Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/2007/Candidates/WarX/questions

2007 board elections
Election notice FAQ Candidate presentations Endorsements Vote Results
Organization
Election committee Candidate presentation guidelines Translations Coordinators Current requests Quick translation

Questions

Ask your questions for WarX here.

Non-free images and other media

Hi WarX. What are your opinions on the use of non-free images and other non-free media on Wikimedia Foundation projects? Should they be used at all, or disallowed completely? What are your opinions on this 23 March board resolution regarding licensing? Picaroon (Talk) 23:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm against using non-free images on Wikimedia projects. I know that removing non-free content would damage projects like en.wiki, so those projects should be left with their content and maybe only better control of images being uploaded and falling into non-free category. Wikinews is the special case - cause it's news character in many countries it can use non-free images according to local copyright and forbidding this by WMF will only hurt it's position in comparison with other media. I think that some day in future we (as Wikimedians) will have enough power to force governments to make copyright more liberal and end-user friendly then now. I think that resolution is step in good direction, cause it clearly specifies what WMF demand from communities in this matter.--WarX 07:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Possible Signpost article.

I'm busy creating an article for the Wikipedia Signpost about the board election candidates' positions on certain topics, and was wondering if you'd like to answer some questions:

1. On the board, will you vote for ads on Wikimedia sites?
   1. yes
      1. pop-ups/flash/banners/graphics
      2. flash/banners/graphics in skin whitespace or at bottom
      3. company logos in site notices
      4. prominent text ads
      5. company names in site notices
      6. text ads in skin whitespace or at bottom
      7. opt out
      8. opt in
      9. other
   2. maybe
      1. only for a huge amount of money
      2. only during budget emergencies
      3. only if editors support it
   3. never
   4. other
2. What are your thoughts on Wikimedia branding?
3. What are your thoughts on the foundation's hiring of a business developer?
4. How would you vote on the board about the foundation reducing or offsetting anthropogenic greenhouse gases, e.g. power used by hardware, flights, etc.?

Thanks. -- Jeandré, 2007-06-10t18:36z

1. I'm against any kind of adverts on Wikimedia projects. I'm one of those people who would be able to leave projects if there were any adverts.
2. I have some negative opinions about Wikimedia logos:
   • logo of WMF uses non-free font and cause of that I had very large problem with preparing WM-PL logo
   • logo of Wikipedia is ugly - it's probably impossible to vectorise (2 best SVGizers from pl.wiki resigned during work), it's impossible to paint it on eg. mug without reducing shades (which makes it even more ugly), it uses unknown font (I was unable to find it specifications)
   • all logos are inconsistent - different styles, color schemes, dimensions, etc.

   I know, that some of those problems are uncorrectable, but some should be fixed

3. It's great that WMF provides possibility of voluntary creating content, but I think that itself it needs some workers to exist. As far as some job positions are needed, they should be filled with hired professionals (but still steering wheel of WMF should be held by representatives of community).
4. I think that WMF is good institution to start making world a better place (we do it all the time with Wikipedia :) and every action which target is doing so is good ;) --WarX 07:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Change

Hi WarX,

What is the top 3 things you want to have changed in the current strategy of the foundation? Thanks, Effeietsanders 20:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

For me most important thing that should be changed is speed ;) From my observations of different discussions I see that in many cases there is large bureaucratic slowness inside Foundation which should be accelerated. For now it's one thing but I think most important ;) --WarX 20:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC) (hope I will develop my answer soon)

• Wikis are slow by nature. One advantage is that it is open to more people to participate. Surely the foundation itself is not run as a wiki, but can you cite actual examples of the bureaucratic slowness, and how is it problematic? Hillgentleman 00:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Added Value

What kind of value do you add to the current set of boardmembers in the area of Legal, Financial, Accounting etc expertise? Thanks, Effeietsanders 20:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

• For now I'm educated in physics and IT. Being honest I wont add any value on graduate degree in any of those disciplines, but don't think Board should consist only from Lawyers or Accountants ;). In those disciplines WMF should pay full-time professionals in the same manner as board in any company uses advisors in those fields. --WarX 20:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)