People don't approve a bad or deficient Constitution, and then hope for improvement afterwards. No Charter is way better than a problematic Charter.
Paulo Christophe Henner <christophe.hen...@gmail.com> escreveu (sexta, 21/06/2024 à(s) 13:29): > Hi Nataliia, > > Thank you for your clear feedback. I’m concerned about the current > situation regarding the Movement Charter. > > Firstly, I recommend the Foundation vote first in the process. The board, > being the smaller group with decisive power, should *lead by example* to > avoid wasting the community’s time and energy if the charter is not going > to be approved. After three years of discussion, it is unlikely that a few > more days will change the board's opinion. > > Let’s be mindful of the toll additional voting will take on all of us. > This way, we can collectively acknowledge that this effort did not result > in an agreement by everyone and create space to move onto the next step of > our collective journey sooner rather than later. > > Secondly, the Strategy Process was initiated and funded by the Wikimedia > Foundation and led by it until the recommendations phase. > > It seems counterproductive to delegate the charter creation to a volunteer > group only to dismiss their work when the outcome isn't as desired. > Returning to previous structures, like the FDC, which we identified as a > band-aid a few years ago, feels like a step back. This approach nullifies > three years of effort and misses the opportunity to address fundamental > issues in our power distribution. > > The current Charter, while not perfect, opens the door for essential > discussions and potential evolution in our governance. Rejecting the > charter outright reinforces the status quo rather than fostering necessary > changes. We must recognize that Wikimedia Foundation, after 21 years, needs > to evolve alongside our projects and the wider world. The discussions we > initiated opened* new possibilities* for our movement. > > I hope the board will commit to *meaningful change* rather than reverting > to old methods. We need to align our movement with our core value of > equity, which requires embracing radical change. > > To also walk the talk of collaborating together and sharing > responsibilities, I propose the following steps to move forward: > > 1. Reopen discussions on the Movement Structures with clear > objectives, support, timelines, and Foundation involvement. > 2. Gather a small working group to outline, in a fast and agile way, > the main questions and issues to tackle. > 3. Engage more directly with community feedback to address key > concerns, improving on what worked in the first phases of the Strategy > Process that drove global discussions. > 4. Engage openly and build together to avoid repeating the current > situation of discarding three years of work. > > I believe these steps could help us fulfill our mission and align our > movement with the values we all share. > > Best regards, > Christophe Henner (Schiste) > Former Wikimedia Foundation Board Chair > Former Wikimedia France Board Chair > _______________________________________________ > 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/NZWTGC6AHECU7T4UEJZF4PWJER7766BB/ > 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/3DTACB26TTAUBCGHOYGN6LREHS62S67L/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
