Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Sorry, I did not mean you, I should have deleted the previous text. Ziko 2011/9/4 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Ziko van Dijk, 04/09/2011 14:26: I would like to know: Is the introduction of WMF people on national boards a serious idea, or is it just a whim, a piece of loud thinking, and does not need to be discussed further? If you're quoting me on purpose, I'd say it belongs to the realms of scholastic hypothesis (worth rejecting) and surrealism; if you agree you can safely ignore the first two paragraphs of my message. ;-) Nemo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Florence Devouard, 02/09/2011 21:11: You seek to remove perceived conflicts of interest, even if that means creating real conflicts of interest ? Because there would be conflict of interest and rather BIG ONES. We are facing rather severe challenges right now. Let's say it straight, Wikimedia Foundation is simply trying to absorb/control the chapters as is they were simple bureaux of the WMF locally and chapters kind of disagree with WMF idea that centralization is a good move for the mouvement... Actually it can be considered quite a coherent plan: if the chapters are completely controlled by the WMF, like local branches of a corporation but with more subtle means, then there's no conflict of interest, perceived (by whom?) or real. I don't understand, by the way, why the perceived conflict of interest should be perceived as high right now, and in need of being reduced; the topic seems a bit surreal, Florence gave better examples and context of real COI issues. Michael Snow, 02/09/2011 22:02: If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. I don't consider this practical, rather ideal: it's impossible to appoint voting (and working) board members, as explained by Ilario, Florence and others; at least observers are ideally possible. Assuming that they are not spies of another organization (!) but they're there because they know the language, the chapter and its problems, and they are willing to help with suggestions, who wouldn't be happy to have them? But even considering only the language problem mentioned by BYria, this is going to be quite difficult and the WMF is most likely not able to find suitable observers; the ChapCom /could/ be able to. I bet that WMIT board would be super-happy to have e.g. Delphine as observer, if she wanted to follow yet another mailing list and bunch of meetings; but despite her preternatural ability to find discussions (among thousands on our members mailing list) where she can give useful feedback, this doesn't seem a safe assumption even in this lucky context. But we're going more and more offtopic. Theo10011, 02/09/2011 21:25: I would argue that the onus is on WMF to aid in communication, there is still not a single dedicated person on staff for chapter coordination/outreach, instead most Chapter relation/oversight comes from an unusual overlap of Global Development, Communications department and rarely Community department. Let me put this in perspective, there are 3 Storytellers, a Strategy department, dedicated researchers, full-time on staff but not a single person to deal with chapters who have been around for several years. If a board of chapters composed of volunteers who have to solely rely on the foundation for activities have to do a better job in communications, the Foundation has to do its part first. Perhaps this can take us a bit more on topic. There's indeed a big confusion about WMF staff responsibilities and it would be interesting to know how the Outreach and the Global South departments will work together, why they're separated despite the overlaps etc. Brasil could be a good example to see whether the local office will just be yet another layer of complexity or rather a useful single point of contact and catalyst for the local chapter and community. I've been following the WMF Brasil office activities on Meta for several months now (almost a year) and I don't understand completely how local activities have been organized and what impact they had so far, so I don't know what's the best approach, but the letter by Wikimedia Brasil is very good in its approach if not in the details. To actually involve the local community and chapter in the activities, besides generic transparency which often doesn't actually give room to useful feedback, we could imagine something like an advisory board or scientific committee (not executive), appointed by the local chapter (and which could just be the chapter board of trustees, to start with), which would assist and somehow oversee the local office, with frequent reciprocal reports and feedback at least. Nemo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Hello, I would like to know: Is the introduction of WMF people on national boards a serious idea, or is it just a whim, a piece of loud thinking, and does not need to be discussed further? Kind regards Ziko 2011/9/4 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Florence Devouard, 02/09/2011 21:11: You seek to remove perceived conflicts of interest, even if that means creating real conflicts of interest ? Because there would be conflict of interest and rather BIG ONES. We are facing rather severe challenges right now. Let's say it straight, Wikimedia Foundation is simply trying to absorb/control the chapters as is they were simple bureaux of the WMF locally and chapters kind of disagree with WMF idea that centralization is a good move for the mouvement... Actually it can be considered quite a coherent plan: if the chapters are completely controlled by the WMF, like local branches of a corporation but with more subtle means, then there's no conflict of interest, perceived (by whom?) or real. I don't understand, by the way, why the perceived conflict of interest should be perceived as high right now, and in need of being reduced; the topic seems a bit surreal, Florence gave better examples and context of real COI issues. Michael Snow, 02/09/2011 22:02: If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. I don't consider this practical, rather ideal: it's impossible to appoint voting (and working) board members, as explained by Ilario, Florence and others; at least observers are ideally possible. Assuming that they are not spies of another organization (!) but they're there because they know the language, the chapter and its problems, and they are willing to help with suggestions, who wouldn't be happy to have them? But even considering only the language problem mentioned by BYria, this is going to be quite difficult and the WMF is most likely not able to find suitable observers; the ChapCom /could/ be able to. I bet that WMIT board would be super-happy to have e.g. Delphine as observer, if she wanted to follow yet another mailing list and bunch of meetings; but despite her preternatural ability to find discussions (among thousands on our members mailing list) where she can give useful feedback, this doesn't seem a safe assumption even in this lucky context. But we're going more and more offtopic. Theo10011, 02/09/2011 21:25: I would argue that the onus is on WMF to aid in communication, there is still not a single dedicated person on staff for chapter coordination/outreach, instead most Chapter relation/oversight comes from an unusual overlap of Global Development, Communications department and rarely Community department. Let me put this in perspective, there are 3 Storytellers, a Strategy department, dedicated researchers, full-time on staff but not a single person to deal with chapters who have been around for several years. If a board of chapters composed of volunteers who have to solely rely on the foundation for activities have to do a better job in communications, the Foundation has to do its part first. Perhaps this can take us a bit more on topic. There's indeed a big confusion about WMF staff responsibilities and it would be interesting to know how the Outreach and the Global South departments will work together, why they're separated despite the overlaps etc. Brasil could be a good example to see whether the local office will just be yet another layer of complexity or rather a useful single point of contact and catalyst for the local chapter and community. I've been following the WMF Brasil office activities on Meta for several months now (almost a year) and I don't understand completely how local activities have been organized and what impact they had so far, so I don't know what's the best approach, but the letter by Wikimedia Brasil is very good in its approach if not in the details. To actually involve the local community and chapter in the activities, besides generic transparency which often doesn't actually give room to useful feedback, we could imagine something like an advisory board or scientific committee (not executive), appointed by the local chapter (and which could just be the chapter board of trustees, to start with), which would assist and somehow oversee the local office, with frequent reciprocal reports and feedback at least. Nemo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- Ziko van Dijk The Netherlands http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Ziko van Dijk, 04/09/2011 14:26: I would like to know: Is the introduction of WMF people on national boards a serious idea, or is it just a whim, a piece of loud thinking, and does not need to be discussed further? If you're quoting me on purpose, I'd say it belongs to the realms of scholastic hypothesis (worth rejecting) and surrealism; if you agree you can safely ignore the first two paragraphs of my message. ;-) Nemo 2011/9/4 Federico Leva (Nemo) I've been following the WMF Brasil office activities on Meta for several months now (almost a year) and I don't understand completely how local activities have been organized and what impact they had so far, so I don't know what's the best approach, but the letter by Wikimedia Brasil is very good in its approach if not in the details. To actually involve the local community and chapter in the activities, besides generic transparency which often doesn't actually give room to useful feedback, we could imagine something like an advisory board or scientific committee (not executive), appointed by the local chapter (and which could just be the chapter board of trustees, to start with), which would assist and somehow oversee the local office, with frequent reciprocal reports and feedback at least. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
I think that is exactly Michael's point. ChapterS appoint two board members. So no single organisation expects the two members selected to push one chapter agenda. On the other, what Jimmy propose is that one organisation appoints a representative in one other organisation. Hence it would be expected for the representative to push its org agenda :) Envoye depuis mon Blackberry -Original Message- From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net Sender: foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 22:51:46 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing Listfoundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF On 09/02/11 1:02 PM, Michael Snow wrote: Meanwhile, on the subject of mutual board appointments between chapters and the foundation, I figured I'd chime in as I helped push the idea for chapters to select foundation board members in the first place. For one thing, there's a very different power dynamic between the chapters collectively choosing a couple members of the foundation's board, and the foundation solely choosing a member of an individual chapter's board. The chapter-appointed seats cannot really be controlled outside of the selection process itself, so those board members can act as freely as their colleagues, and certainly no single chapter can force them to act in a particular way. This is partly by design, since the ultimate fiduciary obligations of those board members are still to the foundation rather than a chapter, and is why we emphasized that they are not necessarily being selected as representatives of the chapters. This is anomalous. What is the benefit of chapter-appointed seats if those appointees cannot represent their constituency? In ordinary politics we also frequently see elected politicians who, when once elected.put the interests of their Party above the interests of their district. Representing the interests of the chapters need not be inconsistent with fiduciary obligations. It may be impossible for chapters collectively to force their representative to act in certain ways, and I agree that the influence of a single chapter is out of the question. Nevertheless, where the WMF Board has become unfriendly to chapters it is bound to influence the next round of elections. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 09/02/11 12:25 PM, Theo10011 wrote: On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Jimmy Walesjwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. I am sorry Jimmy, I don't follow. I don't see who they will be, to be an insurmountable logistical issue for a Foundation representative, but instead, a complete reversal of previous policy and exercise. It undermines the entire concept of local organizations and brings an unnecessary outside influence on an independent legal organization. Are you arguing for such a representative on other chapters? or are you singling out Brazil here. In case this is about Brazil, I would like to question why a similar proposal wasn't considered for India since it's also a priority area. The entire notion, that having a WMF representative on a chapter board for the purposes of aiding in communication seems wrong to me. I would not want to think of this in terms of singling out Brazil, nor would I want to jump to conclusions about who came up with the idea. It could even have been someone on the Brazilian side. Suffice it to say that I consider it a bad idea. A strong autonomous Brazilian chapter is long overdue. The only previous issue was the desire of some Brazilians to avoid having a legally responsible corporate structure. That is being worked on satisfactorily. For the WMF to regard Brazil as a key element in its Global South strategy is rational, but at this stage it has the appearance of compromising the development of a Brazilian chapter. This may be less problematic once WMBR is firmly established. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 09/02/11 12:11 PM, Florence Devouard wrote: ... We are facing rather severe challenges right now. Let's say it straight, Wikimedia Foundation is simply trying to absorb/control the chapters as is they were simple bureaux of the WMF locally and chapters kind of disagree with WMF idea that centralization is a good move for the mouvement... I can not begin to imagine how unconfortable a representant of WMF would be if he were on the board of a chapter. Would he be loyal to the chapter ? Would he be loyal to the WMF ? How fair would that be to ask *anyone* to be put in such type of situation ? And which would be the impact to the public ? (in particular to other funding organizations ?) And how much chance is there that WMF could actually shoot itself in the foot in doing this ? Maintaining an arm's length relationship between chapters and WMF and a legal denial by chapters of responsibility for project contents has certainly been a strategy that has protected chapters from liability in foreign courts. Neither would WMF be responsible for difficulties that chapters may create of their own accord. That strategy has worked well until now. When we moved away from a funding model that depended on Jimmy and his Bomis Corporation the key objective was to have a structure capable of maintaining Wikipedia that did not depend on the fortunes of one man. It also became the owner of the trademarks. That's all fine, but things have changed since then, and those changes are not implicit in the message of the vision, the mission, or the values. These are key documents, and we do wise to look at them from time to time as a reality check. Professionalization has crept into the vocabulary even though we are all amateurs, and we must never pretend that we are anything but amateurs. That apparent weakness can also be our strength. That strength is what makes us a viable top-10 website with a much lower budget that the others in that club. How does a strategy of growth fit with the key documents? There is nothing in there about a large central organization. Reaching out to the Global South, and promoting gender equality in our activities are both commendable ventures, but success will ultimately be measured in the self-reliance of the disadvantaged groups. I see more benefit in Wikimedia Israel's outreach into Cameroon than in some massive injection of head-office think across a swath of third-world nations. In the movement roles discussion it borders on the offensive when an organization arrogates upon itself the term movement. When I reflect upon it the Wikimedia Movement is an amorphous entity that includes the WMF and its associated structures, but it also includes individuals with whom we may never have had contact and who nevertheless propagate our contents elsewhere. More responsibility should be devolving to the chapters, including outreach. This could also apply to a series of US sub-national chapters. This could allow the Foundation to go back to its core objectives. The organization itself is not the objective. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 3 September 2011 10:51, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: The organization itself is not the objective. +1 What things could WMF do to make itself obsolete as quickly as possible, in as many individual areas as possible? - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 3 September 2011 11:03, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 September 2011 10:51, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: The organization itself is not the objective. +1 What things could WMF do to make itself obsolete as quickly as possible, in as many individual areas as possible? All sorts of things, but would that be desirable? While the organisation obviously isn't the objective, that doesn't mean that the objective is not to have the organisation. The organisation (or some similar organisation) probably is the best way to achieve the objective. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 3 September 2011 11:14, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 September 2011 11:03, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 September 2011 10:51, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: The organization itself is not the objective. +1 What things could WMF do to make itself obsolete as quickly as possible, in as many individual areas as possible? All sorts of things, but would that be desirable? While the organisation obviously isn't the objective, that doesn't mean that the objective is not to have the organisation. The organisation (or some similar organisation) probably is the best way to achieve the objective. Indeed, but I suggest it would be a useful exercise, to quite clearly separate useful functions from those assuming perpetuation of the organisation is an implicit goal. The Iron Law of Institutions is real, and won't somehow not happen by being ignored. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 11:51, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: On 09/02/11 12:11 PM, Florence Devouard wrote: ... We are facing rather severe challenges right now. Let's say it straight, Wikimedia Foundation is simply trying to absorb/control the chapters as is they were simple bureaux of the WMF locally and chapters kind of disagree with WMF idea that centralization is a good move for the mouvement... I can not begin to imagine how unconfortable a representant of WMF would be if he were on the board of a chapter. Would he be loyal to the chapter ? Would he be loyal to the WMF ? How fair would that be to ask *anyone* to be put in such type of situation ? And which would be the impact to the public ? (in particular to other funding organizations ?) And how much chance is there that WMF could actually shoot itself in the foot in doing this ? Maintaining an arm's length relationship between chapters and WMF and a legal denial by chapters of responsibility for project contents has certainly been a strategy that has protected chapters from liability in foreign courts. Neither would WMF be responsible for difficulties that chapters may create of their own accord. That strategy has worked well until now. When we moved away from a funding model that depended on Jimmy and his Bomis Corporation the key objective was to have a structure capable of maintaining Wikipedia that did not depend on the fortunes of one man. It also became the owner of the trademarks. That's all fine, but things have changed since then, and those changes are not implicit in the message of the vision, the mission, or the values. These are key documents, and we do wise to look at them from time to time as a reality check. Professionalization has crept into the vocabulary even though we are all amateurs, and we must never pretend that we are anything but amateurs. That apparent weakness can also be our strength. That strength is what makes us a viable top-10 website with a much lower budget that the others in that club. How does a strategy of growth fit with the key documents? There is nothing in there about a large central organization. Reaching out to the Global South, and promoting gender equality in our activities are both commendable ventures, but success will ultimately be measured in the self-reliance of the disadvantaged groups. I see more benefit in Wikimedia Israel's outreach into Cameroon than in some massive injection of head-office think across a swath of third-world nations. In the movement roles discussion it borders on the offensive when an organization arrogates upon itself the term movement. When I reflect upon it the Wikimedia Movement is an amorphous entity that includes the WMF and its associated structures, but it also includes individuals with whom we may never have had contact and who nevertheless propagate our contents elsewhere. More responsibility should be devolving to the chapters, including outreach. This could also apply to a series of US sub-national chapters. This could allow the Foundation to go back to its core objectives. The organization itself is not the objective. Just a bit of different perspective: I could make a list of chapters, besides WM RS, which would be happy to get a representative from WMF (but from any other bigger chapter, as well) in their Board, if that means that the representative would really do something. For a number of chapters it is not a matter of having influence from any other entity, but a matter of getting one person capable to help chapter. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 09/03/11 4:06 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: Just a bit of different perspective: I could make a list of chapters, besides WM RS, which would be happy to get a representative from WMF (but from any other bigger chapter, as well) in their Board, if that means that the representative would really do something. For a number of chapters it is not a matter of having influence from any other entity, but a matter of getting one person capable to help chapter. So it's not really a question of having someone on their Board. And it's not a question of a person who must be from the WMF. A person helping from another chapter would do just as well, and that would not raise apprehensions about being under a head office thumb. The helper would not need to be mentioned in any by-laws. His task would be to help the chapter for a predetermined amount of with whatever tasks were agreed to between the two chapters. The donor chapter could even continue to pay his salary. if he were an employee. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 3 September 2011 19:22, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: On 09/03/11 4:06 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: Just a bit of different perspective: I could make a list of chapters, besides WM RS, which would be happy to get a representative from WMF (but from any other bigger chapter, as well) in their Board, if that means that the representative would really do something. For a number of chapters it is not a matter of having influence from any other entity, but a matter of getting one person capable to help chapter. So it's not really a question of having someone on their Board. And it's not a question of a person who must be from the WMF. A person helping from another chapter would do just as well, and that would not raise apprehensions about being under a head office thumb. The helper would not need to be mentioned in any by-laws. His task would be to help the chapter for a predetermined amount of with whatever tasks were agreed to between the two chapters. The donor chapter could even continue to pay his salary. if he were an employee. I suspect what you're talking about is an ex-officio member of the board, with no voting privileges. That makes a bit more sense to me. On the whole, I think Anthere's post explaining the conflict of interest issues that arise from having WMF staff/board members sitting as Chapter board members as well is quite accurate. (I'm not as sure as she about the WMF's intentions toward chapters; I have a feeling they've not really figured out their own vision of chapters, which makes things more confusing for everyone.) Risker/Anne ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. --Jimbo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. Because there are two points: a) the board is elected (they are representatives of the General Assembly which is the owner of the local association) b) in some legal systems the members of the board (and in some others the majority of the members of the board) should have the nationality No problem to have a representative of the WMF in the executive and no problem to have them in the board if elected or approved by the General Assembly following the statements of the local bylaws. The conflict of interests is here: it's not WMF to choose or to propose the appointee, it's the General Assembly. Please be kind that a lot of local chapters have been accepted as *national* chapters thanks to the bylaws which have been analyzed by the local administration to be sure that there are no links or dependencies with another foreign association/foundation. The risk is that the local chapter can be rejected as national association if the link with WMF becomes restrictive. Ilario ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Le jeudi 01 septembre 2011 à 16:37 +0100, Jimmy Wales a écrit : I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. Oh. First it seems that the Foundation aims at centralize all the fundraising and control Chapters' activity by the way of a imposed grant agreement, and then the Foundation could have an appointee on each chapter's board... It would be very simplier (even if not safer) to open official WMF's desks every where... Nice moves but what about the legal and fiscal issues implied by the presence of a WMF appointee on the board ? It would be just a little bit harder to explain that the chapters « are independent associations », isn't it ? Does the Foundation really want to have subsidiaries in more than 30 countries and undertake all the legal and fiscal risks ? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Hi, sorry for top posting. A quick historical note, really early on some chapters had a WMF representative with a lot of power. We moved from that next to a lawyer recommandation as it created legal links between WMF and chapters hence increasing the legal risks for all the organizations and the safety/sustainability of the whole movement. If the issue is communication between WMF and chapters there used to be a position at the foundation dedicated to this very purpose, the chapter coordinator. Perhaps it is time to revive this position. Christophe Envoye depuis mon Blackberry -Original Message- From: Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com Sender: foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 16:37:42 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing Listfoundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. --Jimbo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 9/1/11 5:37 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. --Jimbo Beside the excellents points raised by my collegues ... I cannot wait to see the WMF representative learn the local language to be able to communicate with the chapter board members ... or for WMF to pay a translator in 30+ languages to do real time translation of board meetings, operational reports translation, real time general assembly discussion translation AHAHAHAHA Florence ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 9/1/11 5:37 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. --Jimbo I can not help commenting a bit more on the matter of conflict of interest. I think I can probably say more on the matter than most people here. First because I pushed a LOT for the adoption of a COI policy on the board of WMF. And this generated lot's of painful discussions between you, Michael and I. In particular with regards to your involvement with Wikia. Second because Wikimedia France used to have in its bylaws that it had a representant of WMF on its board. With veto rights. Third because I used to be that person. Our bylaws were changed a few years ago, as to decrease to a maximum the risk of WMF being considered liable in France through Wikimedia France. Removing this representative was the first obvious recommendation of the lawyer. Fourth because I pushed with others for this rule according to which there should be no overlap between board of chapters/WMF and no overlap between staff and board as well. And I resigned from Wikimedia France board to respect that rule. The truth is being a board member requires to be totally loyal to the organization you are a board member of. One should not vote according to personal interests nor according to the interest of another organization one is also member of, to the detriment of the first. You seek to remove perceived conflicts of interest, even if that means creating real conflicts of interest ? Because there would be conflict of interest and rather BIG ONES. We are facing rather severe challenges right now. Let's say it straight, Wikimedia Foundation is simply trying to absorb/control the chapters as is they were simple bureaux of the WMF locally and chapters kind of disagree with WMF idea that centralization is a good move for the mouvement... I can not begin to imagine how unconfortable a representant of WMF would be if he were on the board of a chapter. Would he be loyal to the chapter ? Would he be loyal to the WMF ? How fair would that be to ask *anyone* to be put in such type of situation ? And which would be the impact to the public ? (in particular to other funding organizations ?) And how much chance is there that WMF could actually shoot itself in the foot in doing this ? FLorence ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. I am sorry Jimmy, I don't follow. I don't see who they will be, to be an insurmountable logistical issue for a Foundation representative, but instead, a complete reversal of previous policy and exercise. It undermines the entire concept of local organizations and brings an unnecessary outside influence on an independent legal organization. Are you arguing for such a representative on other chapters? or are you singling out Brazil here. In case this is about Brazil, I would like to question why a similar proposal wasn't considered for India since it's also a priority area. The entire notion, that having a WMF representative on a chapter board for the purposes of aiding in communication seems wrong to me. There are, and would be conflict of interest, especially after the grants model is implemented. I would argue that the onus is on WMF to aid in communication, there is still not a single dedicated person on staff for chapter coordination/outreach, instead most Chapter relation/oversight comes from an unusual overlap of Global Development, Communications department and rarely Community department. Let me put this in perspective, there are 3 Storytellers, a Strategy department, dedicated researchers, full-time on staff but not a single person to deal with chapters who have been around for several years. If a board of chapters composed of volunteers who have to solely rely on the foundation for activities have to do a better job in communications, the Foundation has to do its part first. Theo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 2 September 2011 20:11, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com wrote: I can not help commenting a bit more on the matter of conflict of interest. I think I can probably say more on the matter than most people here. If I could +1 this message I would. Our bylaws were changed a few years ago, as to decrease to a maximum the risk of WMF being considered liable in France through Wikimedia France. Removing this representative was the first obvious recommendation of the lawyer. Yeah, that was my first thought too. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 9/2/2011 12:11 PM, Florence Devouard wrote: On 9/1/11 5:37 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. --Jimbo I can not help commenting a bit more on the matter of conflict of interest. I think I can probably say more on the matter than most people here. First because I pushed a LOT for the adoption of a COI policy on the board of WMF. And this generated lot's of painful discussions between you, Michael and I. In particular with regards to your involvement with Wikia. For those reading whose memories may not be quite long enough - I assume Florence is referring to Michael Davis here, not to me. The conflict of interest policy was adopted in 2006, before I was on the board. I just thought it would help to make the distinction explicit, as it wouldn't be the first time somebody has gotten us confused. Meanwhile, on the subject of mutual board appointments between chapters and the foundation, I figured I'd chime in as I helped push the idea for chapters to select foundation board members in the first place. For one thing, there's a very different power dynamic between the chapters collectively choosing a couple members of the foundation's board, and the foundation solely choosing a member of an individual chapter's board. The chapter-appointed seats cannot really be controlled outside of the selection process itself, so those board members can act as freely as their colleagues, and certainly no single chapter can force them to act in a particular way. This is partly by design, since the ultimate fiduciary obligations of those board members are still to the foundation rather than a chapter, and is why we emphasized that they are not necessarily being selected as representatives of the chapters. However, somebody appointed to a chapter board by the foundation would be directly answerable to the foundation, and it could be fairly easy to argue that they are an agent of the foundation. It undermines the organizational independence much more dramatically. If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 9/2/11 10:02 PM, Michael Snow wrote: On 9/2/2011 12:11 PM, Florence Devouard wrote: On 9/1/11 5:37 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. --Jimbo I can not help commenting a bit more on the matter of conflict of interest. I think I can probably say more on the matter than most people here. First because I pushed a LOT for the adoption of a COI policy on the board of WMF. And this generated lot's of painful discussions between you, Michael and I. In particular with regards to your involvement with Wikia. For those reading whose memories may not be quite long enough - I assume Florence is referring to Michael Davis here, not to me. The conflict of interest policy was adopted in 2006, before I was on the board. I just thought it would help to make the distinction explicit, as it wouldn't be the first time somebody has gotten us confused. Indeed. I was talking of Michael Davis, the treasurer of the board at that time. Sorry for the confusion Michael. Florence ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
*If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. * 35 people from WMF to observ every single chapter? _ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.* On 2 September 2011 21:02, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com wrote: On 9/2/2011 12:11 PM, Florence Devouard wrote: On 9/1/11 5:37 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote: On 8/28/11 1:00 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. I had never thought of this before, but now that it has been mentioned, I just wanted to disagree, quite respectfully because Ray is awesome of course, and say that I think it is a very interesting idea to have a WMF appointee on the boards of chapters. There should be very few cases where there is a conflict of interest since chapters and the Foundation are deeply tied together always (and that's a good thing). I think having a Foundation representative on the board of chapters does present some possibly insurmountable logistical issues (who will they be?) but I actually think such an arrangement might be incredibly valuable for improving communication and *decreasing* perceived conflicts of interest. --Jimbo I can not help commenting a bit more on the matter of conflict of interest. I think I can probably say more on the matter than most people here. First because I pushed a LOT for the adoption of a COI policy on the board of WMF. And this generated lot's of painful discussions between you, Michael and I. In particular with regards to your involvement with Wikia. For those reading whose memories may not be quite long enough - I assume Florence is referring to Michael Davis here, not to me. The conflict of interest policy was adopted in 2006, before I was on the board. I just thought it would help to make the distinction explicit, as it wouldn't be the first time somebody has gotten us confused. Meanwhile, on the subject of mutual board appointments between chapters and the foundation, I figured I'd chime in as I helped push the idea for chapters to select foundation board members in the first place. For one thing, there's a very different power dynamic between the chapters collectively choosing a couple members of the foundation's board, and the foundation solely choosing a member of an individual chapter's board. The chapter-appointed seats cannot really be controlled outside of the selection process itself, so those board members can act as freely as their colleagues, and certainly no single chapter can force them to act in a particular way. This is partly by design, since the ultimate fiduciary obligations of those board members are still to the foundation rather than a chapter, and is why we emphasized that they are not necessarily being selected as representatives of the chapters. However, somebody appointed to a chapter board by the foundation would be directly answerable to the foundation, and it could be fairly easy to argue that they are an agent of the foundation. It undermines the organizational independence much more dramatically. If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 02.09.2011 22:02, Michael Snow wrote: For those reading whose memories may not be quite long enough - I assume Florence is referring to Michael Davis here, not to me. The conflict of interest policy was adopted in 2006, before I was on the board. I just thought it would help to make the distinction explicit, as it wouldn't be the first time somebody has gotten us confused. Meanwhile, on the subject of mutual board appointments between chapters and the foundation, I figured I'd chime in as I helped push the idea for chapters to select foundation board members in the first place. For one thing, there's a very different power dynamic between the chapters collectively choosing a couple members of the foundation's board, and the foundation solely choosing a member of an individual chapter's board. The chapter-appointed seats cannot really be controlled outside of the selection process itself, so those board members can act as freely as their colleagues, and certainly no single chapter can force them to act in a particular way. This is partly by design, since the ultimate fiduciary obligations of those board members are still to the foundation rather than a chapter, and is why we emphasized that they are not necessarily being selected as representatives of the chapters. However, somebody appointed to a chapter board by the foundation would be directly answerable to the foundation, and it could be fairly easy to argue that they are an agent of the foundation. It undermines the organizational independence much more dramatically. If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. --Michael Snow It would have been sufficient to have some members that understand how chapters work. Every time I read some comments of WMF, I am really astonished that they don't know the basis of the organization of the chapters. I am really disturbed that every time WMF forget that a chapter is based on bylaws and on General Assembly. You make the assumption that it is the board of any chapter to take the decisions, you forget (but is seems to be usual in WMF) that any decision of the chapters board can be changed by the General Assembly and that the board reports to the General Assembly who approves every year the projects and the budget and the financial year. This is not a choice of the chapters, but this is the legal consequence connected with the local legal system (in Switzerland it's the Civil Code art.60). The chapter is not the WMF where the board send out a letter, the executive team makes an interpretation of the letter and the other groups do what they have decided. The local chapter is based on the General Assembly. It means that, to improve the communication, no one must seat in the board, it is sufficient to participate in the discussion of the General Assembly and it would be better to speak the local language to answer to the members questions. The board will do what the General Assembly decides. In the other hand what I really suggest is that the chapters MUST select their WMF board members like representatives to fill up the gaps that WMF has. The problem of communication that WMF has, it's basically the lacking knowledge of the chapters and to solve this problem probably WMF should have a look inside itself. Ilario ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 9/2/2011 1:35 PM, Béria Lima wrote: *If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. * 35 people from WMF to observ every single chapter? It's not a full-time job, since being a board member is not supposed to be a full-time job either. I could imagine something like appointing Jan-Bart as the observer for all European chapters, or Barry for all Asian chapters (not that observers would necessarily have to be Wikimedia board or staff). Again, I don't know that this is really the best solution, but it's not completely impractical to arrange if such a direction is chosen. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com wrote: On 9/2/2011 1:35 PM, Béria Lima wrote: *If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. * 35 people from WMF to observ every single chapter? It's not a full-time job, since being a board member is not supposed to be a full-time job either. I could imagine something like appointing Jan-Bart as the observer for all European chapters, or Barry for all Asian chapters (not that observers would necessarily have to be Wikimedia board or staff). Again, I don't know that this is really the best solution, but it's not completely impractical to arrange if such a direction is chosen. --Michael Snow Now may not be the best time to even discuss it; I doubt many chapters are feeling particularly disposed towards new administrative burdens in the interests of WMF oversight. Hopefully members of the WMF staff and Board are working behind the scenes to resolve some of the tension. Nathan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
And Jan-Bart and Kul knows about European and Asia laws? Jean-Bart and Kul can go to General Assemblies? Jean Bart speak the 12-15 languages spoken in European Chapters (i will not even mention how many languages Kul would need to know to be the Asia representant)? Jan-Bart and Kul would decide what is in the best insterest of the board they would be part in the chapter or the for the interest of WMF? And How many laws we need to change to allow them to be part of boards? because many laws forbid foreigners to be board members (some laws - Like in India) forbid even to be chapters members. I'm sure we can come up with better ways to solve WMF- Chapters communications issues that this. _ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.* On 2 September 2011 21:59, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com wrote: On 9/2/2011 1:35 PM, Béria Lima wrote: *If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. * 35 people from WMF to observ every single chapter? It's not a full-time job, since being a board member is not supposed to be a full-time job either. I could imagine something like appointing Jan-Bart as the observer for all European chapters, or Barry for all Asian chapters (not that observers would necessarily have to be Wikimedia board or staff). Again, I don't know that this is really the best solution, but it's not completely impractical to arrange if such a direction is chosen. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Errata: When i say Kul, i mean Barry. Sorry. _ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.* On 2 September 2011 22:11, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: And Jan-Bart and Kul knows about European and Asia laws? Jean-Bart and Kul can go to General Assemblies? Jean Bart speak the 12-15 languages spoken in European Chapters (i will not even mention how many languages Kul would need to know to be the Asia representant)? Jan-Bart and Kul would decide what is in the best insterest of the board they would be part in the chapter or the for the interest of WMF? And How many laws we need to change to allow them to be part of boards? because many laws forbid foreigners to be board members (some laws - Like in India) forbid even to be chapters members. I'm sure we can come up with better ways to solve WMF- Chapters communications issues that this. _ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.* On 2 September 2011 21:59, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com wrote: On 9/2/2011 1:35 PM, Béria Lima wrote: *If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. * 35 people from WMF to observ every single chapter? It's not a full-time job, since being a board member is not supposed to be a full-time job either. I could imagine something like appointing Jan-Bart as the observer for all European chapters, or Barry for all Asian chapters (not that observers would necessarily have to be Wikimedia board or staff). Again, I don't know that this is really the best solution, but it's not completely impractical to arrange if such a direction is chosen. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Message: 7 Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 22:43:35 +0200 From: Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: 4e613ff7.3080...@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 02.09.2011 22:02, Michael Snow wrote: For those reading whose memories may not be quite long enough - I assume Florence is referring to Michael Davis here, not to me. The conflict of interest policy was adopted in 2006, before I was on the board. I just thought it would help to make the distinction explicit, as it wouldn't be the first time somebody has gotten us confused. Meanwhile, on the subject of mutual board appointments between chapters and the foundation, I figured I'd chime in as I helped push the idea for chapters to select foundation board members in the first place. For one thing, there's a very different power dynamic between the chapters collectively choosing a couple members of the foundation's board, and the foundation solely choosing a member of an individual chapter's board. The chapter-appointed seats cannot really be controlled outside of the selection process itself, so those board members can act as freely as their colleagues, and certainly no single chapter can force them to act in a particular way. This is partly by design, since the ultimate fiduciary obligations of those board members are still to the foundation rather than a chapter, and is why we emphasized that they are not necessarily being selected as representatives of the chapters. However, somebody appointed to a chapter board by the foundation would be directly answerable to the foundation, and it could be fairly easy to argue that they are an agent of the foundation. It undermines the organizational independence much more dramatically. If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. --Michael Snow It would have been sufficient to have some members that understand how chapters work. Every time I read some comments of WMF, I am really astonished that they don't know the basis of the organization of the chapters. I am really disturbed that every time WMF forget that a chapter is based on bylaws and on General Assembly. You make the assumption that it is the board of any chapter to take the decisions, you forget (but is seems to be usual in WMF) that any decision of the chapters board can be changed by the General Assembly and that the board reports to the General Assembly who approves every year the projects and the budget and the financial year. This is not a choice of the chapters, but this is the legal consequence connected with the local legal system (in Switzerland it's the Civil Code art.60). The chapter is not the WMF where the board send out a letter, the executive team makes an interpretation of the letter and the other groups do what they have decided. The local chapter is based on the General Assembly. It means that, to improve the communication, no one must seat in the board, it is sufficient to participate in the discussion of the General Assembly and it would be better to speak the local language to answer to the members questions. The board will do what the General Assembly decides. In the other hand what I really suggest is that the chapters MUST select their WMF board members like representatives to fill up the gaps that WMF has. The problem of communication that WMF has, it's basically the lacking knowledge of the chapters and to solve this problem probably WMF should have a look inside itself. Ilario Just to add to what Illario has said, I think it's important to remember that most (if not all) chapters are run via a democratic system where the entire board or committee is elected by its members. Appointing WMF members to boards would obviously dilute that democratic accountability. Indeed, in my chapter to have any power we'd have to change our constitution, and I don't see our members being overly sympathetic to having a perceived unelected outsider on the board making decisions. Unless the WMF representatives are going to run for election in the normal fashion, or unless they're going to be mute observers with no effective powers whatsoever, I don't think this idea is practical at all. Cheers, Craig ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 09/02/11 1:59 PM, Michael Snow wrote: On 9/2/2011 1:35 PM, Béria Lima wrote: *If the point is to improve communication, then a more practical approach might be to designate observers who are not given authority but merely sit in with a chapter board. That's assuming that the chapter board level is one of the places where it makes the most sense to add a communication interface. 35 people from WMF to observ every single chapter? It's not a full-time job, since being a board member is not supposed to be a full-time job either. I could imagine something like appointing Jan-Bart as the observer for all European chapters, or Barry for all Asian chapters (not that observers would necessarily have to be Wikimedia board or staff). Again, I don't know that this is really the best solution, but it's not completely impractical to arrange if such a direction is chosen. With 21 European chapters, running around to all their meetings could easily be a full-time job. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 09/02/11 5:28 PM, Craig Franklin wrote: Just to add to what Illario has said, I think it's important to remember that most (if not all) chapters are run via a democratic system where the entire board or committee is elected by its members. Appointing WMF members to boards would obviously dilute that democratic accountability. Indeed, in my chapter to have any power we'd have to change our constitution, and I don't see our members being overly sympathetic to having a perceived unelected outsider on the board making decisions. Unless the WMF representatives are going to run for election in the normal fashion, or unless they're going to be mute observers with no effective powers whatsoever, I don't think this idea is practical at all. I don't think that the legalities of implementing such a scheme are the real problem. If a chapter wanted some kind of WMF representation on its board I'm sure it could find a legal way of accomplishing this. The problem is with wanting this in the first place. If chapter members see such a presence as somewhere between useless and hostile, they are not going be enthusiastic to finding ways to make it happen. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 09/02/11 1:02 PM, Michael Snow wrote: Meanwhile, on the subject of mutual board appointments between chapters and the foundation, I figured I'd chime in as I helped push the idea for chapters to select foundation board members in the first place. For one thing, there's a very different power dynamic between the chapters collectively choosing a couple members of the foundation's board, and the foundation solely choosing a member of an individual chapter's board. The chapter-appointed seats cannot really be controlled outside of the selection process itself, so those board members can act as freely as their colleagues, and certainly no single chapter can force them to act in a particular way. This is partly by design, since the ultimate fiduciary obligations of those board members are still to the foundation rather than a chapter, and is why we emphasized that they are not necessarily being selected as representatives of the chapters. This is anomalous. What is the benefit of chapter-appointed seats if those appointees cannot represent their constituency? In ordinary politics we also frequently see elected politicians who, when once elected.put the interests of their Party above the interests of their district. Representing the interests of the chapters need not be inconsistent with fiduciary obligations. It may be impossible for chapters collectively to force their representative to act in certain ways, and I agree that the influence of a single chapter is out of the question. Nevertheless, where the WMF Board has become unfriendly to chapters it is bound to influence the next round of elections. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Uh did I miss something? 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. Was this announced some place? Dan Rosenthal On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:11 PM, CasteloBranco michelcastelobra...@gmail.com wrote: For your information The Brazilian community is offering WMF a letter of agreement, which was collaboratively written. After the Brazilian participants shared their experience on what happened in Haifa, the whole community had one week to discuss and edit the content, which is now available on Meta.[1] Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_letter_of_agreement_between_Wikimedia_Foundation_and_Brazilian_volunteers Proposed letter of agreement between Wikimedia Foundation and Brazilian volunteers On August 5, 2011, during Wikimania 2011 http://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Brasil_no_Wikimania/2011, on Haifa, Israel, a meeting between Wikimedia Brasil and Wikimedia Foundation was held. The meeting, which was also attended by representatives of Wikimedia Portugal and Wikimedia Argentina, provided a discussion about the ongoing Wikimedia Projects in Brazil and the interaction between the future WMF office in the country and the local chapter. The understanding of Brazilian members along the meeting was that: 1. Brazil is a strategic priority for Wikimedia Foundation. 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. 3. Wikimedia Foundation understands that the Brazilian community and, thus, the chapter under formation still doesn't have the capacity to be completely self-managed. 4. Wikimedia Foundation aims to develop the existing programs in Brazil, like Campus Ambassadors, though it still doesn't have a specific development program for Brazil. 5. Wikimedia Foundation wants to conduct researches about the lusophone community. 6. Wikimedia Foundation already has liaisons with Brazilian organizations, like /Positivo/. 7. The members of the Brazilian community want to colaborate with Wikimedia Foundation. 8. The members of the legal chapter under formation are afraid of losing the legitimacy of the local community among society after the establishment of the WMF office. Wikimedia Brasil has apprehension of not having control over what was raised locally, and of the loss of sources of revenue due to internal competition. Based on this understanding, participant members of the Brazilian community decided to: 1. Support the creation of Wikimedia Foundation office in Brazil which, as explained at the meeting, will have the goal of fostering the realization of partnerships and events with the community and the external audiences, provisionally and until the local chapter have enough structure to develop such activities directly. 2. Suggest that the office maintains goals to work for the development of the local community and not only fundraising or the realization of business agreements. 3. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its activites in Brazil are achieved with maximum transparency and envolvement of Wikimedia Brasil, allowing the local volunteers to participate at the various stages of ongoing projects and also in those that will be launched at the country. 4. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its goals and existing plans to Brazil are shared with Wikimedia Brasil. 5. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation to orientate its projects, partnerships and possible proposals of interested sponsors to the local chapter, giving some opportunity to Wikimedia Brasil. 6. Propose the creation of a tatical planning for Brazil, based on Wikimedia's strategic planning, with the participation of WMF office and Wikimedia Brasil for the construction of a development program to Brazil. 7. Propose to Wikimedia Foundation to make room available in its WMF office directorship, provided by statue, for a chosen Wikimedia Brasil representative, consequently, chosen by the local community. Or, that the Wikimedia Foundation enjoy the legal chapter structure of Wikimedia Brasil to seek its goals; We want to offer the position of one director on our legal chapter, provided by statue, to Wikimedia Foundation. 8. Assist the establishment of the office with the volunteer participation of Wikimedia Brasil in activities of organization and achievement of knowledge inherent to local
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 27 August 2011 20:20, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote: Uh did I miss something? 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. Was this announced some place? It's in the strategic plan. It's the same thing as has already started in India. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Yes, Dan It was announced in WMF July Report [1] (last point in the Brazil Catalyst section). [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_July_2011#Brazil_Catalyst Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil Em 27/08/2011 16:20, Dan Rosenthal escreveu: Uh did I miss something? 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. Was this announced some place? Dan Rosenthal On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:11 PM, CasteloBranco michelcastelobra...@gmail.com wrote: For your information The Brazilian community is offering WMF a letter of agreement, which was collaboratively written. After the Brazilian participants shared their experience on what happened in Haifa, the whole community had one week to discuss and edit the content, which is now available on Meta.[1] Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_letter_of_agreement_between_Wikimedia_Foundation_and_Brazilian_volunteers Proposed letter of agreement between Wikimedia Foundation and Brazilian volunteers On August 5, 2011, during Wikimania 2011 http://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Brasil_no_Wikimania/2011, on Haifa, Israel, a meeting between Wikimedia Brasil and Wikimedia Foundation was held. The meeting, which was also attended by representatives of Wikimedia Portugal and Wikimedia Argentina, provided a discussion about the ongoing Wikimedia Projects in Brazil and the interaction between the future WMF office in the country and the local chapter. The understanding of Brazilian members along the meeting was that: 1. Brazil is a strategic priority for Wikimedia Foundation. 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. 3. Wikimedia Foundation understands that the Brazilian community and, thus, the chapter under formation still doesn't have the capacity to be completely self-managed. 4. Wikimedia Foundation aims to develop the existing programs in Brazil, like Campus Ambassadors, though it still doesn't have a specific development program for Brazil. 5. Wikimedia Foundation wants to conduct researches about the lusophone community. 6. Wikimedia Foundation already has liaisons with Brazilian organizations, like /Positivo/. 7. The members of the Brazilian community want to colaborate with Wikimedia Foundation. 8. The members of the legal chapter under formation are afraid of losing the legitimacy of the local community among society after the establishment of the WMF office. Wikimedia Brasil has apprehension of not having control over what was raised locally, and of the loss of sources of revenue due to internal competition. Based on this understanding, participant members of the Brazilian community decided to: 1. Support the creation of Wikimedia Foundation office in Brazil which, as explained at the meeting, will have the goal of fostering the realization of partnerships and events with the community and the external audiences, provisionally and until the local chapter have enough structure to develop such activities directly. 2. Suggest that the office maintains goals to work for the development of the local community and not only fundraising or the realization of business agreements. 3. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its activites in Brazil are achieved with maximum transparency and envolvement of Wikimedia Brasil, allowing the local volunteers to participate at the various stages of ongoing projects and also in those that will be launched at the country. 4. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its goals and existing plans to Brazil are shared with Wikimedia Brasil. 5. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation to orientate its projects, partnerships and possible proposals of interested sponsors to the local chapter, giving some opportunity to Wikimedia Brasil. 6. Propose the creation of a tatical planning for Brazil, based on Wikimedia's strategic planning, with the participation of WMF office and Wikimedia Brasil for the construction of a development program to Brazil. 7. Propose to Wikimedia Foundation to make room available in its WMF office directorship, provided by statue, for a chosen Wikimedia Brasil representative, consequently, chosen by the local community. Or, that the Wikimedia Foundation enjoy the legal chapter structure
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
Ah, ok this is a recent thing then. Dan Rosenthal On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:49 PM, CasteloBranco michelcastelobra...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, Dan It was announced in WMF July Report [1] (last point in the Brazil Catalyst section). [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_July_2011#Brazil_Catalyst Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil Em 27/08/2011 16:20, Dan Rosenthal escreveu: Uh did I miss something? 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. Was this announced some place? Dan Rosenthal On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:11 PM, CasteloBranco michelcastelobra...@gmail.com wrote: For your information The Brazilian community is offering WMF a letter of agreement, which was collaboratively written. After the Brazilian participants shared their experience on what happened in Haifa, the whole community had one week to discuss and edit the content, which is now available on Meta.[1] Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_letter_of_agreement_between_Wikimedia_Foundation_and_Brazilian_volunteers Proposed letter of agreement between Wikimedia Foundation and Brazilian volunteers On August 5, 2011, during Wikimania 2011 http://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Brasil_no_Wikimania/2011, on Haifa, Israel, a meeting between Wikimedia Brasil and Wikimedia Foundation was held. The meeting, which was also attended by representatives of Wikimedia Portugal and Wikimedia Argentina, provided a discussion about the ongoing Wikimedia Projects in Brazil and the interaction between the future WMF office in the country and the local chapter. The understanding of Brazilian members along the meeting was that: 1. Brazil is a strategic priority for Wikimedia Foundation. 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. 3. Wikimedia Foundation understands that the Brazilian community and, thus, the chapter under formation still doesn't have the capacity to be completely self-managed. 4. Wikimedia Foundation aims to develop the existing programs in Brazil, like Campus Ambassadors, though it still doesn't have a specific development program for Brazil. 5. Wikimedia Foundation wants to conduct researches about the lusophone community. 6. Wikimedia Foundation already has liaisons with Brazilian organizations, like /Positivo/. 7. The members of the Brazilian community want to colaborate with Wikimedia Foundation. 8. The members of the legal chapter under formation are afraid of losing the legitimacy of the local community among society after the establishment of the WMF office. Wikimedia Brasil has apprehension of not having control over what was raised locally, and of the loss of sources of revenue due to internal competition. Based on this understanding, participant members of the Brazilian community decided to: 1. Support the creation of Wikimedia Foundation office in Brazil which, as explained at the meeting, will have the goal of fostering the realization of partnerships and events with the community and the external audiences, provisionally and until the local chapter have enough structure to develop such activities directly. 2. Suggest that the office maintains goals to work for the development of the local community and not only fundraising or the realization of business agreements. 3. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its activites in Brazil are achieved with maximum transparency and envolvement of Wikimedia Brasil, allowing the local volunteers to participate at the various stages of ongoing projects and also in those that will be launched at the country. 4. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its goals and existing plans to Brazil are shared with Wikimedia Brasil. 5. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation to orientate its projects, partnerships and possible proposals of interested sponsors to the local chapter, giving some opportunity to Wikimedia Brasil. 6. Propose the creation of a tatical planning for Brazil, based on Wikimedia's strategic planning, with the participation of WMF office and Wikimedia Brasil for the construction of a development program to Brazil. 7. Propose to Wikimedia Foundation
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On 27 August 2011 20:52, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote: Ah, ok this is a recent thing then. Not really. It's mentioned on page 9 of the strategic plan: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/WMF_StrategicPlan2011_spreads.pdf The mention in the July report is just saying that things have started happening. It's been planned for a while now. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
I find this all very sad. Who are the Brazilian volunteers, and how effectively do they represent the views of those Brazilians who are truly interested in Wikipedia in their country. The simple fact is that an agreement entered into by an ad hoc group binds no-one except the individuals that sign it. At one time a chapter was authorized for Brazil, but a refusal to build a legal structure led to the withdrawal of the authorization. It may seem like so much paperwork and bureaucracy, but there are times when a legal structure is essential for moving forward. I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. Ray On 08/27/11 12:11 PM, CasteloBranco wrote: For your information The Brazilian community is offering WMF a letter of agreement, which was collaboratively written. After the Brazilian participants shared their experience on what happened in Haifa, the whole community had one week to discuss and edit the content, which is now available on Meta.[1] Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_letter_of_agreement_between_Wikimedia_Foundation_and_Brazilian_volunteers Proposed letter of agreement between Wikimedia Foundation and Brazilian volunteers On August 5, 2011, during Wikimania 2011 http://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Brasil_no_Wikimania/2011, on Haifa, Israel, a meeting between Wikimedia Brasil and Wikimedia Foundation was held. The meeting, which was also attended by representatives of Wikimedia Portugal and Wikimedia Argentina, provided a discussion about the ongoing Wikimedia Projects in Brazil and the interaction between the future WMF office in the country and the local chapter. The understanding of Brazilian members along the meeting was that: 1. Brazil is a strategic priority for Wikimedia Foundation. 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. 3. Wikimedia Foundation understands that the Brazilian community and, thus, the chapter under formation still doesn't have the capacity to be completely self-managed. 4. Wikimedia Foundation aims to develop the existing programs in Brazil, like Campus Ambassadors, though it still doesn't have a specific development program for Brazil. 5. Wikimedia Foundation wants to conduct researches about the lusophone community. 6. Wikimedia Foundation already has liaisons with Brazilian organizations, like /Positivo/. 7. The members of the Brazilian community want to colaborate with Wikimedia Foundation. 8. The members of the legal chapter under formation are afraid of losing the legitimacy of the local community among society after the establishment of the WMF office. Wikimedia Brasil has apprehension of not having control over what was raised locally, and of the loss of sources of revenue due to internal competition. Based on this understanding, participant members of the Brazilian community decided to: 1. Support the creation of Wikimedia Foundation office in Brazil which, as explained at the meeting, will have the goal of fostering the realization of partnerships and events with the community and the external audiences, provisionally and until the local chapter have enough structure to develop such activities directly. 2. Suggest that the office maintains goals to work for the development of the local community and not only fundraising or the realization of business agreements. 3. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its activites in Brazil are achieved with maximum transparency and envolvement of Wikimedia Brasil, allowing the local volunteers to participate at the various stages of ongoing projects and also in those that will be launched at the country. 4. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation that its goals and existing plans to Brazil are shared with Wikimedia Brasil. 5. Recommend to Wikimedia Foundation to orientate its projects, partnerships and possible proposals of interested sponsors to the local chapter, giving some opportunity to Wikimedia Brasil. 6. Propose the creation of a tatical planning for Brazil, based on Wikimedia's strategic planning, with the participation of WMF office and Wikimedia Brasil for the construction of a development program
