I am happy to read Pine's emails. A mailing list is useful to bring
attention to specific issues as one can only watch a certain percentage of
wikipedia / meta / etc.
J
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Sam Klein <sjklein(a)hcs.harvard.edu> wrote:
[[m:Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Governance_Committee/Board_structure
<
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Boar…
]]
Wiki pages are certainly better for long-term organization of discussions.
They are harder for a few voices to dominate; they can be refactored and
summarized, and skimmed to find discussions among new voices. Our
translation tools work directly on meta.
A simple mail-to-wiki script could be nice, adding a link from wiki pages
to public email/forum threads. But one doesn't exist now.
Pine, you are one of the most active posters to this list, by count and
volume; clearly you like mail. Not everyone does; some are put off by the
power law distribution of posters here. Nat's suggestion is reasonable;
why not try it and see how it works. Some discussions about board
composition will inevitably occur here; if you see ones that you think are
relevant, you can help ensure they are summarized on that page.
Sam
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Dan Garry <dgarry(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hey Pine,
> On 27 July 2016 at 08:25, Pine W
<wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure that I
agree with you. The Board and Lila ignored some
> > inquiries that I made on Meta. Discussions on this mailing list seem to
> > attract at least as much good-faith participation as discussions on
> Meta. I
> > would suggest that inquiries could be made in either venue, and the
Board
> can simply acknowledge and collect them for
action during the
governance
> > review.
> If I'm understanding, you're saying that you've previously left
questions
> on Meta which ended up going unanswered, and therefore you'd prefer to
ask
> questions on this mailing list to increase your chances of a response.
> Increasing the number of open
channels of communication also increases
the
burden of monitoring those channels to ensure
that nothing goes missing.
Therefore, trying to engage in two places will likely increase the chance
of something going missing, rather than decreasing. This is likely why
Nataliia has asked that feedback be given in a single location, so that
she
> can be sure that she can see any feedback or questions that are given. I
> would encourage you to try engaging on Meta, as Nataliia suggests, rather
> than here, to reduce the chances that something goes missing or ignored.
> Thanks,
> Dan
> --
> Dan Garry
> Lead Product Manager, Discovery
> Wikimedia Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine