Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for your thoughts on the Wikimedia Foundation election cycle

[Fæ]

I have views on both votes, but I'll just share one, as I no longer
feel that sharing any more of my viewpoint about the WMF board and its
elections here or on-wiki would be welcome, or make any difference
apart from helping to paint a bigger target on my back.

Having James back on the board is helpful in demonstrating the
election has value in its currently limited format, and gave a strong
and unambiguous message back to the WMF board of trustees. He provides
some of us long termers a friendly private channel with a trustworthy
fellow volunteer, who has no worrying political or commercial
interests.

Fae

On 14 July 2017 at 20:46, Joe Sutherland  wrote:
> Hello all!
>
> The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent
> Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees
> elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in
> May/June.
>
> What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone better?
>
> I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated
> Meta-Wiki page:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mortem
>
> Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
>
> Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
>
> best,
> Joe
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for your thoughts on the Wikimedia Foundation election cycle

[Pine W]

Hi Rogol,

I think that suggesting a change of vocabulary is a good idea. I suggest
that you place that feedback on the page that Joe linked.

You might also mention -- although I'm not sure whether that page is the
best place for this suggestion, but adding it wouldn't hurt --
that WMF could transition itself to be a membership organization with
direct elections.

Also, I suggest that we keep in mind that the decision about terminology is
probably made made much higher up in the
WMF hierarchy than Joe's level. Let's try to be civil to staff who are
communicating decisions that trickle down from higher up in
the hierarchy.

Pine


On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> Joe,
>
> You don't mean "election" when it comes to the Board, unless you mean
> "election to the position of being considered for appointment by the
> Board".  Unless and until those positions are either truly directly elected
> by the Community, or the Board commits itself to appointing whomsoever the
> Community nominates irrespective of the Board's own view of their fitness
> for the post – which would be a violation of their duty as Trustees –
> please avoid the misleading term "election" and replace it by "nomination",
> or "selection", or "pre-election", or some other term that correctly
> reflects the fact that the only body with power to appoint a Board member
> is the Board itself.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Joe Sutherland  >
> wrote:
>
> > Um. I of course mean "election", not "meeting". :)
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > --
> > *Joe Sutherland*
> > Community Advocate
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > On 14 July 2017 at 12:46, Joe Sutherland 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello all!
> > >
> > > The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent
> > > Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees
> > > elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting
> in
> > > May/June.
> > >
> > > What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone
> > better?
> > >
> > > I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated
> > > Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > > elections/2017/Post_mortem
> > >
> > > Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
> > >
> > > Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
> > >
> > > best,
> > > Joe
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Joe Sutherland*
> > > Community Advocate
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for your thoughts on the Wikimedia Foundation election cycle

[Rogol Domedonfors]

Joe,

You don't mean "election" when it comes to the Board, unless you mean
"election to the position of being considered for appointment by the
Board".  Unless and until those positions are either truly directly elected
by the Community, or the Board commits itself to appointing whomsoever the
Community nominates irrespective of the Board's own view of their fitness
for the post – which would be a violation of their duty as Trustees –
please avoid the misleading term "election" and replace it by "nomination",
or "selection", or "pre-election", or some other term that correctly
reflects the fact that the only body with power to appoint a Board member
is the Board itself.

"Rogol"

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Joe Sutherland 
wrote:

> Um. I of course mean "election", not "meeting". :)
>
> Joe
>
> --
> *Joe Sutherland*
> Community Advocate
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> On 14 July 2017 at 12:46, Joe Sutherland 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello all!
> >
> > The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent
> > Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees
> > elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in
> > May/June.
> >
> > What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone
> better?
> >
> > I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated
> > Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > elections/2017/Post_mortem
> >
> > Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
> >
> > Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
> >
> > best,
> > Joe
> >
> > --
> > *Joe Sutherland*
> > Community Advocate
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for your thoughts on the Wikimedia Foundation election cycle

[Joe Sutherland]

Um. I of course mean "election", not "meeting". :)

Joe

--
*Joe Sutherland*
Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation

On 14 July 2017 at 12:46, Joe Sutherland  wrote:

> Hello all!
>
> The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent
> Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees
> elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in
> May/June.
>
> What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone better?
>
> I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated
> Meta-Wiki page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> elections/2017/Post_mortem
>
> Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.
>
> Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)
>
> best,
> Joe
>
> --
> *Joe Sutherland*
> Community Advocate
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Looking for your thoughts on the Wikimedia Foundation election cycle

[Joe Sutherland]

Hello all!

The Support and Safety team is looking for your thoughts on the recent
Wikimedia Foundation elections cycle - that is, the Board of Trustees
elections in April/May, and the Funds Dissemination Committee meeting in
May/June.

What do you think went well, and what do you think could have gone better?

I'd love your thoughts, either on this email thread or on the dedicated
Meta-Wiki page:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mortem

Feel free to email me privately if you'd like to.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, good or bad. :)

best,
Joe

--
*Joe Sutherland*
Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] June 23: Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#19)

[Pine W]

Hi WMF folks,

I'm still waiting for a reply to this question.

Pine


On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Pine W  wrote:

> Having had time to reflect further on this matter, I'm having difficulty
> with writing a comprehensive reply in a civil tone.
>
> Rather than try to address multiple topics at once, I'd like to start by
> following up on a single topic. I'm hoping that this
> will help to keep the conversation focused and civil.
>
> > Regarding costs, as has been previously stated by the Foundation and
> Board, the Board approved a spending resolution
> > last year for expenses related to the movement strategy of up to $2.5
> million over Fiscal Year 2016-17 (July 2016 - June
> > 2017) and Fiscal Year 2017-18 (July 2017 - June 2018).
>
> Thanks for providing the project budget number, which is a good place to
> start. How much is the timeline extension projected
> to cost, and from what source are the funds being drawn? I imagine that an
> analysis of the cost of the extension was done
> before the extension was authorized, and that a funding source was
> identified. I hope that WMF can provide that information
> and that only a few minutes of staff time will be necessary to publish it.
>
> I'm hoping that we can address this topic first, and then move on to other
> issues that have come up.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pine
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>
>> I have stayed away from this thread for awhile with the hope that I can
>> approach it in a businesslike tone. I want to acknowledge those who have
>> posted previously. I have drafted a response to the email that Greg sent,
>> and out of respect for the holiday for US staff I'll wait until Wednesday
>> to send that response. This matter is important, but I don't want WMF staff
>> to feel like they need to think about this or respond to it during a
>> holiday weekend. There will be time enough for more discussion after the
>> holiday. I'm not trying to close off discussion, but I thought that I
>> should explain why I'm planning to wait a few days before responding to
>> staff.
>>
>> Pine
>>
>>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Wikimédia France - informations sur la situation actuelle

[Devouard (gmail)]

Hi Anders

I LOVE your email. I forward it to our public list.

Thanks

Florence

Le 13/07/2017 à 17:37, Anders Wennersten a écrit :
I LOVE the Wikipedia way of working - result-oriented, respectful 
dialogues around facts


I HATE power-games and misuse of given authority, both in general in 
life and especially in the Wikimedia movement


I ADMIRE the functionaries in France who have stood firm in their own 
integrity and their beliefs in our values, and rather resigned then 
"played along"


I am very HAPPY to see the decisive stand of FDC, The Board an WMF for 
our values in this case of misbehaviour


and I TRULY LOVE to see the constructiveness of the French community as 
they arise (as  the Phoenix bird from the ashes) in order to 
re-establish the chapter to be true to the values, vision and best 
practice within the movement


I already know the French community to be both creative, productive and 
well working, and am now looking forward to once again see the also 
creative, productive and well working as we have been used to see


Anders
wishing everyone involved the energy to get through this challenge in 
the best way possible



Den 2017-07-13 kl. 11:44, skrev Natacha Rault:

Der Lodewijk,

Thank you for the message, the threshold has indeed been reached, and 
the WMFR board has communicated that they will have the GA asap. The 
official number of people requesting the GA is of 73 as of now.


The emphasis on democratic chapters is indeed important. People are 
now discussing freely on the public list, and it’s  great because they 
are starting to reflect on what they want for the future, and also 
have spokesmen and women for the organisation of the GA. I think this 
was really needed and the discussion is really refreshing after months 
of moderation.


Kind regards,

Natacha / Nattes à chat








Le 13 juil. 2017 à 11:32, Lodewijk  a 
écrit :


Thanks Natacha.

I see that 70 members have requested a General Assembly to be held. I
remember from WMFR's bylaws that 25% of the membership can force the 
board
to call a General Assembly, or do it themselves. Is this request 
formulated

in such a manner? What is the required threshold?

This is a terribly sad situation WMFR finds itself in. There are no
winners, and trying to continue this struggle can only create bigger 
losses

on all sides.

I hope an assembly can be held soon, and that a democratic decision 
can be
prepared there, where the membership can give its trust to a board - 
either
providing the current board (with a majority of board-appointed 
members, if

I understand correctly) with the much needed moral authority, or by
electing a new board that can start afresh.

This is why we have always put so much emphasis on having democratic
chapters where the members can in the end intervene.

Lodewijk
(snipping the messages below, as the software complains it's too long)



2017-07-13 10:21 GMT+02:00 Natacha Rault :


Dear All,

As some anglophone wikimedians wanted an English version, we have
translated the time line in English concerning what is happening in 
the

French chapter, although surely we still have to clarify and correct
mistakes. You can find it here: https://www.mathisbenguigui.eu
/wikimedia-timeline/indexEN.html 

Kind regards,

Nattes à chat / Natacha


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik

i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,





___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,