IRC office hours/Office hours 2012-08-18
[10:14:58] Topic is Office hours with Sue Gardner at 17:30 UTC TODAY (18 August) | See other IRC office hours https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours
[10:14:58] Set by Thehelpfulone on August 18, 2012 9:46:32 AM PDT
[10:20:17] Pharos: hi
[10:20:43] Pharos: i probably won't be able to participate very heavily, but i'll drop in a couple tmes
[10:20:58] KFP (~KFP@wikipedia/KFP) joined the channel.
[10:21:43] Qcoder02 (~chatzilla@unaffiliated/qcoder02) joined the channel.
[10:21:48] Ebe123: Ok
[10:21:57] Krenair (~Krenair@wikimedia/Krenair) joined the channel.
[10:22:07] Pharos: (I'm in the middle of http://eyebeam.org/events/jean-claude-van-jam !)
[10:22:11] vigorous_afk (~v_a@wikimedia/vigorous-action) joined the channel.
[10:22:24] Qcoder02: Is it too late to propose a topic?
[10:22:34] Qcoder02: I had a laundry list of things
[10:22:37] Ebe123: There is no set topic
[10:22:42] Platonides (~Platonide@wikipedia/Platonides) joined the channel.
[10:22:47] Ebe123: Put all your list
[10:22:59] StevenW: Qcoder02: Nope, not at all.
[10:23:24] StevenW: If you have specific questions, I'd keep them handy and then propose them when sgardner arrives
[10:24:41] AeonF (~Flux@126.96.36.199) joined the channel.
[10:24:56] MF-W (~chatzilla@Wikimedia/MF-Warburg) joined the channel.
[10:25:15] Demiurge1000 (~chatzilla@wikipedia/Demiurge1000) joined the channel.
[10:26:33] SPQRobin (~Robin@wikimedia/SPQRobin) joined the channel.
[10:26:33] jorm (~bharris@wikimedia/jorm) left IRC. (Quit: jorm)
[10:27:01] Qcoder02: OK
[10:27:21] aude: waves
[10:27:37] Ebe123: is waiting
[10:27:41] Demiurge1000: jorm left, so I don't think we can continue.
[10:27:58] Ebe123: is leaving then
[10:28:05] Bence|android (bc060149@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.8.131.52) joined the channel.
[10:28:21] jorm (~bharris@wikimedia/jorm) joined the channel.
[10:28:22] Demiurge1000: As an alternative, you could stand in for jorm? Then we could carry on.
[10:28:26] Demiurge1000: Ah, don't worry.
[10:28:34] aude: Pharos: you keep pinging me when you say jean-claude-van-jam ;)
[10:28:40] Seth_Finkelstein (~sethf@BUZZWORD-BINGO.MIT.EDU) joined the channel.
[10:28:43] the-wub (~the-wub@wikimedia/the-wub) joined the channel.
[10:28:44] aude: needs to fix my irc settings
[10:28:50] SteveMobile (~SteveMobi@wikimedia/Steven-Zhang) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
[10:28:59] Pharos: that's awesome, aude ;P
[10:29:04] aude: lol
[10:29:08] Pharos: you have the best settings ever
[10:29:18] ragesoss (~sage@wikimedia/ragesoss) joined the channel.
[10:29:51] rindolf: Ebe123: I'm getting my homepage's pages to validate again.
[10:29:57] Ebe123: 2:30 now
[10:30:04] Ebe123: now
[10:30:12] Ebe123: 5:30 then
[10:30:19] Ebe123: UTC
[10:30:37] Demiurge1000: 29.2C, 41% humidity.
[10:30:43] Qcoder02: One of the topic I was wanting to raise was the use of 'secret' materials as sources...
[10:30:49] Ebe123: Warm
[10:30:55] sgardner (~firstname.lastname@example.org) joined the channel.
[10:31:01] aude: hi sgardner
[10:31:02] Demiurge1000: Late!
[10:31:07] Qcoder02: Good afternoon sgardber
[10:31:09] Demiurge1000: An entire minute late!
[10:31:11] sgardner: Ah, here we are! Hi folks.
[10:31:13] Ebe123: Qcoder, I wouuld like to raise that too
[10:31:14] Qcoder02: *sgardner
[10:31:19] Ebe123: Late, Sue
[10:31:22] Ebe123: ...
[10:31:27] ChanServ sets mode +v sgardner
[10:31:31] sgardner: I thought I had joined earlier, but apparently not. Hello!
[10:31:39] Ebe123: Hi
[10:31:44] Seth_Finkelstein: Hello, Ms. Executive Director
[10:31:49] sgardner: So this is my first crack at a Saturday morning (PT) office hours.
[10:31:49] the-wub: Hi Sue
[10:31:52] Demiurge1000: (That's like being in a conference call and talking away happily, but being on mute...)
[10:32:05] Ebe123: laughs
[10:32:12] Qcoder02: sgardner: Was there a specfic topic or was any general topic affecting project wide stuff allowed?
[10:32:21] SteveMobile (~SteveMobi@wikimedia/Steven-Zhang) joined the channel.
[10:32:23] Ebe123: Everything allowed
[10:32:25] sgardner: We did an informal poll a couple of months ago to see what time & day would work for the maximum number of people, and this was it. So here we are :-)
[10:32:35] sgardner: Qcoder02: yes, this one is free-form.
[10:32:59] sgardner: I think we can do what we normally do -- people can toss out topic areas, and we'll see which ones interest the largest number of people. Does that sound good?
[10:33:00] Ebe123: So should we start?
[10:33:00] Tango42 (~email@example.com) joined the channel.
[10:33:08] Ebe123: Should we start?
[10:33:14] Tango42: Hello all
[10:33:17] StevenW: Yeah go for it
[10:33:18] Ebe123: Hi
[10:33:25] sgardner: Yes, sure, let's start :-)
[10:33:28] Qcoder02: sgardner: 1. In light of the ongoing controversey about Wikileaks , what is the WMF position on leaked material, which may be legaly secret or confidential?
[10:33:31] aude: sgardner: this day/time works great
[10:33:50] Ebe123: The use of pay-walled articles as references on Wikipedia
[10:33:58] foks (~sup@wikipedia/fox) joined the channel.
[10:34:21] StevenW: LOL. Wikimedians. Right away with the extremely important questions. :)
[10:34:30] sgardner: (I will toss out a couple of topic areas that I think might interest people, as well. Progress towards the FDC might be one, and I will see if I can think of a few more. And Steven is here too, if people are interested in topic areas he's knowledgeable about, as well.)
[10:34:31] Seth_Finkelstein: +1 to Qcoder02, secret or confidential material
[10:34:32] Ebe123: You too
[10:34:54] foks: Hi Sue.
[10:35:03] Tango42: +2 to Qcoder02 - I hadn't thought of that question, but it's a really good one
[10:35:16] foks: I really want to see his question now.
[10:35:16] apergos (~ariel@wiktionary/ArielGlenn) joined the channel.
[10:35:24] sgardner: (I am just leaning back for a while, waiting for people to toss out topics.)
[10:35:25] Qcoder02: foks: In light of the ongoing controversey about Wikileaks , what is the WMF position on leaked material, which may be legaly secret or confidential?
[10:35:32] foks: Unless it's "what is the meaning of life", because that's my one
[10:35:42] Demiurge1000: foks: Sorry, his question is secret and/or confidential
[10:35:51] foks: Well now it's leaked!
[10:35:52] foks: Mwahaha.
[10:35:55] Qcoder02: Demiurge ;)
[10:36:03] Ebe123: Where is leaked material used on Wikipedia?
[10:36:04] Amqui1 (~firstname.lastname@example.org) joined the channel.
[10:36:05] apergos: can we have a position on diplomatic immunity too? (just kidding)
[10:36:10] Tango42: My pet topic at the moment: COIs with FDC staff
[10:36:11] Ebe123: Bonjour
[10:36:13] Ebe123: Amqui1
[10:36:21] Ebe123: My topic: The use of pay-walled articles as references on Wikipedia
[10:36:24] Amqui1: salut Ebe123
[10:37:32] SteveMobile (~SteveMobi@wikimedia/Steven-Zhang) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[10:37:49] Nemo_bis: Oh, sgardner, forgot to say thnak you for fixing https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_budget#.22the_WMF_annual_plan_covers_the_entire_movement.22
[10:37:52] Nemo_bis: :)
[10:37:52] Ebe123: So many ping timouts...
[10:38:50] sgardner: Ah, you're welcome, Nemo. You were absolutely right, and I was happy to fix it.
[10:38:52] sgardner: So do we have three topics so far -- leaked material, pay-walled articles as references, and COI with FDC staff?
[10:38:57] StevenW: Yep
[10:39:04] sgardner: (You should keep going if there are more topics. I am not calling a halt to new ones :-))
[10:39:17] StevenW: And feel free to PM me new questions too
[10:39:19] foks: I'm just here for the free bar.
[10:39:20] Ebe123: Qcoder02...
[10:39:20] SteveMobile (~SteveMobi@wikimedia/Steven-Zhang) joined the channel.
[10:39:24] foks: (There's a free bar, right?)
[10:39:26] Qcoder02: sgardener: I'd also like to suggest the WMF considers the 'safeguarding' issue with respect to younger contributors at some point
[10:39:42] aude: wiki travel guide? next steps?
[10:39:49] apergos: foks: I think it's free as in speech, not as in beer, sadly
[10:39:50] aude: status, etc.
[10:39:58] Demiurge1000: Qcoder02: It's being considered by oversighters at the moment, apparently
[10:39:58] sgardner: Okay, let me start with Qcoder02. I'm kind of curious to know why you're asking, and whether you think the WMF *should* have a position on leaked materials. It sounds like you believe it should?
[10:40:04] sgardner: And yes, aude, we can add the travel site, too.
[10:40:08] Demiurge1000: Qcoder02: What's under consideration, is spending less time dealing with it
[10:40:12] foks: Ah, yes, it'd be nice to get to some kind of conclusion about dealing with minors. Given we've no COPPA.
[10:40:16] Abbas_ (3e186ff9@gateway/web/freenode/ip.184.108.40.206) joined the channel.
[10:40:17] Ebe123: Sister Projects Committee
[10:40:18] Ebe123: ?
[10:40:22] Demiurge1000: Qcoder02: Which is perhaps the opposite of what you have in mind
[10:40:25] sgardner: (If someone can post the link to the RfC, that would help people catch up if they haven't been following it.)
[10:40:45] aude: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
[10:40:48] Abbas_ (3e186ff9@gateway/web/freenode/ip.220.127.116.11) left IRC. (Client Quit)
[10:40:51] Qcoder02: sgardner: Yes, I think the WMF should have a position on leaked material
[10:41:02] Qcoder02: Plenty of other journalistic bodies do
[10:41:03] Risker (~chatzilla@wikimedia/Risker) joined the channel.
[10:41:04] AeonF: i've never been to a meeting here before, but if i were to raise a topic for development, it would be: A farm-based direction in future versions (that would inherently work fine as stand-alone installs as well)
[10:41:09] sgardner: Demiurge1000, if you're familiar with editorial policy around the leaked material issue, please feel free to talk more.
[10:41:21] Ebe123: Where is leaked material used?
[10:41:21] Beria_ (~Beria@wikimedia/Beria) joined the channel.
[10:41:39] Abbasjnr (3e186ff9@gateway/web/freenode/ip.18.104.22.168) joined the channel.
[10:41:58] Demiurge1000: No, it's either more or less complicated than that - I was replying to Qcoder's question about safeguarding younger contributors, not to the issue of leaked materials
[10:42:04] Qcoder02: Ebe123: Wikipedia has articles on the Cablegate scandal... and some would argue it's impossible to disscuss key topic of that without linking the material leaked...
[10:42:14] sgardner: Ah, sorry Demiurge1000.
[10:42:18] Ebe123: That
[10:42:30] thineantiquepen (568ac1f0@gateway/web/freenode/ip.22.214.171.124) joined the channel.
[10:42:52] Risker: oops, looks like I missed something interesting about safeguarding younger users
[10:42:54] Ebe123: safeguarding younger contributors is a thing for parents,
[10:42:58] Amqui1 (~email@example.com) left IRC. (Read error: No route to host)
[10:43:08] Ebe123: and not Wikipedia
[10:43:10] foks: Risker, I've asked to ask that to the topics we're covering. :)
[10:43:13] Demiurge1000: On the cablegate thing, yes there was some very angry discussion initially about whether WP could/should include information
[10:43:18] Ebe123: Minors to know the risks
[10:43:29] Qcoder02: And on 'safeguarding' it wasn't so much to do with content as WMF having the 'appropriate' means to deal with self identifying persons of risk to minors..
[10:43:39] sgardner: The Wikimedia Foundation doesn't have a policy specifically related to leaked materials. I am assuming there is editorial policy, but that's the purview of the community, not the Foundation. I think that's as it should be: do you (Qcoder02 or anyone else) disagree?
[10:43:39] foks: Ebe123, this is a little more complicated than censoring content.
[10:44:00] foks: I would say that sounds about right, Sue.
[10:44:01] Beria (~Beria@wikimedia/Beria) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
[10:44:07] Qcoder02: sgardner: I think the Foundation needs a FOundation level legal position
[10:44:13] Qcoder02: (on leaked material)
[10:44:21] foks: I think this is a case-by-case issue, Qcoder02
[10:44:29] Ebe123: +1
[10:44:46] apergos: Qcoder02: the jurisdictonal issues alone would be tough to manage
[10:44:49] Qcoder02: Clearly Wikimedia projects do not censor
[10:45:07] apergos: depending on which government's information was disclosed
[10:45:30] sgardner: What kind of position do you think we should have, specific to leaked materials?
[10:45:40] foks: WMF have a very capable legal team and I'm sure they would be able to handle any complaints.
[10:46:07] Qcoder02: sgardner: The same as other media organisations have...
[10:46:09] Tango42: The community can sometimes be a little idealistic, so I can envisage situations where the WMF would have to step in with a more pragmatic approach
[10:46:24] foks: Qcoder02, which is?
[10:46:26] Abbasjnr: Hi all. I have a question, once the pending ones are answered.
[10:46:27] Ebe123: So for Canada, it's okay, but not for the US?
[10:46:27] Ebe123: Not fair
[10:46:28] Amqui2 (~firstname.lastname@example.org) joined the channel.
[10:46:28] Ebe123: Amqui2, bonjour
[10:46:45] Qcoder02: .. I.E Leaked material has to show or prove extrodinary fact or conduct to justify publication
[10:46:58] aude: Qcoder02: new york times?
[10:47:14] foks: Qcoder02, what, "public interest", you mean?
[10:47:17] Qcoder02: aude: the NYT is a reliable source...
[10:47:24] aude: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/world/26warlogs.html
[10:47:26] aude: ?
[10:47:30] Tango42: Qcoder02: Who has that policy? I would have thought "public interest" was the criterion, rather than extraordinaryness
[10:47:39] foks: Have there actually been any complaints on leaked material?
[10:47:44] aude: don't click if you don't want to see wikileaks stuff
[10:48:14] Qcoder02: Also some US students were in effect given vieled threats about viewing 'leaked' items...
[10:48:25] Seth_Finkelstein: sgardner - I may disagree with Qcoder02 on the specifics of Wikileaks, but I also dislike the Foundation's catch-all response to complicated legal issues, which I call "NOBODY HOME!"
[10:48:36] sgardner: Qcoder02, the thing is, we have two kinds of policies, generally. WMF policies and community editorial policies. I'd expect that the community itself would develop policies, that might resemble journalistic policy at conventional media organizations. (Or at least, would cover the same ground.) But it isn't the purview of the WMF to develop editorial policy for the projects.
[10:48:36] Ebe123: In some places...
[10:48:47] Ebe123: the NYT is a reliable source... not for medical articles
[10:48:47] sgardner: Tango42: yes, but generally I'd say "idealistic" is a strength, not a weakness :-)
[10:49:29] Qcoder02: I am asking for a Foundation level position so that projects can have a guideline from which to draft project level ones
[10:49:38] the-wub (~the-wub@wikimedia/the-wub) left the channel. ("Leaving")
[10:49:39] sgardner: Qcoder02: I'm curious, what *is* your position on Wikileaks? Or is Seth saying you have a position on Wikileaks' leaked material being used on Wikipedia? Is this a debate you're having on Wikipedia?
[10:49:39] sgardner: (Sorry I don't know about it, but I don't.)
[10:49:39] Tango42: sgardner: Having ideals can be a strength, but when I say "idealistic" I mean taking it too far. It is analogous to "simple" vs "simplistic".
[10:49:39] the-wub (~the-wub@wikimedia/the-wub) joined the channel.
[10:49:40] sgardner: (I am actually curious to know how people are feeling about Wikileaks generally, these days. I am wondering where public sentiment is at, WRT Wikileaks in general.)
[10:49:55] sgardner: Qcoder02, what do you think it should look like?
[10:49:56] Seth_Finkelstein: sgardner - Regarding Qcoder02, people have different takes on the appropriateness of the Wikileaks material, from a journalistic vs respecting confidentiality. I'm merely noting that.
[10:50:24] Qcoder02: sgardner: I would be concerned if Wikileaks had released anything that directly compromised critical assets or personell.
[10:50:34] sgardner: Seth: Right. I'm just wondering where Qcoder02 stands on that question.
[10:50:35] foks: I'm not a big fan of Wikileaks but I can see why it could be useful.
[10:51:04] Ebe123: Calling Assange a terrorist? Idiots
[10:51:08] sgardner: Right, I see. So you're asking whether projects like Wikipedia should privilege "doing no harm" higher than Wikileaks does. Do more scrutiny of potential harm, etc. That's what you're advocating for.
[10:51:33] Tango42: The issue is larger than just Wikileaks.
[10:51:36] Ebe123: Stephen Haper's assistant should of been arrested
[10:51:39] lyzzy (~lyzzy@wikimedia/lyzzy) joined the channel.
[10:51:40] jvandavier (~jvandavie@wikimedia/jvandavier) left IRC. (Quit: jvandavier)
[10:51:41] aude: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_States :)
[10:51:42] Fluff|away is now known as Fluff|errands
[10:51:46] Qcoder02: However, stuff that reveals extrodianry conduct or fact (like a cover up of an attrocity) is stuff that would be in the 'public-interest' to publish...
[10:51:51] foks: Ebe123, he could very easily help terrorists out if WL ever released anything that sensitive.
[10:51:52] aude: not sure that wikipedia qualifies as press but....
[10:52:02] aude: or wikisource or whatever
[10:52:08] Ebe123: He is not a terrorist though
[10:52:14] Qcoder02: aude: Wikipedia covers news events... Wikinews certainly does
[10:52:17] Tango42: In fact, it only really matters if it is posted somewhere other than Wikileaks. It gets so much publicity on Wikileaks that adding our readers doesn't really make any difference.
[10:52:20] ragesoss: I find it frustrating that Wikileaks as an organization and symbol is so closely tied up with the person of (alleged rapist) Assange. It makes it hard to have good discussions over the leaks / secrecy issues.
[10:52:28] foks: Qcoder02, yeah, but Wikipedia isn't the press
[10:52:31] StevenW: Do we want Sue to move on to the question about paywalled sources as references?
[10:52:55] Krenair: I think it goes without saying that most of these sorts of policies need to be decided by the community. If legal issues arise, the WMF legal team can deal with it
[10:52:55] Ebe123: Yes
[10:52:55] Qcoder02: sgardner: Thanks for the taking the time to answer my concerns :)
[10:52:56] Ebe123: StevenW
[10:52:57] Tango42: foks: Define "press".
[10:52:58] Risker: Concur with Krenair
[10:53:21] Qcoder02: On my topic : Motion to defer to Community of projects?
[10:54:04] StevenW: Motion seconded ;-)
[10:54:06] Krenair: So far there is no clear display to me that leaked material has posed any major problems, or at least nothing which would warrant even having a policy to treat leaked material differently.
[10:54:10] MartijnH (~asdesfs@wikipedia/Martijn-Hoekstra) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
[10:54:29] sgardner: Sure Qcoder02, I wish I could be more directly helpful. I'd be curious to know more about current community practices (ie whether potential for harm is a consideration) .. but like I said, I do think it's a community issue rather than a WMF one.
[10:54:45] Beria_ is now known as Beria
[10:55:14] Qcoder02: sgardner: To close on the topic, the concern wasn't just WikiLeaks, but other 'leaked' stuff in general...
[10:55:16] sgardner: (Thanks folks for talking a little about Assange/Wikileaks. I am really interested in how perception of him/them may be shifting.)
[10:55:35] sgardner: Paywalled sources is a community issue too :-)
[10:55:45] Ebe123: Lets go to that now?
[10:56:01] Qcoder02: I don't have as much problem with paywaled sources as I do with clearly unreliable ones :)
[10:56:19] Ebe123: It's keeping the reader away from them
[10:56:23] Qcoder02: (besides paywalls to some extent can be worked around leagally)
[10:56:27] Ebe123: avrage reader
[10:56:48] Qcoder02: Wikipedia also uses non-digital sources...
[10:56:58] Ebe123: And other editors too
[10:56:59] Qcoder02: Does not having an online source deter an average reader?
[10:57:12] Ebe123: some times
[10:57:20] Tango42: Does the average reader even look at sources?
[10:57:21] Ebe123: If you need to pay
[10:57:23] sgardner: I think the current policy is that paywalled sources are treated like all other sources, right?
[10:57:29] Ebe123: Some do
[10:57:30] Demiurge1000: yes, pretty much
[10:57:34] StevenW: That's a really huge question, which impacts most of the Featured Articles on English Wikipedia (if you're talking online sources vs offline)
[10:57:36] Ebe123: Yes
[10:57:40] Qcoder02: Other than marking them as (payment required)
[10:57:48] Risker: I think "paywalled sources" is a non-question. It is essentially providing online access to material that exists off-line. The quality of the source is more important than how one gets to it.
[10:58:05] Qcoder02: Risker: Well that was my view
[10:58:09] Ebe123: The advrage editor canot see it either
[10:58:19] apergos: a source I might find in a public library but not on line is at least doable. a source that's in some journal only university folks can get to (or who otherwise pay for it) is a problem.
[10:58:37] Demiurge1000: One of the issues is that the message that's supposed to be given to, say, educational institutions about Wikipedia, is that students should use Wikipedia as a starting point for their research, not just copy from it or paraphrase it. In other words, going to the sources. If lots of them are paywalled, that's a harder argument to make
[10:58:37] Qcoder02: In any case any serious person looking for sources is going to use an academic library at some poinr
[10:58:40] Qcoder02: *point
[10:58:48] Tango42: apergos: public libraries often have quite a lot of subscriptions
[10:59:02] Demiurge1000: Qcoder02: The average reader is not a "serious person" by that definition
[10:59:03] Ebe123: That's the problem, Demi
[10:59:12] the-wub (~the-wub@wikimedia/the-wub) left IRC. (Quit: Leaving)
[10:59:15] ragesoss: thinks there is a fair use case for archiving and making directly available to readers the paywalled sources we cite.
[10:59:16] sgardner: Risker: yeah, that makes sense to me (personally). You could obviously argue that using information from a paywalled source in a Wikipedia article is a good thing -- making the information accessible to the world.
[10:59:34] Ebe123: One of the issues is that the message that's supposed to be given to, say, educational institutions about Wikipedia, is that students should use Wikipedia as a starting point for their research, not just copy from it or paraphrase it. In other words, going to the sources. If lots of them are paywalled, that's a harder argument to make
[10:59:35] Ebe123: 14:58 Qcoder02: In any case any serious person looking for sources is going to use an academic library at some poinr
[10:59:36] apergos: yes they do, and in those cases the information is then available to the public. But quite a number of journals etc (probably the vast majority) are not. Unfortunately.
[10:59:38] Tango42: ragesoss: doubtful
[10:59:38] Risker: Demiurge1000 there's no difference between a paywalled source and a scientific journal and a hardcover book. They're all reliable.
[10:59:49] Demiurge1000: Risker: I wasn't commenting on their reliability.
[11:00:06] ragesoss: Tango42: I'm not saying it's a strong case. But I'm a fan of pushing boundaries in that area.
[11:00:23] Tango42: ragesoss: IANAL, but I don't think there is any case at all
[11:00:34] Seth_Finkelstein: ragesoss - won't work. If it did, anyone could unpaywall by citation.
[11:00:46] Risker: Well, we can't write the encyclopedia with any degree of adequacy if we restrict ourselves to online, cost-free sources. That just makes us an aggregator.
[11:00:48] ragesoss: Seth_Finkelstein: and...
[11:01:28] Amqui2 (~email@example.com) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
[11:01:43] Tango42: Risker: True, but we could restrict ourselves to only sources accessible to the public by going to a decent library. Would that be desirable?
[11:01:45] Risker: ragesoss, I can't see that case at all, myself.
[11:01:46] Seth_Finkelstein: ragesoss - and copyright is one of the few legal areas Wikimedia does NOT have legal immunity in "Section 230"
[11:02:02] sgardner: (Not meaning to interrupt, but can someone post the link to the travel wiki RfC? Then people can take a look at it before we get to that part of the conversation.)
[11:02:18] Tango42: sgardner: someone did
[11:02:29] sgardner: Ah, thanks Tango. I missed it.
[11:02:33] Amgine (~Amgine@wikinews/Amgine) joined the channel.
[11:02:36] Tango42: aude http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
[11:02:49] Ebe123: If we were immune, I still think we would not permit it
[11:03:05] Risker: Tango42, maybe for Britney Spears or Grey's Anatomy, but not for many medical, scientific, or literature issues. Not if we want to be comprehensive in any way.
[11:03:08] sgardner: (Tango: thank you.)
[11:04:02] Ebe123: What about the Sister Projects Committee
[11:04:09] Abbasjnr (3e186ff9@gateway/web/freenode/ip.126.96.36.199) left IRC. (Quit: Page closed)
[11:05:50] Bence|android: don't forget that a "decent library" is not necessarily something one might find worldwide - so while citing stuff that can be accessed from a decent library might be convenient for many, it is still not a universal solution
[11:05:50] StevenW: Ebe123: was the sister projects committee question/topic directed at sgardner ?
[11:06:03] Ebe123: Maybe, Steven
[11:06:18] StevenW: I also have a question about India programs and other global work waiting from Abbas, who had to run.
[11:07:02] apergos: Bence|android: and that's part of the problem we need to address; in order for the reader to be able to double check the information presented, they need to have access to enough of the sources to verify the material cited, both content and use.
[11:07:04] Bence|android: ragesoss' idea would better work universally if it were legal
[11:07:13] sgardner: Sorry -- what's the question about the sister projects committee?
[11:07:35] jorm (~bharris@wikimedia/jorm) left IRC. (Quit: jorm)
[11:07:43] sgardner: (I think we still want to talk about the FDC, travel site, and the question Steven has from Abbas.)
[11:08:08] Ebe123: Yes
[11:09:32] sgardner: Who's asking it? Ebe123? can you talk a little about why you're interested -- are you working on it, do you think it's a good idea...?
[11:09:41] blr (7aacc46d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.8.131.52) joined the channel.
[11:09:56] Ebe123: "it" refers to what?
[11:10:19] Tango42: ebe123: sister projects comm, i think
[11:10:42] Qcoder02: sgardner: I'll idle for a while to the 'safeguarding' topic comes up ;)
[11:10:53] sgardner: Yeah, sorry. I'm asking who originally asked about the sister projects committee, because I want them to elaborate a little :-)
[11:11:13] Ebe123: Withdrew
[11:11:46] SteveMobile (~SteveMobi@wikimedia/Steven-Zhang) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
[11:12:24] sgardner: (By the way, a side note. I used to greet people by name when they joined the channel if I knew them, but I stopped doing that a while ago because I realized it might feel unwelcoming or exclusionary towards people I don't know. So if anyone is wondering why I didn't greet them effusively by name off the top, that's why :-) I am just wanting to be inclusive.)
[11:12:46] sgardner: Okay -- should we go to the next topic area now then? What's next?
[11:12:59] Ebe123: Was safeguarding done
[11:13:07] jeremyb: also, then you don't discriminate against the people that are on here all the time ;-P
[11:13:28] aude: :)
[11:13:31] StevenW: The question from Abbas maybe?
[11:14:29] StevenW: <Abbasjnr> Question: The WMF has decided, WRT India Programs, to now engage and carry out it's activities with existing, established organisations like CIS India, rather than hire consultants. Will this method be replicated to other catalyst projects such as Brazil and MENA? Why or why not?
[11:14:30] Amqui2 (~firstname.lastname@example.org) joined the channel.
[11:14:48] sgardner: Okay.
[11:15:45] sgardner: That's a really good question, from Abbas.
[11:15:58] SteveMobile (~SteveMobi@wikimedia/Steven-Zhang) joined the channel.
[11:15:58] sgardner: So let me recap for a minute first on what's happened in India. (I'd also like to ask if there're people here who are particularly interested in this topic. Otherwise I'll keep it short, just so Abbas can read it afterwards.)
[11:16:08] Ebe123: Not that interested
[11:16:18] SteveMobile: Agh
[11:16:32] StevenW: Yeah I think just a quick answer so Abbas can check the logs is fine.
[11:16:42] SteveMobile: Hi sgardner :-)
[11:17:10] sgardner: Okay -- hang on: I will construct it in a text editor then, and then dump it in. Why don't you guys move on while I'm doing that, and start setting up the next topic?
[11:17:46] StevenW: Did we finish up talk about the travel site, or is that still open?
[11:17:58] StevenW: (I'm interested in that, not sure what others think.)
[11:18:37] Ebe123: I'm interested
[11:18:40] Bence|android: would be great to have an update on it
[11:19:24] Amqui (~email@example.com) joined the channel.
[11:19:45] Tango42: What is the question re. the travel site? As far as I know, the RFC is still ongoing.
[11:19:56] Steven_Zhang (~Steven_Zh@wikimedia/Steven-Zhang) joined the channel.
[11:20:14] Steven_Zhang: bleh, I am late.
[11:20:34] MelBee (~MelBee@184.108.40.206) joined the channel.
[11:20:36] Demiurge1000: Steven_Zhang: Not in the Slartibartfast sense, I hope.
[11:20:39] Risker: The travel site RFC will close at 0000 hr UTC on 23 August
[11:20:58] Steven_Zhang: well it is 4.20am here
[11:21:46] aude: wonders who will close the RFC
[11:21:57] Amqui2 (~firstname.lastname@example.org) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
[11:21:58] Bence|android: what is the timeline post-RFC?
[11:21:58] StevenW: And it looks like the current !votes are ~400 for, ~150 against.
[11:22:15] foks: Wait, uh, what RFC?
[11:22:19] foks: durrs
[11:22:20] thineantiquepen: Which RfC?
[11:22:26] Ebe123: Travel Guid
[11:22:26] Ebe123: e
[11:22:28] aude: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
[11:22:29] Risker: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
[11:22:29] Demiurge1000: aude: I won't be able to, I'll probably be on my way back from work at that time
[11:22:34] foks: Oh, there's an RFC for that?!
[11:22:37] foks: Whuuut
[11:22:55] Ebe123: yes, there is
[11:23:10] aude: right now the api is locked on wikitravel, etc.
[11:23:14] aude: err, disabled
[11:23:25] Ebe123: Locked?
[11:23:31] lyzzy: thee was announced via site n
[11:23:44] lyzzy: otices on several projects
[11:23:50] aude: oh, they turned it on again
[11:23:51] aude: http://wikitravel.org/wiki/en/api.php
[11:23:57] Risker: There are over 500 supports, about 150 opposes. At the bottom of the page is a pretty good summary of the arguments for and against
[11:24:14] Ebe123: There is
[11:24:14] aude: it was disabled the past week
[11:25:21] sgardner: Hey folks. I am going to dump in my response for Abbas, and then join the travel discussion. Give me one second.
[11:27:10] jvandavier (~jvandavie@wikimedia/jvandavier) joined the channel.
[11:27:17] sgardner: For Abbas: First a little background (I know you know this, but others might be interested who don't.) Originally, the WMF had constructed our work in India so that we were working through & with a group of India-based consultants, commissioned to do outreach to new editors in India. We decided to switch over to a grant to CIS, which was announced a few weeks ago, for a couple of reasons: 1) CIS is a good on-the-ground p
[11:27:17] sgardner: artner for us, because they have specific India-related expertise we don't, while sharing basic Wikimedia values; 2) the administrative burden of working the way we had been, was higher than we had originally expected, and CIS taking over the team will reduce that burden for the WMF, 3) we worried that the WMF's involvement with the on-the-ground work was acting as lightning rod for community criticism, because some commu
[11:27:18] sgardner: nity members felt like the WMF had no business being active in specific geographies, and we worried that was making the team's work harder for no good reason, and was avoidable, and 4) the WMF has been building grant-making as a core capacity, which means we're getting good at constructing and managing those kinds of arrangements. Abbas asked if we were planning to do something similar in Brazil and/or MENA, similar to wh
[11:27:23] sgardner: at we've done in India. The answer is, we don't have any active plans right now to make changes like that in Brazil or MENA. For example, we don't have a partner organization in either of those regions that would or could function similarly to how we're working with CIS. That said, we do think the model of making grants to on-the-ground groups is a good one, for the reasons I gave above.
[11:27:28] sgardner: Done :-)
[11:27:39] sgardner: Let's go back to the travel site. The RfC closes 23 August, right?
[11:27:46] StevenW: Yep
[11:27:49] aude: sgardner: yes
[11:27:51] Bence (bc060149@gateway/web/freenode/ip.220.127.116.11) joined the channel.
[11:28:01] odisha1 (~email@example.com) joined the channel.
[11:28:02] odisha1 (~firstname.lastname@example.org) left IRC. (Changing host)
[11:28:02] odisha1 (~odisha1@wikimedia/odisha1) joined the channel.
[11:28:03] Ebe123: Yes
[11:28:15] StevenW: We were discussing the general voting trends, who might close it, and the fact that Wikitravel disabled their API recently
[11:28:20] sgardner: Do people know that the Board has appointed a couple of Board members to stickhandle (sorry: Canadianism) this?
[11:28:23] Bence|android (bc060149@gateway/web/freenode/ip.18.104.22.168) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
[11:28:43] sgardner: Lyzzy is one of them, and I think she might be here. Lyzzy, if you're here, do you want to talk about the process, where we're at, etc.?
[11:28:50] Steven_Zhang: sgardner: you might need to translate the word stickhandle into english :-)
[11:28:56] lyzzy: is here
[11:29:04] Ebe123: stickhandle is englih
[11:29:07] Ebe123: english
[11:29:09] aude: fyi: http://www.wikivoyage.org/general/Interest_in_starting_a_new_language_version#English
[11:29:21] sgardner: I am always astonished that nobody understands stickhandle! Hockey term: it means to manage, lead, faciliate progress :-)
[11:29:30] Steven_Zhang: ah, okay :P
[11:29:33] lyzzy: ah, thanks
[11:29:33] sgardner: :-)
[11:29:36] aude: they're looking to get the content migrated to another place than wikitravel, as a temporary thing
[11:29:37] Ebe123: I understand it as a Nova Scotian
[11:29:39] sgardner: Lyzzy, do you want to talk about the Board's views?
[11:29:50] sgardner: Ebe123: yay Nova Scotia :-)
[11:29:57] Demiurge1000: (alternatively we could parachute in some gap analysis in order to achieve quick wins at the point of contact after some brainstorming)
[11:30:05] lyzzy: yes, the board foolows the rfc with interest
[11:30:14] Steven_Zhang: Ebe123: we're not all from canada. then again, i'm an aussie, pretty much everything I say is nonsensical.
[11:30:17] Ebe123: What's so special?
[11:30:24] Ebe123: about NS
[11:30:57] lyzzy: we expect the community to analyse the rfc after the 23. and make a proposal to the board
[11:30:59] sgardner: (Ebe123: I lived in the Maritimes for a couple of years, and spent some time in and around Halifax. I liked it: it was pretty :-)
[11:31:11] Ebe123: I'm from and in halifax
[11:31:16] apergos: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/stickhandle huh we have it!
[11:31:25] sgardner: (Jay Walsh, WMF's head of communications, is from Halifax.)
[11:31:33] Ebe123: An acadian is here
[11:31:34] Ebe123: Me
[11:31:37] sgardner: :-)
[11:31:38] lyzzy: we wanted to have a broad participation over languages and projects, therefore we extended the rfc and used the site notices
[11:32:04] lyzzy: and it is great to see that many people interested to find solutions for it
[11:32:07] Ebe123: Acadian French has a Linguist list but no ISO code!
[11:32:37] lyzzy: the ingoing discussions are very helpful to get an idea about challenges and risks with building such a project
[11:32:49] aude: nods
[11:33:08] apergos: is the idea of the (wikimedia) travel wiki that each language community would describe all travel destinations they might be interested in? i.e. global coverage but in their language?
[11:33:19] lyzzy: the board will prepare a resolution after the frc is closed
[11:33:20] MelBee (~MelBee@22.214.171.124) left IRC. (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
[11:33:21] aude: apergos: yes
[11:33:25] odder (~odder@wikimedia/odder) joined the channel.
[11:33:26] apergos: ok, thanks
[11:33:54] aude: lyzzy: what's the timeline? when's the next board meeting?
[11:34:16] odisha1 (~odisha1@wikimedia/odisha1) left IRC. (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[11:34:23] lyzzy: the next board meeting is at the end of october
[11:34:30] Fluff|errands (~Fluffernu@wikipedia/Fluffernutter) left IRC. (Quit: bai)
[11:34:35] Ebe123: that long...
[11:35:09] aude: lyzzy: thanks
[11:35:09] lyzzy: there is no defined timeline for this decision, and we need to check first if we have all infromation we need to decide
[11:35:29] aude: right now the content is at risk, with things like them turning off the api
[11:35:38] Steven_Zhang: ya know, i had a dream about that jar of peanut M&Ms in the office the other day…no idea why >_<
[11:35:39] lyzzy: but we all know about the rfc and want to make a decision as soon as possible
[11:35:44] aude: lyzzy: ok
[11:35:56] aude: contributed at one time to wikitravel
[11:36:10] aude: few years ago
[11:36:21] Ebe123: Ok, now it's going to Wikimedia
[11:36:28] mindspillage: confirms--we're interested in seeing how it turns out!
[11:36:28] sgardner: Lyzzy, do you think the Board will wait until the October meeting, or do you think it might make decisions earlier than that?
[11:36:42] MelBee (~MelBee@126.96.36.199) joined the channel.
[11:36:51] aude: if it goes forward, i assume we'll get things setup on labs
[11:36:55] lyzzy: i believe the decision may be made before the meeting
[11:37:04] Ebe123: Good
[11:37:07] Qcoder02: wakes up
[11:37:08] aude: workout any technical issues, etc.
[11:37:12] sgardner: That summary at the bottom of the RfC is GREAT.
[11:37:34] lyzzy: we have the oppotunity to vote online and this is something where we will try to make it this way
[11:37:49] Qcoder02: I'd have concerns about a travel guide
[11:37:59] lyzzy: yes, the work which has been done there is great and helps a lot
[11:38:02] Ebe123: What are thhy?
[11:38:03] Qcoder02: Why isn't within Wikibookd scope?
[11:38:08] Qcoder02: *Wikibooks
[11:38:17] Qcoder02: Also a travel guide isn't always objective
[11:38:17] aude: Qcoder02: it has non-book type features
[11:38:24] Pharos: an encyclopedia is a book too
[11:38:29] sgardner: Someone told me that Wikibooks had tried to do travel, and had ultimately decided not to. Maybe somebody here knows more about that than me.
[11:38:32] aude: not exactly a book
[11:38:48] lyzzy: Qcoder02: that is something whch was discussed and you'll find some arguments on the disc
[11:38:53] aude: interested in someday to see integration of osm and wikidata into a travel site :)
[11:39:06] lyzzy: mainly it is because the travel guide won't be a single book
[11:39:11] aude: it could use some technical structure like that
[11:39:22] lyzzy: aude: yes! that'd be wonderful
[11:39:34] Qcoder02: If there is going to be travel guide...
[11:39:52] Qcoder02: Make sure it's not written from a cultural bias
[11:39:52] Ebe123: There will be...
[11:39:54] Qcoder02: ;)
[11:39:56] Ebe123: probably
[11:40:25] aude: Qcoder02: as it is now, it's written from the "traveller's point of view"
[11:40:40] aude: sure we won't cultural bias
[11:41:14] aude: http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:Be_fair
[11:41:17] Qcoder02: That said some of Wikitravel was quite funny
[11:41:19] Qcoder02: ;)
[11:41:24] Ebe123: Get a new TNPOV
[11:41:34] Ebe123: Travelers' neutral POV
[11:41:45] aude: http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:The_traveller_comes_first
[11:42:25] StevenW: So I think Sue and I need to leave at noon sharp.
[11:42:26] Qcoder02: My other concern about a travel guide is spam
[11:42:43] Ebe123: 3:42
[11:42:48] Ebe123: UTC-3
[11:42:49] lyzzy: whoever is interested is welcome on the disc, Qcoder02 and all: please share your thoughts and concerns with us
[11:42:54] aude: Qcoder02: i think the travel guide community is quick to remove promotional stuff
[11:43:04] Ebe123: It should
[11:43:13] sgardner: Qcoder02: yeah, the spam issue is being pretty extensively discussed on the wiki. As well as NPOV.
[11:43:25] Ebe123: NPOV is important
[11:43:26] Risker: could we return to the young users question next please?
[11:43:26] aude: lyzzy: sure, everyone feel free to discuss the issues on the RFC in more detail
[11:43:28] StevenW: Did anyone have questions about the FDC or other topics, or do we want to keep discussing the awesome prospects for a travel guide. :)
[11:43:33] Steven_Zhang: StevenW: Great - that gives us 7 hours and 17 minutes to go
[11:43:46] aude: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Travel_Guide
[11:43:46] Seth_Finkelstein: "noon" is POV :-)
[11:44:01] Ebe123: Go say 12 UTC
[11:44:07] SPQRobin (~Robin@wikimedia/SPQRobin) left IRC. (Quit: Leaving.)
[11:44:17] Ebe123: Time is always POV
[11:44:19] jorm (~bharris@wikimedia/jorm) joined the channel.
[11:44:26] Ebe123: Welcome back Jorm
[11:44:27] Steven_Zhang: SF time is awesome, anyways
[11:44:35] Steven_Zhang: as is jorm
[11:44:42] sgardner: So what's next, Steven?
[11:44:42] Qcoder02: Risker: The younger users issue is in the queue
[11:44:49] jorm (~bharris@wikimedia/jorm) left IRC. (Remote host closed the connection)
[11:44:53] Ebe123: Lets go on it
[11:45:11] Ebe123: Solution: Jump on children as they do on bads
[11:45:14] Ebe123: beds
[11:45:22] sgardner: (I think there're two bits left: younger users & FDC COI.)
[11:45:37] Bence (bc060149@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.8.131.52) left IRC. (Quit: Page closed)
[11:45:39] StevenW: Let's tackle the latter. Who exactly asked the question?
[11:45:45] Tango42: me
[11:45:48] StevenW: Cool
[11:45:49] AntiSpamMeta (~MetaBot@AntiSpamMeta/.) left IRC. (Quit: brb, adding timestamps to warning messages. If you see "ow" on IRC, stab him)
[11:45:56] Steven_Zhang: tacks on a question just in case theres time: What changes do you see happening to LCA in the next year?
[11:46:00] sgardner: Tango do you want to reask, with any context you want?
[11:46:09] Tango42: although i didn't ask a question, just raised a topic. I can ask an actual question if you like
[11:46:13] sgardner: Sure :-)
[11:46:23] Demiurge1000: Steven_Zhang: LCA is Libraries, Cosmonauts and Artillery, right?
[11:46:23] sgardner: Or you can just say what you think -- honestly, that would be okay with me too.
[11:46:28] odder: Demiurge1000: ++
[11:46:37] Steven_Zhang: Demiurge1000: you're funny :P
[11:46:41] sgardner: It's a good issue; I'm not dismissing it.
[11:46:53] Tango42: How can the FDC staff in general, and Anasuya in particular, provide the FDC with impartial support and advice while being so heavily involved with the programmes the WMF intends to fund with a grant from the FDC?
[11:47:16] jorm (~bharris@wikimedia/jorm) joined the channel.
[11:47:24] Demiurge1000: jorm: Welcome back.
[11:47:29] sgardner: Hm. Okay, so maybe I should start by recapping a little about the FDC? Very quickly.
[11:47:35] Ebe123: How many are there? (Jorms)
[11:47:48] Risker: oh wow, that was hardly the COI question I was expecting. I was thinking you meant having FDC members who are heavily involved in eligible entities....
[11:48:21] sgardner: so the FDC is a committee of volunteers that's going to be responsible for giving out about eleven million dollars in 2012-13, to so-called eligible entities, groups that include the medium-sized and large chapters, plus the WMF.
[11:48:29] sgardner: Can somebody post a link for anyone who's unaware?
[11:48:33] sgardner: and Risker, LOL :-)
[11:48:35] jorm: just made it into the office.
[11:48:36] Nemo_bis: Risker: isn't this what he asked?
[11:48:54] Tango42: Risker: I also have concerns about that COI, but that one only really comes up if there isn't enough money to go around (otherwise they can just recuse from the discussion about their organisation). The FDC staff COI will definitely exist.
[11:48:56] Steven_Zhang: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee
[11:49:08] Risker: Nemo_bis, Tango is asking about supporting employees, not the committee members themselves
[11:49:12] AntiSpamMeta (~MetaBot@AntiSpamMeta/.) joined the channel.
[11:49:34] odder: sgardner: did anyone ask the obvious question why large and medium-sized chapters would want to ask the WMF for money if they already have their own?
[11:49:44] Tango42: odder: they don't already have their own
[11:49:48] odisha1 (~email@example.com) joined the channel.
[11:49:49] odisha1 (~firstname.lastname@example.org) left IRC. (Changing host)
[11:49:49] odisha1 (~odisha1@wikimedia/odisha1) joined the channel.
[11:50:13] Steven_Zhang: Some chapters would - but a handful are staying independent of FDC
[11:50:13] Tango42: The vast majority of the movement's money comes from the WMF annual fundraiser
[11:50:16] Nemo_bis: Risker: ok but the difference is not so big, you could call the staff non-voting members (I doubt they'll be excluded from the conversation)
[11:50:17] Steven_Zhang: like WMUK
[11:50:18] odder: Tango42: I disagree; WMDE, WMUK, WMFR, WMAT are good examples that they do have their money
[11:50:29] sgardner: So why is the WMF pushing some of its own budget through the FDC? Basically, we want to 'eat our own dog food.' We want to ensure that the process is fair and user-friendly, and the easiest way to do that is by subjecting ourselves to it. It'll help us to keep it honest, and to keep fundseeker needs top-of-mind. Plus, some of the WMF activities are what we're calling non-core, which means they would likely benefit from co
[11:50:29] sgardner: mmunity scrutiny, and they would benefit from having the implicit endorsement of the FDC process (assuming they get it).
[11:50:34] Tango42: odder: they only have money because the WMF lets them raise it using the WMF sites
[11:50:39] sgardner: So that's why we're pushing some WMF funding through the FDC.
[11:50:39] StevenW: Also none of this is "our" money or "chapter" money. It's all donor money.
[11:50:47] Steven_Zhang: WMF likes dog food?
[11:50:50] sgardner: (You guys keep talking. You are not distracting me, and it's good :-)
[11:50:56] Tango42: StevenW: No. Donors give it to us. After that, it is ours.
[11:51:12] sgardner: There must be a wikipedia article about 'eating your own dog food,' mustn't there?
[11:51:18] odder: there is
[11:51:22] Ebe123: What?
[11:51:26] StevenW: If you'd like to think of it that way, go ahead. I think that's a bad ideological approach to take.
[11:51:32] Steven_Zhang: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food
[11:51:34] Steven_Zhang: indeed :P
[11:51:48] Ebe123: Anything gets an article
[11:52:14] Ebe123: What about Stuffed Penguin?
[11:52:22] Tango42: StevenW: It is an important distinction. The trustees of a charity are obliged to spend money in the way they think best serves their mission. They aren't supposed to do what donors want.
[11:52:50] sgardner: No, Tango. It's money donors give to the movement. If the pipe points towards the WMF, they give it to the WMF. If we point the pipe towards a chapter, they give to the chapter. It's not reasonable to say that donors are deliberately giving to an entity because they fully understand what that entity does, relative to others.
[11:53:09] sgardner: Ah, Tango, I hear you now. yes, there is a mission/legal consideration.
[11:53:18] Steven_Zhang: personally thinks money should be prioritised to WMF over chapters as they keep the site running, but *shrug*
[11:53:29] sgardner: Anyway, I think it's a little bit of a red herring -- let's stay on the FDC COI stuff.
[11:53:39] aude: Steven_Zhang: keeping the site running is core expenses, not subject to FDC
[11:53:41] apergos: (well it has an article on stuffed toy and on tux, does that count? :-P)
[11:53:49] Tango42: The WMF only points the pipe at chapters when chapters agree to go through the FDC, which is why the FDC is relevant to those chapters
[11:53:52] Steven_Zhang: aude: ah
[11:53:53] Steven_Zhang: '
[11:54:03] StevenW: Agreed about moving. I just get uncomfortable when people start talking about "our money" or "their money". Sorry to distract.
[11:54:05] aude: it's the more discretionary stuff that goes through FDC
[11:54:05] Steven_Zhang: staff expenses is also core?
[11:54:08] StevenW: moving on*
[11:54:17] aude: Steven_Zhang: depends on the role of the staff
[11:54:19] Steven_Zhang: so whats the distinction?
[11:54:21] aude: or the program
[11:54:25] sgardner: So, Anasuya is responsible for running the FDC process. And what Tango's asking is, isn't it a bad conflict of interest to have the person responsible for running the process, also be a beneficiary of the process itself.
[11:54:27] Steven_Zhang: core vs non core
[11:54:30] sgardner: Right Tango?
[11:54:40] Tango42: essentially
[11:54:42] aude: stuff like education program, it's arguable that some entity other than WMF might do it more effectively
[11:54:47] thineantiquepen is now known as ThineAntiquePen
[11:54:54] aude: and not essential for maintenance of wikipedia
[11:54:59] Tango42: the beneficiaries are actually the people using our projects, rather than those working on them
[11:55:22] aude: in the end, wmf doing education program might be best
[11:55:23] sgardner: So I guess I would say two things:
[11:55:24] Tango42: she has a vested interest in the process
[11:55:40] Risker: Aude, I'm pretty sure the communities affected by the education programs don't want it farmed out to an even less responsive external entity
[11:56:05] Ebe123: What about Wikiversity?
[11:56:22] aude: Risker: well, would you want (for example wikimedia france) running French wikipedia education program or WMF?
[11:56:39] aude: there could be case for a chapter taking more leadership
[11:56:43] odder: the French Wikipedia is a bad example
[11:56:45] aude: case-by-case
[11:56:55] aude: odder: or polish wikipedia :)
[11:56:58] odder: let's say, Italian, as it's used (almost) only in Italy
[11:57:03] Steven_Zhang: or aussie wikipedia
[11:57:11] apergos: I would want the chapter to be spearheading it somehow if there were a chapter with motivation and resources to do it
[11:57:11] Steven_Zhang: er, chapter
[11:57:14] sgardner: One is, that I agree there's a COI: there clearly is. It is not an optimal situation. But, we've had long discussions about it with the Board and with the FDC Advisory Group, and in the end I think it's fair to say that people agree there is a lot of merit to i) having the FDC staff housed at the Foundation and being part of the Foundation, rather than not, and ii) running so-called 'non-core' WMF spending through the FDC.
[11:57:21] apergos: or whatever local community exists
[11:57:25] Risker: Aude, I'll ask my Quebecois colleagues, who already feel they are barely tolerated on Frwp
[11:57:34] sgardner: So in general, I would say, people believe the benefits of doing it this way outweight the downsides, even though the downsides are real.
[11:57:35] aude: Risker: sure, + wikimedia canada?
[11:57:37] aude: maybe
[11:57:39] apergos: (for the education program; don't know aabout fdc)
[11:57:43] Ebe123: I know
[11:58:01] Qcoder02: sgardner: I have to go, if the 'younger users' issue get disscussed I can read the logs
[11:58:02] aude: let's see who proposes what to the FDC
[11:58:09] Ebe123: Quebecois, Acadians, Cajuns, only france french
[11:58:14] Demiurge1000: Qcoder02: What aspects of it did you want to raise, though?
[11:58:23] Steven_Zhang: maybe theres time for mine? :-)
[11:58:25] Tango42: sgardner: I wasn't on the advisory group, but I was involved in all the public discussions. What was discussed there was having the FDC staff housed at the WMF, but being largely independent.
[11:58:41] Qcoder02: Mainly who the WMF plans to ensure 'safeguarding' is appropriate...
[11:58:45] Qcoder02: *how
[11:59:00] Qcoder02: The last thing that's needed is a moral panic ;)
[11:59:02] Tango42: I agree with the practical decision to house them at the WMF. I disagree with the decision to give them conflicting responsibilities.
[11:59:24] Qcoder02: Demiurge1000: You also had some points to raise on younger users
[11:59:41] sgardner: And the second thing I would say is that the FDC process is a work-in-progress, and is intended to evolve. It might evolve such that we scrap the idea of running WMF non-core expenses through the FDC process, it might evolve such that we strengthen the firewall between the FDC and the staff, or reduce the authority of the Anasuya position in some deliberate ways. But I think we need to get some experience with this, and s
[11:59:41] sgardner: ee how it plays out. I'm not denying the COI: it's real.
[12:00:03] Amgine: <remembers when #wikimedia-office-talk was used for side chatter>
[12:00:09] Demiurge1000: Qcoder02: I'm considering raising it on-wiki... also possibly wait until oversight team decide how their role would change, if it is
[12:00:21] sgardner: Tango, I don't know what 'largely independent' would look like. They work for the WMF, they work in the office, they report to someone in the office. I'm not sure that 'independence' is possible in any kind of serious way.
[12:00:35] Demiurge1000: Amgine: surely it should be ##wikimedia-office :)
[12:00:37] denis--o (6d2d001d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.184.108.40.206) joined the channel.
[12:00:56] denis--o (6d2d001d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.220.127.116.11) left IRC. (Client Quit)
[12:00:57] StevenW: Let's try to wrap up the FDC question. It's time for us to head out. :)
[12:01:03] sgardner: There are *benefits* to the FDC people being part of the WMF staff. They will get lots of support and context and training from the rest of the staff. On balance it will be very helpful, not harmful, IMO.
[12:01:04] Tango42: Do you not see a big difference between working in the same office as someone, and having that person report to you and work very closely with you?
[12:01:15] Demiurge1000: Reporting on a dotted wavy line!
[12:01:20] Demiurge1000: (in purple ink)
[12:01:45] Tango42: Everything you are saying only relates to them being in the same office, and I haven't objected to that.
[12:02:02] sgardner: I do. But I don't think it's realistic to think of them as working in the same office but indepdendently. Again, I think the benefits of the way we're setting it up, outweigh the downsides. I also believe we need to get some experience with it, and then we can start tinkering. There are other COI issues as well (as Risker alluded to) and we need to get some experience iwth them too :-)
[12:02:20] sgardner: (I do see a big difference, not I do object to that :-)
[12:02:25] Amgine: SGardner: You have not had consultants working in the office before?
[12:02:36] Tango42: Independence is always a matter of degree
[12:02:50] sgardner: Okay folks, I do really need to go, sorry. I arrived one minute late, and now I'm leaving two minutes late. I've got an appointment across town, so I need to get on my way.
[12:03:02] Tango42: ok, bye! Talk to you later.
[12:03:08] StevenW: Thank you for coming everyone!
[12:03:08] aude: thanks sgardner for being here on a saturday
[12:03:09] Steven_Zhang: bye Sue :)
[12:03:19] Demiurge1000: thanks Sue, see you next time
[12:03:21] Risker: Tango, I don't see how someone can *not* be an employee of the WMF in this context, because neither the Board nor the FDC have direct hiring authority. Well, the Board hires the ED, but that's it.
[12:03:23] Steven_Zhang: aude: but its Sunday.
[12:03:25] sgardner: Thank you guys! And thank you Steven for giving up a chunk of your weekend.
[12:03:26] Seth_Finkelstein: Thank you, Ms. Executive Director
[12:03:29] apergos: thanks for the info
[12:03:30] aude: Steven_Zhang: almost :)
[12:03:33] sgardner: (And I still don't understand why jorm is in the office :-)
[12:03:38] Steven_Zhang: no, it is
[12:03:39] StevenW: No worries. I'd be on IRC anyway. :-)
[12:03:44] Demiurge1000: jorm is always here.
[12:03:47] Tango42: Risker: I don't understand your point.
[12:03:49] Steven_Zhang: yeah jorm i forgot its saturday in SF
[12:03:55] sgardner: Bye guys :-)
[12:03:57] Demiurge1000: jorm has always been the caretaker in the Overlook Hotel.
[12:04:00] sgardner (~email@example.com) left IRC. (Quit: Leaving)
[12:04:11] Steven_Zhang: that said the office is awesome
[12:04:15] ThineAntiquePen: Steven_Zhang: not here!
[12:04:16] Risker: Tango, whose employee would the FDC co-ordinator be if not WMF staff?
[12:04:24] Steven_Zhang: esp. with a jar of peanut M&Ms
[12:04:29] Tango42: Risker: I never said they shouldn't work for the FDC.
[12:04:33] Risker: (Thanks Sue, have a good rest of the weekend)