Yes and no. Considering that I've been waiting for months for answers to questions about the WMF Annual Plan, I would say that there is much room for improvement in communications.
On the other hand, the WMF Comms department itself seems to more or less ok, and I personally think we'll of WMF's chief communications officer.
So, some good points, and some room to improve. I agree that the status quo has been this way for awhile and it would be good to see across-the-board communications SLAs.
Pine On Oct 4, 2015 12:18 AM, "Mathias Damour" mathias.damour@laposte.net wrote:
Le 04/10/2015 05:36, Craig Franklin a écrit :
I take your point Pine, but "improving communication with the community" seems to have been a WMF priority for as long as I can remember, yet there doesn't seem to have been any consistent improvement, as we can see here. A new approach and direction to how matters like this are communicated is clearly needed, because the current one doesn't seem to be working at all.
I wouldn't say that the WMF communication is simply bad, it is pretty professional.
It may rather be that an open communication and keeping control on the greater part of the decisions (or even conducting the users of the projets themself, as an average internet company does), are "two tendancies that are not fully compatible" (to borrow Florence's words).
-- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]]
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe