IRC office hours/2009-11-10

eekim: hi everyone!

[10:01pm] iShadowed_: hi

[10:01pm] You left the room.

[10:02pm] You left the room.

[10:02pm] Topic changed to "Discussion of Wikimedia Foundation's Strategy Project | We now have the book tool on strategy wiki. New! Shiny!" by Philippe|Wiki.

[10:02pm] You rejoined the room.

[10:02pm] Philippe|Wiki: Evidently, strategic planning staff is incapable of working IRC

[10:03pm] iShadowed_: Thanks... anyone like to explain what this is about please ?

[10:03pm] eekim: do you know about strategy.wikimedia.org?

[10:03pm] iShadowed_: nope

[10:03pm] jayansonw left the chat room.

[10:03pm] jayansonw joined the chat room.

[10:04pm] eekim: wikimedia is embarking on a year-long, movement-wide strategic planning process

[10:04pm] eekim: the goal is to figure out where we want to be in five years and how we should get there

[10:04pm] eekim: we're in the process of diving deeper into topics of importance and developing recommendations

[10:04pm] eekim: the work is happening at http://strategy.wikimedia.org/

[10:05pm] eekim: what brought you here, iShadowed?

[10:05pm] Philippe|Wiki: channel spam, I'd bet <grin>

[10:06pm] eekim: that works

[10:06pm] eekim: happy to have new folks here and contributing to the effort!

[10:06pm] iShadowed_: Philippe|Wiki: Yup

[10:07pm] iShadowed_: eekim: in real life or wikipedia or both?

[10:07pm] eekim: both!

[10:07pm] zscout370 joined the chat room.

[10:08pm] iShadowed_: ah I see

[10:09pm] eekim: welcome zscout370

[10:09pm] • zscout370 bows

[10:09pm] Dragonfly6-7 joined the chat room.

[10:09pm] eekim: missed my spiel on Wikimedia strategy

[10:09pm] eekim: hi Dragonfly6-7

[10:10pm] eekim: wow, philippe, irc spam works wonders!

[10:10pm] Philippe|Wiki: Indeed <grin>

[10:10pm] Dragonfly6-7: randmontoya, did you get advice from Gregory Kohs on how to arrange the fundraiser?

[10:10pm] randmontoya: lol

[10:10pm] randmontoya: he's my favorite

[10:10pm] eekim: hey rand!

[10:10pm] eekim: hope you're not still at the office

[10:10pm] ragesoss joined the chat room.

[10:10pm] randmontoya: we are

[10:10pm] Philippe|Wiki: Mine too. I particularly like that he suggested that I just write the wikimedia strategy myself. Saves a lot of work, and feeds my ego.

[10:11pm] Philippe|Wiki: which is quite healthy enough, thankyouverymuch

[10:11pm] eekim: damn

[10:11pm] randmontoya: lol

[10:11pm] eekim: hey ragesoss!

[10:11pm] ragesoss: howdy

[10:11pm] Philippe|Wiki: Hey ragesoss

[10:11pm] Bejinhan: heh

[10:11pm] Philippe|Wiki: Shall we get started?

[10:11pm] eekim: i think we already have

[10:12pm] Philippe|Wiki: good then.

[10:12pm] Philippe|Wiki:

[10:12pm] eekim: so the big epiphany we had over the past few weeks is that we (collectively) probably don't have a great idea of what a strategic plan is

[10:12pm] eekim: i'd like to start restructuring the wiki to make this more clear to people

[10:12pm] eekim: so that they know why we're having these discussions and where we ultimately plan to end up

[10:13pm] eekim: would love to hear thoughts on these matters as well as how the task force process is going

[10:13pm] StevenW: Was part of this epiphany due to (what I see as) the very project-specific, tactical nature of many of the ideas produced from the Call for Proposals?

[10:13pm] StevenW: and hi

[10:14pm] eekim: hey StevenW!

[10:14pm] eekim: that certainly gave us our first clues

[10:14pm] StevenW: okay

[10:14pm] StevenW: I think I know what you mean then

[10:14pm] eekim: we recognized this before the process started

[10:14pm] iShadowed_: eekim: well if this helps any I'm taking a Career I in HS

[10:14pm] eekim: we just didn't do a good job of articulating

[10:15pm] eekim: iShadowed_, what's Career I?

[10:15pm] • Philippe|Wiki feels a card-sort coming on

[10:15pm] iShadowed_: basically how you described this: future plans

[10:15pm] iShadowed_ is now known as iShadowed.

[10:16pm] eekim: and what have you learned from this class?

[10:18pm] eekim: btw, StevenW, got your email

[10:18pm] StevenW: Great

[10:18pm] eekim: thanks for agreeing to facilitate the Advocacy Task Force!

[10:18pm] eekim: excited!

[10:18pm] StevenW: me too!

[10:18pm] iShadowed: eekim: eh, we just started

[10:18pm] eekim: i'll email you the list of the other members, and philippe will get you started

[10:19pm] Philippe|Wiki: StevenW: I'll send out the start-up mail tomorrow

[10:19pm] eekim: iShadowed: Well, stick with us, and you'll get some real-world experience in these matters

[10:19pm] iShadowed:

[10:19pm] StevenW: Sweet, thanks Philippe.

[10:20pm] Bejinhan: weird... when i logged in to strategy.wikimedia.org, i was told that i have new messages. when i clicked the link, i was led to my talk page and there was a 'There are no new messages for you' notification

[10:20pm] eekim: you have a good group

[10:21pm] Philippe|Wiki: Bejinhan: I yelled at werdna about that little bug last week

[10:21pm] Philippe|Wiki: he's workin on it

[10:21pm] Bejinhan: ok

[10:21pm] Philippe|Wiki: Best line of the week by the way: "Werdna, when's liquidthreads going to be done? " "I'll know it's done with Philippe stops yelling at me."

[10:21pm] Bejinhan:

[10:21pm] StevenW: very nice.

[10:21pm] Bejinhan is now known as Bejinhan|AFK.

[10:21pm] StevenW left the chat room.

[10:22pm] StevenW joined the chat room.

[10:23pm] eekim: wow, interesting

[10:23pm] Amgine: Heh.

[10:23pm] eekim: just saw the Foundation_l page on strategy

[10:23pm] Bejinhan|AFK is now known as Bejinhan.

[10:23pm] eekim: don't know whose idea was to link there

[10:23pm] Philippe|Wiki: eekim: It's a result of Liam's thread on foundation-l

[10:23pm] eekim: this is a good example of what we need to get people to understand

[10:23pm] eekim: the question shouldn't be, how can we improve foundation-l?

[10:24pm] eekim: at least the question on strategy

[10:24pm] eekim: that's a fine question for meta

[10:24pm] Philippe|Wiki: I've discussed it with the creator, and it's going to way of the dinosaurs, and have suggested that he think about the interaction between foundation-l and community health

[10:24pm] eekim: we should go further than that

[10:24pm] eekim: we should change the link on meta

[10:24pm] eekim: encourage people to discuss the higher-level questions

[10:26pm] Amgine: There as opposed to stratwiki?

[10:26pm] eekim: discuss higher-level issues on stratwiki, tactical issues on meta

[10:28pm] Amgine: Soo... someone mention venue shopping earlier...

[10:29pm] Philippe|Wiki: yeah, actually... I think that might sort of create a bureaucracy

[10:29pm] Philippe|Wiki: No, don't discuss this here... discuss it THERE

[10:29pm] Philippe|Wiki: that's a little... barrier to entry?

[10:30pm] eekim: my point isn't so much to differentiate the two places

[10:30pm] eekim: my point is that people need to get out of the weeds when discussing strategy

[10:30pm] Philippe|Wiki: agreed, but i'm not sure pointing certain discussions to meta is the way to head at that

[10:30pm] eekim: it's fine if there's some tactical discussion on strategy

[10:30pm] eekim: i was conflating multiple things

[10:31pm] eekim: i don't know why that page was created on strategy in the first place

[10:31pm] Philippe|Wiki: shouldnt have been.

[10:31pm] eekim: that's my point

[10:33pm] LauraHale joined the chat room.

[10:33pm] ragesoss: it seems to me that in a community-driven environment like Wikimedia projects, where the default is to let people do what they think best and define goals and means as they go, it's hard to separate strategy from tactics. Strategy basically amounts to the sum of tactics (each of which is the product of whatever personal strategies community members adhere to at the level of individuals and small groups).

[10:33pm] ragesoss: So it seems natural to me to want to address, e.g., the problems of foundation-l and its dysfunctions in the context of strategy.

[10:33pm] ragesoss: and/or tactics.

[10:34pm] eekim: it's fine to start there. the problem is getting lost there.

[10:34pm] Mike_lifeguard: Wait, strategywiki isn't the place for low-level community proposals? *eyeroll*

[10:34pm] eekim: so that's fine. we understand that this is where most people's heads are at.

[10:34pm] iShadowed left the chat room. ("ChatZilla 0.9.84 :[Firefox 3.5.2/20090729225027]")

[10:34pm] eekim: how do we get people out of that head space?

[10:35pm] Amgine: Replace the community.

[10:35pm] DragonFire_aw left the chat room. (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))

[10:35pm] eekim: in Real Life Strategic Planning, you would lead people through visualization exercises

[10:35pm] eekim: Amgine, not crazy about that solution

[10:36pm] eekim: hi LauraHale!

[10:36pm] eekim: so back to Real Life Strategic Planning: there are ways to get people out of their head space

[10:36pm] eekim: hard to do on a wiki with a wiki community

[10:36pm] eekim: hard, but possible

[10:36pm] Philippe|Wiki: Hmmm, I think it's do-able

[10:36pm] Philippe|Wiki: We've chatted about it before

[10:37pm] Philippe|Wiki: and never really tried it

[10:37pm] Amgine: But not 10 000 differently focused individualists, at least, I'm not sure it's do-able.

[10:37pm] StevenW: looking at the task force mandate outline, I like the fact that each group is going to be given framing questions

[10:37pm] Philippe|Wiki: wont' get all of 'em, no, I agree Amgine.

[10:37pm] StevenW: that seems like a good way to get people in the right frame of mind

[10:37pm] Philippe|Wiki: But we can get enough to focus discussions.

[10:37pm] eekim: Amgine, the tricky part about doing this on a wiki is its asynchronous nature

[10:37pm] Amgine: <nods>

[10:37pm] eekim: our challenge is to focus some critical mass of participants, then let the others go where they will

[10:38pm] LauraHale: Surprise! Plan announced can get people out of head space. Sometimes people just need a cataylst, a push

[10:38pm] eekim: StevenW, asking the right questions is a big part of it

[10:38pm] Dragonfly6-7 left the chat room.

[10:38pm] eekim: absolutely, Laura

[10:38pm] eekim: do you have ideas on what that push might look like?

[10:38pm] Amgine: <thinks "a gun in the face">

[10:38pm] Bejinhan:

[10:38pm] Bejinhan:

[10:38pm] eekim: that's certainly one way

[10:38pm] Philippe|Wiki: Amgine: you've been hanging around with natalie, haven't you?

[10:38pm] Amgine: <snickers>

[10:38pm] Natalie: <eekim> so the big epiphany we had over the past few weeks is that we (collectively) probably don't have a great idea of what a strategic plan is

[10:38pm] Natalie: Hahaha

[10:39pm] LauraHale: In this context, no.

[10:39pm] Natalie: That seriously took weeks to figure out?

[10:39pm] eekim: what took us weeks to figure out was that we weren't spending enough time dealing with that specific issue

[10:39pm] eekim: we ourselves were getting lost in the weeds

[10:39pm] Natalie: That specific issue?

[10:39pm] LauraHale: Wiki conference, surprise! Venue chosen, planning team chosen. That sort of thing. If the surprise fits established goals and desires that people are scared to do...

[10:39pm] Natalie: You make it sound as though it's one of many.

[10:39pm] eekim: absolutely

[10:40pm] eekim: you think we only have one issue?!

[10:40pm] ragesoss: StevenW, a vague problem I feel related to the framing questions is that the framing of these issues in the first place is 9/10s of strategy. eekim, asking "right" questions is already a political decision that determines in large part what kinds of answers will come out.

[10:40pm] Natalie: Your job is to devise a strategic plan for Wikimedia. And you've now realized you've been focusing on other things.

[10:40pm] eekim: that ain't my job, Natalie

[10:40pm] Natalie: What's your job?

[10:40pm] eekim: lead the strategic planning process

[10:40pm] eekim: it's your job to devise the plan

[10:41pm] eekim: yours and everyone else's

[10:41pm] LauraHale: Sounds like open space.

[10:41pm] sherrod joined the chat room.

[10:41pm] sherrod: WHAT

[10:41pm] eekim: ragesoss, that's fair

[10:41pm] Natalie: eekim: So... how's that been going?

[10:41pm] Philippe|Wiki: hey sherrod

[10:41pm] eekim: i think it's been going well

[10:41pm] StevenW: ragesoss: you're correct. I don't know if I'd call it a political decision, but I agree in general.

[10:42pm] Natalie: Has it?

[10:42pm] ragesoss: StevenW: political in the broad sense, "a process by which groups of people make decisions."

[10:42pm] eekim: Natalie, i think it would be going even better if you got off your high horse for once and put that great brain of yours to better use

[10:42pm] Amgine: <give Natalie an ice cube>

[10:43pm] Natalie: eekim: Out of all of the proposals on the strategy wiki, how many actually deal with a strategic plan for Wikimedia?

[10:43pm] Natalie: Rough numbers will do just fine.

[10:43pm] Natalie: And, let's not discuss horses. It'll just get vulgar.

[10:43pm] DragonFire_aw joined the chat room.

[10:43pm] eekim: what's the point of that question, Natalie?

[10:43pm] Natalie: To try to see what progress has been made?

[10:43pm] StevenW: ragesoss: Ah, I see. As another way of thinking about it, I know that the task forces have a few months over the holidays to get some recommendations done, and having framing questions and a list of contacts is a big step towards reaching that goal. Much less scary to get it all done by January or whenever.

[10:43pm] Natalie: You've established a wiki and solicited ideas for a strategic plan.

[10:43pm] eekim: are you saying no progress has been made?

[10:43pm] Natalie: What's the progress?

[10:44pm] Natalie: No, I'm asking what progress has been made.

[10:44pm] Amgine: Take it outside, you two.

[10:44pm] Mike_lifeguard: Natalie: It's been an ignored problem since day zero

[10:44pm] Natalie: How many proposals focus on strategic planning?

[10:44pm] Philippe|Wiki: Natalie: also a great deal of research, a good amount of input from the community, creation of task forces, framing for those task forces....

[10:44pm] eekim: i'll answer that question if it's serious. i'm not wasting time with leading questions tonight.

[10:44pm] Natalie: Mike_lifeguard: It?

[10:44pm] Natalie: I'm asking for a rough number.

[10:45pm] Natalie: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Searching_for_articles_by_typing_a_question

[10:45pm] Mike_lifeguard: The problem you're talking about.

[10:45pm] eekim: what's your point?

[10:45pm] Natalie: Proposals like that are really Bugzilla tickets. That's not "what should Wikimedia do for the next 5 years."

[10:45pm] Natalie: So, you have this wiki.

[10:45pm] Natalie: And these proposals.

[10:45pm] Natalie: But where's the strategic planning aspect?

[10:45pm] Amgine: There are some proposals regarding strategic; I can think of 3 or 4 off the top of my head and I do not frequent the site.

[10:45pm] eekim: there are a lot of proposals that are not strategic planning

[10:45pm] Mike_lifeguard: I pointed out that people were putting up proposals that aren't anything about /strategy/ and was basically told to buzz off

[10:45pm] eekim: and there's a ton of focused content that is

[10:45pm] Mike_lifeguard: At least it got noticed, albeit weeks late.

[10:45pm] eekim: with tons of interaction from lots of great people in the community

[10:45pm] astrozombies joined the chat room.

[10:45pm] eekim: with much more to come

[10:45pm] Natalie: The goal is to develop a strategic plan.

[10:46pm] eekim: there's a ton of aggregated and new research

[10:46pm] eekim: stuff that did not exist previously

[10:46pm] Natalie: And, so far, it doesn't seem like much progress has been made in that direction.

[10:46pm] Natalie: People have added their pet projects.

[10:46pm] Natalie: And their pet issues.

[10:46pm] eekim: based on what?

[10:46pm] Natalie: But, where's the beef?

[10:46pm] Philippe|Wiki: Well, for one thing, I note that we never actually say that proposals should be five-year orientation... because they don't necessarily have to be.

[10:46pm] eekim: based on people submitting useless proposals?

[10:46pm] Natalie: Based on reading the proposals.

[10:46pm] Mike_lifeguard: Whether what's been done on non-strategy proposals is useful is a separate question - I think there's probably lots of value there, but it is value that isn't about a 5-year strategy, it is some other kind of value

[10:46pm] Philippe|Wiki: Tactical issues roll up to strategic issues

[10:46pm] Natalie: Yes.

[10:46pm] Natalie: Help us determine where Wikimedia should go! What goal(s) would you like to see Wikimedia achieve by 2015?

[10:46pm] eekim: okay, let me make something very clear

[10:46pm] Natalie: Oh, sorry. Help us determine where Wikimedia should go! What goal(s) would you like to see Wikimedia achieve by 2015?

[10:46pm] Xesyag joined the chat room.

[10:46pm] Natalie: Better.

[10:46pm] Xesyag: Hey sherrod.

[10:47pm] Bejinhan is now known as Bejinhan|AFK.

[10:47pm] StevenW: I see some good stuff already accomplished in the :[:[Fact base]] and :[:[Interviews]] sections.

[10:47pm] StevenW: FWIW

[10:47pm] StevenW: That's strategic.

[10:47pm] eekim: believe it or not, our goal is not to convert every single contributor on the wiki into a strategic thinker

[10:47pm] Natalie: StevenW: I should hope there's been at least _some_ strategic work in the past few months.

[10:47pm] eekim: that would be a poor goal

[10:47pm] eekim: so if this is the basis of your questioning, you're going down the wrong path

[10:48pm] Natalie: The goal is to house a bunch of aimless and unattainable proposals?

[10:48pm] eekim: why are you so distracted by those?

[10:48pm] Philippe|Wiki: See, now you're just not listening, Natalie

[10:48pm] Natalie: Because they compose most of the site?

[10:48pm] eekim: why don't you pay attention to the discussion that's happening on the wiki?

[10:48pm] Natalie: Do you want numbers?

[10:48pm] eekim: why is that important?

[10:48pm] Natalie: (I want numbers. Maybe you don't.)

[10:48pm] Natalie: Why is measuring progress important?

[10:48pm] Amgine: They also compose the greater volume of wheat. But you still get bread.

[10:48pm] eekim: i'm telling you that the number of proposals is not a useful metric

[10:48pm] LauraHale: Different contributors have different things they get out of Wikipedia. Thus goals will differentiate based on audience.

[10:48pm] Natalie: I'm not answering that. It's self-evident.

[10:48pm] eekim: you're insisting they are, i'm telling you they're not

[10:49pm] eekim: point to the number of contributors on the threads that matter

[10:49pm] Natalie: So what is important?

[10:49pm] Natalie: A dialogue?

[10:49pm] eekim: the questions pages, the task force pages

[10:49pm] Philippe|Wiki: Natalie: numbers make sense when you use them correctly. Your'e constructing a straw man.

[10:49pm] eekim: absolutely

[10:49pm] Natalie: Philippe|Wiki: How so?

[10:49pm] Natalie: You've solicited ideas.

[10:49pm] eekim: dude, you're a broken record

[10:49pm] Natalie: I'm asking what percent of those ideas fall within "strategic planning."

[10:49pm] eekim: let me repeat myself: number of proposals is not a useful metric

[10:49pm] Natalie: That's an unreasonable question?

[10:49pm] Natalie: I think not.

[10:49pm] LauraHale: It seems like determining the purpose of Wikipedia for its users, how to maximize that purpose in order to further increase overall contributons is the goal.

[10:49pm] eekim: it was an opportunity for people to express their ideas

[10:50pm] Natalie: eekim: Express their ideas to what end?

[10:50pm] eekim: our main goal in opening that up was to get people contributing, then try to convert some number of them into strategic contributors

[10:50pm] Philippe|Wiki: Simply counting X and then saying "because there's more that's the most important" is not a good measure. A reasonable measure is "did those items lead to better output"? "How so"? "How many of those items tie to strategic issues?" It's more than counting heads.

[10:50pm] LauraHale: So think of it as more of a cloud... proposals represent general areas that demonstrate concern so key areas for work can be identified.

[10:50pm] Natalie: Philippe|Wiki: So do you have those numbers?

[10:50pm] Bejinhan|AFK is now known as Bejinhan.

[10:50pm] Natalie: LauraHale: Clouds bring bad weather.

[10:50pm] eekim: we're starting to collect those

[10:50pm] eekim: do you want to be constructive and help us get there?

[10:50pm] eekim: we have some starting point scripts

[10:51pm] Philippe|Wiki: Natalie: stats are a massive part of what eekim does. He's asked for help with that on the wiki

[10:51pm] LauraHale: Natalie: Clouds bring rain for farmers to help their crops grow

[10:51pm] Natalie: Is anyone tracking number of views that pages get on the wiki?

[10:51pm] eekim: nope, would love to have those

[10:51pm] Natalie: LauraHale: They also bring floods that kill people.

[10:51pm] eekim: i'd also love to have navigation trails

[10:51pm] eekim: we're running blind here

[10:51pm] Natalie: Haha

[10:51pm] LauraHale: Natalie: People also kill people. Don't need clouds for that.

[10:52pm] Mike_lifeguard left the chat room. ("This is useless, I will never get that time back.")

[10:52pm] LauraHale: Navigation trails are fun..

[10:52pm] Natalie: LauraHale: Enlightened, you are.

[10:52pm] LauraHale: Organizational patterns are important.

[10:52pm] Natalie: eekim: You make my arguments for me when you say "we're running blind here."

[10:52pm] Keegan joined the chat room.

[10:52pm] ragesoss: eekim, hit counts are a native part of mediawiki and shouldn't be much of a server load to enable on stratwiki (unlike the Wikipedias)

[10:52pm] LauraHale: Natalie: Thank you.

[10:52pm] eekim: what's your argument, Natalie?

[10:52pm] eekim: that there are a lot of bad proposals on strategy?

[10:52pm] eekim: that's a pointless argument

[10:53pm] eekim: is your point that we don't have a strategic plan yet?

[10:53pm] eekim: that's why it's a year-long process

[10:53pm] Natalie: When did the year start?

[10:53pm] eekim: do you think we're just wasting our time?

[10:53pm] eekim: july

[10:53pm] eekim: well, you're welcome to that opinion

[10:53pm] • Keegan notes that he's Natalie to English translator

[10:53pm] eekim: do you think there are things we can do better?

[10:53pm] eekim: if yes, then i invite you to help us with that

[10:53pm] LauraHale: Think of the foundation as the PTA. Their plans take a long time to write and are constantly in revision.

[10:53pm] eekim: i've been tracking stats, but i'm wanting more

[10:53pm] eekim: it's one of the many things on my plate

[10:53pm] eekim: and i welcome help

[10:54pm] eekim: there are better numbers than total numbers of proposals

[10:54pm] Natalie: I'm curious what the progress of the past four months has been.

[10:54pm] eekim: i'm willing to point you in the right direction

[10:54pm] eekim: i think others have answered that question for us

[10:54pm] eekim: there is tons of good content on the wiki, and tons of engagement from participants

[10:54pm] Philippe|Wiki: Natalie: I believe we listed a series of high points already.

[10:54pm] eekim: that was not happening before

[10:54pm] Natalie: Because all I see is lot of garbage proposals.

[10:54pm] Natalie: Which everyone seems to agree are garbage.

[10:55pm] Natalie: So, again, where's the beef?

[10:55pm] Natalie: Philippe|Wiki: Sorry, in here?

[10:55pm] Natalie: I have scrollback since the beginning. I can read if you point.

[10:55pm] Philippe|Wiki: Natalie: I said: Philippe|Wiki: Natalie: also a great deal of research, a good amount of input from the community, creation of task forces, framing for those task forces....

[10:55pm] eekim: philippe, you're wasting your time

[10:55pm] eekim: folks, we've got five more minutes

[10:55pm] Natalie: Hah.

[10:55pm] eekim: anyone have anything constructive to contribute or ask?

[10:56pm] Natalie: eekim hits the mark for most insightful comments. (Seriously.)

[10:56pm] Amgine: Sure: What's your next move?

[10:56pm] Bejinhan: bye guys

[10:56pm] Bejinhan: gotta leave now

[10:56pm] Natalie: See ya, Bejinhan.

[10:56pm] eekim: thanks, bejinhan

[10:56pm] StevenW: Second Amgine. What are the next steps?

[10:56pm] Bejinhan left the chat room.

[10:56pm] Philippe|Wiki: Natalie: What would be your suggestion for the proposals that are (as judged by you) crap?

[10:56pm] eekim: we need more engagement on the task force questions

[10:56pm] LauraHale: How do conferences like Wikimania fit into the strategic plan?

[10:56pm] Natalie: Philippe|Wiki: Either mark them as crap or delete them.

[10:56pm] Natalie: Mark is in here?

[10:57pm] Philippe|Wiki: That's good for community health

[10:57pm] Philippe|Wiki: And - by the way - you have a tool for marking them as crap.

[10:57pm] Philippe|Wiki: ReaderFeedback

[10:57pm] Philippe|Wiki: it's at the bottom of every proposal.

[10:57pm] StevenW: eekim: I assume those are on the wiki?

[10:57pm] Natalie: That doesn't mark them as crap.

[10:57pm] eekim: yes

[10:57pm] StevenW: okay

[10:57pm] StevenW: will try and lend a hand

[10:58pm] eekim: LauraHale, i think conferences are a critical part of building community

[10:58pm] Keegan: Philippe, subtle nudge, CALL ME

[10:58pm] eekim: there are valid questions of whether or not the Foundation should be playing a more active role in supporting them

[10:58pm] Philippe|Wiki: Keegan, mea maxima culpa.

[10:58pm] eekim: or other organizations, for that matter

[10:58pm] Keegan:

[10:58pm] Philippe|Wiki: Thank you for the nudge, it was deserved.

[10:59pm] eekim: okay folks, i need to run

[10:59pm] eekim: thanks everyone

[10:59pm] Amgine: nn eekim

[10:59pm] StevenW: thanks all

[10:59pm] LauraHale: Later eekim.

[10:59pm] Natalie: You're welcome!

[10:59pm] Philippe|Wiki: **** END LOG ****