Talk:Wikimedia meetings

From Meta

This page may be used for commenting on Wikimedia meetings, or for discussing any of the points raised in the meeting notes, which are available at Wikimedia:Meetings.

See also Talk:Wikimedia meeting agendas for agenda discussions, and Talk:Wikimedia meeting agendas/Archives for past discussions

---

Contents 1 Membership fees 2 Oct 16 meeting: Junior Wikipedia 3 Apparent typos 4 OSI 5 membership proposal confusion? 6 Nov. 13 Board meeting 7 Committee discussion 8 Can't make it... 9 next meeting

[edit] Membership fees

Anthere noted the difference in fees for members of local chapters. Since it wasn't stated specifically, I wanted to confirm whether, as discussed on the Membership fees page, payment of dues to the local chapter automatically satisfies the fees that would otherwise be paid to the Foundation. Hopefully we can work with local chapters to keep dues equitable - I can't remember, were there legal reasons that dues needed to be a certain amount?

Anyway, operating on these assumptions, it raises a concern in my mind. Suppose that a particular local association (let's call it Klingon) decides it wants to have disproportionate influence over Foundation matters. The Klingons figure out that they can do this by setting dues at 1 cent (sorry, I haven't watched enough Star Trek to remember what the Klingon currency is called). This will make it exceedingly easy for Klingons to become "contributing active members", and more Klingons will probably join compared to other groups. If the Klingon faction is large and they recruit enough people willing to cough up a penny, they will have a strong chance at determining one seat on the Board.

Granted, there are certain poor nations where dues of 1 cent would probably be equitable compared to the proposed fees. But if the Klingons are not among them, perhaps there should be a basic requirement that local chapter dues must at least equal Foundation dues in order for local chapter members to automatically qualify as "contributing active members"? The requirement could then be subject to waiver by the Board in appropriate cases. --Michael Snow 04:54, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As far as I know, paying fees via a local chapter will not enable you to pay less than you would if you paid fees directly to the Foundation. However, this was decided when we thought the minimum fee was going to be $6. We haven't discussed it since it became $12, so I can't give an official answer on this yet. The requirements on what chapters need to pay the Foundation, and how they pay it, will be flexible and open to discussion with each chapter, particularly since laws in some countries will restrict exactly what a chapter can do with their money. Finding ways to prevent Klingonists having unfair levels of influence is something we would take into account when negotiating with chapters. Angela 00:52, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Oct 16 meeting: Junior Wikipedia

I note with interest that a grant has been award to start a Junior 'pedia. This topic has been of interest to me for some time (though my proposals have been been anything more than rambling see e.g. en:User:Pcb21/WP_for_kids). Thus when the time comes for community input on this, I would be grateful if a member of the board could let me know. Thanks. en:User:Pcb21.

Danny is currently co-ordinating this, so I will let him know you're interested. Angela 00:52, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Apparent typos

Notes on Wikimedia:Meetings/October 9, 2004: At the bottom of the page, the "Date of the next meeting" appears to be "Saturday 16, 2004". Less imporantly, in the first sentence of the "Donors" section, the phrase "with consideration will be given" should probably read "to be given" or some equivalent. Thanks! -- Creidieki 10:19, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for pointing out these problems. Angela

[edit] OSI

(Re: Meeting, February 7, 2005)

Is the OSI being taken seriously as an option now? I'd suggested it in the past but it had always been ignored or dismissed with a comment about how Soros got his money... (It would have been nice to get a "good idea" on that page if it was what alerted you to the OSI's commitment to Open Access, but I guess you probably knew about it anyway. Alak...)

If the "POV" argument is still coming up, I think it's worth remembering how Nobel got his money, and why he was so keen to give it away...

Also, if it is of any use to you, I know a trustee of one of the branches of the OSI fairly well. (It would be inappropriate to name her/him here). I'm not sure to what extent you need this, but if you do want to ask for some friendly advice about submitting an application, I would be happy to take your queries to her/him. --cfp 01:10, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] membership proposal confusion?

I'm confused by the various membership descriptions. I gather this is still a proposal waiting for implementation and one cannot actually join as of now (2005 July 2)? Ah, I've just found Anthere's note: "This proposal is largely outdated. Consider with caution. "

Nevertheless, there are contradictions elsewhere.

For example, the wikimediafoundation page Meetings/October 22, 2004 states:

A fee of $36 for non-editors and a minimum $12 for editors will be

required to become a "contributing active member".

but the Membership link summarises July discussions which appear superceded:

Becoming a Contributing Active Member will cost 60 USD

...

Volunteer Active Members may become Contributing Active Members for 6 USD

I got there following a link from the Quarto Blue Edition January 2005. I wanted to correct what looked like a missing phrase here:

Additional discussions led to subscribing membership fees being set at

US$36 (for non-editors) and US$12 (reduced).

Should this be (reduced for editors)?

Also the Image:Monopoly.JPG link is red, was it meant to be Image:German Monopoly board in the middle of a game.jpg?

Anyway, I'd like to say the Quarto is interesting reading, and I'm still going through it, but do miss not being able to click edit to fix the few typos I've seen! -Wikibob 13:12, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. There is still very slow discussion about membership; Anthere might be the best to comment on this. I for one would like to see it implemented. As for the Quarto, you can edit the versions on metabefore they are published on the wikimediafoundation site; see for instance WQ/3. +sj | Translate the Quarto |+ 12:31, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

It would be helpful if Anthere could comment as well, but my view is that membership isn't likely to happen any time and should be removed from the bylaws. This draft of the bylaws removes all mention of membership and has been informally approved by the Board pending legal review. Angela 13:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nov. 13 Board meeting

I'm looking for information about the fate of the Wikiversity proposal which was on the agenda for the Nov. 13 Board meeting. Any help gratefully appreciated! en:User:Physchim62 - Physchim62 14:04, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The Wikiversity crew that is working almost feverishly on Wikibooks is justifiably interested in what is going on with the Wikiversity proposal. Some work has been done on trying to modify the proposal at least according to the short stub of a comment on http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Meetings/November_13%2C_2005 where the decision to turn down the request is listed. There are some questions as to the intention of the board and to really understand what the limitations are that the board wants to put into the proposal. I would certainly like to see this issue brought up for review again by the board, especially with the revised proposal that currently exists at Wikiversity/Modified project proposal that is nearing a more final form. Quite a bit of effort has gone into this revised proposal and it deserves some sort of review by the board. --Roberth 21:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Committee discussion

Is there an agenda for the upcoming committee discussion? Sj 03:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

From the mailing list :

to find ways the committees can remain accountable, legally and financially, but also accountable to the Board and community. The meeting is also to discuss how open and transparent various aspects of those committees can or should be, including their membership, processes, and actions.

Is this the place to suggest specific agenda items? Sj

Be bold and add it to the meeting page. Angela 11:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can't make it...

... however, in absentia, can I request finding out how to become a Wikipedia media contact for Austrlia? Just for en, not for other projects. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest you email Michael Snow about this. He was asked for people on the mailing list to volunteer as press contacts. Angela 12:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] next meeting

On feb 12 2006, the person who posted the logs etc (anonymous) said:

The next meeting will be in 3 weeks (roughly March 4th or 5th). To be announced here.

I have not seen any announcements. Could someone maybe clarifiy whether there are just no public meetings anymore, or that the announcementspage has been moved? Effeietsanders 08:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

There haven't been any meetings, public or otherwise, for a long time and none are planned. However, if you think they're useful, you could always organise one yourself. Angela 00:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I have not very urgent things to discuss right now myself. But as I see the threads grow on foundation-l , I think it might be usefull to have again a irc-open-boardmeeting. Especially when you are seeking for interested people to join the board in time, it might be usefull to use more communication pathways as just the mailinglist and private email. I always found IRC-discussions very enlighting, not especially because they gave so much information, but you can see more clear who thinks what and why. It's easier to ask questions, the bridge to take is not that high. However I think it necessairy that at least several boardmembers can join the conversation. So maybe it's more easy if one should try to find a date and time who knows a little more about the personal agendae :) Effeietsanders 11:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I assumed there hasn't been any Board meeting (for the sake of newly launched Board wiki?). It will be informative why the Board meeting hasn't been held since the early of this year on Wikimedia:Meetings. You can add the most (presumably, but I don't know exactly) result of your discussions are public as "resolutions", if appropriate. --Aphaia 21:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)