A new policy should always be announced on foundation-l; forwarding.
MZMcBride
------ Forwarded Message From: Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org Organization: Wikimedia Foundation Reply-To: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 16:30:07 -0800 To: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] proposed tech conference anti-harassment policy
Thanks to all of you for your feedback on this. We've now finalized the policy and it now lives at
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Friendly_space_policy
Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
Thanks to all of you for your feedback on this. We've now finalized the policy and it now lives at
I don't think the Volunteer Development Coordinator (or any Wikimedia Foundation employee) has the power or authority to institute policies like this, particularly Wikimedia-wide.
I'm inclined to move this into Sumana's user space for now. It seems like a straightforward policy to have, so it shouldn't be too much trouble to have an accompanying Board resolution, though some of the language will undoubtedly need to be tweaked first.
Thoughts?
MZMcBride
On Jan 21, 2012 2:33 PM, "MZMcBride" z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
Thanks to all of you for your feedback on this. We've now finalized the policy and it now lives at
I don't think the Volunteer Development Coordinator (or any Wikimedia Foundation employee) has the power or authority to institute policies like this, particularly Wikimedia-wide.
I'm inclined to move this into Sumana's user space for now. It seems like
a
straightforward policy to have, so it shouldn't be too much trouble to
have
an accompanying Board resolution, though some of the language will undoubtedly need to be tweaked first.
Thoughts?
If a policy makes good sense, we clearly need it, and feedback about the text is mostly positive, then we should adopt it. Rejecting a good idea because of process wonkery is stupid.
Sumana is not declaring that she gets to force arbitrary rules on everyone whenever she wants. She is solving a problem for us.
MZMcBride
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 21 January 2012 22:50, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
If a policy makes good sense, we clearly need it, and feedback about the text is mostly positive, then we should adopt it. Rejecting a good idea because of process wonkery is stupid.
+1
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
On 21 January 2012 22:50, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
If a policy makes good sense, we clearly need it, and feedback about the text is mostly positive, then we should adopt it. Rejecting a good idea because of process wonkery is stupid.
+1
David, I'm a bit surprised that you think a policy that includes the language "Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue or talks." is a good idea. I think it'd be difficult to have a discussion about Wikimedia Commons with a rule like this. Was this what you were +1ing?
MZMcBride
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 2:57 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
I think it'd be difficult to have a discussion about Wikimedia Commons with a rule like this.
Right now, the policy is pretty much framed around technical events like hackathons, because that was what motivated its creation. In that context, explicit presentation content is definitely an edge case. It's less of an edge case for general Wikimedia events.
There have been efforts to generalize these kinds of policies by stating that explicit content is acceptable if it fits the content and the purpose of the presentation, and if the presentation is clearly marked as such so that attendees can choose not to go. I think we should try to find some language to that effect for a generalized version of the friendly space policy.
Erik
1]On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 2:57 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
David, I'm a bit surprised that you think a policy that includes the language "Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue or talks." is a good idea. I think it'd be difficult to have a discussion about Wikimedia Commons with a rule like this. Was this what you were +1ing?
MZMcBride
This is purely a policy for tech conferences. Other types of events, such as GLAM conferences are developing their own versions which have different language as appropriate.[1] It is certainly possible to discuss technical issues surrounding Commons without using porny presentations.[2]
1. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAMcamp_DC/Friendly_space_policy 2. http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Porny_presentation
Ryan Kaldari
On 21 January 2012 22:57, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
David, I'm a bit surprised that you think a policy that includes the language "Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue or talks." is a good idea. I think it'd be difficult to have a discussion about Wikimedia Commons with a rule like this. Was this what you were +1ing?
DFTT.
- d.
Steven Walling wrote:
If a policy makes good sense, we clearly need it, and feedback about the text is mostly positive, then we should adopt it. Rejecting a good idea because of process wonkery is stupid.
Really? Does this apply to discussions on any Wikimedia wiki at any time with any group of people? This way forward certainly has the potential to create some interesting policies. :-)
MZMcBride
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 05:54:34PM -0500, MZMcBride wrote:
Steven Walling wrote:
If a policy makes good sense, we clearly need it, and feedback about the text is mostly positive, then we should adopt it. Rejecting a good idea because of process wonkery is stupid.
Really? Does this apply to discussions on any Wikimedia wiki at any time with any group of people? This way forward certainly has the potential to create some interesting policies. :-)
I thought this approach had never really been deprecated. (Just under-used in recent years)
Stealing procedure from a different well-known venue: "Without objection, I move that this become policy."
sincerely, Kim Bruning
MZMcBride, 21/01/2012 23:32:
Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
Thanks to all of you for your feedback on this. We've now finalized the policy and it now lives at
I don't think the Volunteer Development Coordinator (or any Wikimedia Foundation employee) has the power or authority to institute policies like this, particularly Wikimedia-wide.
It's basically statement of obvious (for us, but not for everyone) principles plus some self-regulation, so I don't see any problem besides a lack of clarity which might make wmfwiki quite confusing.
Nemo
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:32 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
Thanks to all of you for your feedback on this. We've now finalized the policy and it now lives at
Thank you for working on this, Sumana.
I don't think the Volunteer Development Coordinator (or any Wikimedia Foundation employee) has the power or authority to institute policies like this, particularly Wikimedia-wide.
Perhaps you misread the width of this policy. Staff can and generally do set policies affecting WMF-run processes and events. Most have not to date been recorded on the wmfwiki; it is good to see that change.
I'm inclined to move this into Sumana's user space for now. It seems like a straightforward policy to have, so it shouldn't be too much trouble to have an accompanying Board resolution, though some of the language will undoubtedly need to be tweaked first.
It is fine where it is.
As for the right place to post comments or suggestions related to such policies: we should turn on comments for the talk pages on the wmfwiki. Most if not all of the pages there could use some sort of polishing and updating over time.
Sam.
I fully supported this policy's development and feel volunteers impacted by it were directly involved in its authoring.
Should the intro be modified to make it clearer this is for tech conferences? Although I personally didn't find that confusing.
MZMcBride - I guess I'm unclear what the purpose of this thread is. Just a FYI or are you asking for something specific to be done? I'm not sure how you got confused about its scope given the listserv you forwarded this from which outlined all this in great depth already.
A separate discussion - not on this thread - about similar or broader policies for use outside the Wikimedia developer community seems appropriate and I'd agree this list is the right forum for that discussion. I don't think it's the best place for a discussion on this particular policy.
-Greg
____________ Sent from my iPhone. Apologies for any typos. A more detailed response may be sent later.
On Jan 21, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:32 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
Thanks to all of you for your feedback on this. We've now finalized the policy and it now lives at
Thank you for working on this, Sumana.
I don't think the Volunteer Development Coordinator (or any Wikimedia Foundation employee) has the power or authority to institute policies like this, particularly Wikimedia-wide.
Perhaps you misread the width of this policy. Staff can and generally do set policies affecting WMF-run processes and events. Most have not to date been recorded on the wmfwiki; it is good to see that change.
I'm inclined to move this into Sumana's user space for now. It seems like a straightforward policy to have, so it shouldn't be too much trouble to have an accompanying Board resolution, though some of the language will undoubtedly need to be tweaked first.
It is fine where it is.
As for the right place to post comments or suggestions related to such policies: we should turn on comments for the talk pages on the wmfwiki. Most if not all of the pages there could use some sort of polishing and updating over time.
Sam.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Mr. Gregory Varnum, 22/01/2012 00:33:
MZMcBride - I guess I'm unclear what the purpose of this thread is. Just a FYI or are you asking for something specific to be done? I'm not sure how you got confused about its scope given the listserv you forwarded this from which outlined all this in great depth already.
You seem to assume that everybody reading that page will come from such a thread, but it's in the main space and linked from https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Policies , so this is definitely not the case.
Nemo
So then perhaps we should modify the intro as I suggested below. :) Right now the intro says "and applies to Foundation-organized activities." - what's a wording that would be more helpful to folks?
Also, I don't assume everyone is - I was speaking to MZMcBride.
-greg
On Jan 21, 2012, at 6:59 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Mr. Gregory Varnum, 22/01/2012 00:33:
MZMcBride - I guess I'm unclear what the purpose of this thread is. Just a FYI or are you asking for something specific to be done? I'm not sure how you got confused about its scope given the listserv you forwarded this from which outlined all this in great depth already.
You seem to assume that everybody reading that page will come from such a thread, but it's in the main space and linked from https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Policies , so this is definitely not the case.
Nemo
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Actually, what is WMF technical events specifically? It would be helpful to mention what those are.
Would this bleed over to Wikimania? That is the largest conference WMF organizes. It is a bit unclear about the scope. It states that it applies to "Foundation-organized activities" and then "Wikimedia Foundation technical events". I assume Foundation-organized activities have a much larger scope than technical events like Hackathons.
Regards Theo
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Gregory Varnum gregory.varnum@gmail.comwrote:
So then perhaps we should modify the intro as I suggested below. :) Right now the intro says "and applies to Foundation-organized activities."
- what's a wording that would be more helpful to folks?
Also, I don't assume everyone is - I was speaking to MZMcBride.
-greg
On Jan 21, 2012, at 6:59 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Mr. Gregory Varnum, 22/01/2012 00:33:
MZMcBride - I guess I'm unclear what the purpose of this thread is.
Just a FYI or are you asking for something specific to be done? I'm not sure how you got confused about its scope given the listserv you forwarded this from which outlined all this in great depth already.
You seem to assume that everybody reading that page will come from such
a thread, but it's in the main space and linked from https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Policies , so this is definitely not the case.
Nemo
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Theo10011 de10011@gmail.com wrote:
Would this bleed over to Wikimania? That is the largest conference WMF organizes.
Strictly speaking, Wikimania is organized by a local organizing team/entity (which, in recent years, has always been a chapter) rather than by the WMF, so the Foundation's event policies wouldn't necessarily apply unless they were put into place by the local entity as well.
As far as I'm aware, the Foundation hasn't (yet?) asked Wikimedia DC to put this particular policy into effect for Wikimania 2012.
Cheers, Kirill
-- Kirill Lokshin Secretary | Wikimedia District of Columbia http://wikimediadc.org | @wikimediadc
On 01/21/2012 11:13 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
"[…] regardless of […] preferred Creative Commons license […]"
I use the GNU General Public License v3 / GNU Free Documentation License v1.3, as commanded by Saint IGNUcius, you insensitive clod!
Unfree licenses such as CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC or worst of all CC-BY-NC-ND shall perish! Freedom prevails!
-- User:Church of emacs
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org