[Wikimediauk-l] (no subject)

Hi all, I would like to thank Thomas Morton for his well thought explanation addressed to Roger (Sat, 29 Sep 2012 22:51:10 +0100). It covered a number of points I felt need addressing and Tom put them in a useful and tactful way - much better than I could have hoped to do. However, I would like to address some ramifications of this. Quite so. However, one of the consequences of the phenomenal success of WP is that the potential development of where we are now has created space for activity beyond that which WMUK as a charity is best placed to carry out. a) Wikiversity has a great potential, however the development of such a repository of Open Educational Resources (OERs) will be very slow without people being paid - not so much for editing but for delivering teaching which uses WV as a platform, creating OERs free for other people to use. The dynamic for this is quite different from WP and Wikicommons. I have not been involved in all the sister projects, but suspect that they will each have their own dynamic, which needs to be addressed in its own terms. b) Linked to a) is the delivery of training in how to use WP. It seems to me very straight forward to see WV as an ideal platform for this. There is also much to be learnt from WikiEducator, which uses a Mediawiki in conjunction wit the moodle software. c) Another aspect of this is that I have noticed that some of the people who attend WMUK training sessions are people who are employed by learned societies as Social Media Officers. While I find volunteering to train other volunteers quite attractive, when it comes to giving time freely in order help in the training for paid workers of organisations I am confident that i am not the only person who finds this a bit awkward. Likewise as we welcome academics who stipulate that their students achieve certain goals in order to pass a course, this to me creates a market for delivering training outside a volunteer - to -volunteer framework. Aside from the problems which have arisen from Roger being a trustee, I think the work he has done is amazing and really innovative. I would like to see it continue. However what I feel would really facilitate this is the creation of a not-for-profit social enterprise which would provide a structured way in which innovations like QRpedia could be placed in relation to both WMUK, WMF and the broader community. I feel that our community has an amazing range of diverse talents, and that if the possibilities provoked by WPs success are to be realised, then we need to develop a way in which the ethos of unpaid editing of WP itself can be balanced with other roles which are emerging which are peripheral to editing but which can greatly enhance WP and its sister projects. I hope that the recent experiences at WMUK will stimulate a discussion about how such a social enterprise might be set up, how the ethos of collaborative working and sharing of resources might be taken forward, how this can be done in a way which does not disrupt the very success which WP has enjoyed, and how such a social enterprise can contribute towards fundraising for WMUK to deliver its charitable goals. If such a discussion is got going now, there is some prospect that we could have a concrete proposal which has been mulled over by the community in time for the next AGM. As Tom said: I am proposing this as a way of moving on in a way which keeps people like Roger with their brilliant ideas involved but not as trustees. all the best Fabian (User:Leutha)