Gatto Nero wrote:
2007/1/3, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net:
Part of the problem is a lack of resources, both human and technical, in the communications area as much as in any other. That sort of thing is, of course, exactly what this fundraiser is trying to address.
I'm sorry, 'cause of language differences maybe I've not understood: are you saying that "lack of resources" is one of the reasons why are we collecting money?
Yes.
This means, "people needs to be payed"? (I'm asking, 'cause I'm not sure, that's not an accusation)
See "human and technical" above. There's a need for servers, and there's a need to hire staff to do the things that volunteers can't, won't, or aren't trained to do.
In the recent past, I remember a user answering to me and other italians "Communities doesn't matter. Funding does. Capisce?". How does this phrase should be interpreted? Let's think about a new user who's starting to communicate with the Foundation, and he's been answered in this way. Obviously, I don't think this is an isolated case.
I don't know who said it or how it was intended to be interpreted. At face value, it's certainly not an appropriate expression of the Foundation's position. However, I'm surprised that you would take a random comment like this, that sounds like it was made on IRC, as an authoritative statement. A "new user" who wants to "communicate with the Foundation" is looking in entirely the wrong place there, and I'm not sure how a truly new user would receive such an answer (as opposed to someone used to getting information passed by word of mouth in a chat room). As I mentioned with regard to OTRS, good customer service skills are expected, and we do work with new volunteers so they understand not to give such inappropriate responses.
As far as I remember, I have no memories at all of reading a communication "signed" by the CommComm. Better: I have no memories at all of reading a communicaton about Foundation's issues or problem.
The former may not be surprising, although there have been some (like http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/htdig/foundation-l/2006-June/007393.html). In part, the Communications Committee has been involved in coordinating messages that do not necessarily come with its "signature", like the material surrounding the closure of the French Wikiquote. Meanwhile, if you've been subscribed to this list, and truly have no memory of reading communications about the Foundation's issues, I really can't help you with that.
Why has there not been a periodical mail/message/zine/whatever summarizing what's going the Foundation?
Lack of time, attention, and resources. Anyone who wants to try to resurrect the Wikimedia Quarto or do something similar is welcome to. There have been lots of suggestions about things Wikimedia could be doing, many of them useful, both as to communications and other issues. These are nice, but simply adding more tasks to an already overloaded to-do list doesn't produce a lot of progress. That's why we're asking for help. We need more people like Improv or BirgitteSB, who are willing to take a good idea and implement it. Ideas are cheap compared to action.
--Michael Snow
On 03/01/07, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net wrote:
Lack of time, attention, and resources. Anyone who wants to try to resurrect the Wikimedia Quarto or do something similar is welcome to. There have been lots of suggestions about things Wikimedia could be doing, many of them useful, both as to communications and other issues. These are nice, but simply adding more tasks to an already overloaded to-do list doesn't produce a lot of progress. That's why we're asking for help. We need more people like Improv or BirgitteSB, who are willing to take a good idea and implement it. Ideas are cheap compared to action.
A mailing list for the weekly digests might be good.
- d.
On 03/01/07, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net wrote:
In the recent past, I remember a user answering to me and other italians "Communities doesn't matter. Funding does. Capisce?". How does this phrase should be interpreted? Let's think about a new user who's starting to communicate with the Foundation, and he's been answered in this way. Obviously, I don't think this is an isolated case.
I don't know who said it or how it was intended to be interpreted. At face value, it's certainly not an appropriate expression of the Foundation's position. However, I'm surprised that you would take a random comment like this, that sounds like it was made on IRC, as an authoritative statement.
It was indeed made on IRC, if my memory serves, during an extensive multisided argument in #wikimedia which had been going on for an hour or two. Can't quite remember who said it, but it was one comment among many and it certainly wasn't The Foundation Line...
2007/1/3, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net:
I'm sorry, 'cause of language differences maybe I've not understood: are you saying that "lack of resources" is one of the reasons why are we collecting money?
Yes.
This means, "people needs to be payed"? (I'm asking, 'cause I'm not sure, that's not an accusation)
See "human and technical" above. There's a need for servers, and there's a need to hire staff to do the things that volunteers can't, won't, or aren't trained to do.
Oh My God. Question: who is *not* going to be payed? Only editors? (The ones that made wiki so big)
In the recent past, I remember a user answering to me and other italians "Communities doesn't matter. Funding does. Capisce?". How does this phrase should be interpreted? Let's think about a new user who's starting to communicate with the Foundation, and he's been answered in this way. Obviously, I don't think this is an isolated case.
I don't know who said it or how it was intended to be interpreted. At face value, it's certainly not an appropriate expression of the Foundation's position. However, I'm surprised that you would take a random comment like this, that sounds like it was made on IRC, as an authoritative statement. A "new user" who wants to "communicate with the Foundation" is looking in entirely the wrong place there, and I'm not sure how a truly new user would receive such an answer (as opposed to someone used to getting information passed by word of mouth in a chat room). As I mentioned with regard to OTRS, good customer service skills are expected, and we do work with new volunteers so they understand not to give such inappropriate responses.
I'll respond to this in another mail, cause it's a little more complicated than how you draw it.
...if you've been subscribed to this list, and truly have no memory of reading communications about the Foundation's issues, I really can't help you with that.
Maybe you can't help me, but you should be worried about it. "Receiving" is one of the most important element of the communication. It *is* the most important element. A communication which's not received, is a communication which has failed. If theres' no receveing, there's no communication. There's one of the first things learned by a communicator. What you should do is wondering "Why has he not memories of CommComm comunication at all?"
Ideas are cheap compared to action.
Oh, ok. I'm cheap.
Speaking seriously: it's funny. I made a long intervention explaining why perception is important in communication (and that's why we should not have had advertising on wiki), but noone seemed to have read it. Communication, withous receveing.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org