Hi Rogol,
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonfors(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Leila,
I am sorry to hear that your management have not seen fit to allow you the
time to read this report since it is on a topic that is key to work that
you do.
This is not a concern on my end. Time, whether it's paid or not, is very
limited and being informed when spending it is a good practice. :)
But I think the underlying suggestion that Andreas or
non-staff
readers should identify ways in which this report has changed WMF practices
is
disingenuous.
It wasn't a suggestion but a question, also the question was to Andreas or
anyone else reading this list/email which includes staff members.
I also consider a label such as "
disingenuous" disrespectful and am not interested in continuing this line
of conversation.
Best,
Leila
"Rogol"
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Leila Zia <leila(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 3:59 AM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I found some of the audit's recommendations
troubling, and have
summarised
my concerns on the related talk page on Meta.[3]
I would love to find some time to go over the audit (67 pages) and your
comments/thoughts and share mine. However, given that this will require
substantial amount of time, I'm wondering if you or anyone else has a
good
sense of areas that Wikimedia Foundation has
decided to change its best
practices based on the audit notes. I'm assuming that receiving
recommendations for change doesn't mean that all recommendations are
going
to go into effect, the teams usually spend a lot
of care in implementing
changes considering the mission and their field knowledge of our
Movement.
:) If we know which parts of the report
Communications team has decided
to
act on, then we won't spend our time on
things that we already agree on.
:)
I'm also wondering: Given that a Chief Communications Officer is to be
hired whether it's more productive to delay spending more time on this
kind
of document until after this person is in office
and we know more what
their vision/direction is.
(and as you may know by now: I have not followed discussions on this
topic
before, my apologies if this is already addressed
as part of the previous
conversations.)
Best,
Leila
p.s. and you know this but for others: I'm in Research at Wikimedia
Foundation. I'm interested in this topic as communications is key for
surfacing the work I do as part of my responsibilities. I'm not talking
on
behalf of Wikimedia Foundation or Communications
team. :)
Wikimedia_Foundation_
> messaging_strategy#Comments_on_the_2014.E2.80.9316_
communications_audit
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
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 and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
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 and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
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>