[Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Rogol Domedonfors
This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and was
required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in 2015,
so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding page
at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously out of
date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just about a
year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to
revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for
April published a couple of days ago at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No Board
resoultion on the subject has yet been published.

Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a page
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the current
movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight of the
BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in existence
again.

What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted, and if
so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been reconstituted,
what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory Board is
reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in operation
again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and if so,
what will the mechanism be for that interaction.

"Rogol"
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Craig Newmark-2
Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related issues,
but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I learn
them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding reliable
sources.

Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative centered at
the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.

That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk about
this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.

Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit journalism, per
the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide significant
funding to the NII as well as WMF.

I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this subject.
Thanks!


Craig Newmark, founder craigslist


On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and was
> required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in 2015,
> so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding page
> at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously out of
> date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just about a
> year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to
> revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for
> April published a couple of days ago at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No Board
> resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
>
> Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a page
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the current
> movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight of the
> BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in existence
> again.
>
> What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted, and if
> so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been reconstituted,
> what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory Board is
> reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in operation
> again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and if so,
> what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
>
> "Rogol"
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Rogol Domedonfors
Craig

Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues around
the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested in.

Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board has
been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the Community,
and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new members or
new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who the new
Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory Board is,
or whether and how to engage with those members.

Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for engagement
between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to establish
appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and your
fellow members to engage with the Community.

You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view is that
the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider Foundation on
the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the other
has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is one
tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.

"Rogol"

On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related issues,
> but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I learn
> them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding reliable
> sources.
>
> Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative centered at
> the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
>
> That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk about
> this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
>
> Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit journalism, per
> the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
> transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
> difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide significant
> funding to the NII as well as WMF.
>
> I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this subject.
> Thanks!
>
>
> Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and was
> > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in
> 2015,
> > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected at
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding
> page
> > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously out
> of
> > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just about
> a
> > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to
> > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for
> > April published a couple of days ago at
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No Board
> > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
> >
> > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a page
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the current
> > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight of
> the
> > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in existence
> > again.
> >
> > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted, and
> if
> > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been reconstituted,
> > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory Board
> is
> > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
> operation
> > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and if
> so,
> > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Florence Devouard-2
In reply to this post by Rogol Domedonfors
Le 24/06/2017 à 13:10, Rogol Domedonfors a écrit :

> This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and was
> required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in 2015,
> so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding page
> at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously out of
> date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just about a
> year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to
> revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for
> April published a couple of days ago at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No Board
> resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
>
> Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a page
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the current
> movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight of the
> BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in existence
> again.
>
> What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted, and if
> so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been reconstituted,
> what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory Board is
> reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in operation
> again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and if so,
> what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
>
> "Rogol"
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>


I was asked to help with the strategy discussion design at the end of
2016. When the strategy discussions were effectively launched, I thought
it made sense to actually ask their feedback to advisory board members.
It does not really (in my view) what the current administrative status
of the advboard is, there are wise people out there and it made sense to
ask them for their opinion. Practically speaking, I could not pursue the
talks very far (in particular in the second phase) due to multiple
personal issues that really impaired my available time recently. But I
think it simply made sense to get them involve, aware of the strategic
process ongoing and inform them enough that they can jump in if needed.

I have no further comment to make on the Adv Board (it is not to hide
anything. It simply is that I have no further comment to make).

Florence


_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Dariusz Jemielniak-3
In reply to this post by Rogol Domedonfors
Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The concept
they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on how
the AB internal coordination will be organized [2]. The group will work on
this with minimal overhead from the Board of Trustees and without
staff/budget support at first. The BGC believes that the AB can be used as
a practical path for prospective members of the Board Board of Trustees,
and to formalize relationships between high-profile experts, and staff and
the Board members. We shall answer with more details soon.

We have not made any announcements, as we're in the process, which I ope is
understandable - there is no formal constitution of the body yet.

Dariusz & Nat

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017


On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Craig
>
> Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues around
> the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested in.
>
> Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board has
> been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the Community,
> and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
> process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new members or
> new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who the new
> Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory Board is,
> or whether and how to engage with those members.
>
> Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for engagement
> between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
> Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to establish
> appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and your
> fellow members to engage with the Community.
>
> You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view is that
> the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider Foundation on
> the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the other
> has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is one
> tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related
> issues,
> > but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I
> learn
> > them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding
> reliable
> > sources.
> >
> > Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative centered
> at
> > the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
> >
> > That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk about
> > this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
> >
> > Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit journalism, per
> > the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
> > transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
> > difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide significant
> > funding to the NII as well as WMF.
> >
> > I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this
> subject.
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and
> was
> > > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in
> > 2015,
> > > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected at
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding
> > page
> > > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously
> out
> > of
> > > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just
> about
> > a
> > > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to
> > > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for
> > > April published a couple of days ago at
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> > > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> > > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No
> Board
> > > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
> > >
> > > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a
> page
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> > > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the
> current
> > > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight of
> > the
> > > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in
> existence
> > > again.
> > >
> > > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted, and
> > if
> > > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been
> reconstituted,
> > > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory
> Board
> > is
> > > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> > > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
> > operation
> > > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and if
> > so,
> > > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--

__________________________
prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
i grupy badawczej NeRDS
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl

Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)
http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010

Recenzje
Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
Pacific Standard:
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/
Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
The Wikipedian:
http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Rogol Domedonfors
Dariusz

Thanks for that update.  You don't mention any channels for communication
between the reconstituted Board and the Community at large, nor
opportunities for the Community at large to be involved in suggesting
names.  I assume then that engagement with the Community is not considered
important here?

"Rogol"

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
> priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
> members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The concept
> they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on how
> the AB internal coordination will be organized [2]. The group will work on
> this with minimal overhead from the Board of Trustees and without
> staff/budget support at first. The BGC believes that the AB can be used as
> a practical path for prospective members of the Board Board of Trustees,
> and to formalize relationships between high-profile experts, and staff and
> the Board members. We shall answer with more details soon.
>
> We have not made any announcements, as we're in the process, which I ope is
> understandable - there is no formal constitution of the body yet.
>
> Dariusz & Nat
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Craig
> >
> > Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues around
> > the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested in.
> >
> > Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board
> has
> > been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the Community,
> > and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
> > process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new members
> or
> > new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who the
> new
> > Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory Board
> is,
> > or whether and how to engage with those members.
> >
> > Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for
> engagement
> > between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
> > Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to establish
> > appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and your
> > fellow members to engage with the Community.
> >
> > You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view is
> that
> > the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider Foundation
> on
> > the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the other
> > has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is one
> > tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related
> > issues,
> > > but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I
> > learn
> > > them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding
> > reliable
> > > sources.
> > >
> > > Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative
> centered
> > at
> > > the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
> > >
> > > That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk
> about
> > > this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
> > >
> > > Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit journalism,
> per
> > > the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
> > > transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
> > > difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide significant
> > > funding to the NII as well as WMF.
> > >
> > > I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this
> > subject.
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > > Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and
> > was
> > > > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in
> > > 2015,
> > > > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected
> at
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding
> > > page
> > > > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously
> > out
> > > of
> > > > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just
> > about
> > > a
> > > > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities
> to
> > > > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes
> for
> > > > April published a couple of days ago at
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > > > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> > > > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> > > > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No
> > Board
> > > > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
> > > >
> > > > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a
> > page
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> > > > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the
> > current
> > > > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight
> of
> > > the
> > > > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in
> > existence
> > > > again.
> > > >
> > > > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted,
> and
> > > if
> > > > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been
> > reconstituted,
> > > > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory
> > Board
> > > is
> > > > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> > > > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
> > > operation
> > > > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and
> if
> > > so,
> > > > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
> > > >
> > > > "Rogol"
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> __________________________
> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
> i grupy badawczej NeRDS
> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
> http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl
>
> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
> autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)
> http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>
> Recenzje
> Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
> Pacific Standard:
> http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/
> Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
> The Wikipedian:
> http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Pine W
In reply to this post by Dariusz Jemielniak-3
Thanks for the updates, Dariusz and Nat.

I thought I'd mention that in the past my impression is that the Advisory
Board was the body to which people were "retired" after serving
high-profile roles, and the AB performed little to no actual work. It
sounds like your plan is to reverse both of those patterns, which I think
could be good.

Pine


On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
> priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
> members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The concept
> they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on how
> the AB internal coordination will be organized [2]. The group will work on
> this with minimal overhead from the Board of Trustees and without
> staff/budget support at first. The BGC believes that the AB can be used as
> a practical path for prospective members of the Board Board of Trustees,
> and to formalize relationships between high-profile experts, and staff and
> the Board members. We shall answer with more details soon.
>
> We have not made any announcements, as we're in the process, which I ope is
> understandable - there is no formal constitution of the body yet.
>
> Dariusz & Nat
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Craig
> >
> > Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues around
> > the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested in.
> >
> > Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board
> has
> > been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the Community,
> > and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
> > process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new members
> or
> > new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who the
> new
> > Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory Board
> is,
> > or whether and how to engage with those members.
> >
> > Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for
> engagement
> > between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
> > Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to establish
> > appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and your
> > fellow members to engage with the Community.
> >
> > You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view is
> that
> > the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider Foundation
> on
> > the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the other
> > has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is one
> > tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related
> > issues,
> > > but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I
> > learn
> > > them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding
> > reliable
> > > sources.
> > >
> > > Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative
> centered
> > at
> > > the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
> > >
> > > That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk
> about
> > > this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
> > >
> > > Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit journalism,
> per
> > > the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
> > > transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
> > > difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide significant
> > > funding to the NII as well as WMF.
> > >
> > > I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this
> > subject.
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > > Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and
> > was
> > > > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in
> > > 2015,
> > > > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected
> at
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding
> > > page
> > > > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously
> > out
> > > of
> > > > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just
> > about
> > > a
> > > > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities
> to
> > > > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes
> for
> > > > April published a couple of days ago at
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > > > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> > > > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> > > > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No
> > Board
> > > > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
> > > >
> > > > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a
> > page
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> > > > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the
> > current
> > > > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight
> of
> > > the
> > > > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in
> > existence
> > > > again.
> > > >
> > > > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted,
> and
> > > if
> > > > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been
> > reconstituted,
> > > > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory
> > Board
> > > is
> > > > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> > > > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
> > > operation
> > > > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and
> if
> > > so,
> > > > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
> > > >
> > > > "Rogol"
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> __________________________
> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
> i grupy badawczej NeRDS
> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
> http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl
>
> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
> autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)
> http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>
> Recenzje
> Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
> Pacific Standard:
> http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/
> Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
> The Wikipedian:
> http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Dariusz Jemielniak-3
In reply to this post by Rogol Domedonfors
I think we should have those channels, once the body is constituted.

Best

Dj

On Jun 26, 2017 19:59, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dariusz
>
> Thanks for that update.  You don't mention any channels for communication
> between the reconstituted Board and the Community at large, nor
> opportunities for the Community at large to be involved in suggesting
> names.  I assume then that engagement with the Community is not considered
> important here?
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
>> priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
>> members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The
>> concept
>> they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on how
>> the AB internal coordination will be organized [2]. The group will work on
>> this with minimal overhead from the Board of Trustees and without
>> staff/budget support at first. The BGC believes that the AB can be used as
>> a practical path for prospective members of the Board Board of Trustees,
>> and to formalize relationships between high-profile experts, and staff and
>> the Board members. We shall answer with more details soon.
>>
>> We have not made any announcements, as we're in the process, which I ope
>> is
>> understandable - there is no formal constitution of the body yet.
>>
>> Dariusz & Nat
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_
>> Governance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
>> [2]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_
>> Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Craig
>> >
>> > Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues around
>> > the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested in.
>> >
>> > Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board
>> has
>> > been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the Community,
>> > and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
>> > process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new
>> members or
>> > new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who the
>> new
>> > Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory Board
>> is,
>> > or whether and how to engage with those members.
>> >
>> > Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for
>> engagement
>> > between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
>> > Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to establish
>> > appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and your
>> > fellow members to engage with the Community.
>> >
>> > You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view is
>> that
>> > the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider Foundation
>> on
>> > the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the
>> other
>> > has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is one
>> > tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.
>> >
>> > "Rogol"
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <[hidden email]
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related
>> > issues,
>> > > but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I
>> > learn
>> > > them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding
>> > reliable
>> > > sources.
>> > >
>> > > Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative
>> centered
>> > at
>> > > the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
>> > >
>> > > That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk
>> about
>> > > this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
>> > >
>> > > Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit journalism,
>> per
>> > > the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
>> > > transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
>> > > difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide
>> significant
>> > > funding to the NII as well as WMF.
>> > >
>> > > I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this
>> > subject.
>> > > Thanks!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
>> > [hidden email]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation,
>> and
>> > was
>> > > > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in
>> > > 2015,
>> > > > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is
>> reflected at
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the
>> corresponding
>> > > page
>> > > > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously
>> > out
>> > > of
>> > > > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just
>> > about
>> > > a
>> > > > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's
>> priorities to
>> > > > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes
>> for
>> > > > April published a couple of days ago at
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
>> > > > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>> > > > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
>> > > > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No
>> > Board
>> > > > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
>> > > >
>> > > > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a
>> > page
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
>> > > > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
>> > > > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the
>> > current
>> > > > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a
>> fortnight of
>> > > the
>> > > > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in
>> > existence
>> > > > again.
>> > > >
>> > > > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted,
>> and
>> > > if
>> > > > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been
>> > reconstituted,
>> > > > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory
>> > Board
>> > > is
>> > > > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members
>> be
>> > > > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
>> > > operation
>> > > > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community,
>> and if
>> > > so,
>> > > > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
>> > > >
>> > > > "Rogol"
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > 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: [hidden email]
>> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsu
>> bscribe>
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > 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: [hidden email]
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> ,
>> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> __________________________
>> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
>> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
>> i grupy badawczej NeRDS
>> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
>> http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl
>>
>> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
>> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
>> autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)
>> http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>>
>> Recenzje
>> Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
>> Pacific Standard:
>> http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/
>> Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
>> The Wikipedian:
>> http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Rogol Domedonfors
Are those channels proposed as part of the paper you brought to the BGC on
the 13th April, then?  Or are you ready to discuss them now?  Or will the
possibility of establishing them be postponed until some time after the
Advisory Board is reconstituted?

"Rogol"

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I think we should have those channels, once the body is constituted.
>
> Best
>
> Dj
>
> On Jun 26, 2017 19:59, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Dariusz
>>
>> Thanks for that update.  You don't mention any channels for communication
>> between the reconstituted Board and the Community at large, nor
>> opportunities for the Community at large to be involved in suggesting
>> names.  I assume then that engagement with the Community is not considered
>> important here?
>>
>> "Rogol"
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
>>> priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
>>> members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The
>>> concept
>>> they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on how
>>> the AB internal coordination will be organized [2]. The group will work
>>> on
>>> this with minimal overhead from the Board of Trustees and without
>>> staff/budget support at first. The BGC believes that the AB can be used
>>> as
>>> a practical path for prospective members of the Board Board of Trustees,
>>> and to formalize relationships between high-profile experts, and staff
>>> and
>>> the Board members. We shall answer with more details soon.
>>>
>>> We have not made any announcements, as we're in the process, which I ope
>>> is
>>> understandable - there is no formal constitution of the body yet.
>>>
>>> Dariusz & Nat
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_G
>>> overnance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
>>> [2]
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_G
>>> overnance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Craig
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues
>>> around
>>> > the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested
>>> in.
>>> >
>>> > Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board
>>> has
>>> > been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the
>>> Community,
>>> > and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
>>> > process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new
>>> members or
>>> > new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who
>>> the new
>>> > Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory
>>> Board is,
>>> > or whether and how to engage with those members.
>>> >
>>> > Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for
>>> engagement
>>> > between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
>>> > Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to establish
>>> > appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and your
>>> > fellow members to engage with the Community.
>>> >
>>> > You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view is
>>> that
>>> > the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider
>>> Foundation on
>>> > the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the
>>> other
>>> > has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is
>>> one
>>> > tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.
>>> >
>>> > "Rogol"
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related
>>> > issues,
>>> > > but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I
>>> > learn
>>> > > them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding
>>> > reliable
>>> > > sources.
>>> > >
>>> > > Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative
>>> centered
>>> > at
>>> > > the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
>>> > >
>>> > > That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk
>>> about
>>> > > this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
>>> > >
>>> > > Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit
>>> journalism, per
>>> > > the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
>>> > > transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
>>> > > difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide
>>> significant
>>> > > funding to the NII as well as WMF.
>>> > >
>>> > > I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this
>>> > subject.
>>> > > Thanks!
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
>>> > [hidden email]>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation,
>>> and
>>> > was
>>> > > > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so
>>> in
>>> > > 2015,
>>> > > > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is
>>> reflected at
>>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the
>>> corresponding
>>> > > page
>>> > > > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is
>>> seriously
>>> > out
>>> > > of
>>> > > > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just
>>> > about
>>> > > a
>>> > > > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's
>>> priorities to
>>> > > > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC
>>> minutes for
>>> > > > April published a couple of days ago at
>>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
>>> > > > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>>> > > > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on
>>> the
>>> > > > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No
>>> > Board
>>> > > > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a
>>> > page
>>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
>>> > > > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
>>> > > > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the
>>> > current
>>> > > > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a
>>> fortnight of
>>> > > the
>>> > > > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in
>>> > existence
>>> > > > again.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been
>>> reconstiuted, and
>>> > > if
>>> > > > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been
>>> > reconstituted,
>>> > > > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory
>>> > Board
>>> > > is
>>> > > > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members
>>> be
>>> > > > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
>>> > > operation
>>> > > > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community,
>>> and if
>>> > > so,
>>> > > > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > "Rogol"
>>> > > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > > 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: [hidden email]
>>> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsu
>>> bscribe>
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > 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: [hidden email]
>>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> __________________________
>>> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
>>> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
>>> i grupy badawczej NeRDS
>>> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
>>> http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl
>>>
>>> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
>>> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
>>> autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)
>>> http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>>>
>>> Recenzje
>>> Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
>>> Pacific Standard:
>>> http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wik
>>> ipedia-93777/
>>> Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/re
>>> ad/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
>>> The Wikipedian:
>>> http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>> i/Wikimedia-l
>>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Dariusz Jemielniak-3
I believe that the AB should have something to propose and say there, so
until it is I am not going to put any proposals forward in this respect.

Best

On Jun 27, 2017 4:39 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Are those channels proposed as part of the paper you brought to the BGC on
> the 13th April, then?  Or are you ready to discuss them now?  Or will the
> possibility of establishing them be postponed until some time after the
> Advisory Board is reconstituted?
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> I think we should have those channels, once the body is constituted.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Dj
>>
>> On Jun 26, 2017 19:59, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dariusz
>>>
>>> Thanks for that update.  You don't mention any channels for
>>> communication between the reconstituted Board and the Community at large,
>>> nor opportunities for the Community at large to be involved in suggesting
>>> names.  I assume then that engagement with the Community is not considered
>>> important here?
>>>
>>> "Rogol"
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
>>>> priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
>>>> members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The
>>>> concept
>>>> they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on
>>>> how
>>>> the AB internal coordination will be organized [2]. The group will work
>>>> on
>>>> this with minimal overhead from the Board of Trustees and without
>>>> staff/budget support at first. The BGC believes that the AB can be used
>>>> as
>>>> a practical path for prospective members of the Board Board of Trustees,
>>>> and to formalize relationships between high-profile experts, and staff
>>>> and
>>>> the Board members. We shall answer with more details soon.
>>>>
>>>> We have not made any announcements, as we're in the process, which I
>>>> ope is
>>>> understandable - there is no formal constitution of the body yet.
>>>>
>>>> Dariusz & Nat
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_G
>>>> overnance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
>>>> [2]
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_G
>>>> overnance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Craig
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues
>>>> around
>>>> > the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested
>>>> in.
>>>> >
>>>> > Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory
>>>> Board has
>>>> > been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the
>>>> Community,
>>>> > and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
>>>> > process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new
>>>> members or
>>>> > new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who
>>>> the new
>>>> > Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory
>>>> Board is,
>>>> > or whether and how to engage with those members.
>>>> >
>>>> > Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for
>>>> engagement
>>>> > between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
>>>> > Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to
>>>> establish
>>>> > appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and
>>>> your
>>>> > fellow members to engage with the Community.
>>>> >
>>>> > You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view
>>>> is that
>>>> > the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider
>>>> Foundation on
>>>> > the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the
>>>> other
>>>> > has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is
>>>> one
>>>> > tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.
>>>> >
>>>> > "Rogol"
>>>> >
>>>> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related
>>>> > issues,
>>>> > > but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I
>>>> > learn
>>>> > > them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding
>>>> > reliable
>>>> > > sources.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative
>>>> centered
>>>> > at
>>>> > > the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk
>>>> about
>>>> > > this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit
>>>> journalism, per
>>>> > > the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
>>>> > > transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
>>>> > > difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide
>>>> significant
>>>> > > funding to the NII as well as WMF.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this
>>>> > subject.
>>>> > > Thanks!
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
>>>> > [hidden email]>
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation,
>>>> and
>>>> > was
>>>> > > > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so
>>>> in
>>>> > > 2015,
>>>> > > > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is
>>>> reflected at
>>>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the
>>>> corresponding
>>>> > > page
>>>> > > > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is
>>>> seriously
>>>> > out
>>>> > > of
>>>> > > > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just
>>>> > about
>>>> > > a
>>>> > > > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's
>>>> priorities to
>>>> > > > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC
>>>> minutes for
>>>> > > > April published a couple of days ago at
>>>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
>>>> > > > Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>>>> > > > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on
>>>> the
>>>> > > > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No
>>>> > Board
>>>> > > > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote
>>>> a
>>>> > page
>>>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
>>>> > > > movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
>>>> > > > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the
>>>> > current
>>>> > > > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a
>>>> fortnight of
>>>> > > the
>>>> > > > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in
>>>> > existence
>>>> > > > again.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been
>>>> reconstiuted, and
>>>> > > if
>>>> > > > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been
>>>> > reconstituted,
>>>> > > > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory
>>>> > Board
>>>> > > is
>>>> > > > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential
>>>> members be
>>>> > > > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
>>>> > > operation
>>>> > > > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community,
>>>> and if
>>>> > > so,
>>>> > > > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > "Rogol"
>>>> > > > _______________________________________________
>>>> > > > 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: [hidden email]
>>>> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsu
>>>> bscribe>
>>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>>> > > 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: [hidden email]
>>>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsu
>>>> bscribe>
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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: [hidden email]
>>>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>>>> ,
>>>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> __________________________
>>>> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
>>>> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
>>>> i grupy badawczej NeRDS
>>>> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
>>>> http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl
>>>>
>>>> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
>>>> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
>>>> autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)
>>>> http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>>>>
>>>> Recenzje
>>>> Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
>>>> Pacific Standard:
>>>> http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wik
>>>> ipedia-93777/
>>>> Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/re
>>>> ad/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
>>>> The Wikipedian:
>>>> http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>>> i/Wikimedia-l
>>>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Ting Chen-2
In reply to this post by Rogol Domedonfors
Hi,


