Live data from Hacker News

Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

lists.wikimedia.org

31–40 of 87 posts

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#31

If some more people leave, presumably the foundation can go back to hosting Wikipedia and funding the occasional project to improve it, after extensive user input. You know, instead of this playing startup thing.

There was never a problem with developing new technology. It was the outrageous dissembling and secrecy around the Knowledge Engine that has caused this problem. You cannot go into an organization with such an extreme ethos around transparency and openness as the WMF and get away with secretly coming up with a plan to compete against Google. That's what was done, and I don't care who on the Board say it wasn't ever a…

What was the "personnel" (not personal) issue under which he left - sexual harassment or something?

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#32
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was never a problem with developing new technology. It was the outrageous dissembling and secrecy around the Knowledge Engine that has caused this problem. You cannot go into an organization with such an extreme ethos around transparency and openness as the WMF and get away with secretly coming up with a plan to compete against Google. That's what was done, and I don't care who on the Board say it wasn't ever a…

What about Flow? Media Viewer? Visual Editor? The "extensive user input" came after the code was already written and the community didn't like the result.

VE was a Sue Gardner thing. Hate or love it, it had nothing to do with Lila.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#33

What has happened here is one of the worst situations in the WMF's history. I feel the most for James Heilman, who was removed from the Board only after asking serious questions about Lila's 'Knowledge Engine". Lila's stint has had a terrible impact on the staff and community alike. Here are some emails to the Wikimedia mailing list. The one that started the beginning of the end is when she was very specifically aske…

Oh, and I think the rot started around the time that Terry Chay left the WMF. He clearly saw the writing on the wall very early. I highly recommend reading his Quora answer to the question "What has caused so many people to leave jobs at the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) in 2015-16?": https://www.quora.com/What-has-caused-so-many-people-to-leav...

It started well before then. There's been numerous occurrences of dramatic employee burnout that end up in people losing their shit on the WMF internal staff list then quiting. For this particular case it got so bad that the meltdowns were on the public list instead.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice visualization. Something caught my eye looking at it "Signpost reveals that the Wikimedia Foundation initially requested $6 million from the Knight Foundation". That's pretty common actually when dealing with private foundations. They don't have the budget for a big request this funding period, but are interested so they drop a smaller amount of funding. This might lead to a bigger funding event or the interest…

That's not what issue with that was. The issue is that it wasn't discussed within the BoT, it was someone's pet project and it is clear that the discovery team was ramped up before discussions even took place properly, which meant funding allocations, IMO, we're done in a decidedly underhanded way. They also made that grant application so vague that it looked like they wanted to compete with Google. Read the document…

> That's not what issue with that was

Ok, the lower funding number might not be the issue, but it certainly seems like the timeline and article regarded it as a bad thing.

> The issue is that it wasn't discussed within the BoT

Ok, well, I would expect that will probably end the likelihood of further grants from Knight Foundation or many other reputable grant givers. Poor procedure inside an grantee is frowned upon, and having their name shown in a negative light is a warning to everyone else.

> They also made that grant application so vague that it looked like they wanted to compete with Google. Read the document. Heck, read the article that is now on Wikipedia!

Looking at this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/a/a7/Knowl...

It looks pretty normal for how you write up a project. You really only put high level stuff in for some of these organizations.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#35
Honestly, this all sounds pretty typical of non-profit organizations. I've been working with various different ones since I was 7. Sometimes as a volunteer, sometimes as an employee, sometimes as an executive, and sometimes as a board member.

I have never seen a functional non-profit. For whatever reason, non-profits seem to attract all kinds of people who are motivated by things I can only describe as "weird." And it's not just at the management levels. Volunteers and employees tend to have an irrational sense of entitlement, as though the mission of the group and the fact that they are in some way devoted to it earns them a right to a voice in the leadership.

But there are also issues with the personalities that the management roles attract, particularly with boards. There are two types of board members: those who are doing the work because they think they should, so they want to get in, make decisions, and get out. Then there are the ones who are passionately invested in "the cause", and the passionate ones are complete wild cards. You never know what you are going to get. Narcissists, martyrs, and drama queens, most often. But sometimes other.

I haven't been following this situation at all, but if I had to make a guess, the truth is somewhere in the middle. Lila was probably doing her honest and straightforward best to deal with a situation that was way over her head and made some mistakes.

The board and other employees are probably a mixed bag of honest, good-heated people trying to make a difference, some complete nutbags, and a lot of people in between.

In many ways, non-profits are like academia. Important and necessary organizations, but extremely disfunctional in the same ways. They tend to be sanctuaries for people who do not really function all that well in public society or companies. The pay stakes are generally lower, so people fight militantly over issues of status and control that seem trivial to the rest of the outside world.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was never a problem with developing new technology. It was the outrageous dissembling and secrecy around the Knowledge Engine that has caused this problem. You cannot go into an organization with such an extreme ethos around transparency and openness as the WMF and get away with secretly coming up with a plan to compete against Google. That's what was done, and I don't care who on the Board say it wasn't ever a…

What was the "personnel" (not personal) issue under which he left - sexual harassment or something?

Even if I knew, I couldn't and wouldn't say. That would be unethical and illegal. But Damon was definitely going around with secret plans to compete with Google. And he had a number of odd, almost paranoid, emails to the foundation ML with what looks like hashes of documents.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#37
post #25

What has happened here is one of the worst situations in the WMF's history. I feel the most for James Heilman, who was removed from the Board only after asking serious questions about Lila's 'Knowledge Engine". Lila's stint has had a terrible impact on the staff and community alike. Here are some emails to the Wikimedia mailing list. The one that started the beginning of the end is when she was very specifically aske…

Note that it's Brion Vibber, not Brian Vibber. Apart from that, excellent summary of events.

Argh. Damned iPad.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#38
post #32
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about Flow? Media Viewer? Visual Editor? The "extensive user input" came after the code was already written and the community didn't like the result.

VE was a Sue Gardner thing. Hate or love it, it had nothing to do with Lila.

And Media Viewer was in development before Lila came around, even if she did preside over its release. I'm not really interested in blaming individuals. The point is that the Wikimedia Foundation as an organization has a history of pushing projects the community doesn't want. A different kind of executive director might move the foundation back towards more of a support role for the community. Of course, that's not going to happen unless the makeup of the board of directors changes drastically.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what issue with that was. The issue is that it wasn't discussed within the BoT, it was someone's pet project and it is clear that the discovery team was ramped up before discussions even took place properly, which meant funding allocations, IMO, we're done in a decidedly underhanded way. They also made that grant application so vague that it looked like they wanted to compete with Google. Read the document…

> That's not what issue with that was Ok, the lower funding number might not be the issue, but it certainly seems like the timeline and article regarded it as a bad thing. > The issue is that it wasn't discussed within the BoT Ok, well, I would expect that will probably end the likelihood of further grants from Knight Foundation or many other reputable grant givers. Poor procedure inside an grantee is frowned upon, a…

No, it's not normal.

Thst grant application was ambiguously worded. It repeatedly said it was for “the Internet”. It reads that “today, commercial search engines dominate search engine use of the Internet, and they’re employing proprietary technologies to consolidate access to the Internet’s knowledge and information. Their algorithms obscure the way the Internet’s information is collected and displayed”.

How on earth would an internal search engine help in this regard? And why is this wording so broad?

The kicker is the line in the grant that “Knowledge Engine by Wikipedia will be the Internet’s first transparent search engine, and the first one engineered by the Wikimedia Foundation.”

If I was to read that grant application, I'd be expecting an Internet search engine. Lila and the BoT, including Jimmy Wales, says that it never was.

If that's the case, as I said in a comment on a recent blog post by Lila, then the only conclusions that can be come to are:

A. The Knight Foundation were mislead as to the purpose of the grant application,

B. Someone, or multiple people, within the BoT of the WMF were not telling the truth, or

C. This grant application was put together by someone who was incompetent.

Re: Lila Tretikov Has Resigned from Wikimedia Foundation

#40
post #38
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VE was a Sue Gardner thing. Hate or love it, it had nothing to do with Lila.

And Media Viewer was in development before Lila came around, even if she did preside over its release. I'm not really interested in blaming individuals. The point is that the Wikimedia Foundation as an organization has a history of pushing projects the community doesn't want. A different kind of executive director might move the foundation back towards more of a support role for the community. Of course, that's not g…

I think that's not entirely accurate. The VE was wanted, and clearly is needed. There have been valid concerns around Wikimarkup that lead to a less than great UX experience for many editors, and it is a barrier to entry.

It was discussed for a long time when I was active in the community. People who were active in the community championed it.

The execution seems to have been less than successful. The way that some things were introduced were also less than stirling. Rolling do,etching like the VE on a shoestring budget is also quite difficult, on such a massive project.

Sue didn't always get things right, and during her tenure mistakes were made. She was, IMO, amazing though. When she left, she had bedded down an amazing amount of important processes, including governance and other important organizational matters. Her technical skills weren't perhaps as good as her other skills (but actually, they weren't that bad really). There were issues that needed addressing by the next ED, but there always will be matters that need addressing! Nobody leaves an organization in 100% perfect running order.

Lila has not only left the WMF with issues, she has destroyed a good deal of trust, and left the WMF's governance, openness and transparency in tatters.

Post reply on HN