Have the WMF done something bad that needs counterbalancing or are they just forming a union out of some sort of principle?
unions are institutions for bargaining power, even under decent employers
Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
11–20 of 300 posts
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#12Wow, they're on a roll over there. Just two days ago they permanently banned the cofounder of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger.
Per his tweet: "Well, that’s that—I’ve been blocked by Wikipedia “indefinitely” for unstated reasons, by the “consensus” of a mob. There was no due process, no prosecutor, no dispassionate judge, no jury, no interpretation of law. All my judges were self-selected and hated me."
Link to his June 22nd tweet on the matter: https://x.com/lsanger/status/2069061483422425287
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#13This made my day. These workers will be better stewards of Wikipedia than management.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#14It took people in tech an inordinately long time to start finally realizing the value of collective bargaining.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#15Man, it's sad how far the wiki foundation has fallen. For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! To get them to not only consider it, but actually go through the effort of actually doing it ... the foundation truly has shit the bed.
It's bleak it seems like wikimedia is controlled by the same ghouls who are running Mozilla.
Why is it so hard to keep a public interest tech firm honest?
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#16[deleted]
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#17Have the WMF done something bad that needs counterbalancing or are they just forming a union out of some sort of principle?
They recently laid off an internal team that was popular among workers and also fired one of the oldest employees for dubious reasons. Notably all of the people laid off or fired were union advocates, so this can be seen as a supercharged reaction to an effort to union bust (whether it was or not, it was certainly perceived that way).
The team was popular among contributors/editors. Their entire job was to handle the most upvited issues from the community and they were formed after the community felt like the management's priorities we not aligned with the community.
So like, the community was angry management was ignoring them. The response was to create a group to ensure some engineering time was put towards community priorities. Now that group has been fired.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#18Man, it's sad how far the wiki foundation has fallen. For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! To get them to not only consider it, but actually go through the effort of actually doing it ... the foundation truly has shit the bed.
Unionization shouldn't be seen as an emergency measure. Even if I would hypothetically accept union as a last resort, which I don't, safety nets should be built not only when you are speeding towards the ground, and often lack the resources, but much before that, when you are safe.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#19Wow, they're on a roll over there. Just two days ago they permanently banned the cofounder of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger. Per his tweet: "Well, that’s that—I’ve been blocked by Wikipedia “indefinitely” for unstated reasons, by the “consensus” of a mob. There was no due process, no prosecutor, no dispassionate judge, no jury, no interpretation of law. All my judges were self-selected and hated me." Link to his June 22nd…
While the merits of Sanger's banning are worth debating, Sanger is dishonestly representing the process here. The reasons, rather than being 'unstated', were stated repeatedly and were not unreasonable. [0]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_no...
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#20Wow, they're on a roll over there. Just two days ago they permanently banned the cofounder of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger. Per his tweet: "Well, that’s that—I’ve been blocked by Wikipedia “indefinitely” for unstated reasons, by the “consensus” of a mob. There was no due process, no prosecutor, no dispassionate judge, no jury, no interpretation of law. All my judges were self-selected and hated me." Link to his June 22nd…
>for unstated reasons
the reasons were clearly stated, which he knows because he replied to them in the discussion.
whether you agree with the reasons is one thing, but this tweet is just a lie, and only serves to discredit him.