[Wikimedia-l] Re: Decentralized fundraising, centralized distribution

[The Cunctator]

This is a very excellent report. Thanks to all for the work put into it.

On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 10:47 AM Gnangarra  wrote:

> I see one of the key things in the the movement and the WMF has developed
> is thats leaving behind the volunteers and contributors.  There is focus on
> top down, corporate structures in everything and details fear of failure in
> attempting projects in some ways a lost of trust of volunteers altogether.
>  Significant bias is developing into favouring those who can write great
> documents and applications in an academic grant format leaving behind many
> of our "anyone can edit" community who arent as proficient in grant writing
> especially in an english/european academic format.
>
> Wikipedia started in the academic model with Nupedia, but it was  found
> that those outside that circle were doing it more effectively in so many
> ways that when it shifted.  The current system we have fallen into is
> symptom of the lack understanding of the communities where contributors
> arent as prominent in the decision processes but rather its people entering
> from those systems that failed Nupedia making the decisions using complex
> talk fests and year on year never ending discussion. You just need to look
> at the current BoT elections to see how long it takes to get anywhere,
> strategy started 7 years ago and yet we still havent even reached the
> implementation of anything. Many of the contributors that brought into and
> had input have moved on, there's large cohort of contributors that have
> joined since then.
>
> Our biggest successes now are coming from people who move outside the
> systems in place. Even now we chose play it safe and over use things like
> "Wiki Loves..." rather than step out of the comfortable zones.  We need to
> think differently again and trust to the community to do what cant be done,
> just like it did 20 years ago, less bureaucracy more trust, be bold
> nothing should be a big deal.
>
> On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 21:19, Nicola Zeuner 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nathan,
>>
>> Thanks for bringing up comparability. The paper points out that the
>> historic development of the international office in the sampled cases is
>> different from how the WMF was formed. This does not, in my view, preclude
>> us from comparing systems.
>>
>> I agree with Andreas that the central value of our movement is provided
>> by volunteers, and they organize in affiliates. The WMF has many central
>> functions, which is probably what you are referring to, including
>> maintaining the platforms, fundraising, grantmaking, community development,
>> advocacy, to name but a few. The sampled INGOs secretariats have a great
>> variety of functions as well, but typically not including fundraising and
>> grantmaking.
>>
>> With 2030 Movement Strategy's drive toward decentralizing functions
>> (incl. fundraising), those of us working on and contributing to the charter
>> and policies should take good care at reviewing functions to see which ones
>> are still appropriate and effective to be done by a central org, and which
>> ones make more sense to do locally. Studying other global movements, in my
>> view, makes a lot of sense here, *especially *if they have grown
>> differently and gone through cycles of renewal and reform.
>>
>> This is our moment of redesigning and  re-forming.. So let's be open, and
>> not restrict our view by insisting on our exceptionality.
>>
>> best,
>> Nikki
>>
>>
>> Nikki Zeuner
>> Senior Advisor Global Partnerships
>>
>> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
>> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-32
>> Mobile (0151) 50824711
>> https://wikimedia.de
>>
>> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
>> Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
>> https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>>
>> Bleiben Sie auf dem neuesten Stand! Aktuelle Nachrichten und spannende
>> Geschichten rund um Wikimedia, Wikipedia und Freies Wissen im Newsletter: Zur
>> Anmeldung .
>>
>> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
>> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
>> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
>> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
>>
>>
>> Am Mi., 7. Sept. 2022 um 16:06 Uhr schrieb Nathan :
>>
>>> Hi Nicole,
>>>
>>> Thanks for sharing this - very interesting reading so far. I'm hoping
>>> you can elaborate on WMDE's thinking around selecting INGOs for evaluation.
>>> Your criteria is very straightforward - INGOs with a confederation of
>>> independent organizations, connected by a global mission.
>>>
>>> But each of your selected INGOs is composed of individual organizations
>>> that deliver the products and services that advance the global mission
>>> within their geographic area, with an "international office" that fulfills
>>> a coordination and governance role. By contrast, 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Decentralized fundraising, centralized distribution

[Gnangarra]

I see one of the key things in the the movement and the WMF has developed
is thats leaving behind the volunteers and contributors.  There is focus on
top down, corporate structures in everything and details fear of failure in
attempting projects in some ways a lost of trust of volunteers altogether.
 Significant bias is developing into favouring those who can write great
documents and applications in an academic grant format leaving behind many
of our "anyone can edit" community who arent as proficient in grant writing
especially in an english/european academic format.

Wikipedia started in the academic model with Nupedia, but it was  found
that those outside that circle were doing it more effectively in so many
ways that when it shifted.  The current system we have fallen into is
symptom of the lack understanding of the communities where contributors
arent as prominent in the decision processes but rather its people entering
from those systems that failed Nupedia making the decisions using complex
talk fests and year on year never ending discussion. You just need to look
at the current BoT elections to see how long it takes to get anywhere,
strategy started 7 years ago and yet we still havent even reached the
implementation of anything. Many of the contributors that brought into and
had input have moved on, there's large cohort of contributors that have
joined since then.

Our biggest successes now are coming from people who move outside the
systems in place. Even now we chose play it safe and over use things like
"Wiki Loves..." rather than step out of the comfortable zones.  We need to
think differently again and trust to the community to do what cant be done,
just like it did 20 years ago, less bureaucracy more trust, be bold
nothing should be a big deal.

On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 21:19, Nicola Zeuner 
wrote:

> Hi Nathan,
>
> Thanks for bringing up comparability. The paper points out that the
> historic development of the international office in the sampled cases is
> different from how the WMF was formed. This does not, in my view, preclude
> us from comparing systems.
>
> I agree with Andreas that the central value of our movement is provided by
> volunteers, and they organize in affiliates. The WMF has many central
> functions, which is probably what you are referring to, including
> maintaining the platforms, fundraising, grantmaking, community development,
> advocacy, to name but a few. The sampled INGOs secretariats have a great
> variety of functions as well, but typically not including fundraising and
> grantmaking.
>
> With 2030 Movement Strategy's drive toward decentralizing functions (incl.
> fundraising), those of us working on and contributing to the charter and
> policies should take good care at reviewing functions to see which ones are
> still appropriate and effective to be done by a central org, and which ones
> make more sense to do locally. Studying other global movements, in my view,
> makes a lot of sense here, *especially *if they have grown differently
> and gone through cycles of renewal and reform.
>
> This is our moment of redesigning and  re-forming.. So let's be open, and
> not restrict our view by insisting on our exceptionality.
>
> best,
> Nikki
>
>
> Nikki Zeuner
> Senior Advisor Global Partnerships
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-32
> Mobile (0151) 50824711
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Bleiben Sie auf dem neuesten Stand! Aktuelle Nachrichten und spannende
> Geschichten rund um Wikimedia, Wikipedia und Freies Wissen im Newsletter: Zur
> Anmeldung .
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
>
>
> Am Mi., 7. Sept. 2022 um 16:06 Uhr schrieb Nathan :
>
>> Hi Nicole,
>>
>> Thanks for sharing this - very interesting reading so far. I'm hoping you
>> can elaborate on WMDE's thinking around selecting INGOs for evaluation.
>> Your criteria is very straightforward - INGOs with a confederation of
>> independent organizations, connected by a global mission.
>>
>> But each of your selected INGOs is composed of individual organizations
>> that deliver the products and services that advance the global mission
>> within their geographic area, with an "international office" that fulfills
>> a coordination and governance role. By contrast, the bulk of
>> mission-related services from the Wikimedia movement are offered to the
>> world at large centrally by the international office (i.e. the Wikimedia
>> projects). Did WMDE consider how comparable these INGOs are to the
>> Wikimedia 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Decentralized fundraising, centralized distribution

[Nicola Zeuner]

Hi Nathan,

Thanks for bringing up comparability. The paper points out that the
historic development of the international office in the sampled cases is
different from how the WMF was formed. This does not, in my view, preclude
us from comparing systems.

I agree with Andreas that the central value of our movement is provided by
volunteers, and they organize in affiliates. The WMF has many central
functions, which is probably what you are referring to, including
maintaining the platforms, fundraising, grantmaking, community development,
advocacy, to name but a few. The sampled INGOs secretariats have a great
variety of functions as well, but typically not including fundraising and
grantmaking.

With 2030 Movement Strategy's drive toward decentralizing functions (incl.
fundraising), those of us working on and contributing to the charter and
policies should take good care at reviewing functions to see which ones are
still appropriate and effective to be done by a central org, and which ones
make more sense to do locally. Studying other global movements, in my view,
makes a lot of sense here, *especially *if they have grown differently and
gone through cycles of renewal and reform.

This is our moment of redesigning and  re-forming.. So let's be open, and
not restrict our view by insisting on our exceptionality.

best,
Nikki


Nikki Zeuner
Senior Advisor Global Partnerships

Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-32
Mobile (0151) 50824711
https://wikimedia.de

Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
https://spenden.wikimedia.de

Bleiben Sie auf dem neuesten Stand! Aktuelle Nachrichten und spannende
Geschichten rund um Wikimedia, Wikipedia und Freies Wissen im Newsletter: Zur
Anmeldung .

Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.


Am Mi., 7. Sept. 2022 um 16:06 Uhr schrieb Nathan :

> Hi Nicole,
>
> Thanks for sharing this - very interesting reading so far. I'm hoping you
> can elaborate on WMDE's thinking around selecting INGOs for evaluation.
> Your criteria is very straightforward - INGOs with a confederation of
> independent organizations, connected by a global mission.
>
> But each of your selected INGOs is composed of individual organizations
> that deliver the products and services that advance the global mission
> within their geographic area, with an "international office" that fulfills
> a coordination and governance role. By contrast, the bulk of
> mission-related services from the Wikimedia movement are offered to the
> world at large centrally by the international office (i.e. the Wikimedia
> projects). Did WMDE consider how comparable these INGOs are to the
> Wikimedia movement in this sense? I don't see a section of your paper that
> compares the service/product delivery structure of these INGOs, so perhaps
> this distinction did not come up during your review? Or is the thinking
> that decentralization of project hosting and support is on the table, and
> the report can inform that consideration?
>
> Thanks for any insight you can share,
> Nate
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OYCZ7RD2CC4E7HQEIAIDKFZJP7ALCCQH/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/7CSPUY5K5SMSFAK4TKD24K7W3VBGKRRC/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Decentralized fundraising, centralized distribution

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
At the same time, Wikipedia was offered to the world in English and only
now we put more effort into bringing Wikipedia to the rest of our world, in
other languages. When you consider the huge bias we offer in our
information about ourselves. Your arguments centre around a past that was
glorious as a start. It is hightime we ensure that we grow Wikipedia for
the rest of the world,. Yes, we are not only Wikipedia and underinvestment
and lack of interest in other projects is obvious.
Thanks,
Gerard

