To be clear, I’m engaged in understanding your perspective. I’m
not promising to do any specific thing at this time. I like understanding
problems and wondering how we might solve seemingly complicated ones in
simple ways. It’s kind of a sickness.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonfors(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Anna
Thank you for that. In general an engagement works well when both, or all,
parties have something to bring to the table and something to gain from the
engagement (and certain other factors are in .
Thank you for the principle to begin. That helps me orient. Of course it's
obvious when you say it, but I hadn't thought about it in that light.
Simple.
So for example, in the
field of software planning one might expect that an engagement between
members of the community with an interest in and experience of software
issues as they affect contributors, and the WMF management developing the
software roadmap would be effective.
I think I understand your point here, but I'd like to be sure that I do.
Let’s take your software example (though other forms of work may also
clearly apply). Are you saying that they should co-conceive of what to
build (a la Community Tech)? Or are you saying once something is decided
upon
they consult members on how to build it? Or are you saying both?
I do hope the WMF decides to try that
some time.
How is what you are proposing different from Community Tech? That’s not a
challenge, that's genuine inquiry. Is it that what you are proposing is not
like Community Tech *in kind *or that Community Tech has just not achieved *the
scale* you would like to see (e.g. are you hoping that we would build
everything that way?). Either way, I have some thoughts, but I’ll wait to
hear what you actually mean before launching into my POV.
In this instance, there seems little that members of
the
community can do to help the WMF management handle a team problem that is
taking place entirely within the WMF as an organisation. It may well be
that there are people in the community with experience in managing software
teams, but it seems unlikely that they will be in a position to give you
the help you need on the time scales that you need it.
Yes, I agree that it’s not a productive role for members of community.
I engaged for slightly different reasons. I know recently we all lived
through some struggles with transparency. They were tough times for all of
us. I engaged because this "pause in the work" could potentially strike a
deeper cord around transparency.
Maybe not. But if it could strike a deeper cord around transparency, I
wanted to show up for that conversation. Talk openly. Let people know that
we are listening, that we believe in transparency… that’s why we all fought
for it.
To be clear, I have no sense whether it did strike a cord around
transparency, but I enjoyed the conversation nevertheless.
Perhaps at some
later date the senior leadership will want to do a lessons learned exercise
and it might be that certain community members could help, but I would not
use up the valuable bandwidth of staff and volunteers giving a blo-by-blow
account of this particular incident.
Yes, I have some thoughts on directions I might like to go in relative to
my own work. I’ll frame a page on Meta some time *roughly* within the next
month and send you the link when it’s up. I need a place to think and
interact and hear ideas.
In the middle ground, there is the
issue of the current product roadmap and its delivery. Perhaps an
indication of what that roadmap is may help to refine and revise the plan
that will have to be drawn up for executing the work that is left hanging
by these events.
I wonder if you'll be surprised to know that I distinctly recall you
mentioning roadmaps previously. Perhaps more than once. I wouldn’t go so
far as to call it your mantra, but I’ve heard you repeat it numerous times.
I’d like to understand more. I can think of many reasons why someone
would/should want a roadmap. For which reasons would you like one? What
would it allow you to do? For example, is a roadmap a transparent
publication? A platform to build on top of? A means to some other end?
And would you be willing to rank the relative importance of having the
ability to do those things versus solving potentially other important
problems.
and, if you're willing, I'd like to understand the quotes around your
name... how come they are there? Again, genuine question. Not mocking or
even challenging. Just curious. Annoyingly so.
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Anna Stillwell
<astillwell(a)wikimedia.org
wrote:
> Rogol,
> Good to hear from you.
> "I am surprised by the notion
that WMF middle management is in some way
> answerable to the Community. I would have thought that was the least
> productive
> form of engagement between the two sides."
> Rogol, I'd like to hear more
about what you mean here, specifically in
this
> instance. Then, would you be willing to generalize in categories: a
> spectrum of the least productive forms of engagement between the
> communities and WMF to the most productive forms of engagement?
> "But doing planning better is a
lesson for management to learn, not for
the
> Community."
> Yes. Agreed. Though generally I would
say that everybody should always be
> learning on all sides of the fence, but I can't disagree with your
> statement.
