Event:114: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Bryandamon (talk | contribs) (→: Added Links) |
Bryandamon (talk | contribs) (→) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
#* [[Action:46|Action Item]] | #* [[Action:46|Action Item]] | ||
#* [https://manage.mwstake.org/wiki/C0398617288 Outline] | #* [https://manage.mwstake.org/wiki/C0398617288 Outline] | ||
#* [https://smw-cindykate.com/main/Community:Component1713904056 Trusted Web of Colleagues (TWebC) Outline 1] | #* (Lex) We should provide a matching service via TWebC | ||
#* [https://wiki.dataspects.com/wiki/Trusted_Web_of_Colleagues_(TWebC) Trusted Web of Colleagues (TWebC) Outline | #** [https://smw-cindykate.com/main/Community:Component1713904056 Trusted Web of Colleagues (TWebC) Outline 1] | ||
#** [https://wiki.dataspects.com/wiki/Trusted_Web_of_Colleagues_(TWebC) Trusted Web of Colleagues (TWebC) Outline 2] | |||
#* (Bryan) Lex and I discussed reserving 4% of the dues for project management which would be $100 of Gold ($2,500) and $200 of Platinum ($5,000) | |||
#** (Mark) I recommend a round # of 5% which would be $125 of Gold ($2,500) and $250 of Platinum ($5,000) | |||
#* (Bryan) We shouldn't "sole source" the developer so make sure we aren't biased, ideally we can have 3 developers quote each project (pulled from TWebC) | |||
#* (Cindy) Should TWebC be public or private? | |||
#** Based on input from Cindy, Lex, and Bryan, it sounds like open is preferred | |||
#* (Cindy) "Trusted" with regards to TWebC means certified by MWStake | |||
# '''MediaWiki Blog''' | # '''MediaWiki Blog''' | ||
#* (Mark from his communication with Markus) Using the domain (mediawiki.blog) will probably not be OK for us (MWStake) as is, but possibly OK if we were a [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Thematic_Organization_Agreement Thematic Group] | |||
# '''Credit Card Processing''' | # '''Credit Card Processing''' | ||
#* (Mark) Wikidata has an update via email | |||
#* (Mark) If we want any changes made, we should make them quickly | |||
#* (Bryan) What about conference dues or sponsor project costs if they go beyond (8 or 16 hours)? Should we have an ability for an open field? | |||
#** (Mark) Yes we should, we should reach out and discuss this | |||
#* [[Action:47|Action Item]] | #* [[Action:47|Action Item]] | ||
# '''Collection Extension''' | # '''Collection Extension''' | ||
# '''Next Meeting''' | # '''Next Meeting''' | ||
#* (Mark) {{Action}} A vote was called with a unanimous yes to have another meeting in a month (around August 14th) | |||
==Actions== | ==Actions== | ||
Latest revision as of 15:23, 22 July 2020
 Date (UTC):
|
17 July 2020 02:30:00 - 17 July 2020 03:30:00
|
|---|---|
 Attendees:
|
Bryan Hildebrand, Cindy Cicalese, Evita Hollis, Lex Sulzer, Mark Hershberger |
Click for time zone conversion
Notes
The meeting voice transcription is available on the talk page.
- MWStake Brokerage
- Action Item
- Outline
- (Lex) We should provide a matching service via TWebC
- (Bryan) Lex and I discussed reserving 4% of the dues for project management which would be $100 of Gold ($2,500) and $200 of Platinum ($5,000)
- (Mark) I recommend a round # of 5% which would be $125 of Gold ($2,500) and $250 of Platinum ($5,000)
- (Bryan) We shouldn't "sole source" the developer so make sure we aren't biased, ideally we can have 3 developers quote each project (pulled from TWebC)
- (Cindy) Should TWebC be public or private?
- Based on input from Cindy, Lex, and Bryan, it sounds like open is preferred
- (Cindy) "Trusted" with regards to TWebC means certified by MWStake
- MediaWiki Blog
- (Mark from his communication with Markus) Using the domain (mediawiki.blog) will probably not be OK for us (MWStake) as is, but possibly OK if we were a Thematic Group
- Credit Card Processing
- (Mark) Wikidata has an update via email
- (Mark) If we want any changes made, we should make them quickly
- (Bryan) What about conference dues or sponsor project costs if they go beyond (8 or 16 hours)? Should we have an ability for an open field?
- (Mark) Yes we should, we should reach out and discuss this
- Action Item
- Collection Extension
- Next Meeting
- (Mark) ACTION ITEM A vote was called with a unanimous yes to have another meeting in a month (around August 14th)
Actions
See this page for more information
| Open | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| |||