the Advisory Board, as it was, and so far I can see, as it probably will
be, does not have something like a structure or a channel. It is more
like a bunch of individuals that mostly the board, and in some cases the
WMF staff may (or mostly) may not approach on specific topics. The board
and the staff don't need to follow the advises from these people and in
most cases I don't see that the AB members organize or interact very
much. For AB members that are very easy to access, like Florence, just
to name an obvious example, you have multiple channels to ask them about
their opinions. I see myself in this category too. Others may not want
to be able contacted by everyone, and I see alot benefit to respect this
and see only very small benefit to refuse them this.


So in my opinion the current model of the accessability of AB member is
just fine.


Greetings

Ting


Am 27.06.2017 um 16:39 schrieb Rogol Domedonfors:

> Are those channels proposed as part of the paper you brought to the BGC on
> the 13th April, then?  Or are you ready to discuss them now?  Or will the
> possibility of establishing them be postponed until some time after the
> Advisory Board is reconstituted?
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> I think we should have those channels, once the body is constituted.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Dj
>>
>> On Jun 26, 2017 19:59, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dariusz
>>>
>>> Thanks for that update.  You don't mention any channels for communication
>>> between the reconstituted Board and the Community at large, nor
>>> opportunities for the Community at large to be involved in suggesting
>>> names.  I assume then that engagement with the Community is not considered
>>> important here?
>>>
>>> "Rogol"
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello! The Advisory Board (AB) and its role was indeed among the BGC
>>>> priorities for this year [1]. And I have been working with the former AB
>>>> members on a concept for how the AB’s work should be organized. The
>>>> concept
>>>> they came up though needs to be clarified and improved, especially on how
>>>> the AB internal coordination will be organized [2]. The group will work
>>>> on
>>>> this with minimal overhead from the Board of Trustees and without
>>>> staff/budget support at first. The BGC believes that the AB can be used
>>>> as
>>>> a practical path for prospective members of the Board Board of Trustees,
>>>> and to formalize relationships between high-profile experts, and staff
>>>> and
>>>> the Board members. We shall answer with more details soon.
>>>>
>>>> We have not made any announcements, as we're in the process, which I ope
>>>> is
>>>> understandable - there is no formal constitution of the body yet.
>>>>
>>>> Dariusz & Nat
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_G
>>>> overnance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
>>>> [2]
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_G
>>>> overnance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Craig
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your thoughtful response.  There are two gneral issues
>>>> around
>>>>> the Advisory Board that members of the Community might be interested
>>>> in.
>>>>> Firstly, it seems that after having lapsed in 2015, the Advisory Board
>>>> has
>>>>> been reconstituted, but there has been no announcement to the
>>>> Community,
>>>>> and indeed the Community was given no opportunity to engage with the
>>>>> process of reconstitution (for example, by way of suggesting new
>>>> members or
>>>>> new processes).  In particular, we in the Community do not know who
>>>> the new
>>>>> Advisory Board members are, or what the new remit of the Advisory
>>>> Board is,
>>>>> or whether and how to engage with those members.
>>>>>
>>>>> Secondly, as a consequence there are no established channels for
>>>> engagement
>>>>> between the Advisory Board and the Community.  As a member of the new
>>>>> Avdvisory Board, you may wish to encourage your colleagues to establish
>>>>> appropriate opportunities and rules of engagement for yourself and your
>>>>> fellow members to engage with the Community.
>>>>>
>>>>> You mentioned "tradtions".  I am sorry to say that my personal view is
>>>> that
>>>>> the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the wider
>>>> Foundation on
>>>>> the one hand and the Community of contributors and consumers on the
>>>> other
>>>>> has "traditionally" been less than satisfctory.  I hope that this is
>>>> one
>>>>> tradition that your advice will be helpful in overturning.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Rogol"
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Craig Newmark <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rogol, I'm on the advisory board, and actively involved in related
>>>>> issues,
>>>>>> but have hesitated posting in respect for Community traditions (as I
>>>>> learn
>>>>>> them) and also, as a large effort emerges in journalism regarding
>>>>> reliable
>>>>>> sources.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Specifically, the latter involves the News Integrity Initiative
>>>> centered
>>>>> at
>>>>>> the City University of NY, graduate journalism department.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's to say, I hesitate until I learn the respectful way to talk
>>>> about
>>>>>> this, and until the NII has a lot more to say.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additional constraint per the ethics of funding nonprofit
>>>> journalism, per
>>>>>> the American Press Institute: when I say something, I need to be
>>>>>> transparent while also Doing No Harm.  (The latter is surprisingly
>>>>>> difficult.) To that effect, I gotta disclose that I provide
>>>> significant
>>>>>> funding to the NII as well as WMF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd appreciate your advice, and that of anyone interested in this
>>>>> subject.
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Craig Newmark, founder craigslist
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation,
>>>> and
>>>>> was
>>>>>>> required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so
>>>> in
>>>>>> 2015,
>>>>>>> so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is
>>>> reflected at
>>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the
>>>> corresponding
>>>>>> page
>>>>>>> at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is
>>>> seriously
>>>>> out
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just
>>>>> about
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's
>>>> priorities to
>>>>>>> revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC
>>>> minutes for
>>>>>>> April published a couple of days ago at
>>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
>>>>>>> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
>>>>>>> show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on
>>>> the
>>>>>>> subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No
>>>>> Board
>>>>>>> resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a
>>>>> page
>>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
>>>>>>> movement/2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
>>>>>>> recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the
>>>>> current
>>>>>>> movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a
>>>> fortnight of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in
>>>>> existence
>>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been
>>>> reconstiuted, and
>>>>>> if
>>>>>>> so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been
>>>>> reconstituted,
>>>>>>> what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory
>>>>> Board
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members
>>>> be
>>>>>>> welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
>>>>>> operation
>>>>>>> again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community,
>>>> and if
>>>>>> so,
>>>>>>> what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Rogol"
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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: [hidden email]
>>>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsu
>>>> bscribe>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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: [hidden email]
>>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma
>>>> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> __________________________
>>>> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
>>>> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
>>>> i grupy badawczej NeRDS
>>>> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
>>>> http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl
>>>>
>>>> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
>>>> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego
>>>> autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)
>>>> http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>>>>
>>>> Recenzje
>>>> Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
>>>> Pacific Standard:
>>>> http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wik
>>>> ipedia-93777/
>>>> Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/re
>>>> ad/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia
>>>> The Wikipedian:
>>>> http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>>>> i/Wikimedia-l
>>>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Nataliia Tymkiv
In reply to this post by Rogol Domedonfors
Hello! Please find my answers inline.

>> What is the status of the Avisory Board?

There is no active Advisory Board at the moment, but the Board has approved
inviting new members for the year. I have added a template to the page on
Wikimedia Foundation site about it not being accurate at the moment. Thank
you for noticing this.

>> Has it been reconstiuted, and if so, when, and who are its new members?

The Board has resolved to set up the Advisory Board during its meeting on
June 16, 2017. The invitation letter will be sent tonight. As Dariusz
mentioned already, the BGC discussion resulted in a proposal to the Board
[2] to set up the Advisory Board on a lightweight structure (without budget
and staff support at first), relying on the most active core of the former
Advisory Board members, and a few individuals selected by the Board of
Trustees based on the recommendation of the Governance Committee. So,
basically it will consist of people mentioned here [3], but only those who
took part in discussions about the AB role and strategy discussions and
only after they accepted the invitation to join.

>> If it has not been reconstituted, what is the status of Florence's
record?

As far as I know, Florence has indeed worked with the former AB members as
a group on their input to the Strategy process. Although the  Advisory
Board has not been active for a few years, we are still very thankful for
their perspective.

>> If and when the Advisory Board is reconstituted, will input from the
Community for potential members be welcome, and if so how will it be
gathered? Once the Board is in operation again, is it expected that it will
interact with  the Community, and if so, what will the mechanism be for
that interaction.

That’s for the AB to work on and come up with a suggestion to the
BGC/Board. The first task of the AB will be working on internal
coordination, other questions may follow.

