Good {{timezone appropriate greeting}},
I have worked as a facilitator in a few organisations. In the Wikimedia
Movement (2021-2022), I engaged people for the BoT elections and the UCoC
process. Global vote and engagement on this scale take a toll on a
community, and this should not be overlooked.
In the last few months, we have already had a couple of global activities,
including overhauls of the Movement Charter. The U4C
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee>
(Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee) elections ended just a
few weeks ago
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Election/2024#Voting>,
their charter vote happened not long before that
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Charter/Voter_information>.
This complicated process led to a situation in which less than 50% of the
committee was elected (only 7 out of 16 seats filled).
We must start treating volunteer time and attention as resources according
to the same rules as money and staff capacity. We cannot afford to
communicate with and engage tens of thousands of people, explain concepts,
and navigate them through this multi-tier process if we know (or suspect)
that the result is already decided.
The cost to the Board of Trustees to accelerate their meeting and vote is
negligible compared to the cost we are demanding from the community to
participate in a process that may very well end up trivial because the BoT
already made their decision.
I second Christophe Henner's voice in bringing forward the BoT vote (either
by expediting it or delaying the community/affiliate votes, which would not
be a precedent
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Voting&diff=prev&oldid=21827596>).
Suppose there is a risk that a body of 12 could affect the process by
voting the Charter down (which is their right according to the rules
created by the MCDC for ratification). In that case, we should do all we
can to avoid "wasting" the attention and engagement of 100,000 community
members (approx. # of eligible voters).
The community and the affiliates should have their voice heard. We are the
primary stakeholder of the Movement Charter. However, if just a few days
before the vote commences, there is a risk that the BoT will not ratify the
Charter, and the community should not go through a complicated and
demanding process; it should be delayed.
P.S. I would like to thank Nat for sharing this statement (as well as the
previous ones in February and May). This should be noted as an improvement
in the transparency of the BoT actions, which is an example of the
improvements we need.
Cheers,
--
Maciej Artur Nadzikiewicz (He/him)
Wikimania 2024 Poland – Team Lead
Wikimedia Europe Board Member
Wikipedia Administrator
User:Nadzik <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Nadzik>
pt., 21 cze 2024 o 14:50 Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> Hi
>
> Have to agree with Christophe, if the recommendation of the BOT
> liaisons to the Board about the MCDC is to reject it, then the Board should
> meet first and make their collective decision regardless of the cost. This
> is a broad document, with as significant a potential for good and as it
> does harm.
>
> On the checks and balances it has very limited capacity if not absolutely
> no meaningful options for change should it be needed, there's not even a
> last dire last resort Board can dissolve the GC nuclear option.
>
> We have time to wait for the Boards decision.
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 at 20:37, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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
>
>
>
> --
> Boodarwun
> Gnangarra
> 'ngany dabakarn koorliny arn boodjera dardon nlangan Nyungar koortabodjar'
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/VS2I3UXIXBTQUIPJ7GXHB3LDI3RJPUUK/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
--
*User:Nadzik <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Nadzik>*
_______________________________________________
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/KAEGLM4XOZK7EK55AEC4RSGVRKMH7IFE/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
