 Hello there Hey, Zach Hey there. All right, so Zach I did tell everybody else that my power is out and I'm tethering on not too much laptop battery But if I get cut off Chris will take on the questions and you can keep answering them So yeah, if Zach wants to Zach will give a little bit of an introduction We are gonna start with the questions from last week that didn't get answered in the concept presentation and Then if you have other questions as we go feel free to drop them in the chat. We'll be collecting them And when we're done answering the questions from last week We can also take questions of people want to unmute and ask the questions themselves. That's totally fine All I ask is that people Be concise and so that we can get to as many questions as possible. It would be great So, okay, Zach, do you want to give a little bit of an introduction? Yes, of course Hi, everyone. Zack McKeon here. Good to see you right here right now for the first office hours Which is basically we wanted to have an open time to to keep talking about the movement brand project some of the questions that were posed in last week's brand concept presentation and Take on additional questions. I think overall this format is Really meant to be kind of a dialogue and a discussion. So it will not have a very rigid agenda Just know that Somebody asking to join we will admit So, yeah, keep that in mind open agenda less formal than a normal meeting Like many many of you. I'm calling from my house in San Francisco, California and I have a cup of coffee because it is a little early for me I It's actually a very exciting. This is the Norwegian Outdoor Society. It's like for hiking outside They host cabins you can stay in which I've never done, but it's a goal of mine when we can travel again So the project we're all working on here or at least discussing is the 2030 movement brand project and It's inspired by the strategic direction from the movement strategy project Which challenges us to grow really profoundly over the next 10 years and make it so that anyone Who shares our vision can join us? Our brand our collective brand the brand we all use as parts of this movement Can help us make it possible for anyone to join us It's an incredible tool for people to find us and understand us and participate in our work in our mission in our projects What we know is that the current movement brand system is based on wicca media and the round Circle logo that is often shown in three colors Green blue red and we know that those Brand materials have not had the success we would want because lots of people ask questions about them Lots of people are confused by them. Now. We also know that some community members feel that they're working And that they inspire the right discussion Which is when people don't know a brand and you have to explain the brand it gives you a chance to have the conversation You want to have Advancing the brand and explaining the movement and that's one of the factors why this process is opt-in Why it is not a comprehensive one-time design project that forces change on everyone Basically, we are recognizing that the systems work for some members and don't work for other members So it's an open process where we're collaborating to build a new design system and when that design system is complete It will be reviewed and ready for use By everyone in the movement with each Individual affiliate able to kind of make the choice that's right for them at the time and to change that choice If they want in the future as self-determination is super important to our affiliates and to our movement members Quick discussion of dates We are currently prepping work for possibly the most exciting part of this process Which is the naming convention discussions. That's planned for May 7th through the 21st At that time we're going to be showing the movement Multiple options We're going to show them not just one approach to naming but two or three And the approaches will range From being heavily centered on Wikipedia to less centered on it so I think folks will see a range of Possibilities there and the discussion will allow us to compare and contrast The advantages and the disadvantages of making a strong connection to Wikipedia Maybe a lighter connection Really the dialogue that we expect to happen there will be pretty exciting because We know so many people have been concerned about what kinds of names Might be considered and what they mean and what kind of problems they would create So this is a moment where we'll get to look at some stuff and really kind of have it up on the wall and walk around It and talk about it. I Know that from the project team There's a great deal of excitement of sharing this with you all because we've wanted folks to know that this is really is open to discussion as We've intended it to be and this is a moment where people will see But the range of options leave a lot of space for self-determination Exciting things ahead. So yeah, May 7th. That's when our naming convention materials will be shared And with that Elena, do you think I've missed anything for an overview? No, I think you've given a great overview and an overview that leads perfectly into the first question that I do that for this morning Which is about the self-determination and the opt-in system that the project has set up So the question is about reducing confusion. If how do we achieve consistent branding? If we don't achieve a situation where everyone is using the same branding So we have an opt-in system. How does that lead to more consistency and how does that reduce confusion? hmm Yeah, okay, that's a good question So I think it's worth saying that right now we already don't use consistent branding So right now the names between different parts of the movement are not clearly connected There's a set of naming systems that are used by chapters Then there's a lot of flexibility in the naming and branding systems used by user groups the projects have a third set of conventions and even a really distinct set of color palettes that they use depending on What design style was in was kind of in vogue when they were developed and as a so I would say right now the movement is very Inconsistent in a very organic way, which is true to how we've formed Which is and that's exciting So the first thing is that like we've set out to make it more consistent Yes, Chris. Thanks for that reminder in the chat We've set out to make it more consistent by actually really having a very big discussion About branding as a cohesive set of principles rather than an ad hoc set of decisions, right? almost all of the brand materials we have now have been made as Small discrete decisions this project this group This identity this time Rather than a little bit more holistically and that's why this is part of the movement strategy process Is it's a moment where we're we're considering so much about the movement's future that we said let's bring branding into that discussion? But for the person who asked this question, there's a definite moment probably Several months to a few years where we will see inconsistent branding between an old and a new between an old and a new system where Parts of the movement will be using a New design system a new branding system and parts will be using an old branding system That's again, I think true to who we are really We're not trying to make the Lufthansa That's what I call it the Lufthansa branding choice where they famously worked very hard to make it so that on a single day Everything changed the website The planes the tickets everything changed to a new design system We're actually trying to acknowledge that we're an organic system. We we move we move at the speed of our own priorities and our own Efforts and so just as even moving in 2016 to a black and white logo And a new name a new typeface Which is the foundation uses a new typeface now? It's Montserrat its open source rather than Gil sands, which is what Wikimedia was set in Originally like that change itself has been adopted very Progressively and now we see that around half of the chapters have made that change with no over over arching like you have to do this Just a here's the system. We've developed here's the tools you have and people did it So in a sentence, yes, we will not see consistency immediately But we believe that over time by working together We're going to make a system that works for many many people And so we're going to be able to work forward towards consistency in the future so that our projects are interconnected awesome, thank you Zach And to the point that you're making about inconsistency already existing and confusion already existing We have a question about the difference between Wikimedia organizations and the projects So the question is that we now exercise big efforts to explain to everyone that Wikimedia organizations are not Wikipedia editorial offices in quotation So renaming Wikimedia organizations to Wikipedia will make that harder Do you think you're trying to solve one big problem and creating another big problem? that's such a great question and Hello, Rajeep. Thanks for joining us and Zika. Thanks for taking notes Okay, repeating the question Wikipedia is a project Do you think that putting Wikipedia into the movement naming system will confuse the two? Or we'll make it even harder than it already is to distinguish between the two. Yeah, so when we talked with community members Great, we've got a Linux t-shirt here on Sergey when we talked to community members Last year they told us that the number one problem to be solved for branding was reducing confusion They were like people get confused. Are we connected to Wikipedia? Are we not? Are we a part of a big movement? Are we not and so if we simply trade Confusion like oh, we've made it clear that we're connected to Wikipedia But now we've implied all sorts of roles in editorial content that are untrue We have not done our job. We have not been successful So we need to Make sure that if we adopt the Wikipedia name it is clearly differentiated from the Wikipedia project It would it would just be an explicit failure of branding if using the Wikipedia name made it so that Our community groups and our volunteers had a harder and harder time explaining what they do and Doing what they're passionate about. I think an example we can look at here is Yes, you can ask questions and chat and we'll add them to our list a Good example to look at here is that nearby to me is the Yosemite National Park It's a national park. It's big. It's famous. It has a half dome. It's closed. You can't go right now Yosemite as a park has a number of features But there's also a non-profit that supports the park that is not affiliated with the park rangers or anything and they call themselves friends of Yosemite and This is a way of showing that they're connected to the order to play kind of the idea the space the park Yosemite But different than the rangers so it's a way they've used their name to Differentiate between the kinds of services you could get from a ranger or official park staff member like health or guidance on the trails and so that's the that's the place we are right now with naming is how can we use words to Indicate the correct relationship between things And that's why when we share things on May 7th We know that we're that's just round one People are gonna have to help us by poking and saying it doesn't do this. It's not enough of that There's gonna be more work to be done Great. Thank you So moving towards Wikipedia as a solution for some of these problems that we're outlining here If people reject Wikipedia altogether What is going to change later when they see how Wikipedia will be used in context and then related to that? How much is the project team the C team and the board ready to let community members go who don't agree with this decision? Can you give me the front of that I remember the second one The first one is so if people are already rejecting Wikipedia name as a solution. How is that gonna change once they see Wikipedia in context? In the context of a larger branding system Yes So this is a this is a really good question because it gets at some tensions that are within our movement The RFC has been a really clear signal that the undersigned Voices in that request for comment Feel that any use of the Wikipedia name is not right for the movement and there were a variety of reasons given for that Which we read closely simultaneously, we've had conversations with affiliate leaders Members of the movement strategy process and a lot of our emerging user groups who have said that they're very confused by the branding system we use today and That when they work they often have to draw a very close connection between their Be it nonprofit or their emerging user group and Wikipedia Those folks Did not join the RFC and so we recognized that we were definitely hearing from The opposed perspective very strongly and that there were I think there were 39 voices that spoke up in favor of Using Wikipedia, but we feel like there was not a really good position for people to voice support for Wikipedia because they hadn't seen How would be used? It's hard to be an ally of the abstract, right? It's it's something where we feel we're going to share an option or two really rooted in naming the movement with Wikipedia at the center and Again, if people give the same strong outspoken Pushback on those concrete ideas I think we're going to take that as a much stronger signal because now it's no longer the abstract idea of like Should the foundation just be called Wikipedia? That's not what we're proposing We'll have some real name systems and people will even more excitingly be able to see themselves in the naming system Because this project is not just Let's give the foundation a new name. We got Kelly Welcome Kelly This this project is not just let's give the foundation a new name It's also like let's think about how we can show that the parts of our movement are all connected And so if you encountered one part you could start to perceive the whole This is very exciting for us, right if you meet the Chapter in your country or you go to a hackathon or an editathon and meet a user group We really hope that you would start to learn just how big the movement is by encountering even that one node in the network And so that's what we're gonna work towards Elena. What was the second part of the question something about people leaving or something? Yeah, there was actually a so related question in the chat that Like what's gonna happen if some people dislike a wikipedia based solution so much that they decide to leave Like how much is the board and the C team willing to let people go who want to leave as a result of any decision like this? Yeah, I mean we should it would be good to start even talking about who we think would leave and why I mean We'll definitely recognize that wikipedia is an identity It's used by people to explain who they are and what they do and As I understand that question. It's basically saying if this identity has changed There are some people who may want to They might feel like this is no longer the organization or the movement that they joined And I definitely hope that is not what people conclude. I hope they understand that this is a like interactive collaborative process And that if they want to again use the wikipedia name in their groups, they can continue to do so But I do recognize that like we're not going to please everyone in this this process will certainly have frustration We've already seen that Change of any kind has a fundamental emotional quality to it Where we're going to see that people feel they don't like where things are going or they don't agree with The bulk of comments or they agree with these set of comments and they think they should be weighed higher It's going to actually look a lot like a wiki project Which is which is good. That's that's who we are But of course, it's something pretty profound which is like this is kind of how wiki does branding And so like a lot of decisions, it's going to have like lots of points of view different sets of data challenges Critiques and yeah, there there may be one or two people or not one or two I couldn't estimate the number there may be people who feel that this is not their movement anymore because of the change I really hope that's not how they feel. I don't the board and the C team at the foundation have not like communicated to me any sort of departure tolerance, so there's no like number Ultimately, we see it on the other side of the coin. We're making an identity system So it's easier for the movement to explain what it is. It's easier for the movement to have people join so we're actually kind of in a growth mindset rather than a A conservation mindset. We're not trying to keep this Amazing movement that we have now as kind of like just let's protect it We're like saying, how do we help enable the growth? We know we need for 2030 which is basically billions of more people joining and adding Their perspectives to our knowledge Which means that like if the movement branding is successful it works for Many of us in the movement today But even more importantly it works for kind of the next generation the people who also want to join this Just damn remarkable effort to bring all the world's knowledge together in one place for free so we see that like You know this this like we would never want to say we're trading out Volunteers for new volunteers, but we do want to be minded that like there's a whole world to reach And we think that our branding help great So I think you this next question you covered to some extent Last week, but it's still being asked. So I wanted to kind of pose it in a different way You get it again Why is it that Wikimedia could not be included in any Well, yes So the first thing is Again, if people want to use Wikimedia, they can use it they can keep it We found that in in research Wikimedia was very confusing and unclear to people It was either confused with Wikipedia Where people would kind of experience it as a typo or it was Understood to be almost like a project wiki media in which case people understood it more like commons a place where they could get media files a Website where they could get media files. We also found that if we asked people like have you heard of Wikimedia? There was a very low answer to yes And that means that we've used this as our collective identity for 17 years We've done some just incredible things as a movement volunteers have made This one of the most celebrated parts of the internet. In fact, we see this amazing Journalists have started calling Wikipedia and the Wikimedia projects the best part of the internet or the last best part of the internet Or even sometimes the internet that we were promised Where you know, we have a different policy on privacy. We have a different commitment to Collective work. We have a different Economic model and so we were like wow, there's so much enthusiasm. There still is we know that there's so much interest excitement passion Appreciation for the results of our movement, but there's so little understanding of the movement itself That people don't perceive just how human and volunteer driven this is and so that's why we basically realized the Identity we were using the brand we were using Wikimedia was not doing the work It needs to do it needs to do a lot of work It needs to make it so that when you see it, you're not confused by it You understand it or you quickly can make associations with it that pull you into our movement I think a good example here is Doctors without borders, right? Like even if you don't know a single program doctors without borders is doing that name Quickly tells you who's doing Something and where they're doing it So it's it's like as a brand as a name. It's a very inspiring Name it's a passionate way to bring people into caring about your work So that's what I think about Wikimedia Great. Thank you This should be a shorter answer probably but there was a question asked last week about who sent the initial email That sparked the changes to begin with and I'm actually unsure if that is in reference to who sent the initial email that proposed Wikimedia as a name or who sent the email that You know sparked all of this work So maybe you could quickly answer that. Yeah, I well, so I think I saw that was Bobby Bobby Shabangu. Yeah Awesome, it was I mean y'all I couldn't see the chat during our presentation because it was like kind of my full screen here So I was excited to just see everybody who showed up Thanks for making the time to join us last week and again this week and maybe if you're watching this in the future Hello in the future So, yeah, I was excited that Bobby was there that Meg was there incredible Andrew Bobby's question. I thought it was about the first email sent and that was sent by Sheldon Rampton 2003 Greg Varnum has The exact link but basically that was the time where someone said You know in our in our kind of really rapid growth of history if we look back and there's probably here There's people here. I know who know this better than me, but 2003 like we're really on a fast growth moment Projects are spinning out in all sorts of directions Policies are being developed about what is and is not appropriate for this project. Okay, make it into another project That's when the proposal was made. Let's call these collectively wick of media flowers If I was so Sheldon Rampton 2003 Email proposal, let's refer to all these things as wiki media There was not one email other than that that sparked this This project this was this project was not sparked by any one email. It's been long discussed. I know that Eric Moller Talked about it in 2007 as a like a branding consideration I think that was wick of mania Taipei that year and Guillaume Palma was there This has come up a number of times And it's always been a question That the board of trustees has asked to the foundation particularly to the wick of media foundations communications department That I'm in as he's in Chris Kim We're all in that department. It's always been a question of like, how do we stand in the world? What would be better if we changed how people understood us with our name in our brand? Great. So I have actually a very quick question that came up in chat that I want to answer With interest it's a burning curiosity for the person who asked it May 7th, what exactly is happening on May 7th? And how are things being shared more widely then we'll go back into yeah May 7th mark your calendars May 7th We are sharing the long discussed naming proposals like how we would actually consider renaming the movement parts So at that time we will release multiple options to To how things would be readjusted in naming. So again, you would see like right now It's wick of media foundation in this new naming system. It goes to this right now It's wick of media Deutschland in the new naming system. It would go to this right now This user group is called women in red or black lunch table. Here's how they would show that they're part of the same brand system So May 7th, we're gonna release multiple options of that And it will be a nice package We're gonna try to make it actually really easy if you're an individual contributor. We want you to be able to go through this Quickly like 10 minutes to 30 minutes like just being able to parse it the parts are gonna be Really kind of clear and then if you're one of our incredible Affiliate liaisons we're gonna also give you some tools on how to share this with your mailing lists with your telegram groups On wiki, etc to get people to respond as well And really we're gonna basically we're gonna reveal these things We're gonna we're gonna put our seatbelts on Everyone's gonna have a lot of feelings and thoughts and ways that these could be better and that's exactly what we want We want people to tell us Like this is terrible because this isn't that terrible. This actually seems cool. I would use this I wouldn't use you those other parts. We really want people to grapple with it as a as a set of possibilities So I think that this The structure how yeah, I'm gonna add I'm gonna head. Yes. It's all of the above Email. Yes, we're gonna send it on mailing lists meta. Yes, it will be on the project meta page If you're on one of the working groups, we call those the brand network There's one on meta and there's one on Facebook. It will also show up there. So Kira. It will go to many places great, so in terms of the structure and There being multiple proposals involved People being asked to engage with many proposals. I think that seems at odds with The assumption that some people hold that the outcome is already predetermined So this question is about the outcome being predetermined or not If the naming question was not already made Why is it that the branding hub or a snow head to his website? They're running in parallel for this process Why is it called branding wikipedia.org and not branding wikimedia.org? Yeah This is a mistake if we were looking at this now We would have given it a different URL For sure because it's led to that wrong conclusion That this is already done at the time we were thinking that We were kind of like how do we make a name for this site that makes sense to people inside and outside the movement? I think now if we were going to do it. Yeah, we'd give it a different name. I think actually like Branding branding wikimedia also would have been confusing Because it's branded Rebranding wikimedia.org would have been a little bit provocative But that's what this is. So that would have probably been the most accurate thing. We could have called it great. Thanks for that and another Clarification about snow head to the project design partner Do they plan to participate on wiki or do they see themselves exclusively participating off wiki for this process? hmm Hold up We're not going to see them that active on wiki They are our design partners in this so we know that we can actually be better at the wiki work Than they can they are the design leads for us and so their real specialties is Taking in a lot of different perspectives, which is what they did with the brand concept and Reconciling it down to the commonalities Producing ideas that we might not have because we are all so familiar with this that we ourselves can't We can't kind of fully get away from the possibilities that we've already eliminated because we are so well Established and understanding of our system and of course they're incredible design partners. So You know after naming may 7th be there We will go into design graphic design consideration of logo elements consideration of type color that's going to be really exciting and Actually, it's like that's the moment where we're going to see snow head to flex You know kind of use their strength the most Because that's really what they do most of the time rather than try to understand vast interconnected You know free knowledge Web-based movements like that's that's we're doing they're doing that with us for the first time ever But they do design all the time, but yeah simple answer. They're not going to be that involved on wiki Everything that they produce will wind up on wiki And it will be wikiified by the project team Great. So I want to move to two questions about the projects The first one is about wiki data I think that the shift to a Wikipedia foundation type name or I would assume just a Wikipedia based name Limits the importance of other projects like wiki data What do you think? so yeah The so yeah, the question is basically if we choose Wikipedia as the center of naming Because it's a project. It basically elevates that project above the other projects including In this consideration wiki data The first thing I'd respond is that like Like the movement itself The project team and the foundation Love wiki data or excited about wiki data. So the pursuit of this project is definitely not Meant to cause damage to wiki data It's actually meant to elevate wiki data, right? Actually show stronger connection of why wiki data is so important is so vibrant And there it's kind of worth considering that like there's a again. There's a public understanding and a Inside movement understanding of wiki data that are really different like because wiki data is an incredibly exciting Active project in our movement. It's super lively and there are millions of Entries being at it. I've been doing some ski resorts near me and It's like a very vibrant project Outside of our movement people are not haven't maybe even heard of it yet when we did our studies in 2018 We found that there was not yet a lot of understanding for wiki data Certainly growing that there wasn't a lot of understanding So we see Using wikipedia as a possible center for naming would actually Give wiki data that additional boost That's really the goal not to put the projects in competition, but to recognize that wikipedia is brand awareness it's just world-class more than 80 percent of people in Western Europe and North America have heard of wikipedia in South America in Africa in Asia we've seen that it's been fast growing in awareness from 20 to 30 to 40 percent awareness and so wikipedia as this beloved thing that people Encountering use on the internet all the time has the best brand awareness of all our projects and because of that we think that using it as the naming system is an opportunity to Increase the understanding of the other projects associated with it It's a tool to make the other projects more visible Rather than and I understand the concern Hide the other projects. It would be a failure of the brand system if in selecting a name like wikipedia at the center we hide the other projects our goal is to do just the other just the opposite and in fact one of the six parameters we established for this project was Supporting the sister projects making the sister projects visible through the work a good brand example here Is the Coca-Cola company? So Coca-Cola, of course big multinational corporate Organization they have many products that they make they're most famous for soft drinks And Coca-Cola is the best known of the soft drinks, but they also make a variety of other soft drinks Sprite Fanta The list goes on. Maybe some of you have been to their headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia Maybe you've enjoyed a Coca-Cola product today In any case they decided to use Coca-Cola as the name of their organization because of its Elevated position because it's the best known of their products. It's basically a flagship branding system but to just loop back around if People feel the naming systems are hiding Eclipsing or suppressing the sister projects. That's not a good Movement brand system and we should be challenged to improve that Great, so an interesting question that came in the chat that is kind of the opposite end of this spectrum How about if we were to rename the Wikipedia project so that the WMF can have that name? Oh, I mean, I don't think I can answer that question I Leave it to the to the Wikipedia's But yeah, I mean that sounds like a possibility That I will not That's not going to be suggested by this project, but it's a cool suggestion here It is yeah Yeah, exactly. There's it's like this is our system is elastic, you know something that I've enjoyed Reflecting on with people in this project not like you know people who joined us from across the movement is We change so much on our projects all the time We update information We change the layout we we add new features Our brand system should be alive like that too. It should be something we're refining and improving right that we're adapting You know in technology, there's a phrase that like if you don't Update your code a lot. You basically start to have technical debt You start to have this like all these things you haven't adjusted or maintained And that starts to catch up with you in some ways this project is about brand debt like These these things that we haven't fully maintained and so they've they've stopped working the way we want them to And that's what we're doing here So when when we think about like how all of the parts of our movement connect as names and brands and Logos and colors like that's something that we're gonna always need to be working on and refining right like what happens when Brands become more audio right like they're spoken rather than said or seen in graphic systems Like we're gonna need an an approach to audio what it was what is Wikipedia or the Wikimedia movement sound like? When perhaps technology becomes very High emphasis on 3d objects like should the should the logos all become three-dimensional There's like exciting future possibilities to think about for branding that again We are we're kind of prototyping a process of working together on this Not just for this one time, but hopefully so we could do it again. We could work together on Future branding updates So that was actually the last question of the ones in the chat and the ones that we didn't answer from last week If anybody else has other questions Feel free to unmute and ask how we can Wait for a little bit and see if anybody wants to take the mic and if not, I'm sure I can find some questions Please unmute ask it Hello everybody, this is Farhad from Kazan I am here just to tell you that I've been Interpreting all of this into Russian. I have a number of participants from various ethnic groups Listening live, they might not be understanding any English I am unable to manage two devices to see if they have questions, but Just for you to let you just for you to know that this was going on. That's amazing Of course, if it yeah as ever, you know, we're on wiki So we can take on questions at any time You know this format here office hours was is this is not going to be the only time we do it we want to be present in this way to have discussions and It will be in addition to on wiki Work rather than in substitution Liko I see you have thousands of questions. So you're a bit reluctant Do you have one or two that are particularly pressing? Great two is great There are actually two questions. The first one is rather technical I have tried to find information about the brand thing on meta wiki and I didn't know where to start. So I believe that I found the page brand But that was about current branding and trademarks and so on. So maybe you could Come with some idea of how to be more visible on meta wiki have more links, maybe so Well, there's the sub page of the strategy 2030 about branding and there's a page about brand network So that made it a little bit confusing for me, for example to find the timetable. I finally found it in the YouTube presentation of last week, so Maybe you want to have a fresh start there and that would be helpful for some people To find that those people who are not here every week. And my other question is about We had this input we are snow header fine on that website, which is not a wiki Fine, we could not see the comments of other people. That's great because we don't want people to influence each other but then well then it became black box and Finally, we got the answer that interconnections is the result and this black box. Maybe You could in the nearby future give a little bit more transparency to that black box and Tell us about what were the feedback to the concepts and what was your process by which you have selected Finally or have come to the to the track of finding then interconnections So if you could give a little bit, this is not manned as a reproach, but I was struck by that I was I was wondering. Okay, so how would it become from there to here? My 50 cents. Yeah, absolutely. I start answering that question and then Zach. I'm sure you'll have some stuff to add Um Yeah, great point about elevating the main project page if people are having trouble finding it then that would make sense that Perhaps the concept work might feel like a little bit of a black box We do we do have branding wikipedia.org snow headers branding hub as part of the process But every time we have a feedback moment in this process There is a report generated about it and that report is published and linked on the main project page on meta wiki And so all of the concept work which goes back to the workshops. There was a workshop in Oslo workshop in Bangalore There was a workshop online where community members 97 community members in total Did work around concepts around what they thought the movement meant to them and that was the initial selection of Concepts that snow had to work with they tried to understand all of the concepts as a set as a whole how they work together How they reinforce each other's meaning and then distilled all of those concepts There were 23 concepts that came out of the workshops Distilled those concepts into a unifying overarching concept Each of the workshops had a report that was published that talked about main themes from that workshop and the concepts that came out of that workshop And then there were also online Exercises that helps know how to do this distilling process in a way that was guided by how the community thinks of the communities think about About free knowledge how they think about the wikimedia movement And those online exercises were also summarized in reports that were linked from the main project page As soon as this current exercise is up right now there is an exercise an online exercise running about Visualizing interconnection where community members can go on and Link to commons files visuals that represent interconnection to them as soon as that exercise is done There will be a report again that comes out on that wiki that talks about not just visualizing the concept interconnection, but we'll also talk about More about the process of how snow had to arrived at the interconnection concept So that's just a little bit about the documentation that we have going But I think that yes, if it's not visible and of course it may look like a black box I I could totally relate to that. So we'll be convening as a project team to figure out how we can address that Zack do you want to add any more about the process of snow had to Distilling the 23 concepts into the final concept interconnection. I Would like to add multiple points here So yes Ziko these are two very good questions Thank you for asking them and of course we do welcome the remaining 998 that you may have or however many is left in your queue So yes the on on the the meta page for brand. I think we can make that One of the places where we make this more visible that this is this work is happening. There's a great suggestion and Rosie. Thanks for Jumping into confirm that as well Remember when we made when we when we revised that page back in 2016 I'm excited to get back on to the brand page on meta And see how we can link it to this work And I wanted to thank Chris and Elena and Kim for being incredible colleagues with us Se and I as they constantly help us do even more on wiki more effectively. So thanks for that in regards to the black box Ziko I understand that yeah, there's been a lot of visible work on The concepts right people gave ideas. They worked on them together They provided them then they were all hosted on the snow hetto website and people gave Hearts likes onto them and comments all of which was shared and captured by snow hetto and then a Decision was made about interconnection. So I see that's where you're pointing at That's kind of the black box moment input given outcome delivered How did the input inform the outcome? and just as Elena is saying we can further document that and Bigger commitment bigger promise we can improve on that. So when we go into the naming That will actually not be That's when we intend to really produce a lot of documentation about We will summarize what we heard from community What we heard from affiliates? We're gonna summarize the responses to the specific ideas like proposal one proposal two proposal three So that when we go forward people will know Why parts of proposal two have been dropped? Why parts of proposal one have been kept, etc We we I will just say that we really are committed to making that clear Because that's how we make sure that the input that people kindly gives the guidance is trusted by us as people working on the project and by you all as providing that guidance we can improve on making the black box Transparent and we'll do so with with some more documentation ahead Okay If there are anyone else who wants to take the mic I can ask some more questions There's been some discussion on wiki about interconnection and on the mailing list as well Some people seem to like it some people seem to be confused by it How do you feel that the interconnection furthers? the project's understanding of who we are as a movement I Saw a great comment by Richard and it was about inter wiki And inter wiki I don't want to get this wrong, but my understanding is like inter wiki is is some of the things we use that go between the projects and go between different Different parts of our sites In that regard, I think the exciting thing about interconnection is that it's about the fact that our projects are fundamentally Interrelated that they only really thrive when they reference one another they build on one another And that our movement only thrives when it reflects and connects in between different parts of the movement and even more broadly our Entire movement is not alone. We depend on journalism we depend on researchers we depend on photographers on Archaeologists of professors of knowledge workers and makers around the world and so fundamentally I see interconnection as more of a verb than a noun To interconnect is what a healthy movement would do it would find New connections to make and it would pursue making them it would prioritize them And I think that's exactly what's made this movement strong For almost 20 years has been the growth mindset The connective mindset the expansion mindset of how much deeper and richer things could be And there's lots of interconnections to provide they really are there's like The connections within our sites again, there's the connections between our projects There's the connections between parts of our affiliates And so I read that is very I basically think interconnection is a very strong brand concept for us and it will remind us In this project and beyond that like we have to constantly find ways to connect new things the strategic direction emphasizes the essential infrastructure for free knowledge and like Infrastructure can kind of seem static or Even not as a knock on the writers there. It can seem a little boring. It's like hidden it's It feels like You know a utility but not something emotional The spirit of Good infrastructure is that it's interconnected that it works. And so I think that interconnection and infrastructure are super related So it also inspired me to think about the connection between Um brand concepts and the commitments we're making for 2030 great And can you talk a little bit more about how interconnection will be guiding upcoming work I think that we've been talking about how this won't be Um a visible part of branding but rather a guiding idea And I think that's a little bit complicated to to understand so can you Flesh that out a little bit more How will this be guiding? Is that that's the question How are we going to use it? Yeah um, okay So this is a design project um And is it it's an open design project really and that means that we want to Create a set of objects a set of design elements So I sometimes kind of illustrate it like if if I had this piece of paper, you know when we're done There's like a squiggle and that's like the new proposed logo We've all talked about and then there's a set of naming And and this is kind of like the naming ideas and here's how the naming ideas work And if you're making a new group you would you would look at these if you're trying to Improve your group you would use a different set. It's like a set of guidelines with design objects. That's what comes at the end of this um To get to good outcomes. We work collectively Gathering perspectives from across the movement having people challenge the work and show us how it could be better um In preparation for that we've outlined these six qualities that it should achieve that people have told us The movement branding doesn't do now and it should do if we're going to change it If we're going to change things it has to reduce confusion. It has to protect our reputation It has to support the sister projects. It has to prevent legal risks um, it has to Improve our movement growth and it needs to be something you can personalize and opt into those are the six qualities we captured But those are just kind of like Things we score like as we look at options How we actually make design choices is something that also comes from a spirit Like what are you trying to animate about our organization? Um, and so if you're trying to animate the spirit of the olympics, like what's the central spirit of the olympic games? They probably have a sense for that Um, if you're trying to animate the central spirit of nasa, what is it? It's probably not the objects Like rockets or the people alone like astronauts and scientists. See you later. I see um, it's probably something closer to Exploration a like a spirit and what you do when you have that spirit is you use it to Help inspire the approaches to visual Objects to graphic objects and to naming systems like does this Have an interconnected spirit. It's kind of a final question that you can always ask It might be the first question you ask it might be the last question you ask But it's a kind of a an emotional alignment tool. Um, and so what you'll see is like we're going to have all these naming ideas and They're going to hopefully meet large parts of those six qualities that I outlined um But they also will have to have a connection to interconnection as an idea And so you'll see that you'll see how they build on each other And they show that the movement is made up of parts that are linked that are reliant that are um Connected between each other. So it's I know it's like it's not It's basically going to be easier to see and practice once we get to may 7th Then to describe because describing it. I feel like one of these hand wavy Like design people who's like it will be in the spirit of the show, but that you're going to see it and um Honestly, I think interconnection is going to help us for a while as a concept at the heart of who we are as a movement Just as infrastructure essential infrastructure and Anyone can join us have helped us or the vision statement. Imagine a world those help us kind of keep our Keep our minds set on a long distant point in the future that we're working towards Great. Thanks so much And with those forward thinking thoughts we are at time So I just I want to echo what Zach said that this is this is the first of many office hours that we're going to have Unstructured time for people to come bring their questions work through some of the difficult stuff This is a a complex process, but a really rewarding process. So we really want to make sure that everybody You know understands what's going on and feels confident about what's coming up next So big next steps stay tuned for may 7th when the naming convention proposals are released and for any updates before then And um, yeah, thank you all so much for joining us today. I hope to see you soon Thanks everyone Thank you Bye. Thank you. Thank you. Bye. Bye