> the Wikimedia Foundation, correct?
>
> -Dan
> On Apr 30, 2008, at 2:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
>
>> From: "Delphine Ménard" <notafishz@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Just as a matter of clarity. Can the 50 edits be spread across
>>> different projects?
>>> Do internal wikis count?
>>>
>>> I'm just afraid I'm not gonna have the required number of edits on
>>> any
>>> one wiki. And I consider myself kind of "up to date" to be allowed to
>>> vote.
>>>
>>>
>>> Delphine
>>
>>
>> Hi Delphine:
>>
>> Edits can not be combined from several wikis, they must be on a
>> single wiki.
>>
>> The following exceptions exist; these people may vote regardless:
>> * Wikimedia server administrators with shell access;
>> * paid staff of the Wikimedia Foundation who started working at the
>> office before 01 March 2008;
>> * current or former members of the Board of Trustees.
>>
>> Philippe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I'd just like to highlight (so no one is confused) that there actually '' is
'' an exception for sysadmins.

In the past couple of years that I've been on the committee, I haven't been
told of an issue with developers having the required edits (yes, I agree,
poor thing to judge upon but just about all we have). If that's an issue
and there actually are developers who are disenfranchised (as opposed to
hypotheticals), please encourage them to email me or any member of the
committee and we'll see what we can do to work with them.

Philippe

--------------------------------------------------
From: "phoebe ayers" <phoebe.wiki@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 7:48 PM
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Election rules modification regarding
suffrageissues raised on this list

> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Majorly <axel9891@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 30/04/2008, Delphine Ménard <notafishz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Just as a matter of clarity. Can the 50 edits be spread across
>> > different projects?
>> > Do internal wikis count?
>> >
>> > I'm just afraid I'm not gonna have the required number of edits on any
>> > one wiki. And I consider myself kind of "up to date" to be allowed to
>> > vote.
>> >
>> >
>> > Delphine
>> >
>>
>> Delphine - it's seriously not difficult to get 50 edits. I myself have
>> made
>> over 1000 in one hour just on recent changes patrol. 50 edits is tiny,
>> and
>> considering all the tools available, it really shouldn't be very
>> difficult
>> to get 50 edits.
>
> Well, I just took an hour to make 18 edits ;) But then, I was doing
> research to source a biography. I have been known to take an hour to
> make just one or two edits, doing the same kind of work. 50 edits may
> or may not be a lot of work, depending on just what it is you're doing
> onwiki and how familiar you are with the tools.
>
> Generally, editcountitis is a fairly poor measure of community
> participation -- it's just the only readily accessible metric we've
> got. Nathan said it very well up-thread -- people whose contributions
> don't translate into edits shouldn't be penalized. It seems pretty
> obvious to me that Delphine, and the volunteer sysadmins, and others
> in a similar position are clearly community members and should clearly
> have the right to vote regardless of their RC patrolling skills. It
> seems like there's a few classes of exceptions that could be easily
> made in the election rules without over-compromising the process;
> developers and sysadmins are the people that have come up the most so
> far.
>
> Regardless, thanks to the election committee for explaining your
> reasoning on the matter.
>
> -- phoebe
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

In the past, Delphine as well as a few others (mainly technical
people, names escape me at the moment) were listed as independent
contractors. I've seen no indication that has actually changed (i.e.
nobody saying X, a past contractor, has been hired as an actual
employee).

-Dan

On Apr 30, 2008, at 10:28 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote:

> You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the
> Foundation
> had any independent contractors. If that's a situation that is
> actual, then
> I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking
> hypothetically,
> or are there actually some that we need to think about?
>
> Philippe
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Dan Rosenthal" <swatjester@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 1:58 PM
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Election rules modification
> regardingsuffrageissues raised on this list
>
>> I assume that independent contractors do not count as paid staff of
>> the Wikimedia Foundation, correct?
>>
>> -Dan
>> On Apr 30, 2008, at 2:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
>>
>>> From: "Delphine Ménard" <notafishz@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Just as a matter of clarity. Can the 50 edits be spread across
>>>> different projects?
>>>> Do internal wikis count?
>>>>
>>>> I'm just afraid I'm not gonna have the required number of edits on
>>>> any
>>>> one wiki. And I consider myself kind of "up to date" to be
>>>> allowed to
>>>> vote.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Delphine
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Delphine:
>>>
>>> Edits can not be combined from several wikis, they must be on a
>>> single wiki.
>>>
>>> The following exceptions exist; these people may vote regardless:
>>> * Wikimedia server administrators with shell access;
>>> * paid staff of the Wikimedia Foundation who started working at
>>> the
>>> office before 01 March 2008;
>>> * current or former members of the Board of Trustees.
>>>
>>> Philippe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the Foundation
> had any independent contractors. If that's a situation that is actual, then
> I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking hypothetically,
> or are there actually some that we need to think about?
>
> Philippe


I think the guy who wrote the software which is going to be used for the
board elections, might be one.

