[Wikimedia-l] Profile of Magnus Manske

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
88 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Profile of Magnus Manske

Anthony Cole
Magnus, in the interview you said "From the Media Viewer, the Visual
Editor, to Wikidata transclusion, all have been resisted by vocal groups of
editors, not because they are a problem, but because they represent change.
For these editors, the site has worked fine for years; why change anything?"

Well, yes. No one here, I'm sure, will argue there aren't such groups.

But the problem with the blog post is you only mention them. You don't take
into account the very much larger crowd, including myself, who were hanging
out for the visual editor and were contemptuously flicked off by the
developers when we brought up fatal flaws, as just some more
superconservative no-vision Ludites - haters of change.

The first version of VE was so bad it was harming our mission. It was far
worse than "didn't do everything 100% right." It would have been bounced
back from the community to the developers even if that first group of
bitter, change-hating autistic ranters hadn't said a word.

I notice VE isn't even an option when I log out and edit en.Wikipedia, yet
above others are saying it is much improved and ready for release. What are
we waiting for?



Anthony Cole


On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple of
> > people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> > persisting with your idée fixe.
> >
>
> To be fair, Magnus was addressing more than just the initial complaints
> from 2013. He said, “condemning an entire product forever because the first
> version didn’t do everything 100% right is just plain stupid.”
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Magnus Manske-2
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:40 PM Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Magnus, in the interview you said "From the Media Viewer, the Visual
> Editor, to Wikidata transclusion, all have been resisted by vocal groups of
> editors, not because they are a problem, but because they represent change.
> For these editors, the site has worked fine for years; why change
> anything?"
>
> Well, yes. No one here, I'm sure, will argue there aren't such groups.
>
> But the problem with the blog post is you only mention them.


Because they are the problem, and they (by being vocal) often get more
attention than a more silent, sensible majority. But by getting attention,
they shape the general consensus, in a negative way.


> You don't take
> into account the very much larger crowd, including myself, who were hanging
> out for the visual editor and were contemptuously flicked off by the
> developers when we brought up fatal flaws, as just some more
> superconservative no-vision Ludites - haters of change.
>

I am not going to get into a who-said-what-to-whom-in-what-tone discussion
here. I wouldn't be surprised if some developers didn't bother to
differentiate between sensible feedback and nay-sayers. As I have said in
this mail thread, I hope the Foundation has learned how to deal with
feedback more sensibly.


>
> The first version of VE was so bad it was harming our mission. It was far
> worse than "didn't do everything 100% right." It would have been bounced
> back from the community to the developers even if that first group of
> bitter, change-hating autistic ranters hadn't said a word.
>

Consider this perspective: I doubt the developers would have pushed out
that first version if it had massively failed their own tests. But at some
point, you have to leave the test environment, and test your product
against reality. Remember, WMF is not Microsoft, with an army of thousands
of paid beta-testers.

So then it turns out there are more (and more really bad) bugs than
anticipated. Then you go and fix those bugs. Which is what they did. But
turning a major endeavour on and off repeatedly is just a bad thing to do.
AFICT the window where wrong edits were made by VE was not /that/ large.
Apparently, the decision was made to "power through it", rather than flip
the switch repeatedly. That may or may not have been the right strategy.


>
> I notice VE isn't even an option when I log out and edit en.Wikipedia, yet
> above others are saying it is much improved and ready for release. What are
> we waiting for?
>

This is the thing. The atmosphere has been poisoned against VE, which now
makes it much harder to get a good product deployed.

But I agree with the sentiment. What ARE we waiting for?

Cheers,
Magnus


>
>
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple
> of
> > > people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> > > persisting with your idée fixe.
> > >
> >
> > To be fair, Magnus was addressing more than just the initial complaints
> > from 2013. He said, “condemning an entire product forever because the
> first
> > version didn’t do everything 100% right is just plain stupid.”
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > 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
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Jens Best-2
In reply to this post by Magnus Manske-2
I'm not sure where you get your impressions, Magnus. But when I discuss
ideas for a better implementation of Wikidata into Wikipedia to improve
automatisation of repetitive editing procedures, including the
implementation of the possible use of structured data, I rarely hear "It Is
Not Made Here" or "It's Bad Because Its New".

When it comes to analyse the problems with Wikidata it isn't only about
possible early-lifecycle issues(which can be fix), but about the blind spot
when it comes to develope working social processes which keep everybody
(especially the editors) in the picture.

Community involvement (especially consultations) are often seem to be
organized only out of necessity. They not in the middle of the
decision-making process. Nobody said that doing things the way they are
done in a crowdsourced, community-driven process are easy, but this is no
excuse for any Foundation or other similiar entity to set up an
intransparent, precendents creating process where community becomes
accessories.

The whole way the Knowledge Engine process was implemented, the whole still
intransparent incident of kicking a highly valued community-selected person
out of the WMF board are clear signals that some people already decided
about the future of Wikimedia and now staging a folksy broad consultation
circus to create the impression of transparent community involvement. -
Deciding about the color of the car if you would instead prefer to talk
about the vehicle is the illusion of community-based decisionmaking.

We need a lot of change in the social procedures at the level of really
needed ground work which is important for changing the Wikiprojects to make
them work for the future. To reflect and to work on the development of
these social procedures would be the most precious work to be done by the
Foundation. Instead the Foundation dreams of techbubble-driven, humanless
wonderland full of free floading informations which magically forms into
knowledge when it somehow hits a human being.

I like the idea of Wikidata.
I like the idea of combining Encylopedia with structured data to enable
understanding and easy re-use at the reader-side of Wikiprojects. So many
things are imaginable there when the culture of conveying the needed
individual and social skills are done well. Tech is only tool to these
processes. Tools are important, but not the purpose when it comes to
disseminate knowledge.

regards,
Jens




2016-01-19 15:56 GMT+01:00 Magnus Manske <[hidden email]>:

