[Foundation-l] Wikipedia Invites Users to Take Part in Open, Collaborativ...

Sat Jan 19 00:20:45 UTC 2008

On Jan 19, 2008 1:56 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> If you refer to a blog, you might as well provide a URL..  As to volunteer
> time, if a volunteer sees value in this collaboration, it is their time that
> they can spend as they see fit. For the WMF to put the value on volunteer
> time on their balance sheet is similar to putting the value of Wikipedia,
> Wiktionary et al on the balance sheet. Doing this implies ownership, it
> seems to me that this is in marked contrast with the notion that the WMF
> serves as an ISP.

Yes, and indeed the foundation should be very careful about how strongly
it words its encouragement for volunteers to be active in this "partnership".

> What nobody has reflected on is that there are THREE parties to this
> collaboration. It is on Wikieducator where this experiment is happening.
> This indicates that the technology is targeted for the use in an educational
> context. What nobody has reflected on is that because of some of the
> observations on this list, Kaltura has already made changes. It has been
> observed that they are shifting in the "right" direction. Yay indicates that
> the goal is to make the software free and open according to our criteria.
> Yay acknowledges that more work is needed to accomplish this. Some good
> faith may be in order ?

Yes, this is an additional problem, though in part a separate one, that we
will see more an more of, if we go down the route of tying ourselves down
to other projects, which we haven't got direct influence over. We may find
ourselves embarrassed by our "collaborators". Not in this case in any
material manner, but it might be before us some day.

We do need to be both well informed about what outside projects we have
affiliated ourselves with are doing, and of course hope they share our
values as much as possible, and if not initially, can be educated. If this
is happening now, no direct harm may in the end accrue even to our
general reputation, but assuming good faith in business affairs is *not*
a workable modus operandi in the long term. Remember that one
mathematics site and all the other past horrific precedents.

> Gregory indicates that other technology may be more opportune. He may be
> right. In the mean time this is a nice shot in the arm to get things moving
> from being stagnant. The WMF has too much technical work to finish before
> they can be involved.. I am sure that other people will collaborate with
> Katlura or will collaborate on a competing product or will do something else
> entirely. Isn't Open Source great ?

Not all movement is good. The direction should be the right one too.
If WMF can't
be involved yet, why is it trumpeting the name of this other project
that isn't yet
on the same page?

> When a VC funds the development of Open Source, I would say see the software
> developed, make sure that it fits our need, collaborate and just be happy
> with all this effort that is not for us to do. When you values it like this,
> it is a clear benefit to us all.

I won't address the question if it is ever possible for that to ever
fit our need, because
my understanding of the licencing and technical issues is not clear,
but I think it needs
to be demonstrated that there is a need that can be fitted here.
Otherwise it is not
clear at all.

--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]