Lila,
The confusion, as you will surely agree, is understandable given the
scattershot and often contradictory information provided by WMF to
differing audiences. Above all, I hope the next volley of communication
will address the central contradictions between what you and Jimmy Wales
publicly stated prior to the publication of the grant application, and the
words in the application itself.
I will quote these below, but first to underscore the importance: when Siko
questioned the integrity of the organization, these are the apparent
willful lies that came to mind for me.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
Quotes:
"To make this very clear: no one in top positions has proposed or is
proposing that WMF should get into the general "searching" or to try to
"be
google". It's an interesting hypothetical which has not been part of any
serious strategy proposal, nor even discussed at the board level, nor
proposed to the board by staff, nor a part of any grant, etc. It's a total
lie." -J. Wales, Feb. 1
"Let’s all treat each other withcivility
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Civility> and etiquette
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Etiquette>, and see if we can collaborate
to build a consensus <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Consensus> on the
WMF’s project direction to help readers discover the high quality content
and knowledge our editors are creating." - L. Tretikov, Feb. 1
"Knowledge Engine By Wikipedia is a federated knowledge engine that will
give users the most reliable and most trustworthy public information
channel on the web, applying fundamentals of transparent Wiki-based systems
to surfacing the most relevant and important information." Grant
application, August 2015
Hi Gnangarra,
Thank you for forwarding, the authors of the article seem to be confused
about the nature of the project. Our Comms team is working to clarify this.
Please expect to see something from us in next few days.
Lila
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com> wrote:
FYI making main stream media
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-15/wikimedia-foundation-aims-to-take-…
On 14 February 2016 at 00:49, Anthony Cole <ahcoleecu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Anne, we're talking about almost the same
thing, but not exactly. I say
"advised" you say "consulted". "Consulted" implies
soliciting or
expecting
> some kind of response or engagement - probably
> approval/disapproval/critique/input. "Advised" means they got the
memo. I
think
"advised" is enough, and if the board wants more engagement, they
can
> initiate it - presuming the notification is clear and comprehensive, of
> course.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, I'm not sure about that, Anthony. By "consulted", I would
mean
> > something to the effect of "We're looking at applying to XX for a
grant
of
> $YYY to do ZZZ" and asking the Board if they would be likely to agree
to
> > accept such a grant if the application is successful. The grant
> > application, evaluation and approval process is costly in both time
and
>
resources, and for both the applicant and the grantmaker. Being
informed
> that a grant has been approved sounds more
like a fait accompli
situation
> > for the Board - they look petty and ungrateful if they say no, even
if
> they
> > don't think it was a reasonable grant application. In this case,
we're
> > only dealing with $250,000. What if
this was $1 million? $10
million?
> >
> > I think it is healthier for everyone if the Board is properly
consulted
> > before the application is submitted.
(And again, I note that we
don't
know
> how much was actually requested in this case, only what was granted.)
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 12 February 2016 at 21:23, Anthony Cole <ahcoleecu(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > Anne, regarding:
> >
> > "Since the Board must approve acceptance of any donations over
$100,000
> > USD, it seems to be obvious that they
should be consulted and
possibly
> > > should actively approve any grant applications where the dollar
value
> sought is higher than that amount."
>
> I'm not sure that the board should be *consulted* ahead of such
> applications' or should prior-approve all such applications. That
seems
a
> > bit like micromanagement. But it makes sense to me for the board to
be
> > > *advised
> > > *of such applications and when they're being actively contemplated
or
> > > prepared.
> > >
> > > Anthony Cole
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> > > I'm sorry to hear that you feel this way, Gerard. I personally
would
> > like
> > > > to feel more assured that the WMF is looking into the longer
future
> and
> > > > actively plannning for the day that donations no longer support a
> large
> > > > staff doing lots of things.
> > > >
> > > > I am concerned today that the team specifically tasked to work
> closely
> > > with
> > > > so many elements of the community has lost 7% of its staff, and
30%
> of
> > > its
> > > > leaders, in a single week. This should be a concern in any
> > organization.
> > > >
> > > > With respect to the Knight grant - I know that many times grant
> > > > applications are made for considerably more than is given, and I
am
> >
> interested to know how much the WMF requested in the first place.
I
> > > would
> > > > also like to know whether or not the Board was formally advised
of
the
> > > request before it was submitted. Since the Board must approve
> acceptance
> > > of any donations over $100,000 USD, it seems to be obvious that
they
> > > should
> > > > be consulted and possibly should actively approve any grant
> > applications
> > > > where the dollar value sought is higher than that amount. I
don't
> > > believe
> > > > the current policies require advance approval or even advance
> > > notification,
> > > > though.
> > > >
> > > > Risker/Anne
> > > >
> > > > On 12 February 2016 at 03:54, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > I am not complaining. I point out that all this huha does not
get
> us
> > > > > anywhere. I am not afraid to give an opinion and I am not
afraid
to
> > be
> > > a
> > > > > contrarian when I think it makes sense. Yes, things happened
that
were
> > not
> > > beautiful. They are not what upset me. What upsets me is that
people
> > like
> > > > Siko and Anna are leaving. Because they are part of "my"
Wikimedia
> > > > > Foundation. What upsets me is that I routinely use Magnus's
tool
and
> > > > process hundreds of thousands of records and am to understand
that
> > > > official
> > > > > query is stunted and does not allow for this "because it
was
not
in
> > the
> > > > > design" and it is then pointed out that it takes money to
solve
> > this...
> > > > >
> > > > > My point is that baying for blood is not what helps us forward.
> What
> > I
> > > do
> > > > > know is that when sheer negativity is not coupled with an
ability
> to
> > > stop
> > > > > and move forward, we will get in a downward spiral. I fault
Pine
for
> not
> > > being able to stop. What I wish for is for people like Anna and
Siko
> > and
> > > > money for our environment and not for an endowment.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > GerardM
> > > >
> > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:35, Michel Vuijlsteke <
wikipedia(a)zog.org
>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Gerard,
> > > > >
> > > > > I was waiting for this mail. For me personally, your
complaining
> is
> > > > > > achieving exactly the opposite of what you think.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It sounds as if you'd much rather prefer to stick your
head
in
> the
> > > sand
> > > > > and
> > > > > > hope things will blow over. "Move along, nothing to
see here
--
> oh
> > > > look!
> > > > > > something positive over there!" is not going to solve
anything.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Michel
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:24, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > Pine as you are talking about "self inflicting
wounds" I
take
> it
> > > you
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > not talking in your personal capacity. When is it
enough
for
you?
> > > When
> > > > > are
> > > > > > you going to talk about positive things, things that will
move
> us
> > > > > > forward.
> > > > > > > Why ask for blood and more blood? What is it that you
hope
to
> >
> achieve?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Who do you represent in this unending litany of negativity
and
> > what
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > you achieved in this way? When Lila was engaged in her
role,
she
> > was
> > > to
> > > > > > direct in a different direction and she is doing that. You
may
> > not
> > > > like
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > and that is ok.
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > GerardM
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 08:43, Pine W
<wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dariusz, thanks for continuing to engage here.
Besides
the
good
> > > > > questions
> > > > > > > that others have asked, I'll add a few:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. If the Knowledge Engine is such an important
project,
why
is
> > it
> > > > not
> > > > > > > mentioned in
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2015-16
> > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2. I realize that as a percentage of the WMF
budget,
$250k
> is a
> > > > > > > relatively
> > > > > > > > small number. As others have said, this is not a
reason
for
> >
opacity
> > > > > about
> > > > > > > it, nor a reason for not having a conversation with
the
> community
> > > > about
> > > > > > > something so strategically important as a decision to
explore
> > the
> > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > of "Would users go to Wikipedia if it were
an open
channel
>
beyond
> > > an
> > > > > > > encyclopedia?" It's one thing to have a
blue-sky exercise
> > thinking
> > > > > about
> > > > > > > possibilities, and another thing to take a $250k step
in
that
> > > > > direction,
> > > > > > > especially without consulting the community.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 3. I am getting tired about seeing bad news in general
about
> WMF
> > > > > > > governance, planning, and turnover. I am curious how
you
plan
to
> > > > address
> > > > > > those issues. Like you, I would rather that we be talking
about
> > our
> > > > > > > movement plans for the next 10 years. However,
it's
difficult
> > to
> > > > have
> > > > > > > those
> > > > > > > > conversations when WMF is making so many
self-inflicted
> wounds.
> > > The
> > > > > > > recent
> > > > > > > > round of resignations is of respectable people
from the
WMF
> > staff
> > > > is
> > > > > > > making
> > > > > > > > the situation that much more concerning and that
much
more
> > > > difficult
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > recover from. It seems to me that WMF leadership
has lost
> > control
> > > > of
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > situation, and I'd like to hear what the
recovery plan
is.
> > > > > Personally,
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > feel that we need leadership that can build good
> relationships
> > > with
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > staff and community, is transparent by default,
and is
> capable
> > of
> > > > > > > restoring
> > > > > > > > the credibility of the organization's
planning,
execution,
> and
> > > > > > goodwill.
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > think that we may need new leadership to make
that
happen.
I
> am
> > > > > > > interested
> > > > > > > > to hear your thoughts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Pine
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Dariusz
Jemielniak <
> > > > > darekj(a)alk.edu.pl
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 11.02.2016 10:23 PM "SarahSV"
<sarahsv.wiki(a)gmail.com>
> > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > Hi
> > > > > > > > > > Dariusz,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > T
> > > > > > > > > > he grant application doesn't
restrict the search
engine
> to
> > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > projects. It says that the "Knowledge
Engine by
Wikipedia
[is
> > a]
> > > > > system
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > discovering reliable and trustworthy public
information
on
> > the
> > > > > > > Internet.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My understanding is that the top range could
potentially
be
> > all
> > > > > > > > open/public
> > > > > > > > > resources, but this is the far stretched
total goal,
and
> > still
> > > > not
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > general search engine of all content
including
commercial
> > one.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And a rrasonable realistic outcome can be
just
improving
our
> > > > searches
> > > > > > > > across projects.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I can't comment on the initial ideas or
goals, as I was
not
> on
> > > the
> > > > > > Board
> > > > > > > > before August 2015, but this is what I understand
we
build
> now.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The document says the "Search Engine by
Wikipedia"
budget
> > for
> > > > > > > 2015–2016
> > > > > > > > > ($2.4 million) was approved by the board.
Can you
point
us
> > to
> > > > > which
> > > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > meeting approved it and what was discussed
there?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I dont recall this specifically, and I'm
going to elude
> this
> > > > > question
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > going to sleep (and hoping someone better
informed may
> pick).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Good night!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dj
> > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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>
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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>
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
_______________________________________________
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>
--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU:
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery:
http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
_______________________________________________
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>
--
Lila Tretikov
Wikimedia Foundation
*“Be bold and mighty forces will come to your aid.”*
_______________________________________________
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>