In the past, this mailing list has been used for discussions of staff
conduct, which I am not sure is the best idea when identifiable people are
involved. I suggest that a first line of approach would be to discuss the
matter civilly with the people directly involved including the employee and
other volunteers, and if that doesn't get results, then go to the
employees' supervisor.
WMF HR has told me in the past that they can also step in with situations
like this.
Pine
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hey, all. Bit of a question, here.
Basically, how does "comment on the content, not the contributor" apply to
staff and contractors? What can we, as volunteers, do when we believe staff
have gone too far (besides create drama on a mailing list)?
In many of our communities, we have a saying: "comment on the content, not
the contributor". When working with others, this is quite useful, and
something we definitely want to remember, because it reminds us to
cooperate and find use for whatever content is good, and it also helps us
to avoid making personal attacks and other generally unhelpful comments
about the people involved that tend not to be relevant to the situation.
Of course, this depends a great deal on the situation itself - this
applies to an edit dispute or a bug report or an RfC about content or
features or what have you, but what about when the contributor IS a
relevant topic? In volunteer circles it generally boils down to a question
- is the contributor causing more trouble than they're worth? If so, an
appropriate committee or whatever can do something sanctiony, and the
situation will be resolved for the time being.
But what if it's not a volunteer? What if it's a staff developer who is
consistently ignoring project consensus and needs, or a team that refuses
to justify their decisions even in light of scrutiny, or a contractor hired
to do something specific and community-facing who won't actually do it, and
on top of that won't let volunteers do the needful either? With a
volunteer, it's often a pretty simple matter to simply remove an individual
or group from a topic or project, but with staff, the situation is a lot
more complicated - not just because they're paid, but also because they
have specific obligations and requirements, as well as the power and
authority the position grants. Volunteers come and go, and answer to other
volunteers. Staff are supposed to do things, and paid to be doing things,
and answer to staff (and also the board and crap, but at the level I'm
talking about it's basically just other staff).
There's a very real disconnect here, and though community liaisons are
supposed to be bridging that gap, this works far better on content projects
than in development, where developers and designers and whatnot need to
communicate with each other, no matter who they are, in order to get things
done. And indeed, most staff here are pretty great about this and you can
totally go right up to them and talk about their work and collaborate and
what have you, but sometimes they aren't. And that's a problem.
So what can we, as volunteers, do in such cases? What are our channels for
bringing up issues with staff, so that we don't just wind up bringing it up
somewhere completely inappropriate, where we really should be commenting on
the content itself?
-I
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>