[Foundation-l] WMF investment strategy

[susanpgardner at gmail.com]

Yeah, I hear you, John.  I wouldn't characterize it myself as a systemic problem, but I think I get the gist of what you're saying.

I have my own opinions, but I don't think I'll post them here (at least, not tonight, and not while walking down the street). They'd be easier to talk through in a realtime back-and-forth rather than in a mailing-list post, so with luck we'll be able to talk at office hours, if James can set me up to do that in the next few weeks.

Thanks,
Sue


-----Original Message-----
From: John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:58:48 
To: <susanpgardner at gmail.com>; Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] WMF investment strategy

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:49 AM,  <susanpgardner at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Yes, the 2010-11 plan is rooted in the strategy.  We're wrapping it up in the office today -- it goes to the Board tonight, and, post-approval, will be published within a few weeks. Maybe I can do IRC office hours once it's published -- it'd be a good meaty topic :-)

That would be fantastic Sue!

I think it would be helpful to have a discussion about strategy before
the annual plan is finalised as I suspect there are many people in the
community who haven't been following the strategy project (I know I
haven't).  Now is a good time for everyone to review the strategy wiki
content!

I'm a bit concerned about the lack of translations on some of the key
pages on the strategy wiki.  e.g. 11 translations of the "Task
force/Recommendations" page; 9 of the "Emerging strategic priorities"
page, and 2 of the first strategy priorities page "Expand reach within
large, well-connected populations".

Reading through the pages relating to strategic priorities, I am
disheartened by the focus on Wikipedia, such as using research about
Wikipedia as a basis for decision making, and Wikipedia being the
subject of the priorities.  More troubling is the use of this diagram,
where many other projects as referred to as "supporting content".

http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMFCurrent_WMF_projects.png

It appears that the uploader, TylerT, was engaged by the WMF as a consultant.
We recently had WMF board members saying similar things about Commons
and Wikisource on foundation-l, and retractions soon followed.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-May/057926.html

This focus on Wikipedia seems to be a systemic problem.  Maybe the WMF
needs an advisory board consisting of people who are focused on
developing the other projects.

--
John Vandenberg