Please see below. I really don't know what to say right now except <3 you Sue. (And let's hope another woman leads WMF ;) )
-Sarah
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement *please read* Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:04:49 -0700 From: Sue Gardner sgardner@wikimedia.org Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Hello Wikimedia community members,
This is not an easy e-mail to write, and it’s been a very hard decision to make. But I’m writing to tell you that I’m planning to leave my position as the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation.
My departure isn’t imminent -- the Board and I anticipate it’ll take at least six months to recruit my successor, and I’ll be fully engaged as Executive Director all through the recruitment process and until we have a new person in place. We’re expecting that’ll take about six months or so, and so this note is not goodbye -- not yet.
Making the decision to leave hasn’t been easy, but it comes down to two things.
First, the movement and the Wikimedia Foundation are in a strong place now. When I joined, the Foundation was tiny and not yet able to reliably support the projects. Today it's healthy, thriving, and a competent partner to the global network of Wikimedia volunteers. If that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t feel okay to leave. In that sense, my leaving is a vote of confidence in our Board and executive team and staff --- I know they will ably steer the Foundation through the years ahead, and I’m confident the Board will appoint a strong successor to me.
And I feel that although we’re in good shape, with a promising future, the same isn’t true for the internet itself. (This is thing number two.) Increasingly, I’m finding myself uncomfortable about how the internet’s developing, who’s influencing its development, and who is not. Last year we at Wikimedia raised an alarm about SOPA/PIPA, and now CISPA is back. Wikipedia has experienced censorship at the hands of industry groups and governments, and we’re --increasingly, I think-- seeing important decisions made by unaccountable non-transparent corporate players, a shift from the open web to mobile walled gardens, and a shift from the production-based internet to one that’s consumption-based. There are many organizations and individuals advocating for the public interest online -- what’s good for ordinary people -- but other interests are more numerous and powerful than they are. I want that to change. And that’s what I want to do next.
I’ve always aimed to make the biggest contribution I can to the general public good. Today, this is pulling me towards a new and different role, one very much aligned with Wikimedia values and informed by my experiences here, and with the purpose of amplifying the voices of people advocating for the free and open internet. I don’t know exactly what this will look like -- I might write a book, or start a non-profit, or work in partnership with something that already exists. Either way, I feel strongly that this is what I need to do.
I feel an increasing sense of urgency around this. That said, I also feel a strong sense of responsibility (and love!) for the Wikimedia movement, and so I’ve agreed with the Board that I’ll stay on as Executive Director until we have my successor in place. That’ll take some time -- likely, at least six months.
Until then, nothing changes. The Wikimedia Foundation has lots of work to do, and you can expect me to focus fully on it until we have a new Executive Director in place.
I have many people to thank, but I’m not going to do it now -- there’ll be time for that later. For now, I’ll just say I love working with you all, I’m proud of everything the Wikimedia movement is accomplishing, and I’m looking forward to our next six months together.
Jan-Bart’s going to write a note in a couple of minutes with information about the transition process. We’ll be hosting office hours this weekend as well, so anybody with questions can ask them here or turn up to talk with us on IRC.
Thanks, Sue
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.comwrote:
Please see below. I really don't know what to say right now except <3 you Sue. (And let's hope another woman leads WMF ;) )
+1 :)
Can't thank you enough for all you've done to help WMF and the community.
Cheers, Katie
-Sarah
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement *please read* Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:04:49 -0700 From: Sue Gardner sgardner@wikimedia.org sgardner@wikimedia.org Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.orgwikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.orgwikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Hello Wikimedia community members,
This is not an easy e-mail to write, and it’s been a very hard decision to make. But I’m writing to tell you that I’m planning to leave my position as the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation.
My departure isn’t imminent -- the Board and I anticipate it’ll take at least six months to recruit my successor, and I’ll be fully engaged as Executive Director all through the recruitment process and until we have a new person in place. We’re expecting that’ll take about six months or so, and so this note is not goodbye -- not yet.
Making the decision to leave hasn’t been easy, but it comes down to two things.
First, the movement and the Wikimedia Foundation are in a strong place now. When I joined, the Foundation was tiny and not yet able to reliably support the projects. Today it's healthy, thriving, and a competent partner to the global network of Wikimedia volunteers. If that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t feel okay to leave. In that sense, my leaving is a vote of confidence in our Board and executive team and staff --- I know they will ably steer the Foundation through the years ahead, and I’m confident the Board will appoint a strong successor to me.
And I feel that although we’re in good shape, with a promising future, the same isn’t true for the internet itself. (This is thing number two.) Increasingly, I’m finding myself uncomfortable about how the internet’s developing, who’s influencing its development, and who is not. Last year we at Wikimedia raised an alarm about SOPA/PIPA, and now CISPA is back. Wikipedia has experienced censorship at the hands of industry groups and governments, and we’re --increasingly, I think-- seeing important decisions made by unaccountable non-transparent corporate players, a shift from the open web to mobile walled gardens, and a shift from the production-based internet to one that’s consumption-based. There are many organizations and individuals advocating for the public interest online -- what’s good for ordinary people -- but other interests are more numerous and powerful than they are. I want that to change. And that’s what I want to do next.
I’ve always aimed to make the biggest contribution I can to the general public good. Today, this is pulling me towards a new and different role, one very much aligned with Wikimedia values and informed by my experiences here, and with the purpose of amplifying the voices of people advocating for the free and open internet. I don’t know exactly what this will look like -- I might write a book, or start a non-profit, or work in partnership with something that already exists. Either way, I feel strongly that this is what I need to do.
I feel an increasing sense of urgency around this. That said, I also feel a strong sense of responsibility (and love!) for the Wikimedia movement, and so I’ve agreed with the Board that I’ll stay on as Executive Director until we have my successor in place. That’ll take some time -- likely, at least six months.
Until then, nothing changes. The Wikimedia Foundation has lots of work to do, and you can expect me to focus fully on it until we have a new Executive Director in place.
I have many people to thank, but I’m not going to do it now -- there’ll be time for that later. For now, I’ll just say I love working with you all, I’m proud of everything the Wikimedia movement is accomplishing, and I’m looking forward to our next six months together.
Jan-Bart’s going to write a note in a couple of minutes with information about the transition process. We’ll be hosting office hours this weekend as well, so anybody with questions can ask them here or turn up to talk with us on IRC.
Thanks, Sue
Wikimedia-l mailing listWikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
May she kick a little censorship butt all over the planet - in fact most or all of it!
(Kiddie porn and Network/Cable and internet porn depicting torturers and cannibals at play, especially on female bodies, really has to be eliminated but do we really want the violent state to do it?? Boycott NBC's new HANNIBAL show for starters. UGH!!)
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement *please read* Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:04:49 -0700 From: Sue Gardner <sgardner@wikimedia.org> <mailto:sgardner@wikimedia.org> Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> <mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> <mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Hello Wikimedia community members, This is not an easy e-mail to write, and it's been a very hard decision to make. But I'm writing to tell you that I'm planning to leave my position as the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation. My departure isn't imminent -- the Board and I anticipate it'll take at least six months to recruit my successor, and I'll be fully engaged as Executive Director all through the recruitment process and until we have a new person in place. We're expecting that'll take about six months or so, and so this note is not goodbye -- not yet. Making the decision to leave hasn't been easy, but it comes down to two things. First, the movement and the Wikimedia Foundation are in a strong place now. When I joined, the Foundation was tiny and not yet able to reliably support the projects. Today it's healthy, thriving, and a competent partner to the global network of Wikimedia volunteers. If that wasn't the case, I wouldn't feel okay to leave. In that sense, my leaving is a vote of confidence in our Board and executive team and staff --- I know they will ably steer the Foundation through the years ahead, and I'm confident the Board will appoint a strong successor to me. And I feel that although we're in good shape, with a promising future, the same isn't true for the internet itself. (This is thing number two.) Increasingly, I'm finding myself uncomfortable about how the internet's developing, who's influencing its development, and who is not. Last year we at Wikimedia raised an alarm about SOPA/PIPA, and now CISPA is back. Wikipedia has experienced censorship at the hands of industry groups and governments, and we're --increasingly, I think-- seeing important decisions made by unaccountable non-transparent corporate players, a shift from the open web to mobile walled gardens, and a shift from the production-based internet to one that's consumption-based. There are many organizations and individuals advocating for the public interest online -- what's good for ordinary people -- but other interests are more numerous and powerful than they are. I want that to change. And that's what I want to do next. I've always aimed to make the biggest contribution I can to the general public good. Today, this is pulling me towards a new and different role, one very much aligned with Wikimedia values and informed by my experiences here, and with the purpose of amplifying the voices of people advocating for the free and open internet. I don't know exactly what this will look like -- I might write a book, or start a non-profit, or work in partnership with something that already exists. Either way, I feel strongly that this is what I need to do. I feel an increasing sense of urgency around this. That said, I also feel a strong sense of responsibility (and love!) for the Wikimedia movement, and so I've agreed with the Board that I'll stay on as Executive Director until we have my successor in place. That'll take some time -- likely, at least six months. Until then, nothing changes. The Wikimedia Foundation has lots of work to do, and you can expect me to focus fully on it until we have a new Executive Director in place. I have many people to thank, but I'm not going to do it now -- there'll be time for that later. For now, I'll just say I love working with you all, I'm proud of everything the Wikimedia movement is accomplishing, and I'm looking forward to our next six months together. Jan-Bart's going to write a note in a couple of minutes with information about the transition process. We'll be hosting office hours this weekend as well, so anybody with questions can ask them here or turn up to talk with us on IRC. Thanks, Sue _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Unsubscribe:https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap-- @wikimediadc / @wikidata
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hi all,
On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:01:54 -0400 Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
May she kick a little censorship butt all over the planet - in fact most or all of it!
If she can, then it sounds good. All the power to her, and good luck on her future endeavours. I noticed that people who have the right attitude, can start from being "awesome" and become more and more "awesome" in time (despite popular belief that your mind must deteriorate with age).
Censorship deserves its ass to be kicked, and I think that trying to block or filter the Internet in the name of "think of the children" or "preventing copyright infringement" is stupid and will likely be futile (as the recent revolution in Egypt proved).
(Kiddie porn and Network/Cable and internet porn depicting torturers and cannibals at play, especially on female bodies, really has to be eliminated but do we really want the violent state to do it?? Boycott NBC's new HANNIBAL show for starters. UGH!!)
I personally don't think that any content, however deemed inappropriate is a sufficient reason, for enacting censorships, or using Artificial Ultra-Stupidity (UAS) to try to filter it. While Alice Cooper ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Cooper ) is pretty mainstream and respected today, back when he started he was considered very bad culture - see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNYI3iINXrQ ("Sam the Eagle vs. Alice Cooper"). Similarly, the early http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python work was considered very bad form, profane, and rebellious, and now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cleese is a British Knight ("Sir John Cleese").
Thing is - provocative art pushes the limit of what we consider "moral" or even "ethical", and I hope it's for the best - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfection :
<<<< The parallel existence of two concepts of perfection, one strict ("perfection," as such) and the other loose ("excellence"), has given rise — perhaps since antiquity but certainly since the Renaissance — to a singular paradox: that the greatest perfection is imperfection. This was formulated by Lucilio Vanini (1585–1619), who had a precursor in the 16th-century writer Joseph Juste Scaliger, and they in turn referred to the ancient philosopher Empedocles. Their argument, as given by the first two, was that if the world were perfect, it could not improve and so would lack "true perfection," which depends on progress.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
Hi all,
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:17:30 +0300 Shlomi Fish shlomif@shlomifish.org wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:01:54 -0400 Carol Moore DC carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
(Kiddie porn and Network/Cable and internet porn depicting torturers and cannibals at play, especially on female bodies, really has to be eliminated but do we really want the violent state to do it?? Boycott NBC's new HANNIBAL show for starters. UGH!!)
I personally don't think that any content, however deemed inappropriate is a sufficient reason, for enacting censorships, or using Artificial Ultra-Stupidity (UAS) to try to filter it. While Alice Cooper ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Cooper ) is pretty mainstream and respected today, back when he started he was considered very bad culture - see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNYI3iINXrQ ("Sam the Eagle vs. Alice Cooper"). Similarly, the early http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python work was considered very bad form, profane, and rebellious, and now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cleese is a British Knight ("Sir John Cleese").
I seem to have mispoke as Cleese does not appear to be a knight (at least not yet), but nevertheless Monty Python is now considered important, inspirational, and as very cutting edge comedy at the time (and still quite fresh today), and now appears mostly innocent (except naturally for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_The_Meaning_of_Life , which I still consider as bad form).
Sorry for my mistake.
Regards,
-- Shlomi Fish
Thing is - provocative art pushes the limit of what we consider "moral" or even "ethical", and I hope it's for the best - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfection :
<<<< The parallel existence of two concepts of perfection, one strict ("perfection," as such) and the other loose ("excellence"), has given rise — perhaps since antiquity but certainly since the Renaissance — to a singular paradox: that the greatest perfection is imperfection. This was formulated by Lucilio Vanini (1585–1619), who had a precursor in the 16th-century writer Joseph Juste Scaliger, and they in turn referred to the ancient philosopher Empedocles. Their argument, as given by the first two, was that if the world were perfect, it could not improve and so would lack "true perfection," which depends on progress.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish