Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Thanks for the reply, Rupert, and for pushing me to think harder. I like that! Without repeating myself and building on your questions, here's what I'll say: I agree that chapters are an important way to take the wikimedia movement forward across the globe. No issues with that. I'm still not convinced that *any entity* should see itself at the centre of the movement either globally or in a country - either because it has members, or because it has funding, or because it is an entity. For any reason. Why is it important for an entity in a volunteer movement to be at the centre at all? If there is anyone or anything that I see at the centre of the wikimedia movement, it is individual volunteers - who work on the projects, edit day in and day out, do other things etc. When entities and formal organizations start up in a country, individual volunteers who are not affiliated to any of these start seeing themselves as 'lower order volunteers' in some way; to me, this is tremendously sad. I've heard editors in India say, I'm just a volunteer (to describe themselves, since they are neither office bearers in the chapter, nor work in the program trust). When I hear that, I feel we're doing something wrong - the presence of entities in a country should make individual volunteers and editors feel supported and part of this universe, not devalued or disconnected. In response to your questions about not doing it differently in India, I think there's good reason for us to experiment in different ways in different geographies - wasn't wikipedia itself a grand experiment to begin with? But yes, experiment in a way that does not exclude the communities that have organically grown in these places. If we really want to sustain the projects at a time when the editor base is declining, I do think some experimentation may be in order. Agree that things don't work out should be dropped, but maybe new ways of doing things can also provide new answers. And yes, a one-size-fits-all solution is unlikely to work, given how culturally diverse the world is. So yes, boots on the ground, but also ear to the ground. :) Cheers Bishakha On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:53 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote: hi bishaka, many thanks for your mail! i like a lot your attitude a lot to challenge constantly existing ways of thinking and doing :) just let us look on others. our exemplary organizations are not doing anything different than in all other countries: * http://www.indianredcross.org/sb.htm * http://www.msfindia.in/ * national indian football leage * http://www.wwfindia.org/ coming to the other point you made about living up to expectations. i am pretty sure you know that the chapters are per definition at the center stage, like wmf is. and you know of the careful ant patient proceeding which led, in a second try, to a successful UK chapter. and the thoughtful and friendly and listening proceeding to make every organization in the wiki universe live up to the expectations and get better, which now can be seen exemplary by planning the future fundraising and fund disemination. is there a reason why the wikimedia movement should address it differently in india? why not be patient? why not be consistent? why not do like the other big ones, surely much more experienced in india than we are? rupert On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:08, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Hari, Tinu, and Theo, Thank you for your heartfelt emails; all of them made me think, and want to take this conversation forward. One of the things I do want to say is that despite all the openness within the wiki-universe (and there is loads of it, no question), there are certain assumptions or 'logics' that are treated as sacred or as givens - these assumptions are rarely challenged or questioned, let alone explored in any depth. And any attempt to challenge these assumptions is treated almost as sacrilege. One of these assumptions is the idea that once a chapter has started operating in a country, no other entity has any business to be there - regardless of the size or potential of that country. This has been expressed in many emails on this thread, where the India chapter has implicitly and explicitly been positioned as legitimate - that which deserves to be there - and the program trust as illegitimate (or some sort of trespasser or gate-crasher). A related assumption is that the single-entity model is, by default, and without any questioning or critical analysis, the best one for every country in the world, including India. (Yes, this model may work for many countries - the question is: does it work for all? Is it the only workable model?) For example, the European Union has a population of 502 million (27 countries, 27 official languages) [1] - and 15-20 chapters if I'm not mistaken. India has a population of 1.2 billion (28 states, 7 union
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
haha, I like that expression ... need to remember the ear on the ground:) the big problem with a trust is imo, that it is not possible for an ordinary person to get involved in a decisive role. a chapter takes anybody as member and anybody can be elected to its board. rupert On Nov 23, 2011 7:21 AM, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the reply, Rupert, and for pushing me to think harder. I like that! Without repeating myself and building on your questions, here's what I'll say: I agree that chapters are an important way to take the wikimedia movement forward across the globe. No issues with that. I'm still not convinced that *any entity* should see itself at the centre of the movement either globally or in a country - either because it has members, or because it has funding, or because it is an entity. For any reason. Why is it important for an entity in a volunteer movement to be at the centre at all? If there is anyone or anything that I see at the centre of the wikimedia movement, it is individual volunteers - who work on the projects, edit day in and day out, do other things etc. When entities and formal organizations start up in a country, individual volunteers who are not affiliated to any of these start seeing themselves as 'lower order volunteers' in some way; to me, this is tremendously sad. I've heard editors in India say, I'm just a volunteer (to describe themselves, since they are neither office bearers in the chapter, nor work in the program trust). When I hear that, I feel we're doing something wrong - the presence of entities in a country should make individual volunteers and editors feel supported and part of this universe, not devalued or disconnected. In response to your questions about not doing it differently in India, I think there's good reason for us to experiment in different ways in different geographies - wasn't wikipedia itself a grand experiment to begin with? But yes, experiment in a way that does not exclude the communities that have organically grown in these places. If we really want to sustain the projects at a time when the editor base is declining, I do think some experimentation may be in order. Agree that things don't work out should be dropped, but maybe new ways of doing things can also provide new answers. And yes, a one-size-fits-all solution is unlikely to work, given how culturally diverse the world is. So yes, boots on the ground, but also ear to the ground. :) Cheers Bishakha On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:53 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote: hi bishaka, many thanks for your mail! i like a lot your attitude a lot to challenge constantly existing ways of thinking and doing :) just let us look on others. our exemplary organizations are not doing anything different than in all other countries: * http://www.indianredcross.org/sb.htm * http://www.msfindia.in/ * national indian football leage * http://www.wwfindia.org/ coming to the other point you made about living up to expectations. i am pretty sure you know that the chapters are per definition at the center stage, like wmf is. and you know of the careful ant patient proceeding which led, in a second try, to a successful UK chapter. and the thoughtful and friendly and listening proceeding to make every organization in the wiki universe live up to the expectations and get better, which now can be seen exemplary by planning the future fundraising and fund disemination. is there a reason why the wikimedia movement should address it differently in india? why not be patient? why not be consistent? why not do like the other big ones, surely much more experienced in india than we are? rupert On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:08, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Hari, Tinu, and Theo, Thank you for your heartfelt emails; all of them made me think, and want to take this conversation forward. One of the things I do want to say is that despite all the openness within the wiki-universe (and there is loads of it, no question), there are certain assumptions or 'logics' that are treated as sacred or as givens - these assumptions are rarely challenged or questioned, let alone explored in any depth. And any attempt to challenge these assumptions is treated almost as sacrilege. One of these assumptions is the idea that once a chapter has started operating in a country, no other entity has any business to be there - regardless of the size or potential of that country. This has been expressed in many emails on this thread, where the India chapter has implicitly and explicitly been positioned as legitimate - that which deserves to be there - and the program trust as illegitimate (or some sort of trespasser or gate-crasher). A related assumption is that the single-entity model is, by default, and without any
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Dear Bishakha, I apologize for intruding in this discussion again as someone who has little knowledge about India and the local situation. I'm myself not entirely convinced that there always should be one organization in one country - but it is out default. That means that if we want to drift off drom that default, there should be a good reason for it. That is a different mindset of course than that organizations have to prove itself. There are a few things special here however. The first is that one of the organizations is a membership organization, and the other isn't. To me, with my limited knowledge and understanding, it would indeed seem logical given our background to put the membership organization at the center stage. However, at the same time I can understand that this organization might not be ready to handle the funds yet that it needs to. But again - the default would lie imho with the membership organization. If the Trust wants to deviate that is fine, but ideally that would always happen with the consent of the chapter. And of course, now that there *are* two organizations, they should communicate well with each other. Somehow we should ensure that, and I hope some good routes are being found to let everyone on the chapter believe that they are being communicated well with to the full extent. Like was noted somewhere else in this thread, if there is a paid organization just doing stuff you'd like to do as a volunteer as well - that can be pretty darn demotivating. And possibly harmful for the volunteer community in the long run. Lets just be careful. Another is the confusing name - both organizations have the words Wikimedia India in their name. Since chapters are usually identified with Wikimedia Country, this trust is already to me confusing, since it implies it is set up *by* the chapter. Choosing a different name might resolve some issues here. I'm not trying to say here whether those conversations and consent happened - at the beginning of the discussion I was merely trying to understand the situation better, to get a better grasp of who talked with who, who were involved in decision making processes here. From chapters we expect no less than transparent founding processes on meta, involving the community. Receiving feedback and even opening up the bylaws for discussion. I have not seen such a process, but may have missed it. If we are to place the trust at the center stage (are we? still unclear to me, so not suggesting anything here) we should *at least* require the same standards as we do for new chapters. At least for me this is the major part of why I started off this discussion in the first place. It is no attack, it has mainly been a set of questions which have gotten answered in many different ways throughout this discussion. That alone leaves me to believe that there are ways to improve. Best regards, Lodewijk No dia 16 de Novembro de 2011 04:08, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com escreveu: Dear Hari, Tinu, and Theo, Thank you for your heartfelt emails; all of them made me think, and want to take this conversation forward. One of the things I do want to say is that despite all the openness within the wiki-universe (and there is loads of it, no question), there are certain assumptions or 'logics' that are treated as sacred or as givens - these assumptions are rarely challenged or questioned, let alone explored in any depth. And any attempt to challenge these assumptions is treated almost as sacrilege. One of these assumptions is the idea that once a chapter has started operating in a country, no other entity has any business to be there - regardless of the size or potential of that country. This has been expressed in many emails on this thread, where the India chapter has implicitly and explicitly been positioned as legitimate - that which deserves to be there - and the program trust as illegitimate (or some sort of trespasser or gate-crasher). A related assumption is that the single-entity model is, by default, and without any questioning or critical analysis, the best one for every country in the world, including India. (Yes, this model may work for many countries - the question is: does it work for all? Is it the only workable model?) For example, the European Union has a population of 502 million (27 countries, 27 official languages) [1] - and 15-20 chapters if I'm not mistaken. India has a population of 1.2 billion (28 states, 7 union territories, atleast 28 official languages) [2], [3] - and 2 entities. If this data were to be presented to someone outside of the wikimedia movement, he or she might actually argue that India needs more entities, not less, to accomplish the movement's goal of spreading free knowledge to people in India. An outsider may not understand why the arrival of a second entity is causing so much angst and anxiety, more so when funding sources do not seem to be scarce. Related to the assumption
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote: Dear Bishakha, I apologize for intruding in this discussion again as someone who has little knowledge about India and the local situation. Your reply made me happy - it broadened the conversation beyond borders, it made me feel we can still exchange ideas without snarling at each other, and it made some solid points. I feel no particular need to respond to anything, but just wanted to thank you for pitching in. Really. After a long time, I'm smiling on this thread. Best Bishakha ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
hi bishaka, many thanks for your mail! i like a lot your attitude a lot to challenge constantly existing ways of thinking and doing :) just let us look on others. our exemplary organizations are not doing anything different than in all other countries: * http://www.indianredcross.org/sb.htm * http://www.msfindia.in/ * national indian football leage * http://www.wwfindia.org/ coming to the other point you made about living up to expectations. i am pretty sure you know that the chapters are per definition at the center stage, like wmf is. and you know of the careful ant patient proceeding which led, in a second try, to a successful UK chapter. and the thoughtful and friendly and listening proceeding to make every organization in the wiki universe live up to the expectations and get better, which now can be seen exemplary by planning the future fundraising and fund disemination. is there a reason why the wikimedia movement should address it differently in india? why not be patient? why not be consistent? why not do like the other big ones, surely much more experienced in india than we are? rupert On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:08, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.comwrote: Dear Hari, Tinu, and Theo, Thank you for your heartfelt emails; all of them made me think, and want to take this conversation forward. One of the things I do want to say is that despite all the openness within the wiki-universe (and there is loads of it, no question), there are certain assumptions or 'logics' that are treated as sacred or as givens - these assumptions are rarely challenged or questioned, let alone explored in any depth. And any attempt to challenge these assumptions is treated almost as sacrilege. One of these assumptions is the idea that once a chapter has started operating in a country, no other entity has any business to be there - regardless of the size or potential of that country. This has been expressed in many emails on this thread, where the India chapter has implicitly and explicitly been positioned as legitimate - that which deserves to be there - and the program trust as illegitimate (or some sort of trespasser or gate-crasher). A related assumption is that the single-entity model is, by default, and without any questioning or critical analysis, the best one for every country in the world, including India. (Yes, this model may work for many countries - the question is: does it work for all? Is it the only workable model?) For example, the European Union has a population of 502 million (27 countries, 27 official languages) [1] - and 15-20 chapters if I'm not mistaken. India has a population of 1.2 billion (28 states, 7 union territories, atleast 28 official languages) [2], [3] - and 2 entities. If this data were to be presented to someone outside of the wikimedia movement, he or she might actually argue that India needs more entities, not less, to accomplish the movement's goal of spreading free knowledge to people in India. An outsider may not understand why the arrival of a second entity is causing so much angst and anxiety, more so when funding sources do not seem to be scarce. Related to the assumption that a chapter is the only legitimate entity in any country is the idea of entitlement. I quote from Hari's email: ...this new development seems to indicate that the chapter, which has the potential to better represent the community doesn't get to be at the center stage anymore. I am unable to see why the chapter - or for that matter, any entity, should feel it is 'entitled' to be centre-stage without doing anything to prove that it deserves to be centre-stage. Like any other organization, the chapter will have to prove itself, both to its members, and to the community. Then, and only then, can it slowly, (if at all), start laying any claim to moving towards the centre or the stage. And yes, in much the same vein, the trust will have to prove itself too - via programs that yield measurable results. Not to members, since it doesn't have those, but to the movement at large. Then, and only then, will it have credibility in a broader sense. (In a related aside, I don't think anyone feels that paid staff should be held to lower standards; that would be very bizarre. But paid staff should be treated with the same respect with which volunteers are treated; they're human too). So really, what is the problem with these two entities co-existing in India? I'm open to being convinced there is a problem - if I can see what this problem actually is. Best Bishakha [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_European_Union [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_with_official_status_in_India [4] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters#Existing_chapters ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
would you be so kind to tell us a reason why 1. the indian chapter does not receive 50 dollars to hire 2 persons, to pay the internet and telephone cost of 150 volunteers and to pay prices for 50 writing and photo shooting competitions around many universities in india? the first price could again be free internet and phone for one year. 2. the indian chapter does not set up an advisory board to include people with other desired experiences than wikimedia? but instead a trust was set up ... making some volunteers unhappy, and leading to differences in opinion even amongst chapter executives. if we assume the goal is to win contributors, I am wondering how somebody who is paid, writes blogs, tweeds, mails and maybe discussion pages is able to convince somebody else to write wikipedia in his free time. I am lacking a good english word here, but maybe one could say it is not authentic? setting up an independent trust besides the chapter and giving it 20 times as much money is not perceived peaceful by everybody. the goal of the wiki movement is to make love, and peace and wikipedia, at least imo. rupert On Nov 14, 2011 7:15 PM, CherianTinu Abraham tinucher...@gmail.com wrote: The following comments are my personal view and not necessarily of an Executive Member of the Wikimedia India Chapter. Having said that I must politely disagree with some of the views of Anirudh, my fellow Executive Member and Salmaan ( Theo) , a member of Wikimedia India chapter. But I do respect their personal views , but I guess we agree to disagree. The news of the formation of Wikimedia India Program Trust wasn't anything new to the chapter EC as it was mentioned in last two Chapter - Foundation Co-ordination meetings, if I remember correctly. And Sunil Abraham , Director of Centre of Internet Society ( CIS) is a patron of Wikimedia movement in India and chapter in India, not to forget that CIS have been sharing their office space for the chapter and Wikimeetups in Bangalore, or all the help CIS was doing for boot strapping the chapter. When it comes to paid contractors/staff , I don't see a difference between Theo[1] or Hisham, except that Hisham is working for a longer term. So what? Not every work can be done as a volunteer. As far as I understand, the foundation is also committed to support the chapters and community alike. The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India. When there are more than enough work to do, I don't understand why this hue and cry. There is only one who could diminish the importance of the chapter, the chapter itself. The road ahead for us is not easy but there are tons of things to do. We have our advantages but limitations too. Our current bank balance [2] is not more than a night's tariff at a decent hotel. The board members does the clerical work of receiving membership applications to posting individual snail mail letters of acceptance of membership. In spite of all these, we do this for the passion and love for the movement. It does come at the sacrifice of our own professional/career growths or the wonderful time we would otherwise have spend with our family and friends. But we are proud to Wikipedians/Wikimedians! And we love what we are doing. Foundation-Community-Chapter-India Trust...Yea, it is complicated and the model may or may not be the best.. But that is the reality. Let us all work together for the movement. Regards Tinu Cherian References 1) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_contractors 2) http://wiki.wikimedia.in/images/0/06/WMIN-AnnualReport2010-11.pdf On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or on the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will Wikimedia India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that country I could imagine them to have a say in it. Nope. Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the Wikimedia India Program Trust. And given that not many people are going to talk about it, I don't think much will change in the future. How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention that there is communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the default or the exception? From my own
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:12:42 + From: B?ria Lima berial...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust *The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India.* Did you ever read the Chapter Agreement you signed with WMF? That document states that WMIN is the ONLY chapter of WMF in India, and that any one organization must have their approval to work in Indian soil (I'm saying that based in WMPT agreement, WMIN one might be different.) I think that the spirit of an agreement is more important than its wording but I would like to comment both. Regarding the wording, in my opinion what the contract says can be interpreted exactly the other way around. It says that to create another chapter in the same geographical area WMIN will be consulted. [1] It doesn’t say that the approval of WMIN is needed. Furthermore to create an organization different than chapters not even that consultation is foreseen. As for the spirit I feel that the impression that chapters have private ownership of land is a big mistake that can leads us to a situation contrary to our values. This exclusivity is contrary to the spirit of sharing. We are not cultivating potatoes where the owner of the land keeps the potatoes. We give the potatoes away. The more and better people working the land more potatoes can give away. We don’t need land owners, what we need are people working the land. I think these organizations should be happy of having there each other andsee a chance that what one of them can’t do, perhaps will be done by the other. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Agreement_between_chapters_and_Wikimedia_Foundation#3.%20Geographic_limits ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
I am not going the respond inline, as it may confuse many a readers like me. I will also try to answer below various questions/comments from multiple mails/ people. Some of my comments may be general and not directed to anyone in particular. I didn't mean to offend anyone, whether he is a chapter member or not. I reserve my right to free opinion just like anyone does. I didn't either intend to undermine the great works of anyone. I am aware that whipping foundation label is very cool these days, but I am not for it. I may have disagreements of some of the foundation way or chapter way , but I express my concerns on issues only. The reason that I had mentioned that the formation of trust was announced in earlier co-ordination meetings was that whosoever had concerns earlier could have raised it even then. The fact that Sunil Abraham was made as one of the trustees was indeed not mentioned in the meetings, all i meant was I think he is well eligible for his contributions as a trustee for the WIPT. Does every chapter share every minute things of its proceedings with the foundation or the community? I am not here to say whether hiring Hisham or any foundation staff is right to wrong. AFAIK, the foundation encouraged/s community members to apply for various positions and I could point to you a lots of examples where active community members have been hired. Everywhere possible, whenever eligible and qualified candidates from the community are available, they have been hired, AFAIK. If I choose to work on a volunteer basis on part time, it is my own wish... And if I want work on full time for the movement, without worrying about my daily bread, it is also my wish. The choice is strictly personal. So is it cool if some people joins the foundation and not when some other people ? We, Wikipedians, claim to be open welcoming and vow to not bite the new comers, but in reality we form cabals and resists anyone new who comes to the movement, ...hah, ... they are all outsiders ! Oh I can whip everyone personally, but don't you dare to touch me attitude is also not productive. I am tired of seeing foundation-l used for personal grudges and attacks. I am tired seeing sock puppet accounts been made to just launch personal attacks on individuals on the mailing lists/forums. It is not just one time, but many a times. So finally it all boils down to funding and money, right ? Who gets the bigger share and who gets the smaller share? Is that all we care about ? Is that why we are all in the movement? I would have been much personally much richer, if I ( like many others) had put my energy, time and concentration elsewhere than putting on a movement that is very close to my/our hearts. Our family and friends would have much appreciated if we had spend time more with them, instead. But that is my/our choice and I am happy about it. We are just doing it because we are just passionate about it. Regards Tinu Cherian On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: *Having said that I must politely disagree with some of the views of Anirudh, my fellow Executive Member and Salmaan ( Theo) , a member of Wikimedia India chapter. But I do respect their personal views , but I guess we agree to disagree. * So, your idea of politeness include offend other member of your chapter? I already had been tagged as impolite, but not even I got that low. And that create a second question: Is that office worth the price to divide the chapter in 2 or more groups? * The news of the formation of Wikimedia India Program Trust wasn't anything new to the chapter EC as it was mentioned in last two Chapter - Foundation Co-ordination meetings, if I remember correctly.* So, WMF remembered to warn the chapter 2 months ago about a project they are conducting for the past year? And you think that is ok? You can't see the miscommunication here? *When it comes to paid contractors/staff , I don't see a difference between Theo[1] or Hisham, except that Hisham is working for a longer term. So what?* I have not to add besides what Theo said. The main and bigger difference is that one is a well know and long term wikimedian, the other happens to have a job who deal with wikis. *The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India.* Did you ever read the Chapter Agreement you signed with WMF? That document states that WMIN is the ONLY chapter of WMF in India, and that any one organization must have their approval to work in Indian soil (I'm saying that based in WMPT agreement, WMIN one might be different.) Best regards, *Béria Lima* Who sincerely hope that this office don't became a arm of mass destruction for Indian Chapter and community. * Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Tinu Cherian, thank you so much for writing this gorgeous, thoughtful e-mail. I agree with every word you wrote, and I am grateful that you did it. One of the things I like best about Wikimedia is that anyone can become a leader. You become a leader by acting like one: by being compassionate and good, by reminding us of why we're all here, and calling upon us all to be our best, wisest, most generous selves. That's what you've done here, and I think it's really lovely. While I was reading your e-mail, it reminded me of a famous mail that Brion sent to this same list, back on Christmas Eve of 2006. It was before I joined the projects, but lots of people told me about it, and eventually I looked it up in our archives. It's here: http://web.archiveorange.com/archive/v/FH5EqJVBMHtX4RawfKZY -- we used to call it the eggnog e-mail. It was essentially doing the same thing that you did in your mail just now: asking us all, despite our disagreements, to remember that what we're doing here in the Wikimedia projects is awesome, and that we should remember that we love each other. You've written the new eggnog e-mail. Thank you! Sue On Nov 15, 2011 10:02 AM, CherianTinu Abraham tinucher...@gmail.com wrote: I am not going the respond inline, as it may confuse many a readers like me. I will also try to answer below various questions/comments from multiple mails/ people. Some of my comments may be general and not directed to anyone in particular. I didn't mean to offend anyone, whether he is a chapter member or not. I reserve my right to free opinion just like anyone does. I didn't either intend to undermine the great works of anyone. I am aware that whipping foundation label is very cool these days, but I am not for it. I may have disagreements of some of the foundation way or chapter way , but I express my concerns on issues only. The reason that I had mentioned that the formation of trust was announced in earlier co-ordination meetings was that whosoever had concerns earlier could have raised it even then. The fact that Sunil Abraham was made as one of the trustees was indeed not mentioned in the meetings, all i meant was I think he is well eligible for his contributions as a trustee for the WIPT. Does every chapter share every minute things of its proceedings with the foundation or the community? I am not here to say whether hiring Hisham or any foundation staff is right to wrong. AFAIK, the foundation encouraged/s community members to apply for various positions and I could point to you a lots of examples where active community members have been hired. Everywhere possible, whenever eligible and qualified candidates from the community are available, they have been hired, AFAIK. If I choose to work on a volunteer basis on part time, it is my own wish... And if I want work on full time for the movement, without worrying about my daily bread, it is also my wish. The choice is strictly personal. So is it cool if some people joins the foundation and not when some other people ? We, Wikipedians, claim to be open welcoming and vow to not bite the new comers, but in reality we form cabals and resists anyone new who comes to the movement, ...hah, ... they are all outsiders ! Oh I can whip everyone personally, but don't you dare to touch me attitude is also not productive. I am tired of seeing foundation-l used for personal grudges and attacks. I am tired seeing sock puppet accounts been made to just launch personal attacks on individuals on the mailing lists/forums. It is not just one time, but many a times. So finally it all boils down to funding and money, right ? Who gets the bigger share and who gets the smaller share? Is that all we care about ? Is that why we are all in the movement? I would have been much personally much richer, if I ( like many others) had put my energy, time and concentration elsewhere than putting on a movement that is very close to my/our hearts. Our family and friends would have much appreciated if we had spend time more with them, instead. But that is my/our choice and I am happy about it. We are just doing it because we are just passionate about it. Regards Tinu Cherian ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
OMG Gomà, can´t you leave any thread in peace without push your POV? _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 November 2011 09:37, Joan Goma jrg...@gmail.com wrote: Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:12:42 + From: B?ria Lima berial...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust *The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India.* Did you ever read the Chapter Agreement you signed with WMF? That document states that WMIN is the ONLY chapter of WMF in India, and that any one organization must have their approval to work in Indian soil (I'm saying that based in WMPT agreement, WMIN one might be different.) I think that the spirit of an agreement is more important than its wording but I would like to comment both. Regarding the wording, in my opinion what the contract says can be interpreted exactly the other way around. It says that to create another chapter in the same geographical area WMIN will be consulted. [1] It doesn’t say that the approval of WMIN is needed. Furthermore to create an organization different than chapters not even that consultation is foreseen. As for the spirit I feel that the impression that chapters have private ownership of land is a big mistake that can leads us to a situation contrary to our values. This exclusivity is contrary to the spirit of sharing. We are not cultivating potatoes where the owner of the land keeps the potatoes. We give the potatoes away. The more and better people working the land more potatoes can give away. We don’t need land owners, what we need are people working the land. I think these organizations should be happy of having there each other andsee a chance that what one of them can’t do, perhaps will be done by the other. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Agreement_between_chapters_and_Wikimedia_Foundation#3.%20Geographic_limits ___ 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 India Program Trust
Can we not pick on a person whose POV is that he wishes to participate in the Wikimedia movement in the fullest way possible? Pick on me instead. Oh wait... Best wishes, Achal On Tuesday 15 November 2011 07:40 PM, Béria Lima wrote: OMG Gomà, can´t you leave any thread in peace without push your POV? _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 November 2011 09:37, Joan Gomajrg...@gmail.com wrote: Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:12:42 + From: B?ria Limaberial...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust *The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India.* Did you ever read the Chapter Agreement you signed with WMF? That document states that WMIN is the ONLY chapter of WMF in India, and that any one organization must have their approval to work in Indian soil (I'm saying that based in WMPT agreement, WMIN one might be different.) I think that the spirit of an agreement is more important than its wording but I would like to comment both. Regarding the wording, in my opinion what the contract says can be interpreted exactly the other way around. It says that to create another chapter in the same geographical area WMIN will be consulted. [1] It doesn’t say that the approval of WMIN is needed. Furthermore to create an organization different than chapters not even that consultation is foreseen. As for the spirit I feel that the impression that chapters have private ownership of land is a big mistake that can leads us to a situation contrary to our values. This exclusivity is contrary to the spirit of sharing. We are not cultivating potatoes where the owner of the land keeps the potatoes. We give the potatoes away. The more and better people working the land more potatoes can give away. We don’t need land owners, what we need are people working the land. I think these organizations should be happy of having there each other andsee a chance that what one of them can’t do, perhaps will be done by the other. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Agreement_between_chapters_and_Wikimedia_Foundation#3.%20Geographic_limits ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Achal, I don't quite understand what is the idea, meaning or whatever you wrote in your mail. Can you explain (this time with full and meaningful sentences), please? _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 November 2011 14:19, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Can we not pick on a person whose POV is that he wishes to participate in the Wikimedia movement in the fullest way possible? Pick on me instead. Oh wait... Best wishes, Achal On Tuesday 15 November 2011 07:40 PM, Béria Lima wrote: OMG Gomà, can´t you leave any thread in peace without push your POV? _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 November 2011 09:37, Joan Gomajrg...@gmail.com wrote: Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:12:42 + From: B?ria Limaberial...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust *The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India.* Did you ever read the Chapter Agreement you signed with WMF? That document states that WMIN is the ONLY chapter of WMF in India, and that any one organization must have their approval to work in Indian soil (I'm saying that based in WMPT agreement, WMIN one might be different.) I think that the spirit of an agreement is more important than its wording but I would like to comment both. Regarding the wording, in my opinion what the contract says can be interpreted exactly the other way around. It says that to create another chapter in the same geographical area WMIN will be consulted. [1] It doesn’t say that the approval of WMIN is needed. Furthermore to create an organization different than chapters not even that consultation is foreseen. As for the spirit I feel that the impression that chapters have private ownership of land is a big mistake that can leads us to a situation contrary to our values. This exclusivity is contrary to the spirit of sharing. We are not cultivating potatoes where the owner of the land keeps the potatoes. We give the potatoes away. The more and better people working the land more potatoes can give away. We don’t need land owners, what we need are people working the land. I think these organizations should be happy of having there each other andsee a chance that what one of them can’t do, perhaps will be done by the other. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Agreement_between_chapters_and_Wikimedia_Foundation#3.%20Geographic_limits ___ 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 ___ 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 India Program Trust
Let's not? I'm sure there is a lot of backstory to why some posts to this thread have been so argumentative, but the belligerence is childish and not conducive to a serious and productive discussion. ~Nathan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Hisham, There has been much discussion on this already, but this does sound like some *serious* development to someone like me who has been a long time volunteer from India. And perhaps to several other long time contributors from here too, who seem to be staying away from adding their opinion here for a reason. Thinking back about the time years back when many of us were used to spending our personal earnings to organize small scale outreach programs here, things have surely changed now and much of the development in last couple of years has been, to say the least, *overwhelming*. India is now getting to see well funded conferences, the funds are now flowing in for new programs that seem to be keen in quickly 'inducing' a community that otherwise would have taken its own time growing in an organic way. While all this focus on India and the sudden inflow of funds is all quite amazing, this new development seems to indicate that the chapter, which has the potential to better represent the community doesn't get to be at the center stage anymore. When the Chapter was formed, a major decision involved choosing between the open, more democratic legal model of a 'society' and slightly locked-in model of a 'trust'. The Chapter chose the 'society' model which presented more democratic setup despite the paperwork, hassles and the delay it presented. Although Bishaka did mention on an earlier email about the trust, there was nothing much to indicate why specifically the India programs office needs to be registered as a trust. A serious concern in this context is that in a trust, the trustees needn't change. Although new trustees can be elected, the control remains with the initial set of trustees on board. The assets of the trust will be governed by this closed set of trustees who are not subject to elections or restricted to any fixed term unlike the model the chapter is built on. It is rather disturbing and surprising to see none of the volunteers from the community actually voicing their concerns about this. There sure was a huge discussion when the legal model of chapter was in question. I should note here that Wikimedia India Chapter could have started operating earlier than it did had we gone for the 'trust' model, as this one presented lesser hassles with respect to paperwork. I should also admit that I was one of the people who objected strongly to the idea of going for a 'trust' and instead voted for the 'society' model when the chapter was being formed. Although I'm no longer part of the chapter now, it is quite disturbing for me to see the efforts put into chapter being pulled to a certain possibility of being sidelined and undermined, if not fully forced to shut its office. Like Ray expressed in an earlier email, it starts to give an impression that somewhere we have lost our way. These two organizations would compete, create more confusion than that exists now. It would surely make people alienated. And above all - the community faces the risk of being dried out with tons of chemical fertilizers that are being thrown in powered by huge funds to pacify the growth. The rapidly spewed 'community' can vanish or evaporate with just the same pace. The land could get barren. More than the numbers, it will be the quality (which in turn retains the interest of people contributing to it) that would sustain the projects. And if we continue like this, there might be a time when nothing would grow even with the best of the funds thrown in. Cheers, On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org wrote: cross-posting to foundation-l internal-l from India Community list; apologies if you've read this already. hisham Begin forwarded message: From: Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org Subject: Wikimedia India Program Trust Date: November 11, 2011 9:55:00 AM GMT+05:30 To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindi...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi Folks, I'm writing to share an update with you on certain developments of relevance to the Wikimedia movement in India. Announcement of Wikimedia India Program Trust For some time, efforts have gone into creating an organization that would provide an appropriate structure to support Wikimedia program activities in India. Aspects such as the current regulatory framework (regarding funding, taxation, etc.) as well as the legal protection for the India team have been considered to determine this structure. In this context, a host of options (e.g. subsidiary, branch, Section 25) were evaluated and a determination was made towards an independent non-profit public trust. Legal advice has been taken at every stage in this decision. A new entity, the “Wikimedia India Program Trust”, has now been formed and registered (in Delhi.) This will be the organization that will eventually drive India programs and house the team in India. Why an Independent Public Trust? The Trust will provide an effective vehicle within India to
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Hi Beria, I'm sorry - I wrote this in a hurry and don't necessarily want to further crowd foundation-l. The point about Goma is that he (and other Catalan Wikipedians) don't need to feel any more excluded than they already do (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_CAT/en) The point about me is superfluous. I guess I was reacting to the incredibly harsh tone of (most) of your messages. I apologise; there is no excuse for reproducing the kind of behaviour that makes me despair. Achal On Tuesday 15 November 2011 08:02 PM, Béria Lima wrote: Achal, I don't quite understand what is the idea, meaning or whatever you wrote in your mail. Can you explain (this time with full and meaningful sentences), please? _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 November 2011 14:19, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Can we not pick on a person whose POV is that he wishes to participate in the Wikimedia movement in the fullest way possible? Pick on me instead. Oh wait... Best wishes, Achal On Tuesday 15 November 2011 07:40 PM, Béria Lima wrote: OMG Gomà, can´t you leave any thread in peace without push your POV? _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 15 November 2011 09:37, Joan Gomajrg...@gmail.com wrote: Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:12:42 + From: B?ria Limaberial...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust *The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India.* Did you ever read the Chapter Agreement you signed with WMF? That document states that WMIN is the ONLY chapter of WMF in India, and that any one organization must have their approval to work in Indian soil (I'm saying that based in WMPT agreement, WMIN one might be different.) I think that the spirit of an agreement is more important than its wording but I would like to comment both. Regarding the wording, in my opinion what the contract says can be interpreted exactly the other way around. It says that to create another chapter in the same geographical area WMIN will be consulted. [1] It doesn’t say that the approval of WMIN is needed. Furthermore to create an organization different than chapters not even that consultation is foreseen. As for the spirit I feel that the impression that chapters have private ownership of land is a big mistake that can leads us to a situation contrary to our values. This exclusivity is contrary to the spirit of sharing. We are not cultivating potatoes where the owner of the land keeps the potatoes. We give the potatoes away. The more and better people working the land more potatoes can give away. We don’t need land owners, what we need are people working the land. I think these organizations should be happy of having there each other andsee a chance that what one of them can’t do, perhaps will be done by the other. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Agreement_between_chapters_and_Wikimedia_Foundation#3.%20Geographic_limits ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
The following comments are my personal view and not necessarily of an Executive Member of the Wikimedia India Chapter. Having said that I must politely disagree with some of the views of Anirudh, my fellow Executive Member and Salmaan ( Theo) , a member of Wikimedia India chapter. But I do respect their personal views , but I guess we agree to disagree. The news of the formation of Wikimedia India Program Trust wasn't anything new to the chapter EC as it was mentioned in last two Chapter - Foundation Co-ordination meetings, if I remember correctly. And Sunil Abraham , Director of Centre of Internet Society ( CIS) is a patron of Wikimedia movement in India and chapter in India, not to forget that CIS have been sharing their office space for the chapter and Wikimeetups in Bangalore, or all the help CIS was doing for boot strapping the chapter. When it comes to paid contractors/staff , I don't see a difference between Theo[1] or Hisham, except that Hisham is working for a longer term. So what? Not every work can be done as a volunteer. As far as I understand, the foundation is also committed to support the chapters and community alike. The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India. When there are more than enough work to do, I don't understand why this hue and cry. There is only one who could diminish the importance of the chapter, the chapter itself. The road ahead for us is not easy but there are tons of things to do. We have our advantages but limitations too. Our current bank balance [2] is not more than a night's tariff at a decent hotel. The board members does the clerical work of receiving membership applications to posting individual snail mail letters of acceptance of membership. In spite of all these, we do this for the passion and love for the movement. It does come at the sacrifice of our own professional/career growths or the wonderful time we would otherwise have spend with our family and friends. But we are proud to Wikipedians/Wikimedians! And we love what we are doing. Foundation-Community-Chapter-India Trust...Yea, it is complicated and the model may or may not be the best.. But that is the reality. Let us all work together for the movement. Regards Tinu Cherian References 1) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_contractors 2) http://wiki.wikimedia.in/images/0/06/WMIN-AnnualReport2010-11.pdf On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or on the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will Wikimedia India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that country I could imagine them to have a say in it. Nope. Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the Wikimedia India Program Trust. And given that not many people are going to talk about it, I don't think much will change in the future. How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention that there is communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the default or the exception? From my own experience and from what I have heard from a fellow Pune community member, the general community and the Chapter body have been excluded and ignored by WMF consultants from the very beginning. In fact, the Chapter representatives were only invited to attend meetings when Frank Schlenburg and Annie Lin were in town. And how will it work with regards of who will be the primary point of contact in India for institutions who want to partner with Wikimedia? Will they have to approach one of the two or whichever they like (and if they dont get the answer they like, can they just approach the other?). Will the chapter and the trust be competing with each other or collaborating? I think there is already a lot of confusion with regard to the two entities operating out of India. Going by the media, news reporters are already very confused by the existence of two Wikimedia bodies and I personally get a lot of queries every week asking me to clarify on the location of Wikimedia offices. With its paid consultants, the local WMF consultants have done a good job of making their presence felt (especially in Western India), and more and more journalists are interested in hearing from WMF (the international organization) than WMIN. The initial idea, if I
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
I was not going to comment on this thread again. I am kind of annoyed by what you are painting me as, but I'll try and remain objective. First, what mail are you disagreeing with? The last mail I sent on this thread is 3 days old, the last topic was Achal. I didn't talk about Hisham directly on any thread. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:44 PM, CherianTinu Abraham tinucher...@gmail.com wrote: When it comes to paid contractors/staff , I don't see a difference between Theo[1] or Hisham, except that Hisham is working for a longer term. So what? Not every work can be done as a volunteer. As far as I understand, the foundation is also committed to support the chapters and community alike. Really? there is no difference between me and Hisham except the term? I didn't know I held a position of such stature. I never hid the fact that I worked for 3 months for WMF in the last fundraiser anywhere, you may remember me sending updates and asking for help with outreach last year on the India mailing list. You honestly think hiring a community member for 2-3 months for local outreach and translation for the fundraiser is the same as hiring a staff to oversee the entire operation in a country, set up the office, run the programs and hire 4 more staff members? You know this also puts a slap across my work as a community member for the last 2 years before Hisham was hired, you negate all my work and standing because I helped out WMF for 3 months last year with outreach and localization? I won't even mention the work I did on WMF strategy plan. I am trying really hard to remain objective about this, but this is infuriating to hear. Theo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
*Having said that I must politely disagree with some of the views of Anirudh, my fellow Executive Member and Salmaan ( Theo) , a member of Wikimedia India chapter. But I do respect their personal views , but I guess we agree to disagree. * So, your idea of politeness include offend other member of your chapter? I already had been tagged as impolite, but not even I got that low. And that create a second question: Is that office worth the price to divide the chapter in 2 or more groups? * The news of the formation of Wikimedia India Program Trust wasn't anything new to the chapter EC as it was mentioned in last two Chapter - Foundation Co-ordination meetings, if I remember correctly.* So, WMF remembered to warn the chapter 2 months ago about a project they are conducting for the past year? And you think that is ok? You can't see the miscommunication here? *When it comes to paid contractors/staff , I don't see a difference between Theo[1] or Hisham, except that Hisham is working for a longer term. So what?* I have not to add besides what Theo said. The main and bigger difference is that one is a well know and long term wikimedian, the other happens to have a job who deal with wikis. *The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India.* Did you ever read the Chapter Agreement you signed with WMF? That document states that WMIN is the ONLY chapter of WMF in India, and that any one organization must have their approval to work in Indian soil (I'm saying that based in WMPT agreement, WMIN one might be different.) Best regards, *Béria Lima* Who sincerely hope that this office don't became a arm of mass destruction for Indian Chapter and community. * Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 14 November 2011 18:14, CherianTinu Abraham tinucher...@gmail.comwrote: The following comments are my personal view and not necessarily of an Executive Member of the Wikimedia India Chapter. Having said that I must politely disagree with some of the views of Anirudh, my fellow Executive Member and Salmaan ( Theo) , a member of Wikimedia India chapter. But I do respect their personal views , but I guess we agree to disagree. The news of the formation of Wikimedia India Program Trust wasn't anything new to the chapter EC as it was mentioned in last two Chapter - Foundation Co-ordination meetings, if I remember correctly. And Sunil Abraham , Director of Centre of Internet Society ( CIS) is a patron of Wikimedia movement in India and chapter in India, not to forget that CIS have been sharing their office space for the chapter and Wikimeetups in Bangalore, or all the help CIS was doing for boot strapping the chapter. When it comes to paid contractors/staff , I don't see a difference between Theo[1] or Hisham, except that Hisham is working for a longer term. So what? Not every work can be done as a volunteer. As far as I understand, the foundation is also committed to support the chapters and community alike. The way I see is India is a land of immense potential for the Wikimedia Movement. IMHO, There is enough space of 10 chapters and Wikimedia offices to co-exist and work together in India. When there are more than enough work to do, I don't understand why this hue and cry. There is only one who could diminish the importance of the chapter, the chapter itself. The road ahead for us is not easy but there are tons of things to do. We have our advantages but limitations too. Our current bank balance [2] is not more than a night's tariff at a decent hotel. The board members does the clerical work of receiving membership applications to posting individual snail mail letters of acceptance of membership. In spite of all these, we do this for the passion and love for the movement. It does come at the sacrifice of our own professional/career growths or the wonderful time we would otherwise have spend with our family and friends. But we are proud to Wikipedians/Wikimedians! And we love what we are doing. Foundation-Community-Chapter-India Trust...Yea, it is complicated and the model may or may not be the best.. But that is the reality. Let us all work together for the movement. Regards Tinu Cherian References 1) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_contractors 2) http://wiki.wikimedia.in/images/0/06/WMIN-AnnualReport2010-11.pdf On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 03:30:06 -0800 From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: 4ebe58be@telus.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Thank you Liam for using the term, organisational roles, instead of the more pretentious, movement roles. I find the whole thread disturbing. I am and have always been a strong supporter of the autonomy of both projects and chapters, and from that vantage point it is difficult to see this initiative as leading to anything other than the undermining of a chapter. I am also in favor of the autonomy of the projects and the chapters but autonomy does not mean autism. Whether we like it or not, there is a relationship between the chapters and projects. We can create channels to vehiculate it or we can ignore it and go to have conflicts one after another. It is all proceeding in a predictable pattern. It pits young amateurs who have embraced an ideal as a labour of love and who have a na?vet? about the ways of the world against goal-oriented professionals well schooled in the sophisms that produce success. This does not establish intent or malice; it's just the way things develop unless someone is willing to step away and recognize the process for what it is. And the way things develop lead to a series of values that are good to grow and prosper trading companies: selfishness, envy, private property, exclusivity, greed ... The values of our edditing community are completely opposed to those. I think we need to establish channels for the values and motivations of the edditing communities be moved to chapters. I am an amateur. I am not motivated by dreams of a sinecure or reveries of prestige. I don't care if anything that I do becomes a polished feature articles. I don't care if the site has a professional appearance with consistent format throughout. I am not obsessed by growth, or by leading the global south by the hand into salvation. It's nice if that can happen, and nicer if they can figure it out for themselves. My bottom line remains a commitment to share the sum of the world's knowledge. Not more, not less. When I hear of things like these Indian developments, I start to get the impression that we have lost our way. As much as the organizers may deny, it's as plain as day that these two organizations are being set up to compete. That alienates people. Ray If members of these organizations were like you it would be impossible to compete in the worst sense of the word. I also think that we have begun to lose out way but not by establishing two organizations in the same territory and that this will necessarily lead to a savage competition among them but because of the risk that these organizations and the individuals that compose them were not imbued enought with the values and the mechanisms that would make this result impossible. I think there is no reason to believe that we will have more problems by having 2 organizations in India thant those we have by having 20 organizations in Europe. In fact to go for a similar proportion we should have 50 organizations 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 India Program Trust
Bishakha, the program (for WCI) is not a problem. Everyone agrees on it. The funding for WMIN and WIPT is. So makes no sense ask us to discuss in a point everyone agrees and left out the one where we don't. _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 12 November 2011 06:53, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: This thread started out with questions about the legal and practical differences between chapter and trust, but has veered much more into the terrain of funding and money. In addition, there have been numerous emails on bank accounts, grants, fellowships and what not. I'm glad we're talking about money and funding, but it's seeming like this is of greater concern than programs and activities - surely, funding is just a means to an end, rather than an end in itself? Funding is being discussed almost as if funding is an 'end' in itself - as if money is of greater importance than the huge amounts of work needed to build editing communities. This is both ironical in a volunteer community, and a source of worry, and I would like to place this on record. Best Bishakha ___ 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 India Program Trust
*The major program initiative undertaken by Hisham's team so far is the India Education Program.* You sure you want to use that as an example of Hishan workhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-11-07/Special_report? Because if was in a for-profit organization things like that would lead to a demission in 2 seconds. *WLM is a wonderful project, one which WMF actively supported (most importantly by improving Upload Wizard to directly support the management of the upload campaigns). * Or so the people who spend lots and LOTS of time in Commons, creating, updating and localizing the Upload campaigns for WLM had WMF support? Because we didn't saw any during the time we were doing it. Create the Upload Wizard (thanks for it - despite the fact I preffer the old commonist) don't make you supportes because the UW was not created for WLM or even thinking about it. _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 12 November 2011 07:18, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:04 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote: to get a feeling about the size, the number of readers, contributors, and a trend in it, i tried to find the india country statistics on editing and reading: The major program initiative undertaken by Hisham's team so far is the India Education Program. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:India_Education_Program/Courses So far there's been a pilot program, which uncovered lots of serious issues with the quality of content contributed by the participating courses. This is now driving further iteration of the program, as it should. The pilot very much built on, and was informed by, the lessons learned in the Public Policy Initiative, which was the largest and most successful student engagement program ever undertaken in the Wikimedia movement (!). Both the India Education Program and the PPI have been led by Frank Schulenburg, who is an experienced and accomplished Wikipedian. at the same time, another part of the world, a foto competition, no trust, no consultants, no KPMG involved, but a lot of volunteers and chapters. it gave 160'000 images for wikimedia commons, in one month. and, 30% new contributors. [2] WLM is a wonderful project, one which WMF actively supported (most importantly by improving Upload Wizard to directly support the management of the upload campaigns). It really is credit to all the people who developed it, and built on the lessons from last year's WLM in the Netherlands. It's also a photo competition, which by its very nature is a very different kind of program than something like the IEP, with very different risks and opportunities. It's easy to compare apples and oranges and say those apples are rotten, my oranges are so much nicer. But they are very different fruit entirely. :) I don't think anyone is served by stereotyping people or programs. We're all pulling towards the same goal. That doesn't mean constantly patting ourselves on the back, but let's focus on the the substance of the work rather than on peddling stereotypes about ignorant consultants and outsiders. -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ 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 India Program Trust
*FYI - The two Fellows are WMIN chapter members and signatories on its bank account.* Thanks but that only make things worse to me. So, the people who are paid by WMF are the ones taking care of WMIN money? Only I see the COI here? _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 12 November 2011 05:33, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: FYI - The two Fellows are WMIN chapter members and signatories on its bank account. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:41:43 + From: berial...@gmail.com To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust Disclaimer: I'm not Indian, and I don't know much about the Indian operations, but I needed to answer about something I do know. *Anirudh said: WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces.* *And Bishakha answered: As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance.** * Ok talking about grants: WMIN has so far 2 grants: a Bootstrap Granthttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Bootstrap_Grantand a grant for WCI 2011 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/WikiConference_India_2011 (since this grant http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Wiki_Community_development_in_India_and_newsletter state in the begin that is not a chapter grant, despite the fact that has the WMIN in the title). One is for a ver specif thing - a conference - who is being leading by 2 fellows of WMF. The second one has nothing to do with professionalization. So when comes to funding, if they decide to collect funds locally, would be incredible difficult to fight against the WIPT who is full of employees[1] who are used to work with that for years. That was - I believe - Anirudh's point. [1] I'm in WMIN ML and I see a hiring once per month, sometimes more. _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 11 November 2011 17:34, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to execute specific (and large-scale) programmes. As of now, the WIPT (Wikimedia India Program Office) can pretty much do anything it wants with the Wikimedia brand - partner with institutions, raise money locally, have paid employees and bypass community. From what I have seen, the program office does not behave like a law unto itself, as implied above. This is what I foresee happening: WMIN will be involved in community-building and small-scale projects which support volunteers and the WIPT will partner with large institutions in India (who are understandably looking to club with international organizations), get a lot of media coverage and acquire the big grants (since WMIN is not a professional body). WMIN has already had interest from and meetings with other donors, including pretty big ones in India (I was there at one such in 2010), so why this feeling that WMIN can't acquire the big grants? WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces. As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance. This is how WMIN has been made redundant (something that I have been saying for a long, long time). I really don't get this. Given that India is a huge country - with more than 1 billion people - and zillions of opportunities to grow editing communities in different languages, how can WMIN become or be made redundant? Also, given that the chapter is less than a year old, and has some new office-bearers, and has announced new plans for moving forward, how is it redundant? My personal view is that there is enough work ahead for not just one, or two, but numerous entities, formal and informal, to enter the fray and actualize this potential. Already, there are many more requests for collaboration within India than either WMIN or WIPT or both put
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Thank you Liam for using the term, organisational roles, instead of the more pretentious, movement roles. I find the whole thread disturbing. I am and have always been a strong supporter of the autonomy of both projects and chapters, and from that vantage point it is difficult to see this initiative as leading to anything other than the undermining of a chapter. It is all proceeding in a predictable pattern. It pits young amateurs who have embraced an ideal as a labour of love and who have a naïveté about the ways of the world against goal-oriented professionals well schooled in the sophisms that produce success. This does not establish intent or malice; it's just the way things develop unless someone is willing to step away and recognize the process for what it is. I am an amateur. I am not motivated by dreams of a sinecure or reveries of prestige. I don't care if anything that I do becomes a polished feature articles. I don't care if the site has a professional appearance with consistent format throughout. I am not obsessed by growth, or by leading the global south by the hand into salvation. It's nice if that can happen, and nicer if they can figure it out for themselves. My bottom line remains a commitment to share the sum of the world's knowledge. Not more, not less. When I hear of things like these Indian developments, I start to get the impression that we have lost our way. As much as the organizers may deny, it's as plain as day that these two organizations are being set up to compete. That alienates people. Ray On 11/11/11 11:24 PM, Liam Wyatt wrote: I understand what you [Bishaka] mean, and agree with the sentiment, but I think the funding question you're referring to is the practical application of the broader issue of organisational roles. What I still don't understand, despite the fast and helpful answers from both yourself and Hisham (thank you) is the differentiation of the organisational roles between the Trust and the Chapter. I had originally assumed that the Trust was set up because it provided a legal way for the WMF India Team to be a 'branch' organisation of the WMF (not just individual contractors). But, from reading the description of the legal setup of the Trust, it seems that the Trust is, in fact, legally independent. Presumably this means that Hisham and the rest of the team are now employees of the Trust and no longer contractors to the WMF directly. If that is the case, then presumably the WMF has basically the same amount of legal and financial control over the Trust than it has over the Chapter. Namely, it provides project funds (one-off or ongoing) and provides trademark permission. Both organisations, presumably, also have the right to seek funding and undertake projects independently from the WMF so long as they meet their organisation's mission. Therefore... I'm confused about the differentiation of organisational roles because it seems we now have two, independent from each other, non-profit organisations in India that are both also equally independent from the WMF. The only difference, as I understand it from what Bishakha explained earlier, is that the Chapter is legally a Society (with an elected board and members) and the Trust has two appointed trustees. Is that the case? As a practical question - to make it more concrete and less abstract - what can the Trust do that the Chapter cannot? And, if the Chapter can legally do all the things that the Trust can do (and the WMF has the same amount of control either way), why do we need two organisations? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 11:03 AM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: FYI - The two Fellows are WMIN chapter members and signatories on its bank account. Ummm, not to the best of my knowledge. They are, by virtue of being organisers of the Wiki Conference India, signatories to the Conference account. Not the Chapter account. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: Can you elaborate on the legal and practical differences between the new India Trust and the India Chapter? To add to what Bishakha has said - another reason for such a choice could very well be a difference in the methods of execution, where the Chapter depends on volunteers and members to help scale, and primary objectives, where the Chapter is also a collective voice for members. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or on the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will Wikimedia India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that country I could imagine them to have a say in it. How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention that there is communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the default or the exception? And how will it work with regards of who will be the primary point of contact in India for institutions who want to partner with Wikimedia? Will they have to approach one of the two or whichever they like (and if they dont get the answer they like, can they just approach the other?). Will the chapter and the trust be competing with each other or collaborating? Thanks for helping me seeing the situation more clearly, Lodewijk No dia 11 de Novembro de 2011 09:29, Gautam John gkj...@gmail.comescreveu: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: Can you elaborate on the legal and practical differences between the new India Trust and the India Chapter? To add to what Bishakha has said - another reason for such a choice could very well be a difference in the methods of execution, where the Chapter depends on volunteers and members to help scale, and primary objectives, where the Chapter is also a collective voice for members. ___ 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 India Program Trust
My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or on the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will Wikimedia India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that country I could imagine them to have a say in it. Nope. Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the Wikimedia India Program Trust. And given that not many people are going to talk about it, I don't think much will change in the future. How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention that there is communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the default or the exception? From my own experience and from what I have heard from a fellow Pune community member, the general community and the Chapter body have been excluded and ignored by WMF consultants from the very beginning. In fact, the Chapter representatives were only invited to attend meetings when Frank Schlenburg and Annie Lin were in town. And how will it work with regards of who will be the primary point of contact in India for institutions who want to partner with Wikimedia? Will they have to approach one of the two or whichever they like (and if they dont get the answer they like, can they just approach the other?). Will the chapter and the trust be competing with each other or collaborating? I think there is already a lot of confusion with regard to the two entities operating out of India. Going by the media, news reporters are already very confused by the existence of two Wikimedia bodies and I personally get a lot of queries every week asking me to clarify on the location of Wikimedia offices. With its paid consultants, the local WMF consultants have done a good job of making their presence felt (especially in Western India), and more and more journalists are interested in hearing from WMF (the international organization) than WMIN. The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to execute specific (and large-scale) programmes. As of now, the WIPT (Wikimedia India Program Office) can pretty much do anything it wants with the Wikimedia brand - partner with institutions, raise money locally, have paid employees and bypass community. This is what I foresee happening: WMIN will be involved in community-building and small-scale projects which support volunteers and the WIPT will partner with large institutions in India (who are understandably looking to club with international organizations), get a lot of media coverage and acquire the big grants (since WMIN is not a professional body). WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces. This is how WMIN has been made redundant (something that I have been saying for a long, long time). The most important difference, something many are uncomfortable talking about, is in the distribution of money. The WIPT in India will have access to *significantly *more WMF funding than WMIN (significant meaning *real significant*). Around the time when discussions about the India Office began, Barry came to India and assured us that the WIPT will only be here for a period of 3-5 years. I am hopeful that the Foundation will stick to its words, and with time we will all learn that small volunteer-driven projects have a larger impact than costly, ill-designed, large-scale programmes run by hired consultants who hire consultants with no relevant background (with a couple of exceptions). Thanks for helping me seeing the situation more clearly, No, thank you for asking the right questions. Lodewijk anirudh ___ 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 India Program Trust
Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk, While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening for some time - I know that Anirudh has raised these questions before, for instance. In that sense, I'm not sure how the registration of a trust changes the situation at all; I think that for anyone involved with the Wikimedia movement in India, the relationship between the Foundation entity in India and the India chapter has been perceived as an interesting, evolving - and highly experimental - situation, at least since the strategic plan was concluded. To repeat, I think this discussion is very useful, but I think it's important to remember that the situation is neither new nor unexpected. Having said that: On Friday 11 November 2011 10:09 AM, Anirudh Bhati wrote: My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). I'd be interested in understanding what the India chapter and the WikiConference India organising committee (to name one formal community grouping outside either the chapter or foundation) think of the Foundation's presence in India. In my own personal experience, there have been large periods of time when the India chapter was not as active as it is now; there have also been (as can be expected) many differences of opinion between community groupings in India. To that extent, and assuming good faith, have the presence of several entities (formal and informal) helped balance out periods of inactivity or dysfunction among all involved? On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijklodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or on the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will Wikimedia India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that country I could imagine them to have a say in it. Nope. Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the Wikimedia India Program Trust. And given that not many people are going to talk about it, I don't think much will change in the future. There appears to be a strong sense of exclusion you are expressing here, which I think it's important to bring up. I'm curious to understand if it's a more widespread feeling - are there others who were consulted? Or weren't but felt they should be? My own understanding of the program is that the India Education Program involved people who elected to get involved - as a community member, I, for instance, know very little about it because I feel I have nothing to contribute there. More importantly, does the chapter feel it was inadequately consulted? And does it feel like it was in a position to contribute more? I think this would be very interesting to probe a little further. How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention that there is communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the default or the exception? From my own experience and from what I have heard from a fellow Pune community member, the general community and the Chapter body have been excluded and ignored by WMF consultants from the very beginning. In fact, the Chapter representatives were only invited to attend meetings when Frank Schlenburg and Annie Lin were in town. And how will it work with regards of who will be the primary point of contact in India for institutions who want to partner with Wikimedia? Will they have to approach one of the two or whichever they like (and if they dont get the answer they like, can they just approach the other?). Will the chapter and the trust be competing with each other or collaborating? I think there is already a lot of confusion with regard to the two entities operating out of India. Going by the media, news reporters are already very confused by the existence of two Wikimedia bodies and I personally get a lot of queries every week asking me to clarify on the location of Wikimedia offices. With its paid consultants, the local WMF consultants have done a good job of making their presence felt (especially in Western India), and more and more journalists are interested in hearing from WMF (the international organization) than WMIN. Honestly, news reporters in India are confused about *everything* related to Wikipedia and Wikimedia :) Even a cursory analysis of news coverage will confirm that they routinely mix up what the movement is, what the difference between Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation is, what the difference between a chapter member and a staff member is, etc. And as someone who has been following this from the outset, I can say with some confidence that this has nothing to do with the chapter and the Foundation in
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On 11 November 2011 17:11, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Honestly, news reporters in India are confused about *everything* related to Wikipedia and Wikimedia :) Even a cursory analysis of news coverage will confirm that they routinely mix up what the movement is, what the difference between Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation is, what the difference between a chapter member and a staff member is, etc. And as someone who has been following this from the outset, I can say with some confidence that this has nothing to do with the chapter and the Foundation in India, rather, just our own complicated terminology and insider-language, and a general laziness on the part of Indian news media to learn the details. Basically, we'd still get completely whacky press coverage even if there was no chapter and no Foundation entity. FWIW, this is definitely not confined to India :-) From a brand perspective, the Wikimedia movement is extremely confusing to reporters: we have Wikimedia, Wikipedia, the sister projects, MediaWiki, the Wikimedia Foundation, chapter organizations, school clubs, and projects and activities of all types. And, media are continually befuddled about how we work: they are used to professional spokespeople, so they don't understand why X person in the Wikimedia movement isn't speaking on behalf of the whole movement. When I joined the Wikimedia Foundation in 2007, I thought this was a problem that needed to be fixed. Over time though, I've begun to realize that it's pretty fundamental to our movement's values. We want to have a movement in which it's easy to participate; in which there are few barriers to entry; there is minimal rule-making and rule-enforcement, where people can flexibly wear different hats and take on different roles, etc. So yes: I think we are confusing to journalists, and they often get the story wrong. That's too bad. But on the whole, I think it's a small price to pay in exchange for a vibrant, creative, productive movement, and the cure for it (real clarity, lots of rules) would be worse than the disease. Thanks, Sue -- Sue Gardner Executive Director Wikimedia Foundation 415 839 6885 office 415 816 9967 cell Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: From personal experience with WCI 2011, we have benefited by having both the Chapter and the Foundation in the country. Kind Regards, Hi In the interest of full-disclosure first, please have a look here.[1] Both the organizers are on WMF India Fellowship while organizing the conference. I think lodewijk and Anirudh might have an idea of my opinion on this. But I would like to respond later too. Regards Theo [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships/Proposals/WikiConference_India [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships/Proposals/WikiConference_India_2 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
+1 on Achal's note. Thanks Achal. Let me add that the relationship with the Wikimedia India chapter is evolving...and it is evolving in a good way. Hisham worked collaboratively with Arjuna in joint support of the Wikiconference India team. We work very closely with Tinu on communications (as we have since we first started working in India, before Tinu was on the chapter board). The work Naveen introduced recently for Wiki Academies is being funded via a grant from WMF and Hisham's team wants to be supportive of this. From the beginning of our involvement in India, we sought to have the chapter involved (when I traveled to India we funded the travel of chapter EC members - Anirudh and HP Nadig to join me and we provided a prominent role for the chapter in press discussions. We did the same funding Arun when Jimmy was in India). We have committed to providing the chapter with funding to support programs that they have in the works. In fact, I proactively suggested that the chapter prepare a grant request almost a year ago. We've also helped the chapter work through regulatory hurdles to getting funds including supporting a require for prior permission for FCRA. Arjuna was involved in the discussions at the formation of the Pune Pilot, but the chapter really didn't have the capacity in Pune to be heavily involved in it at the time. An argument that the trust is getting in the way or supplanting the chapter doesn't really hold water. My hope is that the relationship is and will continue to get closer...and I remain committed to an outcome where the chapter and trust become one as our collective capacity and work mature in India. On the funding issue...this is a bit of a red herring. As of now, there is sufficient funds available to the chapter to build its organizational capacity and execute on the plans that it has laid out. We are working hard to overcome regulatory issues to the flow of funds that would provide more resources over time to support work of the chapter, the Trust and other groups in the community. The true focus of both the chapter, Trust and other interested community groups should be on building the capacity to do effective work that advances the mission. Money is not the limiting factor though Indian regulations to create some short term hassles)...it's ideas and capacity to get things done. That's what we all need to work on and do so, in good faith, with a shared commitment to the Wikimedia mission. Look forward to joining all of our Indian colleagues at the Wikiconference India next week...and to continuing to work to achieve our shared vision in India... Barry On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk, While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening for some time - I know that Anirudh has raised these questions before, for instance. In that sense, I'm not sure how the registration of a trust changes the situation at all; I think that for anyone involved with the Wikimedia movement in India, the relationship between the Foundation entity in India and the India chapter has been perceived as an interesting, evolving - and highly experimental - situation, at least since the strategic plan was concluded. To repeat, I think this discussion is very useful, but I think it's important to remember that the situation is neither new nor unexpected. Having said that: On Friday 11 November 2011 10:09 AM, Anirudh Bhati wrote: My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). I'd be interested in understanding what the India chapter and the WikiConference India organising committee (to name one formal community grouping outside either the chapter or foundation) think of the Foundation's presence in India. In my own personal experience, there have been large periods of time when the India chapter was not as active as it is now; there have also been (as can be expected) many differences of opinion between community groupings in India. To that extent, and assuming good faith, have the presence of several entities (formal and informal) helped balance out periods of inactivity or dysfunction among all involved? On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijklodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or on the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will Wikimedia India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that country I could imagine them to have a say in it. Nope. Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the Wikimedia India Program Trust. And given that not many
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to execute specific (and large-scale) programmes. As of now, the WIPT (Wikimedia India Program Office) can pretty much do anything it wants with the Wikimedia brand - partner with institutions, raise money locally, have paid employees and bypass community. From what I have seen, the program office does not behave like a law unto itself, as implied above. This is what I foresee happening: WMIN will be involved in community-building and small-scale projects which support volunteers and the WIPT will partner with large institutions in India (who are understandably looking to club with international organizations), get a lot of media coverage and acquire the big grants (since WMIN is not a professional body). WMIN has already had interest from and meetings with other donors, including pretty big ones in India (I was there at one such in 2010), so why this feeling that WMIN can't acquire the big grants? WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces. As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance. This is how WMIN has been made redundant (something that I have been saying for a long, long time). I really don't get this. Given that India is a huge country - with more than 1 billion people - and zillions of opportunities to grow editing communities in different languages, how can WMIN become or be made redundant? Also, given that the chapter is less than a year old, and has some new office-bearers, and has announced new plans for moving forward, how is it redundant? My personal view is that there is enough work ahead for not just one, or two, but numerous entities, formal and informal, to enter the fray and actualize this potential. Already, there are many more requests for collaboration within India than either WMIN or WIPT or both put together can handle. Given this huge potential, I don't see why this discussion has to be framed through the lens of competition or territoriality. Cheers Bishakha ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
inline. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:21:17 -0800 From: bnewst...@wikimedia.org To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust On the funding issue...this is a bit of a red herring. As of now, there is sufficient funds available to the chapter to build its organizational capacity and execute on the plans that it has laid out. We are working hard to overcome regulatory issues to the flow of funds that would provide more resources over time to support work of the chapter, the Trust and other groups in the community. The true focus of both the chapter, Trust and other interested community groups should be on building the capacity to do effective work that advances the mission. Money is not the limiting factor though Indian regulations to create some short term hassles)...it's ideas and capacity to get things done. That's what we all need to work on and do so, in good faith, with a shared commitment to the Wikimedia mission. From WCI experience. Its not just regulations, its more than that. Iv had trouble getting funding where the route is clear - and the trouble roots with a particular bank that the foundation used, which I dont care to mention on a public list. Believe you me, these guys were playing around to their benefit at our cost, something which I find totally unacceptable. Look forward to joining all of our Indian colleagues at the Wikiconference India next week...and to continuing to work to achieve our shared vision in India... Barry ___ 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 India Program Trust
Clarification and Statutory Disclosure: Iv been working on WCI 2011 since April and have received a fellowship to do this since August. It was necessary for something to come into the bank while I have been working on the conference full time (Note that although Iv been working on this since April, Iv been compensated only August onwards). Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 22:49:36 +0530 From: de10...@gmail.com To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:40 PM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: From personal experience with WCI 2011, we have benefited by having both the Chapter and the Foundation in the country. Kind Regards, Hi In the interest of full-disclosure first, please have a look here.[1] Both the organizers are on WMF India Fellowship while organizing the conference. I think lodewijk and Anirudh might have an idea of my opinion on this. But I would like to respond later too. Regards Theo [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships/Proposals/WikiConference_India [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships/Proposals/WikiConference_India_2 ___ 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 India Program Trust
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:36 AM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: inline. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:21:17 -0800 From: bnewst...@wikimedia.org To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust On the funding issue...this is a bit of a red herring. As of now, there is sufficient funds available to the chapter to build its organizational capacity and execute on the plans that it has laid out. We are working hard to overcome regulatory issues to the flow of funds that would provide more resources over time to support work of the chapter, the Trust and other groups in the community. The true focus of both the chapter, Trust and other interested community groups should be on building the capacity to do effective work that advances the mission. Money is not the limiting factor though Indian regulations to create some short term hassles)...it's ideas and capacity to get things done. That's what we all need to work on and do so, in good faith, with a shared commitment to the Wikimedia mission. From WCI experience. Its not just regulations, its more than that. Iv had trouble getting funding where the route is clear - and the trouble roots with a particular bank that the foundation used, which I dont care to mention on a public list. Believe you me, these guys were playing around to their benefit at our cost, something which I find totally unacceptable. For clarification...when you say these guys I hope you are referring to the banks, not WMF? We have expended a huge amount of effort to provide the funding for the conference and other needs. It has indeed been hard as the banking system is difficult to work with (actually, sometimes it is very easy and other times it is shockingly difficult with no pattern), but we've done everything in our power to make things work and a lot has gotten done. Look forward to joining all of our Indian colleagues at the Wikiconference India next week...and to continuing to work to achieve our shared vision in India... Barry ___ 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 -- Barry Newstead Chief Global Development Officer Wikimedia Foundation Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Bank, Barry. I appreciate what the foundation has done for us, however the bank at your end has proven to be a pain on more than one occasion. We have gone through a lot of unnecessary shit - you would think that international transfers are quite simple in this day and age. They have delayed our payments for weeks on end whiles they debited foundation accounts, which means they were playing with the money interest free all that while! Money mean for the conference. Even when it came, we couldnt trace it due to their methods. At the end of the day they blamed the Indian Banks. For your information, this happened to 4 different people each having a different bank (one of which was actually the Indian counterpart of the US bank WMF uses). Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:55:03 -0800 From: bnewst...@wikimedia.org To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:36 AM, wheredevelsd...@hotmail.com wrote: inline. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:21:17 -0800 From: bnewst...@wikimedia.org To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust On the funding issue...this is a bit of a red herring. As of now, there is sufficient funds available to the chapter to build its organizational capacity and execute on the plans that it has laid out. We are working hard to overcome regulatory issues to the flow of funds that would provide more resources over time to support work of the chapter, the Trust and other groups in the community. The true focus of both the chapter, Trust and other interested community groups should be on building the capacity to do effective work that advances the mission. Money is not the limiting factor though Indian regulations to create some short term hassles)...it's ideas and capacity to get things done. That's what we all need to work on and do so, in good faith, with a shared commitment to the Wikimedia mission. From WCI experience. Its not just regulations, its more than that. Iv had trouble getting funding where the route is clear - and the trouble roots with a particular bank that the foundation used, which I dont care to mention on a public list. Believe you me, these guys were playing around to their benefit at our cost, something which I find totally unacceptable. For clarification...when you say these guys I hope you are referring to the banks, not WMF? We have expended a huge amount of effort to provide the funding for the conference and other needs. It has indeed been hard as the banking system is difficult to work with (actually, sometimes it is very easy and other times it is shockingly difficult with no pattern), but we've done everything in our power to make things work and a lot has gotten done. Look forward to joining all of our Indian colleagues at the Wikiconference India next week...and to continuing to work to achieve our shared vision in India... Barry ___ 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 -- Barry Newstead Chief Global Development Officer Wikimedia Foundation Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ 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 India Program Trust
Disclaimer: I'm not Indian, and I don't know much about the Indian operations, but I needed to answer about something I do know. *Anirudh said: WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces.* *And Bishakha answered: As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance.** * Ok talking about grants: WMIN has so far 2 grants: a Bootstrap Granthttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Bootstrap_Grantand a grant for WCI 2011 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/WikiConference_India_2011(since this granthttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Wiki_Community_development_in_India_and_newsletterstate in the begin that is not a chapter grant, despite the fact that has the WMIN in the title). One is for a ver specif thing - a conference - who is being leading by 2 fellows of WMF. The second one has nothing to do with professionalization. So when comes to funding, if they decide to collect funds locally, would be incredible difficult to fight against the WIPT who is full of employees[1] who are used to work with that for years. That was - I believe - Anirudh's point. [1] I'm in WMIN ML and I see a hiring once per month, sometimes more. _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 11 November 2011 17:34, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to execute specific (and large-scale) programmes. As of now, the WIPT (Wikimedia India Program Office) can pretty much do anything it wants with the Wikimedia brand - partner with institutions, raise money locally, have paid employees and bypass community. From what I have seen, the program office does not behave like a law unto itself, as implied above. This is what I foresee happening: WMIN will be involved in community-building and small-scale projects which support volunteers and the WIPT will partner with large institutions in India (who are understandably looking to club with international organizations), get a lot of media coverage and acquire the big grants (since WMIN is not a professional body). WMIN has already had interest from and meetings with other donors, including pretty big ones in India (I was there at one such in 2010), so why this feeling that WMIN can't acquire the big grants? WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces. As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance. This is how WMIN has been made redundant (something that I have been saying for a long, long time). I really don't get this. Given that India is a huge country - with more than 1 billion people - and zillions of opportunities to grow editing communities in different languages, how can WMIN become or be made redundant? Also, given that the chapter is less than a year old, and has some new office-bearers, and has announced new plans for moving forward, how is it redundant? My personal view is that there is enough work ahead for not just one, or two, but numerous entities, formal and informal, to enter the fray and actualize this potential. Already, there are many more requests for collaboration within India than either WMIN or WIPT or both put together can handle. Given this huge potential, I don't see why this discussion has to be framed through the lens of competition or territoriality. Cheers Bishakha ___ 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 India Program Trust
I meant to ask earlier, since the fundraiser already started and this is being announced now. Is this trust set-up to participate in the annual fundraiser? processing donations on-behalf of WMF internally? or would it seek to do so in future? I know you mention FCRA and external funding after approval but what about internal funding through the annual fundraiser. Theo On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org wrote: cross-posting to foundation-l internal-l from India Community list; apologies if you've read this already. hisham Begin forwarded message: From: Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org Subject: Wikimedia India Program Trust Date: November 11, 2011 9:55:00 AM GMT+05:30 To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindi...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi Folks, I'm writing to share an update with you on certain developments of relevance to the Wikimedia movement in India. Announcement of Wikimedia India Program Trust For some time, efforts have gone into creating an organization that would provide an appropriate structure to support Wikimedia program activities in India. Aspects such as the current regulatory framework (regarding funding, taxation, etc.) as well as the legal protection for the India team have been considered to determine this structure. In this context, a host of options (e.g. subsidiary, branch, Section 25) were evaluated and a determination was made towards an independent non-profit public trust. Legal advice has been taken at every stage in this decision. A new entity, the “Wikimedia India Program Trust”, has now been formed and registered (in Delhi.) This will be the organization that will eventually drive India programs and house the team in India. Why an Independent Public Trust? The Trust will provide an effective vehicle within India to marshal resources to support programs and partner with local institutions. The objective of the Trust is to promote the objectives of the Wikimedia movement and work closely with the Wikimedia community on various projects with an India focus. It is important to understand that the Trust will not have any editorial control over content on any of the Wikimedia projects. The Trust is a not for profit organization. Introduction of Trustees Trustees have been identified based upon their support for Wikimedia movement's principles and plans in addition to having reputations for good governance and management. Sunil Abraham and Rahul Matthan have been requested to be the initial Trustees. Both are friends of Wikipedia and have extensive experience. Sunil is Executive Director of the Centre for Internet Society (CIS), is a long term advocate of free software and IP reform and has been supporting the Wikimedia community and movement for some time now. Rahul is a partner and heads the technology practice at Trilegal. He brings deep expertise and relationships that will be valuable for the Trust. These initial Trustees will serve for a term of three years at the maximum. All additional or subsequent Trustees will serve on rotation in accordance with a trustee selection plan that will be prepared. Trustees will not be compensated for their services. Governance, Funding, Financial Standards Communications of the Trust The Trust will be governed by Trustees who will provide oversight and guidance regarding the operations and governance of the Trust. Since the Trust is an independent organization, it will require funding for its operations which is in compliance with the legal and regulatory framework in India. It will seek funding from private donors within India as well as external sources. The Trust has the support of the Wikimedia Foundation which is a United States based non-profit foundation. However, in India all non-profit organizations need to be in existence for 3 years before they can receive funding from sources outside India. In the interim, they can apply for prior-permission under the FCRA regulations to help expedite the process. As a result, the Trust will shortly be applying for approval to receive funds from the Wikimedia Foundation in the future. As a Trust, we are required to have an independent external auditor. We have appointed KPMG. KPMG is experienced in auditing non-profit companies and are also auditors for the Wikimedia Foundation. Annually, the Trust will publicly disclose it's independently audited financial statements. The Trust will publish a monthly newsletter outlining its current activities and future plans. This will commence in December 2011. Operations of the Trust The trust deed under which the Trust must operate clearly states that the purpose of the Trust is to independently promote the growth of volunteer activities within India in support of effective and unrestricted dissemination of free knowledge to the public. I will serve as the Executive Director of the
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
A couple of clarifications: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: Disclaimer: I'm not Indian, and I don't know much about the Indian operations, but I needed to answer about something I do know. *Anirudh said: WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces.* *And Bishakha answered: As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance.** * Ok talking about grants: WMIN has so far 2 grants: a Bootstrap Granthttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Bootstrap_Grantand a grant for WCI 2011 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/WikiConference_India_2011 (since this grant http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Wiki_Community_development_in_India_and_newsletter state in the begin that is not a chapter grant, despite the fact that has the WMIN in the title). One is for a ver specif thing - a conference - who is being leading by 2 fellows of WMF. So there are some technical issues that we were dealing with regarding the funding of the conference that did not enable it to be a grant. Also, I think it is a mistake to say that the conference is the product of a WMF initiative or is being controlled by WMF. The conference was and is a community initiative with lots of participation. We provided a small stipend to help once it was clear that the logistical activities required full time resources. WMF or the trust as not run the conference...we have provided funds to enable it. The second one has nothing to do with professionalization. The grant does actually help to put some building blocks in place such as supporting accounting and legal needs. Also, nothing stopping the chapter from building further in the future...since the grant process remains open as do communication lines with WMF and the community. So when comes to funding, if they decide to collect funds locally, would be incredible difficult to fight against the WIPT who is full of employees[1] who are used to work with that for years. That was - I believe - Anirudh's point. As I said, there is no reason to fight against anyone. For example, Hisham, Gautam and others all worked to find sponsorships for the Wikiconference India. It was a collaborative effort, not a competition. Funding should and will flow to program work in various places. In some cases, donors may be more comfortable giving to one org or another...so it may actually be an asset to have more than one alternative. [1] I'm in WMIN ML and I see a hiring once per month, sometimes more. There have been three consultant hires in India to date - Hisham, Nitika and Shiju. As mentioned in the past, the team is expected to be 5 people. _ *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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* Best, Barry On 11 November 2011 17:34, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Anirudh Bhati anirudh...@gmail.com wrote: The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to execute specific (and large-scale) programmes. As of now, the WIPT (Wikimedia India Program Office) can pretty much do anything it wants with the Wikimedia brand - partner with institutions, raise money locally, have paid employees and bypass community. From what I have seen, the program office does not behave like a law unto itself, as implied above. This is what I foresee happening: WMIN will be involved in community-building and small-scale projects which support volunteers and the WIPT will partner with large institutions in India (who are understandably looking to club with international organizations), get a lot of media coverage and acquire the big grants (since WMIN is not a professional body). WMIN has already had interest from and meetings with other donors, including pretty big ones in India (I was there at one such in 2010), so why this feeling that WMIN can't acquire the big grants? WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces. As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance. This is how WMIN has been made redundant (something that I have been saying for a long, long time). I really don't get this. Given that India is a huge country - with more than 1 billion
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Ohai Achal As usual, I disagree. I am a bit more informed of the current situation than most people, maybe not as much as the current WMF advisory board member but who knows. My opinion on this is from a regular community member before much of the community in other cities was active. I am not affiliated with the chapter or the India operations. Honestly, from my proximity, and I have been in close proximity for a while to both entities, there is some tension and a sense of antagonism on a lot of issues. The fact they can't and usually don't co-ordinate before, only heightens the issue. As for solicitation and being open for the famed India education program, I recall mentioning this to Hisham when he first brought it up, weeks after he was hired. My opinion at the time, and now is, he did it in the wrong city, the wrong colleges and with the wrong people. I still stand by my opinion. You brought up Anirudh's physical presence as affecting his judgement about the chapter. I would like to point out that the India offices are located in Delhi, the foundation offices in San Francisco, neither of those put you in a better position to comment than Anirudh. Many chapters and you can check if you like, have board members who are not resident or are temporarily resident outside a country. It is usually a chapter's decision, if they have objections or not. As for the Media getting it wrong, well, it's sad you can't correct everyone on what the Movement is or where it should be headed. Theo On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk, While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening for some time - I know that Anirudh has raised these questions before, for instance. In that sense, I'm not sure how the registration of a trust changes the situation at all; I think that for anyone involved with the Wikimedia movement in India, the relationship between the Foundation entity in India and the India chapter has been perceived as an interesting, evolving - and highly experimental - situation, at least since the strategic plan was concluded. To repeat, I think this discussion is very useful, but I think it's important to remember that the situation is neither new nor unexpected. Having said that: On Friday 11 November 2011 10:09 AM, Anirudh Bhati wrote: My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). I'd be interested in understanding what the India chapter and the WikiConference India organising committee (to name one formal community grouping outside either the chapter or foundation) think of the Foundation's presence in India. In my own personal experience, there have been large periods of time when the India chapter was not as active as it is now; there have also been (as can be expected) many differences of opinion between community groupings in India. To that extent, and assuming good faith, have the presence of several entities (formal and informal) helped balance out periods of inactivity or dysfunction among all involved? On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijklodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or on the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will Wikimedia India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that country I could imagine them to have a say in it. Nope. Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the Wikimedia India Program Trust. And given that not many people are going to talk about it, I don't think much will change in the future. There appears to be a strong sense of exclusion you are expressing here, which I think it's important to bring up. I'm curious to understand if it's a more widespread feeling - are there others who were consulted? Or weren't but felt they should be? My own understanding of the program is that the India Education Program involved people who elected to get involved - as a community member, I, for instance, know very little about it because I feel I have nothing to contribute there. More importantly, does the chapter feel it was inadequately consulted? And does it feel like it was in a position to contribute more? I think this would be very interesting to probe a little further. How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention that there is communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the default or the exception? From my own experience and from what I have heard from a fellow Pune community member, the general community and the Chapter body have been excluded and
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Barry, answers will be in line (as a side notice: I will start love when someone says something bad about WMF if that is the only way that we can actually see they posting mails). *So there are some technical issues that we were dealing with regarding the funding of the conference that did not enable it to be a grant. * So, I helped AroundTheGlobe to write the grant, I'm in GAC and thefore I need to review the grant. I'm also an honorary organizer of WCI, so I actually know a lot about this grant and all the things around it - and that is why I mention it. *Also, I think it is a mistake to say that the conference is the product of a WMF initiative or is being controlled by WMF. The conference was and is a community initiative with lots of participation. * I don't know where you read in my mail that the conference is product of a WMF initiative. I never said that. *We provided a small stipend to help once it was clear that the logistical activities required full time resources.** WMF or the trust as not run the conference...we have provided funds to enable it.* So let me do a little comparison to see if you get my (in fact Anirudh's) point: If WMIN decide to fund thenselves in 2012 Fundraising, WMF will provide people to a small stipend help them with the full time employee necessary to run a decent fundraising? *The grant does actually help to put some building blocks in place such as supporting accounting and legal needs. * legal needs don't actually imply a full time lawyer or accountant to WMIN (I also review this grant and made that exactly questionhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:WM_IN/Bootstrap_Grant#Operating_Expenses ) *Also, nothing stopping the chapter from building further in the future...since the grant process remains open as do communication lines with WMF and the community. * Again, no one said they can't. The only thing we said was that WIPT receive money directly WITHOUT a grant, with give them an advantage. *There have been three consultant hires in India to date - Hisham, Nitika and Shiju. As mentioned in the past, the team is expected to be 5 people. * Well, I saw at least 4 hiring in the mailing list, so Hisham might have someone else working for him. I can go look into archives, but I'm pretty sure Indian operations are bigger than 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. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 11 November 2011 18:58, Barry Newstead bnewst...@wikimedia.org wrote: A couple of clarifications: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote: Disclaimer: I'm not Indian, and I don't know much about the Indian operations, but I needed to answer about something I do know. *Anirudh said: WMIN and WIPT will theoretically compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to WIPT, given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and in WMF's good graces.* *And Bishakha answered: As I understand it, WMIN has received a grant from WMF, so I can't understand how it never had a chance.** * Ok talking about grants: WMIN has so far 2 grants: a Bootstrap Granthttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Bootstrap_Grantand a grant for WCI 2011 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/WikiConference_India_2011 (since this grant http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_IN/Wiki_Community_development_in_India_and_newsletter state in the begin that is not a chapter grant, despite the fact that has the WMIN in the title). One is for a ver specif thing - a conference - who is being leading by 2 fellows of WMF. So there are some technical issues that we were dealing with regarding the funding of the conference that did not enable it to be a grant. Also, I think it is a mistake to say that the conference is the product of a WMF initiative or is being controlled by WMF. The conference was and is a community initiative with lots of participation. We provided a small stipend to help once it was clear that the logistical activities required full time resources. WMF or the trust as not run the conference...we have provided funds to enable it. The second one has nothing to do with professionalization. The grant does actually help to put some building blocks in place such as supporting accounting and legal needs. Also, nothing stopping the chapter from building further in the future...since the grant process remains open as do communication lines with WMF and the community. So when comes to funding, if they decide to collect funds locally, would be incredible difficult to fight against the WIPT who is full of employees[1] who are used to work with that for years. That was - I believe - Anirudh's point. As I
