Looking over this list for the past couple of months, several key issues have been discussed. I notice, however, that most of the discussion is by members of the English projects, with the notable exception of Gerard. In comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and three and four years ago on Wikipedia-l (pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous participation from representatives of other projects. In fact, that is what made Wikipedia a truly international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of those discussions have drifted. Is the discussion taking place on chapter lists, at the expense of the Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on internal-l, at the expense of transparency.
Regardless, it seems that this list is missing out.
Danny
**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp00300000... 48)
Especially when such discussions are things that should be affecting members of these non-english projects. I would, however maybe qualify your statement by saying I believe a certain amount here contribute on both english projects and their own language projects.
-dan On Jan 25, 2008, at 12:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of months, several key issues have been discussed. I notice, however, that most of the discussion is by members of the English projects, with the notable exception of Gerard. In comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and three and four years ago on Wikipedia-l (pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous participation from representatives of other projects. In fact, that is what made Wikipedia a truly international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of those discussions have drifted. Is the discussion taking place on chapter lists, at the expense of the Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on internal-l, at the expense of transparency.
Regardless, it seems that this list is missing out.
Danny
**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp00300000... 48) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hoi, There is too much noise on the line, there are too many people who are only negative and without respect. This has resulted among other things in Mike Godwin no longer posting on this list. I have urged people to be polite. I have spoken passionately about this. The only result I got at the time is that people say something about "freedom of speech".
This "freedom of speech" makes the list more and more irrelevant. When people complain that the organisation is becoming less transparant, it is this what is to blame. People give up when there is only the crisis of the day to be discussed and when what Kelly Martin has to say is taken as the gospel.
I am wondering less and less. Many of the things I really have to say, I say on my blogs. It is that I advocate certain causes otherwise I would not be here anymore because it is increasingly becoming a waste of time. Thanks, GerardM
On Jan 25, 2008 6:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of months, several key issues have been discussed. I notice, however, that most of the discussion is by members of the English projects, with the notable exception of Gerard. In comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and three and four years ago on Wikipedia-l (pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous participation from representatives of other projects. In fact, that is what made Wikipedia a truly international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of those discussions have drifted. Is the discussion taking place on chapter lists, at the expense of the Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on internal-l, at the expense of transparency.
Regardless, it seems that this list is missing out.
Danny
**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. ( http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp00300000... 48) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Jan 25, 2008 6:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of months, several key issues have been discussed. I notice, however, that most of the discussion is by members of the English projects, with the notable exception of Gerard. In comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and three and four years ago on Wikipedia-l (pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous participation from representatives of other projects. In fact, that is what made Wikipedia a truly international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of those discussions have drifted. Is the discussion taking place on chapter lists, at the expense of the Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on internal-l, at the expense of transparency.
As far as I can make out, neither.
I'd have one explanation though. There comes a point where reading in a language that is not yours, on a list that sprouts an average of 20 emails of more than 2 pages a day, very often on a level of English that is hard to follow, just prevents one, as a non-English speaker, from participating. I consider myself as having a rather good level of English, but sorry, when you get a thread dominated by lengthy English speakers, I just give up.
Apart from that, I find that people who have little to say on a subject, or who actually answer "on the side", are somehow also too present, and answer faster than their shadow [1], often depleting a thread of its substance in the very first emails to veer towards uninteresting side conversations, or even considerations that have nothing to do with the subject at hand. Which, for those who might have something to say about a subject but need a little time to formulate their answer, means that they'd be going back to a dead thread when they're ready to participate.
To summarize: Level of English and fast pace of the list. I would personally not look further for an explanation.
Delphine [1] see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_Luke
Seconded.
The only things I feel comfortable posting here are 2 lines long answers or are answers to post that are left unanswered since several hours. Coming with a thoughtful/insightful answer takes time, but in the mean time you can be sure that 10 mails will have been posted on the thread, posts that you will need to read to make sure you are not making a redundant post or missing an important idea. And often, the subject has drifted so far that such a post would seems by then off-topic compared to the heated posts of that time.
So I think most peoples now remain silent and just try to keep themselves informed but do not voice their opinions as it feels a waste of time.
And I live in England, so the language is not even much a problem for me. Just imagine peoples for which this list is the main daily contact with English language...
Jerome
2008/1/25, Delphine Ménard notafishz@gmail.com:
On Jan 25, 2008 6:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of months, several key issues have been discussed. I notice, however, that most of the discussion is
by
members of the English projects, with the notable exception of Gerard.
In
comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and three and four years ago
on Wikipedia-l
(pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous participation from representatives of other projects. In fact, that is what made Wikipedia
a truly
international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of those discussions have drifted. Is the discussion taking place on chapter lists, at the expense
of the
Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on internal-l, at the expense
of
transparency.
As far as I can make out, neither.
I'd have one explanation though. There comes a point where reading in a language that is not yours, on a list that sprouts an average of 20 emails of more than 2 pages a day, very often on a level of English that is hard to follow, just prevents one, as a non-English speaker, from participating. I consider myself as having a rather good level of English, but sorry, when you get a thread dominated by lengthy English speakers, I just give up.
Apart from that, I find that people who have little to say on a subject, or who actually answer "on the side", are somehow also too present, and answer faster than their shadow [1], often depleting a thread of its substance in the very first emails to veer towards uninteresting side conversations, or even considerations that have nothing to do with the subject at hand. Which, for those who might have something to say about a subject but need a little time to formulate their answer, means that they'd be going back to a dead thread when they're ready to participate.
To summarize: Level of English and fast pace of the list. I would personally not look further for an explanation.
Delphine [1] see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_Luke -- ~notafish http://blog.notanendive.org
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to this address will probably get lost.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I would encourage people who feel this way to set up their mail to ignore those that they find too often heated and/or off-topic. If there is a thread that really interests me, I tend to read it through the archives to make sure I don't miss anything. But even just having two people ignored makes this mailing list a different place. And then maybe it will be easier to reply on-topic as you won't realize so much has been said.
Birgitte SB
--- Jerome Banal jerome.banal@gmail.com wrote:
Seconded.
The only things I feel comfortable posting here are 2 lines long answers or are answers to post that are left unanswered since several hours. Coming with a thoughtful/insightful answer takes time, but in the mean time you can be sure that 10 mails will have been posted on the thread, posts that you will need to read to make sure you are not making a redundant post or missing an important idea. And often, the subject has drifted so far that such a post would seems by then off-topic compared to the heated posts of that time.
So I think most peoples now remain silent and just try to keep themselves informed but do not voice their opinions as it feels a waste of time.
And I live in England, so the language is not even much a problem for me. Just imagine peoples for which this list is the main daily contact with English language...
Jerome
2008/1/25, Delphine Ménard notafishz@gmail.com:
On Jan 25, 2008 6:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com
wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of
months, several key issues
have been discussed. I notice, however, that
most of the discussion is
by
members of the English projects, with the
notable exception of Gerard.
In
comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and
three and four years ago
on Wikipedia-l
(pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous
participation from
representatives of other projects. In fact, that
is what made Wikipedia
a truly
international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of
those discussions have
drifted. Is the discussion taking place on
chapter lists, at the expense
of the
Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on
internal-l, at the expense
of
transparency.
As far as I can make out, neither.
I'd have one explanation though. There comes a
point where reading in
a language that is not yours, on a list that
sprouts an average of 20
emails of more than 2 pages a day, very often on a
level of English
that is hard to follow, just prevents one, as a
non-English speaker,
from participating. I consider myself as having a
rather good level of
English, but sorry, when you get a thread
dominated by lengthy English
speakers, I just give up.
Apart from that, I find that people who have
little to say on a
subject, or who actually answer "on the side", are
somehow also too
present, and answer faster than their shadow [1],
often depleting a
thread of its substance in the very first emails
to veer towards
uninteresting side conversations, or even
considerations that have
nothing to do with the subject at hand. Which, for
those who might
have something to say about a subject but need a
little time to
formulate their answer, means that they'd be going
back to a dead
thread when they're ready to participate.
To summarize: Level of English and fast pace of
the list. I would
personally not look further for an explanation.
Delphine [1] see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_Luke -- ~notafish http://blog.notanendive.org
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists.
Personal emails sent
to this address will probably get lost.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Some people (like me!) may not realize their posting habits to this list make it difficult for others to follow along or contribute constructively. If you see someone who is posting in good faith but may not realize they are exacerbating a problem, the easiest thing to do is to let them know (and then ignore them after!).
Nathan
On Jan 25, 2008 9:49 AM, Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com wrote:
I would encourage people who feel this way to set up their mail to ignore those that they find too often heated and/or off-topic. If there is a thread that really interests me, I tend to read it through the archives to make sure I don't miss anything. But even just having two people ignored makes this mailing list a different place. And then maybe it will be easier to reply on-topic as you won't realize so much has been said.
Birgitte SB
--- Jerome Banal jerome.banal@gmail.com wrote:
Seconded.
The only things I feel comfortable posting here are 2 lines long answers or are answers to post that are left unanswered since several hours. Coming with a thoughtful/insightful answer takes time, but in the mean time you can be sure that 10 mails will have been posted on the thread, posts that you will need to read to make sure you are not making a redundant post or missing an important idea. And often, the subject has drifted so far that such a post would seems by then off-topic compared to the heated posts of that time.
So I think most peoples now remain silent and just try to keep themselves informed but do not voice their opinions as it feels a waste of time.
And I live in England, so the language is not even much a problem for me. Just imagine peoples for which this list is the main daily contact with English language...
Jerome
2008/1/25, Delphine Ménard notafishz@gmail.com:
On Jan 25, 2008 6:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com
wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of
months, several key issues
have been discussed. I notice, however, that
most of the discussion is
by
members of the English projects, with the
notable exception of Gerard.
In
comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and
three and four years ago
on Wikipedia-l
(pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous
participation from
representatives of other projects. In fact, that
is what made Wikipedia
a truly
international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of
those discussions have
drifted. Is the discussion taking place on
chapter lists, at the expense
of the
Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on
internal-l, at the expense
of
transparency.
As far as I can make out, neither.
I'd have one explanation though. There comes a
point where reading in
a language that is not yours, on a list that
sprouts an average of 20
emails of more than 2 pages a day, very often on a
level of English
that is hard to follow, just prevents one, as a
non-English speaker,
from participating. I consider myself as having a
rather good level of
English, but sorry, when you get a thread
dominated by lengthy English
speakers, I just give up.
Apart from that, I find that people who have
little to say on a
subject, or who actually answer "on the side", are
somehow also too
present, and answer faster than their shadow [1],
often depleting a
thread of its substance in the very first emails
to veer towards
uninteresting side conversations, or even
considerations that have
nothing to do with the subject at hand. Which, for
those who might
have something to say about a subject but need a
little time to
formulate their answer, means that they'd be going
back to a dead
thread when they're ready to participate.
To summarize: Level of English and fast pace of
the list. I would
personally not look further for an explanation.
Delphine [1] see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_Luke -- ~notafish http://blog.notanendive.org
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists.
Personal emails sent
to this address will probably get lost.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
____________________________________________________________________________________Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I think the big problem is that some people use threaded e-mail and others do not.
When I was so hated by all for posting so much back in the day, I raised this issue.
For those of us who use Gmail (and other threaded e-mail clients?), someone sending out 3 responses to a thread in rapid succession is not noticeable from our inbox view and cannot be really said to create much clutter.
Having said that - I actually started my Gmail account _for the very purpose_ of subscribing to Wikipedia-l. Prior to that I used a Hotmail account.
People who don't use Gmail should probably stop whining; it's a free service, it is no longer invite-only, and anyone who is subscribed to a high-traffic listserv such as this _should_ be using it or something like it. What's your excuse?
Mark
On 25/01/2008, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Some people (like me!) may not realize their posting habits to this list make it difficult for others to follow along or contribute constructively. If you see someone who is posting in good faith but may not realize they are exacerbating a problem, the easiest thing to do is to let them know (and then ignore them after!).
Nathan
On Jan 25, 2008 9:49 AM, Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com wrote:
I would encourage people who feel this way to set up their mail to ignore those that they find too often heated and/or off-topic. If there is a thread that really interests me, I tend to read it through the archives to make sure I don't miss anything. But even just having two people ignored makes this mailing list a different place. And then maybe it will be easier to reply on-topic as you won't realize so much has been said.
Birgitte SB
--- Jerome Banal jerome.banal@gmail.com wrote:
Seconded.
The only things I feel comfortable posting here are 2 lines long answers or are answers to post that are left unanswered since several hours. Coming with a thoughtful/insightful answer takes time, but in the mean time you can be sure that 10 mails will have been posted on the thread, posts that you will need to read to make sure you are not making a redundant post or missing an important idea. And often, the subject has drifted so far that such a post would seems by then off-topic compared to the heated posts of that time.
So I think most peoples now remain silent and just try to keep themselves informed but do not voice their opinions as it feels a waste of time.
And I live in England, so the language is not even much a problem for me. Just imagine peoples for which this list is the main daily contact with English language...
Jerome
2008/1/25, Delphine Ménard notafishz@gmail.com:
On Jan 25, 2008 6:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com
wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of
months, several key issues
have been discussed. I notice, however, that
most of the discussion is
by
members of the English projects, with the
notable exception of Gerard.
In
comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and
three and four years ago
on Wikipedia-l
(pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous
participation from
representatives of other projects. In fact, that
is what made Wikipedia
a truly
international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of
those discussions have
drifted. Is the discussion taking place on
chapter lists, at the expense
of the
Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on
internal-l, at the expense
ory to keep themselves
informed but do not voice their opinions as it feels a waste of time.
And I live in England, so the language is not even much a problem for me. Just imagine peoples for which this list is the main daily contact with English language...
Jerome
2008/1/25, Delphine Ménard notafishz@gmail.com:
On Jan 25, 2008 6:10 AM, daniwo59@aol.com
wrote:
Looking over this list for the past couple of
months, several key issues
have been discussed. I notice, however, that
most of the discussion is
by
members of the English projects, with the
notable exception of Gerard.
In
comparison, two years ago on Foundation-l and
three and four years ago
on Wikipedia-l
(pre-Foundation-l), there was much more vigorous
participation from
representatives of other projects. In fact, that
is what made Wikipedia
a truly
international organization.
I wonder where so many of the participants of
those discussions have
drifted. Is the discussion taking place on
chapter lists, at the expense
of the
Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on
internal-l, at the expense
of
transparency.
As far as I can make out, neither.
I'd have one explanation though. There comes a
point where reading in
a language that is not yours, on a list that
sprouts an average of 20
emails of more than 2 pages a day, very often on a
level of English
that is hard to follow, just prevents one, as a
non-English speaker,
from participating. I consider myself as having a
rather good level of
English, but sorry, when you get a thread
dominated by lengthy English
speakers, I just give up.
Apart from that, I find that people who have
little to say on a
subject, or who actually answer "on the side", are
somehow also too
present, and answer faster than their shadow [1],
often depleting a
thread of its substance in the very first emails
to veer towards
uninteresting side conversations, or even
considerations that have
nothing to do with the subject at hand. Which, for
those who might
have something to say about a subject but need a
little time to
formulate their answer, means that they'd be going
back to a dead
thread when they're ready to participate.
To summarize: Level of English and fast pace of
tation-l
daniwo59@aol.com writes:
I wonder where so many of the participants of those discussions have drifted. Is the discussion taking place on chapter lists, at the expense of the Foundation umbrella, or is it taking place on internal-l, at the expense of transparency.
Third possibility:
None of the posters to this list read what they are responding to. This produce endless arguments over insubstantial issues, leading to absolutely no results. So if I want something to happen, I take it elsewhere.
This may seem rude. It is meant so. It holds true for a majority of the postings to this list.
I thought this wouldn't be as bad, but when I checked it does indeed seem the case. Looking at the most active posters of last month (December), I counted 41, and checked which Wikipedia should be called their home (I have not checked non-Wikipedia Wikimedia wikis, which at least three (Brian McNeil, Gerard Meijssen and Bryan Tong Minh) are more active on), based on frequency of recent edits.
Of those 41: * 24 had the English wikipedia as their main wikipedia * 7 had another wikipedia as their main language (Daniel Arnold on de:, Lars Aronsson sv:, Luiz Augusto pt:, Milos Rancic sr:, Waerth th:, Yoni Weiden he:, effeietsanders nl:) * 3 were about equally active on en: and some other language (Michael Bimmler de:, Florence Devouard fr:, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen fi:) * 6 I could not identify with a Wikipedia username; 4 of those would probably be en: users judging from their name, the other 2 were unclear * 1 does not really have a home Wikipedia, having the majority of his edits on another project (Gerard Meijssen, counted as nl:)
All in all, English users outnumbered other-language users by 28 to 11 (counting the 3 doubles as other-language and the 6 unknowns as 4 English, 2 not counted). That's slightly over 70% English users, whereas they're less than half of our volunteer population (as far as I know).
