What is the current status with regard to the recommendations from the
2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content?
From what I can see, a proposal based on the study was generated at
and the proposal was subsequently presented and discussed at the Board
Meeting in Berlin, in late March.
How did that go? Any further developments?
--- On Sun, 20/2/11, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] 2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content -- update
To: "phoebe ayers" <phoebe.wiki(a)gmail.com>om>, "Wikimedia Foundation
Mailing List" <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Date: Sunday, 20 February, 2011, 22:54
Thank you very much for the update.
Recommendations 7 and 9 are important points, and I am glad
there is some work being done on them.
Do let us know again how things are progressing!
--- On Sun, 20/2/11, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki(a)gmail.com>
From: phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] 2010 Wikimedia Study of
Controversial Content --
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
Cc: "Andreas Kolbe" <jayen466(a)yahoo.com>
Date: Sunday, 20 February, 2011, 19:35
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:26 AM,
Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com>
> Could Phoebe, Jan-Bart or Kat please give us an
on the activities of
> the working group looking into the
resulting from the 2010
> Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content?
> Have any conclusions been drawn, and are there
plans or discussions about
Hi Andreas! Thanks for asking. Sorry for the slow
away on holiday the last couple of days and have not
Also, my apologies for not posting an update before
have been slowly moving but as yet no conclusions.
Here is what has happened since I sent my last
Over the winter holidays the membership of the
due to the workload of other board committees.
stepped down and were replaced by Matt, Jimmy and
I am still
involved and agreed to chair the group. Of course any
for statements or resolutions will go to the whole
are still involved as consultants on a
basis; if we
want them to do any further research or facilitation
In my last message, I wrote that "The working group
the recommendations more closely, soliciting Board
each of the recommendations to a greater degree than
for in the in-person meeting, working with the
making a report to the full Board. The working group
recommend next steps, including providing fuller
We did the first part of this (board member feedback);
currently working on the analysis part. As you know
recommendations fall into three kinds: philosophical,
(such as changing specific community practices), and
asked the WMF tech staff to spend some time looking
recommendations that require technical work (7 &
that we can
have more information about what's feasible and
and what it
would take on the wmf/tech side and the community
This does not
mean they're developing these features now; it means
possible specifications (since I am unfamiliar with
in MediaWiki to make this happen) so the working group
make a more
informed recommendation. The WMF won't develop
You may notice that the "working with the community"
largely absent this winter. Beyond carefully reading**
public discussion to date, the working group has not
with the community (at large) or specific community
members. This is
because I wanted to first focus on getting all of the
and getting background information, and that has
longer than I
hoped. Of course we're not under the illusion that
changes can be
made in how this organization works with
even happily keeping the status quo) without
(which there has been a lot of), consensus (which the
were meant to help catalyze but afaik has not yet
work. I'd still suggest the meta talk pages along
pages as a good place to discuss the issue; and people
the working group by working on summarization,
advice for going forward.
I'll say that the board does not yet have a formal
whole issue, and so I am hesitant to say much about
for fear of
it being *taken* as an official board position.
You may read this message and think "ok, they're
you may read this message and think "the board has
way/not done their job on this issue" or you may not
way, feel free to write me or us, publicly or
Our next step
as a working group will be a report to the board,
* recs 7 & 9:
** I have also been working on summarizing all this
discussion; a big job.
foundation-l mailing list