> Anthony, it does seem you've missed some of which I wrote in this thread. I
> have no problem with specific criticism where it is deserved, and I do well
> remember that the Visual Editor, in its early incarnation, was not quite up
> to the job.
>
> What I do have a problem with is people fixating on some technical or
> early-lifecycle issues, declaring the entire thing worthless, even
> dangerous, and spreading that view around. This behaviour, I have seen time
> and again, with the Media Viewer, with Wikidata.
>
> It's bad because it's broken - let's come together and fix it.
>
> It's bad because ... well, everyone says it's bad. And new. And Not Made
> Here. THAT is a problem, and not a technological one.
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 2:39 PM Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple of
> > people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> > persisting with your idée fixe.
> >
> > There were two parts to the visual editor catastrophe, actually. The
> > product wasn't ready for anyone to use. Not veteran editors. Not newbies.
> > Newbies who used it were less likely to successfully complete an edit. It
> > was broken, and the WMF insisted we had to use it.
> >
> > The second part of the problem was arrogance. Yes, a few editors were
> > unnecessarily rude about the product and the developers. But then most of
> > the developers and tech staff who dealt with the community arrogantly
> > characterised *anyone* who complained about the product as an ignorant,
> > selfish Ludite - and you're persisting with that characterisation now.
> >
> > The WMF under Lila has learned the lessons from that, and they have
> > fostered a much healthier relationship between the developers and the
> > community. You clearly haven't learned all you might have.
> >
> > In fact, reading the arrogant responses from you here and in the
> concurrent
> > thread titled "How to disseminate free knowledge," and from Denny in
> > earlier threads addressing criticism of WikiData, it seems to me there is
> > still a significant arrogance problem that needs addressing, at least
> over
> > at WikiData.
> >
> > Some people may approach you arrogantly, maybe even insultingly, about an
> > innovation, and I suppose you might be justified in talking down to them
> or
> > ridiculing them (though I advise against it.). But if you can't
> distinguish
> > them from those who approach you with genuine concerns and well-founded
> > criticisms, then no matter how clever you think your technical solutions
> > are, you will soon find you're no more welcome here than those WMF
> staffers
> > who thought insulting well-meaning critics was a good career move.
> >
> > Denny's contemptuous dismissal of valid criticisms of his project, and
> your
> > contemptuous dismissal of the valid criticisms of the early visual editor
> > and its launch are both very disappointing.
> >
> > Anthony Cole
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Magnus Manske <
> > [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The iPhone was a commercial success because it let you do the basic
> > > functions easily and intuitively, and looked shiny at the same time. We
> > do
> > > not charge a price; our "win" comes by people using our product. If we
> > can
> > > present the product in such a way that more people use it, it is a
> > success
> > > for us.
> > >
> > > I do stand by my example :-)
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37 PM Michael Peel <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > On 18 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Magnus Manske <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly
> > > enthusiastic. I
> > > > > would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to handle
> new
> > > > > software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic functionality,
> but
> > > > > working smoothly first.
> > > >
> > > > But at a huge cost premium? I'm not sure that's a good example to
> make
> > > > here. :-/
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Mike
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > 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
> > > 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
> > 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
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Andrew Lih
In reply to this post by Magnus Manske-2
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Magnus Manske <[hidden email]
> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:40 PM Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I notice VE isn't even an option when I log out and edit en.Wikipedia,
> yet
> > above others are saying it is much improved and ready for release. What
> are
> > we waiting for?
> >
>
> This is the thing. The atmosphere has been poisoned against VE, which now
> makes it much harder to get a good product deployed.
>
> But I agree with the sentiment. What ARE we waiting for?
>

Folks, it is ON by default in English Wikipedia for new users who are
logged in. But not for anons.

At the top of the articles now: "Read - Edit source - Edit - View History”

This was turned on late last year as a default for new users, to the
delight of those who do GLAM training and edit-a-thons.

-Andrew
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Anthony Cole
Excellent. Seems funny it's not the default for IPs.



Anthony Cole


On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Magnus Manske <
> [hidden email]
> > wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:40 PM Anthony Cole <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I notice VE isn't even an option when I log out and edit en.Wikipedia,
> > yet
> > > above others are saying it is much improved and ready for release. What
> > are
> > > we waiting for?
> > >
> >
> > This is the thing. The atmosphere has been poisoned against VE, which now
> > makes it much harder to get a good product deployed.
> >
> > But I agree with the sentiment. What ARE we waiting for?
> >
>
> Folks, it is ON by default in English Wikipedia for new users who are
> logged in. But not for anons.
>
> At the top of the articles now: "Read - Edit source - Edit - View History”
>
> This was turned on late last year as a default for new users, to the
> delight of those who do GLAM training and edit-a-thons.
>
> -Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Anthony Cole
In reply to this post by Magnus Manske-2
Magnus, regarding, "...at some point, you have to leave the test
environment, and test your product against reality."

Of course. But VE was far, far too bad for real time when it was released.
Really. It was driving newbies away. The sensible embracers-of-change threw
it out, in the end. The squealing Ludites don't have the numbers for that.
When the sensible majority starts squealing, the developers really need to
pay attention.

I didn't follow it carefully but it seemed to me the release of the Image
Viewer was much better timed and handled. Ludites squealed but genuine
concerns were addressed promptly and respectfully.

Anthony Cole


On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Magnus Manske <[hidden email]
> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:40 PM Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Magnus, in the interview you said "From the Media Viewer, the Visual
> > Editor, to Wikidata transclusion, all have been resisted by vocal groups
> of
> > editors, not because they are a problem, but because they represent
> change.
> > For these editors, the site has worked fine for years; why change
> > anything?"
> >
> > Well, yes. No one here, I'm sure, will argue there aren't such groups.
> >
> > But the problem with the blog post is you only mention them.
>
>
> Because they are the problem, and they (by being vocal) often get more
> attention than a more silent, sensible majority. But by getting attention,
> they shape the general consensus, in a negative way.
>
>
> > You don't take
> > into account the very much larger crowd, including myself, who were
> hanging
> > out for the visual editor and were contemptuously flicked off by the
> > developers when we brought up fatal flaws, as just some more
> > superconservative no-vision Ludites - haters of change.
> >
>
> I am not going to get into a who-said-what-to-whom-in-what-tone discussion
> here. I wouldn't be surprised if some developers didn't bother to
> differentiate between sensible feedback and nay-sayers. As I have said in
> this mail thread, I hope the Foundation has learned how to deal with
> feedback more sensibly.
>
>
> >
> > The first version of VE was so bad it was harming our mission. It was far
> > worse than "didn't do everything 100% right." It would have been bounced
> > back from the community to the developers even if that first group of
> > bitter, change-hating autistic ranters hadn't said a word.
> >
>
> Consider this perspective: I doubt the developers would have pushed out
> that first version if it had massively failed their own tests. But at some
> point, you have to leave the test environment, and test your product
> against reality. Remember, WMF is not Microsoft, with an army of thousands
> of paid beta-testers.
>
> So then it turns out there are more (and more really bad) bugs than
> anticipated. Then you go and fix those bugs. Which is what they did. But
> turning a major endeavour on and off repeatedly is just a bad thing to do.
> AFICT the window where wrong edits were made by VE was not /that/ large.
> Apparently, the decision was made to "power through it", rather than flip
> the switch repeatedly. That may or may not have been the right strategy.
>
>
> >
> > I notice VE isn't even an option when I log out and edit en.Wikipedia,
> yet
> > above others are saying it is much improved and ready for release. What
> are
> > we waiting for?
> >
>
> This is the thing. The atmosphere has been poisoned against VE, which now
> makes it much harder to get a good product deployed.
>
> But I agree with the sentiment. What ARE we waiting for?
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Anthony Cole
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple
> > of
> > > > people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> > > > persisting with your idée fixe.
> > > >
> > >
> > > To be fair, Magnus was addressing more than just the initial complaints
> > > from 2013. He said, “condemning an entire product forever because the
> > first
> > > version didn’t do everything 100% right is just plain stupid.”
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > 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
> > 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
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Anna Stillwell
Informative discussion. Thank you all. I knew the history here, but seeing
it come alive from these various perspectives further clarified that
history for me.

Thank you.
/a

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Magnus, regarding, "...at some point, you have to leave the test
> environment, and test your product against reality."
>
> Of course. But VE was far, far too bad for real time when it was released.
> Really. It was driving newbies away. The sensible embracers-of-change threw
> it out, in the end. The squealing Ludites don't have the numbers for that.
> When the sensible majority starts squealing, the developers really need to
> pay attention.
>
> I didn't follow it carefully but it seemed to me the release of the Image
> Viewer was much better timed and handled. Ludites squealed but genuine
> concerns were addressed promptly and respectfully.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Magnus Manske <
> [hidden email]
> > wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:40 PM Anthony Cole <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Magnus, in the interview you said "From the Media Viewer, the Visual
> > > Editor, to Wikidata transclusion, all have been resisted by vocal
> groups
> > of
> > > editors, not because they are a problem, but because they represent
> > change.
> > > For these editors, the site has worked fine for years; why change
> > > anything?"
> > >
> > > Well, yes. No one here, I'm sure, will argue there aren't such groups.
> > >
> > > But the problem with the blog post is you only mention them.
> >
> >
> > Because they are the problem, and they (by being vocal) often get more
> > attention than a more silent, sensible majority. But by getting
> attention,
> > they shape the general consensus, in a negative way.
> >
> >
> > > You don't take
> > > into account the very much larger crowd, including myself, who were
> > hanging
> > > out for the visual editor and were contemptuously flicked off by the
> > > developers when we brought up fatal flaws, as just some more
> > > superconservative no-vision Ludites - haters of change.
> > >
> >
> > I am not going to get into a who-said-what-to-whom-in-what-tone
> discussion
> > here. I wouldn't be surprised if some developers didn't bother to
> > differentiate between sensible feedback and nay-sayers. As I have said in
> > this mail thread, I hope the Foundation has learned how to deal with
> > feedback more sensibly.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > The first version of VE was so bad it was harming our mission. It was
> far
> > > worse than "didn't do everything 100% right." It would have been
> bounced
> > > back from the community to the developers even if that first group of
> > > bitter, change-hating autistic ranters hadn't said a word.
> > >
> >
> > Consider this perspective: I doubt the developers would have pushed out
> > that first version if it had massively failed their own tests. But at
> some
> > point, you have to leave the test environment, and test your product
> > against reality. Remember, WMF is not Microsoft, with an army of
> thousands
> > of paid beta-testers.
> >
> > So then it turns out there are more (and more really bad) bugs than
> > anticipated. Then you go and fix those bugs. Which is what they did. But
> > turning a major endeavour on and off repeatedly is just a bad thing to
> do.
> > AFICT the window where wrong edits were made by VE was not /that/ large.
> > Apparently, the decision was made to "power through it", rather than flip
> > the switch repeatedly. That may or may not have been the right strategy.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I notice VE isn't even an option when I log out and edit en.Wikipedia,
> > yet
> > > above others are saying it is much improved and ready for release. What
> > are
> > > we waiting for?
> > >
> >
> > This is the thing. The atmosphere has been poisoned against VE, which now
> > makes it much harder to get a good product deployed.
> >
> > But I agree with the sentiment. What ARE we waiting for?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Magnus
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Anthony Cole
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A
> couple
> > > of
> > > > > people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> > > > > persisting with your idée fixe.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > To be fair, Magnus was addressing more than just the initial
> complaints
> > > > from 2013. He said, “condemning an entire product forever because the
> > > first
> > > > version didn’t do everything 100% right is just plain stupid.”
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > 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
> > > 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
> > 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
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
Anna Stillwell
Major Gifts Officer
Wikimedia Foundation
415.806.1536
*www.wikimediafoundation.org <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>*
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Pine W
In reply to this post by Anthony Cole
As it happens, I now like both VE and Image Viewer as optional features. I
didn't appreciate how they were deployed.

The constitutional crisis that WMF created by using Superprotect to force
Image VIewer on the communities was arrogant, disproportionate, politically
unwise, and wasteful. Although WMF has backed off from this position a bit,
it has never apologized for it AFAIK, and this is one in a number of
experiences that is informing the community thinking about strategic
alternatives to WMF.

Let me contrast this with Echo, which had some initial pains but was
accepted by the community with relative ease. It's still one of my favorite
features, and I look forward to its continued development.

Piine

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Magnus, regarding, "...at some point, you have to leave the test
> environment, and test your product against reality."
>
> Of course. But VE was far, far too bad for real time when it was released.
> Really. It was driving newbies away. The sensible embracers-of-change threw
> it out, in the end. The squealing Ludites don't have the numbers for that.
> When the sensible majority starts squealing, the developers really need to
> pay attention.
>
> I didn't follow it carefully but it seemed to me the release of the Image
> Viewer was much better timed and handled. Ludites squealed but genuine
> concerns were addressed promptly and respectfully.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Ziko van Dijk-3
Hello,

I can second more or less everything what Magnus said, and hope that
the discussion about how to implement software improvements will go on
in a productive way. I totally agree with Magnus and many others that
these improvements are very much necessary - just think of Wikimedia
Commons.

On one point I would like to mention what could be a serious cause for
disagreement between "the Foundation" and "the community" (both aren't
monolithic). Sometimes I experience that paid collaborators of the WMF
or chapters perceive "the community" as a huge workforce, a steerable
resource without limits, that can be made use of.

When the VE was introduced in 2013, some people from the WMF might
have thought: "the community" has unlimited time to clean up the mess
that is temporarily created by the VE. Using that resource is better
than to wait with the introduction, as software development is costly.

But "the community" was unhappy to serve as beta testers and cleaning
personnel, certainly without having been asked.

Adding insult to injury, during the VE introduction of 2013, one WMF
collaborator said on a talk page: Don't forget your resistance is
burning a lot of money. - It is a little strange to tell this to the
people who are creating the income by their volunteer work.

With regard to the Media Viewer, in 2014, my opinion was different:
the MV worked fairly well, serving to readers and to newbies. As long
as I can turn it off (because it is rather slowing down my workflow
than support it) I am happy with it.

Neither "the Foundation", neither "the community" is always right (or
always wrong). It's that simple.

Kind regards
Ziko




















2016-01-19 18:53 GMT+01:00 Pine W <[hidden email]>:

> As it happens, I now like both VE and Image Viewer as optional features. I
> didn't appreciate how they were deployed.
>
> The constitutional crisis that WMF created by using Superprotect to force
> Image VIewer on the communities was arrogant, disproportionate, politically
> unwise, and wasteful. Although WMF has backed off from this position a bit,
> it has never apologized for it AFAIK, and this is one in a number of
> experiences that is informing the community thinking about strategic
> alternatives to WMF.
>
> Let me contrast this with Echo, which had some initial pains but was
> accepted by the community with relative ease. It's still one of my favorite
> features, and I look forward to its continued development.
>
> Piine
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Magnus, regarding, "...at some point, you have to leave the test
>> environment, and test your product against reality."
>>
>> Of course. But VE was far, far too bad for real time when it was released.
>> Really. It was driving newbies away. The sensible embracers-of-change threw
>> it out, in the end. The squealing Ludites don't have the numbers for that.
>> When the sensible majority starts squealing, the developers really need to
>> pay attention.
>>
>> I didn't follow it carefully but it seemed to me the release of the Image
>> Viewer was much better timed and handled. Ludites squealed but genuine
>> concerns were addressed promptly and respectfully.
>>
>> Anthony Cole
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Philippe Beaudette-4
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 1:45 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> As a huge VE advocate, I was quite disconcerted how hard the WMF was
> trying to force through what was clearly an early beta in need of
> real-world testing as if it were a production-ready product; I think
> this was the problem and the reason for the backlash. VE *now* has had
> a couple of years' development in a real-world environment and is
> really quite excellent (and the only sensible way to edit tables). But
> the problem here was not fear of change or fear of technology, but
> rejecting technology that was being forced on editors when it was
> really obviously not up to the job as yet.
>
>
> - d.
>

This.  David and Risker say it well.  From my position, as the guy
responsible for the team that was worried about the non-technical aspects
of the rollout,  I think I'm safe​

​in saying that the root cause was a lack of a clearly articulated minimum
viable product. From the WMF developers' POV, "Hey!  it does half of what
you need!" was a pretty substantial win at the time.  From the POV of a
random editor, "Hey!  it only does //half// of what I need" was pretty
damning criticism.

I own part of the blame for that rollout. I wish I'd pushed back harder.
In my own defense, the team that had to articulate these changes and manage
the social roll out (which formed the corpus of the Community Engagement
(Product) team today)​ was hired about 11 minutes before the roll-out.  We
didn't have much of a chance to have direct influence.  And I don't think
we really knew how many editing errors would be introduced - I don't think
that anyone expected that, and until we got it up to scale, we wouldn't
have seen that, necessarily.

The real flaw was the failure to agree with the editing community on what
the minimum viable product was.  I'm pleased to say that the WMF learned a
lot from that experience, and by the time I left, we had moved on to making
a whole new set of mistakes....

But yeah, what David and Risker said.

pb

>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--


Philippe Beaudette

[hidden email]
415-275-1424
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Todd Allen
In reply to this post by Anthony Cole
Once the VisualEditor was fit for purpose and a good deployment strategy
had been developed, the English Wikipedia community overwhelmingly
supported rolling it out. (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_125#Gradually_enabling_VisualEditor_for_new_accounts
)

It's not Luddism, it's not "resistance to change", it's not "power users"
grumpy about newbies having an easier time, it's not anything like that.
It's that in the state it was initially released in, the thing did not work.

So yes, by all means, let's try new things. But try:

1: Asking us what we actually want, before coding something up and feeling
obligated to push it out. People are a lot more receptive to something they
asked for than something being forced upon them. That's been an issue with
Flow. It's not that it doesn't work well (though it doesn't), it's that it
wasn't wanted to start with. So instead of "Here's the new discussion
system", ask "What can we do to make our system of discussion better?"

2: Make sure it works. Have an opt-in beta phase. Doesn't have to be
perfect, but certainly make sure it's not breaking page formatting all over
the place. You'll notice, for example, that there wasn't really any
resistance to HHVM. It worked well, it was desirable, it was clearly fit
for purpose. So no, there isn't just a reflexive change aversion. Though
the previous missteps and hamfisted followups have, rather ironically,
created a lot of the reflexive change aversion that people said was there.

3: Be nice (but NOT condescending or patronizing) if an issue comes up.
"Superprotect" alienated people right quickly, and turned what could have
been a productive (if tense) conversation into a war. Same with refusal to
budge on VE and the arrogant tone several people took. Yes, some people
might be rude about objecting to the change. Don't sink to their level. If
they call the new software a steaming pile, ask "Could you offer more
concrete feedback?"

4: Don't surprise people. Not everyone follows the Village Pumps or what
have you. If a major new feature is set to roll out, do banners, do
watchlist notices, do whatever it takes, but make sure people know. When
Mediaviewer was rolled out, all of a sudden, I was just having images act
completely different. I had no idea what was going on. People are more
amenable to change if you brace them for it. Even better, do that to
develop a rollout strategy in advance with the community. (You already know
they want it; they asked for it. Right?)

5: If at all feasible, offer an easy opt-out. People are actually more
likely to give something a decent try if they know they can switch back if
they don't like it.

6: Show willingness to budge. "No, we won't do ACTRIAL, period." "You get
VE, like it or not." "You're getting Mediaviewer even if we have to develop
a new protection level to cram it down your throats!" That type of
hamfisted, I'm-right-you're-wrong approach will gear people right up for a
fight. Fights are bad. Discussions are good. But people don't like to talk
to a brick wall.

Many of us were asking for a WYSIWYG editor for some time, because we very
much need a way to reach out to prospective editors who are intimidated by
wikimarkup or just don't care to learn it. So it wasn't that we were
opposed to VE in principle. Good idea, bad execution.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple of
> people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> persisting with your idée fixe.
>
> There were two parts to the visual editor catastrophe, actually. The
> product wasn't ready for anyone to use. Not veteran editors. Not newbies.
> Newbies who used it were less likely to successfully complete an edit. It
> was broken, and the WMF insisted we had to use it.
>
> The second part of the problem was arrogance. Yes, a few editors were
> unnecessarily rude about the product and the developers. But then most of
> the developers and tech staff who dealt with the community arrogantly
> characterised *anyone* who complained about the product as an ignorant,
> selfish Ludite - and you're persisting with that characterisation now.
>
> The WMF under Lila has learned the lessons from that, and they have
> fostered a much healthier relationship between the developers and the
> community. You clearly haven't learned all you might have.
>
> In fact, reading the arrogant responses from you here and in the concurrent
> thread titled "How to disseminate free knowledge," and from Denny in
> earlier threads addressing criticism of WikiData, it seems to me there is
> still a significant arrogance problem that needs addressing, at least over
> at WikiData.
>
> Some people may approach you arrogantly, maybe even insultingly, about an
> innovation, and I suppose you might be justified in talking down to them or
> ridiculing them (though I advise against it.). But if you can't distinguish
> them from those who approach you with genuine concerns and well-founded
> criticisms, then no matter how clever you think your technical solutions
> are, you will soon find you're no more welcome here than those WMF staffers
> who thought insulting well-meaning critics was a good career move.
>
> Denny's contemptuous dismissal of valid criticisms of his project, and your
> contemptuous dismissal of the valid criticisms of the early visual editor
> and its launch are both very disappointing.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Magnus Manske <
> [hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > The iPhone was a commercial success because it let you do the basic
> > functions easily and intuitively, and looked shiny at the same time. We
> do
> > not charge a price; our "win" comes by people using our product. If we
> can
> > present the product in such a way that more people use it, it is a
> success
> > for us.
> >
> > I do stand by my example :-)
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37 PM Michael Peel <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > On 18 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Magnus Manske <[hidden email]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly
> > enthusiastic. I
> > > > would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to handle new
> > > > software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic functionality, but
> > > > working smoothly first.
> > >
> > > But at a huge cost premium? I'm not sure that's a good example to make
> > > here. :-/
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mike
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > 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
> > 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
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Marc-Andre
In reply to this post by Pine W
On 2016-01-19 12:53 PM, Pine W wrote:
> The constitutional crisis that WMF created by using Superprotect to force
> Image VIewer on the communities [...]

... except that this is not what happened.  While that narrative might
be satisfying for someone who looks for a sense of being the stalwart
defender of an oppressed community, the reality is that superprotect was
created to block the deployment of a technically inapt and entirely
broken "fix" that was - itself - a kneejerk reaction.

