Mailing List Archive

Just to say that I misread our initial document, so I thought that our
deadline is September 15th to list the short list of candidates.
However, my misreading was productive: We've got a lot of very good
candidates.

On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 8:32 PM, Sue Gardner <sgardner@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> As you know, the board recently created a Nominating Committee to help
> it identify, research and recommend candidates for the appointed Board
> of Trustee positions involving "specific expertise." The members of the
> committee are me, Michael Snow, BirgitteSB, Milos Rancic, Melissa
> Hagemann and Ting Chen.
>
> We've brainstormed a list of selection criteria here
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nominating_Committee/Selection_criteria -
> and now need to cut it back from about two dozen to eight.
>
> If you're interested, we'd like your help. Please comment on the talk
> page re which criteria you think are most important, and also let us
> know if you feel anything is missing.
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
>
> Our rough timeline, in case you're interested:
>
> 1.Michael Snow, on behalf of the Board, will brief the Nominating
> Committee regarding its role, the restructuring, and the board's
> assessment of its own strengths and skills gaps. By August 30 DONE
>
> 2.Based on that briefing, the Nominating Committee will generate a set
> of criteria for potential "specific expertise" board members. By
> September 15
>
> 3.The staff of the Foundation will deliver to the Nominating Committee
> the list of potential candidates that has been developed by the staff,
> current Board members and supporters and friends of Wikimedia. By
> September 15 DONE (by Michael)
>
> 4.The Nominating Committee will brainstorm and solicit additional names,
> and add them to the total list. By September 30 IN PROGRESS
>
> 5.The Nominating Committee will research the names which have been put
> forward, and assess their fit against the selection criteria developed
> earlier. This will result in a midlist of candidates. By October 30
>
> 6.The Nominating Committee will initiate discussions with midlist
> candidates to gauge their interest, provide them with information, and
> respond to questions or concerns. By November 14
>
> 7.The Nominating Committee will cull the midlist and deliver to the
> board a final list of interested candidates who fit the criteria for the
> "specific expertise" roles. The goal will be to give the board a full
> briefing on the top eight candidates for the four "expertise" seats,
> along with a recommendation for the four who the Nominating Committee
> thinks would be the best fit. By November 14
>
> 8.The community board members (Michael, Kat, Frieda, Domas, Ting, and
> Jimmy) will vote to determine who will fill the four seats. By December 15
>
> 9.Nominating Committee orients new board members. January and February
>
> 10. Nominating Committee supports the board with other board development
> tasks as requested. March, April, May, June
>
>
>
> --
> Sue Gardner
> Executive Director
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment: help us make it a
> reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Sue Gardner wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> As you know, the board recently created a Nominating Committee to help
> it identify, research and recommend candidates for the appointed Board
> of Trustee positions involving "specific expertise." The members of the
> committee are me, Michael Snow, BirgitteSB, Milos Rancic, Melissa
> Hagemann and Ting Chen.
>
> We've brainstormed a list of selection criteria here
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nominating_Committee/Selection_criteria -
> and now need to cut it back from about two dozen to eight.
>
> If you're interested, we'd like your help. Please comment on the talk
> page re which criteria you think are most important, and also let us
> know if you feel anything is missing.
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
>
> Our rough timeline, in case you're interested:
>
> 1.Michael Snow, on behalf of the Board, will brief the Nominating
> Committee regarding its role, the restructuring, and the board's
> assessment of its own strengths and skills gaps. By August 30 DONE
>
> 2.Based on that briefing, the Nominating Committee will generate a set
> of criteria for potential “specific expertise” board members. By
> September 15
>
> 3.The staff of the Foundation will deliver to the Nominating Committee
> the list of potential candidates that has been developed by the staff,
> current Board members and supporters and friends of Wikimedia. By
> September 15 DONE (by Michael)
>
> 4.The Nominating Committee will brainstorm and solicit additional names,
> and add them to the total list. By September 30 IN PROGRESS
>
> 5.The Nominating Committee will research the names which have been put
> forward, and assess their fit against the selection criteria developed
> earlier. This will result in a midlist of candidates. By October 30
>
> 6.The Nominating Committee will initiate discussions with midlist
> candidates to gauge their interest, provide them with information, and
> respond to questions or concerns. By November 14
>
> 7.The Nominating Committee will cull the midlist and deliver to the
> board a final list of interested candidates who fit the criteria for the
> "specific expertise" roles. The goal will be to give the board a full
> briefing on the top eight candidates for the four "expertise" seats,
> along with a recommendation for the four who the Nominating Committee
> thinks would be the best fit. By November 14
>
> 8.The community board members (Michael, Kat, Frieda, Domas, Ting, and
> Jimmy) will vote to determine who will fill the four seats. By December 15
>
> 9.Nominating Committee orients new board members. January and February
>
> 10. Nominating Committee supports the board with other board development
> tasks as requested. March, April, May, June


Talking about board seats...

Sue...

I'd like to acknowledge the fact that local associations are apparently
unable to create a separate mailing list for discussing the nomination
of chapter representatives. It did not appear to me to be a huge
unaccessible task, but unfortunately, that's a fact. Not the right
infrastructure I guess.
I even envisionned to create a Google list, that the idea really turned
me off :-)

Hopefully, in two years from now, for next elections (we can set it up
for ourselves as a GOAL), we'll be able to host a list to discuss WMF
rep, but since that's not the case right now, I'd like to officially
(and humbly) ask that the WMF set up a wiki for us to discuss the issue.
After much thinking, it seems to me that setting up a list would not be
the easiest way to come to a consensual agreement, whilst a wiki could
host at the same time, discussions and votes if necessary.

This wiki would not be public. Its members would be chapter board members.

Can you make sure that such a wiki is set up ? I know it is a tech
issue, but it's also a (sad) political one as well, so I think best to
acknowledge here that WMF help is necessary for chapters to be able to
reach a common agreement on who their representatives will be on the WMF
board.

Thanks

Ant



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

> Talking about board seats...
>
> Sue...
>
> I'd like to acknowledge the fact that local associations are apparently
> unable to create a separate mailing list for discussing the nomination
> of chapter representatives. It did not appear to me to be a huge
> unaccessible task, but unfortunately, that's a fact. Not the right
> infrastructure I guess.
> I even envisionned to create a Google list, that the idea really turned
> me off :-)

What have you tried? A request on bugzilla.mediawiki.org would be the
best way, I think (I've searched and can't find one there). Unless the
sysadmins have orders from on high not to give you a mailing list, I
can't see why they wouldn't be able to do it pretty quickly.

> Hopefully, in two years from now, for next elections (we can set it up
> for ourselves as a GOAL), we'll be able to host a list to discuss WMF
> rep, but since that's not the case right now, I'd like to officially
> (and humbly) ask that the WMF set up a wiki for us to discuss the issue.
> After much thinking, it seems to me that setting up a list would not be
> the easiest way to come to a consensual agreement, whilst a wiki could
> host at the same time, discussions and votes if necessary.
>
> This wiki would not be public. Its members would be chapter board members.

The way I see it, there are two things the chapters need to decide. A
method for selecting chapter reps to the WMF board, and then actually
selecting them. I can see why the latter may need to be private (that
would depend on the method chosen), but why can't the former be
public? Or, at least, publicly viewable - discussion sometimes moves
faster if you restrict who can take part.

