[Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
Anthere9 at yahoo.com
Wed May 9 17:20:12 UTC 2007
Robert Horning wrote:
> Florence Devouard wrote:
>> The way I read it (forgive me if I am wrong), your email seems to be
>> implying that this is a suggestion from WMF. It is not so. It has not
>> been discussed on the board, and even less agreed upon. Take it for what
>> it is, a simple suggestion by one person, not a wmf suggestion.
>> Note that there is chance other suggestions are made by board members
>> during elections time. Please take these suggestions as platform
>> discussion, not as wmf position.
> Permit me if I may, there have been many "suggestions" that have been
> made on this list recently with the seeming official stamp of approval
> (some with notes of discussion of the WMF board, others not so much),
> and this is the thinking of at least one member of that board. Quite
> often discussions like this quickly turn into actual policy and have
> impact directly on individual projects, and this is a radical policy
Fair enough :-)
And this proposal/suggestion was not made in the context of any
> upcoming elections or any campaign platform.
I read you (and Erik), but allow me to have a different opinion :-)
> In this case, some substantial opposition to this proposal has been
> voiced, and there is some concern that this may have even more
> widespread support among board members than just this one individual.
I have NO idea of what the other board members think on this point.
> Since most of us aren't privy to most board discussions, it can be
> difficult to tell if this is something that has been discussed at length
> previously or simply a random thought.
Hmmm. I do not think anything in Erik is ever random :-)
No, re-branding has not been discussed at length and there is no ongoing
planned proposition. However, brands have been discussed, and as Danny
put it some time ago, a company dealing with brands met at last board
meeting. Brands are also clearly part of our strategy to collect funds.
We made it amongst top brands in 2006 (see
would be unreasonable not to discuss brands.
> I do appreciate that you have voiced at least a neutral attitude toward
> this idea as perhaps a future direction for Wikimedia projects.
I am not supportive of the idea. However, I am supportive of the
discussion. Some issues have been discussed ad nauseam on this list.
Brand have rarely been the topic of dicussion, so I appreciate the
freshness ;-) Mostly, even though the conclusion of the proposition
might be "not a good idea", I believe the discussion is important to
hold, and might spark other thoughts that will be precious.
More information about the foundation-l