Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/2007/Candidates/Frieda/questions: Difference between revisions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Content deleted Content added
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 22: Line 22:


Thanks. -- [[User:Jeandré du Toit|Jeandré]], 2007-06-23[[User talk:Jeandré du Toit|t]]18:01z
Thanks. -- [[User:Jeandré du Toit|Jeandré]], 2007-06-23[[User talk:Jeandré du Toit|t]]18:01z

# One of my usual focus points when I present our projects is "We have no ads on our sites". Wikimedia projects have their particular feelings also because they have precise choices, and no ads is one of these. I totally support these choice. If we have to decide wether to close all the projects or to put some ads on them, I'll want the entire community to be informed properly and could express its opinion on such a desperate matter.
# have a look there ;-)
# I support this choice. WMF cannot always rely on untrained personnel on strategic positions. On the other hand I'd want to have verifiable outputs (to protect our investment)
# I think this proposal is commendable, but I'm not sure that it fits our purposes. In every case it's early, we have more pressing tasks to accomplish to keep the projects running and stable.
[[User:Frieda|Frieda]] 22:59, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


== Wikinews and Accredited reporters attending events ==
== Wikinews and Accredited reporters attending events ==

Revision as of 22:59, 24 June 2007

Ads, branding, business dev., GHGs.

  1. On the board, will you vote for ads on Wikimedia sites?
    1. yes
      1. pop-ups/flash/banners/graphics
      2. flash/banners/graphics in skin whitespace or at bottom
      3. company logos in site notices
      4. prominent text ads
      5. company names in site notices
      6. text ads in skin whitespace or at bottom
      7. opt out
      8. opt in
      9. other
    2. maybe
      1. only for a huge amount of money
      2. only during budget emergencies
      3. only if editors support it
    3. never
    4. other
  2. What are your thoughts on Wikimedia branding?
  3. What are your thoughts on the foundation's hiring of a business developer?
  4. How would you vote on the board about the foundation reducing or offsetting anthropogenic greenhouse gases, e.g. power used by hardware, flights, etc.?

Thanks. -- Jeandré, 2007-06-23t18:01z

  1. One of my usual focus points when I present our projects is "We have no ads on our sites". Wikimedia projects have their particular feelings also because they have precise choices, and no ads is one of these. I totally support these choice. If we have to decide wether to close all the projects or to put some ads on them, I'll want the entire community to be informed properly and could express its opinion on such a desperate matter.
  2. have a look there ;-)
  3. I support this choice. WMF cannot always rely on untrained personnel on strategic positions. On the other hand I'd want to have verifiable outputs (to protect our investment)
  4. I think this proposal is commendable, but I'm not sure that it fits our purposes. In every case it's early, we have more pressing tasks to accomplish to keep the projects running and stable.

Frieda 22:59, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews and Accredited reporters attending events

Wikinews may be one of the lesser-known projects, but we recently managed to get a contributor entry to the G8 conference. Efforts were made to get the Board involved in the drafting of a letter for the reporter's entry to the G8, but these received no response. As an involved party there is more about this issue on Eloquence's questions page [1]. What is your opinion on this, it is - I believe - an issue the board should take seriously. Those of us who contribute on Wikinews are ambitious enough to think that we can overtake the Wikipedia article count (although I may be retired before we manage it there are new news stories every day). As we really want to be able to do truly original reporting we need people who can "almost" say they represent us. Do you support this, and do you believe the board should have been involved for something as important as sending a reporter to the G8 conference? --Brian McNeil / talk 19:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IRC Debate

This is a mass question being posted to all candidates. A couple days ago there was a proposal to hold an all candidates debate on IRC at a time TBD. The planning page is at ElectionDebate07 - please indicate if you are interested and if so, a time that would work for you. -- Tawker 22:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change

Hi Frieda,

What is the top 3 things you want to have changed in the current strategy of the foundation? Thanks, Effeietsanders 22:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added Value

Hi Frieda,

What kind of value do you add to the current set of boardmembers in the area of Legal, Financial, Accounting etc expertise? Thanks, Effeietsanders 22:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]