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

Hoi,
When you are at, please create the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia that is
currently waiting for 108 days now.
Thanks,
GerardM

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9@yahoo.com>wrote:

> Sue Gardner wrote:
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > As you know, the board recently created a Nominating Committee to help
> > it identify, research and recommend candidates for the appointed Board
> > of Trustee positions involving "specific expertise." The members of the
> > committee are me, Michael Snow, BirgitteSB, Milos Rancic, Melissa
> > Hagemann and Ting Chen.
> >
> > We've brainstormed a list of selection criteria here
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nominating_Committee/Selection_criteria -
> > and now need to cut it back from about two dozen to eight.
> >
> > If you're interested, we'd like your help. Please comment on the talk
> > page re which criteria you think are most important, and also let us
> > know if you feel anything is missing.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sue
> >
> > Our rough timeline, in case you're interested:
> >
> > 1.Michael Snow, on behalf of the Board, will brief the Nominating
> > Committee regarding its role, the restructuring, and the board's
> > assessment of its own strengths and skills gaps. By August 30 DONE
> >
> > 2.Based on that briefing, the Nominating Committee will generate a set
> > of criteria for potential "specific expertise" board members. By
> > September 15
> >
> > 3.The staff of the Foundation will deliver to the Nominating Committee
> > the list of potential candidates that has been developed by the staff,
> > current Board members and supporters and friends of Wikimedia. By
> > September 15 DONE (by Michael)
> >
> > 4.The Nominating Committee will brainstorm and solicit additional names,
> > and add them to the total list. By September 30 IN PROGRESS
> >
> > 5.The Nominating Committee will research the names which have been put
> > forward, and assess their fit against the selection criteria developed
> > earlier. This will result in a midlist of candidates. By October 30
> >
> > 6.The Nominating Committee will initiate discussions with midlist
> > candidates to gauge their interest, provide them with information, and
> > respond to questions or concerns. By November 14
> >
> > 7.The Nominating Committee will cull the midlist and deliver to the
> > board a final list of interested candidates who fit the criteria for the
> > "specific expertise" roles. The goal will be to give the board a full
> > briefing on the top eight candidates for the four "expertise" seats,
> > along with a recommendation for the four who the Nominating Committee
> > thinks would be the best fit. By November 14
> >
> > 8.The community board members (Michael, Kat, Frieda, Domas, Ting, and
> > Jimmy) will vote to determine who will fill the four seats. By December
> 15
> >
> > 9.Nominating Committee orients new board members. January and February
> >
> > 10. Nominating Committee supports the board with other board development
> > tasks as requested. March, April, May, June
>
>
> Talking about board seats...
>
> Sue...
>
> I'd like to acknowledge the fact that local associations are apparently
> unable to create a separate mailing list for discussing the nomination
> of chapter representatives. It did not appear to me to be a huge
> unaccessible task, but unfortunately, that's a fact. Not the right
> infrastructure I guess.
> I even envisionned to create a Google list, that the idea really turned
> me off :-)
>
> Hopefully, in two years from now, for next elections (we can set it up
> for ourselves as a GOAL), we'll be able to host a list to discuss WMF
> rep, but since that's not the case right now, I'd like to officially
> (and humbly) ask that the WMF set up a wiki for us to discuss the issue.
> After much thinking, it seems to me that setting up a list would not be
> the easiest way to come to a consensual agreement, whilst a wiki could
> host at the same time, discussions and votes if necessary.
>
> This wiki would not be public. Its members would be chapter board members.
>
> Can you make sure that such a wiki is set up ? I know it is a tech
> issue, but it's also a (sad) political one as well, so I think best to
> acknowledge here that WMF help is necessary for chapters to be able to
> reach a common agreement on who their representatives will be on the WMF
> board.
>
> Thanks
>
> Ant
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> Talking about board seats...
>>
>> Sue...
>>
>> I'd like to acknowledge the fact that local associations are apparently
>> unable to create a separate mailing list for discussing the nomination
>> of chapter representatives. It did not appear to me to be a huge
>> unaccessible task, but unfortunately, that's a fact. Not the right
>> infrastructure I guess.
>> I even envisionned to create a Google list, that the idea really turned
>> me off :-)
>
> What have you tried? A request on bugzilla.mediawiki.org would be the
> best way, I think (I've searched and can't find one there). Unless the
> sysadmins have orders from on high not to give you a mailing list, I
> can't see why they wouldn't be able to do it pretty quickly.


No, I had a dream... a dream where chapters would be big guys enough to
be able to set up themselves a place to discuss a matter where - imho -
the Foundation should not be involved.
I raised the topic of creating a list, hosted by a chapter, to do so. I
got about 3 or 4 comments back, no more. No one created such a list. We
tried on the French side, for now over two months. Problem is that we
are hosted for free by a hosting company - and as a "free customer", we
have a zero priority. We asked them, were put on a waiting list for over
a month; when the list was finally set, it revealed itself buggy. That
was a month ago.

In my view, when the board of WMF decided to let chapters select two
representatives, it was also a heavy message to the chapters: collect
your wits and be grown ups. I am not quite sure how chapters can select
board members when they are not even able to self organize to get a
common mailing list for an election. That's not necessarily out of bad
will, but mostly poor infrastructure and lack of cooperation.

I have not set up a request on bugzilla because I hoped that we would be
able to precisely avoid doing that. I was wrong, and prefer to make it
clear why I am asking for it now, whilst for two months, I said no thank
you :-)


>> Hopefully, in two years from now, for next elections (we can set it up
>> for ourselves as a GOAL), we'll be able to host a list to discuss WMF
>> rep, but since that's not the case right now, I'd like to officially
>> (and humbly) ask that the WMF set up a wiki for us to discuss the issue.
>> After much thinking, it seems to me that setting up a list would not be
>> the easiest way to come to a consensual agreement, whilst a wiki could
>> host at the same time, discussions and votes if necessary.
>>
>> This wiki would not be public. Its members would be chapter board members.
>
> The way I see it, there are two things the chapters need to decide. A
> method for selecting chapter reps to the WMF board, and then actually
> selecting them. I can see why the latter may need to be private (that
> would depend on the method chosen), but why can't the former be
> public? Or, at least, publicly viewable - discussion sometimes moves
> faster if you restrict who can take part.

Given that CHAPTERS are going to select these two guys and given that
all chapter board members would be part of this wiki, there is no
planned restriction of access.

Now, the fact is, there is no agreement on how chapters will select
these two guys. So, it might just be nice to start by looking at WHO is
interested in becoming so ;-)

Ant


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

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9@yahoo.com> wrote:
Problem is that we
> are hosted for free by a hosting company - and as a "free customer", we
> have a zero priority. We asked them, were put on a waiting list for over
> a month; when the list was finally set, it revealed itself buggy. That
> was a month ago.

Okay, I must have missed that request somehow. We're hosted by one of
our members and we've already created a couple of wikis for various
purposes...give me one or two days to find out, I think wikimedia.ch
should really be able to do at least this to help.

Michael

--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler@gmail.com

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

Michael Bimmler wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Problem is that we
>> are hosted for free by a hosting company - and as a "free customer", we
>> have a zero priority. We asked them, were put on a waiting list for over
>> a month; when the list was finally set, it revealed itself buggy. That
>> was a month ago.
>
> Okay, I must have missed that request somehow. We're hosted by one of
> our members and we've already created a couple of wikis for various
> purposes...give me one or two days to find out, I think wikimedia.ch
> should really be able to do at least this to help.
>
> Michael
>

Note that I made a request on bugzilla for a wiki.
If you think you can make it, I'll put the request on bugzilla on hold
Michael. If you can do it, great.

Ant


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

Really? Cause I didn't get that message at all. What I got out of it
was, "The board intends to consolidate the power of the existing big
name chapters, and make some gesture of including them on the board,
but we're actually not addressing substantively the issue of making it
easy for them to actually form and be approve."

There's no excuse for blaming the chapters or the people in them when
the system for developing and approving them is fundamentally flawed.

-Dan
On Nov 2, 2008, at 11:55 AM, Florence Devouard wrote:

> In my view, when the board of WMF decided to let chapters select two
> representatives, it was also a heavy message to the chapters: collect
> your wits and be grown ups. I am not quite sure how chapters can
> select
> board members when they are not even able to self organize to get a
> common mailing list for an election. That's not necessarily out of bad
> will, but mostly poor infrastructure and lack of cooperation.


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

2008/11/2 Dan Rosenthal <swatjester@gmail.com>:
> Really? Cause I didn't get that message at all. What I got out of it
> was, "The board intends to consolidate the power of the existing big
> name chapters, and make some gesture of including them on the board,
> but we're actually not addressing substantively the issue of making it
> easy for them to actually form and be approve."
>
> There's no excuse for blaming the chapters or the people in them when
> the system for developing and approving them is fundamentally flawed.

I wouldn't put it quite like that, but the WMF board really did need
to give the chapters some kind of structure to work with (flying all
the chapter boards to Wikimania and arranging a big meeting would have
been one way). People have been saying this ever since the idea of
chapter seats was first announced. Chapters sorting things out amongst
themselves without support from the central organisation was never
going to go well...

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

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Note that I made a request on bugzilla for a wiki.
> If you think you can make it, I'll put the request on bugzilla on hold
> Michael. If you can do it, great.
>

Well, I asked Manuel, our webmaster, now. I don't see why it
shouldn't work, but we'll see ;-)

M.


--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler@gmail.com

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

Dan Rosenthal wrote:
> Really? Cause I didn't get that message at all. What I got out of it
> was, "The board intends to consolidate the power of the existing big
> name chapters, and make some gesture of including them on the board,
> but we're actually not addressing substantively the issue of making it
> easy for them to actually form and be approve."

Big names ?
What do you mean ?
What came out of the chapter meeting in May is that there should be no
such thing such as inequality between chapters. Since then, a few people
have objected this, but generally, there was a perception that the
representatives would not be there to "consolidate" the power of big
chapters, but rather to be people chosen by chapters to propose another
approach that other board members would not bring.

The resolution leading to the addition of these two members was
absolutely not meant to solve any issue regarding the way chapters are
approved or not. That's a completely different matter.

> There's no excuse for blaming the chapters or the people in them when
> the system for developing and approving them is fundamentally flawed.

I can not speak for the "approving" part (eg, recognising as Wikimedia
chapter). But ultimately, the business of wikimedians choosing to group
and form a local organization is nowhere the business of the Foundation.

Ant

> -Dan
> On Nov 2, 2008, at 11:55 AM, Florence Devouard wrote:
>
>> In my view, when the board of WMF decided to let chapters select two
>> representatives, it was also a heavy message to the chapters: collect
>> your wits and be grown ups. I am not quite sure how chapters can
>> select
>> board members when they are not even able to self organize to get a
>> common mailing list for an election. That's not necessarily out of bad
>> will, but mostly poor infrastructure and lack of cooperation.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester@gmail.com> wrote:

> There's no excuse for blaming the chapters or the people in them when
> the system for developing and approving them is fundamentally flawed.
>


Can you expand on this? Seriously...I have heard many criticism on
various parts of the Wikimedia "movement", but the chapter approvals
process was, I thought, considered to be working all right. What's
wrong with it?

M.

--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler@gmail.com

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

2008/11/2 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton@gmail.com>:
> I wouldn't put it quite like that, but the WMF board really did need
> to give the chapters some kind of structure to work with (flying all
> the chapter boards to Wikimania and arranging a big meeting would have
> been one way). People have been saying this ever since the idea of
> chapter seats was first announced. Chapters sorting things out amongst
> themselves without support from the central organisation was never
> going to go well...

It could just about be done by a determined enough person who knew
about a dozen or so languages. Normally on wikipedia you have a chance
of getting things done by moveing fast and giving people a choice of
moveing with you are being left behind but that very much relies on
being able to let people know you are moveing. Doing that across
languages when chapters are not that well documented in any case
cannot be done.


--
geni

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

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Note that I made a request on bugzilla for a wiki.
> If you think you can make it, I'll put the request on bugzilla on hold
> Michael. If you can do it, great.
>

Update:

Yes, Wikimedia CH, through our webmaster and -hoster, will gladly
provide both a (MediaWiki) wiki and a (Mailman) list.

I can't remember, are all chapter board members supposed to have
access or also "delegates" like on internal-l? Or shall we make it
"public viewing, restricted editing-posting" now? And: do we have the
email addresses of all the chapter board members somewhere in a neat
list so that I don't have to pick them manually from internal? I
thought Delphine had solicited addresses for a directory once, does
that one exist somewhere now?

Michael

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

> Or shall we make it
> "public viewing, restricted editing-posting" now?

That would be my vote. I see no benefit to secrecy. (I'm not entirely
sure there's a benefit to restricted editing of the wiki, either,
although restricted posting to the mailing list may help keep things
running smoothly.)

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

Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> Or shall we make it
>> "public viewing, restricted editing-posting" now?
>>
>
> That would be my vote. I see no benefit to secrecy. (I'm not entirely
> sure there's a benefit to restricted editing of the wiki, either,
> although restricted posting to the mailing list may help keep things
> running smoothly.)
>
>
The request of Florence was for a "collaborative space" for chapters,
IMHO but she can confirm, the access should be restricted to the members
of local chapters.

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

2008/11/2 Ilario Valdelli <valdelli@gmail.com>:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>>> Or shall we make it
>>> "public viewing, restricted editing-posting" now?
>>>
>>
>> That would be my vote. I see no benefit to secrecy. (I'm not entirely
>> sure there's a benefit to restricted editing of the wiki, either,
>> although restricted posting to the mailing list may help keep things
>> running smoothly.)
>>
>>
> The request of Florence was for a "collaborative space" for chapters,
> IMHO but she can confirm, the access should be restricted to the members
> of local chapters.

There is a big difference between restricting it to members of
chapters and restricting it to board members of chapters. The former
is an option, but I see little point - why shouldn't we value the
contributions of members of the community that live in countries which
don't have a chapter yet? Obviously, the final decision needs to be
made by actual chapters (well, the final decision is actually made by
the WMF board under the advice of chapters - chances are they'll just
rubber stamp whatever decision the chapters make, but they don't have
to - hopefully if they have a problem with the chapters' plans they'll
speak up during the discussion phase rather than rejecting the idea
once it is fully formed).

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

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> contributions of members of the community that live in countries which
> don't have a chapter yet? Obviously, the final decision needs to be
>
Yes, because there are no barriers to create a new chapter.

Ilario

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

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> is an option, but I see little point - why shouldn't we value the
> contributions of members of the community that live in countries which
> don't have a chapter yet? Obviously, the final decision needs to be
>
>
...or to be a member of another existing chapter.

Ilario

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

Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> contributions of members of the community that live in countries which
>> don't have a chapter yet? Obviously, the final decision needs to be
>>
> Yes, because there are no barriers to create a new chapter.
>
> Ilario


There are no barriers to create a new organization. There is a barrier
to have it recognised as Wikimedia chapter.

Ant


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

Michael Bimmler wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Note that I made a request on bugzilla for a wiki.
>> If you think you can make it, I'll put the request on bugzilla on hold
>> Michael. If you can do it, great.
>>
>
> Update:
>
> Yes, Wikimedia CH, through our webmaster and -hoster, will gladly
> provide both a (MediaWiki) wiki and a (Mailman) list.

Real neat. Now, there is a competition between Schiste and you !

> I can't remember, are all chapter board members supposed to have
> access or also "delegates" like on internal-l? Or shall we make it
> "public viewing, restricted editing-posting" now?

There was never such a decision, because we never had the opportunity to
discuss that all together. I suggest that for now, we make it
view-restricted to members and have all chapter board members join.
Because ultimately, the decision will be made by chapters and more
precisely by boards of chapters, who are legally responsible of
decisions made by their organization.

