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(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:52 AM, MZMcBride
<z(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l