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board

[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
[3] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board#Former_members

Best regards,
antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv

*NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working
hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You
should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in
advance!*


On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and was
> required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in 2015,
> so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding page
> at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously out of
> date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just about a
> year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to
> revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for
> April published a couple of days ago at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_
> Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No Board
> resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
>
> Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a page
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/
> 2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the current
> movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight of the
> BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in existence
> again.
>
> What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted, and if
> so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been reconstituted,
> what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory Board is
> reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in operation
> again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and if so,
> what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
>
> "Rogol"
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advisory Board of the Wikimedia Foundation

Pine W
Thanks for the updates.

My perspective is that a functioning advisory board could be nice to have,
and I hope that its scope and methods of work could be articulated
somewhere such as in a charter. I think that such an arrangement would help
everyone to know their roles and have realistic expectations.

My impression is that the AB is a less time-sensitive concern than several
other issues that are on the Board's agenda, and I would suggest "not
stressing" about the AB, although one benefit to having a functional and
well-designed AB is that the AB might be able to help the Board a bit with
some of the other issues.

Pine


On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Nataliia Tymkiv <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hello! Please find my answers inline.
>
> >> What is the status of the Avisory Board?
>
> There is no active Advisory Board at the moment, but the Board has approved
> inviting new members for the year. I have added a template to the page on
> Wikimedia Foundation site about it not being accurate at the moment. Thank
> you for noticing this.
>
> >> Has it been reconstiuted, and if so, when, and who are its new members?
>
> The Board has resolved to set up the Advisory Board during its meeting on
> June 16, 2017. The invitation letter will be sent tonight. As Dariusz
> mentioned already, the BGC discussion resulted in a proposal to the Board
> [2] to set up the Advisory Board on a lightweight structure (without budget
> and staff support at first), relying on the most active core of the former
> Advisory Board members, and a few individuals selected by the Board of
> Trustees based on the recommendation of the Governance Committee. So,
> basically it will consist of people mentioned here [3], but only those who
> took part in discussions about the AB role and strategy discussions and
> only after they accepted the invitation to join.
>
> >> If it has not been reconstituted, what is the status of Florence's
> record?
>
> As far as I know, Florence has indeed worked with the former AB members as
> a group on their input to the Strategy process. Although the  Advisory
> Board has not been active for a few years, we are still very thankful for
> their perspective.
>
> >> If and when the Advisory Board is reconstituted, will input from the
> Community for potential members be welcome, and if so how will it be
> gathered? Once the Board is in operation again, is it expected that it will
> interact with  the Community, and if so, what will the mechanism be for
> that interaction.
>
> That’s for the AB to work on and come up with a suggestion to the
> BGC/Board. The first task of the AB will be working on internal
> coordination, other questions may follow.
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_2016-07-08#Advisory_Board
>
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> [3] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board#Former_members
>
> Best regards,
> antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
>
> *NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working
> hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You
> should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in
> advance!*
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > This Board was fomed in 2007 to advise the  Wikimedia Foundation, and was
> > required to be renewed annually.  No resolution was made to do so in
> 2015,
> > so by the beginning of 2016 it had lapsed.  This status is reflected at
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board but the corresponding
> page
> > at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board is seriously out
> of
> > date (it was written when the board was still in existence).  Just about
> a
> > year ago, Dariusz assured me that "it is one of the BGC's priorities to
> > revise and re-ignite the Advisory Board" and indeed the BGC minutes for
> > April published a couple of days ago at
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_
> > Governance_Committee/Minutes_13-04-2017
> > show that the BGC took a paper (not made public) from Dariusz on the
> > subject and agreed to "submit a formal proposal to the Board".  No Board
> > resoultion on the subject has yet been published.
> >
> > Rather confusingly, shortly after the BGC meeting, Florence wrote a page
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/
> > 2017/Sources/WMF_Advisory_board
> > recording the Advisory Board's opinions on matters arising in the current
> > movement strategy process.  So it would seem that within a fortnight of
> the
> > BGC meeting, an entity called the Advisory Board was already in existence
> > again.
> >
> > What is the status of the Avisory Board?  Has it been reconstiuted, and
> if
> > so, when, and who are its new members?  If it has not been reconstituted,
> > what is the status of Florence's record?  If and when the Advisory Board
> is
> > reconstituted, will input from the Community for potential members be
> > welcome, and if so how will it be gathered?  Once the Board is in
> operation
> > again, is it expected that it will interact with  the Community, and if
> so,
> > what will the mechanism be for that interaction.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>