Open Board meeting, February 2005
A meeting was held on IRC on February 15, 2005 to discuss general Foundation-related issues. The meeting was open to anyone. The full transcript is included below. Times are UTC. An agenda was published at board agenda.
Topic: Wikimedia Foundation Meeting | 15 February, 21:00 (UTC) | http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_agenda | This meeting is being logged and will be uploaded to Meta.
[21:04] <dannyisme> okay, it is time
[21:04] <dannyisme> down to work
[21:04] <mav> are we all here now?
[21:04] <waerth> only Anthere said it was to early
[21:04] <dannyisme> Wiki shop?
[21:05] <dannyisme> how is finland jimbo
[21:05] <dannyisme> did you get to meet cimon?
[21:05] <silsor> is he really on a pogostick?
[21:05] <mav> what do we need to talk about re Wikimedia shop? It was closed down
[21:05] <Angela> should we reopen the shop at http://shop.wikimedia.org/ ? Should there be any rules on who can use it and what can be sold?
[21:06] <mav> not part of our mission
[21:06] <Anthere> okay, I am around
[21:06] <dannyisme> is there any other way to get wikipedia t shirts and stuff?>
[21:06] <Anthere> trying to dig up the topic of the day
[21:06] <akl> no shop, but we need a policy for using our trademarks in products sold by the community
[21:06] <Angela> why is not part of our mission to raise money through selling things? Why should it not be used in addition to fundraising drives?
[21:07] <dannyisme> did it bring in money?
[21:07] <mav> if anything, we should partner with Mozilla store or MDK for this type of thing
[21:07] <Xirzon> one problem with operating our own shop is that we have to put a fairly high amount of money in upfront and keep items in stock
[21:07] <Xirzon> printing on demand and cafepress-style production on demand is much more cost-effective from our perspective
[21:07] <mav> angela ; what Erik said
[21:08] <dannyisme> ok, then no more shop
[21:08] <Xirzon> the cafepress shop is starting to bring in reasonable amounts of money, and the people there have been very helpful and want to work with us to expand the range of items
[21:08] <Xirzon> some people are very anti-cafepress, but everything I've ordered there so far was high quality
[21:08] <dannyisme> i have been quite happy with them
[21:08] <Xirzon> cp also has print on demand, but there are cheaper services for that
[21:08] <sannse> I was happy with my order from them
[21:08] <mav> xirzon ; can we get volume discounts?
[21:09] <akl> you all know this? http://www.wikireader.de/
[21:09] <Xirzon> you can buy from your own shop at least and get stuff at the base price
[21:09] <Xirzon> will ask leslie about discounts
[21:09] <Angela> does any of the money from http://www.wikireader.de/ go to the foundation?
[21:09] <Xirzon> jimbo, for those not in the know, could you briefly summarize the experience with tomk32?
[21:09] <Xirzon> I think that should be background information for everyone
[21:10] <akl> Angela: harko said he would, afaik
[21:10] <Anthere> he would, but no contract
[21:10] <mav> we do need a policy on this
[21:10] <Anthere> I would like t
[21:10] <Anthere> all these things more establiseh
[21:10] <akl> mav: agreed
[21:10] <mav> use of our trademarks needs to be done via permission
[21:10] * Anthere hates this keyboard...
[21:11] <dannyisme> ok, next topix
[21:11] <mav> can we make it as simple as that? Just ask the board
[21:11] <Anthere> but who would fi
[21:11] <dannyisme> shop closed
[21:11] <Angela> ok, so a policy can be written on meta for this.
[21:11] <Angela> Fundraising: does anything need to happen before the drive starts on Friday?
[21:11] <Anthere> feel interested in trying to draft a persmission ?
[21:11] <dannyisme> are the banners translated?
[21:12] <mav> can we finsish the trandemark bit first?
[21:12] <Anthere> too late akl
[21:12] <Anthere> we'll discuss the a$
[21:12] <jwales> catching up
[21:12] <Anthere> this again in 2020
[21:12] <jwales> I'd rather not comment publicly about tomk32.
[21:12] <Xirzon> ok
[21:12] <mav> again, trademark policy
[21:12] <Angela> mav: finish it how? Don't we just need to write a policy for it?
[21:12] <mav> needed
[21:12] <Anthere> jwales, so that needs t
[21:12] <Anthere> we let thenext ones do the same ?
[21:13] <jwales> We do need a proper trademark policy.
[21:13] <mav> angela ; but what will be the outline of such a policy?
[21:13] <jwales> And a proper agreement between Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia de and fr about these things.
[21:13] <Xirzon> mav: is there a risk of dilution if you give too many permissions?
[21:13] <jwales> Could we clarify the status of this meeting?
[21:14] <mav> the simpliest thing to do is just require an agreement between the board and whoever is using the trademark
[21:14] <Angela> jwales: it's being publically logged
[21:14] <jwales> Ok.
[21:14] <mav> Erik ; IANAL
[21:14] <jwales> I think we should have a new class of meetings.
[21:14] <Angela> mav: I'm happy to go with that for now
[21:14] <jwales> Community meetings. Not public, but not closed board meetings either.
[21:14] <dannyisme> meaning?
[21:14] <akl> jwales: yes
[21:14] <Angela> do you want to make this one into that? You risk upsetting people who can't use IRC though
[21:15] <Xirzon> jwales: that was how the last grants meeting was handled, I think
[21:15] <mav> angela ; agreed ; once we go through a few agreements, we can develop a general policy
[21:15] <Angela> ok
[21:15] <Xirzon> Angela: we set up soem IRC gateways for the Wikinews Chat, we could do that for these as well
[21:15] <jwales> Well, let me just give an example of something that I'm not comfortable with saying that could show up on slashdot for all I know, but it's just a friendly offer.
[21:15] <jwales> Larry Lessig said that we can make full use of the legal resources of creative commons to check on our policies.
[21:16] <Xirzon> wow, that's pretty cool
[21:16] <mav> cool
[21:16] <jwales> This would be help with things like trademark policy (and the interaction with a free license), etc.
[21:16] <akl> jwales: great
[21:16] <dannyisme> cool
[21:16] <jwales> Right, but that's not an _announcement_. I don't know the parameters of it.
[21:16] <mav> let's do that
[21:16] <Angela> so, is this meeting not to be logged now then?
[21:16] <dannyisme> it can be logged and saved to foundation
[21:16] <jwales> It's important that I have a way to communicate things like that without it being public.
[21:16] <jwales> Well, it can be logged yes.
[21:16] <Xirzon> jwales, an alternative would be to remove sensitive parts from the logs
[21:16] <Angela> dannyisme: logged to foundation is public
[21:17] <jwales> I chose my example carefully and gave a decent explanation.
[21:17] * mav is going to keep his mouth shut this time
[21:17] <jwales> I don't mind this being made public, as long as anyone from slashdot reading this understands that THIS WAS JUST A CASAUL COMMENT BY LARRY LESSIG AND I MIGHT HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD AND IT IS PROBABLY TOO BORING TO WRITE ABOUT!
[21:17] <jwales> ;-;
[21:17] <Xirzon> also, one thing that is done on some channels which use log bots:
[21:17] <Angela> ok, so if there's anything anyone doesn't want logged, can you let me know before I put it on meta please?
[21:17] <Xirzon> have a prefix like "#" for comments which are meant to be omitted from the log
[21:18] <jwales> shhh, joi is here. ;-)
[21:18] <jwales> He blogs everything.
[21:18] <Xirzon> uh-oh
[21:18] <jwales> *g*
[21:18] <sannse> oh no!
[21:18] <Angela> can we move onto fundraising now?
[21:18] <mav> Fundraising: does anything need to happen before the drive starts on Friday?
[21:19] <jwales> Should I write a passionate beg letter?
[21:19] <mav> I'll help coordinate the fund drive notices
[21:19] <jwales> This did really well in our first fund drive.
[21:19] <dannyisme> are the banners all translated and do admins in the major wikis all know about it
[21:19] <Angela> jwales: there's the one mav started already
[21:19] <jwales> But I like mav's statement, which he showed me the other day.
[21:19] <jwales> Yes.
[21:19] <Xirzon> the google thing should maybe be touched upon
[21:19] <Angela> dannyisme: I doubt anyone knows about it
[21:19] <Xirzon> explain why we still need money in spite of google's offer
[21:19] <jwales> If we do that, we should not mention google directly, but rather "partnerships".
[21:20] <Angela> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mayer/Sandbox
[21:20] <dannyisme> then this week we have to make sure that admins in all the major wikipedias know about it
[21:20] <Xirzon> jwales: good idea
[21:20] <mav> here is the fund drive statement I drafted
[21:20] <mav> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mayer/Sandbox
[21:20] <dannyisme> so that we dont just pop it on them unannounced
[21:20] <jwales> Because there's money coming in from other partners, customers of the live data feed.
[21:20] <akl> mav: some people don't understand the 75.000$, me too
[21:20] <mav> Xirzon ; it mentions 'hosting partners' in it
[21:21] <mav> akl ; read this http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mayer/Sandbox jusification
[21:21] <silsor> People have been popping into #wikipedia asking whether Google is buying us. Before fundraising, could we clarify exactly what we get, and why we will still need money?
[21:21] <silsor> There is a lot of misinformation in the air
[21:21] <JoiIto> I ask before I blog...
[21:21] <jwales> silsor: I can't comment publicly.
[21:21] <jwales> Yes, Joi does. He's good. I was only joking earlier.
[21:21] <JoiIto> ;-)
[21:21] <mav> too much has been said already
[21:21] <silsor> can we just say "cache servers"?
[21:22] <silsor> and why those aren't fundamental?
[21:22] <Xirzon> silsor: what do you think about the paragraph on partnerships that is there in the current text?
[21:22] <JoiIto> someone will misspell it as "cash server"
[21:22] <silsor> Xirzon: what page, Google hosting?
[21:22] <Xirzon> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mayer/Sandbox
[21:22] <Xirzon> We are also almost at the point where we can start to accept hosting offers on a regular basis. More preparation and more hardware is needed before this can happen. These hosting partners will help us share the exponentially increasing traffic load and thus help curb future increases in the amount of money we need to ask you for. But we will still need to maintain and expand the server infrastructure we own.
[21:23] <dannyisme> does this mean that we are presentingthe fundraising drive only in terms of servers
[21:23] <dannyisme> there are other important expenses that should be covered as well
[21:23] <Xirzon> one thing that may need to be touched upon a bit more is that we don't just need servers, but also people who maintain them
[21:23] <Anthere> I alm not entirely convinced by tghat apopprocah
[21:23] <Anthere> merde de clavci
[21:23] <Anthere> that approach
[21:24] <Anthere> I am not convinced it is credible
[21:24] <mav> danny ; there was limited space, but other items are mentioned
[21:24] <dannyisme> ok
[21:24] <Xirzon> I'm not sure that mentioning developers at this point is a good idea, but at least server administration cost is something that everyone should understand
[21:24] <Anthere> I ?ould have thought more honest to just say that the 40000 just last a couple of months
[21:24] <dannyisme> i just want to be clear that money is not only going to servers but to whatever the board deems necessary
[21:24] <Angela> it should link to the budget so people can see exactly what the plans are to use it
[21:24] <jwales> mentioning is good
[21:24] <jwales> it gives us flexibility
[21:24] <Xirzon> Angela: agreed
[21:24] <Anthere> and that we have nothing left thereafter
[21:24] <dannyisme> that way people cant complain when it suddenly goes to pay an intern or something
[21:25] <jwales> no one should be able to say "you begged for money for servers and spent it on developers"
[21:25] <silsor> draw a clearer distinction between the core servers and everything else
[21:25] <jwales> exactly
[21:25] <mav> angela ; it does link to the budget
[21:25] <Xirzon> ah, right
[21:25] <dannyisme> then we should also note that the budget is flexible
[21:25] <silsor> the cache servers that we have, and the cache servers that partners would provide, only "reflect" content, the actual work is done at home
[21:25] <dannyisme> and may change according to exigencies
[21:25] <mav> should I just make this editable?
[21:26] <Xirzon> silsor has a point - the work that partners can do for us is limited if we want to keep control over the content
[21:26] <Xirzon> maybe mention that the only way to maintain true independence is to host our own content servers
[21:26] <dannyisme> good point
[21:26] <Anthere> should not a meeting be a place where we listen to people ?
[21:26] <Anthere> hello ?
[21:26] <Xirzon> the word "independence" is good, I think
[21:26] <dannyisme> however, we should keep the statement short
[21:26] <Anthere> oh, et puis merde
[21:26] * Anthere is now known as AntGone
[21:26] <mav> again, should I just make http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mayer/Sandbox editable?
[21:27] <Xirzon> yes, mav, please make it editable for now
[21:27] <Angela> I agree
[21:27] <silsor> Anthere: you could just scare by saying what would happen if we ran out of money :)
[21:27] <Angela> anthere: what exactly is it you're not convinced of?
[21:27] <mav> done http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mayer/Sandbox
[21:28] <silsor> AntGone: what is it you think is not credible about the approach?
[21:28] <Xirzon> ok, how about we all edit the page together later and move on to the next point?
[21:28] <jwales> Xirzon: "the only way to maintain true independence is to host our own content servers" - I think this is unnecessary to say
[21:28] <mav> xirzon ; agreed
[21:28] <jwales> Anthere is having keyboard problems.
[21:29] <Angela> should the Developer Liaison be responsible for managing things like bounties? And is there any feedback from or about the developer committee in general?
[21:29] <mav> brion is the Developer Liaison now?
[21:29] <AntGone> jwales, I just do not see the point of writing something whi
[21:30] <AntGone> when by the time it is tyopoed, the topic is already over
[21:30] <dannyisme> who is developer liaison
[21:30] <AntGone> so, I will limit myselfto listen
[21:30] <Angela> dannyisme: there isn't one currently
[21:30] <Xirzon> I think coordinating bounties is a separate position. it's something I'd be interested in doing, without wanting to do other liaisoning, whatever that is
[21:31] <mav> at the very least such a person should be a part of the development committee
[21:31] <Angela> so the developer liaison should just be someone who comes to board meetings with feedback about hardware issues?
[21:31] <mav> jamesday already does that
[21:31] <jwales> Anthere we can come back to your topic when you type it if you like.
[21:32] <AntGone> jwales, already two are gone
[21:32] <Angela> mav: not in any official position though
[21:32] <Xirzon> is there anything else you want the liaison to do?
[21:32] <dannyisme> i wonder. should the person coordinating bounties be a developer?
[21:32] <dannyisme> that may lead to complaints of a conflict of interests
[21:32] <mav> good point
[21:32] <Xirzon> well, that's why I'm interested in doing it - I'm still technically involved, but not one of the very active devs anymore
[21:33] <dannyisme> you realize, erik, that this will exclude you from bounties
[21:33] <AntGone> :-)
[21:33] <Xirzon> dannyisme: yes
[21:34] <mav> I'd do it, but I'm already donig about a million other things
[21:34] <dannyisme> ok
[21:34] <mav> like learning how to type :/
[21:34] <Xirzon> now, if we do this, I would like to put a ban on the word "bounty"
[21:35] <Xirzon> because these aren't bounties, where there is a competition and the first submitter wins the money
[21:35] <mav> I'm fine with Erik doing this - so long as there is no conflict of interest
[21:35] <Angela> are there any objections to the board choosing a new dev liaison, and having a separate bounty/whatever-co-ordinator?
[21:35] <dannyisme> i am fine with that
[21:35] <jwales> agreed on the ban on the word bounty
[21:35] <mav> angela ; I don't object
[21:36] <AntGone> Mayu I ?
[21:36] <Xirzon> Angela, Ant, Jim: I would be willing to submit a formal description for the role of developer contract coordinator
[21:36] <mav> what do we call it then?
[21:36] <AntGone> without thje topic immediately changed ?`
[21:36] <AntGone> since xirzon declared himself interested to developped about a harlf dozen things
[21:36] <AntGone> which might be covered by grants
[21:37] <AntGone> hence generate money
[21:37] <mav> 'developer contract' would include brion's contract
[21:37] <AntGone> how erick
[21:37] <AntGone> , do you plan to both do these things and get pao
[21:37] <AntGone> paid
[21:37] <AntGone> while not being allowed to be
[21:37] <Xirzon> AntGone: that's not possible, unless these contracts would be separately negotiated.
[21:37] <Angela> Xirzon: are you expecting the coordinator role to be a paid position?
[21:37] <AntGone> due to being a "bounty" coordinator ?
[21:37] <Xirzon> Angela: no
[21:38] <AntGone> so that meanst
[21:38] <AntGone> that the b ountry coordinator
[21:38] <AntGone> would not coordinate contracts
[21:38] <AntGone> ``wghi
[21:38] <Xirzon> AntGone: so, in these cases, I would make a proposal to the board and try to find someone else to implement it
[21:38] <AntGone> chiwh
[21:38] <AntGone> `
[21:38] <AntGone> shitiiitit
[21:38] <Xirzon> erm
[21:38] <mav> FYI ; there is up to $20,000 for this this quarter
[21:38] <AntGone> which are the opportunity to be precisely funded ?
[21:38] <mav> Extra hardware/dev projects
[21:38] <mav> $20,000.00
[21:38] <AntGone> is not there somthing illogicial here ?
[21:38] <Xirzon> the role as I see it is this
[21:38] <Xirzon> 1) listen to the board as to what the current needs of the projects are
[21:39] <Xirzon> 2) make suggestions to the board for key critical features that need funding
[21:39] <Xirzon> 3) find developers who are skilled and willing to implement these
[21:39] <Xirzon> that this precludes me from doing the implementation myself does not matter to me, the role itself is interesting enough
[21:40] <Xirzon> oh, 4) write basic specifications which can be the basis for communication between the coordinator and the implementor
[21:40] <mav> I'd like to see Erik set up the system ; if he want to later do work on contracts, then he can resign as coordinator
[21:40] <Angela> ok. any objections?
[21:40] <mav> but setting up the system at this point is the most important
[21:40] <dannyisme> fine
[21:41] <Xirzon> then I will formally define the role on meta and ask the board to approve it
[21:41] <Angela> jwales/anthere: are you both ok with that?
[21:41] <jwales> I think we should discuss it privately.
[21:41] <Xirzon> ok.
[21:41] <AntGone> nod
[21:42] <Xirzon> then we move on to the next point for now?
[21:42] <Angela> wikinews: is everyone ok with the latest policy at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/Start_a_new_edition ?
[21:42] <Xirzon> re: wikinews language policy, there's an interesting idea which I got from Memory Alpha
[21:42] <Xirzon> Memory Alpha requires new MA editions to translate a certain basic set of pages before they can start
[21:42] <Xirzon> like FAQ, About, etc.
[21:42] <Xirzon> this is kind of a test for whether there are actually people willing to do work
[21:42] <Xirzon> it might be worth experimenting with a similar approach
[21:43] <mav> that seems reasonable
[21:43] <jwales> yes
[21:43] <Angela> do we want to use this for the next wikinewes then?
[21:43] <notafish_> Angela: yes
[21:43] <dannyisme> yes
[21:43] <Xirzon> Angela: I would suggest not changing the rules in mid-process
[21:43] <jwales> I also think it would be wise to have a way for some communities to voice a strong objection to the creation.
[21:43] <Xirzon> because people now have certain expectations
[21:43] <Xirzon> and I think the current wikinews process is reasonably restrictive
[21:44] <Xirzon> i.e. minimum number of contributions, as suggested by anthere
[21:44] <dannyisme> it may even be a good idea to adapt it for the creation of new wikipedias in general
[21:44] <mav> jwales ; I very strongly agree
[21:44] <Xirzon> just something to think about in the general framework of language policy
[21:44] <jwales> here are three regulars in en: Lir, ComradeNick, and Michael
[21:44] <dannyisme> i would also expand the minimum number of contributions
[21:44] <dannyisme> 1,000
[21:44] <Xirzon> jwales: lol
[21:44] <Xirzon> they can have a Friulian Wikinews with node_ue
[21:45] <notafish_> Xirzon: do you think some kind of a "tutor process" could be applied ? ie. Have someone who would be a liaison from the existing wikinews for the new ones ?
[21:45] <AntGone> agreed, that does not exclude all wrong cases
[21:45] <Xirzon> notafish_: interesting idea
[21:45] <Xirzon> the language barrier is a problem, though
[21:45] <Xirzon> this is effectively happening through the IRC channel
[21:45] <notafish_> Xirzon: yes, but if someone can drive the new editors through the labyrinth of the existing wikis, that would be cool
[21:45] <Xirzon> (I would like to somewhat more prominently link the Wikinews IRC channel on every edition, but this is getting OT)
[21:46] <AntGone> I would lilke that wikinews license is set as soon as possible
[21:46] <mav> goddamnit! ABC news picked up the Dvorak junk
[21:46] <Xirzon> notafish_: I will try to put some more advice in the message that I sent to the pledging participants when the wiki is set up
[21:46] <Xirzon> s/sent/send
[21:46] <jwales> I have to go to sleep in 15 minutes. But we are making good progress.
[21:47] <Xirzon> OK, I take it we keep the Wikinews policy as is for now?
[21:47] <Xirzon> if you want to make changes, please comment on the meta talk page
[21:47] <Angela> a request was made that the board decide about the wikisource domains: http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Scriptorium/Language_domain_proposal
[21:48] <Xirzon> Angela: please postpone this
[21:48] <Xirzon> IMHO it is the wrong approach
[21:48] <AntGone> agreed
[21:48] <Angela> it's been going on since October
[21:48] <mav> different language domains for Wikisource is stupid
[21:48] <dannyisme> one domain
[21:48] <Xirzon> I think Wikisource / Wikicommons share the same goal and should be merged
[21:48] <mav> I agree with Erik
[21:48] <Xirzon> if we make a hasty decision to split, merging Wikisource/Wikicommons will be a lot harder
[21:48] <Angela> so is the decision to keep one domain for now?
[21:49] <AntGone> agreed as well
[21:49] <mav> agreed
[21:49] <dannyisme> the only problem is right left languages
[21:49] <dannyisme> how does wikisource handle that
[21:49] <notafish_> i agree
[21:49] <mav> IIRC, there is a Hebrew Wikisource
[21:49] <dannyisme> so we already have two wikisources
[21:49] <dannyisme> potentially arabic
[21:50] <dannyisme> ideally, i would like to see them merged into a single wikisource
[21:50] <mav> all R>L languages should be in the same one
[21:50] <dannyisme> then, they cant be merged into commons
[21:50] <Xirzon> dannyisme: they could if we had a developer contract coordinator who makes sure that the software gets changed to support that ;)
[21:50] <mav> all L>R ones in another - unitl we work out the technical issues
[21:50] <mav> :)
[21:50] <dannyisme> ok, i was leading to that, erik
[21:51] <dannyisme> but that should be one of the priorities to be worked out
[21:51] <dannyisme> so that the right-left languages dont get isolated
[21:51] <Xirzon> yes
[21:51] <Xirzon> policy-wise, I think it's best to respond that splitting would be premature at this point
[21:51] <Xirzon> can we move on?
[21:51] <Angela> ok
[21:51] <Angela> The Emergency Medicine project was on the board agenda since ages ago, but is now on Wikibooks. Is that ok or is there anything else to say about this?
[21:51] <mav> looks fine on wikibooks to me
[21:52] <dannyisme> yup
[21:52] <Xirzon> fine with me
[21:52] <AntGone> fine with me
[21:53] <Angela> ok, I'm moving on quite quickly, but let me know if there are still comments on that. On to domain names... Should local chapters hold control over national domains?
[21:53] <dannyisme> good, next?
[21:53] <jwales> wait wait wait
[21:53] * Angela waits
[21:53] <jwales> I think there should be wikisources for every language.
[21:53] * dannyisme waits
[21:53] <dannyisme> why?
[21:53] <jwales> I think wikisource is different from wikicommons.
[21:53] <jwales> Same reason we have wikipedias for every language. Else it's just a dump.
[21:54] <mav> so long as we own the trademarks and they use the domains in good faith, I don't see an issue with it
[21:54] <Xirzon> jwales: let me explain a bit more while I think the projects are similar in purpose
[21:54] <AntGone> quite true jimbo, but to the contrary of wp
[21:54] <AntGone> we do not work on text
[21:54] <Xirzon> both are essentially repository of static media which is linked and used on the other projects
[21:54] <dannyisme> one great advanatage to wikisource is that it can be a basis for translating texts
[21:54] <AntGone> my main personal problem with it is more about interface
[21:54] <Xirzon> now, we do not currently have a way to transclude text from wikisource in wikipedia
[21:54] <Xirzon> but it would be very cool if we could do that
[21:54] <dannyisme> it would be easier if they were in teh same domain
[21:55] <Xirzon> because then you could have reliable quotations of key documents - constitutions, law, etc. - directly transcluded in wikipedia
[21:55] <mav> yes - same domin - what danny and Erik said
[21:55] <jwales> I don't agree.
[21:55] <Xirzon> and if we had such functionality, which I think we should strive for, the commons and wikisource would essentially become identical in function
[21:55] <Xirzon> now, having them as the same project does not preclude us from having sane language separation
[21:55] <Xirzon> we need such language separation for the commons as it is
[21:55] <Xirzon> so it is a problem we have to resolve anyway
[21:55] <AntGone> wikicommons being one language only
[21:56] <Xirzon> splitting up the database is not the only way to do it
[21:56] <AntGone> greatly limits its development
[21:56] <jwales> If translations is the reason, we should figure out what makes translation harder with different domains and fix that, rather than pursue a rather strange user interface decision to mix languages.
[21:56] <notafish_> Xirzon: that still needs some working on....
[21:56] <AntGone> it effevtively exclude people
[21:56] <Xirzon> jwales: languages should not be mixed from the user POV
[21:56] <Xirzon> that's what we need to resolve on the software side of things
[21:56] <jwales> exactly: and people expect to find things on different domains
[21:56] <notafish_> AntGone: indeed
[21:56] <jwales> just as with wikipedia
[21:56] <jwales> We do need to resolve it on the software end of things.
[21:56] <mav> jwales ; the user interface issue is a technial problem that needs a general solution that does not segregate interfaces
[21:57] <AntGone> no
[21:57] <jwales> But the proper resolution is to support a consistent interface everywhere.
[21:57] <Xirzon> essentially, the whole problem is that mediawiki's language support is very, very poor when you have multiple languages in a single wiki
[21:57] <AntGone> it is not ONLY about interface
[21:57] <AntGone> categories are in english
[21:57] <AntGone> all discussions are in english
[21:57] <jwales> I'm with Ant completely on those points.
[21:57] <AntGone> in effect, it restricts upload and participatin
[21:57] <notafish_> and so am I
[21:57] <jwales> It is not about the interface in the sense of the menu items.
[21:57] <waerth> I am with AntGone also
[21:57] <Xirzon> jwales: yes, I understand that
[21:57] <jwales> It is about people being able to work together effectively in their own language.
[21:58] <Xirzon> I think we need to work on the software to make it possible to manage multiple languages in a single wiki without splitting things up unnecessarily, creating another 50 account databases, etc.
[21:58] <mav> at the same time is dumb to have the *exact same text* or media file duplicated for each and every language
[21:58] <jwales> We could invent features like: langauge segregated recent changes, separate portal pages, multi-language interface. But that's the wrong approach.
[21:58] <Xirzon> we already have a multi-language interface
[21:58] <AntGone> hmm, strange all these opeople flow
[21:58] <AntGone> fklowing in
[21:58] * mark-_ is now known as mark-
[21:58] <notafish_> mav: I agree about the duplication, however commons still has not found ideas
[21:58] <notafish_> we have worked on it a lot
[21:58] <jwales> Because a better approach is what we have now: people *expect* that if they go to "de.wikipedia.org" they get german. If they go to "de.wikisource.org" they get German.
[21:59] <Xirzon> jwales: whether it's commons.wikimedia.org/de or de.commons.wikimedia.org doesn't really make a difference
[21:59] <jwales> I'm not talking about commons.
[21:59] <jwales> Commons is different from wikisource.
[21:59] <jwales> They are separate and have different purposes and work flows.
[21:59] <Xirzon> but you should be talking about the commons, because it has the exact same problems
[21:59] <mav> jwales ; and we could set it up so that going to de.wikisource gives a german user interface that is persistant
[21:59] <jwales> We can talk about commons separately.
[21:59] <jwales> I am talking about wikisource for the moment.
[21:59] <jwales> Yes, mav, we could, but we already know how to do that.
[22:00] <Xirzon> well, please explain how the wikisource has necessarily different workflows.
[22:00] <jwales> We don't need to write a ton of software to do something we already do perfectly well.
[22:00] <mav> jwales ; it does not require separate databases
[22:00] <mav> just a few software features
[22:00] <jwales> Xirzon: i am not going to talk about wikicommons right now.
[22:00] <Xirzon> well, you can't reasonably separate the issues
[22:00] <jwales> Xirzon: i am not going to talk about wikicommons right now.
[22:01] <Xirzon> because if you pretend we're going to waste money on wikisource features that we don't need to you need to take into account that the very same features would be beneficial to the commons.
[22:01] <jwales> Xirzon: i am not going to talk about wikicommons right now.
[22:01] <Xirzon> that's fine, but wrong :)
[22:01] <AntGone> hmmm
[22:01] <dannyisme> Xircon: he is not going to talk about wikicommons right now.
[22:01] <AntGone> :-))))
[22:01] <jwales> It can be part of the overall discussion, but I want to make some points about wikisource first.
[22:02] <jwales> Wikisource needs to have separate domains for user interface reasons. People need to be able to visit *one* language, and find *their* commmunity there.
[22:02] <Xirzon> I don't see how this can only be accomplished with separate domains.
[22:02] <mav> jwales ; that can be done through cookies ; one goes to de.wikisource.org and gets a german interface
[22:02] <jwales> Of course it can be accomplished in other ways.
[22:02] <jwales> But why?
[22:02] <jwales> We already have this problem solved.
[22:02] <Xirzon> because .. see above :)
[22:03] <GerardM> with a domain, you also have a distinct community
[22:03] <AntGone> mav, thiks is not ONLY about interface
[22:03] <AntGone> you can not use a cookie to translate a discussion
[22:03] <mav> oh, and they also go directly to the German main page for wikisource
[22:03] <jwales> Now, having made that point, I'm willing to talk about wikicommons.
[22:03] <Xirzon> GerardM: that is the only point where I would agree with jwales that separation would be harder within the same wiki
[22:04] <jwales> Wikicommons is a repository of media, esp. stuff that is likely to be transcluded elsewhere.
[22:04] <jwales> Wikisource is about texts.
[22:04] <jwales> There is no need or desirability to transclude the entire text of Hamlet into a wikipedia article.
[22:04] * akl wonders if "german" is the new synonym for "not english" ;-)
[22:04] <Xirzon> do you think we should strive towards source text transclusion, esp. of labeled excerpts?
[22:04] <GerardM> With a domain you can still have an other language interface.
[22:04] <Xirzon> no, not the entire text of hamlet
[22:04] <jwales> Right.
[22:04] <jwales> And people who work in wikisource do things:
[22:04] <jwales> they edit
[22:04] <Xirzon> but <Article 1> of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, for example
[22:05] <AntGone> akl, no, it is "non french"
[22:05] <Angela> it's a nice idea to suggest Wikisource should have separate communities, but in reality, you'll end up with very few communities, and 180 practically dead wikis
[22:05] <mav> I'd like the ability to call upon just a small part of Hamlet
[22:05] <dannyisme> in multiple languages?
[22:05] <innocence> You need to be careful that every wikisource doesn't end up uploading a separate copy of hamlet, or whatever. That's very wasteful.
[22:05] <Angela> wikisource is far less active than the wikipedias. It might not be sensible to split it because it would just become far too small
[22:05] <jwales> Angela: I would recommend a software solution to that, a solution which does not mingle different languages on the same domain.
[22:05] <AntGone> this suggest
[22:05] <jwales> combined rc for example
[22:05] <AntGone> common recent changes among project of same languages angela
[22:05] <AntGone> eh
[22:06] <Xirzon> jwales: do you agree that transclusion of labeled excerpts would be useful?
[22:06] <jwales> It's possible that a perfect implementation of either approach ends up in the end being the same thing.
[22:06] <akl> jwales: and single login, please
[22:06] <innocence> (in terms of finding content, as much as resource usage)
[22:06] <jwales> Xirzon: no I don't.
[22:06] <Xirzon> jwales: please explain.
[22:06] <jwales> ctrl-c, ctrl-v
[22:06] <Xirzon> the point of using the wikisource excerpt is that you can select a guaranteed stable, certified revision
[22:07] <mav> what erik said
[22:07] <jwales> All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
[22:07] <jwales> All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
[22:07] <jwales> :-)
[22:07] <jwales> See, now that was easy.
[22:07] <mav> jwales ; repeat for 100 different language versions of Wikisource
[22:07] <jwales> And if you want to edit my text, it doesn't contain strange markup.
[22:07] <Xirzon> and that you can use it in multiple places easily, like templates. transclusion is one of the key features of the original Xanadu vision - I think it's time to put this into reality, as it opens a lot of cool possibilities.
[22:07] <notafish_> mav: you stole my queue !
[22:07] <jwales> mav: explain the context?
[22:08] <AntGone> not !
[22:08] <AntGone> nota !
[22:08] <AntGone> tu n a
[22:08] <AntGone> n en a pas
[22:08] <notafish_> AntGone: :P
[22:08] <jwales> mav: I mean, what about 100 different langauge versions?
[22:08] <mav> jwales ; each language version would want its own version of the same text
[22:08] * AntGone begaye
[22:08] <mav> really bad database design
[22:08] <Xirzon> jwales: the transcluded portion would have an automatic link to the full source document
[22:08] <innocence> mav> and, some texts will only exist an some wikisources
[22:08] <Xirzon> which is also very, very useful
[22:08] <jwales> mav: what do you mean? Like, Germans want to read German?
[22:08] <notafish_> jwales: I agree with mav, these are supposed to be original texts, no need for different wikis
[22:08] <dannyisme> that seems repetitious and clumsy
[22:09] <Xirzon> andmakes it possible to edit if necessary, without affecting a certified stable revision tag
[22:09] <jwales> some texts will only exist on some wikisources?
[22:09] <jwales> Like, for example, the original Hamlet will only be in en? Why is this a problem?
[22:09] <innocence> jwales> i sometimes want german texts, but i find german interface hard to use. so first i will look on the english wikisource for this german text, but it's not there. so then i look on the german one. but maybe it turns out that a french person who speaks german actually put it on the french wikisource.
[22:09] <notafish_> jwales: because then the french won't have access to it because they will never go to en :P
[22:09] <mav> jwales ; Germans will also want to have access to original sources in English, old English, Middle, English, Serbian, etc
[22:09] <innocence> so i never find my text, even though it exists on wikisource
[22:09] <Xirzon> jwales, we will have to disagree about the usefulness of transclusion. and it is one reason I see wikicommons and wikisource as essentially identical.
[22:09] <Angela> would that be the case though? Or would the Germans want the original version on their wiki too?
[22:10] <jwales> But if i want to read a German article about Hitler, I go to de.wikipedia
[22:10] <Xirzon> since this discussion is going into very much detail, I suggest we postpone a decision on the matter for now.
[22:10] <jwales> I know exactly where to find it.
[22:10] <notafish_> Angela: if I understand what Wikisource is all about, yes, they would
[22:10] <innocence> jwales> so, you would say the english wikisource can only contain english texts?
[22:10] <AntGone> may I asked
[22:10] <jwales> Yes, that's my thinking.
[22:10] <AntGone> why we simply *have* wikisource ?
[22:10] <innocence> jwales> where do the latin texts go? i don't want latin interface!
[22:10] <notafish_> jwales: ah...hmmmm
[22:11] <Xirzon> jwales, do you want to make the decision now?
[22:11] <notafish_> innocence: tsk
[22:11] <jwales> no no
[22:11] <mav> jwales ; Old English gets its own wiki then?
[22:11] <jwales> it's obviously not even close to consensus
[22:11] <AntGone> why does wikisource exist ?
[22:11] <innocence> i think this is a bad direction for wikisource to go in, personally..
[22:11] <innocence> i'd rather have all the texts accessible in one central place, for maximum chance of finding what i want
[22:11] <Xirzon> ok, then let's discuss this on the mailing list etc.
[22:11] <jwales> ok
[22:11] <Xirzon> and perhaps hold an official vote on it
[22:11] <AntGone> do we need wikiksource
[22:11] <AntGone> NO
[22:12] <Xirzon> AntGone?
[22:12] <AntGone> not YET an official vote
[22:12] <Angela> AntGone: yes, we do. these texts are not suitable to be put in Wikipedia
[22:12] <AntGone> it means nothing
[22:12] <AntGone> why NOT suitable ?
[22:12] <AntGone> what defines suitable ?
[22:12] <waerth> why split everything up?
[22:12] <Xirzon> AntGone: can you speak in full sentences?
[22:12] <jwales> Well, for example, the full text of Hamlet is valuable, but it is not an encyclopedia article.
[22:12] <Angela> because you don't go to an encyclopedia to see the ful text of the bible
[22:12] <waerth> I still think we should have kept everything in wikipedia in the first place
[22:12] <AntGone> xirzon, no, otherwise, if I do, the next topic is already there
[22:12] <jwales> Ant has keyboard trouble, we can appreciate she had to go slow tonight. :-)
[22:12] <dannyisme> howewver, it seems that wikisource is duplicating project gutenberg's efforts
[22:13] <dannyisme> maybe we should try to cooperate more closely with them
[22:13] <AntGone> Angela, this is ONE perception of an encyclopedia
[22:13] <sannse> I agree with danny there
[22:13] <mav> danny ; good point
[22:13] <dannyisme> they are far more advanced in this in any event
[22:13] <AntGone> just as you decided to remove wiktionary
[22:13] <Xirzon> AntGone, I am not suggesting a vote at this point, but I think a discussion on the merits of Wikisource will not go anywhere
[22:13] <AntGone> while other languages think it is encyclopedic
[22:13] <Angela> I don't think this meeting is the time to decide whether there is a point to Wikisource
[22:13] <waerth> let antgone speak
[22:13] <mav> they have the texts, but their interface to read them sucks ; all plain text
[22:14] <dannyisme> we could cooperate with them on that
[22:14] <AntGone> hmmm
[22:14] <dannyisme> they also have html
[22:14] <mav> oh
[22:14] <dannyisme> i propose a meeting between the two organizations
[22:14] <Angela> dannyisme: see http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Wikisource_and_Project_Gutenberg
[22:14] <AntGone> between one place where we have own language and is encyclopedic, and antoher where it is NECESSARY on english...
[22:16] <Xirzon> dannyisme: PG and WMF?
[22:16] <dannyisme> PG and WMF
[22:16] <dannyisme> exactly
[22:16] <dannyisme> there is interest on their part in cooperating
[22:17] <dannyisme> many of us are active in both
[22:17] <Xirzon> there's also Distributed Proofreaders, which already uses wiki-like software.
[22:17] <mav> there should be much more cooperation
[22:17] <dannyisme> yeah, i was #54 in dp for a while
[22:17] <Xirzon> :)
[22:17] <Angela> does anyone want to arrange a meeting?
[22:17] <dannyisme> now i am like #110
[22:17] <dannyisme> but a meeting would be useful
[22:18] <dannyisme> jimbo and michael hart
[22:18] <Xirzon> dannyisme: could you try to arrange something?
[22:18] <mav> you want to head that Danny?
[22:18] <dannyisme> i will do that
[22:18] <Angela> thanks
[22:18] <Xirzon> maybe a chat style meeting like the Wikinews Chat would be a good idea
[22:18] <dannyisme> i will contact them
[22:18] <dannyisme> ok
[22:18] <Angela> can we move onto domain names now? Are there any issues with local chapters buying these?
[22:18] <dannyisme> ok
[22:18] <mav> yes, an IRC meeting with PD would be good
[22:19] <dannyisme> PG took over DP
[22:19] <dannyisme> so it is effectively the same thing
[22:19] <mav> IMO, they can buy them but must use them the way we want them too since it is the foundatio's trademark
[22:19] <jwales> I think it's best if the foundation buys them or if local chapters buy them it is done with a formal agreement. We have been happy so far because we are all friends, but we could run into trouble someday.
[22:19] <Angela> agreed
[22:20] <mav> us owning them would be best - I agree
[22:20] <akl> jwales: our bylaws mention that the foundation holds the trademarks
[22:20] <jwales> *nod*
[22:20] <notafish_> jwales: agreed fr domains *should* only be "buyable" by French based organisations for example
[22:20] <jwales> So far we ahve been lucky...
[22:21] <jwales> Either friends or spammers have bought the domains.
[22:21] <akl> this should be enough, but if you want to set up a contract this would be fine
[22:21] <notafish_> on this topic, the Domains page on meta is a heresy
[22:21] <jwales> But it wouldn't surprise me if someday someone buys a domain and tries to create a fork or something.
[22:21] <notafish_> it's like : squatters, come and buy our domains !
[22:21] <akl> jwales: someone ore some chapter?
[22:22] <AntGone> I agree with alk
[22:22] <AntGone> alk
[22:22] <AntGone> kl
[22:22] <AntGone> pfff
[22:22] <AntGone> Once
[22:22] <akl> a chapter won't do that because it would no longer be a chapter
[22:22] <AntGone> wmf owns trademark, there is little risk involved
[22:23] <AntGone> it could still degenerate in an ugly
[22:23] <jwales> akl: yes
[22:23] <AntGone> little fight, but I doubt it though
[22:23] <jwales> akl is right, but anthere is right too.
[22:23] <waerth> good 'ning
[22:23] <akl> jwales: did you see my proposal? the foundation should register wikimedia as a trademark soon
[22:23] <jwales> There's an old saying "good fences make good neighbors"
[22:24] <jwales> akl: *nod*
[22:24] <AntGone> yes, should as soon as possible
[22:24] <Nicnac25> if I may say something, trademark doesn't automatically cover domain name
[22:25] <AntGone> nod jwales, but also consider fr is the legal representation of wmf
[22:25] <AntGone> in any cases, I have no fixed opinion on this
[22:25] <akl> jwales: i have nothing against a contract, but do contracts prevent people from fighting? i think it's no neccesary to write something down which is written down somewhere else (trademark laws)
[22:26] <Angela> I see no harm in the Foundation owning the domain names, so is there any reason for them not to always do that (except in cases like fr where they legally can't)?
[22:26] <akl> Angela: we can pay for something we own (with permission) very easily
[22:26] * AntGone doubts french people will engage themselves to get back control of fr, on legal fights
[22:27] <jwales> akl: hmm, like here's an example: someone wants to do something we don't like with our trademark (wikireaders, say, but in some way that we don't like): a contract can give de foundation legal standing to do something about it.
[22:27] <AntGone> just to lose it afterwards since foundation can not get control of it
[22:27] * Amgine is now known as Amgine_drv
[22:27] <AntGone> best to let it to the squatter in this case then
[22:27] <jwales> I mean, give the verein something to use.
[22:28] <jwales> The verein can say in court if necessary "No, we have the right to this in Germany, per this contract with Wikimedia Foundation in US."
[22:28] <jwales> In this way, we can split up the work of defending if necessary, and get local people involved in it.
[22:28] <akl> jwales: as i said above. i have nothing against setting up such a contract
[22:29] <Angela> why not let the foundation just buy them all rather than needing contracts with every local chapter for it?
[22:29] <jwales> akl: *nod*
[22:29] <mav> speaking of contracts, do you want me to draft one for brion jwales ?
[22:29] <AntGone> because in some countries, it is jujst not possible
[22:29] <jwales> akl: I totally agree with you by the way.
[22:29] <jwales> mav: sure
[22:29] <mav> k
[22:29] <akl> Angela: we can't pay for something we don't own
[22:30] <mav> we can talk about the outline later
[22:30] <Angela> AntGone: I already said excluding fr where it's not legally possible
[22:30] <jwales> but I really must go to bed now...
[22:30] <jwales> I have to speak tomorrow
[22:30] <jwales> and I'm meeting joi for breakfast.
[22:30] <dannyisme> ay hi to cimon
[22:30] <dannyisme> say
[22:30] <Angela> bye jwales
[22:30] * jwales nudges joi.
[22:30] <jwales> I don't think I'll cimon.
[22:30] <mav> I need to get something to eat - so must leave as well
[22:30] <AntGone> france
[22:30] <Xirzon> bye jim
[22:30] <jwales> I'm not having a public meeting. Just doing this nokia thing and leaving.
[22:31] <dannyisme> ah, ok
[22:31] <Angela> bye mav
[22:31] * mav is now known as mav-away
[22:31] <dannyisme> well, if you see a guy with a beard and a pipe hopping around helsinki on a pogo stick, you wave to him
[22:31] <Angela> since it's been 90 minutes now, and meetings tend to go downhill after that, shall we postpone the remaining points until the next meeting?
[22:31] <jwales> :-)
[22:31] <Xirzon> Angela: yay
[22:31] * jwales is going downhill.
[22:32] <Angela> any objections?
[22:32] <Angela> anyone want to stay here forever?
[22:32] <dannyisme> is there any business we can cover quickly?>
[22:32] <Angela> I doubt it :)
[22:32] <dannyisme> ok, then lets end this
[22:32] <Xirzon> dannyisme: we can let GerardM talk about Wiktionary for a while
[22:32] <dannyisme> ah, that could be good
[22:32] <Angela> go read http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy and change it soon if you want to
[22:33] <Angela> GerardM: do you want to do that now?
[22:33] <Xirzon> that was a joke, damnit
[22:33] <Xirzon> don't let him do that!
[22:33] <Angela> oh right...
[22:33] <Angela> :)
[22:33] * Xirzon hides
[22:33] <akl> Angela: are there any plans how the board plans involving chapters?
[22:34] <AntGone> yes
[22:34] <AntGone> at least, I proposed something
[22:34] <AntGone> but for now, it leds no where
[22:34] <Angela> it's still an open question at the moment
[22:34] <Angela> perhaps we could try to get more comments to add to Anthere's sugestions before the next meeting?
[22:35] <AntGone> I did not really want to make it public
[22:35] <AntGone> until Jimbo commented it
[22:35] <AntGone> though of course, it has been discussed in french a bit`
[22:35] <AntGone> so, for next meeting
[22:35] <Angela> ok
[22:35] <AntGone> I"'ll rey to have more
[22:35] <akl> okay
[22:35] <AntGone> feedback and draft something`
[22:36] <AntGone> abnd mostly
[22:36] <AntGone> I hope that you all do suggestions as well
[22:36] <AntGone> my suggestions may be okay, or may not, or may not b e the best ones
[22:36] <AntGone> itr would be real nice
[22:36] <AntGone> the verein also give suggestions on this
[22:38] <Angela> Meeting closed. Thank you for coming. :)
[22:38] <Xirzon> thanks for moderating :)