Change Details

Continuing the interesting office discussion here--see questions raised in T152641#2861660 and following comments. Please fork culture and politics insights to this thread. AWight writes: Hi, welcome to a forked task where we have more elbowroom for talking about how to continue to improve collaboration between WMF Fundraising and its sub-units, with the rest of the WMF and Wikimedia community. @Jseddon has led this charge recently, and I look forward to his contributions here. We (Fundraising) in the midst of the Big English fundraising drive, so please excuse any longer latency than usual. Normally, our workflow for technical operations tickets is to tag them with #fundraising-tech-ops and optionally #operations, in which case @Jgreen will notice them promptly. If the task is urgent, we make sure to get an acknowledgement from each other when we believe we've handed it off. When this workflow is broken, we would love to have it repaired by anyone reading this message. Please tag such orphaned tasks with #fundraising-backlog and/or #fundraising-tech-ops and reestablish communication with @DStrine and @Jgreen, or any other fr-tech members as shown https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Fundraising_tech This post-facto protocol was in fact followed in this case, many thanks to @Krenair and others jumping into the mix on a December weekend. I'm offering to continue the discussion here because there were some harsh exchanges of comments that we could work towards healing, perhaps through more clarify and engagement. On my part I apologize for deploying too little humor and jockeying for "fundraising priority" to force a resolution without allowing for adequate discussion and buy-in from community members. On the other hand, I think I did the right thing in moving the conversation to IRC at `#wikimedia-fundraising`, where I believe we came to an initial [[ http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-fundraising/20161211.txt | consensus ]]. I also stand by my evaluation of this bug as worthy of the organizational resources to accomplish a 24-hour or better turnaround. Rather than attempt to paraphrase what has been said, how about we start with a blank slate? Please suggest anything that should be discussed in more depth, here.

Continuing the interesting office discussion here--see questions raised in T152641#2861660 and following comments. Please fork culture and politics insights to this thread. AWight writes: Hi, welcome to a forked task where we have more elbowroom for talking about how to continue to improve collaboration between WMF Fundraising and its sub-units, with the rest of the WMF and Wikimedia community. @Jseddon has led this charge recently, and I look forward to his contributions here. We (Fundraising) in the midst of the Big English fundraising drive, so please excuse any longer latency than usual. Normally, our workflow for technical operations tickets is to tag them with #fundraising-tech-ops and optionally #operations, in which case @Jgreen will notice them promptly. If the task is urgent, we make sure to get an acknowledgement from each other when we believe we've handed it off. When this workflow is broken, we would love to have it repaired by anyone reading this message. Please tag such orphaned tasks with #fundraising-backlog and/or #fundraising-tech-ops and reestablish communication with @DStrine and @Jgreen, or any other fr-tech members as shown https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Fundraising_tech This post-facto protocol was in fact followed in this case, many thanks to @Krenair and others jumping into the mix on a December weekend. I'm offering to continue the discussion here because there were some harsh exchanges of comments that we could work towards healing, perhaps through more clarity and engagement. On my part I apologize for deploying too little humor and jockeying for "fundraising priority" to force a resolution without allowing for adequate discussion and buy-in from community members. On the other hand, I think I did the right thing in moving the conversation to IRC at `#wikimedia-fundraising`, where I believe we came to an initial [[ http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-fundraising/20161211.txt | consensus ]]. I also stand by my evaluation of this bug as worthy of the organizational resources to accomplish a 24-hour or better turnaround. Rather than attempt to paraphrase what has been said, how about we start with a blank slate? Please suggest anything that should be discussed in more depth, here.

Continuing the interesting office discussion here--see questions raised in T152641#2861660 and following comments. Please fork culture and politics insights to this thread. AWight writes: Hi, welcome to a forked task where we have more elbowroom for talking about how to continue to improve collaboration between WMF Fundraising and its sub-units, with the rest of the WMF and Wikimedia community. @Jseddon has led this charge recently, and I look forward to his contributions here. We (Fundraising) in the midst of the Big English fundraising drive, so please excuse any longer latency than usual. Normally, our workflow for technical operations tickets is to tag them with #fundraising-tech-ops and optionally #operations, in which case @Jgreen will notice them promptly. If the task is urgent, we make sure to get an acknowledgement from each other when we believe we've handed it off. When this workflow is broken, we would love to have it repaired by anyone reading this message. Please tag such orphaned tasks with #fundraising-backlog and/or #fundraising-tech-ops and reestablish communication with @DStrine and @Jgreen, or any other fr-tech members as shown https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Fundraising_tech This post-facto protocol was in fact followed in this case, many thanks to @Krenair and others jumping into the mix on a December weekend. I'm offering to continue the discussion here because there were some harsh exchanges of comments that we could work towards healing, perhaps through more clarifty and engagement. On my part I apologize for deploying too little humor and jockeying for "fundraising priority" to force a resolution without allowing for adequate discussion and buy-in from community members. On the other hand, I think I did the right thing in moving the conversation to IRC at `#wikimedia-fundraising`, where I believe we came to an initial [[ http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-fundraising/20161211.txt | consensus ]]. I also stand by my evaluation of this bug as worthy of the organizational resources to accomplish a 24-hour or better turnaround. Rather than attempt to paraphrase what has been said, how about we start with a blank slate? Please suggest anything that should be discussed in more depth, here.