Yours;

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Philippe Beaudette
<philippebeaudette@gmail.com> wrote:
> You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the Foundation
> had any independent contractors.

I would love to note
* [[Foundation:Current staff]] list some of those contractors but *
not all *. I don't know why but the office do not like to list some of
them ...
* Oversee people are defined as "contactors" iirc, while, well, Tim
Starling may vote only with his edit counts ... I don't know if it is
the case too for Mark and Delphine, though.
* As an example of such contractors who are not listed on the page, we
know Frank as outreach coordinator (his hiring was announced on this
list).
* There are at least two more contractors for technical issues whose
names didn't appear on that page, although I don't know those
contractors are still working for WMF right now.


> If that's a situation that is actual, then
> I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking hypothetically,
> or are there actually some that we need to think about?
>
> Philippe
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Dan Rosenthal" <swatjester@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 1:58 PM
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Election rules modification
> regardingsuffrageissues raised on this list
>
>
>
> > I assume that independent contractors do not count as paid staff of
> > the Wikimedia Foundation, correct?
> >
> > -Dan
> > On Apr 30, 2008, at 2:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> >
> >> From: "Delphine Ménard" <notafishz@gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>> Just as a matter of clarity. Can the 50 edits be spread across
> >>> different projects?
> >>> Do internal wikis count?
> >>>
> >>> I'm just afraid I'm not gonna have the required number of edits on
> >>> any
> >>> one wiki. And I consider myself kind of "up to date" to be allowed to
> >>> vote.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Delphine
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Delphine:
> >>
> >> Edits can not be combined from several wikis, they must be on a
> >> single wiki.
> >>
> >> The following exceptions exist; these people may vote regardless:
> >> * Wikimedia server administrators with shell access;
> >> * paid staff of the Wikimedia Foundation who started working at the
> >> office before 01 March 2008;
> >> * current or former members of the Board of Trustees.
> >>
> >> Philippe
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
KIZU Naoko
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)
Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Philippe Beaudette
<philippebeaudette@gmail.com> wrote:
> You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the Foundation
> had any independent contractors. If that's a situation that is actual, then
> I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking hypothetically,
> or are there actually some that we need to think about?

No, I am one of them :-), actually, the only one.


> >> The following exceptions exist; these people may vote regardless:
> >> * Wikimedia server administrators with shell access;
> >> * paid staff of the Wikimedia Foundation who started working at the
> >> office before 01 March 2008;
> >> * current or former members of the Board of Trustees.

And I am none of those. Not a server administrator and not a "paid
staff who started working at the office before 01 March 2008". I am
staff, though, kind of, but I don't work "at the office".

Oh well.

Oh, does contributing a few images to commons (that took about 10
hours of work alone to draw) actually count as more than the one edit
it takes to upload them?



Delphine
--
~notafish
http://blog.notanendive.org

NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent
to this address will probably get lost.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Delphine Ménard <notafishz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Philippe Beaudette
> <philippebeaudette@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the Foundation
> > had any independent contractors. If that's a situation that is actual, then
> > I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking hypothetically,
> > or are there actually some that we need to think about?
>
> No, I am one of them :-), actually, the only one.

Meaning, I am not the only contractor, but I believe I am the only one
with no shell access that has been around since earlier than March
01. I think. :-)

Delphine
--
~notafish
http://blog.notanendive.org

NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent
to this address will probably get lost.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Although i hate to fight your authority here, the website [1] states
there are three contractors currently: Mark Bergsma, Delphine Ménard
and Tim Starling. Is the page outdated, or am I misreading something
here maybe?


Lodewijk

[1] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Current_staff

2008/5/1, Delphine Ménard <notafishz@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Philippe Beaudette
> <philippebeaudette@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the Foundation
> > had any independent contractors. If that's a situation that is actual, then
> > I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking hypothetically,
> > or are there actually some that we need to think about?
>
>
> No, I am one of them :-), actually, the only one.
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Delphine Ménard <notafishz@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, does contributing a few images to commons (that took about 10
> hours of work alone to draw) actually count as more than the one edit
> it takes to upload them?
>
Yes. It counts as 11. But then you have to subtract 10 for asking
this question.

Wait a second. Did you draw them in 2007, or 2008?

Seriously, if you want to get 50 easy contributions to commons, go
nominate for deletion, 17 of the images I uploaded, as "doesn't list a
source". I think that requires 3 edits each.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Delphine Ménard wrote:
| On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Delphine Ménard <notafishz@gmail.com>
wrote:
|> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Philippe Beaudette
|> <philippebeaudette@gmail.com> wrote:
|> > You know, Dan, that's a good question. I wasn't aware that the
Foundation
|> > had any independent contractors. If that's a situation that is
actual, then
|> > I'll check in with the election committee. Are you asking
hypothetically,
|> > or are there actually some that we need to think about?
|>
|> No, I am one of them :-), actually, the only one.
|
| Meaning, I am not the only contractor, but I believe I am the only one
| with no shell access that has been around since earlier than March
| 01. I think. :-)
|
| Delphine

I would like to mention that Delphine has over 50 edits in the time
period on at least one "private" internal wiki, so she does meet the
technical requirements regardless.

