Hi Brill, Everything is a discussion. There has been interesting points and discussions for many mails, and we would like that to continue. Because all of those opinions are interesting in setting the movement strategy.
Howevere the *temporary* criteria are to be used by AffCom now. So that AffCom can actually continue its work, and resume approving new chapters (which was on hold for month) without postponing it. As we said on other emails few weeks, we want to use the coming year to form a movement strategy. A strategy that is comprehensive of who we are, a global movement. So it would be, I believe, a waste of time to work / discuss over criterieas that will have to be adapted in a few month. The AffCom came up with, what I think, and from the previous emails, is good criterias. They might need some interpretation, and I'm sure the AffCom will not apply them bluntly. And again they are a temporary framework. So again, not shutting down the discussion, discussion is more than welcome and needed. But the discussion will impact the long term criterias and AffCom role and responsabilities. which, I believe, is a much more important discussions. And the different opinions voiced in reaction to those criterias are really interesting. Have a nice day :) Christophe On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am fundamentally dismayed to read the response that this is not a > discussion. I am baffled. Shutting down discussion is rule #1 in NOT > fostering community. > > To create a one-way flow of communication with parties engaged enough to > take the time to actively discuss concerns is a non-ideal approach to > engagement on any level. > > I haven't heard anything untoward in this discussion. Except the > dismissive responses by those who seem to be on the committee. > > If this was a for-profit organization this response might be more > understandable but as Wikimedia is most definitely NOT this approach seems > a real misstep. > > - Erika > > > On Aug 23, 2016, at 3:44 AM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I dont see how a dissenting voice would be a surprise, I suppose you > could be surprised at my choice of language (blunter than I normally use) > or at my expectations from Affcom but being here in Australia we are > isolated we dont get the opportunities like people in Europe and America to > be part of the discussions behind those closed doors. When changes happen > we dont normally hear about them but are expected to follow them. > > > > What I see is that Affcom has drifted from being a voice of the > affiliates to being just another bureaucracy which has resulted in exactly > the same response that caused affcom to be initially created back in 2012 > with the loose creation of a Latin America group, SE Asia group, Eastern > Europe groups being formed to give those chapters a voice they thought they > had with affcom. > > > > All we ever hear down here is the level of distrust and lack assumption > of good faith with more rules, more bureaucracy more power cabals. we > make rules to address things that might occur using language that shows a > level of distrust and badt faith . As a group we need to get back to trust > and assuming good faith. > > > > Choose language carefully, use wording to promote not put down, create > criteria thats boosts the affiliates we dont need to pull each other down > to make things better because we just happen to find it easy to make that > choice > > > >> On 23 August 2016 at 14:46, Christophe Henner <chen...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: > >> Hi Gnangarra, > >> > >> This is not a discussion, and this is by design. > >> > >> As Carlos said, those are provisional criterias so that our movement can > >> keep seeing new organizations blooming. But the discussion will not be > only > >> about those criterias, but on a much larger, and I believe more > interesting > >> and important, topic. > >> > >> As we're moving forward regarding the movement strategy process (more to > >> come soon, it's only been 7 weeks since we announced that, and summer), > it > >> is key to have discussions about the organizations in general. How do we > >> make them work as a whole? What values do we want Wikimedia > organizations > >> to live by? etc. And out of those discussions, a criteria discussion > will > >> come. > >> > >> But it seemed quite a waste of time and energy to first have a > consultation > >> about those provisional criterias and then another discussion about the > >> strategy. > >> > >> That's for your point on the criterias. Now on the "Affcom whom I > thought > >> was there to support the Affiliates not punish them". Yes, AffCom > support > >> affiliates, but AffCom also has a duty to make sure that affiliates > live by > >> their engagements. > >> > >> One doesn't exclude the other, quite the opposite actually. > >> > >> As a whole, I'm a bit surprized by your email. Things aren't black or > >> white. > >> > >> Those criterias aren't up for discussion so that the discussion can > happen > >> on a much larger topic that includes them. > >> AffCom role is to tend to our movement affiliates, this comes with many > >> duties and responsabilities amongst which helping organizations to get > >> recognized, supporting them, helping them, remind them of their duties > and > >> sometime (rarely hopefully) challenge their statuts. > >> > >> Happy to further that discussion, > >> > >> Have a all great day > >> > >> Christophe > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > So to clarify, this isnt a discussion its been mandated to happen, > just > >> > like Wikimania was mandated behind closed doors... > >> > > >> > sorry for it sounding like a dummy spit here but its nice to hear > after all > >> > of the upraor and damage done over the last 18 months the community > was > >> > heard and their requests were well and truly ignored by the BoT and > now > >> > Affcom whom I thought was there to support the Affiliates not punish > them > >> > > >> > On 23 August 2016 at 12:43, Salvador A <salvador1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > I want to close the chapter of this discussion related to > >> > > quantitative-qualitative criteria in order to call your attention > to some > >> > > consequences of this new criteria for existing affiliates. I want > to be > >> > > clear on this in order to avoid future missunderstandings. > >> > > > >> > > Romaine said that it's desirable to have already recognized > affiliates to > >> > > meet this criteria. Both AffCom and BoT want this, and it's would be > >> > unfair > >> > > to require this criteria only for groups that want to get the ThOrg > and > >> > > Chapter status and at the same time to have a lesser average of work > >> > among > >> > > those that already are recognized as such. Consequently, *every > ThOrg and > >> > > Chapter must comply with this criteria in order to get and keep > affiliate > >> > > status. *The idea is keeping the affiliates moving forward and to > avoid > >> > to > >> > > get them dormant. > >> > > > >> > > This criteria will be checked out during the annual review that WMF > staff > >> > > makes of Chapters and ThOrgs status (yes, the same that make you > eligible > >> > > to go to WMCON in Berlin) in case an affiliate doesn't meet the > >> > > requirementes it will be reported to AffCom who will decide in > every case > >> > > if a recomendation to Board of Trustees is needed. > >> > > > >> > > --- > >> > > *Possible questions:* > >> > > > >> > > *Q1: My chapter/ThOrg exists since many years ago, could I loose my > >> > > recognition as chapter?* > >> > > > >> > > *A1:* Yes, if you don't meet the criteria and you don't repair the > >> > > situation during some time after AffCom request, you can loose it. > >> > > > >> > > *Q2: How can I do to avoid this?* > >> > > > >> > > *A2:* Work hard, make activities, set goals and report. Ask for > AffCom, > >> > WMF > >> > > or other affiliates help if is needed. > >> > > > >> > > *Q3: But there are some chapters that have already many years > without > >> > > activity and nothing had happened so far.* > >> > > > >> > > *A3:* AffCom is already working on it. > >> > > > >> > > --- > >> > > If you have any other questions on that doesn't hesitate in doing > it, I'm > >> > > sure Carlos will be happy of answer them :P > >> > > > >> > > Regards! > >> > > > >> > > 2016-08-22 22:31 GMT-05:00 Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com>: > >> > > > >> > > > Point Im trying to make is focus on the positives to achieve what > you > >> > > > want, your path isnt necessarily be that which will help others, > accept > >> > > > that vague definitions is better than actual numbers to do that > you > >> > need > >> > > to > >> > > > assume good faith and trust that the vague will fair to > challenges we > >> > all > >> > > > face in own circumstances number are hard and fast they cant > always be > >> > > fair > >> > > > > >> > > > On 23 August 2016 at 11:20, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > >> Gnangarra, > >> > > >> > >> > > >> I agree with you about the vision. I think that where we see > things > >> > > >> differently may be in the discussion of how we achieve the > vision. > >> > > >> Individuals have a lot of freedom in the Wikimedia community, but > >> > > >> organizations exist in a complicated world with real money, real > laws, > >> > > >> real > >> > > >> people, and a variety of circumstances that can help or hinder > >> > progress. > >> > > >> We > >> > > >> want to share the sum of human knowledge, and to do that > effectively > >> > > >> requires a coordinated effort. Wikimedia is an incredibly > complicated > >> > > >> collection of entities, of which affiliates are a part. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> I am very mindful that real resources (time and money) are > involved in > >> > > >> Wikimedia, and I would like those resources to be used wisely, > >> > > >> transparently, and fairly in service of the mission. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> I need to depart thread so that I can focus on other projects, > but I > >> > > plan > >> > > >> to return here in a week or two. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Pine > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > >> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik > >> > > >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > >> > > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma > ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > >> > , > >> > > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsu > bscribe> > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > GN. > >> > > > President Wikimedia Australia > >> > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > >> > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Affiliates mailing list > >> > > > affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > *Salvador Alcántar* > >> > > *@salvador_alc* > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > 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/ma > ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > >> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsu > bscribe> > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > GN. > >> > President Wikimedia Australia > >> > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > >> > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > 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> > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik > i/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> > > > > > > > > -- > > GN. > > President Wikimedia Australia > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Affiliates mailing list > > affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik > i/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> > _______________________________________________ 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>
