I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
1) Privacy policy 2) Terms of use 3) Code of Conduct
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
4) Visual Editor?
Would it be easy to set that up? My guess is that Spores are for novel user groups, and VE seems to be something useful. But I also think to remember that setting up VE used to be sometimes a bit complex.
Stay safe, Denny
Regarding 4) there's a phabricator task for that here: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T237819
It has apparently run into some difficulties.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:16 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
- Visual Editor?
Would it be easy to set that up? My guess is that Spores are for novel user groups, and VE seems to be something useful. But I also think to remember that setting up VE used to be sometimes a bit complex.
Stay safe, Denny _______________________________________________ Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
Thank you Denny for bringing this up! Much appreciated and important now.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
Though I think being explicit about #Unacceptable_behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior
I find it super-important to have consensus also on #3-expected-behavior ! My preferences here are with https://BerlinCodeOfConduct.org/ https://berlincodeofconduct.org/ that originated from https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior
Personally I find most of the older projects often unsupportive and even made toxic for newbies to join due to 'legal' bot-like behavior or passive agressive of older (highly patronizing and teritorial) admins... ...as the project matures this should be monitored for and suppressed, but ideally also discouraged from the start by Expected_Behavior policy.
Best Z
Sorry I arrived late on WikiSpore meet tonight and missed the start of CoC discussion...
...anyway this is email reminder to what I wanted to discuss if possible to go beyond minimum of technical CoC of MediaWiki (which is fine) and also give focus on affirmative expectations ;-p
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 11:14 AM Željko Blaće zblace@mi2.hr wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
Thank you Denny for bringing this up! Much appreciated and important now.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
Though I think being explicit about #Unacceptable_behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct%23Unacceptable_behavior
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct%23Unacceptable_behavior
I find it super-important to have consensus also on #3-expected-behavior ! My preferences here are with https://BerlinCodeOfConduct.org/ https://berlincodeofconduct.org/ that originated from https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct%23Unacceptable_behavior
Personally I find most of the older projects often unsupportive and even made toxic for newbies to join due to 'legal' bot-like behavior or passive agressive of older (highly patronizing and teritorial) admins... ...as the project matures this should be monitored for and suppressed, but ideally also discouraged from the start by Expected_Behavior policy.
Best Z
+1 to the berlin COC.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:14 AM Željko Blaće zblace@mi2.hr wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
Thank you Denny for bringing this up! Much appreciated and important now.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
Though I think being explicit about #Unacceptable_behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct%23Unacceptable_behavior
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct%23Unacceptable_behavior
I find it super-important to have consensus also on #3-expected-behavior ! My preferences here are with https://BerlinCodeOfConduct.org/ https://berlincodeofconduct.org/ that originated from https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior%20https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct%23Unacceptable_behavior
Personally I find most of the older projects often unsupportive and even made toxic for newbies to join due to 'legal' bot-like behavior or passive agressive of older (highly patronizing and teritorial) admins... ...as the project matures this should be monitored for and suppressed, but ideally also discouraged from the start by Expected_Behavior policy.
Best Z _______________________________________________ Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
Maybe we can bring some of the unfinished discussions like CoC to this Sunday?
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:19 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to the berlin COC.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:14 AM Željko Blaće zblace@mi2.hr wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
Thank you Denny for bringing this up! Much appreciated and important now.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
Though I think being explicit about #Unacceptable_behavior https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior I find it super-important to have consensus also on #3-expected-behavior ! My preferences here are with https://BerlinCodeOfConduct.org/ that originated from https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior
Personally I find most of the older projects often unsupportive and even made toxic for newbies to join due to 'legal' bot-like behavior or passive agressive of older (highly patronizing and teritorial) admins... ...as the project matures this should be monitored for and suppressed, but ideally also discouraged from the start by Expected_Behavior policy.
Best Z _______________________________________________ Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
-- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 _______________________________________________ Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
Interesting. Apologies for probably going over old ground as a latecomer, but I had assumed that Wikispore was sufficiently proximate to Mediawiki that the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct] would have to apply?
In an exceptional situation, if someone complained to the Foundation about something that had happened in the Wikispore space, wouldn't they see it in their remit to take action? If that is so, shouldn't at least the "Unacceptable behaviour" provisions of the Mediawiki Code be explicitly bound in? (Though also taking Denny's point about the positives of that Berlin Code.)
On 16/07/2020 07:16, Željko Blaće wrote:
Maybe we can bring some of the unfinished discussions like CoC to this Sunday?
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:19 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to the berlin COC.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:14 AM Željko Blaće zblace@mi2.hr wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
Thank you Denny for bringing this up! Much appreciated and important now.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
Though I think being explicit about #Unacceptable_behavior https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior I find it super-important to have consensus also on #3-expected-behavior ! My preferences here are with https://BerlinCodeOfConduct.org/ that originated from https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior
Personally I find most of the older projects often unsupportive and even made toxic for newbies to join due to 'legal' bot-like behavior or passive agressive of older (highly patronizing and teritorial) admins... ...as the project matures this should be monitored for and suppressed, but ideally also discouraged from the start by Expected_Behavior policy.
Best Z
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct in my view is the lowest common denominator not enough and certainly not optimum
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:44 AM Alastair Dickson adickson@allyd.co.uk wrote:
Interesting. Apologies for probably going over old ground as a latecomer, but I had assumed that Wikispore was sufficiently proximate to Mediawiki that the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct] would have to apply?
In an exceptional situation, if someone complained to the Foundation about something that had happened in the Wikispore space, wouldn't they see it in their remit to take action? If that is so, shouldn't at least the "Unacceptable behaviour" provisions of the Mediawiki Code be explicitly bound in? (Though also taking Denny's point about the positives of that Berlin Code.)
On 16/07/2020 07:16, Željko Blaće wrote:
Maybe we can bring some of the unfinished discussions like CoC to this Sunday?
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:19 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to the berlin COC.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:14 AM Željko Blaće zblace@mi2.hr wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
Thank you Denny for bringing this up! Much appreciated and important now.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
Though I think being explicit about #Unacceptable_behavior https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior I find it super-important to have consensus also on #3-expected-behavior ! My preferences here are with https://BerlinCodeOfConduct.org/ that originated from https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior
Personally I find most of the older projects often unsupportive and even made toxic for newbies to join due to 'legal' bot-like behavior or passive agressive of older (highly patronizing and teritorial) admins... ...as the project matures this should be monitored for and suppressed, but ideally also discouraged from the start by Expected_Behavior policy.
Best Z
Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
I have added a link to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct from the footer. We are probably covered by it anyway (Wikimedia Cloud being a technical space), it's certainly better than not having any code of conduct, and there is an ongoing process for a Universal Code of Conduct for the movement - once that comes into existence, it would make very little sense for us to pick a different code of conduct. So I suggest that people interested in debating what should and shouldn't be in the code of conduct should focus their energies on that discussion - currently it is happening at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Draft_review
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 3:05 AM Željko Blaće zblace@mi2.hr wrote:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct in my view is the lowest common denominator not enough and certainly not optimum
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:44 AM Alastair Dickson adickson@allyd.co.uk wrote:
Interesting. Apologies for probably going over old ground as a latecomer, but I had assumed that Wikispore was sufficiently proximate to Mediawiki that the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct] would have to apply?
In an exceptional situation, if someone complained to the Foundation about something that had happened in the Wikispore space, wouldn't they see it in their remit to take action? If that is so, shouldn't at least the "Unacceptable behaviour" provisions of the Mediawiki Code be explicitly bound in? (Though also taking Denny's point about the positives of that Berlin Code.)
On 16/07/2020 07:16, Željko Blaće wrote:
Maybe we can bring some of the unfinished discussions like CoC to this
Sunday?
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:19 AM Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com
wrote:
+1 to the berlin COC.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:14 AM Željko Blaće zblace@mi2.hr wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com
wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns
regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
Thank you Denny for bringing this up! Much appreciated and important
now.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the
respective policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
Regarding 3), mediawiki.org has a CoC, meta does not, and I would
really like us to start Spores per default with a CoC. What are your thoughts?
Though I think being explicit about #Unacceptable_behavior https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct#Unacceptable_behavior I find it super-important to have consensus also on
#3-expected-behavior !
My preferences here are with https://BerlinCodeOfConduct.org/ that originated from https://pdxruby.org/CONDUCT#3-expected-behavior
Personally I find most of the older projects often unsupportive and even made toxic for newbies to join due to 'legal' bot-like
behavior
or passive agressive of older (highly patronizing and teritorial)
admins...
...as the project matures this should be monitored for and
suppressed,
but ideally also discouraged from the start by Expected_Behavior
policy.
Best Z
Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
- Privacy policy
2) Terms of use
The Wikimedia Cloud terms of use, which itself is meant for the wiki operators, has some boilerplates: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikitech:Cloud_Services_Terms_of_use#Wha... ?
Labs had a lack-of-privacy policy that never made it out of draft status: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Labs/Agreement_to_disclosure_of_per...
I imagine we'll go with something low-key like those. We don't really collect personal information as we use SUL (note to self: delete old pre-SUL passwords from the database), and the Wikimedia Cloud proxy removes IP addresses from the requests. We do collect email addresses as there is no way to send messages without that, and they are taken from Wikimedia wikis, so I guess there should be a clear warning about that. (I filed https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T241039 about avoiding email collection some time ago, it did not generate much interest.)
3) Code of Conduct
We should just go with the technical CoC ( https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct ) as it already exists and has the required institutional infrastructure set up, and in practice I don't think the contents of the CoC matter much (other than people complaining when there isn't any). Admin culture is more important, but we are not at the size yet where even that would really matter.
Arguably the technical CoC already applies, as it covers all "development-oriented spaces operated by the Wikimedia Foundation", and wmflabs.org is one of those; but we should probably link it from the footer.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective
policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
The WMF ToU and PP is huge, most of it is irrelevant, and a lot of it is infeasible, due to the relatively lax controls on who can access Wikimedia Cloud hosts.
- Visual Editor?
Visual Editor depends on the Parsoid service. Parsoid has been ported to PHP, and the port will be bundled with MediaWiki soon (in theory by the MW 1.35 release, which is in a month). Visual Editor should just work at that point, so unless there is some reason for urgency, I don't really want to go through the effort of setting it up the traditional node-service-based way. It's possible VE with Parsoid/PHP already works and just needs some feature flag set ( https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T239660 is marked as resolved). I'll ask around.
Would be glad to adopt these policies as suggested, probably in whatever way is most lightweight and easiest for now.
Do Gergo's ideas work for your purposes, Denny? I will support anything reasonable, feel free to just post something adapted from elsewhere on the wiki, and I'm sure we'll approve it soon.
We can also cover some of this during the Wikispore Sunday call tomorrow, maybe come up with a draft plan.
Thanks, Richard (User:Pharos)
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 7:29 AM Tisza Gergő gtisza@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:15 AM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
The Wikimedia Cloud terms of use, which itself is meant for the wiki operators, has some boilerplates:
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikitech:Cloud_Services_Terms_of_use#Wha... ?
Labs had a lack-of-privacy policy that never made it out of draft status:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Labs/Agreement_to_disclosure_of_per...
I imagine we'll go with something low-key like those. We don't really collect personal information as we use SUL (note to self: delete old pre-SUL passwords from the database), and the Wikimedia Cloud proxy removes IP addresses from the requests. We do collect email addresses as there is no way to send messages without that, and they are taken from Wikimedia wikis, so I guess there should be a clear warning about that. (I filed https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T241039 about avoiding email collection some time ago, it did not generate much interest.)
- Code of Conduct
We should just go with the technical CoC ( https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct ) as it already exists and has the required institutional infrastructure set up, and in practice I don't think the contents of the CoC matter much (other than people complaining when there isn't any). Admin culture is more important, but we are not at the size yet where even that would really matter.
Arguably the technical CoC already applies, as it covers all "development-oriented spaces operated by the Wikimedia Foundation", and wmflabs.org is one of those; but we should probably link it from the footer.
I am sure we'll easily agree on the first two, just taking the respective
policies from the other WMF Wikis and link them accordingly.
The WMF ToU and PP is huge, most of it is irrelevant, and a lot of it is infeasible, due to the relatively lax controls on who can access Wikimedia Cloud hosts.
- Visual Editor?
Visual Editor depends on the Parsoid service. Parsoid has been ported to PHP, and the port will be bundled with MediaWiki soon (in theory by the MW 1.35 release, which is in a month). Visual Editor should just work at that point, so unless there is some reason for urgency, I don't really want to go through the effort of setting it up the traditional node-service-based way. It's possible VE with Parsoid/PHP already works and just needs some feature flag set ( https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T239660 is marked as resolved). I'll ask around. _______________________________________________ Wikispore mailing list Wikispore@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 7:15 PM Denny Vrandečić vrandecic@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked with a few people, and here are some concerns regarding Wikispore, which, I am sure, can be easily resolved. I am happy to help with the first three if I sense consensus on these topics.
- Privacy policy
- Terms of use
- Code of Conduct
So, this took embarrassingly long (since we forgot to declare a license when starting the wiki, and cleaning up the resulting mess was cumbersome) but I think we have all legal things in order now. See my comment at https://wikispore.wmflabs.org/wiki/Greenhouse#Legal (We do not have a ToU. Do we need one?)
4) Visual Editor?
That happened a while ago (cheers to the Parsing and Editing teams who have made it very easy to set up Visual Editor, without the wrangling with standalone services that was required in the past).