Hi!
Concerning the point about the WMF BoT's perspective on the Global Council,
the European affiliates discussed these perspectives at a recent online
meeting last Monday. Here's a summary of this discussion (the points I
highlight here are my personal editing choice, you can find a link to the
full response on Meta (which also links the full Etherpad notes) at the end
of this email.
* Concerning the Global Council running the grants/funding system for
non-WMF entities
** The Global Council should have more competencies than just administering
grants
** The position or vision of the WMF on the Global Council could be clearer
** Statement doesn’t explain how the WMF will be held accountable within
the new system
** The Global council doing grant making would effectively make the
communities argue amongst each other, leaving the decision-makers at the
WMF out of it.
** We still have no resources to onboard new affiliates. Once a new one is
approved, they are left alone to fend for themselves.
* Concerning the Global Council running the affiliates system
** Huge amount of work and bureaucracy of managing an affiliate system is
being outsourced to the Global Council and it is unclear who is paying for
the resources needed to manage this or who decides how much that is.
Looking at AffCom right now a repeat of a massively understaffed system is
in no one's interest.
** Suggestions by the WMF BoT for the Global Council appear like they’re
supposed to make the Global Council “busy & weak”
* Concerning online banner fundraising on Wikimedia projects
** The "current principles for banner fundraising" do not exist in written
form and favor the status quo over any meaningful change within the 2030
strategy
** The WMF not using this donor data to share information or message by the
local affiliates is a huge wasted opportunity; there have apparently been
instances where this has been done, but there is no written process or
documentation
** "Looking for funds elsewhere sometimes requires starting capital" (for
example borrowing money from the WMF); requires are more thought through
approach to enable affiliates to do this
The full response can be found here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#Wikimedia_Foundation_perspectives_on_the_Global_Council
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#Wikimedia_Foundation_perspectives_on_the_Global_Council>
Best regards, Philip
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 13:42, Victoria Doronina <vdoronina@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> As far as I remember, yes—the rate of account creation, making more than
> one edit, and the percentage of unreverted edits was higher than in other
> methods. I think this is a spectacular result and a completely unexpected
> source for the new editors.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 2:47?AM Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> These updates keep getting better. (I left out the board updates from my
>> recent thanks for regular newsletters lifting all of our boats :)
>>
>> I realize this is the smallest footnote of a long and significant update,
>> but: does this mean *3% of donors* who saw a thank-you note inviting
>> them to edit went on to make an account and at least one unreverted edit?
>> 3% of all donors is almost as many new editors as we get each year. That's
>> spectacular, staggering, superb. Let's please see how this scales in
>> various dimensions.
>>
>> W?, SJ
>>
>> We heard from the Advancement team about donor thank-you page changes
>>> <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newcomer_experience_projects#Scaling_the_new_donor_Thank_you_page_to_English_Wikipedia>,
>>> which invited donors to edit and yielded 4,398 new user accounts being
>>> created [8
>>> <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newcomer_experience_projects#Scaling_the_new_donor_Thank_you_page_to_English_Wikipedia>].
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/Z2BCGRDVYMOMVSE3HIH3IICNYKWOTBVF/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZU7FN7YXD7AD6TSHAIYVMF5GXV75QWXP/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Concerning the point about the WMF BoT's perspective on the Global Council,
the European affiliates discussed these perspectives at a recent online
meeting last Monday. Here's a summary of this discussion (the points I
highlight here are my personal editing choice, you can find a link to the
full response on Meta (which also links the full Etherpad notes) at the end
of this email.
* Concerning the Global Council running the grants/funding system for
non-WMF entities
** The Global Council should have more competencies than just administering
grants
** The position or vision of the WMF on the Global Council could be clearer
** Statement doesn’t explain how the WMF will be held accountable within
the new system
** The Global council doing grant making would effectively make the
communities argue amongst each other, leaving the decision-makers at the
WMF out of it.
** We still have no resources to onboard new affiliates. Once a new one is
approved, they are left alone to fend for themselves.
* Concerning the Global Council running the affiliates system
** Huge amount of work and bureaucracy of managing an affiliate system is
being outsourced to the Global Council and it is unclear who is paying for
the resources needed to manage this or who decides how much that is.
Looking at AffCom right now a repeat of a massively understaffed system is
in no one's interest.
** Suggestions by the WMF BoT for the Global Council appear like they’re
supposed to make the Global Council “busy & weak”
* Concerning online banner fundraising on Wikimedia projects
** The "current principles for banner fundraising" do not exist in written
form and favor the status quo over any meaningful change within the 2030
strategy
** The WMF not using this donor data to share information or message by the
local affiliates is a huge wasted opportunity; there have apparently been
instances where this has been done, but there is no written process or
documentation
** "Looking for funds elsewhere sometimes requires starting capital" (for
example borrowing money from the WMF); requires are more thought through
approach to enable affiliates to do this
The full response can be found here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#Wikimedia_Foundation_perspectives_on_the_Global_Council
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#Wikimedia_Foundation_perspectives_on_the_Global_Council>
Best regards, Philip
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 13:42, Victoria Doronina <vdoronina@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> As far as I remember, yes—the rate of account creation, making more than
> one edit, and the percentage of unreverted edits was higher than in other
> methods. I think this is a spectacular result and a completely unexpected
> source for the new editors.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 2:47?AM Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> These updates keep getting better. (I left out the board updates from my
>> recent thanks for regular newsletters lifting all of our boats :)
>>
>> I realize this is the smallest footnote of a long and significant update,
>> but: does this mean *3% of donors* who saw a thank-you note inviting
>> them to edit went on to make an account and at least one unreverted edit?
>> 3% of all donors is almost as many new editors as we get each year. That's
>> spectacular, staggering, superb. Let's please see how this scales in
>> various dimensions.
>>
>> W?, SJ
>>
>> We heard from the Advancement team about donor thank-you page changes
>>> <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newcomer_experience_projects#Scaling_the_new_donor_Thank_you_page_to_English_Wikipedia>,
>>> which invited donors to edit and yielded 4,398 new user accounts being
>>> created [8
>>> <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newcomer_experience_projects#Scaling_the_new_donor_Thank_you_page_to_English_Wikipedia>].
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/Z2BCGRDVYMOMVSE3HIH3IICNYKWOTBVF/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZU7FN7YXD7AD6TSHAIYVMF5GXV75QWXP/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org