All boards members of the WMF are required legally to represent the interests of the WMF no matter how they arrived on the board. However, when I was on the board I viewed the best interests of the foundation and community as inseparable as neither can succeed without the other.
J Sent from Gmail Mobile On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:55 Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga < galder...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Dear Natalia and Lorenzo, > I have read your message and there are good reasons to support what you > are claiming there, even if I don't share your views. The discussion about > how to share power is always complex, and the ones losing power might have > good reasons to try keeping it. I don't doubt that whatever the WMF BoT > decides will be for done in good faith, and not only to prevent sharing > power. > > However, I find something weird in your message. You, Natalia, were > directly appointed by the board, so it is evident that, as a Liaison to the > MCDC, you have represented the Board's view and interests. My doubt resides > more in how it is possible that Lorenzo, who was elected by the community > to serve the community's view (whatever that means, I will return to that > soon) acts as a liaison for the WMF and not for the community itself. > > I know that acting as a representative of "the community" is not easy: we > don't know yet what the community is going to vote. We don't have a crystal > ball, and that's why promoting a vote in one direction or the other is not > a problem by itself. It would be more interesting if the four "community" > elected members at the BoT vote aligned with the community, and the two > Affiliated elected members vote aligned with the affiliates voting. > Whatever it is. > > We don't know what the Community and the Affiliates will vote yet. But we > know why you were elected, because every candidate presented goals and > priorities for the election. I would like to quote a couple of sentences > from your stated goals ( > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Candidates/Lorenzo_Losa > ) > > *Now, with the Movement Strategy, the new Global Council is expected to > finally give a body that is truly representative of our movement. We don't > know yet how it will be shaped, but in order to achieve its potential the > Wikimedia Foundation Board, and the Wikimedia Foundation itself, will have > to learn a new way.* > > *Strategy implementation, in a fair way. (...). This strategy talks about > decentralization, equity in decision-making, empowering communities. This > is a great opportunity to change our movement for the better. At the same > time, there is the risk that a time of changes will end favouring the old > power structures. We need to make sure this does not happen.* > > *The community is a governing body. The community is not just a bunch of > people providing free work to support the projects. The community is the > Wikimedia movement itself. It is our ultimate decision-making body.* > > It's evident that people can change their mind, and that accessing to > other viewpoints and information may affect what we decide. Anyway, it > would be interesting to know which are the reasons to making just the > opposite that was stated. As a community member, I think that this is an > interesting insight on why we should oppose the Movement Charter. > > Thanks > > Galder > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Nataliia Tymkiv <ntym...@wikimedia.org> > *Sent:* Friday, June 21, 2024 1:17 AM > *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > *Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board liaisons reflections > on final Movement charter draft > > Dear all, > > We are grateful to the Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) members, > who have dedicated their time and energy to putting forward this final > draft of the Movement Charter. They have demonstrated tremendous resilience > and perseverance in grappling with ways to increase our collective sense of > belonging as a movement, and outlining roles and responsibilities intended > to help us all make better decisions in steering the Wikimedia movement > into the future. > > For some, this final draft Charter represents an extension of the Movement > Strategy process that began in earnest in 2020. There are many reflections > on this history, some nostalgic and others less so. The 2030 strategic > direction has guided and continues to guide the Wikimedia Foundation’s > strategy. As the Foundation’s annual plan this year > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2024-2025/History> > observed, there is much to celebrate in the collective advancement of the > original ten movement strategy recommendations > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations>, > including shared progress in creating more equitable and decentralised > decision-making structures. > > At the same time, we should all recognise that the world around us has > shifted significantly since the movement strategy process began, that our > limited resources require much more pragmatic trade-offs and choices, and > that the Board has a duty to consider the risk, value, cost and benefit of > any significant commitments being made to advance the mission. > > As requested by the MCDC, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has, > over the last few months, shared with the committee its direct feedback on > the previous Movement Charter drafts, including its perspectives on the > Global Council > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Archive_5#Wikimedia_Foundation_perspectives_on_the_Global_Council> > and its feedback on a previous draft > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Archive_5#Wikimedia_Foundation_feedback_on_Movement_Charter_Final_Draft> > that we posted publicly. Liaisons have also engaged in regular and ongoing > meetings with the MCDC members, including inviting the MCDC members to all > Board meetings and Strategic retreats since June 2022. > > Our general observation, which is elaborated in the body of this letter, > is that the final draft of the Movement Charter *still does not address > the significant concerns* previously raised by the Board. Thus, as > liaisons, *our recommendations* to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of > Trustees are: > > - *not to ratify* the final draft of the Movement Charter *as > proposed; and* > - *support* the Foundation in developing *concrete, time-bound next > steps* on a more practical scale, allowing us all to *evaluate > progress*, and see what to change or build on. > > We believe that approving this version of the Charter, despite the > tremendous amount of work and resources already put into it, would not be > the right call. Instead, we think it is better to continue pursuing the > same goals the draft Charter also sought to pursue in a different way, by > identifying key areas where the final draft Charter provides us with > guidance on concrete steps that can be taken towards increasing volunteer > and movement oversight of certain core areas of responsibility. We believe > this will allow the Foundation, and all of us, to live into the > recommendation of Movement Strategy to evaluate, iterate, and adapt > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Evaluate,_Iterate,_and_Adapt> > as we go, rather than too quickly to agree to new structures that may not > yet be fit for purpose. > > As liaisons, we first shared this recommendation and our reflections with > the MCDC on June 18 and then with the rest of the Wikimedia Foundation > Board on June 20 (including a short draft brief > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Board_liaisons_reflections_on_final_Movement_charter_draft/Brief>). > The Board is reviewing the final draft of the Movement Charter now and *plans > to vote during a special meeting between June 25 and July 9*, during the > voting period for all affiliates and individuals > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Charter/Supplementary_Document/Ratification_Methodology#Sequence_of_voting>. > > == Context for sharing these reflections: why now? == > > As liaisons, we believe that the final draft does not address the concerns > previously stated by the Board of Trustees in its feedback > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Archive_5#Wikimedia_Foundation_feedback_on_Movement_Charter_Final_Draft> > on previous drafts of the Charter. Specifically, the final draft still > falls short of providing a clear enough explanation of *how* it will > advance Wikimedia's public interest mission and effectively address the > shortcomings of Wikimedia's current structures to enable more effective and > equitable decisions. > > These points are not new and were shared in previous Board feedback to the > MCDC, including the January 22 letter (shared publicly in February > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Archive_5#Wikimedia_Foundation_perspectives_on_the_Global_Council>) > in response to the first public draft and the May letter > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Archive_5#Wikimedia_Foundation_feedback_on_Movement_Charter_Final_Draft> > in response to the second public draft. In response to both affiliates and > individual contributors who have asked the Foundation to speak more clearly > about its views, and do it sooner, we felt it was important to reiterate > these points in the interest of transparency and learning. > == Process accountability == > > We, as liaisons, have heard concerns and frustrations about the Movement > Charter process. It faced significant challenges and constraints from the > impact of the pandemic limiting travel and in-person meetings; resignations > of several members of the MCDC; and other issues that extended the timeline > to 2.5 years. It was a shared hope by all to have this process successfully > wrapped up sooner. > > For some of this, the Board certainly must take some responsibility. This > is the purpose of the Board’s oversight, as well as its governance > responsibilities. An important lesson learnt through this experience is > that large-scale processes should have more explicit and clear expectations > up front so that as a stakeholder the Foundation can engage directly and > openly earlier about its own positions, views and boundaries. It is not > easy to find this balance, but this is essential to moving forward > differently. These and other lessons should be documented, and built upon > in any future processes aimed at hard-to-reverse movement-wide commitments > (for example, the Playbook > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Reports/Movement_Strategy_Playbook> > that was developed after the Wikimedia's Movement Strategy process). > == Reflections on the final draft == > > The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has a legal and fiduciary duty > to consider any significant commitment or decision in light of the expected > risk, value, cost, and benefit to Wikimedia's public interest mission. The > value of new structures proposed in the final draft of the Movement Charter > has to be weighed against their risk, their cost, and the resource demands > of this movement at a time when we have all seen that the growth rate of > revenue is not increasing at the same rate as in the past, while demands to > invest more in the Wikimedia platforms, projects, and communities are > increasing. > > As liaisons, we believe the *risks and costs* associated with the > currently proposed form of the Global Council *outweigh its potential > value*. > > Firstly and most importantly, the proposed Global Council's *purpose* is > not clearly connected to advancing Wikimedia's public interest mission. It > lacks a compelling explanation of *how* it will ensure more equitable > decision-making and support the mission of sharing free knowledge. It also > does not guide us on how to address many of the most pressing issues facing > community governance on Wikimedia projects. We recognise that for some, the > status quo *also* does not provide that clarity, but we do not believe > that the final draft Charter moves us closer. > > > Secondly, we note that the *proposed structure and makeup* of the Global > Council have changed significantly with each iteration of the published > drafts (from a small body to a large assembly to a flexible-sized body in > the most recent text). This may have been done in response to feedback from > multiple stakeholders, but it raises an ongoing concern we have expressed > in all of our feedback that this proposed structure is not based on the *form > following function* principle -- we do not see a deliberate or > intentional design that seeks to meet the purpose of such a critical and > important new body. > > Finally, as liaisons we believe that important elements within the final > draft Charter, including, most critically, the *Values and Principles*, > require more consensus of communities before attempting to incorporate them > into a larger document that enshrines binding commitments on us all. > Ensuring values are understood, shared, and - importantly - prioritised > similarly across the movement is essential to relying on them to help craft > an effective and accepted decision-making framework. > == Wikimedia Foundation’s commitment: what to do irrespective of the > outcome of the ratification vote == > > As liaisons, the proposal that we are making to the Board is that, instead > of ratifying the Movement Charter in its current form, it is better to > follow the Movement Strategy Recommendation to experiment > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Evaluate,_Iterate,_and_Adapt> > more quickly with key areas of responsibility before establishing a more > permanent body with a wider scope. That is why, irrespective of the outcome > of the final draft Charter vote, the Foundation has already begun to work > on shifting core areas of decision-making > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2024-2025/History#Clarifying_movement_roles_and_responsibilities_moving_forward> > to increased volunteer oversight, including *fund dissemination*, and > volunteers offering more immediate input on Foundation decisions, such as > *advising > on product & technology*. > > More specifically, we propose that by January 2025, fund dissemination, > which is one functional area of the proposed Global Council, be handled by > a global decision-making body to determine the Wikimedia Foundation's > regional allocation of grants budgets for the rest of fiscal year 2024-2025 > and to plan grantmaking estimates for the next two years. A global, but > narrower scope, will help to experiment with more accountability for the > results. > > This process, which we shall ask to be co-created with affiliates and > individual community members, would build on the experience of the Regional > Funds Committees > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Resources/Grants_Strategy_Relaunch_2020-2021/Regional_Committees>, > and the past Funds Dissemination Committee > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Funds_Dissemination_Committee>, > in line with the Movement Strategy 2030 Initiative #27 > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Initiatives/Flexible_resource_allocation_framework> > and the work currently taking place with Affiliate EDs and Regional Funds > Committees to determine the Wikimedia Foundation's regional allocation of > grants budgets for FY 2024-2025. It is important to document and publish > the lessons learned from each step of the process and use these to inform > future decision-making and the possible creation of permanent committees > and/or movement bodies. > > Additionally, as liaisons we also propose moving forward with the > establishment of a Product & Technology Advisory Council > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Product_and_Technology_Advisory_Council/Proposal>, > following a proposal from the Foundation that was shared with the MCDC. > This is in line with Movement Strategy 2030 Initiative #31 > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Initiatives/Technology_Council> > to advance shared decision-making and co-creative spaces in technology > spaces that are fundamental to support the mission. > == Next steps == > > As all affiliates and individuals prepare to vote on the final Charter > draft, we as liaisons hope that voters will also take the time to provide > written comments alongside their “yes”, “no”, and “--” > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Charter/Supplementary_Document/Ratification_Methodology#Method_of_voting> > vote so that everyone will learn as much as possible about how we all can > move forward with decision-making structures that are more effective, with > an equity lens, for our complex global community to advance Wikimedia’s > mission in the world. > > As previously noted, the Board is reviewing the final draft of the > Movement charter now and *plans to vote during a special meeting between > June 25 and July 9*, during the voting period for all affiliates and > individuals > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Charter/Supplementary_Document/Ratification_Methodology#Sequence_of_voting>. > This will allow the Board to consider all public comments available before > the start of the voting while casting its vote alongside affiliates and > individual contributors. > > At the MCDC’s request, the results of the Board’s vote will be shared only > after the vote of individuals and affiliates has concluded, so as not to > influence their voting, but likely before the outcomes of those votes are > published, and not before July 10. > > As we all await the outcome of the final draft Charter vote, it will be > important to be ready to take concrete steps that will help move us forward > as a movement. Wikimania will be an opportunity to begin constructive and > productive conversations on these and other immediate next steps, informed > by the comments left by individuals and affiliates during the vote. Working > together on practical, time-bound steps will shape a better and more > equitable framework for making decisions. With a shared commitment, this > moment of change can foster a greater sense of belonging, one that can > sometimes feel elusive in this widely diverse global movement. > > > Best regards > > Nat and Lorenzo > > Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees liaisons to the Movement Charter > Drafting Committee > =========================================== > Best regards, > antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees > > *NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working > hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You > should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in > advance!* > > _______________________________________________ > 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/OIUNV5Q5RHAY6CAIQ2747QCMGMCIFHZ6/ > 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/2X7NM3HGIUDSISDUG7VL4RXNOHXFNKXP/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
