I have no comment on Wikimedia Space. IMHO it's too soon to criticize it
but I want to point out to a pattern that I have been seeing in the past
couple of months by several people in this very mailing list.
You have been repeating the word "WMF" (four time, for four different
purposes) and treating it as a big monolith which is far from truth, WMF
consists of different teams with different focuses, priorities, goals, and
processes.
This type of comments also increases the tension by promoting concept of
"volunteer vs. WMF". It's not a war, we have the same mission. Stop
criticizing a huge organization devoted to support volunteers (which you
can't deny all of its good deeds, like keeping servers the world-class
website running while being horribly understaffed, we have only 1% of
Google's staff) because you disagree with this project or that program.
Criticize projects, criticize actions (which can be valid), but don't be
like "here we go again, WMF".
I'm a volunteer at night, WMDE staff at day. Right now, it's the volunteer
hats on.
Best
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, 01:19 Yair Rand <yyairrand(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm getting so many red flags.
Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no community
involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing wikis?
WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
(Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki mailing
list?
Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
-- Yair Rand
בתאריך יום ג׳, 25 ביוני 2019 ב-14:56 מאת Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com
>:
Hi Maria,
Thanks for this update.
I hope that you can answer a question. I may be mistaken, but my
impression
is that the purposes that are outlined for
Wikimedia Space are within the
intended scopes of the Meta and Outreach wikis, as well as Wikimedia-l. I
think that the community would be willing to consider design improvements
and additional features for Meta and Outreach, such as calendar and map
tools that are easy to use. Design improvements and additional features
might also be welcome by third parties who use MediaWiki software and
could
eventually have the option to implement the
changes on their own sites.
Can
you explain the decision to launch a new site
instead of proposing design
improvements and additional features for Meta and Outreach?
Thank you,
Pine
(
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
_______________________________________________
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>