[18:51:16] * James_F waves. [18:51:39] * pharos waves [18:52:02] Hello! [18:52:10] I am hosting today! And kind of terrified. [18:52:58] And I'm IRC-ing today. [18:58:16] Good morning [18:58:36] good afternoon! [18:58:45] James_F: are you The Voice today? [18:59:03] * XenoRyet waves [18:59:10] Pine: I am, and foks is the moderator. [18:59:26] \o/ [18:59:28] Sorry, "facilitator" is I believe the term we use. [18:59:40] Agenda today: [18:59:53] Theme: "The future of open" [19:00:00] * Welcomes [19:00:05] * Movement update [19:00:09] * The Met Museum [19:00:15] * Wikimedia Foundation values [19:00:21] * Movement strategy update [19:00:25] * Questions and discussion. [19:00:30] Lots to get through. :-) [19:00:35] Will some nice person with chanop permissions please change the channel topic? [19:00:46] JAmes already did :) [19:00:50] Pine: What would you like it to say? [19:00:59] Ah nvm [19:01:29] Although I would like it to say something about what a great person Pharos is. [19:01:37] James_F, can you also do op-y things? [19:01:40] thanks. :) [19:01:44] foks: Will try. [19:01:56] I might be a little heavy-handed. [19:02:31] The video is live! [19:02:45] Hey everyone : ) [19:02:45] i_jethrobot: Thank you [19:02:49] Damn! that is whack. [19:02:55] * funcrunch waves to i_jethrobot [19:02:58] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-blWUhkm8g4 [19:03:16] * i_jethrobot waves back to funcrunch [19:04:36] How come I'm not on that list! [19:04:38] :( [19:04:46] Seddon: Tell HR. :-) [19:05:19] Can you all wave? Just to prove that it's live. [19:05:24] Seddon: you don't count, we've talked about this ;) [19:05:43] ta James! [19:06:08] Can't believe you completely butchered my name [19:06:19] Sorry Edward [19:06:20] hey it's a hard name! [19:06:27] foks: It's Edmund. [19:06:36] Edrichson [19:06:37] (It's not.) [19:06:41] hard name solidarity! [19:06:42] Edgar? [19:06:54] Edrick? [19:07:21] Seddon: We have your original start date as September 2015, if that's wrong, just email with the corrected info :) [19:07:44] {{citationneeded }} [19:07:44] jlohr, I think he's joking since he was here in 2010? :P [19:07:56] (but then left :) ) [19:08:04] What was the URL for the Camaroon villages project? [19:08:17] actually 2011, he was with WMUK in 2010 [19:08:31] kaldari: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikivillages_of_Cameroon [19:08:50] woah, is this picture-in-picture tech new for us? [19:08:53] krmaher: Thank you! [19:08:55] I don't remember seeing it before. [19:09:00] I'll stick with Edrick http://bit.ly/2mpQHck [19:09:06] The name I never had [19:09:09] i_jethrobot: pretty new. it's a couple months old [19:09:19] i_jethrobot: I think it's brendan_campbell showing off. ;-) [19:09:32] brendan_campbell: Looks good! [19:09:35] OSS > Hangouts on Air [19:09:40] Sorry for the noise all. :) [19:09:43] thanks foks was just about to adjust it to that :) [19:10:29] Oh, the campaign has 60 ideas and 177 participants! [19:10:31] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire [19:10:31] check it out if you're interested. : ) [19:10:36] Sorry, pharos! [19:10:43] i_jethrobot: Thanks. [19:11:32] pharos, cool that they are even releasing the images of 3D PD works as public domain. [19:11:46] go go go [19:11:57] I believe that I saw on Phabricator that 3d files are coming to Commons. :) [19:12:10] Pine: Spoilers! :-) [19:12:49] How will it be displayed? [19:12:52] Also, photographs of public domain 3D works are copyrighted by default, so it's cool when the photographer chooses to release them as PD. [19:14:16] * James_F zebrah: For 3D files, there's a little bit of information at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:3d (more coming). For what Richard is presenting, it will be on Commons. [19:14:17] * zebrah James_F: For 3D files, there's a little bit of information at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:3d (more coming). For what Richard is presenting, it will be on Commons. [19:14:20] zebrah: I haven't looked into whether there will be 3d rendering on Commons itself. Have a look at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T132058 and try poking around [19:14:49] Sorry, stupid bug [19:14:49] :( [19:15:08] Pine: There will. [19:15:14] Turned it off [19:18:02] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:3d [19:19:46] pharos - Nice job! [19:20:00] thanks! [19:20:18] pharos, likewise! :D [19:20:39] hope everyone can participate at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art [19:21:38] this is the article I'm working on today and for the weekend events: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benin_Pendant_Mask [19:22:09] :D [19:25:18] Man, that's awesome. [19:25:28] (The Transcripts page(s).) [19:25:41] Links for this – https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion plus sub-pages [19:25:49] Transcripts: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Transcripts [19:25:52] Awesome stuff. E.g. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Transcripts [19:25:57] Ha, snap guillom. [19:25:59] :D [19:26:02] And themes: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Themes [19:26:26] [silence intentional] [19:26:54] avocado! [19:27:09] totally ok to break silence with quesadillas [19:27:10] Proof that it took place in California, certainly. :-) [19:27:26] i_jethrobot: please be quiet in church. [19:27:57] Pine: yeah yeah, : P [19:28:41] (Silences are still intentional.) [19:30:27] The best silence is intentional silence. ;) [19:30:35] (You're very welcoming to break the silence on this channel and share your thoughts on the values though!) [19:31:31] foks: read that as the best silence is international silence [19:31:41] Would be good to read some of the text out for the visually impaired though [19:31:42] :O [19:31:51] Who might be listening to this on YouTube later [19:32:26] Yeah, sadly this is tough if you're either a slow reader or visually impaired [19:32:26] funcrunch: They'll have the slides which will let them (screen)read it at their own pace without editorial decisions as to which bits are important. [19:32:54] funcrunch: that's a good point. We can't edit the youtube recording without creating a new link, but we could edit the Commons upload [19:32:54] "What we say has consequences" is especially important there. [19:33:58] Valentine's Day was February 14. [19:34:04] I don't know if that's an international thing. [19:34:16] Thanks, foks. [19:34:17] Yes, I was wondering. This doesn't feel inclusive for visually impaired individuals :( [19:34:41] we should strive for wisdom! [19:34:43] Comments are welcome on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Synthesis [19:34:49] foks - Sort of? It's not fully international, but it's definitely outside the U.S. [19:34:53] the world has too much excellence already :) [19:34:55] question: can you give an overview over how the new values differ from the previous ones (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values ) and the Guiding Principles (https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles ) ? What are the new themes that emerged (or are now emphasized more highly), what was dropped or deemphasized? [19:34:59] It's in the Anglosphere, yeah. [19:35:19] James_F, pinging to queue HaeB's question. [19:35:21] HaeB: Thanks, in the queue. [19:35:36] ...E.g. "transparency" was a main value before, but it's only mentioned very briefly in passing now [19:35:58] Speaking of inclusiveness for visually-impaired individuals, I found it inspiring that one of our regular contributors to the Signpost for awhile was legally blind. [19:36:07] He used/uses a screen reader. [19:36:25] Sorry all! Katherine talkin'. [19:36:59] Transparency is a guiding principal. It's not going anywhere. The guiding principals are still foundational. [19:37:11] Pine, Graham, right? [19:37:13] He's awesome. [19:37:14] Pine, He's pretty much my favourite Wikipedian. Smart, friendly, patient, diligent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2017-01-17/Interview [19:37:21] foks: yes, Graham. [19:37:33] he is indeed! [19:40:06] Nicole \o/ [19:41:31] vcoleman, I don't see developers as an audience. What do you think about that now showing up in the list of audiences? [19:41:55] Some work for us to do in tech to socialize wiki-technologists as part of our audience? [19:42:04] neither donors halfak [19:42:11] halfak: developers are either organized groups or individual contributors [19:42:16] halfak: Would they be "individual contributors"? [19:42:18] Dedalus_: Donors are included in Track C [19:42:25] James_F, hmm... maybe yeah [19:42:43] (Though of course some "volunteer" devs are actually organisations/companies, not individuals.) [19:42:53] The slides are only overviews; the full lists of constituents will be on the pages on Meta [19:43:03] (and of course if you do see people missing, you should bring it up :) [19:43:33] has someone a link to the new values anna was talking about? [19:43:36] guillom, what's the process for "bring it up"? [19:43:41] Katherine missing a prime opportunity for a "Germany, can we have your points, please" joke. :( [19:43:43] BOLDly edit? [19:43:45] Talk page [19:43:46] Dedalus_: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion [19:43:47] ? [19:44:15] halfak: yep, talk page of the tracks or main talk page of the process. We're still building out the pages. [19:44:20] foks: If you think St. Valetine's Day isn't global but Eurovision in-jokes are, I've got a bridge to sell you. :-) [19:44:25] ;) [19:44:28] Or email to me, but I prefer public talk page messages :) [19:44:33] kk. So BRD does not apply. [19:44:33] guillom: That would be on https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017 ? [19:44:39] Australia competes now!!! [19:44:45] yep James_F. Thank you :) [19:45:05] a, this one: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Synthesis [19:45:11] halfak - we currently have developers in the individual contributor track, but of course, would love to know what institutional or organized groups we should be engaging... [19:46:06] Developers there. :) [19:46:14] Oh man, that slide is a little dense [19:46:17] research labs who contribute code and tools are organized. I think Wikia has some devs sharing work with us. I guess we have labs-l as a sort of rough organization. There's pywikibot devs. They are pretty organized. [19:46:44] pywikibot-l is more organized than most WikiProjects. [19:46:47] We also have some organizations that use MediaWiki, which I'm guessing would fall under organized groups, e.g. NASA. [19:46:56] halfak: e.g. MediaWiki Stakeholders' Group, MediaWiki Farmers User Group would be in Track A. [19:46:57] Oh! WikiProjects! Do those count as groups? [19:47:24] Jaime means Karen in SuSa, who has done so much work on this over the past month. [19:47:26] halfak: They may. The idea is that anyone who wants to participate as a group is welcome to do so and will get the same toolkit. [19:48:36] guillom, my concern #1 is -- will they be known enough for someone to invite them to participate. I think Tech should devote some time to make sure that we flesh out some groups and individuals. [19:49:27] halfak: Nicole and her advisory committee will be responsible for doing that outreach. Having someone on that committee focusing on tech-related groups makes sense to me. Feel free to offer names to Nicole :) [19:49:29] halfak, that would be great [19:49:31] I think devs are an audience (they can choose to use or work on our technologies). use/work on is equivalent to read/edit, which is clearly relevant to audience. [19:49:44] * halfak does not want to join a committee -- just contribute a bit. [19:50:06] yes, sorry, didn't mean you should join it yourself. [19:50:12] :) gotcha [19:50:23] * Pine wonders if the group of people who do not wish to join committees count as an organized group ;) [19:52:29] alewis: well, it seems like it's going from the values at least. you're right that transparency is still in the guiding principles, but there is a variety of opinions how those relate to the values - the team appears to argue that the principles are less fundamental than the values and in the end subordinate to them [19:52:29] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Framing#Values_and_guiding_principles [19:52:40] FWIW, I continue to hear about Facebook and Google initiatives to bring Internet connectivity to places where that connectivity doesn't exist today. [19:53:04] Although I recall that FB initiatives that channel "the Internet" through FB are frowned upon. [19:53:10] * halfak twitches every time someone uses the word "ethnography" to describe "interview studies" [19:53:38] Nothing wrong with interview studies [19:54:48] I don't really know what an ethnography is if not interview studies. :) [19:55:32] HaeB, does that help to answer your question? [19:55:38] (The first half. :) ) [19:55:38] haeb [19:55:39] guillom: do you happen to have links to these two sets of values that existed before? [19:56:06] foks: not quite, i was specifically referring to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values [19:56:16] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2007_discussion and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values [19:56:18] HaeB: [[m:Values]] and [[office:HR Corner/Values]] [19:56:40] and https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles [19:56:43] But the main difference between values and guiding principles is that the values are more about the why and the principles more about the how [19:57:09] They work together, just address different things. [19:57:46] foks, for ethnography, you become involved in a community for an extended period of time and take part in cultural activities. [19:58:12] Oh, I see! [19:58:30] There's a great one of those by Heather Ford related to the Arab Spring on Wikipedia. [19:58:33] I think of it as "gonzo anthropology". [19:58:35] Right [19:58:38] * foks used it a lot in his disso. [19:58:53] * guillom read that as "in his disco". [19:59:02] it can still be a good interview study even if you don't throw the E-word around it [19:59:03] oonst oonst oonst. :) [19:59:09] J-Mo, +1 [19:59:13] research interviews are a thing. [19:59:16] I do them all the time. [19:59:19] And very useful! [19:59:53] it's not a huge deal, but doing ethnography "right" is a pretty deep and complex task [19:59:55] there is a thing called d [20:00:03] Is the sound soft for anyone else? [20:00:03] Somehow, the word "ethnography" became super cool and everyone wants a piece of it even though the work that they are doing is awesome and useful and in no need of being dressed up. [20:00:15] yes. like "AI" ;) [20:00:21] lol yup [20:00:27] and "data science" [20:00:28] matt_flaschen: currently combating 500hz resonance... [20:00:36] trying to boost gain as much as i can [20:00:42] I remember using the word "ethnography" a lot back in 2009-2010 after I had read Cooper's "About face", in which they were a big deal. [20:00:46] I don't do "AI" unless you're a funder or helping me get a budget. If you are, I am THE AI MASTER WORKER. [20:00:57] guillom: thanks for clarifying that anna was referring to the office page as the second set of values. that's a bit confusing though because https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion only refers to the public values page [20:00:58] lol [20:01:00] To what level are individual contributors currently aware of the current strategy process? [20:01:33] To what level are individual contributors currently aware of the current strategy process? question [20:01:45] Dedalus_, Katherine is answering :) [20:01:46] Dedalus_: Asked. [20:01:50] guillom: (also, i don't think that the contents of the office wiki page ever got much attention... were they ever published btw?) [20:01:57] thanks foks [20:01:59] Speaking: Greg Varnum. [20:01:59] how about "contextual inquiry" - very jargon... the idea is going to talk with people - interviewing people in their context. We learn a lot more about people's needs, constraints, etc... when we visit them in their context.. [20:02:10] abbeyripstra yep! [20:02:27] Oh yeah. I like that more [20:02:30] Not just an "interview" [20:02:36] but an "interview in context" [20:03:43] foks: That's us over time, right? [20:03:52] LUNCH! [20:03:52] 'tis. [20:03:55] I get to eat it! [20:04:02] I'm in the office -- wooo [20:04:06] Yay! [20:04:15] I think the last time I ate a staff lunch was over a year ago. [20:04:22] January 2016 I'm pretty sure. [20:04:35] Oh wait no. I was remote for that too [20:04:52] Okie-dokie. Thank you everyone! [20:05:00] halfak, but you ate lunch while staff, so it was still a staff lunch. ;) [20:05:44] yikes, sorry for the interference [20:05:47] Oh. [20:05:48] :D [20:06:00] thanks everyone! [20:06:00] one of our neighbors stepping on our RF