Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_... [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
Hello Quim,
I knew this was a possibility, but it still is a big surprise for me that the WMF has not recognized the enormous value and potential of Wikimedia Space, which was a space incredibly more friendlier and easier to use than anything I've ever seen onwiki. As we discussed last November in WikiIndaba, it only needed to be somehow connected to the Wikimedia Projects, so that we could get the notifications there - as a standalone project it's very difficult to follow, since apart from real life we have mail, social networks, chats - and the wikimedia projects constantly draining attention and competing for time.
But... All the investment, all the information shared there, will be lost?
I suspect that after this last debacle of Wikimedia Space, it will be considerably more difficult for people to embark in more new WMF adventures. It was already difficult with this one.
Bad decisions at top level -> lots of money wasted, valuable WMF staff time and expertise wasted... and a lot of volunteer time and expertise, and community goodwill burned for nothing, like if we have plenty of that.
Best, Paulo
Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org escreveu no dia terça, 18/02/2020 à(s) 10:31:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_... [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Quim and Paulo,
Like anything we lose as a movement (see also Wikipedia Zero), I am very sorry for this decision, for those who worked and for those who were comfortable with the platform. I was not, as I am not with Phabricator (despite being a developer). It's a matter of habits and preferences, of course, so my opinion has the same value as someone else who loves them. I don't really know the whole situation (expenses, number of users etc), but I think we shouldn't have the same philosophy as Google, which lets go of products that - not only from a commercial point of view, but in terms of use - they didn't have the turnout expected. We are different and I may be sentimental, but I expect that we keep the projects standing even if we have only one user.
Camelia
-- *Camelia Boban*
*| Java EE Developer |*
*Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation* Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030 *Interwiki Women https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_Women_Collaboration | **Wiki Loves Sport https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Sport | Wiki Loves Fashion https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Fashion* WMIT https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Italia - WMSE https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Sverige - WMAR https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Argentina - WMCH https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CH Member
M. +39 3383385545 camelia.boban@gmail.com *Aissa Technologies* http://aissatechnologies.eu/* | *Twitter https://twitter.com/cameliaboban *|* *LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122* *Wikipedia https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban **| **WikiDonne UG https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne* | *WikiDonne Project https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne *
Il giorno mar 18 feb 2020 alle ore 11:44 Paulo Santos Perneta < paulosperneta@gmail.com> ha scritto:
Hello Quim,
I knew this was a possibility, but it still is a big surprise for me that the WMF has not recognized the enormous value and potential of Wikimedia Space, which was a space incredibly more friendlier and easier to use than anything I've ever seen onwiki. As we discussed last November in WikiIndaba, it only needed to be somehow connected to the Wikimedia Projects, so that we could get the notifications there - as a standalone project it's very difficult to follow, since apart from real life we have mail, social networks, chats - and the wikimedia projects constantly draining attention and competing for time.
But... All the investment, all the information shared there, will be lost?
I suspect that after this last debacle of Wikimedia Space, it will be considerably more difficult for people to embark in more new WMF adventures. It was already difficult with this one.
Bad decisions at top level -> lots of money wasted, valuable WMF staff time and expertise wasted... and a lot of volunteer time and expertise, and community goodwill burned for nothing, like if we have plenty of that.
Best, Paulo
Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org escreveu no dia terça, 18/02/2020 à(s) 10:31:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to
experiment
with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the
Foundation
has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to
fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so
that
we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to
join
us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia
Space
category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_...
[2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Phase V confirmed! -- I hope this means related features (a calendar + forum :) are getting included in mediawiki propre...
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Tue., Feb. 18, 2020, 5:31 a.m. Quim Gil, qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_... [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:49 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Phase V confirmed! -- I hope this means related features (a calendar + forum :) are getting included in mediawiki propre...
🌍🌏🌎🌑
Indeed, it has been a mistake to keep spinning off new discussion platforms, in the hope that the next one will be different and controllable and totally replace everything else. This has been an anti-pattern for a decade. Far better to make a real investment (including both a social and a technical investment) in the actual community platforms based on MediaWiki, where many of the ideas that were developed for Space could be rather more fruitfully applied, and the existing eforts by good people not be put to waste.
Thanks, Richard (User:Pharos)
On Tue., Feb. 18, 2020, 5:31 a.m. Quim Gil, qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to
experiment
with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the
Foundation
has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to
fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so
that
we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to
join
us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia
Space
category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_...
[2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 18 Feb 2020, at 19:53, Pharos pharosofalexandria@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:49 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Phase V confirmed! -- I hope this means related features (a calendar + forum :) are getting included in mediawiki propre...
🌍🌏🌎🌑
Indeed, it has been a mistake to keep spinning off new discussion platforms, in the hope that the next one will be different and controllable and totally replace everything else. This has been an anti-pattern for a decade. Far better to make a real investment (including both a social and a technical investment) in the actual community platforms based on MediaWiki, where many of the ideas that were developed for Space could be rather more fruitfully applied, and the existing eforts by good people not be put to waste.
I completely agree - investing in the core platform the way to go. See you all on-wiki with everyone else?
Thanks, Mike
Thankyou Pharos for expressing the issue so clearly.
In the last 2 days, purely as part of our Wikimedia projects, I have felt /obliged/ to contribute to discussions on Telegram, Twitter, Facebook, Zoom and IRC (and at least 2 other platforms in a passive way). All of these discussion spaces are used by our community to talk about our Wikimedia community issues or to work together in parallel to the normal and more permanent on-wiki talk pages of Wikipedia, Commons, Meta... Honestly, I do not see the point of spinning off a fringe Wikimedia alternate that in practice cannot be expected to match the well tested and well-understood capabilities of the mainstream applications.
Fae
On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 20:18, Michael Peel email@mikepeel.net wrote:
On 18 Feb 2020, at 19:53, Pharos pharosofalexandria@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:49 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Phase V confirmed! -- I hope this means related features (a calendar + forum :) are getting included in mediawiki propre...
🌍🌏🌎🌑
Indeed, it has been a mistake to keep spinning off new discussion platforms, in the hope that the next one will be different and
controllable
and totally replace everything else. This has been an anti-pattern for a decade. Far better to make a real investment (including both a social
and a
technical investment) in the actual community platforms based on
MediaWiki,
where many of the ideas that were developed for Space could be rather
more
fruitfully applied, and the existing eforts by good people not be put to waste.
I completely agree - investing in the core platform the way to go. See you all on-wiki with everyone else?
Thanks, Mike _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
... it has been a mistake to keep spinning off new discussion platforms, in the hope that the next one will be different and controllable and totally replace everything else. This has been an anti-pattern for a decade. Far better to make a real investment (including both a social and a technical investment) in the actual community platforms based on MediaWiki,
Apparently the plan is to try something completely new other than Wikis from scratch:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Rec...
Hello Quim,
Thank you for the information. It was not quite a surprise, as we did not hear much of Space in the last time, and I must confess myself that I only used it in the iniatial phase and somewhat later. I feel sorry for those who invested time and energy in it.
I am interested in a report later, about what worked and what did not work, and maybe why.
Kind regards, Ziko
Am Di., 18. Feb. 2020 um 11:31 Uhr schrieb Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_... [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Thank you Quim for this unfortunate information.
This is surprise for me, as Wikimedia Space is given too little time to evolve. I really like this idea and I remembered when people asked me on conferences what we miss as a movement, I would say that we miss place like *Space* where you can see what others do, to see discussion about everything, to ask ordinary questions, to share some news, to share some beautiful moments as editors. So, this decision for me is wrong. I don`t know who is responsible for this, but they should ask for thoughts/opinions of people on Space and outside of Space and then to decide this kind of decision.
Now, we are back on looking information about what is happening in Wiki-world on your personal will, to search across haotic Meta, to read newsletters that is too long, or to open Facebook, which I personally avoid.
And most importantly, Space for me was a channel that I could rely when I have some problem (especially technical), but I don`t know who is responsible in Foundation, and I would want to ask something without annoying hundreds people on e-mail, so I would share my issue on Space, and someone will help. So, in conclusion, finally something good happens in movement, and Foundation decide to ruined it and kill it on a very beginning.
Toni editor and admin on Macedonian Wikipedia
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 4:14 PM Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Quim,
Thank you for the information. It was not quite a surprise, as we did not hear much of Space in the last time, and I must confess myself that I only used it in the iniatial phase and somewhat later. I feel sorry for those who invested time and energy in it.
I am interested in a report later, about what worked and what did not work, and maybe why.
Kind regards, Ziko
Am Di., 18. Feb. 2020 um 11:31 Uhr schrieb Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to
experiment
with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the
Foundation
has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to
fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so
that
we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to
join
us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia
Space
category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_...
[2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Thank you for all the feedback. After scanning different channels, we have a wide range of opinions which reflect how deep and complex the problem of cross-wiki collaboration is, and also how differently the Space prototype and this decision is being perceived. We will process this feedback and integrate it in the lessons learned. If you have more feedback or questions, please share. This conversation is important.
The channels we are watching:
* https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/3184 * https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space#Next_steps_on_Wikimedia... * https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2020-February/094269.html and replies * https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/2699004306814050/
If you are aware of more conversations related to this announcement, please share them here as well.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:30 AM Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_... [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
I provided feedback previously on Space earlier and I could not find it now but I assume it was taken into consideration when the decision was taken. Without repeating it, let me remark that the two main questions, which remained unsolved, were (i) what is the target audience and (ii) what is the content to be discussed there. For (i), we have many different groups with many different interests. We have project people (editors), active on different projects, we have affiliate people, we have WMF people, there is certain overlap between these categories, but I am afraid not much. They have very different interests and vision. If I understand it correctly, the idea was to bridge the gap between these categories (primarily, between WMF and community), but it did not work - it is understandable that people who never edited Wikipedia and have no interest editing it, do not find a topic on the first Wikipedia contribution very appealing, and those for example who deal with Wikipedia as their daily job are not so keen to discuss the job on social media - I also have an exciting job but I do not have any desire to discuss it anywhere in my free time. Concerning (ii), we have people who were looking for something like social media, just to hang out, we had people who wanted to discuss project and foundation issues which they found important, we had people who were only posting announcements - but I do not think we had general understanding why people should come to Space to discuss, and what they should discuss. There are discussions going on in the projects. Meta started as a cross-product (and cross-language) discussion venue, but now it is essentially dead - I long ago stopped following my watchlist there. The mailing lists are mainly dead or at least half-dead. Understandably, people went to FB and Twitter - they will discover at some point that there are serious privacy issues, and, in addition, this is like Wild West where you are on your own (I had my FB account disabled for alleged copyright violations last year, and there is nothing I can do about it), but before they discover it I am not sure why they should go to any other platform to discuss - what? There might be some room for a social media platform run by WMF, but it should be very well discussed what exactly we expect, what we can provide, and how this can be done. I would recommend a community conversation - not a "community consultation", when a decision has already been taken, and the "consultation" is used to legitimize this decision, but a real brainstorming, and see what the stakeholders are and what they want. I am afraid though that it would be difficult to organize even this brainstorming and collect a sufficient number of responses to make meaningful conclusions.
(There were opinions voiced that the Space would never take off because it is run by WMF who would erase any criticism - well, I have not seen this happening. This would not be my concern at this point.)
Despite my skepticism, I believe that people who were running the Space and people who invested into the Space clearly had good intentions, and whereas things did not work at the end, I would like to thank them - mainly Elena and Quim I guess.
Yaroslav
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:35 PM Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thank you for all the feedback. After scanning different channels, we have a wide range of opinions which reflect how deep and complex the problem of cross-wiki collaboration is, and also how differently the Space prototype and this decision is being perceived. We will process this feedback and integrate it in the lessons learned. If you have more feedback or questions, please share. This conversation is important.
The channels we are watching:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space#Next_steps_on_Wikimedia...
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2020-February/094269.html and replies
https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/2699004306814050/
If you are aware of more conversations related to this announcement, please share them here as well.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:30 AM Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to
experiment
with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the
Foundation
has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to
fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so
that
we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to
join
us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia
Space
category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_...
[2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I don't think anyone had bad intentions. It was just redundant.
Real time communication is on IRC. Asynchronous communication is either on the wiki, preferably, or on the mailing list.
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work just fine.
Todd
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 10:41 AM Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
I provided feedback previously on Space earlier and I could not find it now but I assume it was taken into consideration when the decision was taken. Without repeating it, let me remark that the two main questions, which remained unsolved, were (i) what is the target audience and (ii) what is the content to be discussed there. For (i), we have many different groups with many different interests. We have project people (editors), active on different projects, we have affiliate people, we have WMF people, there is certain overlap between these categories, but I am afraid not much. They have very different interests and vision. If I understand it correctly, the idea was to bridge the gap between these categories (primarily, between WMF and community), but it did not work - it is understandable that people who never edited Wikipedia and have no interest editing it, do not find a topic on the first Wikipedia contribution very appealing, and those for example who deal with Wikipedia as their daily job are not so keen to discuss the job on social media - I also have an exciting job but I do not have any desire to discuss it anywhere in my free time. Concerning (ii), we have people who were looking for something like social media, just to hang out, we had people who wanted to discuss project and foundation issues which they found important, we had people who were only posting announcements - but I do not think we had general understanding why people should come to Space to discuss, and what they should discuss. There are discussions going on in the projects. Meta started as a cross-product (and cross-language) discussion venue, but now it is essentially dead - I long ago stopped following my watchlist there. The mailing lists are mainly dead or at least half-dead. Understandably, people went to FB and Twitter - they will discover at some point that there are serious privacy issues, and, in addition, this is like Wild West where you are on your own (I had my FB account disabled for alleged copyright violations last year, and there is nothing I can do about it), but before they discover it I am not sure why they should go to any other platform to discuss - what? There might be some room for a social media platform run by WMF, but it should be very well discussed what exactly we expect, what we can provide, and how this can be done. I would recommend a community conversation - not a "community consultation", when a decision has already been taken, and the "consultation" is used to legitimize this decision, but a real brainstorming, and see what the stakeholders are and what they want. I am afraid though that it would be difficult to organize even this brainstorming and collect a sufficient number of responses to make meaningful conclusions.
(There were opinions voiced that the Space would never take off because it is run by WMF who would erase any criticism - well, I have not seen this happening. This would not be my concern at this point.)
Despite my skepticism, I believe that people who were running the Space and people who invested into the Space clearly had good intentions, and whereas things did not work at the end, I would like to thank them - mainly Elena and Quim I guess.
Yaroslav
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:35 PM Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thank you for all the feedback. After scanning different channels, we
have
a wide range of opinions which reflect how deep and complex the problem
of
cross-wiki collaboration is, and also how differently the Space prototype and this decision is being perceived. We will process this feedback and integrate it in the lessons learned. If you have more feedback or questions, please share. This conversation is important.
The channels we are watching:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space#Next_steps_on_Wikimedia...
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2020-February/094269.html
and replies
https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/2699004306814050/
If you are aware of more conversations related to this announcement,
please
share them here as well.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:30 AM Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to
experiment
with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation,
and
showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the
Foundation
has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to
fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue
in a
new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so
that
we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to
join
us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia
Space
category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_...
[2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 7:31 PM Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work just fine.
Apparently not if people go there en masse instead of using on-wiki channels.
Yaroslav
Todd
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 10:41 AM Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com wrote:
I provided feedback previously on Space earlier and I could not find it
now
but I assume it was taken into consideration when the decision was taken. Without repeating it, let me remark that the two main questions, which remained unsolved, were (i) what is the target audience and (ii) what is the content to be discussed there. For (i), we have many different groups with many different interests. We have project people (editors), active
on
different projects, we have affiliate people, we have WMF people, there
is
certain overlap between these categories, but I am afraid not much. They have very different interests and vision. If I understand it correctly,
the
idea was to bridge the gap between these categories (primarily, between
WMF
and community), but it did not work - it is understandable that people
who
never edited Wikipedia and have no interest editing it, do not find a
topic
on the first Wikipedia contribution very appealing, and those for example who deal with Wikipedia as their daily job are not so keen to discuss the job on social media - I also have an exciting job but I do not have any desire to discuss it anywhere in my free time. Concerning (ii), we have people who were looking for something like social media, just to hang
out,
we had people who wanted to discuss project and foundation issues which they found important, we had people who were only posting announcements - but I do not think we had general understanding why people should come to Space to discuss, and what they should discuss. There are discussions
going
on in the projects. Meta started as a cross-product (and cross-language) discussion venue, but now it is essentially dead - I long ago stopped following my watchlist there. The mailing lists are mainly dead or at
least
half-dead. Understandably, people went to FB and Twitter - they will discover at some point that there are serious privacy issues, and, in addition, this is like Wild West where you are on your own (I had my FB account disabled for alleged copyright violations last year, and there is nothing I can do about it), but before they discover it I am not sure why they should go to any other platform to discuss - what? There might be
some
room for a social media platform run by WMF, but it should be very well discussed what exactly we expect, what we can provide, and how this can
be
done. I would recommend a community conversation - not a "community consultation", when a decision has already been taken, and the "consultation" is used to legitimize this decision, but a real brainstorming, and see what the stakeholders are and what they want. I am afraid though that it would be difficult to organize even this brainstorming and collect a sufficient number of responses to make meaningful conclusions.
(There were opinions voiced that the Space would never take off because
it
is run by WMF who would erase any criticism - well, I have not seen this happening. This would not be my concern at this point.)
Despite my skepticism, I believe that people who were running the Space
and
people who invested into the Space clearly had good intentions, and
whereas
things did not work at the end, I would like to thank them - mainly Elena and Quim I guess.
Yaroslav
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:35 PM Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thank you for all the feedback. After scanning different channels, we
have
a wide range of opinions which reflect how deep and complex the problem
of
cross-wiki collaboration is, and also how differently the Space
prototype
and this decision is being perceived. We will process this feedback and integrate it in the lessons learned. If you have more feedback or questions, please share. This conversation is important.
The channels we are watching:
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/3184
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space#Next_steps_on_Wikimedia...
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2020-February/094269.html
and replies
https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/2699004306814050/
If you are aware of more conversations related to this announcement,
please
share them here as well.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:30 AM Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to
experiment
with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation,
and
showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this
important
goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the
Foundation
has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues
to
fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue
in a
new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so
that
we may share them with the movement.
To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all
Space
users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps
to
join
us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia
Space
category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_...
[2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
-- Quim Gil (he/him) Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF _______________________________________________ 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@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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Am 19.02.20 um 22:52 Uhr schrieb Yaroslav Blanter:
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work just fine.
Apparently not if people go there en masse instead of using on-wiki channels.
Most people do not go to TwitFaceTube in order to publish something about themselves, but they use the closed channels those services provide. That makes a difference. On-wiki everything is public by default.
Regards, Jürgen.
When we decide to use something other than wikis to help those who don't use wikis, instead of helping those who don't use wikis to use them, how is that not turning our backs on project editor recruitment? Is the problem that people can't use wikis or that they don't yet know how? It just seems like a profound waste to keep building new walled gardens at the expense of onboarding.
Hoi, There are too many places where all kinds of conversations are held. Everyone expects that others make use of their preferred platform. I can use wikis and I am not able to cover all the Wikis where all kinds of conversations are held that may be or may not be of interest to me.
As chaos reigns supreme we decidedly do not communicate well. Even this platform is boycotted by some and some are boycotted from this platform. We are really bad at getting communication going because any and all conversations echo from different points in other directions. Thanks, Gerard
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 10:31, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
When we decide to use something other than wikis to help those who don't use wikis, instead of helping those who don't use wikis to use them, how is that not turning our backs on project editor recruitment? Is the problem that people can't use wikis or that they don't yet know how? It just seems like a profound waste to keep building new walled gardens at the expense of onboarding.
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I think I agree with this. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen Sent: 21 February 2020 15:50 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps on Wikimedia Space
Hoi, There are too many places where all kinds of conversations are held. Everyone expects that others make use of their preferred platform. I can use wikis and I am not able to cover all the Wikis where all kinds of conversations are held that may be or may not be of interest to me.
As chaos reigns supreme we decidedly do not communicate well. Even this platform is boycotted by some and some are boycotted from this platform. We are really bad at getting communication going because any and all conversations echo from different points in other directions. Thanks, Gerard
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 10:31, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
When we decide to use something other than wikis to help those who don't use wikis, instead of helping those who don't use wikis to use them, how is that not turning our backs on project editor recruitment? Is the problem that people can't use wikis or that they don't yet know how? It just seems like a profound waste to keep building new walled gardens at the expense of onboarding.
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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi,
Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 10:31, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com a écrit :
I don't think anyone had bad intentions. It was just redundant.
Real time communication is on IRC. Asynchronous communication is either on the wiki, preferably, or on the mailing list.
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work just fine.
That perspective suffers from a lack of empathy. "The tools we already have" may work for the limited sample of the population who are currently using them. Assuming that that sample is representative is flawed and is a classic example of survivorship bias. If we have learned anything from the Space experiment and from years of strategy discussions, it is that the tools we currently have do not, in fact, work just fine for a large number of people, whose voices are missing from our discussions and content.
+1 to Guillaume’s comment.
Best,
Victoria Coleman
On Feb 19, 2020, at 2:31 PM, Guillaume Paumier gpaumier@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi,
Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 10:31, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com a écrit :
I don't think anyone had bad intentions. It was just redundant.
Real time communication is on IRC. Asynchronous communication is either on the wiki, preferably, or on the mailing list.
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work just fine.
That perspective suffers from a lack of empathy. "The tools we already have" may work for the limited sample of the population who are currently using them. Assuming that that sample is representative is flawed and is a classic example of survivorship bias. If we have learned anything from the Space experiment and from years of strategy discussions, it is that the tools we currently have do not, in fact, work just fine for a large number of people, whose voices are missing from our discussions and content.
-- Guillaume Paumier (he/him) _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Then, they're welcome to pop on in any time. If they choose not to, well, no one can make them. Anyone is able to use those tools.
Todd
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:32 PM Guillaume Paumier gpaumier@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi,
Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 10:31, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com a écrit :
I don't think anyone had bad intentions. It was just redundant.
Real time communication is on IRC. Asynchronous communication is either
on
the wiki, preferably, or on the mailing list.
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work just fine.
That perspective suffers from a lack of empathy. "The tools we already have" may work for the limited sample of the population who are currently using them. Assuming that that sample is representative is flawed and is a classic example of survivorship bias. If we have learned anything from the Space experiment and from years of strategy discussions, it is that the tools we currently have do not, in fact, work just fine for a large number of people, whose voices are missing from our discussions and content.
-- Guillaume Paumier (he/him) _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I've been involved in the movement for ~7 years, took one look at IRC and walked very quickly the other way, having used it 15+ years ago. I'm all for retro, but that was taking it too far. Relying on a tool that has been been haemorrhaging users for years, and golden years are seen as around 20 years ago, seems less than ideal.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:37, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
Then, they're welcome to pop on in any time. If they choose not to, well, no one can make them. Anyone is able to use those tools.
Todd
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:32 PM Guillaume Paumier gpaumier@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi,
Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 10:31, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com a
écrit :
I don't think anyone had bad intentions. It was just redundant.
Real time communication is on IRC. Asynchronous communication is either
on
the wiki, preferably, or on the mailing list.
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work
just
fine.
That perspective suffers from a lack of empathy. "The tools we already have" may work for the limited sample of the population who are currently using them. Assuming that that sample is representative is flawed and is
a
classic example of survivorship bias. If we have learned anything from
the
Space experiment and from years of strategy discussions, it is that the tools we currently have do not, in fact, work just fine for a large
number
of people, whose voices are missing from our discussions and content.
-- Guillaume Paumier (he/him) _______________________________________________ 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I do think that there are benefits in continuing to explore WMF/movement-managed communication tools outside of the onwiki/IRC/mailing list paradigm; we have long known that a lot of voices are excluded from using these channels, and that is not helpful in growing a large, international, multilingual movement. We've also used YouTube for quite a long time, and it has not been particularly problematic, but it's not really a discussion platform, more an information-sharing one. I noticed that Wikimedia Space does have a higher than average concentration of posts from outside the "English speaking" world that simply doesn't happen on Meta.
On the other hand, I also agree that moving "official" communications to platforms outside of the control of the WMF/movement, like Facebook and Twitter, are (for many of us in the movement) very problematic from a privacy perspective, as well as unsatisfactory from an accessibility perspective.
"Onwiki" is a nice concept. The challenge here is that there are 700+ "onwiki" platforms, and only one hypothetically dedicated to inter-project discussions, that being Meta. I would venture to guess that probably 85-90% of Wikimedians either don't know Meta exists as a discussion platform, or have tried to participate in a discussion there only to find that it will often move very fast, is dominated by the English language almost to the point of exclusion, and that their voice is drowned out quickly or they are challenged in a way that makes them feel uncomfortable. It's not helpful to take the "stay out of the kitchen if you can't stand the heat" attitude, as it's neither welcoming nor accepting of other ideas. Meta is also very, very difficult to navigate; even I have considerable difficulty finding material that I know for a fact exists on that platform. And we all know that Meta is not at all good at sharing information and news about what's happening in other projects, or for multiple projects (e.g., several projects in the same language, several Wikisources, etc) to work together.
Wikimedia Space didn't feel like the right fit for us, either. In particular, I found it hard to figure out how to do things (like making hyperlinks) that I've been doing comfortably on other existing platforms for years. But I think it is a worthwhile idea to keep looking for a platform that isn't commercially/externally controlled (thus "selling" the private information of our users) that works for more people. I think we also need to figure out how to support multi-project discussions better without pushing them all out to what is intended to be a global, movement-wide platform (i.e., Meta). Experiments are always worthwhile, as they're opportunities to learn. I will trust that Quim and the rest of the Wikimedia Space team will be summarizing the positives and negatives about this particular experiment.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 17:49, Rebecca O'Neill rebeccanineil@gmail.com wrote:
I've been involved in the movement for ~7 years, took one look at IRC and walked very quickly the other way, having used it 15+ years ago. I'm all for retro, but that was taking it too far. Relying on a tool that has been been haemorrhaging users for years, and golden years are seen as around 20 years ago, seems less than ideal.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:37, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
Then, they're welcome to pop on in any time. If they choose not to, well, no one can make them. Anyone is able to use those tools.
Todd
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:32 PM Guillaume Paumier <
gpaumier@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Hi,
Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 10:31, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com a
écrit :
I don't think anyone had bad intentions. It was just redundant.
Real time communication is on IRC. Asynchronous communication is
either
on
the wiki, preferably, or on the mailing list.
Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work
just
fine.
That perspective suffers from a lack of empathy. "The tools we already have" may work for the limited sample of the population who are
currently
using them. Assuming that that sample is representative is flawed and
is
a
classic example of survivorship bias. If we have learned anything from
the
Space experiment and from years of strategy discussions, it is that the tools we currently have do not, in fact, work just fine for a large
number
of people, whose voices are missing from our discussions and content.
-- Guillaume Paumier (he/him) _______________________________________________ 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- PhD in Digital Media Project Coordinator Wikimedia Community Ireland http://wikimedia.ie She/Her _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Also +1 to Guillaume's comment, I couldn't have said better. A user-friendly forum, like discuss-space is most needed by those, who want to join the movement, whom the WMF wants to attract, not to those who are comfortable with the current solutions.
And IRC being an appropriate real-time platform? It's a serious privacy violation with the IP addresses published. It took me an hour to learn about cloaks (to hide the IP) and find someone, who would add a cloak... how many newbies would do that? IRC also goes against the wiki way with "forgetting" all the history, about which I always had concerns besides that it's very impractical: long-term discussions cannot take place or the user has to be always online...
Aron (Demian)
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 23:32, Guillaume Paumier gpaumier@wikimedia.org wrote:
That perspective suffers from a lack of empathy. "The tools we already
have" may work for the limited sample of the population who are currently using them. Assuming that that sample is representative is flawed and is a classic example of survivorship bias. If we have learned anything from the Space experiment and from years of strategy discussions, it is that the tools we currently have do not, in fact, work just fine for a large number of people, whose voices are missing from our discussions and content.
-- Guillaume Paumier (he/him)
Thank you, Quim Gil and your team all the effort that went into discuss-space. We've seen a great platform being developed. It was far from ready, however, and my impression was we were in a pre-release phase. To add to the lessons learned, let me share my thoughts on this.
From the recurring feedback that the forum did not become part of
contributors' everyday workflow, that groups are still using facebook for similar purposes, we can deduce that a crucial feature-set was missing: integration with our everyday on-wiki workflow. This would include 3 features: * Notifications within Echo. * Automatic listing of active and on-topic discussions on wiki pages (in project namespace mostly). * Including (transcluding) discussions on wiki-pages.
The first one is crucial, the next two "just" very important. If there will be any similar solution in the future, these will be the hard criteria for adoption and success. Without these features the expectation that this forum becomes widely adopted was unfounded: it's still in its infancy and it was judged too early.
