[14:43:06] Hi, a presentation from the 2030 Movement Brand project is starting in ~15 minutes. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project#Naming_convention_proposal_discussions_starting_16_June [14:43:28] The presentation can be followed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3zlBGHHHiY [14:44:04] You can post questions here and I will pass them to the presenters. [15:01:17] The video has just started. [15:01:32] morning [15:02:59] Hi! [15:09:23] there were only 45 community members at most, the reswt was functionaries with a clear agenda [15:09:39] 97 is just a blown uip number with no validity [15:10:11] malls have anchor stores, designed to get people inside. however, they don't call the mall "sears" or "macys" [15:10:22] sorry, 54, not 45, but I heven't looked for doubles [15:12:12] the community clearly and nearly unanimous said that it's not OK to use WikiPedia, why dio you disregard the community completely? [15:24:49] Why did you completely disregard the overwhelming community input by the RfC? Why do you ignore the community? [15:25:37] @Saenger, got it, will pass your question [15:28:51] Where is the option completely without wikipedia? Why was none such option included? [15:31:31] because it was explicitly excluded from consideration [15:32:18] Yeah, but without any proper reasiniong, it was just an ordre de mufti, the wisbom of a small group of fuctionaries. [15:32:40] the community is the higest entity in this grasroot meivement, the WMF just haas to follow orders [15:33:52] repeat with proper spelling: The community is the highest entity in this grassroots movement, the WMF just has to follow its orders [15:35:14] Saenger, I passed your question " Where is the option completely without wikipedia? Why was none such option included?" [15:46:08] Even the first presentations, long before snöhetta involvement and any community input, already determined, that the name would be wikiPedia, full stop, don't bother to question this assumption. there never was any kind of open discussion about the brand, the core was decided by some lonely people in the WMF, and they bullied their way through. [15:46:08] community input was only wanted for minor subleties, the basics were not to be questioned [15:56:52] wikipedia was the only option on the table up to the RfC, it was the only option on the table by the small group, of enthusiastic renamers. So don't tell the wrong story about "taking one option off the table", when you didn't want to have any other option on the table at all [15:56:55] I agree that two weeks seems very short for such a significant and heated discussion [16:00:07] and it doesn't seem like the timeline includes time for community review and discussion of whatever recombined or refined options come out of this phase [16:01:42] they don't need any, because they are not interested in any input, they just want some window dressing to sugarcoat their decisions [16:01:53] but overall, I do like the "Wikipedia Network" option :) [16:02:43] it's very comfusiong to have the same name for one single proejct and for the whole wikiverse [16:07:09] Alright, thank you. There were a lot of questions left because of time. Also, at least in the YouTube channel there was a vivid chat. We will publish all this, and organize an office hour to continue the conversation. [16:58:41] Yeah, that YouTube channel was very lively