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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
--
Oliver Keyes
Research Analyst
Wikimedia Foundation