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
The letter was written collaboratively and announced in IRC, village pump, mailing list, facebook, twitter, ... so i think it does represent the views of all Brazilians who are interested on it. We do know a legal structure is now essential, and we are developing the legal structure (rewriting the bylaws, contacting lawyers and accountants, and so on). So, we agree on this, Ray: our higher priority is to develop a legal entity, for now. During the first months, it would be great to get some help from the WMF Office. That's why we are offering our support, and suggesting ways on how to better work together. The chair on the board is this, a suggestion. We can discuss another ways to do it, and your opinion is welcome. Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil Em 27/08/2011 21:00, Ray Saintonge escreveu: I find this all very sad. Who are the Brazilian volunteers, and how effectively do they represent the views of those Brazilians who are truly interested in Wikipedia in their country. The simple fact is that an agreement entered into by an ad hoc group binds no-one except the individuals that sign it. At one time a chapter was authorized for Brazil, but a refusal to build a legal structure led to the withdrawal of the authorization. It may seem like so much paperwork and bureaucracy, but there are times when a legal structure is essential for moving forward. I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. Ray On 08/27/11 12:11 PM, CasteloBranco wrote: For your information The Brazilian community is offering WMF a letter of agreement, which was collaboratively written. After the Brazilian participants shared their experience on what happened in Haifa, the whole community had one week to discuss and edit the content, which is now available on Meta.[1] Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_letter_of_agreement_between_Wikimedia_Foundation_and_Brazilian_volunteers Proposed letter of agreement between Wikimedia Foundation and Brazilian volunteers On August 5, 2011, during Wikimania 2011 http://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Brasil_no_Wikimania/2011, on Haifa, Israel, a meeting between Wikimedia Brasil and Wikimedia Foundation was held. The meeting, which was also attended by representatives of Wikimedia Portugal and Wikimedia Argentina, provided a discussion about the ongoing Wikimedia Projects in Brazil and the interaction between the future WMF office in the country and the local chapter. The understanding of Brazilian members along the meeting was that: 1. Brazil is a strategic priority for Wikimedia Foundation. 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. 3. Wikimedia Foundation understands that the Brazilian community and, thus, the chapter under formation still doesn't have the capacity to be completely self-managed. 4. Wikimedia Foundation aims to develop the existing programs in Brazil, like Campus Ambassadors, though it still doesn't have a specific development program for Brazil. 5. Wikimedia Foundation wants to conduct researches about the lusophone community. 6. Wikimedia Foundation already has liaisons with Brazilian organizations, like /Positivo/. 7. The members of the Brazilian community want to colaborate with Wikimedia Foundation. 8. The members of the legal chapter under formation are afraid of losing the legitimacy of the local community among society after the establishment of the WMF office. Wikimedia Brasil has apprehension of not having control over what was raised locally, and of the loss of sources of revenue due to internal competition. Based on this understanding, participant members of the Brazilian community decided to: 1. Support the creation of Wikimedia Foundation office in Brazil which, as explained at the meeting, will have the goal of fostering the realization of partnerships and events with the community and the external audiences, provisionally and until the local chapter have enough structure to develop such activities directly. 2. Suggest that the office maintains goals to work for the development of the local community and not only fundraising or the realization of business
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 2:29 AM, CasteloBranco michelcastelobra...@gmail.com wrote: The letter was written collaboratively and announced in IRC, village pump, mailing list, facebook, twitter, ... so i think it does represent the views of all Brazilians who are interested on it. We do know a legal structure is now essential, and we are developing the legal structure (rewriting the bylaws, contacting lawyers and accountants, and so on). So, we agree on this, Ray: our higher priority is to develop a legal entity, for now. During the first months, it would be great to get some help from the WMF Office. That's why we are offering our support, and suggesting ways on how to better work together. The chair on the board is this, a suggestion. We can discuss another ways to do it, and your opinion is welcome. I think this is a great initiative. Good job in getting the community(ies) together on this! Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia Brasil + WMF
I'm happy to hear this. As a member of the Chapters Committee, I look forward to being helpful. Ray On 08/27/11 5:29 PM, CasteloBranco wrote: The letter was written collaboratively and announced in IRC, village pump, mailing list, facebook, twitter, ... so i think it does represent the views of all Brazilians who are interested on it. We do know a legal structure is now essential, and we are developing the legal structure (rewriting the bylaws, contacting lawyers and accountants, and so on). So, we agree on this, Ray: our higher priority is to develop a legal entity, for now. During the first months, it would be great to get some help from the WMF Office. That's why we are offering our support, and suggesting ways on how to better work together. The chair on the board is this, a suggestion. We can discuss another ways to do it, and your opinion is welcome. Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil Em 27/08/2011 21:00, Ray Saintonge escreveu: I find this all very sad. Who are the Brazilian volunteers, and how effectively do they represent the views of those Brazilians who are truly interested in Wikipedia in their country. The simple fact is that an agreement entered into by an ad hoc group binds no-one except the individuals that sign it. At one time a chapter was authorized for Brazil, but a refusal to build a legal structure led to the withdrawal of the authorization. It may seem like so much paperwork and bureaucracy, but there are times when a legal structure is essential for moving forward. I think that developing such a legal entity should be a high priority for Brazilian Wikipedians to ensure that Wiki activities in Brazil are controlled by Brazilians. At the same time I don't think there is any value to having a WMF appointee on your board; such a person would find it difficult to function under circumstances of perpetual conflict of interest. No other chapter has such a clause. Ray On 08/27/11 12:11 PM, CasteloBranco wrote: For your information The Brazilian community is offering WMF a letter of agreement, which was collaboratively written. After the Brazilian participants shared their experience on what happened in Haifa, the whole community had one week to discuss and edit the content, which is now available on Meta.[1] Castelo [[:m:User:Castelobranco]] Wikimedia Brasil [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposed_letter_of_agreement_between_Wikimedia_Foundation_and_Brazilian_volunteers Proposed letter of agreement between Wikimedia Foundation and Brazilian volunteers On August 5, 2011, during Wikimania 2011 http://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/Brasil_no_Wikimania/2011, on Haifa, Israel, a meeting between Wikimedia Brasil and Wikimedia Foundation was held. The meeting, which was also attended by representatives of Wikimedia Portugal and Wikimedia Argentina, provided a discussion about the ongoing Wikimedia Projects in Brazil and the interaction between the future WMF office in the country and the local chapter. The understanding of Brazilian members along the meeting was that: 1. Brazil is a strategic priority for Wikimedia Foundation. 2. Wikimedia Foundation will set up an office in Brazil in order to stimulate the development of projects to increase the penetration of Wikipedia in Brazil. This process was already launched with the search for locations, hiring lawyers and the search for a professional to manage it. 3. Wikimedia Foundation understands that the Brazilian community and, thus, the chapter under formation still doesn't have the capacity to be completely self-managed. 4. Wikimedia Foundation aims to develop the existing programs in Brazil, like Campus Ambassadors, though it still doesn't have a specific development program for Brazil. 5. Wikimedia Foundation wants to conduct researches about the lusophone community. 6. Wikimedia Foundation already has liaisons with Brazilian organizations, like /Positivo/. 7. The members of the Brazilian community want to colaborate with Wikimedia Foundation. 8. The members of the legal chapter under formation are afraid of losing the legitimacy of the local community among society after the establishment of the WMF office. Wikimedia Brasil has apprehension of not having control over what was raised locally, and of the loss of sources of revenue due to internal competition. Based on this understanding, participant members of the Brazilian community decided to: 1. Support the creation of Wikimedia Foundation office in Brazil which, as explained at the meeting, will have the goal of fostering the realization of partnerships and events with the community and the external audiences, provisionally and until the local chapter have enough structure to develop such
