On 18 February 2016 at 09:04, ido ivri <idoi...@gmail.com> wrote: > If any APG-receiving affiliate conducted itself in such a non transparent, > dishonest manner and with lack of clear, timely communication with its > community and stakeholders, it would get seriously reprimanded by the > Foundation: its board audited, its budget cut, etc. Expecting the > Foundation to be held to a lower standard than any of its worldwide > affiliates is just hypocritical.
The principle of the WMF being a good role model for its affiliates - and living up to minimum standards that it sets for those affiliates - is one of the primary reasons that the FDC recommended the WMF submit its next Annual Plan to the same APG system.[1] This FDC recommendation was built into a full proposal WMF Community Resources team,[2] and this proposal was accepted by the WMF leadership - as described by Luis during the January Metrics Meeting.[3] This, means that there will at *least* the same level of detail required from the WMF in annual planning documents, and the same timeline of public consultation upon those documents. Alongside Wikimedias Armenia, France, Norway and also CIS, the WMF will be providing an Annual Plan by April 1 on the central application page on Meta.[4] During the 1 April to 30 April community review period,[5] everyone will be encouraged to thoroughly investigate those documents. Obviously, the scale of the WMF plan will be larger and (hopefully) more detailed than would be required from an affiliate. As a member of the FDC myself, I will be heavily relying on the analysis of the community to help identify areas that are of concern or are unclear. So, during the month of April, I strongly encourage everyone to help with the analysis of the next WMF annual plan! -Liam [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round_1#Wikimedia_Foundation [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_2016-17_Annual_Planning_Recommendation [3] Starting at 19:40. https://youtu.be/GpZOx1Mzmuk?t=19m40s One crucial difference will be that the FDC will be making recommendation based on its analysis, but *not* be providing a recommendation in terms of actual dollars. [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2015-2016_round_2 [5] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Information#Calendar wittylama.com Peace, love & metadata _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
