There has been recent discussion about Wikimedia-l communications. I think that there are varying understandings that would benefit from discussion in a distinct thread.
The information page for Wikimedia-l says:
*"Discussion list for the Wikimedia community and the larger network of organizations (Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/, chapter organizations http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Local_chapters, affiliates, partners) supporting its work. *
*This mailing list can, for example, be used for: *
- *The initial planning phase of potential new Wikimedia projects and initiatives * - *Organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations, others * - *Discussing the setup of local Wikimedia chapters * - *Developing and evaluating grant-making programs * - *Planning elections, polls and votes * - *Discussion of projects that don't already have a mailing list * - *Finding ways to raise funds * - *Other Wikimedia-related issues *
* This is a high traffic mailing list. The list is moderated, and is publicly archived. Participants are asked to remain civil and stay on topic. There is a soft post limit of 30 posts per individual/month."*
I think some of the mixed expectations are coming from a few places, which I'd like to try to address. I want to emphasize that this is my perspective only, and others may wish to share varying perspectives.
1. I'm happy to hear that Board members want to be responsive to community questions and comments. However, my impression is that a few Board members are feeling obligated to check the list constantly. I feel that that's unnecessary. Checking the list twice a week is probably fine, and I'm grateful for the responsiveness of Board members to community input.
2. Likewise, WMF staff don't need to feel obligated to check the list on a daily basis, let alone be constantly reading every email that comes across the list. Many staff don't need to subscribe to the list at all. For most comments or questions that are directed to staff, I think that a response within 7 days should be the expectation.
3. I encouraged Lila, and would still encourage WMF, to appoint an employee to be responsible for ensuring that questions and comments from the many community channels are referred to appropriate places in WMF. This would reduce the burden on WMF staff to monitor multiple channels. Multiple channels are inevitable; Wikimedia-l happens to be one of the higher traffic channels. My impression is that the community product liaisons already do this kind of work for technical questions and comments, and I think that a similar arrangement should be made for questions and comments about other subjects.
4. I share the concern that low-volume individuals may feel too intimidated to post on the mailing list, and I would welcome ideas about how to encourage them to speak up more often with well-intentioned questions and comments.
5. I would encourage us to experiment with Discourse ( https://www.discourse.org/faq/) to see if it will provide a platform that is easier to use than our current mailing list setup. Perhaps we could set up a test instance and move a small number of lists there, and evaluate how those go. If the tests go well then we could consider moving progressively higher traffic mailing lists to Discourse.
I'd welcome hearing from other people about these points. This is a public list that's intended for high traffic, and I hope that anyone with a well-intentioned comment or question will feel that it's okay to speak up with their perspectives.
Thanks,
Pine (writing in personal capacity only)
A couple of other points:
1. This list is practically English-only. It's not officially defined, and occasionally people say that posting in other languages is allowed. In practice it doesn't work, and it cannot work—mixing different languages in one list is just wrong. And it's not even a problem as long as people remember point #2:
2. Most people in Wikimedia projects write in other languages, and a lot of them—probably the majority—don't even know English. Most of them don't know this list exist, and if they knew it exists, almost none of them would participate in it. Even the biggest discussions that happen here, like the early 2016 WMF management storm, are complete mystery to most people who actually write on the projects. The information is not intentionally hidden by anybody, but in actuality it reaches very few of the projects' contributors, so the result is the same. Even if it reaches several hundreds of people, it is still a minority.
This list has developed its own culture long ago. It is related to the wider Wikimedia culture, but it does not represent all of it. I am not even saying that it should be changed—that's a separate question. It must, however, be acknowledged and understood.
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
2016-07-28 7:14 GMT+03:00 Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com:
There has been recent discussion about Wikimedia-l communications. I think that there are varying understandings that would benefit from discussion in a distinct thread.
The information page for Wikimedia-l says:
*"Discussion list for the Wikimedia community and the larger network of organizations (Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/, chapter organizations http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Local_chapters, affiliates, partners) supporting its work. *
*This mailing list can, for example, be used for: *
*The initial planning phase of potential new Wikimedia projects and initiatives *
*Organizational issues of the Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations, others *
*Discussing the setup of local Wikimedia chapters *
*Developing and evaluating grant-making programs *
*Planning elections, polls and votes *
*Discussion of projects that don't already have a mailing list *
*Finding ways to raise funds *
*Other Wikimedia-related issues *
- This is a high traffic mailing list. The list is moderated, and is
publicly archived. Participants are asked to remain civil and stay on topic. There is a soft post limit of 30 posts per individual/month."*
I think some of the mixed expectations are coming from a few places, which I'd like to try to address. I want to emphasize that this is my perspective only, and others may wish to share varying perspectives.
- I'm happy to hear that Board members want to be responsive to community
questions and comments. However, my impression is that a few Board members are feeling obligated to check the list constantly. I feel that that's unnecessary. Checking the list twice a week is probably fine, and I'm grateful for the responsiveness of Board members to community input.
- Likewise, WMF staff don't need to feel obligated to check the list on a
daily basis, let alone be constantly reading every email that comes across the list. Many staff don't need to subscribe to the list at all. For most comments or questions that are directed to staff, I think that a response within 7 days should be the expectation.
- I encouraged Lila, and would still encourage WMF, to appoint an employee
to be responsible for ensuring that questions and comments from the many community channels are referred to appropriate places in WMF. This would reduce the burden on WMF staff to monitor multiple channels. Multiple channels are inevitable; Wikimedia-l happens to be one of the higher traffic channels. My impression is that the community product liaisons already do this kind of work for technical questions and comments, and I think that a similar arrangement should be made for questions and comments about other subjects.
- I share the concern that low-volume individuals may feel too intimidated
to post on the mailing list, and I would welcome ideas about how to encourage them to speak up more often with well-intentioned questions and comments.
- I would encourage us to experiment with Discourse (
https://www.discourse.org/faq/) to see if it will provide a platform that is easier to use than our current mailing list setup. Perhaps we could set up a test instance and move a small number of lists there, and evaluate how those go. If the tests go well then we could consider moving progressively higher traffic mailing lists to Discourse.
I'd welcome hearing from other people about these points. This is a public list that's intended for high traffic, and I hope that anyone with a well-intentioned comment or question will feel that it's okay to speak up with their perspectives.
Thanks,
Pine (writing in personal capacity only) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 28 July 2016 at 06:00, Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
mixing different languages in one list is just wrong
D'accord!
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
- I would encourage us to experiment with Discourse (
https://www.discourse.org/faq/) to see if it will provide a platform that is easier to use than our current mailing list setup. Perhaps we could set up a test instance and move a small number of lists there, and evaluate how those go. If the tests go well then we could consider moving progressively higher traffic mailing lists to Discourse.
https://discourse.wmflabs.org/
It's been up for awhile now, came about from a conversation on this list. No idea how much traffic it's getting.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org