The foundation of it - an established forum engine - is solid, any solution that would be chosen in the future would recreate this or similar functionality. That would be a massive endeavour. The WMF devs have their hands full all the time, how would that be possible?
I'm sure the success of such a project hinges on the above critical features. Even if the WMF stops developing these features, nothing is lost: interest from volunteers might be enough to develop some of these features. I've shown interest in one of these, GSoC also will be an opportunity for motivated developers to contribute and grant proposals could be made for the most important features. In true collaborative fashion, the WMF can enable the community to turn this experiment into a fully-featured, integrated product. I believe this is the best path to take, that's in line with the Mid-Term Plan's targets.
On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 11:31, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
While we remain committed to this important goal ...
Given how overwhelming the positive expectations are about this project, I think the best path to take for the WMF is to halt the development, but continue operating the platform and motivate volunteers to get involved with its development. At least that's how I see the ideal role of WMF in our Movement.
The Space blog, which continues to fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home.
A subjective note: I think both the blog and the forum would be more accessible on simpler URLs, I've always found "discuss-space" unusual. Wikimedia Space is a good name for those projects all together but in the URLs I find it confusing.
I would have suggested these URLs instead: * "discuss.wmflabs.org" * or simply "discourse.wmflabs.org" as usual in the free-software community * or "forum.wmflabs.org" (following the KISS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle principle) * "blog.wmflabs.org" * "events.wmflabs.org/calendar" * "events.wmflabs.org/map"
If any of these is released to production, ".wmflabs.org" would be replaced by ".wikimedia.org"
Thank you, Quim for asking feedback from the community.
Aron (Demian)
Agree about the 3 features, have not given sufficient though to the rest yet to comment. Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Aron Manning Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 4:04 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps on Wikimedia Space
Thank you, Quim Gil and your team all the effort that went into discuss-space. We've seen a great platform being developed. It was far from ready, however, and my impression was we were in a pre-release phase. To add to the lessons learned, let me share my thoughts on this.
From the recurring feedback that the forum did not become part of
contributors' everyday workflow, that groups are still using facebook for similar purposes, we can deduce that a crucial feature-set was missing: integration with our everyday on-wiki workflow. This would include 3 features: * Notifications within Echo. * Automatic listing of active and on-topic discussions on wiki pages (in project namespace mostly). * Including (transcluding) discussions on wiki-pages.
The first one is crucial, the next two "just" very important. If there will be any similar solution in the future, these will be the hard criteria for adoption and success. Without these features the expectation that this forum becomes widely adopted was unfounded: it's still in its infancy and it was judged too early.
The foundation of it - an established forum engine - is solid, any solution that would be chosen in the future would recreate this or similar functionality. That would be a massive endeavour. The WMF devs have their hands full all the time, how would that be possible?
I'm sure the success of such a project hinges on the above critical features. Even if the WMF stops developing these features, nothing is lost: interest from volunteers might be enough to develop some of these features. I've shown interest in one of these, GSoC also will be an opportunity for motivated developers to contribute and grant proposals could be made for the most important features. In true collaborative fashion, the WMF can enable the community to turn this experiment into a fully-featured, integrated product. I believe this is the best path to take, that's in line with the Mid-Term Plan's targets.
On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 11:31, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
While we remain committed to this important goal ...
Given how overwhelming the positive expectations are about this project, I think the best path to take for the WMF is to halt the development, but continue operating the platform and motivate volunteers to get involved with its development. At least that's how I see the ideal role of WMF in our Movement.
The Space blog, which continues to fill
a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a new home.
A subjective note: I think both the blog and the forum would be more accessible on simpler URLs, I've always found "discuss-space" unusual. Wikimedia Space is a good name for those projects all together but in the URLs I find it confusing.
I would have suggested these URLs instead: * "discuss.wmflabs.org" * or simply "discourse.wmflabs.org" as usual in the free-software community * or "forum.wmflabs.org" (following the KISS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle principle) * "blog.wmflabs.org" * "events.wmflabs.org/calendar" * "events.wmflabs.org/map"
If any of these is released to production, ".wmflabs.org" would be replaced by ".wikimedia.org"
Thank you, Quim for asking feedback from the community.
Aron (Demian) _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org