Hmm, I'm not sure that I'd agree that everything that WMF does has a community aspect. There's been a lot of discussion about readership that to me seems primarily concerned with fundraising and only secondly concerned with recruiting new contributors and otherwise serving the community. (I'm not opposed to fundraising, I just want to clarify that community support is a step removed from the interest in readership.) There's also the open question of what to do with the millions of dollars in WMF reserves, and whether current grantmaking and affiliation policies and processes are actually hindering progress in certain areas, as we discussed a bit at the Wikimedia Conference and elsewhere; thankfully it sounds like Grantmaking is going to go through a community consultation this year, and I hope to see some rethinking of current policies and practices.
Pine
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 3:11 PM, S Page spage@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:52 AM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
What is "Community Tech"? How does it differ from the work the rest of
the
engineering and product team is doing?
Yes, everything WMF does has a community aspect (except facilities?), so it's tricky to know when to highlight it. And "community" is an open-ended pluralistic term, like "User" or "Open". It's reasonable to want teams to be more specific, give them a little more time as we work through the reorg.
I'm forming an Open Community Core Engagement team, dedicated to experimenting on wiki users. <-- joke, I kid
Peace,
=S Page WMF Tech writer _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l