It sounds, from conversations Leila is having here and elsewhere, like she's fully aware of what could've gone better. For what it's worth as both a community member and a staffer Leila has been nothing but helpful and responsive in regards to this, keeping her cool and keeping things moving forward. I'd like to thank her for that :)
So I have no doubt that there will be lessons learned from this - but I don't think it's fair to oblige anyone to come up with a Permanent Report. If the WMF or Leila or Michelle personally want to do it, cool, but it seems unreasonable to externally pressure for that kind of writeup, and also honestly somewhat naive - individual employees at the Foundation do not get to set specifically what they work on, and should not be obliged to do this in their spare time. So it sounds like a good idea but I want to make clear that, at least for me, I only expect that report if and only if the people involved or their managers think it's a valuable document to have and assign time for it.
On 27 June 2015 at 23:32, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I appreciate people answering questions on weekends.
After reading this thread, it sounds like this is a well-intentioned research project but there are opportunities for improvement. If someone (maybe Leila and Michelle?) could compile a timeline, a list of the issues raised in these email threads, a list of open questions about policies and processes, and a list of opportunities for process improvement based on discussion in these threads, then I think we can use this series of events to make improvements and clarifications that will benefit future outreach and research.
Thanks,
Pine
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l