Hi Galder I think *"**voted against the interests of both the community and the affiliates"* is a very dangerous bow to draw, they also impede future participation in fear of being labelled and discriminated against.
People who had reservations about the charter were free to vote against it without repercussion, both then as they should have been in the future. I will say personally I did not support the charter because I had concerns about the wording having previously experienced sensible interaction with State and Federal courts in Australia as the Affiliate Chair that were easily resolved. I found those protections were not as clear in the charter if anything invited being held accountable and liable where we had no capacity to comply with the Courts. There were other issues around the GC that concerned me too. In total I voted freely based on my experiences. I know my local affiliate did consult with its members before casting its vote. They considered what individual members had to say to create a consensus, I trust our CEO or Chair cast the Affiliate vote based on that. BoT is legally responsible to comply with various US government regulations. They must comply with those first, the disappointment is in that they had good representation in the drafting process so these issues should never have occurred this late in the game. On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 at 23:26, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga < galder...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > This is a very interesting result. Now we know that those voted by the > community and half of those voted by affiliates to represent the community > and the affiliates at the Boars of Trustees voted against the interests of > both the community and the affiliates, while arguing that they were voting > for the interests of the WMF. As the BoT is, by definition, the one > directing what the interests of the WMF are, we must conclude that all the > so-called community-elected and half of the affiliated-elected voted > against the interests of their represented. What interests did they vote > for? That's the question that remains unanswered. > > Thanks to all the members of the MCDC for their huge work. > > Galder > > 2024(e)ko uzt. 18(a) 14:39 erabiltzaileak hau idatzi du (Charter Electoral > Commission <c...@wikimedia.org>): > > Hello everyone, > > After carefully tallying both individual and affiliate votes, the Charter > Electoral Commission is pleased to announce the final results of the > Wikimedia Movement Charter voting. > > As communicated by the Charter Electoral Commission > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#Thank_you_for_your_participation_in_the_Movement_Charter_ratification_vote!>, > we reached the quorum for both Affiliate and individual votes by the time > the vote closed on July 9, 23:59 UTC. We thank all 2,451 individuals and > 129 Affiliate representatives who voted in the ratification process. Your > votes and comments are invaluable for the future steps in Movement > Strategy. > > The final results of the Wikimedia Movement Charter > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Charter> ratification voting > held between 25 June and 9 July 2024 are as follows: > > Individual vote: > > Out of 2,451 individuals who voted as of July 9 23:59 (UTC), 2,446 have > been accepted as valid votes. Among these, 1,710 voted “yes”; 623 voted > “no”; and 113 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral votes don’t > count towards the total number of votes cast, 73.30% voted to approve the > Charter (1710/2333), while 26.70% voted to reject the Charter (623/2333). > > Affiliates vote: > > Out of 129 Affiliates designated voters who voted as of July 9 23:59 > (UTC), 129 votes are confirmed as valid votes. Among these, 93 voted > “yes”; 18 voted “no”; and 18 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral > votes don’t count towards the total number of votes cast, 83.78% voted to > approve the Charter (93/111), while 16.22% voted to reject the Charter > (18/111). > > Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation: > > The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted not to ratify the > proposed Charter during their special Board meeting on July 8, 2024. The > Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, Natalia Tymkiv, shared > the result of the vote, the resolution, meeting minutes and proposed next > steps > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Board_resolution_and_vote_on_the_proposed_Movement_Charter#cite_note-1> > . > > With this, the Wikimedia Movement Charter in its current revision is not > ratified. > > We thank you for your participation in this important moment in our > movement’s governance. > > The Charter Electoral Commission, > > Abhinav619, Borschts, Iwuala Lucy, Tochiprecious, Der-Wir-Ing > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/PQJ5WR2OZORQDBFX2LP4XR5UPNRS7K6W/ > 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/TULZ6TWAK2LOZRGZDJ5RV56YXRSO4W2S/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
