I've no idea what you mean by " second iteration". I was told by Work Group members that those are the recommendations that were used as starting points for the discussions by the Work Groups at Tunis last weekend.
Therefore, all that is most probably outdated stuff by now (it was already outdated by the time it was posted). I really don't know what happens to the discussions going on there, but I don't believe they will be taken into account, since by now those recommendations have already advanced to somewhere else.
Best, Paulo
Mario Gómez mariogomwiki@gmail.com escreveu no dia quarta, 25/09/2019 à(s) 08:45:
The recommendations from the second iteration are available now:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommen...
Looking at the formatting with discussion links and so on, I assume community feedback is still welcome. It would be good to announce this in wikimedia-l, meta main page, etc.
Best,
MarioGom
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:48 PM Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the
future
of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of
the
working groups.
If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing the recommendations.
Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are
much
more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the
Wikimeda
volunteers.
There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At
least
at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".
The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought
through.
There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the
statement
that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open
content
organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic
change?
And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All
change
has negative connotations to some members of the community."
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_...
I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is
giving
a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the
very
same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).
This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations are unusable or damaging. I also cannot judge about the efforts invested, as I have no insight in the inner workings. But it is very frustrating
for
me to read the documents and often have to guess what they actually mean. And it seems to me, given the comments on the user pages on Meta Wiki, on this list, on de:WP:Kurier and on Facebook, that I am not the only one
who
feels this frustration.
Therefore, I ask the people responsible: please reconsider the timeline.
If
these documents are the result of one year work, then the documents will not be ready within two and a half months. Consider several months for
the
working groups to use the present feedback for a redraft, and then give
the
Wikimedia volunteers at least the same amount of time for giving feedback again.
Kind regards Ziko _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe