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 &lt;qgil(a)wikimedia.org&gt; escreveu no dia terça, 18/02/2020 à(s) 10:31: experiment Foundation fill that join Space https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to… _______________________________________________ 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(a)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, &lt;qgil(a)wikimedia.org&gt; wrote: experiment Foundation fill that join Space https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to… _______________________________________________ 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

controllable and a MediaWiki, more 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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 &lt;qgil(a)wikimedia.org&gt; wrote: have of https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space#Next_steps_on_Wikimedi… https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2020-February/094269.html > and replies https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/2699004306814050/ please and in a https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to… _______________________________________________ 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Apparently not if people go there en masse instead of using on-wiki channels.

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(a)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.

Hi, Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 10:31, Todd Allen &lt;toddmallen(a)gmail.com&gt; a écrit : on 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(a)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 &lt;toddmallen(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: gpaumier(a)wikimedia.org&gt; either currently is -- 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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>