| Revision as of 14:56, 21 June 2019 view source107.242.117.56 (talk) →Who put the WMF in charge?: no← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:01, 25 December 2024 view source Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,502 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 252) (bot | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{pp-sock|small=yes}} | |||
| {{noindex}} | |||
| {{pp-move|small=yes}} | |||
| {{noindex}} | |||
| {{Stb}} | {{Stb}} | ||
| {{Usercomment}} | {{Usercomment}} | ||
| {{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed| |
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|}} | ||
| {{Notice|1={{Center|1='''Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an ].'''<br /> | {{Notice|1={{Center|1='''Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an ].'''<br /> | ||
| '''He holds the founder's seat on the ]'s ].<br />The current ] occupying "community-selected" seats are ], ] and ].<br />The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is ].'''}}}} | '''He holds the founder's seat on the ]'s .<br />The current ] occupying "community-selected" seats are ], ], ] and ].<br />The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is ].'''}}}} | ||
| {{Notice|1={{Center|1=''' |
{{Notice|1={{Center|1='''This page is ] and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead, <br> ] '''}}}} | ||
| {{Talk header|search=yes}} | {{Talk header|search=yes}} | ||
| {{Misplaced Pages:TPS/banner}} | {{Misplaced Pages:TPS/banner}} | ||
| {{annual readership}} | |||
| {{Press | |||
| | subject = talkpage | |||
| | author = Matthew Gault | |||
| | title = Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy Wales' NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit | |||
| | org = ] | |||
| | url = https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjbkvm/wikipedia-editors-very-mad-about-jimmy-waless-nft-of-a-wikipedia-edit | |||
| | date = 8 December 2021 | |||
| | quote = The trouble began when Wales posted an announcement about the auction on his user talk page—a kind of message board where users communicate directly with each other. | |||
| }} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| | algo = old( |
| algo = old(10d) | ||
| | archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d | | archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| | counter = |
| counter = 252 | ||
| | maxarchivesize = 350K | | maxarchivesize = 350K | ||
| | archiveheader = {{aan}} | | archiveheader = {{aan}} | ||
| | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | ||
| | minthreadsleft = |
| minthreadsleft = 3 | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Centralized discussion}} | {{Centralized discussion}} | ||
| __TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
| {{-}} | {{-}} | ||
| == Seasonal greetings :) == | |||
| == What was the outcome of the board meeting? == | |||
| I think you and the WMF owe all of us an explanation. | |||
| I'd point out that a failure to sort things here will likely result in further, extended turmoil. ] (]) 11:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :See ] as well, it's still an ongoing discussion. Grüße vom ] <sup> (])</sup> 12:27, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| A statement in a new section at ] would be great, when you're done. Thank you. ''']] (])''' 13:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :Jimmy, there was a very troubling allegation made at the discussion around this issue, and I'm afraid it may get lost in the noise, because if true, it would indicate that the Wikimedia Foundation did not fail to consider or communicate well, but is instead actively going against the interest of the communities it was founded to support. I would not normally give much credence to such an allegation without such evidence, but I have also never known Risker to say something careless or thoughtless, and I know she does indeed know and talk to several of the people involved. So, I'll ask you directly—is this true? Does the WMF actually have an end goal of undermining the communities' independence and taking more authority on at a global level? ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 16:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::(+1). If this was someone else, I would have discounted it but Risker is too credible. ]] 16:36, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::(+1). Agreed. With I think all of the above - explanation, statement, allegation. ] (]) 18:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::(+1) If the WMF's goal is to undermine the autonomy of our communities, then we are in a constitutional crisis. ] (]) 18:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::I mean technically none of this is new or against the TOS. They just choose not to act on the power they have that often. Constitutional crisis or acting like this is a new thing is just incorrect. In the end it is their sandbox. ] (]) 20:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::: As soon as we take that defeatist perspective, it is game over. It is NOT "their sandbox." There was a Misplaced Pages before there was a WMF. It is a legalistic ownership entity with the task of software development and site maintenance at a macro level, and coordination of convention events. The local Wikipedias are supposed to be autonomous and self-governing. ] (]) 02:04, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::It is not defeatist, it is how pretty much every website that has users is run. It cannot be completely autonomous and self-governed for a host of reasons, mostly legal. The question is where in the margins and split is. Ultimately though, final call is with the office, not volunteers. Misplaced Pages is not owned by volunteers, technically never has been. ] (]) 03:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::: {{ec}} {{tq|It cannot be completely autonomous and self-governed for a host of reasons, mostly legal}} It's clear that the WMF ban of Fram was not legally necessary. Thus, your point about the community being unable to be 100% self-governing, while likely true, is irrelevant. Nothing is preventing the WMF from allowing its communities to be more self-governing than they currently are. ] ] 03:11, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::{{tq|It's clear that the WMF ban of Fram was not legally necessary.}} Based on what? My understanding is there is still a bunch of private information on the case. Thus it is unlikely to be a provable statement. Also to a point you are correct, WMF can allow the volunteers to be more self-governed or they can choose not to and it is 100% their call to make. ] (]) 03:45, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::All indications are that the case was entirely about Fram's on-wiki conduct, which is viewable in the revision history unless something got deleted. So the evidence is all public. It's like when someone is arrested on the basis of a security video, and the video is public, people examine it and can't find the crime, and the person is convicted without the authorities identifying the crime either. Sure, there may have been a private complaint, but if a crime took place it must be in the video somewhere, so it should be possible to locate it.<p>Also what is this about "the WMF's communities"? It's really supposed to be the communities' WMF. ] (]) 05:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| {{od}} Except there are also indications that there is private information. Is all the info on-wiki somewhere? Perhaps we do not know, there could be off wiki but private info. (I doubt that btw, but still possible) The other issue is sure, the info is probably on wiki. What was the info they used? Finally in the end, does that actually matter? ] (]) 13:38, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :The most obvious private information is communications from individuals, communications that could be used to identify individuals and subject them to retribution. ] (]) 13:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::I may be mistaken, but it appears to me that some users have lost sight of the fact that WMF's primary duty is the future of the project first and foremost - which is what we all should be thinking about rather than who gets to control whom. WMF is governed by established By-Laws and the members comprising the Board of Trustees are responsible for seeing that the Foundation's governing documents are properly (and legally) followed which includes taking care of their fiduciary responsibilities. Let's just say there are justifiable concerns that incivility has become a serious issue, and a volunteer (or 2 or 3) have become a liability to the project for whatever reason. It is the Board of Trustees' duty (and fiduciary responsibility) to find ways to protect the project first and foremost. It's quite possible their choices may not always align with ours (the wider community), much less garner widespread community approval. Jimbo has done amazing things for WP, but when push comes to shove, his legal obligation is to the project first, and so it goes for all the members of the Board of Trustees and the entire staff of the WMF. They have a heavy cross to bear. ] <sub>]</sub> ] 20:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :PacManEng, Atsme, yes it definitely does matter. There's no need to publish anyone's private correspondence with the WMF but if the offending activity was on-wiki then the rest of us can examine it with our own eyes. There are zero examples of clear harassment on-wiki because if there were any, they would have come up in on-wiki dispute resolution long ago. If there is an unclear example then the WMF had no fiduciary duty to do anything about it (since it's unclear), and anyway that would have come up in DR too. And if there's a pattern of low level unpleasant interactions that the WMF decided required intervention from them, then they could give us a big pile of diffs showing the pattern they acted on. There are undoubtedly dozens or 100s of such interactions so giving us the diffs wouldn't identify the particular complainer. In fact there are so many potential complainers with similar interactions, that they could leave out the diffs involving the real complainers while still giving us something to go on. ] (]) 02:02, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::Perhaps that would of been nice of them to do, though not required. They saw an issue and corrected it. Strictly speaking from a rules standpoint the only ones going against the rules are the two admins and bureaucrat that knowingly abused their tools to make a point. But the office was nice enough not to continue action against them. ] (]) 03:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::They did not abuse their tools. They acted to protect the project from a hostile takeover attempt. T&S said they would block/desysop anyone who unblocked Fram. Floq unblocked, T&S desysopped Floq. Then Bish unblocked again and WJB resysopped Floq, and T&S didn't carry out their threat that time, i.e. they backed down. The pushback against them was successful and hopefully slowed down further incursions. If the 3 of them broke WMF rules, it's up to WMF to do something about it, but T&S instead turned the matter over to us. If you are saying they broke OUR rules, you have to tell me which rule, and whichever rule you name, I'm going to say that particular rule is not firm, and I know that it's not firm because ]. And they made a good call in deciding to ignore whatever rule you're going to say they broke.<p>We should not be doing T&S's dirty work. We should be giving medals to those 3. If T&S wants to smack them they can do it themselves and take the blowback themselves. That's what they said they would do, but then they thought the better of it. Of course T&S still acted stupidly, but they could have been even more stupid, and I'm glad they weren't. ] (]) 16:43, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::It was a wheel war(also note the office is not subject to that only admins), unblocking someone they shouldn't, and giving tools back to someone that had them removed. The rest is just not what happened or what the rules are. Frankly all three should lose their tools but I doubt that would happen. ] (]) 17:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::You doubt it would happen because they have the broad support of the community and arbitrators from what we can tell so far, and the T&S department does not. ] (]) 18:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Yup, poorly thought out tantrums of "I do what I want!!1!" The same garbage that makes the office intervention necessary. When rules no longer have meaning someone has to step in and correct the situation. ] (]) 18:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::What rules? We used to have rules that judgements would be made in the sunlight. Now nobody knows what the rules are because accusations, evidence, and trials are secret when a clique who can't bother to refer civility issues to the arbcom says they need to be. How are we supposed to know anything about the standards to which we are expected to adhere? How can anyone know that those standards don't take second fiddle to powerful connections of complainants, especially under these circumstances in which they were introduced? Why are other projects with rampant racism, sexism, authoritarianism and ethnicity-related abuse left twisting in the wind while T&S targets a 14-year admin with a clean block record for holding a well-connected editor with a decade of serious English composition and sourcing issues to reasonable competence standards? ] (]) 21:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::The rules I was talking about is ] which the three involved willfully violated for ] reasons. The stuff about other projects, it's whataboutism. But just because there are issues elsewhere does not mean they should not be fixed here as well. ] (]) 22:05, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::IDONTLIKEIT is a content essay. IAR is policy. The community believes that banning Fram does not improve the encyclopedia. The only harassment of which we know for certain he's been accused was absolutely in furtherance of improving the encyclopedia, seen as harassment subjectively by those who hold harmony and tranquility above our editorial, copyvio, and sourcing standards. Perhaps the superblock guy has good reasons that would convince me, but nobody can tell until the T&S civility criteria are known. ] (]) 23:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| {{od}} IAR does not apply to office and TOS actions, you know that. Also I am dubious of anyone that cites IAR anymore, this many years in there is generally a system in place for anything. Which in there case there was it's just as I said no one cares because "I do what I want!!1!" as I mentioned before. ] (]) 00:29, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :How do I "know that"? If by TOS, you mean the Terms of Use, have you even read it? It says: | |||
| ::''"Especially problematic users who have had accounts or access blocked on multiple Project editions may be subject to a ban from all of the Project editions, in accordance with the '''In contrast to ... these Terms of Use,''' policies established by the community ... cover a single Project edition...." | |||
| :There is nothing in the ToU about partial or temporary bans. This policy change doesn't just lack the consent of the volunteers who provide the content, the new policy wasn't even properly noticed by the Foundation in their own Terms. ] (]) 02:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::This was not a global ban so I am not sure why you would link there. The relevant polices for what the office did here can be found at ] under primary & secondary office actions. Which includes partial foundation bans and removal of advanced rights. All covered by the terms of use, as explained there. That is why I linked it early on, since all the relevant policies are there. ] (]) 13:57, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::: was instituted without community discussion or prior announcement. What part of the Terms of Use are you saying "covered" it? ] (]) 22:35, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::, clearly listed there and was referenced in the comments by the WMFOffice account . Heck that change was from February, not exactly out of nowhere at this point. ] (]) 00:37, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::That's the section I quoted above: "In contrast to ... these Terms of Use, policies established by the community ... may cover a single Project." Was there any more notice given to the WP:OFFICE policy change than that single diff? ] (]) 03:12, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::From what I can track down , it is the outcome of from March 2018. ] (]) 14:42, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :{{U|Atsme}}. the WMF responsibility to to support the movement, not undermine it. They must see that it acts legally, but this had never been a problem--for actual illegal conduct on WP, such as that involved in childprotection, their work is fully supported by the community; for matters such as copyvio their role--and a role they do excellently--is to protect the contributors against unwarranted copyright claims. Civility between members is indeed a problem for the communities, and the enWP community seems to have standards in this field that I consider absurdly permissive, but they're not illegal, and I am not at all sure that my own more conventional standards have consensus. If the WMF had actual expertise here, its support would be to help us move them in a more responsible direction by developing better mechanisms that we would regard as fair and effective . The recent event(s) show it has no realistic concept of either fairness or effectiveness--in camera proceedings are not fair, and if needed at all should be limited to true emergencies; and action taken months after the offense is not effective. | |||
| :It has been obvious for some time that the WMF staff would like to run WP. That is not their role. Their role is to ''support'' WP. The proper role of the board at this point is to restrain the staff from taking a course that would destroy WP as an open voluntary movement.''']''' (]) 09:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| * Any updates? ] (]) 20:33, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| * Any updates? ] (]) 13:05, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| *Sheep get fleeced, or so I'm told. And what's more valuable than fleece? or money? Time! So we've all got lots of time invested here, and if you ( and I say you because I don't know enough about the structure/platform to fight back effectively) don't fight back, all or a lot of that time is going to get stolen from you. Easy choice, accept the fleecing or fight back. I'll join whatever resistance is mounted, if possible. ] (]) 05:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :: Who is this "we" you speak of with an investment in the encyclopedia? You've made, what, 2 edits to article space in 2019? --] (]) 21:01, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::: No wonder the kids have trouble with math. ] (]) 22:12, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::. ‑ ] 22:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: To spell it out, its not very mathematical to count the number of anything in 2019, think hurricanes, and take that as a representative mathematical sample. Good grief. ] (]) 03:31, 21 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::: What you just wrote is meaningless gibberish. To spell it out, you do not contribute to the encyclopedia. --] (]) 11:29, 21 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| *I seem to recall when this hell broke loose that I was encouraged to wait until it was "office time" in California. That was a couple of weeks ago. Jimbo, what's happening here? The absence of communication and leadership is apparent and absolutely unforgivable to our community. ] (]) 22:21, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| *:I ''do note'' you have time to Tweet on other unrelated events though. Such a shame you can't give us some insight here while you're tweeting on other events. ] (]) 22:52, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Do you still have any stock in Wikia? == | |||
| Sorry to bother you, but I saw many months ago how you co-founded Fandom/Wikia, and I have been wanting to ask if you still own any shares in the company. ] 03:08, 16 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :Yes, I do.--] (]) 07:24, 17 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::Ahh okay, thanks for the response (this is BobRobert14's new account by the way). Do you actively participate in running the company, or do you just own stock in it? Also, sorry for all the questions, but do you support their policy of monetizing the wiki? Just wondering, since I know that Misplaced Pages is a 💕 void of any advertisements, but Wikia differs in that respect. ] (]) 00:35, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Wikia has been ad-supported since day one, Have you read the article on ]? They also have a showing about the number of managers you might expect, including their latest who occasionally engages and might answer some general questions there, but probably won't help you get a deal on their IMHO inevitable IPO. | |||
| :::Speaking of Wikia, I note that explicitly forbid intimidation, profanity, homophobia, ethnic slurs, and religious intolerance. Perhaps the Foundation might want to include such provisions in their Terms of Use, prior to acting like they're already there. ] (]) 03:52, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Then what would we do with the articles ], ], ], ], and ]? ] (]) 09:31, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Those are unrelated topics that I was not asking about... I know Wikia utilizes advertisements, since I have read a lot about them, I was just asking if Jimmy agrees with that policy. No need to bring up random controversial topics. ] (]) 14:02, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Yes, I agree with Wikia utilizing advertisement. To answer other questions which have come up here, I don't actively participate in running the company on a day-to-day basis, but I am a board member.--] (]) 15:27, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Okay, thanks a lot for telling me. I appreciate it {{smiley|1}}. ] (]) 15:29, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :I wish I had never heard about this. Especially the investment by Amazon...I know something about the way they operate and its the poster boy for predatorial and manipulative capitalism, imo...and yes, there are other types of capitalism....all of which is none of my business, but does make me wish that Jimbo would pick a side and sever connections with the other side. This project is the philosophical enemy of predatorial and manipulative capitalism and vice versa, imo. I can wish something (in this edit 2 things ) even if it is none of my business. ] (]) 18:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::Who said he is "severing connections with the other side"? Misplaced Pages and Wikia are potentially "other sides", yet he helped set up both. He's still editing this talk page, is he not? That means he supports both Wikia's policies and Misplaced Pages's, since they are more independent than you would think. Wikia goes way more into specifics on certain subjects, and it also has fandoms that are just random things made up by fans. Misplaced Pages is only sourced content, since it is a "💕". ] (]) 18:27, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==Invitation== | |||
| Please consider paying attention to ] launced by WMF Taiwan branch. Gratitude! --]✎] 18:54, 18 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :On what ground Wikimedia should be used to push forward a political petition? The topic in question doesn’t hamper Wikimedia’s operation whatsoever, unlike SOPA. This is completely at odds with Wikimedia’s neutrality.-- ] (] · ]) 06:38, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::I don't agree. The statement strikes me as particularly concise and limited to relevant points (travel for Taiwanese Wikipedians, potential threat to freedom of expression for Hong Kong people, etc.). And the ask is very mild - that the WMF pay attention to the issue and that the international community of Wikimedians pay attention to the issue. I think we should.--] (]) 09:12, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::The bill has already been pulled from the legislation. It also has nothing to do with freedom of expression in Hong Kong. I am so baffled where you get that idea but simply for its involvement with the PRC. I would be honest if the PRC ever wants to apprehend someone in Hong Kong to the mainland, whether this bill passes or not does not make any difference. -- ] (] · ]) 09:37, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::The bill is suspended, and as such could be reintroduced and passed at any time. "Pulled" would imply cancellation, which would take a considerably longer time and additional preliminary votes to reintroduce. ] (]) 10:26, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: Indeed I used the wrong word, but it doesn’t change the reality that it is pulled indefinitely (maybe until 2047). If you insist the bill affects freedom of expression, be my guest; but if the petition represents the position of WMF, I must make it loud and clear: You do not represent me. Instead such petition would be best saved for any future attempt to pass the Article 23 National Security bill when that freedom is actually threatened. -- ] (] · ]) 10:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::: I think it's great that Jimbo started looking into this! If the risk to conference participants is real, then some narrow, easy steps MUST be taken to ensure nothing terrible happens. I doubt they will agree with every syllable (is it really the ''ownership'' of the airline that matters, rather than the route the plane takes?) ] (]) 13:49, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==Hi Jimbo== | |||
| Do you typically reply to these things? <span class="nowrap"><span style="border:2px solid; font-family:Trebuchet MS;"><span style="background:#EE0000">] ==(</span>)== ]</span></span> 00:38, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :Typically, yes. I miss some things, particularly if I'm traveling and there's a lot going on.--] (]) 09:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::If you don’t mind, could you say something with my name in it so I can show it off on my userpage? (Yes, I know this sounds stupid) <span class="nowrap"><span style="border:2px solid; font-family:Trebuchet MS;"><span style="background:#EE0000">] ==(</span>)== ]</span></span> 15:09, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Yet more WMF questions raised == | |||
| The issues raised at ] continue to grow. The latest thing you should probably be made aware of (if you're not already) would be this lovely nugget of joy that has been raised: ]. While not directly related, it seems to be more evidence of a pattern of behavior within the Foundation (and particularly at T&S) that is... disturbing, at a minimum, and needs to be looked into; the fact that a sitting Trustee openly mocked WM Belgium's complaint about the situation makes it even worse, as this leaves the worry that a member of the Board, who are supposed to keep the Office under control, may be rubber-stamping Office decisions and dismissing concerns about them out of hand. When the issue was first brought to your attention, I commented that ]; at this point, the smell is becoming overwhelming. ] (]) 13:43, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Who put the WMF in charge? == | |||
| Recent and ongoing discussions reveal that most editors and the WMF itself are under the assumption that the WMF is in charge here, but who decided that? There was a Misplaced Pages and Wikipedians long before there was a WMF. I've been trying to trace the history of the WMF, combing through interesting links like the and the to find where and when this change was made, but I figured it would be better to just ask you. It seems like, in those early days, it was your intention that the community have authority over content, conduct, and all matters other than the behind-the-scenes "development and maintenance" on the project. But in the years since, the WMF has made a number of increasingly disruptive decisions, changes, and power grabs, inconsistent with their original goals, all while ballooning into an expensive, dysfunctional bureaucracy. | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 4px solid #FFD700;" | |||
| Who gave them that authority? You? The community (Ha!)? The clueless donors enabling them with the power of the almighty dollar? What basis is there for them to dictate to the community, and at what point ''exactly'' was that power ceded to them? Thanks. ] (]) 15:54, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2px 2px 0 2px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | | |||
| ---- | |||
| '''Hello Jimbo Wales, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this ]. Spread the ] by wishing another user a ] and a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. <br />Happy editing,'''<br /> | |||
| — Benison <small>(] · ])</small> 18:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ''{{resize|96%|Spread the love by adding {{tls|Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.}}'' | |||
| :You seem to be under the impression that Misplaced Pages was just an independent community group before the WMF was created, but that's not the case; it's always had an owner. Initially, it was wholly owned by the private company ]; in 2003 . The issue being raised by the current discussions isn't who ultimately controls Misplaced Pages—nobody disputes that the WMF owns the assets and takes on the liabilities, and has the technical right to boot whoever they like—but an ethical issue of how much the owning body should intervene and under what circumstances. ‑ ] 16:16, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |}<span id="Benison:1734890634947:User_talkFTTCLNJimbo_Wales" class="FTTCmt">— Benison <small>(] · ])</small> 18:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)</span> | |||
| ::Much as I appreciate the input, <u>I'm asking Jimbo directly</u> what <u>his</u> intent was all those years ago, and for <u>his</u> take on how we ended up here. He's the only one who can answer that. How the WMF operates today seems very different from his espoused philosophies back then. I don't doubt that the WMF (and Bomis before them) owns the physical servers, the web address, and the branding rights, but do they own the content? Do they own the community? Since when? ] (]) 16:42, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Anon, I was here before the WMF was created and was part of some of the discussions. Jimbo himself was widely considered "in charge" in the early days of the project, despite various competing claims, and began to make an earnest effort to devolve and distribute that power starting in late 2003. This led to the creation of the WMF, the arbitration committee, OTRS, the independence of the mediawiki software, and formalization of Misplaced Pages-related trademarks. Jimbo's goals then were for the community to be self-sustaining and self-governing such that it would fulfill its mission with less of his involvement as time went on. It was never a goal for the WMF to have any sort of authority over or involvement in community or content decisions beyond the removal of libellous material and copyright violations, which the WMF took on for reasons of compliance. You might also contact {{u|BradPatrick}} or ] who could tell you more. ''']]''' 18:06, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :This is pretty accurate as a too-brief summary of the history. This is an edited version of the key sentences as I would put it myself: "Jimbo's goals then were for the community to be self-sustaining and self-governing such that it would fulfill its mission with less of his involvement as time went on. It was never a goal for the WMF to have any sort of authority over or involvement in community or content decisions beyond the removal of libellous material and copyright violations and other limited actions for public safety of various kinds, which the WMF took on for reasons of compliance." And that isn't the whole of it really, I would also argue that the WMF can and should have a role of facilitating and guiding community consultations to help the community resolve sticky issues where there is a failing of process. Reading between the lines here, you can likely guess my view of the current situation.--] (]) 11:02, 21 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for the response. "...{{xt|the WMF can and should have a role of facilitating and guiding community consultations to help the community resolve sticky issues}}..." I hope you realize that the community won't support that, no matter how you dress it up. It would give the WMF the potential to be judge, jury, and executioner, even if only in what they deem "sticky" situations - like when the community takes action against a change the WMF tries to push through against community consensus, whether that be visual editor, blocking a long-term admin, or whatever. As you know, those examples aren't hypothetical. <small>Same anon, different IP</small>→] (]) 14:56, 21 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| As far as instituting new Foundation-imposed, project-specific bans, ] gave them the authority to modify the Terms of Use to allow it, but they never actually made the necessary ToU modifications before making an unannounced, undiscussed edit to ] here and on Meta back in February. The only member of the community who noticed the change at all was the German ], who ] and was told there was not and would not be one. The Board could rescind their delegation of permission, and the community could ask admins to e.g. modify ] with a description of why it's necessary and how to contact the Board with the request to do so. I feel this is a use-it-or-lose-it situation. ] (]) 18:19, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Old edits to your user page retrieved, your very early edits, etc. == | |||
| == There is no contact information for Trust & Safety == | |||
| Hi Jimmy, I've moved your user page edits from their previous location at "Jimbo Wales" to {{noredirect|User:Jimbo Wales/old2}} with ], so they're no longer in the main namespace; the title "{{noredirect|User:Jimbo Wales/old}}" was ]. I then imported edits to your user page from some 2001 database dumps, most notably the one from August 2001, so we can now see ]! I hope this is all OK with you. | |||
| Jimbo, ] just that ] contains no contact information or instructions for opening a case with them of any kind. So, how do they receive their cases? ] (]) 19:16, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :This^^^^. ] (]) 21:03, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| It's a long story how I ended up doing this. So ] is celebrating a milestone of 20% of our biographical articles being about women. In the ], a ] about who was the first woman to get a biographical entry here]]. I was able to give a ] of ] on ]! I've been spending the last couple of days checking the very early edits of the first biographies created around that time, and came upon ] (or ThomasEdison as it was at first in CamelCase). In the process of consolidating the Thomas Edison page history, I moved your edit from "ThomasEdison" to "Thomas Edison"; your early edit to that page on 23 January (UTC) was previously listed as the first one but ]. | |||
| ==Ten days== | |||
| Jimbo, | |||
| As noted in various places like ], your first surviving edit under the username "JimboWales" was to the ThomasEdison (or Thomas Edison) page. I checked the August 2001 database dump for any earlier ones, found them, and imported to the English Misplaced Pages database. Of course you made earlier edits, but it's interesting to find early contributions attached to your username (in CamelCase form or otherwise). ] (]) 15:32, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| It's been ten days since the out-of-process action of the T&S department, and since then our community—''your'' community—has been tearing itself apart. (Being a Brit it's a reflection of Brexit, except in this case there is a deafening silence from the powers that be). Since then the community has raised several fundamental problems with the WMF and T&S (and this is aside from the potential COI which has been brushed under the take with the incredibly crass comment by the chair of the WMF Board likening anyone who complained to Gamergaters). | |||
| :Such nerdy presents we give. Thanks, brother. ] (]) 16:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| The question is: how little do you want of the community at the end of this? Delaying everything further and further is just pouring petrol on the fires, and the time for clear statements and decisions was some time ago. Are the community's legitimate concerns (and those of the German, Belgian and Chinese projects) constantly going to be pushed onto the back burners? If so, I'll give WP five years tops before it implodes into smithereens - ending with a whimper, not a bang. | |||
| ::No worries. My Christmas gifts are ], as I realised later. ] (]) 05:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ''The Signpost'': 24 December 2024 == | |||
| WP was built by volunteers donating time, effort and money, and this is seemingly being wasted by silence and paralysis at the WMF. It needs to be rectified sooner, not later. - ] (]) 19:28, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| : Jimbo, I have not spent the last ten days ranting and raving and issuing threats but I am deeply concerned about this debacle. I really recommend that you and {{u|Doc James}} make a statement very soon. ] ] 22:20, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| : I am staying away from the discussions out of respect for you and the rest of the board. I think we all look forward to a comprehensive, cogent reply. ''']]''' 23:02, 20 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
| <div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-12-24}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 18--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 00:01, 25 December 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div> | |||
| ::We on the board are in active conversations. I think you will receive a comprehensive, cogent reply, but we are looking to be thoughtful, reflective, to examine every aspect of this, and neither allow invalid precedent to be set, nor to set invalid precedent. The best way to avoid a bad outcome is to look to first principles, look at what has gone wrong, and to propose a process for healing but also for building a process that works better in the future. | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1263792399 --> | |||
| ::In those board discussions, I am stating my own views directly and clearly, but it would be inappropriate to share them here and now, because as we all know, there are those who like to engage in "Jimbo said" argumentation, which doesn't clear the air but instead often only creates more heat.--] (]) 10:58, 21 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:01, 25 December 2024
| Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
 | Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an open door policy. He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees. The current trustees occupying "community-selected" seats are Rosiestep, Laurentius, Victoria and Pundit. The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is Jan Eissfeldt. |
| This page is semi-protected and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead, you can leave a message here |
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
 | This talkpage has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Centralized discussion
- Voluntary RfAs after resignation
- Allowing page movers to enable two-factor authentication
- Rewriting the guideline Misplaced Pages:Please do not bite the newcomers
- Should comments made using LLMs or chatbots be discounted or even removed?
Seasonal greetings :)
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025! |
|
Hello Jimbo Wales, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Old edits to your user page retrieved, your very early edits, etc.
Hi Jimmy, I've moved your user page edits from their previous location at "Jimbo Wales" to User:Jimbo Wales/old2 with a little assistance, so they're no longer in the main namespace; the title "User:Jimbo Wales/old" was already taken. I then imported edits to your user page from some 2001 database dumps, most notably the one from August 2001, so we can now see the first version of your user page on 19 January 2001 (UTC)! I hope this is all OK with you.
It's a long story how I ended up doing this. So WikiProject Women in Red is celebrating a milestone of 20% of our biographical articles being about women. In the draft press release about this event, a question was raised about who was the first woman to get a biographical entry here]]. I was able to give a definitive answer of Rosa Parks on 21 January 2001 (UTC)! I've been spending the last couple of days checking the very early edits of the first biographies created around that time, and came upon Thomas Edison (or ThomasEdison as it was at first in CamelCase). In the process of consolidating the Thomas Edison page history, I moved your edit from "ThomasEdison" to "Thomas Edison"; your early edit to that page on 23 January (UTC) was previously listed as the first one but not any more.
As noted in various places like this discussion, your first surviving edit under the username "JimboWales" was to the ThomasEdison (or Thomas Edison) page. I checked the August 2001 database dump for any earlier ones, found them, and imported all of them to the English Misplaced Pages database. Of course you made earlier edits, but it's interesting to find early contributions attached to your username (in CamelCase form or otherwise). Graham87 (talk) 15:32, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Such nerdy presents we give. Thanks, brother. BusterD (talk) 16:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- No worries. My Christmas gifts are so predictable, as I realised later. Graham87 (talk) 05:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 December 2024
- From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting?
- Recent research: "Misplaced Pages editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality
- Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols
- Traffic report: Was a long and dark December