On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 08:03, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> Dear Nate,
>
> You say, "By contrast, the bulk of mission-related services from the
> Wikimedia movement are offered to the world at large centrally by the
> international office (i.e. the Wikimedia projects)."
>
> Just think about this statement for a moment. It is not true. The bulk of
> mission-related services from the Wikimedia movement are offered to the
> world at large by volunteers distributed all over the world, some of whom
> organise themselves into local affiliates.
>
> How do we know this? We know this because Wikipedia became a top-10
> website serving the world in 2007, at a time when the WMF had less than a
> dozen staff and annual expenses of $2 million.
>
> I'm not advocating a return to those times, but I think it makes clear
> where the value came from.
>
> Best,
> Andreas
>
> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022, Nathan  wrote:
> > Hi Nicole,
> > Thanks for sharing this - very interesting reading so far. I'm hoping
> you can elaborate on WMDE's thinking around selecting INGOs for evaluation.
> Your criteria is very straightforward - INGOs with a confederation of
> independent organizations, connected by a global mission.
> > But each of your selected INGOs is composed of individual organizations
> that deliver the products and services that advance the global mission
> within their geographic area, with an "international office" that fulfills
> a coordination and governance role. By contrast, the bulk of
> mission-related services from the Wikimedia movement are offered to the
> world at large centrally by the international office (i.e. the Wikimedia
> projects). Did WMDE consider how comparable these INGOs are to the
> Wikimedia movement in this sense? I don't see a section of your paper that
> compares the service/product delivery structure of these INGOs, so perhaps
> this distinction did not come up during your review? Or is the thinking
> that decentralization of project hosting and support is on the table, and
> the report can inform that consideration?
> > Thanks for any insight you can share,
> > Nate ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/MYEOTJM4HXACTGXDTOJZLKWNVULL44LZ/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/O6UHC5LCJQWVHHHCYTUY2DCI4CRKT6E6/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Decentralized fundraising, centralized distribution

[Andreas Kolbe]

Dear Nate,

You say, "By contrast, the bulk of mission-related services from the
Wikimedia movement are offered to the world at large centrally by the
international office (i.e. the Wikimedia projects)."

Just think about this statement for a moment. It is not true. The bulk of
mission-related services from the Wikimedia movement are offered to the
world at large by volunteers distributed all over the world, some of whom
organise themselves into local affiliates.

How do we know this? We know this because Wikipedia became a top-10 website
serving the world in 2007, at a time when the WMF had less than a dozen
staff and annual expenses of $2 million.

I'm not advocating a return to those times, but I think it makes clear
where the value came from.

Best,
Andreas

On Wednesday, September 7, 2022, Nathan  wrote:
> Hi Nicole,
> Thanks for sharing this - very interesting reading so far. I'm hoping you
can elaborate on WMDE's thinking around selecting INGOs for evaluation.
Your criteria is very straightforward - INGOs with a confederation of
independent organizations, connected by a global mission.
> But each of your selected INGOs is composed of individual organizations
that deliver the products and services that advance the global mission
within their geographic area, with an "international office" that fulfills
a coordination and governance role. By contrast, the bulk of
mission-related services from the Wikimedia movement are offered to the
world at large centrally by the international office (i.e. the Wikimedia
projects). Did WMDE consider how comparable these INGOs are to the
Wikimedia movement in this sense? I don't see a section of your paper that
compares the service/product delivery structure of these INGOs, so perhaps
this distinction did not come up during your review? Or is the thinking
that decentralization of project hosting and support is on the table, and
the report can inform that consideration?
> Thanks for any insight you can share,
> Nate
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/MYEOTJM4HXACTGXDTOJZLKWNVULL44LZ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Decentralized fundraising, centralized distribution

[Nathan]

Hi Nicole,

Thanks for sharing this - very interesting reading so far. I'm hoping you
can elaborate on WMDE's thinking around selecting INGOs for evaluation.
Your criteria is very straightforward - INGOs with a confederation of
independent organizations, connected by a global mission.

But each of your selected INGOs is composed of individual organizations
that deliver the products and services that advance the global mission
within their geographic area, with an "international office" that fulfills
a coordination and governance role. By contrast, the bulk of
mission-related services from the Wikimedia movement are offered to the
world at large centrally by the international office (i.e. the Wikimedia
projects). Did WMDE consider how comparable these INGOs are to the
Wikimedia movement in this sense? I don't see a section of your paper that
compares the service/product delivery structure of these INGOs, so perhaps
this distinction did not come up during your review? Or is the thinking
that decentralization of project hosting and support is on the table, and
the report can inform that consideration?

Thanks for any insight you can share,
Nate
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OYCZ7RD2CC4E7HQEIAIDKFZJP7ALCCQH/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org