Talk:IRC office hours/Office hours 2009-09-25

Refactor for clarity

Refactoring some of the noise out, and sorting comments relative to the questions presented. (Preparation for commentary elsewhen/where.) Obviously more comments could be bummed out which did not substantively address the questions. Likewise, some relevant statements may have been removed which might be deemed important; {{sofixit}}. - Amgine/^{meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news} 18:09, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Q1: Sue, how are you?

[22:32pm] Tango42: QUESTION: Sue, how are you?

[22:32pm] SueGardner: Excellent! First question.

[22:32pm] SueGardner: I am well Thomas, how are you?

[22:33pm] Tango42: I'm fine, thank you, but we're asking the questions here!

Q2: Can we begin with actual questions?

[22:33pm] Natalie: SueGardner: Can we begin with actual questions?

[22:33pm] SueGardner: Natalie: Yes, sure.

Q3: Flagged revisions on en.wp?

[22:33pm] Natalie: SueGardner: What is the hold-up with flagged revisions on the English Wikipedia? It's been months and months.

[22:33pm] cary: Natalie, you should ask brion that question

[22:33pm] Natalie: And I'd rather not hear "talk to X."

[22:34pm] cary: he's here

[22:34pm] Natalie: Brion works for Sue.

[22:34pm] cary: and he has the answers

[22:34pm] cary: Sue is not responsible.

[22:34pm] SueGardner: Brion's here; he says he can speak to this.

[22:34pm] Natalie: Sue is not responsible? Errr, what?

[22:34pm] SueGardner: (Flagged Revs)

[22:34pm] Ziko: flagged revisions is not a wikimedia something

[22:34pm] cary: Prodego, exactly

[22:35pm] Natalie: Where did SueGardner and brion go?

[22:35pm] cary: brion is typing

[22:36pm] SueGardner: (I am collecting questions, but am waiting for Brion to speak to FlaggedRevs. It is correct though that it's not a projects-wide question but rather an enWP one: I don't know if that matters.)

[22:37pm] Natalie: en.wiki is the largest project and the breadwinner. It can go first.

[22:37pm] brion: Natalie: We've got the previously specced test config running now on http://flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org/ for people to poke at

[22:37pm] Atluxity: it will eventually affect other projects too, so its relevant. methinks

[22:37pm] Natalie: brion: Any idea when we might see it on a live site?

[22:37pm] Natalie: brion: This is the third or fourth test run.

[22:37pm] brion: Natalie: In the next few weeks I'd also like us to get ready to roll out the ability to apply FlaggedRevs on a page-by-page basis on en.wikipedia (eg as an alternative to semi-protection)

[22:38pm] brion: This is dependent on it actually working of course.

[22:38pm] Natalie: Can I hold you to the next few weeks? Wikimedia + deadlines don't mix well...

[22:38pm] Philippe|Wiki: (by my count that's three questions from Natalie

[22:38pm] Natalie: Follow-ups are exempt.

[22:38pm] brion: We've also been waiting for a long time on someone to pull together a clear post-mortem of FlaggedRevs' affect on de.wikipedia community, which I'm not sure we've seen yet. Would be nice to see, anyway.

[22:39pm] brion:[I have the vague impression someone's released something like that just recently?]

[22:39pm] Natalie: I think de.wiki's and en.wiki's configurations are so different that any report would be of little value...

[22:39pm] Prodego: post-mortem may not be the best choice of words

[22:39pm] • Natalie shrugs.

[22:39pm] brion: heh

[22:39pm] MrX: post-mortem as in they aren't using it any more, or are they still on dewiki?

[22:39pm] Jake_Wartenberg: brion: so there is no flagged protection on flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org

[22:39pm] Jake_Wartenberg: just flagged revs

[22:40pm] brion: Anyway we're wrapping up a bunch of other updates now which'll free us up to pay more attention to the FlaggedRevs config.

[22:40pm] cary: I think that's enough on Flagged Revs.

[22:40pm] Natalie: Yes, only lives of living people we're ruining.

[22:41pm] brion:[If folks want to talk more about FlaggedRevs come grab me next week!]

[22:41pm] brion:[I'll be the all-FlaggedRevs channel by then ;)]

Q4: What has pleased you most, most concern, re: strategy process?

[22:34pm] MrX: QUESTION: What has pleased you the most from the strategy process so far, and what about it has caused the most concern?

[22:38pm] SueGardner: (I will start answering the first question about the strategy project, from MrX.)

[22:40pm] SueGardner: What has pleased me most about the strategy project thus far has been the amount of interest and energy people have shown in it. I am really proud of the process itself: Eugene & Philippe are doing a terrific job custom-creating a process that suits our unique culture.

[22:40pm] SueGardner: I think it's a brave approach we're taking, and I'm proud of us for having the audacity to do it.

[22:40pm] SueGardner: What troubles me about the strategy project .....

[22:40pm] SueGardner: (And this is a hard problem we knew we would have.)

[22:41pm] SueGardner: Is that it is hard to bring in the voices of people we don't already know.

[22:42pm] SueGardner: The project is designed to take advantage of wiki mechanisms for collaboration and inclusion.

[22:42pm] effeietsanders: SueGardner: well, I've heard a lot of "I'd rather just edit"

[22:42pm] effeietsanders: which is also a good sign

[22:42pm] SueGardner: But we also want to bring in new voices, and "new voices" by definition don't know wiki syntax, for example.

[22:42pm] effeietsanders: they checked it out, and are fine with it

[22:42pm] bodnotbod: There's quite a lot of applications from non-US citizens. In fact I think US citizens may even be in the minority. And a lot of them seem to be just readers, at least they don't talk much about editing in their application.

[22:42pm] SueGardner: So it is a careful balancing act: trying to make it comfortable and workable for existing wiki users, but also making it inviting for new people who have expertise and perspectives we need.

[22:43pm] SueGardner: Should I move on to geniice, or does anyone have follow-up on the strategy project?

[22:43pm] FT2: one question on strategy

[22:43pm] SueGardner: FT2, go ahead

[22:44pm] SueGardner: (Because it's still on topic, strategy project.)

[22:44pm] FT2: Initially when wiki*edia was small, consensus and collective decision making was relatively easy - smaller communities, etc.

[22:44pm] SueGardner: Right.

[22:44pm] FT2: Now we're huge, and there are thousands of decisions and discussions going on that affect all of the communities and their editors, and all users

[22:45pm] SueGardner: FT2: Yes.

[22:45pm] FT2: has the slightly anarchic style of the past, worn out a bit? Is a more polished or organized route needed, just so editors can stay aware of the decisions affecting their projects?

[22:46pm] MrX: well, a larger participant base doesn't make everything more difficult -- the gist of consensus or lack thereof emerges faster, and smouldering idiocy like the userbox wars tend to get nipped quicker

[22:46pm] FT2: or can we keep going "just as we are"?

[22:46pm] SueGardner: Sure. Thanks FT2.

[22:46pm] SueGardner: I don't pretend to know the ansswer to that question. But

[22:47pm] SueGardner: In the strategy project, there's going to be a task force dedicated to retention of the current editing community, that I think / hope will address some of what you're talking about.

[22:48pm] SueGardner: I think we have some challenges WRT internal communications (who's doing what, how do people know), and with regard to policy growth / cruft, and other barriers to people joining us, or staying with us.

[22:48pm] SueGardner: (Sorry: I May be being slightly incoherent; there are people talking near me

[22:49pm] SueGardner: Personally, I think the community should be developing organizational structures that support it in information-sharing and decision-making. But that's just my personal view: I would like to see a task force of committed Wikimedians take a look at those issues.

[22:50pm] effeietsanders: SueGardner: but that would mainly be the same us-knows-us-people

[22:50pm] effeietsanders: who are used to the shouting

[22:50pm] effeietsanders: otherwise we wouldn't know them :

[22:52pm] SueGardner: (Just quickly to effe -- yeah, I know. But some of the submissions to the strategy project are really eloquent about challenges we face, and about their own periods of burnout. I think there may need to be an external facilitator type person in that task force, or supporting it -- but I think we can internally develop find our own answers.)

[22:52pm] SueGardner: (On that one.)

[22:52pm] SueGardner: (I am surprised by how much consensus there is on the problem.)

[22:52pm] Dedalus_: (On which one?)

[22:52pm] SueGardner: Dedalus: Personally I always liked the volunteer council idea

[22:52pm] • SueGardner ducks and runs for cover

[22:53pm] • DarkoNeko throws a pillow

[22:53pm] SueGardner: Seriously: I think multiple flexible structures for multiple purposes. Some will work; some won't.

[22:53pm] SueGardner: Frank is experimenting for example with WikiPods.

[22:53pm] SueGardner: I think we want to let a thousand flowers bloom.

[22:54pm] Prodego: WikiPods?

[22:54pm] SueGardner: (Consensus on the problem that we are too insular, a little unfriendly, inaccessible, people burn out.)

[22:54pm] Amgine: analogy extension: over-grown vacant lot, as opposed to a tended garden.

[22:54pm] Ziko: thousand flowers -> mass murder (in Chinese history, at least)

[22:54pm] SueGardner: A lightly tended garden

[22:54pm] Ziko: no, it was 100 flowers and 1000 ideas...

[22:55pm] SueGardner: Ziko -- yeah, an imperfect metaphor in that regard. Cary tells me I can't get away with anything

[22:55pm] Amgine: <apologies>

[22:55pm] SueGardner: Shall I move on to the "maximum number of employees" question?

[22:55pm] effeietsanders: SueGardner: actually I'm not too sure we have consensus that being harsh/unfriendly is a problem

[22:55pm] Tango42: Sue, please do

[22:55pm] SueGardner: And, Cary will post the WikiPods link from Meta......

[22:55pm] bodnotbod: I too would like to know what a Wikipod is.

[22:55pm] cary:m:WikiPods

[22:56pm] eekim: Ziko, bodnotbod: WikiPods are ad hoc, local community enthusiasts

[22:56pm] cary: who still needs a URL after that?

[22:56pm] Philippe|Wiki: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiPods

[22:56pm] cary: Thank you, Philippe|Wiki -bot

[22:56pm] SueGardner: effe: Double-edged sword I know; a medium-sized wall keeps out the clueless....?

[22:56pm] Mentifisto: effeietsanders: being uninviting to potential contributors isn't a problem?

Q5: Max full time foundation employees?

[22:34pm] geniice: QUESTION:What do you see as the upper bound on full time foundation employees in the next 5 years?

[22:43pm] cary: Let me repeat geniice's question

[22:43pm] cary: <geniice> QUESTION:What do you see as the upper bound on full time foundation employees in the next 5 years?

[22:43pm] Tango42: QUESTION: (Follow-up to geniice's Q) How many employees can fit in the new office?

[22:50pm] cary: <geniice> QUESTION:What do you see as the upper bound on full time foundation employees in the next 5 years?

[22:50pm] SueGardner: Thanks Cary.

[22:57pm] SueGardner: Maximum number of employees: I don't have a hard maximum. But

[22:57pm] SueGardner: I think we all know it is not thousands or hundreds of thousands.

[22:57pm] SueGardner: It is also not 25.

[22:57pm] • Dedalus_ blames Sue for lack of ambition (and ducks for cover)

[22:57pm] SueGardner: The trick for us is to be thoughtful and calm about how we grow and why we grow. The purpose of the Wikimedia Foundation isn

[22:57pm] SueGardner:[oops]

[22:57pm] Ziko: I am not sure whether we need to know what the max will be, but what the work will be and how many people we will need for that

[22:58pm] Ziko: and take care of financing that later...

[22:58pm] SueGardner: isn't to self-perpetuate and grow itself; its purpose is to support the work of the volunteers.

[22:58pm] • effeietsanders puts a maximum at 3 billion

[22:58pm] effeietsanders: we shouldn't ever employ more then 50% of the world population

[22:58pm] SueGardner: That means we are constantly experimenting with how to do that -- where the staff can support and nudge and engage productively -- like for example with the NIH Academy (which was an experiment).

[22:58pm] kim_: effeietsanders, why the number?

[22:59pm] SueGardner: Or for example in countries where there are no chapters: it might be useful for the Foundation to try to actively stimulate chapters development.

[22:59pm] effeietsanders: SueGardner: are you mainly focussing on full time employees, or also considering more parttimers?

[22:59pm] SueGardner: The Bookshelf project is a good example, I think, of staff being needed in order to support volunteers.

22:59pm] Dedalus_: Sue: is this a public statement? "it might be useful for the Foundation to try to actively stimulate chapters development."

[23:00pm] SueGardner: effe: Mostly on FT people. When we hire people from outside the community, there is a massive learning curve. Typically I want them deeply engaged with us, learning and sharing as much as possible.

[23:00pm] cary: Dedalus_, this log is going to be posted.

[23:00pm] SueGardner: Nobody at the Foundation actually works a FT job: most work much much more than that

[23:00pm] cary: Everything is a public question

[23:00pm] eekim: Philippe|Wiki is actually two full-time people

[23:01pm] DarkoNeko: oh wow

[23:01pm] SueGardner: Dedalus: Oh, sure, definitely.

[23:01pm] SueGardner: I want the chapters to grow and flourish. I want hundreds of chapters everywhere around the world. I wish they would develop faster. I would be happy to try to support that.

[23:01pm] SueGardner: I want!

[23:02pm] Tango42: FOLLOWUP: Sue, I understand there is no maximum number of employees, how about a forecast?

[23:02pm] SueGardner: K.

[23:02pm] jeblad: Even a small chapter soon grows out of proportions and needs to hire people, that means budgets and money, and that that means they have to go commercial somehow

[23:03pm] kim_: jeblad, commercial? Discuss that at #wikimedia-office-talk

[23:03pm] SueGardner: Thomas: this year we're 30 people.

[23:03pm] Tango42: Is my followup question from ages ago still in the list or did Cary reject it as ill-timed?

[23:03pm] SueGardner: I wouldn't be surprised if next year were 40 people, and the following year 50.

[23:04pm] Tango42: That's interesting - thank you.

[23:04pm] • Dedalus_ supports SueGardner ambition ...

[23:04pm] MichaelSnow: Tango42: For the coming fiscal year, you can see a projection in the annual plan

[23:04pm] SueGardner: But I also wouldn't be surprised if it were different from that. I want us to remain flexible. We're learning and experimenting all the time: we don't need to be locked into projections: we need to be open to changing our minds.

[23:04pm] • bodnotbod supports office growth too.

[23:04pm] Tango42: MichaelSnow: Yes, but I was thinking more long term.

[23:06pm] MichaelSnow: I'm not sure how useful that long-term numerical forecast would be

Q6: Office vibes re: strategy process?

[22:34pm] Dedalus_: How are the vibes in the office about the strategy process?

Q7: Does George W. Bush have an account?

[22:35pm] harej: does George W. Bush have a Wikipedia account

Q8: Innate hostility? does it exist, what should we do about it? (praphrasing the implication)

[22:41pm] Ziko: Question: It seems to me that one peticular subject came back again and again in the lectures at buenos aires: the hostility on wikimedia projects and the biting away of newbies (or "resistance", as ed chi names it)

[22:43pm] DarkoNeko: ziko that kind of thing that's be decided by the board or anything, it's lcoal communites problems that only them can resolve

[22:43pm] DarkoNeko: solve*

[23:01pm] Ziko: Sue: Jennifer talked in buenos aires about welcoming new people, and argued with someone whether a non-editor can be accepted by the community as a wikimedian. has that something to do with the learning courve you are talking about?

[23:02pm] Ziko: in fact, there were a few ladies saying the same (sue, catrin...)

[23:02pm] cary: <Ziko> Question: It seems to me that one peticular subject came back again and again in the lectures at buenos aires: the hostility on wikimedia projects and the biting away of newbies (or "resistance", as ed chi names it)

[23:02pm] eekim: Ziko: could you clarify your question?

[23:02pm] SueGardner: I will follow up on Ziko's question, but I am asking Cary to collect other follow-ups I might be missing.

[23:02pm] Ziko: Cary: I could imagine that the foundation supports a kind of trainings

[23:03pm] Ziko: like anger management, is that the terminus technicus?

[23:04pm] kim_: Ziko: I think that might be an issue for the communities, but it might be interesting for the foundation to bring it up

[23:05pm] SueGardner: Ziko, I will speak to hostility-to-newbies, and I will ask Cary to collect for me the next question

[23:05pm] SueGardner: Personally I think hostility-to-newbies is a really big problem.

[23:06pm] SueGardner: I think that the kinds of people who are unphased (unfazed) by hostility are already Wikimedians. Seriously, most people here are thick-skinned, blunt, straightforward, and like an argument.

[23:07pm] SueGardner: I think there are lots and lots of potential contributors who wouldn't last five minutes in our culture: they would just leave.

[23:07pm] geniice: actualy I think a fair number of wikipedians want duels and or wars but that isn't legal

[23:07pm] Ziko: i believe that the hostility has something to do with the fact that wikipedia editing is not only done by motives we find positive. some people get their enjoy to behave towards others in a superior way.

[23:07pm] MrX: "like an argument" with "like" in the sense of "enjoy" or "are similar to" or both?

[23:07pm] cary: "would leave" = "do leave"

[23:07pm] SueGardner: Over the past year I think I've begun to understand some of the reasons behind the hostility newcomers face.... and some of it is legitimate.

[23:08pm] wittylama: like = enjoy

[23:08pm] SueGardner: But it definitely scares people away.

[23:08pm] DarkoNeko: I don't htink it's soemthing specific to the wikimedia communaity./ Every online community experiment this kind of problems. I bet there's meatball pages about that

[23:08pm] SueGardner: MrX: enjoy. I think people here like intellectual debate // play.

[23:08pm] SueGardner: DarkoNeko: yes, I totally agree.

[23:08pm] SueGardner: I sometimes think we are friendlier than many other older online communities, and less friendly than newer ones.

[23:09pm] SueGardner: Which makes sense, as the online world has gotten more like genpop.

[23:09pm] SueGardner: (general population)

[23:09pm] Ziko: wikipedians seem to be more "objetc oriented" people, less "people people". some awareness, some coaching maybe helpful. the bookshelf might be a good first step for that too

[23:10pm] SueGardner: Ziko: Yes, definitely. One of the things we need to do IMO is recruit new types of people who are "people people" -- in addition to the wonderful "objects people" we already have

[23:10pm] Ziko: ok

[23:10pm] bodnotbod: I think some of the automated services like Huggle are really helpful but they can also make a new user go from zero to four warnings in as many edits.

[23:10pm] • effeietsanders agrees for the people people

[23:10pm] effeietsanders: (on all levels!)

[23:22pm] Ziko: and sue, how about a wikimedia foundation newsletter?

Q9: How important is growing traffic for our smallest projects?

[22:42pm] GerardM-: QUESTION How important is growing traffic for our smallest projects

[23:25pm] cary: Also, Gerard had one: <GerardM-> QUESTION How important is growing traffic for our smallest projects

[23:25pm] SueGardner: That is such a good question Gerard.

[23:25pm] SueGardner: I think my personal opinion might not be a popular or widely-shared one.

[23:26pm] SueGardner: And I am not the best-informed on this issue.

[23:26pm] SueGardner: I think our obligation is to focus our energy, for the most part, on the projects that have the greatest potential.

[23:26pm] Amgine: Define "potential"?

[23:26pm] DarkoNeko: number of readers ?

[23:26pm] SueGardner: And by "potential," I would mean the projects where there is a very large available readership (speakers of the language, internet-connected, literate)

[23:27pm] SueGardner: and where we are currently performing porrly.

[23:27pm] SueGardner: poorly

[23:27pm] SueGardner: So for example: Hindi.

[23:27pm] SueGardner: Chinese.

[23:27pm] Amgine: Pardon, but in what way is that related to projects?

[23:27pm] Amgine: Rather than languages of a project?

[23:28pm] SueGardner: Oh I'm sorry.

[23:28pm] SueGardner: Maybe I misunderstood Gerard.

[23:28pm] SueGardner: Gerard were you talking about eg Wikibooks vs Wikipedia

[23:28pm] SueGardner: ?

[23:28pm] GerardM-: Russian grew 117%

[23:28pm] SueGardner: Yes!

[23:28pm] SueGardner: Amazing!

[23:28pm] GerardM-: yes ... but also languages

[23:28pm] SueGardner: (Russia)

[23:28pm] MichaelSnow: Gerard talks so often about languages and translation, it's easy to automatically interpret what he says through that lens

[23:29pm] SueGardner: Okay.

[23:29pm] GerardM-: Wiktionary IS the biggest lexical resource on the Internet

[23:29pm] SueGardner: So upshot.....

[23:29pm] DarkoNeko: ruwiki has many bot created articles, right ?

[23:29pm] DarkoNeko: plwiki too

[23:29pm] Ziko: bot created articles, that's my subject

[23:29pm] GerardM-: I am talking traffic not articles

[23:29pm] SueGardner: I guess I feel we have an obligation to focus our energy where it will make the most difference -- where there is enormous potential. That is easier said than done.

[23:29pm] Seddon: its worth noting there are issues with the biggest project, not just the smaller ones

[23:29pm] Seddon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Seddon/State_of_the_wiki

[23:29pm] Prodego: both the way articles were created and the shear number of them do not usefulness to the reader make

[23:30pm] Prodego: the only way to tell how useful something is to a reader is to see how may readers there are

[23:30pm] SueGardner: It is also the case that sometimes the hard things are the important things. For example, it is important that we figure out ways to increase participation in developing countries (it is not "low hanging fruit" -- but it is also very important.

[23:30pm] GerardM-: Prodego that IS traffic

[23:30pm] Prodego: GerardM-: I'm agreeing with you - the long way

[23:30pm] SueGardner: A lot of this, people will wrestle with during the strategy project.

[23:30pm] Prodego: SueGardner: is that really a realisitic goal?

[23:31pm] GerardM-: Volapuk proved that number of articles leads to increased traffic

[23:31pm] SueGardner: Prodego: increasing participation in developing countries?

[23:31pm] SueGardner: Is that realistic?

[23:31pm] Prodego: yes

[23:31pm] GerardM-: yes

[23:31pm] wittylama: yes. and it should be.

[23:31pm] GerardM-: India for instance

[23:32pm] SueGardner: Well, we can definitely increase participation in developing countries. The question is, how transformatively, significantly, meaningfully, can we increase participation in developing countries.

[23:32pm] harej: GerardM-: American sign language Wikipedia!

[23:32pm] Ziko: we must esplore for the bottlenecks

[23:32pm] SueGardner: I think there is enormous potential in India.

[23:32pm] SueGardner: And the Arabic-speaking countries.

[23:32pm] bodnotbod: I would like to see Wikimedia conquer China and India/Pakistan first and then use that huge weight (and funding, one hopes) to then start really focusing on offline stuff.

[23:33pm] GerardM-: harej ASL is in the cards

[23:33pm] Prodego: what will developing countries bring? Wikipedia is user generated content, writers draw readers. It is difficult to try to jump start that process, dedicated writers do not appear spontaniously

[23:33pm] DarkoNeko: china has a big probleme that's not directly related to the WMF conquering mainland contributors will be ahrd

[23:33pm] SueGardner: Yes, Prodego. But we also don't want to be rich people writing for poor people.

[23:33pm] geniice: bodnotbod china? not going to happen. Hudong already captured that market

[23:33pm] GerardM-: Prodego. we do know little about them

[23:33pm] SueGardner: There will also be a task force on China, and one on India.... as part of the strategy project.

[23:34pm] geniice: Ziko the undersea lines that suplly most of the west coast of africa with it's web links

[23:34pm] Prodego: SueGardner: I think in a lot of cases language barriers lead to a sort of culture isolation, and not a rich / poor one per se

[23:34pm] jeblad: poor people without computers can't wrte on the net for other poor peoples without computers

[23:34pm] geniice: SueGardner given the foundation's recent dealings with Hudong did we learn any more about them?

[23:34pm] Tango42: Rich writing for poor may not be ideal, but well educated writing for less well educated may be inevitable, and there is a strong correlation

[23:35pm] DarkoNeko: jeblad: people without computer don't read wikipedia online or offline

[23:35pm] DarkoNeko: people with specific computer (there'(s some project about htat) can read an offline version, like from the moulin project, or okawix

[23:35pm] GerardM-: darkoneko we invested in PDF production ...

[23:35pm] MrX: I wish I understood where to begin to help underserved languages. What can you do about China when the government locks everyone out so often and tells them wp is potentially subversive? It's like juntas refusing humanitarian aid, just keep trying and maybe someone in power will change their mind

[23:35pm] DarkoNeko: GerardM-: sorry, what ?

[23:35pm] Prodego: Obviously we want to encourage anyone and everyone to write content, but I am uncertain what specific benifits developing countries bring beyond 'growth of user generated content' - which all writers bring

Q10: What are the effects of the departure of Jennifer Riggs?

[22:42pm] Seddon: Another Question to be added to the list: How does the departure of Jennifer Riggs (best of luck to her) affect the foundations planned increase in income for the next annual fundraiser, particularly in the mid-sized donations?

[23:09pm] cary: <Seddon> Another Question to be added to the list: How does the departure of Jennifer Riggs (best of luck to her) affect the foundations planned increase in income for the next annual fundraiser, particularly in the mid-sized donations?

[23:10pm] SueGardner: To answer Seddon's question.

[23:10pm] SueGardner: I don't think Jennifer's departure will have any effect on fundraising.

[23:11pm] SueGardner: I do think that her departure will make it harder for us to execute on projects (such as the Bookshelf, and other work of the program team).

[23:11pm] SueGardner: It's interesting....

[23:11pm] SueGardner: We have not had difficulty persuading for example foundations to give us money for projects.

[23:12pm] SueGardner: Our constraint isn't foundations' willingness to fund us; it is really our own internal capacity to execute.

[23:12pm] SueGardner: (I realize you weren't asking specifically about foundations. FWIW I don't think Jennifer leaving will affect general donations.)

[23:12pm] Dedalus_: SueGardner: Elaborate on ... "it is really our own internal capacity to execute."

[23:12pm] SueGardner: Does that answer the question?

[23:12pm] Seddon: so the money is thier but the foundation isnt growing quickly enough to put that money to use?

[23:12pm] SueGardner: Oh sure.

[23:12pm] SueGardner: Seddon, yes, essentially.

[23:13pm] SueGardner: We only pursue grants that we feel we have the capacity to execute.

[23:13pm] SueGardner: And the staff is small enough that it can't execute much.

[23:13pm] Tango42: If money is available that we can't spend, perhaps it is time to start on an endowment?

[23:13pm] SueGardner: Plus, we want to experiment with ways of empowering community members to execute, rather than just

[23:13pm] Philippe|Wiki: (plus, the level of effort in writing grant proposals is HUGE)

[23:13pm] SueGardner: executing on projects in traditional ways.

[23:13pm] jeblad: Thats interesting, how?

[23:13pm] SueGardner: So we are experimenting with various models (e.g., on the usability project, and some other stuff we

[23:14pm] SueGardner: 're talking about).

[23:14pm] SueGardner: Sorry

[23:14pm] SueGardner: "How" meaning how are we experimenting?

[23:14pm] Amgine: Tango42: grant money is for a purpose. You can't get it and bank it.

[23:14pm] MichaelSnow: Tango42: Money is available for specific projects (that we don't always have the capacity to carry out), not necessarily for an endowment

[23:14pm] SueGardner: jeblad?

[23:15pm] Tango42: Could the general donations to into an endowment and grants be used to pay for the projects those donations would have gone on?

[23:15pm] jeblad: How can you empower community memebers to do followups on foundations grants?

[23:15pm] Ziko: spending money in a senceful way is a lot of work, and maybe money is not always our first problem

[23:16pm] SueGardner: So, empowering community members .....

[23:16pm] SueGardner: There are a couple of things we are doing, related to community members and grants.

[23:16pm] Amgine: Tang42: Not usually. A grant has to be specific, and usually won't fund general operating expenses that the donations are used for.

[23:16pm] SueGardner: 1) We write letters of support for people who want them, supporting their grant applications for research projects, etc. (By the way, we also write general letters of recommendation when people ask us to.)

[23:17pm] MichaelSnow: An endowment basically is a fundraiser on top of a normal fundraiser

[23:17pm] SueGardner: 2) We apply for grants, and incorporate volunteers into their execution. For example the usability project has lots of volunteers involved; the NIH Academy work was done with lots of volunteers, and the bookshelf will be also.

[23:18pm] SueGardner: 3) We recently launched the chapters grantmaking process -- in which we gave out I believe 21 grants to chapters, so they could move forward work that they needed money for.

[23:19pm] SueGardner: 4) We secured a Mozilla grant for 100K that we "flowed through" to individual tech volunteers, to enable them to do work on Theora.

[23:19pm] SueGardner: grammar!

[23:19pm] SueGardner: And lastly 5) we are starting now to talk to foundations about creating pools of money that could be dispensed to volunteers through a volunteer-driven process. That is tricky and it will take time for foundations to really think it through, but it is something we are talking about.

[23:19pm] SueGardner: Whew. I will rest for a minute

[23:20pm] effeietsanders: hmm, I remember the grant with the image-creation

[23:20pm] bodnotbod: You deserve a rest, Sue

[23:20pm] effeietsanders: has there been a post mortem?

[23:20pm] Mentifisto: What kind of volunteers?

[23:20pm] jeblad: 5 is interesting

[23:21pm] effeietsanders: to find out what went wrong, and whether the concept of volunteer-grant-projects is viable at all in WIkimedia?

[23:21pm] SueGardner: effe: I believe Brianna wrote up a postmortem document, although I am not positive. (This is about the Philip Greenspun project you referred to.)

[23:21pm] effeietsanders: yes

[23:21pm] SueGardner: That was an experiment, and I think we learned from it.

[23:21pm] effeietsanders: could we do better now?

[23:21pm] SueGardner: Oh definitely.

[23:22pm] SueGardner: What I think we learned is, it is too much to demand from a single individual, that they alone create and manage an entire process for giving out funding.

[23:23pm] SueGardner: Brianna is a terrific Wikimedian, and she deserved more support from the Foundation than we were able to give her. We wouldn't let that happen today...

[23:23pm] wittylama: BTW, Brianna's write-up of the Greenspun illustration project is here http://brianna.modernthings.org/article/213/reflections-on-pgip-phase-1

[23:23pm] SueGardner: Thanks Liam

Q11: Why does the "Design the future of Wikimedia"-project require "Personal Information"?

[22:44pm] Bensin: QUESTION: Why does the "Design the future of Wikimedia"-project require "Personal Information"?

[22:44pm] eekim: Bensin: How will we contact you to followup on helping if we don't know who you are?

[22:45pm] cary: I know who Bensin is.

[22:45pm] Bensin: eekim: I'm a registered user with a user page.

[22:45pm] eekim: Bensin: for you, it's not a problem. not everyone who's volunteering are registered users.

[22:45pm] Philippe|Wiki: Bensin, but we want more than registered users, right? Participation from outside...?

[22:45pm] eekim: per Sue's point earlier

[22:46pm] Bensin: Philippe|Wiki: Absolutely! And it might be a good idea for them to register their information... But to require personal information from registered users?

[22:47pm] Philippe|Wiki: Bensin, how about if eekim or i follow up with you so that Sue can move on to geniice's question?

[22:47pm] eekim: Bensin: i think that's a fair question. let's continue this conversation on the strategy wiki.

[22:47pm] Dedalus_: Bensin: one day in the process we will meet in real life ... that's why we need some personal information exchanged

[22:47pm] Bensin: Philippe|Wiki, eekim: OK! Thanks!

[23:17pm] cary: Bensin's question is next.

[23:20pm] cary: eekim answered Bensin's question apparently

[23:20pm] Bensin: cary: I think I will get the answer to my question from Philippe|Wiki. Right?

[23:20pm] eekim: Bensin: right

[23:20pm] Philippe|Wiki: Bensn, yup

Q12: C'est possible que je pose mes questions en français?

[22:48pm] harej: C'est possible que je pose mes questions en français?

[22:48pm] pez: Non.

[22:48pm] DarkoNeko: no.

[22:48pm] schiste: harej: oui je traduirai

[22:48pm] schiste: harej: pose la moi en pv

[22:48pm] FT2: (on peut traduire, peut etre....)

[22:49pm] aZaFred: sans doute...

[22:49pm] Quagmire: Bonne idée!

Q13: Would it be an idea to set up a separate mailing list for announcements from the wmf?

[22:48pm] effeietsanders: question (do we need to write it like this?) would it be an idea to set up a seperate mailinglist for announcements from the wmf? Just like chapters-reports-l ?

[22:49pm] effeietsanders: to make sure people can track the important stuff without being bothered with all the shouting on foundtion-l ?

[22:50pm] Ziko: affirmative, effe: i would like to receive just a simple newsletter from the foundation and not have the noise on foundation-l or going to sites and wikis on my own

[22:51pm] MrX: I second the request for an official foundation newsletter, which, by the way http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Newsletter is not -- I'm not even sure it's a request for a newsletter, the way it's written

Q14: Is it not a goal of the foundation to try to at least survive?

[22:59pm] kim_: QUESTION (after everyone else's turn), is it not a goal of the foundation to try to at least survive?

[23:20pm] cary: <kim_> QUESTION (after everyone else's turn), is it not a goal of the foundation to try to at least survive?

[23:23pm] cary: kim_'s question

[23:23pm] cary: <kim_> QUESTION (after everyone else's turn), is it not a goal of the foundation to try to at least survive?

[23:23pm] SueGardner: Kim: "Is it not our goal to survive?"

[23:24pm] SueGardner: The goal of the Foundation is to ensure the projects thrive and reach people. Probably that requires the Foundation itself to survive. But the purpose isn't to self-perpetuate; the purpose is the work.

[23:24pm] SueGardner: The projects need to be protected; they need to exist forever.

[23:24pm] SueGardner: Maybe it is wordsmithing nitpickiness, but I think it's a small important distinction

[23:24pm] SueGardner: (Between Foundation and projects)

Q15: Why exactly are we spending money on the bookshelf drive?

[22:59pm] NuclearWarfare: QUESTION: Why exactly are we spending money on the bookshelf drive?

[23:01pm] cary: NuclearWarfare, what do you mean by Drive?

[23:01pm] NuclearWarfare: cary: Drive, project, same difference

Q16: Do you see the relationship between chapters and foundation as hierarchical or mutual?

[23:08pm] Seddon: QUESTION (if there is time for it): Do you the see the relationship between the chapters and the foundation as one which is hierarchical or one which is mutual?

[23:35pm] SueGardner: First, do I think the relationship between the chapters and Foundation is a hierarchical one, or one of peers.

23:35pm] SueGardner: I think it needs to be one of peers. The chapters are independent associations; they are not subsidiaries of the Wikimedia Foundation.

[23:36pm] Tango42: SueGardner: Do you think that view is shared by the rest of the WMF?

[23:36pm] SueGardner: But, in my opinion the chapters need and deserve support from the Foundation, to help them develop.

[23:36pm] wittylama: here here.

[23:36pm] SueGardner: Tango: Oh definitely yes, I think so.

[23:36pm] SueGardner: Michael could add?

[23:37pm] SueGardner: So WRT chapters development....

[23:37pm] Tango42: I didn't get that feeling when reading, for example, a draft of the now abandoned new chapters agreement

[23:37pm] Tango42: It was very much the WMF taking control of chapters

[23:37pm] SueGardner: We abandoned that process Thomas, it was just focusing on the wrong stuff and making everybody bad.

[23:37pm] Prodego: chapters are not very functionally integrated at this point. I couldn't tell you what the point of them is

[23:37pm] SueGardner: So we just shut it down.

[23:38pm] SueGardner: effe has started a new process that I hope (and believe) will be more positive and forward-looking.

[23:38pm] Tango42: Yes, but the fact that it was written in the first place makes me think some people in the WMF have fundamental differences of opinion from you and I regarding the nature of chapters and the WMF

[23:38pm] SueGardner: Personally, I get very tired of talking about the "relationship" between the chapters and the Foundation, as I think we all do. I would much rather we focus on the _work_ we want to get done, and how to do it

[23:39pm] schiste: Tango42: I think there are different culture

[23:39pm] schiste: and we're experiencing it

[23:39pm] bodnotbod: The UK chapter received a bit of WMF funding and they are doing outreach with schools and media (like the BBC). It's good stuff. Be gratifying to watch it grow.

[23:39pm] schiste: I also think both chapters and WMF have issues regarding communication

[23:39pm] SueGardner: No, Thomas, I don't think so. Mike's primary job is to protect the legal interests of the Wikimedia Foundation: that's his core obligation.

[23:39pm] wittylama: not just communicating to the outside, but problems communicating to each other.

[23:39pm] schiste: But, we have to keep in mind our goals are the same

[23:39pm] Tango42: Perhaps that needs to change, Sue.

[23:39pm] schiste: Tango42: no.

[23:40pm] Tango42: I think his obligation should be to the WM movement, not WMF

[23:40pm] • schiste disagree

[23:40pm] Tango42: As you have said yourself, it is the projects that are important, not the foundation

[23:40pm] SueGardner: His work is complex and he's got multiple obligations.

[23:40pm] eekim: Tango42: What would that mean in practice?

[23:40pm] Risker: Tango42: no, that was not said today

[23:40pm] Tango42: Risker: Yes, it was - under the "survival" question

[23:40pm] SueGardner: I actually think that Mike was attempting in his draft to protect us ALL.

[23:41pm] schiste: Anyway, about the agreement, or whatever we want to call it, chapters and WMF has to work together and speak to each other. Wich is exactly what is currently going on

[23:41pm] Tango42: With clauses like the one forcing chapters to abide by all rules of the WMF, including future ones?

[23:41pm] • eiaway has the feeling we won't get anywhere discussing past agreement drafts which have been withdrawn

[23:41pm] Tango42: That's not protecting, that's controlling

[23:41pm] schiste: Tango42: do you think WMUK General Counsel should work on protecting wpen ?

[23:41pm] schiste: (the day wmuk has one)

[23:41pm] SueGardner: eiaway: fair enough

[23:42pm] schiste: Tango42: this is past

[23:42pm] schiste: Drop it and get a fresh new start

[23:42pm] Tango42: schiste: No, chapters have a very restricted role, the WMF is more general

[23:42pm] jeblad: The draft had good intentions but was wrong on some points, it was a good move to restart the process

[23:42pm] schiste: I mean, we all agree the last attempt was a failure.

[23:42pm] schiste: Now, move on.

[23:42pm] Tango42: schiste: Yes, it was a failure and I think we need to work out why that failure happened

[23:43pm] schiste: And stop focusing on a failure, and start working on success.

[23:44pm] DarkoNeko: JC I think chapters are trying to take care of this

[23:44pm] DarkoNeko: partially at least

Q17: What is your ideal method of encouraging volunteer participation?

[23:14pm] JC: QUESTION when all others are done (a bit unrelated to what the general conversation seems to be focusing on): what is your ideal method of encouraging volunteer participation?

[23:42pm] cary: QUESTION when all others are done (a bit unrelated to what the general conversation seems to be focusing on): what is your ideal method of encouraging volunteer participation?

[23:42pm] cary: that's from JC

[23:42pm] cary: <JC> QUESTION when all others are done (a bit unrelated to what the general conversation seems to be focusing on): what is your ideal method of encouraging volunteer participation?

[23:42pm] cary: BARNSTARS

[23:42pm] cary: Lots of BARNSTARS

[23:42pm] JC: cary: lol

[23:42pm] Prodego: barnstars do work, they give a sense that another person has appreciated you

[23:43pm] SueGardner: So the question is, what is the ideal method of encouraging volunteer participation.

[23:43pm] Prodego: which is sorely lacking

[23:43pm] SueGardner: I think the best thing the Wikimedia Foundation can do is support volunteers in encouraging themselves and each other

[23:43pm] SueGardner: So

[23:43pm] DarkoNeko: barnstars ? doesn't that system only work at enwiki ?

[23:43pm] cary: Prodego, I was only half joking.

[23:43pm] • MrX awards Cary a metabarnstar. Here put this on your userpage: *

[23:43pm] wittylama: and volunteer retention (countering burnout)

[23:43pm] cary: DarkoNeko, I think they use it on eswiki too

[23:43pm] WereSpielChequer: welcome newbies and communicate clearly especially when deleting their pages

[23:43pm] DarkoNeko: hmm

[23:44pm] Prodego: DarkoNeko: more generally, a little pat on the back once and a while is the best motivator

[23:44pm] JC: SueGardner: indeed, but what about encouraging new people to join up?

[23:44pm] DarkoNeko: I do agree with that

[23:44pm] SueGardner: For example, Frank is developing the tools for people to engage new people as Wikimedians. Frank's starting the WikiPods, which has its roots in the Debian-type projects.....

[23:44pm] bodnotbod: I have my own proposal which speaks to this: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Reward_editors

[23:44pm] SueGardner: JC: Re encouraging new people, yes.

[23:44pm] • jeblad awards Sue a barnstar for having this talk

[23:44pm] SueGardner: What we can't do is: the Wikimedia Foundation invites in new people, and then the community tells them to get lost

[23:44pm] SueGardner: Which I know is Frank's biggest fear.l

[23:45pm] kim_: bodnotbod, dude, how about just banning the current community?

[23:45pm] DarkoNeko: oh hey, good idea

[23:45pm] Philippe|Wiki: that's an option?

[23:45pm] kim_: SueGardner, yes, it's a community problem

[23:45pm] Ziko: i know german mentors who left mentoring for that reason, sue

[23:45pm] Risker: kim_: there are things to be said for that

[23:45pm] SueGardner: And I know there are lots of Wikimedians who _worry_ about new people -- who don't want a sudden influx of clueless folks messing things up.

[23:45pm] SueGardner: Ziko: because their "new people" were turned away?

[23:46pm] SueGardner: (Thank you jeblad

[23:46pm] kim_: SueGardner, there are lots of people who don't like change. And they're participating in a bleeding edge project, operating in the most change-prone environment concieved in the entire history of mankind

[23:46pm] kim_: humans aren't quite evolved to work on the internet

[23:46pm] Ziko: sue: yes, for that reason

[23:46pm] Ziko: my task as a mentor is partly being a guardian angel

[23:46pm] Ziko: partially

[23:47pm] GerardM-: there are people in the current community that should be banned

[23:47pm] kim_: Teaching people to rely on logic rather than instinct helps. But it takes time

[23:47pm] DarkoNeko: kim_: it's partially a matter of age, the older you get, the moire you like your little confort and dislike changes. BoCTAOE

[23:47pm] DarkoNeko: (but of course there are bovious exceptions)

[23:47pm] kim_: DarkoNeko, actually, I find the opposite is true

[23:47pm] kim_: DarkoNeko, older people tend to be more flexible

[23:48pm] SueGardner: Yes. An interesting little case study for me was BLPs, which I spent a lot of time thinking about recently. I had always assumed that the "problem" with BLPs was thoughtless, insufficiently kind editors... but when I dug more into it, I realized the problem was mostly outsiders trying to POV-push on BLPs (hagiographies, etc.).

[23:48pm] DarkoNeko: ...I disagree, but we could probably talk about that on the other channel kim_

[23:48pm] SueGardner: What was interesting to me about that was, I began to realize why editors get so impatient with outsiders.

[23:49pm] kim_: SueGardner, that's interesting. Please continue! (if you need to cut short to get the Bensin question in, it'd be interesting to discuss that topic alone some other time)

[23:49pm] jeblad: BLP and FlaggedRevs went out a little bit badly in the press

[23:49pm] SueGardner: Gah, FlaggedRevs! Indeed.

[23:49pm] kim_: jeblad, "wikipedia has finally failed" , that's somewhat badly

[23:49pm] SueGardner: It is still going badly

[23:50pm] Ziko: sue: yes, i had such a case at de.wp deletion discussions a month a go. the newbie did behave stupidly, no question. but the experienced editors could have simply pointed him on what he did wrong instead of behaving to him in a way not let him keep his face

[23:50pm] SueGardner: The NY Times FlaggedRevs story was too bad; nobody was expecting it (it didn't come out of a p

[ress release). And we weren't ready for the storm of media interest it created.

[23:50pm] • kim_ encountered an actual hacker who couldn't get along with the wikipedia community... that's a bad sign

[23:50pm] jeblad: A proposal, we need somethng to send out both to the press and to the contributors about what this beast called FlaggedRevs really are

[23:50pm] Philippe|Wiki: (I should point out that Jay Walsh works really really hard to make the media undersatnd... and sometimes it can't be done)

[23:50pm] SueGardner: And it's a hard, complicated story, and the media are not good at stuff that's hard and complicated.

[23:50pm] DarkoNeko: ziko that's a bit of burnout syndrome. the more you have to explain the same things over and over to these *ù$ù* newbie, the more impatient one gets

[23:51pm] bodnotbod: The UK media coverage of flagged revs was also bone-headed and uninformed, unfortunately.

[23:51pm] kim_: (slashdot showing emnity towards wikipedia is also a bad sign, especially when wikipedia's old nickname was "the encyclopedia that slashdot wrote" )

[23:51pm] MrX: this isn't exactly new or unique to wmf, just another day high-tech-in-popular-press hell

[23:51pm] Seddon: WMUK knows all about the press frenzy it generated

[23:51pm] Prodego: Ziko: only when experienced editors treat each other nicely will newbies be treated nicely

[23:51pm] Ziko: maybe there will be a brochure on the bookshelf to explain things like flagged revisions etc.

[23:51pm] SueGardner: bodnotbod: It's not a surprise, but it just makes it much harder for us to help readers understand the implications.

[23:51pm] Ziko: darkoneko: that's true

[23:51pm] cary: Ziko: in Esperanto, no less!

[23:52pm] eekim: seconding Philippe|Wiki's point about Jay Walsh. and no, i am not the second full-time half of Philippe

23:52pm] geniice: To be fair to the press there wasa a slight lack of a cohrent foundation postion on flagged revisions. The "another form of protection" claim appears to have kinda appeared by acident

[23:52pm] Philippe|Wiki: lol

[23:52pm] jeblad: Just a note, I don't want to critizise Jay Walsh, things like that moves extremly fast and nobody was able to stop it. It was a good attempt anyhow!

[23:53pm] Ziko: jeblad: i never judge wikimedians from what they said according to the press

[23:53pm] cary: jeblad, if you'd like to criticize Jay he's on the channel

[23:54pm] jayansonvv: I have nothing to do with understnading, philippe

[23:54pm] jayansonvv: i see flagged revs is on every en:WP page now, cool!

Q18: European tour to visit chapters planned?

[23:14pm] TCY: QUESTION :European tour to visit chapters planned ?

[23:35pm] cary: TCY: Sue is visiting Norway, Germany and Poland next year

[23:35pm] jeblad: Que?

[23:35pm] jeblad: Cary, it would be nice to be informed..

[23:36pm] cary: jeblad, well, if you need more time before 2010

[23:36pm] • jeblad cary Haven't heard about Sue going to Norway, and I'm in WM Norway

[23:36pm] cary: She's going to Sweden next year, not Norway

[23:37pm] cary: My bad

Q19: When (and where) might we expect an analysis of the 2008 October survey?

[23:28pm] Bensin: QUESTION: The draft of the 2008 October survey was an interesting read. When (and where) might we expect a full analysis of the results?

[23:31pm] cary: - The large detailed version with tabbed interface.

[23:31pm] cary: http://infodisiac.com/Wikimedia/ReportCard/EN/RC_2009_09_detailed.html

[23:31pm] cary: - A one-column summary version for online browsing

[23:31pm] cary: http://infodisiac.com/Wikimedia/ReportCard/EN/RC_2009_09_summary.html

[23:31pm] cary: - A two-columns summary version for printing

[23:31pm] cary: http://infodisiac.com/Wikimedia/ReportCard/EN/RC_2009_09_columns.html

[23:48pm] cary: <Bensin> QUESTION: The draft of the 2008 October survey was an interesting read. When (and where) might we expect a full analysis of the results?

[23:49pm] SueGardner: Erik talks to UNU-Merit all the time. I know he is waiting for more detailed analysis...

[23:49pm] SueGardner: It has been slower than we would like.

[23:51pm] Eloquence: Bensin: The survey team has been late on many of their deliverables, sadly, but I have three more reports in the pipeline and hopefully will also get raw data from them soon so that Erik Zachte can start doing some crunching on it.

[23:52pm] Bensin: Eloquence: Excellent! Where will the result and analasys be posted?

[23:52pm] Eloquence: Bensin: Everything I get will be posted to <http://blog.wikimedia.org>.

[23:52pm] GerardM-: Erik's new statistics are really thought provoking