[Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

attolippip
+1 to Yurik

<!-- it seems to me that a lot of troubles are coming from the "grey line"
between our wikiworld, where you are free to nominate people and talk
almost about anything you want publicly (including your own pros and cons
in any role there is available), and a real world, where you are afraid to
tell people that you (dis)agree because of this and that. and the worst
thing is that people change their behaviour too much passing that "grey
line", so it is difficult to tell where they were more true to
themselves... and open (not secret) voting can be a real advantage, btw :)
-->

best regards,
antanana

2016-02-27 1:23 GMT+02:00 Yuri Astrakhan <[hidden email]>:

> Lodewijk, this is a very valid point, thanks.  My understanding is that
> this process done in private has lost some of its credibility with the
> staff and the community, and thus I would like to get some understanding on
> how we can do that same process in the open, without offending anyone.  In
> the wiki world, I think most of the time people
> have publicly nominated candidates for various roles, and that has not been
> a concern. Of course the nick names provide some degree of anonymity, so
> this might not be exactly the same.
>
> On Feb 27, 2016 01:57, "Lodewijk" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > While I love public discussions, I must say I always feel a bit awkward
> to
> > discuss people in public, unless there is no other choice.
> >
> > To discuss people without them agreeing to it, may even be considered
> rude
> > by some. You're throwing up names, which can realistically only lead to
> > people supporting it, because if you would be against it, it would
> possibly
> > be a slap in the face of someone you like.
> >
> > If you really see a serious potential candidate, why not send it to the
> > board? or, once a public call is being made, point those people to it.
> >
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > For the inside, I would think Yana W would be a good candidate, but as
> > Raul
> > > Veede suggested on FB, it would be bad to loose her expertise in her
> > > current role.
> > >
> > > Dan, I think you are right that we are not yet ready to have a drop-in
> > > replacement simply because we should figure out what went wrong first.
> > > Possibly we shouldn't even have an ED, but rather have a flatter
> > > community-driven committee that allocates funds, and projects getting
> > > resources from it. And this committee would, in affect, be the
> > > direction-determining force.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm agreed with Dan and Nathan (well, Nathan's implied point) both.
> > > >
> > > > Right now we need stability. I'd much prefer an interim ED appointed
> > > > from inside the organisation or movement, ideally someone who has
> been
> > > > watching what's been going on. And then time for healing and
> > > > reflection in that space of stability that lets us make a better
> > > > decision.
> > > >
> > > > I have no particular opinions on Lessig - or on Creative Commons -
> > > > except to note that the organisational leaders are the people whose
> > > > opinions on trauma around reorganisations least matter, insofar as,
> > > > structurally, they are both the people least likely to be messed over
> > > > by them and the people most detached from any swirling mass of
> feeling
> > > > that exists in the employee base. I'd be interested instead in
> hearing
> > > > from current or former employees (I know a couple and they are not as
> > > > positive, but it's a small sample size) to make any evaluation more
> > > > informed.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Dan Andreescu <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I met him, he's amazingly focused and radical, I appreciate his
> brand
> > > of
> > > > intellect very much. But I think suggesting candidates for the ED
> > > position
> > > > at this time is jumping two steps ahead of where we are.
> > > > >
> > > > > We just screwed up. We were all dragged through months of an
> awkward
> > > > collapse of our leadership and organizational structure. Before we
> > start
> > > > piling the rubble of this collapse back up into the same exact shape
> > > with a
> > > > different keystone, let's take a breath and think.
> > > > >
> > > > > First we should make sure we understand what, more or less, failed.
> > It
> > > > was not just Lila. Second, we should talk about what options we have
> > and
> > > > what criteria we should use to evaluate those options.
> > > > >
> > > > > We can be patient. We have reaffirmed our respect for each other
> and
> > we
> > > > trust each other enough to share ideas, emotions, and proposals. This
> > is
> > > > our foundation, and it hasn't collapsed.
> > > > >
> > > > >   Original Message
> > > > > From: Yuri Astrakhan
> > > > > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 16:47
> > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > Reply To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Lawrence Lessig for ... WMF
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to continue the discussion of who, in an ideal case,
> > would
> > > > be
> > > > > a good fit for the ED position. This person has to fit culturally,
> > > share
> > > > > movement's values, and be a trusted figure in the time of
> rebuilding.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lawrence Lessig seems to have a very strong support in the
> community,
> > > and
> > > > > even attempted to run (unsuccessfully) a large organization called
> > > United
> > > > > States.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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>