Hi,
thanks for sharing the IdeaLab portal. [1] I didn't know it, although
I knew portals and individual inside him, like the Individual
Engagement Grants. I don't have time now to make longer comments, but
two questions:
1) Is there a possibility for thie committee to be more open, like the
WMF grants program? [2]
2) Isn't time for we think out of the box, I mean, out of the wiki and
try technologies that can foster the community evaluation of
projetcs/idea and discussions? I know the question is too general, but
recently, for isntance, I thought about using a reddit like system for
the Portuguese Wikipedia village pump for the community distringuish
try to distinguish what is good or not. I mentioned something like All
Our Ideas once <http://www.allourideas.org/>, but I think there are
other things worth trying, if possible.
P. S. Just look the discussion system inside a wiki. Damn.
Tom
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Index
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Jessie Wild <jwild(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Any initial thoughts on how to maximize the effectiveness of those two
> ideas (IdeaLab and Learning Portal)?
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful
than a life spent doing nothing."
http://blogs.estadao.com.br/link/wikimedia-brasil-abre-vagas-para-projeto-c…
A competição pelo manto sagrado deverá estar a altura de quem vos
deixa. :P #brincadeirinha
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
useful than a life spent doing nothing."
Henrique Andrade
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sue Gardner <sgardner(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:04 PM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement *please read*
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Hello Wikimedia community members,
This is not an easy e-mail to write, and it’s been a very hard
decision to make. But I’m writing to tell you that I’m planning to
leave my position as the Executive Director of the Wikimedia
Foundation.
My departure isn’t imminent -- the Board and I anticipate it’ll take
at least six months to recruit my successor, and I’ll be fully engaged
as Executive Director all through the recruitment process and until we
have a new person in place. We’re expecting that’ll take about six
months or so, and so this note is not goodbye -- not yet.
Making the decision to leave hasn’t been easy, but it comes down to two
things.
First, the movement and the Wikimedia Foundation are in a strong place
now. When I joined, the Foundation was tiny and not yet able to
reliably support the projects. Today it's healthy, thriving, and a
competent partner to the global network of Wikimedia volunteers. If
that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t feel okay to leave. In that sense, my
leaving is a vote of confidence in our Board and executive team and
staff --- I know they will ably steer the Foundation through the years
ahead, and I’m confident the Board will appoint a strong successor to
me.
And I feel that although we’re in good shape, with a promising future,
the same isn’t true for the internet itself. (This is thing number
two.) Increasingly, I’m finding myself uncomfortable about how the
internet’s developing, who’s influencing its development, and who is
not. Last year we at Wikimedia raised an alarm about SOPA/PIPA, and
now CISPA is back. Wikipedia has experienced censorship at the hands
of industry groups and governments, and we’re --increasingly, I
think-- seeing important decisions made by unaccountable
non-transparent corporate players, a shift from the open web to mobile
walled gardens, and a shift from the production-based internet to one
that’s consumption-based. There are many organizations and individuals
advocating for the public interest online -- what’s good for ordinary
people -- but other interests are more numerous and powerful than they
are. I want that to change. And that’s what I want to do next.
I’ve always aimed to make the biggest contribution I can to the
general public good. Today, this is pulling me towards a new and
different role, one very much aligned with Wikimedia values and
informed by my experiences here, and with the purpose of amplifying
the voices of people advocating for the free and open internet. I
don’t know exactly what this will look like -- I might write a book,
or start a non-profit, or work in partnership with something that
already exists. Either way, I feel strongly that this is what I need
to do.
I feel an increasing sense of urgency around this. That said, I also
feel a strong sense of responsibility (and love!) for the Wikimedia
movement, and so I’ve agreed with the Board that I’ll stay on as
Executive Director until we have my successor in place. That’ll take
some time -- likely, at least six months.
Until then, nothing changes. The Wikimedia Foundation has lots of work
to do, and you can expect me to focus fully on it until we have a new
Executive Director in place.
I have many people to thank, but I’m not going to do it now --
there’ll be time for that later. For now, I’ll just say I love working
with you all, I’m proud of everything the Wikimedia movement is
accomplishing, and I’m looking forward to our next six months
together.
Jan-Bart’s going to write a note in a couple of minutes with
information about the transition process. We’ll be hosting office
hours this weekend as well, so anybody with questions can ask them
here or turn up to talk with us on IRC.
Thanks,
Sue
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Muito boa a iniciativa. Parabéns aos hermanos! Podíamos contatá-los para
tentar fazer no Brasil. Abraços! Tom
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:50 PM
Subject: [Gendergap] Wikicontest in Spanish Wikipedia about Latin women
To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects <
gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Leigh, a WikiWoman, sent this my way..for our Spanish speaking Wikipedians:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiconcurso/edici%C3%B3n_23
-Sarah
--
*Sarah Stierch*
*Museumist and open culture advocate*
>>Visit sarahstierch.com <http://sarahstierch.com><<
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful
than a life spent doing nothing."
Pessoal,
alguém conhecia?
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab
Apesar de ser wiki, parece interessante.
Em tempo, recomendo o tópico original também:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-March/124809.html
Tom
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jessie Wild <jwild(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>, Siko Bouterse
<sbouterse(a)wikimedia.org>
Hey all -
I have been really curious about this thread, and thanks to all of you for
the thoughts and participation. I am in full agreement that we need to have
better movement-wide shared lessons and accountability: I think this should
include most particularly all places receiving movement funding resources
(WMF, chapters, other grant recipients, etc.).
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:14 AM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequers(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> If we truly want to learn from these two, I would suggest running an
> election on meta where editors can lobby for the next initiative. This is
> what I'd hoed that the Strategy wiki would foster, and it might have done
> if the Strategy debate had been on Meta rather than hidden on a separate
> wiki made more complex by liquid threads. Maybe the result would be Global
> watchlists, maybe it would be software changes to resolve more edit
> conflicts without losing edits (both currently languishing as low
> priorities in Bugzilla). The important thing is that the resulting
> initiative would be likely to make a positive difference to the project
and
> unlikely to share the fate of liquid threads, the IEP or the AFT.
>
I have been thinking about something like this too. Siko Bouterse - who is
leading the Individual Engagement Grants (IEG, not to be confused with
IEP!) set up a page a few months ago with the goal of idea generation for
projects within the broader community:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab
I see this as having a lot of potential for thinking critically and
communally about ideas before execution begins -- the challenge, of course,
will be maintaining the right balance of applying lessons-learned and
fostering innovation!
The other thing I am gearing to get up and running is a learning/evaluation
space on meta where these conversations can happen: case studies be posted,
learnings captured, tools for evaluation shared, projects prioritized, etc.
It would be great to have help on this front, so ping me personally if you
are interested, and/or keep an eye-out here for more information.
Any initial thoughts on how to maximize the effectiveness of those two
ideas (IdeaLab and Learning Portal)?
Jessie
--
*Jessie Wild
Learning & Evaluation *
*Wikimedia Foundation*
*
*
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
Donate to Wikimedia <https://donate.wikimedia.org/>Hey
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful
than a life spent doing nothing."