> /a
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:30 PM,
Rogol Domedonfors <
domedonfors(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I am surprised by the notion
that WMF middle management is in some way
> > answerable to the Community. I would have thought that was the least
> > productive form of engagement between the two sides. The issue is
what,
if
> anything, will happen to the tools that the contributors want and need
to
> carry on doing their work. Wes Moran says
that they will be delivered
on
> > schedule and I presume he is in a position to make that happen.
>
> > It's disturbing to read
that the failure of this team is attributed by
> > Chris Koerner to planning. But doing planning better is a lesson for
> > management to learn, not for the Community. It so happens that I have
> > advocated for involving the Community in the planing more, earlier and
> at a
> > higher level. But I do not regard this setback as attributable to the
> > Foundation's reluctance to do that.
>
> > "Rogol"
>
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at
10:18 AM, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > I guess the question
is was this a request for input on what the
> > community
> > > thinks of the Interactive Team or the strategy of the discovery team?
> Or
> > > was it simply a "for your information", we have decided to do X,
Y,
and
> Z.
> > The first is much more preferable to the second, but it appears the
> second
> > was what was intended. We as Wikipedians, of course, while give you
our
> > > opinions on these decisions whether you request them or not :-)
> >
> > > Now to be clear I
am not requesting an official response. I am
> expressing
> > > 1) my support for the work that the Interactive Team was carrying
out.
2)
> > my great appreciation to Yuri for the years he has dedicated to the
WM
> > movement. IMO him being let go is a
great loss to our movement.
People
> who
> > both understand tech and can explain tech to the non expert are few
and
far
> between and Yuri was both. While I imagine and hope that he will
continue
> > on as a volunteer, it is easy to get distracted by working to put
food
> on
> > > the table. Maybe another team within the WMF or within the Wikimedia
> > > movement will pick him up.
> >
> > > Best
> > > James
> >
> > > On Wed, Jan 25,
2017 at 9:52 PM, Anna Stillwell <
> > astillwell(a)wikimedia.org>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > On Wed, Jan
25, 2017 at 9:14 PM, Pete Forsyth <
peteforsyth(a)gmail.com
>
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
Anna,
> > > >
> > > >
> I've now read what you quoted for a third time, and can confirm I
> did
> > > > > understand, and agree with, what you said. I'm sorry my
summary
was
> > > > > inadequate, and may have made it seem otherwise.
> > > >
> > > >
> As for planning, I am not making assumptions, but perhaps
> > interpreting
> > > > > differently from you. I'm happy to defer to Pine on the
details;
> > their
> > > > > recent message captures the gist of what I intended.
> > > >
> > > >
> I can't give a solid estimate of the "half-life," but I do not
> think
> > > the
> > > > > enthusiasm I've seen (and the metrics I cited in my initial
message
> on
> > > this
> > > > thread) constitute a passing crush. I do think a "pause"
that
> > > necessitates
> > > > addressing uncertainty when discussing popular features can have
a
> > > > > significant impact, and therefore should be minimized to
whatever
> > > degree
> > > > is
> > > > > attainable. I could be wrong, but that's my belief.
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Got it. (I add color so I
can see. I think I need better glasses.
> > Sad!).
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > As for the request for
more time, I guess I'm just not sure what
to
> > make
> > > > of it. I make no demands, and I'm not sure I've heard Pine,
James,
DJ,
> or
> > > anybody in this thread make demands. Is there somebody with
standing
> to
> > > > grant such a request? I've heard it, and it makes sense.
It's
> > worthwhile
> > > to
> > > > know that the team needs more time, and plans to share more on a
> scale
> > > that
> > > > sounds like days-to-weeks. But if there's something specific
being
> > > asked
> > > > of
> > > > > me (or others on this list), I'm not clear on what it is.
> > > >
> > >
> > > > I was just asking whether
you thought it was reasonable to give
them
> > the
> > > > time that they asked for. It wasn't a governance question, or a
> > > discussion
> > > > about authority. I was just asking if those who commented, who all
> > seemed
> > > > to have legitimate concerns, were willing to have the team get back
> to
> > > them
> > > > with any answers that they could fairly, justly, respectfully and
> > legally
> > > > provide, but more likely they would talk about the future work.