When all board members are together on the wiki, we can open a
discussion to decide whether we collectively agree to open it more or not.

And: do we have the
> email addresses of all the chapter board members somewhere in a neat
> list so that I don't have to pick them manually from internal? I
> thought Delphine had solicited addresses for a directory once, does
> that one exist somewhere now?

I fear we do not. It seems to me that the best route is to ask every
chapter to nominate one person to be the contact; and give
admin/bureaucrat rights to this delegate. Then each delegate is in
charge of creating accounts for his chapter.

Seems to me the best way so that nobody is forgotten, and no outdated
name is added.

Ant

> Michael


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

(Note, I said approvals and development. The lack of involvement by
ChapCom in the active development of chapters is even more concerning
than the lack of transparency in the approvals process.)

Well for one thing, when I first started questioning the idea of why
there were no US chapters either nationally or subnationally (this was
before the Pennsylvania chapter started) i was told that it simply
wasn't going to happen, that the Chapters Committee could not decide
what they wanted to do, and that in fact there was direct opposition
on the committee towards certain countries or regions forming chapters.

Currently there are only 18 chapters (excluding UK). There should be
far more, and I seriously suspect the Chapters Committee is the problem.

WM Venezuela still drafting bylaws since November 2006
WM Canada has been "finishing up by-laws" since March.
WM Hrvatske (Croatia I assume? The page says something about Zagreb)
has been translating bylaws since December last year.
WM India still in bylaws discussion since November of last year.
WM Norge listed as awaiting approval since July.
WM Portugal listed as "bylaws ready, discussing how to constitute"
since March.
WM NYC still figuring things out since Jan. 07,
WM Penn. still listed as figuring stuff out since June 07.
WM DC has not heard a peep from the chapters committee since May.

Nine chapters languishing in development for an unacceptable length of
time. This is not to say that the chapters themselves hold no
responsibility, but I've seen no evidence of the Chapters Committee
proactively reaching out to say "What can we do to help you guys get
moving". I suspect if they did, we'd have quite a few more chapters.

A couple of Wikimeetups ago, I discussed with some people what their
interests in developing a chapter were. Quite a few people expressed
no interest, either because they believed the Chapters Committee was
unable or unwilling to help, or because they simply believed that it
was impossible for them to get a chapter approved and they didn't want
to waste the effort. The fact that people even think that sort of
thing speaks for itself that the Chapters Committee has failed on some
level.

The Local Chapter FAQ has a "Do not translate until ChapCom has had an
opportunity to update it" message since Feb. 2006.

The Chapter Creation Guide has not been updated in over a year.
In over two years of existence, the line that says "The details of
this process are given in the [[Chapter approval process]] document."
are STILL a red link. So prospective chapters have ZERO idea of what
the approval process is.

These are just some of the criticisms of the chapters process.

-Dan

On Nov 2, 2008, at 2:06 PM, Michael Bimmler wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> There's no excuse for blaming the chapters or the people in them when
>> the system for developing and approving them is fundamentally flawed.
>>
>
>
> Can you expand on this? Seriously...I have heard many criticism on
> various parts of the Wikimedia "movement", but the chapter approvals
> process was, I thought, considered to be working all right. What's
> wrong with it?
>
> M.
>
> --
> Michael Bimmler
> mbimmler@gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

2008/11/2 Ilario Valdelli <valdelli@gmail.com>:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> contributions of members of the community that live in countries which
>> don't have a chapter yet? Obviously, the final decision needs to be
>>
> Yes, because there are no barriers to create a new chapter.

There are plenty of barriers. The first one is finding a large enough
group of people interested in being involved. One or two people can't
form a chapter.

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

> WM Portugal listed as "bylaws ready, discussing how to constitute"
> since March.

I'm going a little off-topic here, but how does that work? Surely you
need to know what form the chapter is going to take before you can
draft bylaws? If they're doing things backwards, that might explain
why they haven't got very far...

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