Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] To WMF; Anasuya's involvement. And transparency!

[Ravishankar]

HI Vikram Vincent.

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Vikram Vincent wrote:

> Such apprehensions exist in all communities where there are volunteers
> and employees whether the Linux kernel, GCC, LibC, Wikipedia, etc..
>

Wikipedia is unique in many aspects and should not be confused with other
FOSS and Free Knowledge projects.

For example, in Ubuntu and WordPress, there are many full time employees
contributing code. Whether you are volunteer or not, the ultimate product /
deliverable is same and the output can be clearly mesaured. Except few
non-technical employees, most of the employees are developers.  And none of
these organizations work purely on a donation basis.

Comparing this to Wikipedia, almost 99% of content is generated by
volunteers. In fact, generating content by paid programs is strictly banned
or has strict guidelines in most of the projects.

Wikipedia is run solely by donations appreciating the work of the
volunteers. I have seen donors who are shocked to know that their money is
spent on things other than technical needs.

In such a situation, WMF which handles the donated money has a
responsibility to invest that wisely and transparently.

But that is not happening. WMF is squandering a lot of money on
"experimental programs" with no measure of outcomes.

See

http://bit.ly/1jlcA3j

where the reckless spending of money by chapters is criticized.

Interestingly, I don't see such criticism for programs run directly or
indirectly by WMF like the CIS-A2K program.

// IMO I am fine with a paid employee doing more work than a volunteer
cause that is a strength and I am also fine with the employee setting
goals. Volunteers may either work on those goals or create their own.//

Paid empoyees are free to set independent goals that don't interefere or
mislead a naive community.

//Now, one weakness in the current model is that it is pedagogically not
sound.  It does not effectively engage the learner within the context
of education in India.  And due to this we lose out on the multitude
of students who join us in the initial stages.  This problem is common
to both volunteer driven and paid project driven activities.
Second weakness would be making the new comers self-sufficient and
enabling them to continue contributing even after the program is done.//

The fundamental issue is the lack of understanding by these Education
program designers that not everyone can and need to become a Wikipedian.

Heck, I contribute to Tamil Wikipedia for 9 years. Even if you lock me in a
room and torture me, I won't contribute to English Wikipedia :) People's
motivations vary.

Not everyone can and need to become a poet / musician / FOSS geek / green
peace volunteer.

Any such program to convert people en mase by rigorous training and
measurement is fundamentally flawed.

All successful Wikipedia communities are organically grown which takes lot
of time.

There is no point running half baked programs with huge cost and zero
understanding of ground realities.

I can even tolerate if there is zero output from these. But, programs like
these spoil the community dynamics and make them clueless and spoon feeding
dependent for ever.


Ravi
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] To WMF; Anasuya's involvement. And transparency!

[ansuman]

Yes, you're right. But I was talking specifically about this project in
making decisions.

This percept by Pradeep at proposal talk page sums it up;

//I see no point in community engagement with this proposal to improve it
without the knowledge of WMF's assessment. Trying to make improvements
without any idea of the feedback will just lead to poor quality. Also, I do
not see the need for this public grant application process when pretty much
everything else seems to be behind closed doors. I believe you (& WMF) will
have a better idea on whether to fund this proposal or not based on your
internal appraisal of the performance of CIS-A2K than community members
here who have seen only the plan and only parts of the implementation of
the programme by CIS-A2K for which they were already funded.
Prad2609
 (talk ) 18:41, 17
April 2014 (UTC) //

Thanks.

Ansuman




On 19 April 2014 17:33, Vikram Vincent  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> On 19 April 2014 16:36, ansuman  wrote:
> 
> > And it looks like no matter what volunteers ask, say; irrespective of
> their
> > concerns, the decisions are final or have been made. To put it in another
> > way, the paid employees outweigh volunteers. That's all. Thanks.
>
> Such apprehensions exist in all communities where there are volunteers
> and employees whether the Linux kernel, GCC, LibC, Wikipedia, etc..
> The point however is to try to identify the strengths and weaknesses,
> opportunities and threats - increase strengths, utilise opportunities,
> eliminate weaknesses and take care of threats.
> The best way to do these is by speaking plainly and by asking
> questions and assuming good faith. Further, suggestions and alternate
> models could be proposed. Even if the proposer is unable to implement
> the idea somebody else will.
>
> IMO I am fine with a paid employee doing more work than a volunteer
> cause that is a strength and I am also fine with the employee setting
> goals. Volunteers may either work on those goals or create their own.
> If the paid employee is doing something illegal then we need to take
> hard steps to rectify but I don't think that is the problem here.
> Now, one weakness in the current model is that it is pedagogically not
> sound.  It does not effectively engage the learner within the context
> of education in India.  And due to this we lose out on the multitude
> of students who join us in the initial stages.  This problem is common
> to both volunteer driven and paid project driven activities.
> Second weakness would be making the new comers self-sufficient and
> enabling them to continue contributing even after the program is done.
>  This problem is common to both volunteer driven and paid project
> driven activities.
> A challenge is coming up with effective and measurable outcomes and
> these should be negotiable between the volunteers, employees and the
> Foundation - maybe it is specified somewhere and I have not seen it.
> I think there is enough space for all of us to work ensuring that the
> free knowledge movement is strengthened.
> Let us now get back to productive work.
> Warm regards
> Vikram
>
> ___
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] To WMF; Anasuya's involvement. And transparency!

[Vikram Vincent]

Hi!

On 19 April 2014 16:36, ansuman  wrote:

> And it looks like no matter what volunteers ask, say; irrespective of their
> concerns, the decisions are final or have been made. To put it in another
> way, the paid employees outweigh volunteers. That's all. Thanks.

Such apprehensions exist in all communities where there are volunteers
and employees whether the Linux kernel, GCC, LibC, Wikipedia, etc..
The point however is to try to identify the strengths and weaknesses,
opportunities and threats - increase strengths, utilise opportunities,
eliminate weaknesses and take care of threats.
The best way to do these is by speaking plainly and by asking
questions and assuming good faith. Further, suggestions and alternate
models could be proposed. Even if the proposer is unable to implement
the idea somebody else will.

IMO I am fine with a paid employee doing more work than a volunteer
cause that is a strength and I am also fine with the employee setting
goals. Volunteers may either work on those goals or create their own.
If the paid employee is doing something illegal then we need to take
hard steps to rectify but I don't think that is the problem here.
Now, one weakness in the current model is that it is pedagogically not
sound.  It does not effectively engage the learner within the context
of education in India.  And due to this we lose out on the multitude
of students who join us in the initial stages.  This problem is common
to both volunteer driven and paid project driven activities.
Second weakness would be making the new comers self-sufficient and
enabling them to continue contributing even after the program is done.
 This problem is common to both volunteer driven and paid project
driven activities.
A challenge is coming up with effective and measurable outcomes and
these should be negotiable between the volunteers, employees and the
Foundation - maybe it is specified somewhere and I have not seen it.
I think there is enough space for all of us to work ensuring that the
free knowledge movement is strengthened.
Let us now get back to productive work.
Warm regards
Vikram

___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] To WMF; Anasuya's involvement. And transparency!

[ansuman]

Thanks Anasuya. I believe you, and I understand your points.

But the facts (some are getting out at proposal talk page) were not told
before, which should have been told much earlier.
Even the WMF's intent is not transparent about this particular project. You
can see many questions being asked there not only from me, but also from
other members. And i believe because of this nature of business many others
are quiet.

And it looks like no matter what volunteers ask, say; irrespective of their
concerns, the decisions are final or have been made. To put it in another
way, the paid employees outweigh volunteers. That's all. Thanks.


Ansuman




On 19 April 2014 09:06, Anasuya Sengupta  wrote:

> Hi Ansuman,
>
> I think I've made clear on the CIS talk page what the process for the CIS
> transition was, as best as I am able. Since neither Asaf or I were directly
> involved at the start, it is difficult for us to give the community details
> we do not know.
>
> The so-called Conflict of Interest issue has been addressed by the Board
> here, [1] making it clear that they do not believe that there is any CoI
> involved.
>
> If it helps further, I'm happy to quote from my email correspondence with
> you in February:
>
>>
>> I'd also like to clarify that I am not 'associated' with CIS in any
>> problematic fashion - I have no CoI and never have had one. I have known
>> Sunil from when I was 21 years old because we worked in the same rural
>> development NGO - 'Samuha' - he worked on the tech side of things in
>> Bangalore, and I was working on livelihood and women's leadership in north
>> Karnataka. We have naturally continued to know each other because of our
>> common interests in social justice and tech issues in Bangalore and beyond.
>> And the grant to CIS was discussed and finalised by Barry before I
>> joined WMF in July 2012; I had nothing to do with that process and did not
>> even know it was happening till I came on board. I hope that clarifies the
>> situation and makes clear why the Board said what it did. I'm happy to
>> respond to any questions about this or anything else.
>
>
> Let me just say that simply knowing someone does not constitute 'conflict
> of interest' - what is important is to establish that there is no undue
> influence by and benefit to the 'conflicted person' (a somewhat amusing
> phrase of legalese) by this situation. Since neither is true, please be
> assured that there is no CoI whatsoever. I'd also like to point out that
> our community loses energy and focus by not recognising perceived or actual
> CoI when it exists, while assuming it exists in situations where it does
> not. I know it can be confusing, and we've made a start to explore it
> together at the Wikimedia conference. Asaf and Stephen led a session there,
> which we hope to expand into guidelines for the community soon.[2]
>
> I hope this helps,
> Anasuya
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Appeals_to_the_Board_on_the_recommendations_of_the_FDC#Ombudsperson_feedback
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2014/Documentation/12
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:30 PM, ansuman  wrote:
>
>> Here it's 
>> written
>>  about
>> Anasuya's involvement.
>>
>> If there is a COI issue, why is she involved now? Why did she visited
>> India officially to meet CISA2K?
>>
>> To Anusuaya, you have written in that email sent to me that you were not
>> involved, I think you need to tell the whole community the same.
>>
>> You said you were not involved, Asaf said on cisa2k proposal page that he
>> was not involved back then, then who was involved? You need to disclose
>> that, and bring some clarity, transparency.
>>
>> If you guys don't disclose, then how would we believe that everything
>> happened properly without any bias/COI?
>>
>> Note:you don't disclose these matters openly, hence we ask!
>>
>> Ansuman
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> *Anasuya SenguptaSenior Director of GrantmakingWikimedia Foundation*
>
>  Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
> Support Wikimedia 
>
>
>
>
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] To WMF; Anasuya's involvement. And transparency!

[Anasuya Sengupta]

Hi Ansuman,

I think I've made clear on the CIS talk page what the process for the CIS
transition was, as best as I am able. Since neither Asaf or I were directly
involved at the start, it is difficult for us to give the community details
we do not know.

The so-called Conflict of Interest issue has been addressed by the Board
here, [1] making it clear that they do not believe that there is any CoI
involved.

If it helps further, I'm happy to quote from my email correspondence with
you in February:

>
> I'd also like to clarify that I am not 'associated' with CIS in any
> problematic fashion - I have no CoI and never have had one. I have known
> Sunil from when I was 21 years old because we worked in the same rural
> development NGO - 'Samuha' - he worked on the tech side of things in
> Bangalore, and I was working on livelihood and women's leadership in north
> Karnataka. We have naturally continued to know each other because of our
> common interests in social justice and tech issues in Bangalore and beyond.
> And the grant to CIS was discussed and finalised by Barry before I joined
> WMF in July 2012; I had nothing to do with that process and did not even
> know it was happening till I came on board. I hope that clarifies the
> situation and makes clear why the Board said what it did. I'm happy to
> respond to any questions about this or anything else.


Let me just say that simply knowing someone does not constitute 'conflict
of interest' - what is important is to establish that there is no undue
influence by and benefit to the 'conflicted person' (a somewhat amusing
phrase of legalese) by this situation. Since neither is true, please be
assured that there is no CoI whatsoever. I'd also like to point out that
our community loses energy and focus by not recognising perceived or actual
CoI when it exists, while assuming it exists in situations where it does
not. I know it can be confusing, and we've made a start to explore it
together at the Wikimedia conference. Asaf and Stephen led a session there,
which we hope to expand into guidelines for the community soon.[2]

I hope this helps,
Anasuya

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Appeals_to_the_Board_on_the_recommendations_of_the_FDC#Ombudsperson_feedback
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2014/Documentation/12



On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:30 PM, ansuman  wrote:

> Here it's 
> written
>  about
> Anasuya's involvement.
>
> If there is a COI issue, why is she involved now? Why did she visited
> India officially to meet CISA2K?
>
> To Anusuaya, you have written in that email sent to me that you were not
> involved, I think you need to tell the whole community the same.
>
> You said you were not involved, Asaf said on cisa2k proposal page that he
> was not involved back then, then who was involved? You need to disclose
> that, and bring some clarity, transparency.
>
> If you guys don't disclose, then how would we believe that everything
> happened properly without any bias/COI?
>
> Note:you don't disclose these matters openly, hence we ask!
>
> Ansuman
>
>
>


-- 


*Anasuya SenguptaSenior Director of GrantmakingWikimedia Foundation*

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
Support Wikimedia 
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l