On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:03 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
galder158(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
We have plenty of roadmaps, but no vehicle to reach
our destination.
Seven years ago, we were discussing our Strategy for 2030. We used
thousands of volunteer hours, thousands of staff hours and millions of
dollars to build a really well-balanced strategy. There we concluded that "*By
2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem
of free knowledge*". We also made some recommendations to improve the
User Experience (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Improve_U…)
and claimed that we wanted to Innovate in Free Knowledge (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Innovate_…
).
cool summary, galder! there is one sentence in there:
Build the necessary technology to make free knowledge content
accessible in various formats. Support more diverse modes of
consumption and contribution
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Glossary#Contributor>
to
our projects (e.g. text, audio,
visual, video, geospatial, etc.).
the result is not so satisfying, i'd say. alone on this list, the only
discussion which comes out of such a sentence is we should put mp4 on
commons or not? really? of course i am exaggeration a little. but galder
has a point that wikipedia was disruptive 20 years ago and not so much
curently. admitted, it is kind of natural that an innovative company
looses the power to innovate over time, this is not necessarily true for
volunteer organisations. lodewijk showed it by launching a foto competition
which turned out to be the biggest one on this planet. it attracted people
who were not in the movement before, with ideas which we did not have in
the movement before. with the example in content space, there is no reason
to believe that approach would not work for technical innovation as well.
money is no problem, hosting is no problem, global reach and glory is not
an issue. we could create some "wiki loves new tech" competition, and, say,
pout 100 million into a five year program to do this, what you think? use
for example the price money to productize stuff, and not care too much if 9
out of 10 ideas fail. one out of ten will be good enough to disrupt.
rupert