Hi,
as a followup to previous activities and ideas how to improve code
review, we've proposed a session at the upcoming Developer Summit to
concentrate on organizational and social aspects.
Sharing your experience and thoughts is welcomed:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149639
Thanks in advance,
andre
--
Andre Klapper | Wikimedia Bugwrangler
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/
A few weeks ago our Executive Director gave a talk on "Privacy and
Harassment on the Internet" at MozFest 2016 in London. I encourage you to
read the transcript:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Privacy_and_Harassment_on_the_Internet
Katherine argued that the Wikimedia project can take a lead role in
creating a culture of respect and inclusion online. I whole-heartedly
agree, and I hope you all do too. She concluded with:
"We have a lot of work to do. I know that. We know that. As Molly’s story
> illustrates, we are not there yet."
I'd like to open a broader discussion on how we get "there": how to
build/maintain places where we can get work done and control abuse and
vandalism while still remaining wide open to the universe of differing
viewpoints present in our projects. We can't afford to create filter
bubbles, but we must be able to provide users safe(r) spaces to work.
By habit I would propose that this be a technical discussion, on specific
tools or features that our platform is currently missing to facilitate
healthy discussions. But the "filter bubble" is a social problem, not a
technical one. Our project isn't just a collection of code; it's a
community, a set of norms and habits, and a reflection of the social
process of collaboration. A graph algorithm might be able to identify a
filter bubble and good UX can make countervailing opinions no more than a
click away, but it takes human will to seek out uncomfortable truth.
So although my endgame is specific engineering tasks, we need to start with
a broader conversation about our work as social creatures. How do we work
in the projects, how do we communicate among ourselves, and how do we
balance openness and the pursuit of truth with the fight against abuse,
harassment, and bias.
Let's discuss discussions!
Here are some jumping off points; feel free to contribute your own:
We currently use a mixture of Talk pages, Echo, mailing lists, IRC,
Phabricator, OTRS, Slack, Conpherence, and Google Doc on our projects, with
different logging, publication, privacy/identity, and other
characteristics. I tried to start cataloging them here:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-November/085542.html
Because of this diversity, we lack a unified code of conduct or mechanism
to report/combat harassment and vandalism.
Matt Flaschen replied in the above thread with an update on the Code of
Conduct for technical spaces:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-November/085542.html
...which should definitely help! The creation of a centralized reporting
mechanism, in particular, would be most welcome.
I created a proposal for the Wikimedia Developer Summit in January
discussing "safe spaces" on our projects:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149665
Subscribe/comment/click "award token" to support its inclusion in the dev
summit or to start a conversation there.
I have another, broader, proposal as well, on the "future of chat" on our
projects:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149661
Subscribe/comment/click "award token" there if that angle piques your
interest.
It seems that "groups of users" arise repeatedly as an architectural
meta-concept, whether it's a group of collaborators you want to invite to
an editing session, a group of users you want to block or ban, a group of
users who belong to a particular wikiproject, or who watch a certain page.
We don't really have a first-class representation of that concept in our
code right now. In previous conversations I've heard that people "don't
want <their wiki project> to turn into another facebook" and so have pushed
back strongly on the idea of "friend lists" (one type of group of users) --
but inverting the concept to allow WikiProjects to maintain a list of
"members of the wikiproject" is more palatable, more focused on the editing
task. From a computer science perspective "friend list" and "member of a
wikiproject" might seem identical--they are both lists of users--but from a
social perspective the connotations and focus are significantly different.
But who administers that list of users?
Perhaps we can build a system which avoids grappling with user groups
entirely. It was suggested that we might use an ORES-like system to
automatically suggest collaborators on an editing project based on some
criteria (like editing history), rather than force you or the WikiProject
to maintain an explicit list. Perhaps you can implement block lists to
combat harassment based entirely on keywords, not users. Do we trust the
machine to be more fair and less abusive than us mere mortals? Additional
ideas welcome! (I don't have a dedicated phab task for this, but
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149665 might be appropriate if you want
to contribute off-list.)
Hopefully this has been enough to prime the pump.
Let's discuss discussions.
Let's live up to the hope placed in us by the Washington Post:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/10/25/somethings-terribly-…
Let's retake the lead on building and renewing a healthy collaborative
community. We can't afford to be complacent or content with the status
quo. Let's come up with new ideas, build them, find the problems, and try
again. It starts with deciding that we can do better.
--scott
--
(http://cscott.net)
Hey folks,
I'm your friendly facilitator for who forgot that today was the last day to
gather discussion on a set of topics of the Dev Summit. I might be a bit
biased, but I think they are all pretty interesting, so I'm reaching out
with a quick overview to see if I can spur some interest from ya'll. Check
'em out:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149373 -- Evaluating the user
experience of AI systems
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T147710 -- Building an AI wishlist &
working groups for Wikimedia Projects
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T148690 -- Where to surface AI in
Wikimedia Projects
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T147929 -- Algorithmic dangers and
transparency -- Best practices
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149666 -- Next steps for machine
translation
If you're interested, please drop a note or a token in the task. BTW, you
don't have to physically attend the dev summit in order to participate.
I'll make sure that IRC and Etherpad are shared with all remote attendees
who want to attend the sessions I'm helping to organize. I've heard that
there will be additional facilities for remote attendees (maybe a youtube
stream!?) this year, but I can't confirm yet.
-Aaron
In the last few weeks I have been updating documentation on Selenium tests.
You can find it here:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Selenium
Please notice that there is documentation on how to write Selenium tests in
Node.js:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Selenium/Node.js
There is still a lot of things I would like to do, but I think the
documentation is now in a good enough shape to announce it.
I am still working on it and I really need your feedback. Feel free to
reply here, at IRC (zeljkof at #wikimedia-releng) or at Phabricator:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T108108
I was not working on the documentation alone. I would like to say thank you
to Antoine Musso (hashar), Dan Duvall and Greg Grossmeier, among others.
Željko
The 'phabricator model' is far from perfectly fitting our needs though:
https://secure.phabricator.com/maniphest/query/qWbzSK1NVwb0/
On 17 Nov 2016 1:07 pm, "Vi to" <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That's obvious, anybody knows only bag inspectors are allowed to inspect
wallets.
Coming back to be serious, imho, Wikimedia should apply the "phabricator
model" to a 2FA open source app: collaborating in development and making it
perfectly fit with our needs
Vito
2016-11-17 13:06 GMT+01:00 Dmitry Brant <dbrant(a)wikimedia.org>:
> Don't give your wallet to anyone claiming to be a Wallet Inspector.
>
> On Nov 17, 2016 4:48 AM, "Vi to" <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So are you telling me that tool "test if your credit card was cloned" is a
> fraud? But its test included my ccv2 too! :p
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-11-17 9:33 GMT+01:00 Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com>:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:18 AM Antoine Musso <hashar+wmf(a)free.fr>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Le 16/11/2016 à 19:19, Pine W a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > (0) Consider testing your password strength with a tool like
> > > > http://www.testyourpassword.com/; be sure that the tool you use does
> > not
> > > > send your chosen password over the Internet and instead tests it
> > locally.
> > >
> > > By using an online testing tool, you are effectively breaking the very
> > > first rule:
> > >
> > > DO NOT GIVE OUT YOUR PASSWORD. EVER.
> > >
> > > Using that site is exactly like sharing your password with a random
> > > stranger in the world. Even if you trusted that website, and audited
> > > the code at a given point in time, you have no guarantee the site
> hasn't
> > > changed or that it is not collecting passwords.
> > >
> > >
> > Not to mention, it's plain-old-insecure HTTP, so of course anyone and
> > their mother's uncle could be sniffing the traffic ;-)
> >
> > Same rule goes for a "generate a random password" site. Don't use
> > them.
> >
> > -Chad
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Don't give your wallet to anyone claiming to be a Wallet Inspector.
On Nov 17, 2016 4:48 AM, "Vi to" <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So are you telling me that tool "test if your credit card was cloned" is a
fraud? But its test included my ccv2 too! :p
Vito
2016-11-17 9:33 GMT+01:00 Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:18 AM Antoine Musso <hashar+wmf(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> > Le 16/11/2016 à 19:19, Pine W a écrit :
> > >
> > > (0) Consider testing your password strength with a tool like
> > > http://www.testyourpassword.com/; be sure that the tool you use does
> not
> > > send your chosen password over the Internet and instead tests it
> locally.
> >
> > By using an online testing tool, you are effectively breaking the very
> > first rule:
> >
> > DO NOT GIVE OUT YOUR PASSWORD. EVER.
> >
> > Using that site is exactly like sharing your password with a random
> > stranger in the world. Even if you trusted that website, and audited
> > the code at a given point in time, you have no guarantee the site hasn't
> > changed or that it is not collecting passwords.
> >
> >
> Not to mention, it's plain-old-insecure HTTP, so of course anyone and
> their mother's uncle could be sniffing the traffic ;-)
>
> Same rule goes for a "generate a random password" site. Don't use
> them.
>
> -Chad
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hi, the second role mentioned in the email below is technical, and maybe
someone in this list is interested.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Maria Cruz <mcruz(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:17 AM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Two internships in the Community Engagement
department
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Hello all,
As some of you may have seen there are two open positions (both paid) in
the Community Engagement department for internships on the Learning &
Evaluation team:
-
Communications Intern:. (6 months, up to 30 hours/week) We are looking
for a candidate who works and / or studies in the field of
communications,
has excellent verbal and written English communications skills and the
ability to excel in a fast-paced, multitasking environment. Knowledge
and/or experience with Wikimedia Projects a plus!
The Communications Iintern will primarily support conference communications
for the Community Engagement Team (including event planning and materials
preparation), help plan workshops and community events for program leaders
(as well as document the outcome of those events), and assist with the
coordination of technology supports for communications and events. You can
find the complete job description here:
https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/488571#.WCHxXOErKRs
-
Technical Intern (3 months up to 20 hours/week) We are looking for a
candidate that has experience in Mediawiki mark-up and technical
communications experience in designing for web content curation and user
flow, has proficiency in at least three of the following programming
languages: Javascript, Lua, Python, MySQL, has experience developing or
administrating MediaWiki websites. The candidate should have a strong
interest in archival systems, searchability and usable portals on wiki,
and
technical skills for designing Wikimedia templates and pages.
The Technical Design Intern will work closely with the Communications and
Outreach Coordinator (that would be me!) on the Wikimedia Resource Center,
the redesign of the Evaluation Portal on Meta Wikimedia, and migration and
archiving of L&E portal pages from existing namespaces to new namespace,
among other tasks. You can find the complete job description here:
<https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/488570#.WBE6X-ErKRs>
https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/488570#.WBE6X-ErKRs
If you are interested, please apply. If you know someone who might fit this
position, please forward the email to them!
Cheers,
María
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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>
--
Quim Gil
Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil