On Sunday, February 28, 2016, Leigh Thelmadatter osamadre@hotmail.com wrote:
I have to agree here.
Yes.
The WMF and its employees have forgotten that the mission is to support the work done on the various wikis, not make work for fireworks for themselves.
No.
Nothing we are dealing with here is new. It is just the eruption of some very long-standing problems with the WMF and the tone it sets for the rest of the movement.
Yes.
While some might be celebrating now,
No, except as sense of relief in an immediate part of problem bent addressed.
Lila was not the problem. IMHO, the problem is a lot of hidden hierarchies (denied of course). Add to that, that the lack of transparency allows the growth of hidden agendas.
Remember this blew when a community selected board member was tossed off
the board unceremoniously. We find out through this that the community (or chapters) have no real voice on the board under the current set up.
Yes.
-- brion
From: dacuetu@gmail.com javascript:; Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:52:30 +0100 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Subject: [Wikimedia-l] What it means to be a *volunteer* organization
I am starting a new thread because I disagree with the idea that the WMF should be a high-tech organization as the other thread by Brion seemed to suggest. Yes, technology is a tool that we use in our mission to gather
and
process all forms of human knowledge, but in the end the driving force is volunteership.
Without volunteers there wouldn't be any movement and there wouldn't be
any
need for tools, or any donations whatsoever. It is the concept of working for free for the common good that allows us to exist and fulfill our mission. The WMF is instrumental in providing the tools for it to happen, but those tools are not only technological, they are also legal, educational, and social, however when talking through computer screens we seem to forget that.
A hi-tech tool can work for a given task or not, but there are more important topics like trust, commitment, empowerment, motivation, and joy that cannot be assessed so easily, and that are at least as crucial as
any
software. What is the point of having a perfect tool Z if I don't enjoy working with my fellows on a common mission?
The role of nurturing volunteers is not exclusive of affiliate organizations, the WMF offer grants to volunteers and organizes several gatherings. Is that enough to strengthen the volunteer community? Then I look at organizations like WOOF or workaway that thrive with full-time volunteers and I wonder if more opportunities could be opened for our volunteers. Is there anything holding us back to try new things besides old patterns
of
participation?
It is a challenge to do more for the volunteer community without
resorting
to grants or payment, but that is the key to succeed as a volunteer organization, to provide an ecosystem where personal growth is possible.
I am interested in hearing what others have to say about it. Maybe it is possible to gather ideas or even a team of people who wants to research more information about the topic.
Cheers, Micru _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>