Which is not to say that its creation or use was wise in any way - it
wasn't.  But trying to reframe things in "oh, evil WMF did all wrong
against the poor, innocent community" terms serves no purpose other than
create a windmill to tilt at.

-- Marc


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Magnus Manske-2
In reply to this post by Todd Allen
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:58 AM Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Once the VisualEditor was fit for purpose and a good deployment strategy
> had been developed, the English Wikipedia community overwhelmingly
> supported rolling it out. (
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_125#Gradually_enabling_VisualEditor_for_new_accounts
> )
>
That is for new accounts only. Without an account, still no VE for you,
even if you are probably the one needing it most.

>
> It's not Luddism, it's not "resistance to change", it's not "power users"
> grumpy about newbies having an easier time, it's not anything like that.
> It's that in the state it was initially released in, the thing did not
> work.
>

No one said "Luddism", except to defend against its use. Odd.


> So yes, by all means, let's try new things. But try:
>
> 1: Asking us what we actually want, before coding something up and feeling
> obligated to push it out. People are a lot more receptive to something they
> asked for than something being forced upon them. That's been an issue with
> Flow. It's not that it doesn't work well (though it doesn't), it's that it
> wasn't wanted to start with. So instead of "Here's the new discussion
> system", ask "What can we do to make our system of discussion better?"
>

Listening to what editors want is important. ONLY listening to wad editors
want is bad. People often don't know what they want or need, until they see
it. Compare the famous (possibly misattributed) Henry Ford quote:
“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster
horses.”

Also, veteran editors do not represent the readers or casual/newbie
editors; their needs are often quite different.


>
> 2: Make sure it works. Have an opt-in beta phase. Doesn't have to be
> perfect, but certainly make sure it's not breaking page formatting all over
> the place. You'll notice, for example, that there wasn't really any
> resistance to HHVM. It worked well, it was desirable, it was clearly fit
> for purpose. So no, there isn't just a reflexive change aversion. Though
> the previous missteps and hamfisted followups have, rather ironically,
> created a lot of the reflexive change aversion that people said was there.
>

Wrong example. The HHMV switch was a back-end change that should have had
no visible effect. As long as the servers are fast, people don't really
care what's going on there. Did e.g. English Wikipedia actually vote on
HHMV?

>
> 3: Be nice (but NOT condescending or patronizing) if an issue comes up.
> "Superprotect" alienated people right quickly, and turned what could have
> been a productive (if tense) conversation into a war. Same with refusal to
> budge on VE and the arrogant tone several people took. Yes, some people
> might be rude about objecting to the change. Don't sink to their level. If
> they call the new software a steaming pile, ask "Could you offer more
> concrete feedback?"
>

Superprotect was used to revert an admin action on de.wikipedia, an action
that might actually fall under U.S. or German computer sabotage laws. This
was hailed as some heroic action by that vocal group I keep mentioning,
when it can easily be seen as someone abusing the privileges given by the
Foundation (as owners of the servers) to deactivate functionality put in
place by the Foundation.
The creation and subsequent use of superprotect was not exactly the most
wise decision ever undertaken, but neither was the original sabotage
(literally so; using access to a machine to stop it from working, just not
using a wooden shoe).
And while it is always good to ask for more concrete feedback, it is even
better to offer it to begin with.


>
> 4: Don't surprise people. Not everyone follows the Village Pumps or what
> have you. If a major new feature is set to roll out, do banners, do
> watchlist notices, do whatever it takes, but make sure people know. When
> Mediaviewer was rolled out, all of a sudden, I was just having images act
> completely different. I had no idea what was going on. People are more
> amenable to change if you brace them for it. Even better, do that to
> develop a rollout strategy in advance with the community. (You already know
> they want it; they asked for it. Right?)
>

The Foundation appears to be doing this already. I even saw a mail about it
today.


>
> 5: If at all feasible, offer an easy opt-out. People are actually more
> likely to give something a decent try if they know they can switch back if
> they don't like it.
>

IIRC, both VE and MediaViewer offered opt-out from the beginning; the MV
opt-out just was "below the fold" or something.


>
> 6: Show willingness to budge. "No, we won't do ACTRIAL, period." "You get
> VE, like it or not." "You're getting Mediaviewer even if we have to develop
> a new protection level to cram it down your throats!" That type of
> hamfisted, I'm-right-you're-wrong approach will gear people right up for a
> fight. Fights are bad. Discussions are good. But people don't like to talk
> to a brick wall.
>

Everyone (as in, the vast majority of people I ever spoke to, approaching
100%) agreed that Wikipedia editing, especially for newbies, sucked.
Everyone agreed that what happened when clicking on a file in Wikipedia was
confusing for most readers.
These are not issues the Foundation just made up in some ivory tower; there
was little dispute that something should be done. So the Foundation did,
and switched their solution on, for everyone, because most users are "just"
readers, not editors, and see an actual improvement. Neiter VE nor MV was
perfect in the beginning; neither is now. They just got better over time.
So MV is active for everyone, including IPs, even on German Wikipedia,
right now. Because it's beeter for most people, and it works. Why did it
need to be completely switch off again?


>
> Many of us were asking for a WYSIWYG editor for some time, because we very
> much need a way to reach out to prospective editors who are intimidated by
> wikimarkup or just don't care to learn it. So it wasn't that we were
> opposed to VE in principle. Good idea, bad execution.
>

As someone who has worked on alternative Wikitext parsers, and alternative
interfaces, rest assured that the execution was quite good for an initial
version. As I said before, it is impossible to get this perfect right away.
Just like it is impossible (literally, as in "not possible") to reliably
get the license for an image in MV on all cases. The community/vocal group
needs to show some patience when developers are trying their best to get a
giant project up and running smoothy.

Cheers,
Magnus


>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple of
> > people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> > persisting with your idée fixe.
> >
> > There were two parts to the visual editor catastrophe, actually. The
> > product wasn't ready for anyone to use. Not veteran editors. Not newbies.
> > Newbies who used it were less likely to successfully complete an edit. It
> > was broken, and the WMF insisted we had to use it.
> >
> > The second part of the problem was arrogance. Yes, a few editors were
> > unnecessarily rude about the product and the developers. But then most of
> > the developers and tech staff who dealt with the community arrogantly
> > characterised *anyone* who complained about the product as an ignorant,
> > selfish Ludite - and you're persisting with that characterisation now.
> >
> > The WMF under Lila has learned the lessons from that, and they have
> > fostered a much healthier relationship between the developers and the
> > community. You clearly haven't learned all you might have.
> >
> > In fact, reading the arrogant responses from you here and in the
> concurrent
> > thread titled "How to disseminate free knowledge," and from Denny in
> > earlier threads addressing criticism of WikiData, it seems to me there is
> > still a significant arrogance problem that needs addressing, at least
> over
> > at WikiData.
> >
> > Some people may approach you arrogantly, maybe even insultingly, about an
> > innovation, and I suppose you might be justified in talking down to them
> or
> > ridiculing them (though I advise against it.). But if you can't
> distinguish
> > them from those who approach you with genuine concerns and well-founded
> > criticisms, then no matter how clever you think your technical solutions
> > are, you will soon find you're no more welcome here than those WMF
> staffers
> > who thought insulting well-meaning critics was a good career move.
> >
> > Denny's contemptuous dismissal of valid criticisms of his project, and
> your
> > contemptuous dismissal of the valid criticisms of the early visual editor
> > and its launch are both very disappointing.
> >
> > Anthony Cole
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Magnus Manske <
> > [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The iPhone was a commercial success because it let you do the basic
> > > functions easily and intuitively, and looked shiny at the same time. We
> > do
> > > not charge a price; our "win" comes by people using our product. If we
> > can
> > > present the product in such a way that more people use it, it is a
> > success
> > > for us.
> > >
> > > I do stand by my example :-)
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37 PM Michael Peel <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > On 18 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Magnus Manske <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly
> > > enthusiastic. I
> > > > > would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to handle
> new
> > > > > software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic functionality,
> but
> > > > > working smoothly first.
> > > >
> > > > But at a huge cost premium? I'm not sure that's a good example to
> make
> > > > here. :-/
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Mike
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > 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
> > > 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
> > 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
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Pete Forsyth-2
In reply to this post by Marc-Andre
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2016-01-19 12:53 PM, Pine W wrote:
>
>> The constitutional crisis that WMF created by using Superprotect to force
>> Image VIewer on the communities [...]
>>
>
> ... except that this is not what happened.  While that narrative might be
> satisfying for someone who looks for a sense of being the stalwart defender
> of an oppressed community, the reality is that superprotect was created to
> block the deployment of a technically inapt and entirely broken "fix" that
> was - itself - a kneejerk reaction.
>

No, Marc. Your version is quite a stretch. According to Lila Tretikov --
the person responsible for rolling out Superprotect -- its legacy is that
it established a "precedent of mistrust
<http://wikistrategies.net/superprotect-removed/>."

It was deployed to block something, but the thing that was technically
inept was the initial deployment of Media Viewer. Even if you (or WMF)
disagreed, there was no real cost to the alternative of disabling it by
default, with the possibility of fixing it and redeploying it.

Even now, more than a year later, independent news organizations and web
sites frequently cite the wrong person when reusing Commons photos -- they
cite the uploader, rather than the photographer. That bug (one of many) was
caught, has now been fixed (in the last couple of weeks). It was caught by
a photographer looking after his own attribution -- a photographer who did
not sign the Superprotect letter, if that matters -- not by Wikimedia staff.

Media Viewer was deployed before it was ready. There was no benefit to
doing so. Superprotect was deployed to reinforce that bad decision.

Which is not to say that its creation or use was wise in any way - it
> wasn't.  But trying to reframe things in "oh, evil WMF did all wrong
> against the poor, innocent community" terms serves no purpose other than
> create a windmill to tilt at.


The Wikimedia Foundation needs, first and foremost, to look after the
principle and unique asset that gives the Wikimedia and Wikipedia brands
value: its volunteer community. When the Wikimedia Foundation conducts
itself in a way that leads to division, it's damaging our shared vision,
and it needs to be held accountable. None of that is to say that the
Wikimedia Foundation should give way before a mob of pitchfork-wielding
anarchists; but to the repeated suggestion that that's what the community
(or those opposed to any specific software deployment) is, I say:

Citation needed.

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
Author of letter objecting to Superprotect:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Letter_to_Wikimedia_Foundation:_Superprotect_and_Media_Viewer
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

John Mark Vandenberg
In reply to this post by Marc-Andre
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2016-01-19 12:53 PM, Pine W wrote:
>>
>> The constitutional crisis that WMF created by using Superprotect to force
>> Image VIewer on the communities [...]
>
>
> ... except that this is not what happened.  While that narrative might be
> satisfying for someone who looks for a sense of being the stalwart defender
> of an oppressed community, the reality is that superprotect was created to
> block the deployment of a technically inapt and entirely broken "fix" that
> was - itself - a kneejerk reaction.
>
> Which is not to say that its creation or use was wise in any way - it
> wasn't.  But trying to reframe things in "oh, evil WMF did all wrong against
> the poor, innocent community" terms serves no purpose other than create a
> windmill to tilt at.

It is comments like this from WMF staff which make me think that WMF
has not yet really internalised the reason why VE, MV, etc. were such
a problem.

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Risker
On 20 January 2016 at 22:08, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > On 2016-01-19 12:53 PM, Pine W wrote:
> >>
> >> The constitutional crisis that WMF created by using Superprotect to
> force
> >> Image VIewer on the communities [...]
> >
> >
> > ... except that this is not what happened.  While that narrative might be
> > satisfying for someone who looks for a sense of being the stalwart
> defender
> > of an oppressed community, the reality is that superprotect was created
> to
> > block the deployment of a technically inapt and entirely broken "fix"
> that
> > was - itself - a kneejerk reaction.
> >
> > Which is not to say that its creation or use was wise in any way - it
> > wasn't.  But trying to reframe things in "oh, evil WMF did all wrong
> against
> > the poor, innocent community" terms serves no purpose other than create a
> > windmill to tilt at.
>
> It is comments like this from WMF staff which make me think that WMF
> has not yet really internalised the reason why VE, MV, etc. were such
> a problem.
>
>
Marc is not a member of the WMF staff.

Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Marc-Andre
On 2016-01-20 10:09 PM, Risker wrote:
> Marc is not a member of the WMF staff.

[anymore].

But yeah, that was my personal opinion only and not any sort of
staff-like thing - I was never involved in superprotect or its deployment.

I was hacking happily at Wikimania in London when I saw (a) parts of
dewiki go insane over the media viewer followed by (b) parts of WMF go
insane over the parts of dewiki going insane.  Hilarity ensued. My own
reaction at the time, if I recall correctly, was "what an idiot"
followed by "is [Erik] insane?  That is the single worst way of handling
this".  Both were accompanied with copious facepalms.

-- Marc


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Jens Best-2
Hoi,
Jens, so you talk about improving Wikipedia. What I hear is basic
negativity. What is it in what you say that will actually make a positive
difference. Have you considered how Wikidata already made a big quality
improvement and do you agree that by taking the next step from interwiki
links and move to links and red links Wikidata would easily improve any
Wikipedia actually any Wikimedia project. It does not need sources, it does
not need anything but the realisation that it will remove a whole class of
errors that can be as much as 20% in some articles.

