User talk:Sue Gardner/Archive 2

Add topic
Active discussions

FD/R: condensed

I created a separate page for Funds Dissemination Committee (including the advisory committee), and edited down your recommendations into something shorter. I haven't created pages on the wmf wiki for Fundraising Principles and Funds Dissemination Principles, but they're next.

The recs are still numbered by the original numbering scheme, though some are merged. I tried to preserve the original intent almost everywhere. Three exceptions: I applied the first two (less-controversial) proposed amendments from your original talk page, I added rec 3c. to clearly distinguish the three different options, and I changed 'payment processing' to 'donation processing'. (I'm of two minds about that last change. But it seems to me that at present we have no way of separating processing one part of donations from the other; until we sort out safe-harbor issues, whoever processes the payment of a donation is responsible for the long-term processing of the donor relationship, in a way that seems legally hard to share.)

I don't know if any of this is useful to you, and apologize in advance if this now reads like boiled cabbage; but it helps me visualize how all the pieces fit together. SJ talk   00:28, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Just FYI

Hi Sue. People still are discussing about the idea of an image filter. In another context, I decided to put this image on my talk page. Just a notice, thanks for reading. --Blogotron (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Blogotron. Sue is traveling and may not be able to come by her talk page soon, but I'll make sure she knows that the community is still discussing the idea. Thanks! --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 19:39, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Because of changing to archive now, the link has changed: [1] I tried to let someone know that we both shared the same encounter; standing nearby this autopsy table in the concentration camp. A picture that maybe a subject to filtering; but it is a part of history.--Blogotron (talk) 14:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Blogotron. Thanks for your comment here. I would really like to encourage you to get involved in any of the discussions where Wikimedia communities are talking about how to handle potentially objectionable or disturbing content. The quality of decisions made by the Wikimedia movement is directly related to the number and diversity of people participating in the discussions that lead to the decision, and so your presence would help improve the result. Talking is good :-) So please, do get involved. It's not just the notion of an image filter (or similar technical tool) that should be discussed: IMO the editorial issues are more complex and more important. (I wrote a little about that on my blog, here.) Thanks Sue Gardner (talk) 01:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


Do the fundraising growth projections include [2]? 18:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Sue is out of the office at the moment, but while waiting for her return, I just wanted to check and see if you can link to the fundraising growth projections that you mean, specifically. :) I can tell you that, as I understand it, generally speaking the WMF didn't take the blackouts into account when doing next year's annual plan because they didn't see them as a susbtantial, long-term game changer. Obviously, if the trend follows into 2012, that'll be taken into account going forward. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 19:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi We don't actually have any projections -- what we create & publish is targets. In other words, we are stating the growth we hope to achieve, not making predictions. But to your question: no, the 2012-13 targets don't assume any change to donation levels resulting from the Italian blackout (or the anti-SOPA activities, or the blackout on the Russian Wikipedia). That doesn't mean those activities won't have any effect --they may-- it just means that we are not making any predictions about what the effect might be, nor are we planning, nor did we plan, to use the protest activities to influence donations. It's definitely true that protest activities can have the effect of causing a spike in giving -- I think the German chapter has seen this two or three times, and now I gather the same has happened in Italy. But to be honest, I mostly aim to ignore those correlations. The Wikimedia Foundation doesn't want fundraising considerations to have any influence on how the movement handles policy issues, and the easiest way to ensure they don't is to behave as though there were a firewall, and zero correlation, between the two. Thanks Sue Gardner (talk) 00:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sue,

see pls oldwikisource:Wikisource:Scriptorium#Comments, I guess it is rather something for you than for the Oldwikisource. Thanks, regards -jkb- 14:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, jkb. I'll make sure that the trademark team is aware. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 19:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
ok, regards, -jkb- 22:01, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks jkb & Maggie :-) Sue Gardner (talk) 21:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you edited the initial naming straw poll for the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll is now open and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 23:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Some suggestions

Regarding this, a good way to remove about 80% of the flak from Wikimedia is to stop support of "free culture" related activities and narrow it down to Wikimedia and legality surrounding Wikimedia. This includes actively involving the Foundation in attacking businesses, paying for lawyers to defend people that attack businesses, and other unethical behavior that potentially harms the Foundation's ability to support an encyclopedia. You can also trim the budget of Wikimedia down to staff essential to operating servers and designing software upgrades. After all, if the Foundation is not part of editing content (which allows the to keep the immunity), then philosophically they should have no other duty than to work the servers.

Just to be clear, I am building off your section "What is not the core work of the Wikimedia Foundation?" Ottava Rima (talk) 19:13, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Ur impertinent, those were that paper again. U can read, can u? U intend to be against all. Fine, but very lonely view.--Angel54 5 (talk) 20:34, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Eric Moller's attempt to intimidate and harass

Since he is your deputy, it would be best that you ask him from refraining to attempt to intimidate people who have been critical of positions and views he has pushed. There are many members of the press who were keeping an eye on the page, and it really does a lot of disservice, especially when the harassment is targeting a person who actually contributed a significant portion of the quality content on Wikipedia and was recognized for being one of the top content contributors. Mr. Moller is, as I have told you before, one of the people who has to be removed from the Foundation before it can move forward. It is no coincidence that he is attempting to abuse his power to intimidate now. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

A discussion is a discussion, if u dont understand the rules, I cant change that. U could make proposals, but u will not. Now this is a attack against a person. What kind of problem do u have?--Angel54 5 (talk) 20:00, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Angel's question. Please don't take out your anger in attacks on editors here. SJ talk  14:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Intern for the Medical Translation Project

I am looking at hiring an Intern to help manage the medical translation project we are working on in collaboration with Translators Without Borders. The Monterey Institute has agreed to be the associated academic institute and will help find a candidate. The position will be paid $400 per month which I am happy to cover personally. What I need is some place for the person to physically work. Wondering if their is room at the San Francisco offices for this person? Or if there is someone else I should be speaking to about this? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:04, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh thanks Doc James -- sorry I haven't responded to your e-mail. I've just asked Asaf to talk with you about it: you'll probably hear back from him before the weekend. Thanks Sue Gardner (talk) 21:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Great thanks. Will probably be coming to San Fran early Jan 2013 to speak at UCSF. Hope to stop by the WMF than. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
We would LOVE to see you. Please do come by :-) Sue Gardner (talk) 07:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Civic debates

Recent PR updates made me think: we tend to have people who know corporate governance, law, decision-making discussing growth and governance (of both movement and WMF; they can't be entirely separated). But we have fewer people who know the civic version of the same. It would offer interesting parallax to invite more civic planners to the table. SJ talk  14:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Sue Gardner/Archive 2".