- --
Cary Bass
Volunteer Coordinator

Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia
Foundation today: http://donate.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Phone: 415.839.6885
Fax: 415.882.0495

E-Mail: cary@wikimedia.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkgZ6REACgkQyQg4JSymDYmn4QCgvGYoE0gsGnu/1SotUKJz9jWH
SDcAoK3CVsSs77T3RPqxq8fSyOruUYRo
=L1MZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

From: "Cary Bass" <cbass@wikimedia.org>
>
> I would like to mention that Delphine has over 50 edits in the time
> period on at least one "private" internal wiki, so she does meet the
> technical requirements regardless.
>
> - --
> Cary Bass
> Volunteer Coordinator
>


If she has at least 50 edits on an internal wiki, she can vote.

Philippe


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> In the past, Delphine as well as a few others (mainly technical
> people, names escape me at the moment) were listed as independent
> contractors. I've seen no indication that has actually changed (i.e.
> nobody saying X, a past contractor, has been hired as an actual
> employee).


A lot depends on the reason for having an independent contractor. A
person working outside the United States is better treated as an
independent contractor to avoid complications with United States
employment and taxation laws. The distinction can be defined
differently for election purposes than for employment law purposes.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

That seems awfully shady to me, and may cause issues with its
definition as related to, say, the non-disparagement agreements.

-Dan
On May 1, 2008, at 1:46 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Dan Rosenthal wrote:
>> In the past, Delphine as well as a few others (mainly technical
>> people, names escape me at the moment) were listed as independent
>> contractors. I've seen no indication that has actually changed (i.e.
>> nobody saying X, a past contractor, has been hired as an actual
>> employee).
>
>
> A lot depends on the reason for having an independent contractor. A
> person working outside the United States is better treated as an
> independent contractor to avoid complications with United States
> employment and taxation laws. The distinction can be defined
> differently for election purposes than for employment law purposes.
>
> Ec
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

That's what I was thinking. Classifying a worker as a contractor who
holds substantially the same position as another worker you classify
as an employee, is a good way to rack up a hefty bill with the IRS
(for employment taxes, penalties, and interest).

See http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester@gmail.com> wrote:
> That seems awfully shady to me, and may cause issues with its
> definition as related to, say, the non-disparagement agreements.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On May 1, 2008, at 1:46 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
> > Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> >> In the past, Delphine as well as a few others (mainly technical
> >> people, names escape me at the moment) were listed as independent
> >> contractors. I've seen no indication that has actually changed (i.e.
> >> nobody saying X, a past contractor, has been hired as an actual
> >> employee).
> >
> >
> > A lot depends on the reason for having an independent contractor. A
> > person working outside the United States is better treated as an
> > independent contractor to avoid complications with United States
> > employment and taxation laws. The distinction can be defined
> > differently for election purposes than for employment law purposes.
> >
> > Ec
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Anthony writes:

> That's what I was thinking. Classifying a worker as a contractor who
> holds substantially the same position as another worker you classify
> as an employee, is a good way to rack up a hefty bill with the IRS
> (for employment taxes, penalties, and interest).


The Foundation has spent a significant amount of time and money over
the last 10 months reviewing precisely these issues (both internally
and in consultation with outside counsel), and we're taking pains to
be compliant with IRS regs and various state and federal labor-law
requirements. It's complicated work, but we're not quite dumb enough
simply to classify employees as contractors just for convenience.

That said, the outside contractors who are also community members seem
to me to be particularly well-qualified and well-informed enough to
vote in Board elections, if they choose to do so. Even if they
conduct the bulk of their work outside the office (they are, in fact,
outside the USA altogether).


--Mike




_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Anthony wrote:
> That's what I was thinking. Classifying a worker as a contractor who
> holds substantially the same position as another worker you classify
> as an employee, is a good way to rack up a hefty bill with the IRS
> (for employment taxes, penalties, and interest).
>
> See http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html
>
>
Non-resident aliens performing duties outside of the United States are
not subject to United States tax.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge@telus.net> wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
> > That's what I was thinking. Classifying a worker as a contractor who
> > holds substantially the same position as another worker you classify
> > as an employee, is a good way to rack up a hefty bill with the IRS
> > (for employment taxes, penalties, and interest).
> >
> > See http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html
> >
> >
> Non-resident aliens performing duties outside of the United States are
> not subject to United States tax.
>
So what are the "complications with United States...taxation laws"?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l