As for the reasons, the fact that this list is written in English is an important factor. I myself read and write English quite well, but there will be plenty of contributors who do speak some English, but for whom reading in English is much more tiring than doing so in their own language, and writing English would be even worse.
Having said that, I agree with other writers in this thread (like Notafish) that the high amount of often low-quality or off-topic replies is not a good thing, although I doubt whether it's more of a factor for non-English speaking people. I have been thinking whether it would be possible to get a lower-volume version of this list, but no way of making a selection that would even be a little effective while at the same time not leading to even more heated discussion seems doable.
There are some, like me, who simply do not participate in discussions because they get technical/legal quite often, which is beyond a lot of people, or perhaps just plain boring to them. And there is, of course, the fact that they can often degenerate into heated arguments. I, for one, already have enough of this kind of aggressiveness on-wiki and don't need the added aggravation. (Just for the record, my home wiki is fr:wp, and my maternal languages are English and Spanish.) I still scan the e-mails to see if anything interesting is being said, and reread some threads carefully (as is evidently the case for this one), but these are rare occasions because sometimes both of the above situations apply to a single thread: heated arguments about technical/legal details I know nothing about, or just the basics. Happy editing, --Maria Fanucchi (User:Arria Belli, and "Arria" on IRC.)
On 1/25/08, Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com wrote:
I thought this wouldn't be as bad, but when I checked it does indeed seem the case. Looking at the most active posters of last month (December), I counted 41, and checked which Wikipedia should be called their home (I have not checked non-Wikipedia Wikimedia wikis, which at least three (Brian McNeil, Gerard Meijssen and Bryan Tong Minh) are more active on), based on frequency of recent edits.
Of those 41:
- 24 had the English wikipedia as their main wikipedia
- 7 had another wikipedia as their main language (Daniel Arnold on
de:, Lars Aronsson sv:, Luiz Augusto pt:, Milos Rancic sr:, Waerth th:, Yoni Weiden he:, effeietsanders nl:)
- 3 were about equally active on en: and some other language (Michael
Bimmler de:, Florence Devouard fr:, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen fi:)
- 6 I could not identify with a Wikipedia username; 4 of those would
probably be en: users judging from their name, the other 2 were unclear
- 1 does not really have a home Wikipedia, having the majority of his
edits on another project (Gerard Meijssen, counted as nl:)
All in all, English users outnumbered other-language users by 28 to 11 (counting the 3 doubles as other-language and the 6 unknowns as 4 English, 2 not counted). That's slightly over 70% English users, whereas they're less than half of our volunteer population (as far as I know).
As for the reasons, the fact that this list is written in English is an important factor. I myself read and write English quite well, but there will be plenty of contributors who do speak some English, but for whom reading in English is much more tiring than doing so in their own language, and writing English would be even worse.
Having said that, I agree with other writers in this thread (like Notafish) that the high amount of often low-quality or off-topic replies is not a good thing, although I doubt whether it's more of a factor for non-English speaking people. I have been thinking whether it would be possible to get a lower-volume version of this list, but no way of making a selection that would even be a little effective while at the same time not leading to even more heated discussion seems doable.
-- Andre Engels, andreengels@gmail.com ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Maybe it is just me not being picky, but I personally find the signal to noise ratio on this list quite positive.
Which does not mean I agree with everything on it, nor even consider all messages on it useful contributions, but even useless verbiage can impart useful signal about the state of the general community.
I think it is important to also note that for any given number of readers, what people consider good mailing list content, the selection is likely to widely vary. For my own part, for instance, even though I think we could do with more measured critixism, "negativity" in itself is not a communication category that I would wish to see gone from this list. Nor would I in fact wish to see advocacy and boosterism gone from this channel, even though personally I do not generally such particularly useful additions to the discussion on this list, _for_me_ personally.
This is not a "brainstorming" channel, but a place where we have to look at things in detail, and with discernment.
All in all, English users outnumbered other-language users by 28 to 11 (counting the 3 doubles as other-language and the 6 unknowns as 4 English, 2 not counted). That's slightly over 70% English users, whereas they're less than half of our volunteer population (as far as I know).
Given that this is an English language list, and many WP volunteers do not speak English, this might be not so much surprising. A good thing to check would be a percentage of English users among English-speaking volunteers, but I doubt that such statistics are available.
Cheers, Yaroslav
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org