Really Jens, let us forget about adding stumbling blocks and focus on
quality. Improving quality in Wikipedia because we can.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 19 January 2016 at 16:58, Jens Best <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm not sure where you get your impressions, Magnus. But when I discuss
> ideas for a better implementation of Wikidata into Wikipedia to improve
> automatisation of repetitive editing procedures, including the
> implementation of the possible use of structured data, I rarely hear "It Is
> Not Made Here" or "It's Bad Because Its New".
>
> When it comes to analyse the problems with Wikidata it isn't only about
> possible early-lifecycle issues(which can be fix), but about the blind spot
> when it comes to develope working social processes which keep everybody
> (especially the editors) in the picture.
>
> Community involvement (especially consultations) are often seem to be
> organized only out of necessity. They not in the middle of the
> decision-making process. Nobody said that doing things the way they are
> done in a crowdsourced, community-driven process are easy, but this is no
> excuse for any Foundation or other similiar entity to set up an
> intransparent, precendents creating process where community becomes
> accessories.
>
> The whole way the Knowledge Engine process was implemented, the whole still
> intransparent incident of kicking a highly valued community-selected person
> out of the WMF board are clear signals that some people already decided
> about the future of Wikimedia and now staging a folksy broad consultation
> circus to create the impression of transparent community involvement. -
> Deciding about the color of the car if you would instead prefer to talk
> about the vehicle is the illusion of community-based decisionmaking.
>
> We need a lot of change in the social procedures at the level of really
> needed ground work which is important for changing the Wikiprojects to make
> them work for the future. To reflect and to work on the development of
> these social procedures would be the most precious work to be done by the
> Foundation. Instead the Foundation dreams of techbubble-driven, humanless
> wonderland full of free floading informations which magically forms into
> knowledge when it somehow hits a human being.
>
> I like the idea of Wikidata.
> I like the idea of combining Encylopedia with structured data to enable
> understanding and easy re-use at the reader-side of Wikiprojects. So many
> things are imaginable there when the culture of conveying the needed
> individual and social skills are done well. Tech is only tool to these
> processes. Tools are important, but not the purpose when it comes to
> disseminate knowledge.
>
> regards,
> Jens
>
>
>
>
> 2016-01-19 15:56 GMT+01:00 Magnus Manske <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Anthony, it does seem you've missed some of which I wrote in this
> thread. I
> > have no problem with specific criticism where it is deserved, and I do
> well
> > remember that the Visual Editor, in its early incarnation, was not quite
> up
> > to the job.
> >
> > What I do have a problem with is people fixating on some technical or
> > early-lifecycle issues, declaring the entire thing worthless, even
> > dangerous, and spreading that view around. This behaviour, I have seen
> time
> > and again, with the Media Viewer, with Wikidata.
> >
> > It's bad because it's broken - let's come together and fix it.
> >
> > It's bad because ... well, everyone says it's bad. And new. And Not Made
> > Here. THAT is a problem, and not a technological one.
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 2:39 PM Anthony Cole <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple
> of
> > > people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> > > persisting with your idée fixe.
> > >
> > > There were two parts to the visual editor catastrophe, actually. The
> > > product wasn't ready for anyone to use. Not veteran editors. Not
> newbies.
> > > Newbies who used it were less likely to successfully complete an edit.
> It
> > > was broken, and the WMF insisted we had to use it.
> > >
> > > The second part of the problem was arrogance. Yes, a few editors were
> > > unnecessarily rude about the product and the developers. But then most
> of
> > > the developers and tech staff who dealt with the community arrogantly
> > > characterised *anyone* who complained about the product as an ignorant,
> > > selfish Ludite - and you're persisting with that characterisation now.
> > >
> > > The WMF under Lila has learned the lessons from that, and they have
> > > fostered a much healthier relationship between the developers and the
> > > community. You clearly haven't learned all you might have.
> > >
> > > In fact, reading the arrogant responses from you here and in the
> > concurrent
> > > thread titled "How to disseminate free knowledge," and from Denny in
> > > earlier threads addressing criticism of WikiData, it seems to me there
> is
> > > still a significant arrogance problem that needs addressing, at least
> > over
> > > at WikiData.
> > >
> > > Some people may approach you arrogantly, maybe even insultingly, about
> an
> > > innovation, and I suppose you might be justified in talking down to
> them
> > or
> > > ridiculing them (though I advise against it.). But if you can't
> > distinguish
> > > them from those who approach you with genuine concerns and well-founded
> > > criticisms, then no matter how clever you think your technical
> solutions
> > > are, you will soon find you're no more welcome here than those WMF
> > staffers
> > > who thought insulting well-meaning critics was a good career move.
> > >
> > > Denny's contemptuous dismissal of valid criticisms of his project, and
> > your
> > > contemptuous dismissal of the valid criticisms of the early visual
> editor
> > > and its launch are both very disappointing.
> > >
> > > Anthony Cole
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Magnus Manske <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The iPhone was a commercial success because it let you do the basic
> > > > functions easily and intuitively, and looked shiny at the same time.
> We
> > > do
> > > > not charge a price; our "win" comes by people using our product. If
> we
> > > can
> > > > present the product in such a way that more people use it, it is a
> > > success
> > > > for us.
> > > >
> > > > I do stand by my example :-)
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37 PM Michael Peel <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 18 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Magnus Manske <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly
> > > > enthusiastic. I
> > > > > > would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to handle
> > new
> > > > > > software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic functionality,
> > but
> > > > > > working smoothly first.
> > > > >
> > > > > But at a huge cost premium? I'm not sure that's a good example to
> > make
> > > > > here. :-/
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > 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
> > > > 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
> > > 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
> > 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
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Isarra Yos
In reply to this post by Magnus Manske-2
You just don't get it, do you? Even from the start this was all about
social issues with rollouts, and still you are contributing to the very
same social problems you so blindly condemned.

-I

On 20/01/16 14:16, Magnus Manske wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:58 AM Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Once the VisualEditor was fit for purpose and a good deployment strategy
>> had been developed, the English Wikipedia community overwhelmingly
>> supported rolling it out. (
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_125#Gradually_enabling_VisualEditor_for_new_accounts
>> )
>>
> That is for new accounts only. Without an account, still no VE for you,
> even if you are probably the one needing it most.
>
>> It's not Luddism, it's not "resistance to change", it's not "power users"
>> grumpy about newbies having an easier time, it's not anything like that.
>> It's that in the state it was initially released in, the thing did not
>> work.
>>
> No one said "Luddism", except to defend against its use. Odd.
>
>
>> So yes, by all means, let's try new things. But try:
>>
>> 1: Asking us what we actually want, before coding something up and feeling
>> obligated to push it out. People are a lot more receptive to something they
>> asked for than something being forced upon them. That's been an issue with
>> Flow. It's not that it doesn't work well (though it doesn't), it's that it
>> wasn't wanted to start with. So instead of "Here's the new discussion
>> system", ask "What can we do to make our system of discussion better?"
>>
> Listening to what editors want is important. ONLY listening to wad editors
> want is bad. People often don't know what they want or need, until they see
> it. Compare the famous (possibly misattributed) Henry Ford quote:
> “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster
> horses.”
>
> Also, veteran editors do not represent the readers or casual/newbie
> editors; their needs are often quite different.
>
>
>> 2: Make sure it works. Have an opt-in beta phase. Doesn't have to be
>> perfect, but certainly make sure it's not breaking page formatting all over
>> the place. You'll notice, for example, that there wasn't really any
>> resistance to HHVM. It worked well, it was desirable, it was clearly fit
>> for purpose. So no, there isn't just a reflexive change aversion. Though
>> the previous missteps and hamfisted followups have, rather ironically,
>> created a lot of the reflexive change aversion that people said was there.
>>
> Wrong example. The HHMV switch was a back-end change that should have had
> no visible effect. As long as the servers are fast, people don't really
> care what's going on there. Did e.g. English Wikipedia actually vote on
> HHMV?
>
>> 3: Be nice (but NOT condescending or patronizing) if an issue comes up.
>> "Superprotect" alienated people right quickly, and turned what could have
>> been a productive (if tense) conversation into a war. Same with refusal to
>> budge on VE and the arrogant tone several people took. Yes, some people
>> might be rude about objecting to the change. Don't sink to their level. If
>> they call the new software a steaming pile, ask "Could you offer more
>> concrete feedback?"
>>
> Superprotect was used to revert an admin action on de.wikipedia, an action
> that might actually fall under U.S. or German computer sabotage laws. This
> was hailed as some heroic action by that vocal group I keep mentioning,
> when it can easily be seen as someone abusing the privileges given by the
> Foundation (as owners of the servers) to deactivate functionality put in
> place by the Foundation.
> The creation and subsequent use of superprotect was not exactly the most
> wise decision ever undertaken, but neither was the original sabotage
> (literally so; using access to a machine to stop it from working, just not
> using a wooden shoe).
> And while it is always good to ask for more concrete feedback, it is even
> better to offer it to begin with.
>
>
>> 4: Don't surprise people. Not everyone follows the Village Pumps or what
>> have you. If a major new feature is set to roll out, do banners, do
>> watchlist notices, do whatever it takes, but make sure people know. When
>> Mediaviewer was rolled out, all of a sudden, I was just having images act
>> completely different. I had no idea what was going on. People are more
>> amenable to change if you brace them for it. Even better, do that to
>> develop a rollout strategy in advance with the community. (You already know
>> they want it; they asked for it. Right?)
>>
> The Foundation appears to be doing this already. I even saw a mail about it
> today.
>
>
>> 5: If at all feasible, offer an easy opt-out. People are actually more
>> likely to give something a decent try if they know they can switch back if
>> they don't like it.
>>
> IIRC, both VE and MediaViewer offered opt-out from the beginning; the MV
> opt-out just was "below the fold" or something.
>
>
>> 6: Show willingness to budge. "No, we won't do ACTRIAL, period." "You get
>> VE, like it or not." "You're getting Mediaviewer even if we have to develop
>> a new protection level to cram it down your throats!" That type of
>> hamfisted, I'm-right-you're-wrong approach will gear people right up for a
>> fight. Fights are bad. Discussions are good. But people don't like to talk
>> to a brick wall.
>>
> Everyone (as in, the vast majority of people I ever spoke to, approaching
> 100%) agreed that Wikipedia editing, especially for newbies, sucked.
> Everyone agreed that what happened when clicking on a file in Wikipedia was
> confusing for most readers.
> These are not issues the Foundation just made up in some ivory tower; there
> was little dispute that something should be done. So the Foundation did,
> and switched their solution on, for everyone, because most users are "just"
> readers, not editors, and see an actual improvement. Neiter VE nor MV was
> perfect in the beginning; neither is now. They just got better over time.
> So MV is active for everyone, including IPs, even on German Wikipedia,
> right now. Because it's beeter for most people, and it works. Why did it
> need to be completely switch off again?
>
>
>> Many of us were asking for a WYSIWYG editor for some time, because we very
>> much need a way to reach out to prospective editors who are intimidated by
>> wikimarkup or just don't care to learn it. So it wasn't that we were
>> opposed to VE in principle. Good idea, bad execution.
>>
> As someone who has worked on alternative Wikitext parsers, and alternative
> interfaces, rest assured that the execution was quite good for an initial
> version. As I said before, it is impossible to get this perfect right away.
> Just like it is impossible (literally, as in "not possible") to reliably
> get the license for an image in MV on all cases. The community/vocal group
> needs to show some patience when developers are trying their best to get a
> giant project up and running smoothy.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
>
>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple of
>>> people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
>>> persisting with your idée fixe.
>>>
>>> There were two parts to the visual editor catastrophe, actually. The
>>> product wasn't ready for anyone to use. Not veteran editors. Not newbies.
>>> Newbies who used it were less likely to successfully complete an edit. It
>>> was broken, and the WMF insisted we had to use it.
>>>
>>> The second part of the problem was arrogance. Yes, a few editors were
>>> unnecessarily rude about the product and the developers. But then most of
>>> the developers and tech staff who dealt with the community arrogantly
>>> characterised *anyone* who complained about the product as an ignorant,
>>> selfish Ludite - and you're persisting with that characterisation now.
>>>
>>> The WMF under Lila has learned the lessons from that, and they have
>>> fostered a much healthier relationship between the developers and the
>>> community. You clearly haven't learned all you might have.
>>>
>>> In fact, reading the arrogant responses from you here and in the
>> concurrent
>>> thread titled "How to disseminate free knowledge," and from Denny in
>>> earlier threads addressing criticism of WikiData, it seems to me there is
>>> still a significant arrogance problem that needs addressing, at least
>> over
>>> at WikiData.
>>>
>>> Some people may approach you arrogantly, maybe even insultingly, about an
>>> innovation, and I suppose you might be justified in talking down to them
>> or
>>> ridiculing them (though I advise against it.). But if you can't
>> distinguish
>>> them from those who approach you with genuine concerns and well-founded
>>> criticisms, then no matter how clever you think your technical solutions
>>> are, you will soon find you're no more welcome here than those WMF
>> staffers
>>> who thought insulting well-meaning critics was a good career move.
>>>
>>> Denny's contemptuous dismissal of valid criticisms of his project, and
>> your
>>> contemptuous dismissal of the valid criticisms of the early visual editor
>>> and its launch are both very disappointing.
>>>
>>> Anthony Cole
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Magnus Manske <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The iPhone was a commercial success because it let you do the basic
>>>> functions easily and intuitively, and looked shiny at the same time. We
>>> do
>>>> not charge a price; our "win" comes by people using our product. If we
>>> can
>>>> present the product in such a way that more people use it, it is a
>>> success
>>>> for us.
>>>>
>>>> I do stand by my example :-)
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37 PM Michael Peel <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 18 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Magnus Manske <
>> [hidden email]
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly
>>>> enthusiastic. I
>>>>>> would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to handle
>> new
>>>>>> software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic functionality,
>> but
>>>>>> working smoothly first.
>>>>> But at a huge cost premium? I'm not sure that's a good example to
>> make
>>>>> here. :-/
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Mike
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>>>> 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
>>>> 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
>>> 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
>> 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
> 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
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] Profile of Magnus Manske

Yaroslav M. Blanter
In reply to this post by Jens Best-2
On 2016-01-19 16:58, Jens Best wrote:


> I like the idea of Wikidata.
> I like the idea of combining Encylopedia with structured data to enable
> understanding and easy re-use at the reader-side of Wikiprojects. So
> many
> things are imaginable there when the culture of conveying the needed
> individual and social skills are done well. Tech is only tool to these
> processes. Tools are important, but not the purpose when it comes to
> disseminate knowledge.
>
> regards,
> Jens
>

Actually, Wikidata itself is an excellent positive example of community
involvement. All things, including technical innovations, are discussed
at the village pump (there, it is called Project Chat); for those who
are less active in some areas there are weekly digests covering all the
activities; if there is a technical problem help comes within minutes.
It is of course much easier for a smaller scale project, but the
problems in Wikipedia from Wikidata come, I believe, not from negligence
or from insufficient attention to the community, but from bad
communication.

Cheers
Yaroslav

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
12345