> > >
> > > > In my
mind I've been clear and consistent: "Hey, do you guys think
it
> is
> > > reasonable to give these guys some time?" But it seems like I've
not
> > made
> > > > this point clear. Would singing it at karaoke help?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > I'd be happy to
chat if you come back to it at the end of Q3, if
> > you'd
> > > > > like.
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Thanks. I'll reach
out.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > -Pete
> > > >
> > > >
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> > > >
> > >
>
> > > >
> > > > > On 01/25/2017 06:38
PM, Anna Stillwell wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Pete Forsyth <
> > peteforsyth(a)gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Anna,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Pete,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Your points are valid and well taken. If I may summarize
what I
> > think
> > > I
> > > > >>> heard, it's basically: "Getting things right
can be hard, and
if
> full
> > > >>> preparations weren't made ahead of time, thorough answers
may
not
be
> > >>> readily available. Be compassionate/patient." Is that about
right?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> I appreciate that you are trying to understand what I mean.
Thanks.
> > > >>
> > > >> No, I didn’t say getting things right can be hard. I said, “This
> > > >> communication thing is hard, especially when people are
involved.
> > > >> Sometimes
> > > >> there are laws that constrain what we say. Sometimes we don’t
know
> > > whether
> > > >> we are right yet and we need a further unpacking of the facts.
The
>
truth
> > >> is
> > >> that there can be a whole host of reasons for partial
communication
that
> >> aren’t related to competence or the intent to deceive.”
> >>
> >> As for the preparations, it seems that a lot of assumptions are
being
> >> made.
> >> As for thorough answers, some might already be known and others
known
> once
> >> more planning is completed. However, it could be that the
explanations
> > you
> > >> want are not legal to share. There are many issues where
employment
> law
> > >> and
> > >> worker protections are crystal clear, as they should be.
> > >>
> > >> As for compassion, I don’t require it. That seems like extra to
me.
I
> > >> usually prefer just paying attention, but that’s my personal
choice.
>
>>
> >> The team asked for some time. I wondered if that would be a
reasonable
> > >> request to grant them.
> > >>
> > >> If so, I agree in principle and in spirit, but I think the point
is
in
> >>
> >>> tension with
> >>> another one:
> >>>
> >>> Community and public enthusiasm for software can be a rare and
> important
> >>> thing. The conditions that make it grow, shrink, or sustain are
> complex,
> >>> and largely beyond the influence of a handful of mailing list
> >>> participants.
> >>> The recent outputs of the Interactive Team have generated
enthusiasm
> > in a
> > >>> number of venues, and many on this list (both volunteers and
staff)
> > > would
> > > >>> like to see it grow or sustain, and perhaps throw a little
weight
> behind
> >>> an
> >>> effort to make it grow or sustain.
> >>>
> >>> Good points. I mean that. Glad to hear of these recent outputs
generate
> >> excitement. I’m personally also getting quite excited about ORES
> >> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Objective_Revision_
Evaluation_Service>
> >> and
> >>
> >> what’s going on with the Community Tech Wish List, Labs, and New
> Readers.
> >> But I also get that you want to be clear: you'd like to see the
> >> interactive
> >> team’s work grow or sustain. Makes sense.
> >>
> >> The only thing I heard is that the team said that they needed to
pause,
> >> have a bit of time, and get back to everybody. “The team's aim
during
> > this
> > >> period is to get its work to a stable and maintainable state.”
> > >>
> > >> But that enthusiasm has a half-life. What is possible today may
not
> be
> > > >>> possible next week or next month. The zeitgeist may have
evolved
or
> > > moved
> > > >>> on by then.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'm not in disagreement with your main point about
enthusiasm
for
> > > > >> software.
> > > > >> I think it's a very good one. Enthusiasm with a half
life of a
> week,
> > > > >> however, sounds more like a passing crush. Nevertheless,
your
> point
> > > > still
> > > > >> stands.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Pete
> > > > >>> --
> > > > >>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> /a
> > > > >> [[User:Annaproject]]
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Anna Stillwell <
> > > > astillwell(a)wikimedia.org
> > > > >>>
> >
> > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> You make substantive points, Tim. Thank you.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> "An employee should not experience their time
off as a period
> > where
> > > > his
> > > > >>>> [her/they] work load is just temporarily buffered
until his
> > > [her/they]
> > > > >>>> return, but where colleagues will step in and take
care of
> > > business."
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I take this point seriously and don't wish you
to think
> otherwise.
> > > In
> > > > >>>> theory, I absolutely agree. In practice, sometimes
we all face
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>> constraints.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> There are roughly 300 of us (order of magnitude).
Every now
and
>
then,
> > >>>>
> > >>> there
> > >>>
> > >>>> are not enough of us to go around on everything on a timeline
that
> > meets
> > >>>> the legitimate need that you present here. We'll continue
to
work
> on
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> this.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> But, to clarify, no one ever said it was a "useful
practice"
nor
did
> >>>>
> >>> anyone
> >>>
> >>>> suggest that it was generalized across the org.
> >>>>
> >>>> What I was wondering about in my previous email and now
reiterating
> in
> > >>>>
> > >>> this
> > >>>
> > >>>> one too, are people willing to grant their request: a bit of
time
> and
> > >>>>
> > >>> allow
> > >>>
> > >>>> for one person to return to work?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Does that seem like a way to move forward?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Warmly,
> > >>>> /a
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Tim Landscheidt <
> > >>>> tim(a)tim-landscheidt.de
> > >>>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Anna Stillwell <astillwell(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> […]
> > >>>>>> I also hear that the pause on the interactive work is
temporary.
> > > I’ve
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> heard
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> them request time. I am comfortable granting that
request,
but
no
> > one
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> is
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> required to agree with me. They’ve also said that the
person
with
> > the
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> most
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> information is on vacation. As someone who has
seen
employees
go
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> through
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> considerable stress in the last years, the entire
executive
team
is
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> working
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> to establish some cultural standards around supporting
vacations.
> We
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> want
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> people here to feel comfortable taking proper vacations
and
> sometimes
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> that
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> can even need to happen in a crisis. People often plan
their
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> vacations
> > >>>
> > >>>> well
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> in advance and may not know that something tricky will
come
up.
> > Just
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> so
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> you
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> understand one bias I bring to this
conversation.
> > > >>>>>> […]
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> I concur with DJ in his initial mail that this is not
a use-
> > > >>>>> ful practice, and I doubt very much that it relieves
employ-
> > > >>>>> ees' stress. It conveys the organizational
expectation that
> > > >>>>> employees are SPOFs without any backup. An employee
should
> > > >>>>> not experience their time off as a period where his
work
> > > >>>>> load is just temporarily buffered until his return,
but
> > > >>>>> where colleagues will step in and take care of
business.
> > > >>>>> Especially such a major decision like
"pausing" a team
> > > >>>>> should not depend on the inner thoughts of one
employee, but
> > > >>>>> be backed and explainable by others.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Tim
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>>>> 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>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> --
> > > >>>> "If you have knowledge, let others light their
candles in
it." -
> > > > >>>> Margaret
> > > > >>>> Fuller
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Anna Stillwell
> > > > >>>> Director of Culture
> > > > >>>> Wikimedia Foundation
> > > > >>>> 415.806.1536
> > > > >>>> *www.wikimediafoundation.org <http://www.
>
wikimediafoundation.org
> > >*
> > > > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > > > >>>> 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>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > > > >>> 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>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > > > > i/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>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> > > --
> > > > "If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in
it." -
> > Margaret
> > > > Fuller
> > >
> > > > Anna
Stillwell
> > > > Director of Culture
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > > 415.806.1536
> > > > *www.wikimediafoundation.org
<http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>*
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> > 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>
>
> --
> "If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it." - Margaret
> Fuller
> Anna Stillwell
> Director of Culture
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 415.806.1536
> *www.wikimediafoundation.org <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>*
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
_______________________________________________
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>
--
"If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it." - Margaret
Fuller
Anna Stillwell
Director of Culture
Wikimedia Foundation
415.806.1536
*www.wikimediafoundation.org <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>*