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Responses below... On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: I meant to ask earlier, since the fundraiser already started and this is being announced now. No relationship between this announcement and the fundraiser. The Trust has been in the works for months, but it takes months to get the approvals to launch it. Is this trust set-up to participate in the annual fundraiser? Again, the trust is setup to support program work in India. It was not set up as a vehicle for the annual fundraiser. processing donations on-behalf of WMF internally? or would it seek to do so in future? I know you mention FCRA and external funding after approval but what about internal funding through the annual fundraiser. Our fundraising team did ask (literally this week) if the Trust might be able to process payments for bank transfers (which is an option they would like to offer Indian donors) and requires a domestic processor of some sort. We are looking into this with lawyers and accountants, but from my perspective, I'd rather not have the Trust involved in the annual fundraiser. It would help us all (meaning everyone involved in India) to have funds available domestically to avoid the issues with international funds transfers mentioned earlier, but I don't want it to be a distraction from the priority in India - working with the community and chapter to good program work that advances the mission. Fundraising in India is nice to have, but money isn't really our greatest challenge. More directly to your questions...the Trust is an independent org, so technically it cannot serve as an internal processor for WMF. The question of seeking to in the future is open (as it should be because there is no need to close doors at this time), but I shared my current view. Theo Best, Barry On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org wrote: cross-posting to foundation-l internal-l from India Community list; apologies if you've read this already. hisham Begin forwarded message: From: Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org Subject: Wikimedia India Program Trust Date: November 11, 2011 9:55:00 AM GMT+05:30 To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindi...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi Folks, I'm writing to share an update with you on certain developments of relevance to the Wikimedia movement in India. Announcement of Wikimedia India Program Trust For some time, efforts have gone into creating an organization that would provide an appropriate structure to support Wikimedia program activities in India. Aspects such as the current regulatory framework (regarding funding, taxation, etc.) as well as the legal protection for the India team have been considered to determine this structure. In this context, a host of options (e.g. subsidiary, branch, Section 25) were evaluated and a determination was made towards an independent non-profit public trust. Legal advice has been taken at every stage in this decision. A new entity, the “Wikimedia India Program Trust”, has now been formed and registered (in Delhi.) This will be the organization that will eventually drive India programs and house the team in India. Why an Independent Public Trust? The Trust will provide an effective vehicle within India to marshal resources to support programs and partner with local institutions. The objective of the Trust is to promote the objectives of the Wikimedia movement and work closely with the Wikimedia community on various projects with an India focus. It is important to understand that the Trust will not have any editorial control over content on any of the Wikimedia projects. The Trust is a not for profit organization. Introduction of Trustees Trustees have been identified based upon their support for Wikimedia movement's principles and plans in addition to having reputations for good governance and management. Sunil Abraham and Rahul Matthan have been requested to be the initial Trustees. Both are friends of Wikipedia and have extensive experience. Sunil is Executive Director of the Centre for Internet Society (CIS), is a long term advocate of free software and IP reform and has been supporting the Wikimedia community and movement for some time now. Rahul is a partner and heads the technology practice at Trilegal. He brings deep expertise and relationships that will be valuable for the Trust. These initial Trustees will serve for a term of three years at the maximum. All additional or subsequent Trustees will serve on rotation in accordance with a trustee selection plan that will be prepared. Trustees will not be compensated for their services. Governance, Funding, Financial Standards Communications of the Trust The Trust will be governed by Trustees who will provide oversight and guidance regarding the operations and governance
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Barry Newstead bnewst...@wikimedia.orgwrote: More directly to your questions...the Trust is an independent org, so technically it cannot serve as an internal processor for WMF. I meant internal as in within the country, as opposed to external, when Hisham's email said external or outside sources. I thought it was apparent. Theo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
the practical difference seems to be the experience On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 07:44, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Hisham, Interesting development :-) My question is with regards to the relationship of the new trust to the existing India Chapter. The purpose of the trust (as defined as The objective of the Trust is to promote the objectives of the Wikimedia movement and work closely with the Wikimedia community on various projects with an India focus.) seems synonymous with the purpose of a Chapter, and you now also have trustees which is synonymous with a Chapter's board. One difference I can see is that you don't have Members. Can you elaborate on the legal and practical differences between the new India Trust and the India Chapter? -Liam On 11 November 2011 05:11, Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org wrote: cross-posting to foundation-l internal-l from India Community list; apologies if you've read this already. hisham Begin forwarded message: From: Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org Subject: Wikimedia India Program Trust Date: November 11, 2011 9:55:00 AM GMT+05:30 To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindi...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi Folks, I'm writing to share an update with you on certain developments of relevance to the Wikimedia movement in India. Announcement of Wikimedia India Program Trust For some time, efforts have gone into creating an organization that would provide an appropriate structure to support Wikimedia program activities in India. Aspects such as the current regulatory framework (regarding funding, taxation, etc.) as well as the legal protection for the India team have been considered to determine this structure. In this context, a host of options (e.g. subsidiary, branch, Section 25) were evaluated and a determination was made towards an independent non-profit public trust. Legal advice has been taken at every stage in this decision. A new entity, the “Wikimedia India Program Trust”, has now been formed and registered (in Delhi.) This will be the organization that will eventually drive India programs and house the team in India. Why an Independent Public Trust? The Trust will provide an effective vehicle within India to marshal resources to support programs and partner with local institutions. The objective of the Trust is to promote the objectives of the Wikimedia movement and work closely with the Wikimedia community on various projects with an India focus. It is important to understand that the Trust will not have any editorial control over content on any of the Wikimedia projects. The Trust is a not for profit organization. Introduction of Trustees Trustees have been identified based upon their support for Wikimedia movement's principles and plans in addition to having reputations for good governance and management. Sunil Abraham and Rahul Matthan have been requested to be the initial Trustees. Both are friends of Wikipedia and have extensive experience. Sunil is Executive Director of the Centre for Internet Society (CIS), is a long term advocate of free software and IP reform and has been supporting the Wikimedia community and movement for some time now. Rahul is a partner and heads the technology practice at Trilegal. He brings deep expertise and relationships that will be valuable for the Trust. These initial Trustees will serve for a term of three years at the maximum. All additional or subsequent Trustees will serve on rotation in accordance with a trustee selection plan that will be prepared. Trustees will not be compensated for their services. Governance, Funding, Financial Standards Communications of the Trust The Trust will be governed by Trustees who will provide oversight and guidance regarding the operations and governance of the Trust. Since the Trust is an independent organization, it will require funding for its operations which is in compliance with the legal and regulatory framework in India. It will seek funding from private donors within India as well as external sources. The Trust has the support of the Wikimedia Foundation which is a United States based non-profit foundation. However, in India all non-profit organizations need to be in existence for 3 years before they can receive funding from sources outside India. In the interim, they can apply for prior-permission under the FCRA regulations to help expedite the process. As a result, the Trust will shortly be applying for approval to receive funds from the Wikimedia Foundation in the future. As a Trust, we are required to have an independent external auditor. We have appointed KPMG. KPMG is experienced in auditing non-profit companies and are also auditors for the Wikimedia Foundation. Annually, the Trust will publicly disclose it's independently audited financial
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Hi Theo On 11 November 2011 14:10, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Ohai Achal As usual, I disagree. ?? I didn't realise we disagree frequently...you must fill me in off list :) I am a bit more informed of the current situation than most people, maybe not as much as the current WMF advisory board member but who knows. Theo, this isn't a competition. I value your perspective, as do several other people. My opinion on this is from a regular community member before much of the community in other cities was active. I am not affiliated with the chapter or the India operations. Honestly, from my proximity, and I have been in close proximity for a while to both entities, there is some tension and a sense of antagonism on a lot of issues. The fact they can't and usually don't co-ordinate before, only heightens the issue. While I value your perspective on this issue, I think it would be also helpful to hear from people who have a direct relationship with the chapter, and from people who are in a formal/semi-formal community grouping who've interacted with the chapter and Foundation in India. I don't disagree with you or dispute what you say; I just think that there are many others who are in a better position to speak to this. As for solicitation and being open for the famed India education program, I recall mentioning this to Hisham when he first brought it up, weeks after he was hired. My opinion at the time, and now is, he did it in the wrong city, the wrong colleges and with the wrong people. I still stand by my opinion. You brought up Anirudh's physical presence as affecting his judgement about the chapter. Actually no. Anirudh is not speaking for the chapter, and clearly said he is speaking for himself. I respect that. I'm simply reiterating that as he has been in Cambodia the last year or so, he hasn't attended chapter meetings, the AGM, or participated in any of the chapter events (physically) - which I, and several other people based here, have. Anirudh is a long standing and dedicated Wikipedian who has every right to an opinion; I'm merely pointing out that living in the country whose Wikimedia chapter you are a board member of is likely to provide more opportunities to do things for the chapter and not make it redundant. I would like to point out that the India offices are located in Delhi, the foundation offices in San Francisco, neither of those put you in a better position to comment than Anirudh. Many chapters and you can check if you like, have board members who are not resident or are temporarily resident outside a country. It is usually a chapter's decision, if they have objections or not. As for the Media getting it wrong, well, it's sad you can't correct everyone on what the Movement is or where it should be headed. I'm not entirely sure if you're being sarcastic here, Theo, but assuming good faith, I'll assume that you mean (like Sue pointed out) that the media does tend to confuse terms that sound and look similar. Theo Best wishes, Achal On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk, While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening for some time - I know that Anirudh has raised these questions before, for instance. In that sense, I'm not sure how the registration of a trust changes the situation at all; I think that for anyone involved with the Wikimedia movement in India, the relationship between the Foundation entity in India and the India chapter has been perceived as an interesting, evolving - and highly experimental - situation, at least since the strategic plan was concluded. To repeat, I think this discussion is very useful, but I think it's important to remember that the situation is neither new nor unexpected. Having said that: On Friday 11 November 2011 10:09 AM, Anirudh Bhati wrote: My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or the Foundation (I wouldn't dare!). I'd be interested in understanding what the India chapter and the WikiConference India organising committee (to name one formal community grouping outside either the chapter or foundation) think of the Foundation's presence in India. In my own personal experience, there have been large periods of time when the India chapter was not as active as it is now; there have also been (as can be expected) many differences of opinion between community groupings in India. To that extent, and assuming good faith, have the presence of several entities (formal and informal) helped balance out periods of inactivity or dysfunction among all involved? On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijklodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi, thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and Wikimedia
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Yes, we disagreed on a couple of things during the filter discussion on this very list, I'm sure you can look it up. Along with the local discussions, your thoughts on the strategy plan, and movement roles, I wasn't there at the time to disagree so I suppose you have no idea. You are more than welcome to bring any of this up on Internal-l however, I would be happy to go into much more detail for your elucidation. On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Theo On 11 November 2011 14:10, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Ohai Achal As usual, I disagree. ?? I didn't realise we disagree frequently...you must fill me in off list :) I am a bit more informed of the current situation than most people, maybe not as much as the current WMF advisory board member but who knows. Theo, this isn't a competition. I value your perspective, as do several other people. Never said it is. My opinion on this is from a regular community member before much of the community in other cities was active. I am not affiliated with the chapter or the India operations. Honestly, from my proximity, and I have been in close proximity for a while to both entities, there is some tension and a sense of antagonism on a lot of issues. The fact they can't and usually don't co-ordinate before, only heightens the issue. While I value your perspective on this issue, I think it would be also helpful to hear from people who have a direct relationship with the chapter, and from people who are in a formal/semi-formal community grouping who've interacted with the chapter and Foundation in India. I don't disagree with you or dispute what you say; I just think that there are many others who are in a better position to speak to this. So by implication, you mean I have no direct relationship with the chapter and India operations. I don't think I ever stopped being active on the local mailing lists or the conference organizing committee to be considered not-direct, however, I can't say the same for you or others. I can go into the specifics of my involvement with the foundation in India, with things like the office, all the India-operation pages on Meta, the regular IRC meetings I moderated as well as my work for the chapter like customizing the chapter wiki, Wikiconference pages, general outreach etc.. Again, I'm not sure if my work qualifies me to comment or be considered direct, which you seem to be entitled to judge. I find it odd since you are dismissing Anirudh for being in the chapter and not in the country, and then me for being in the country and not on the chapter or in proximity. You suggested asking the organizers in your last mail, last I checked I was one of them. Pranav also responded but he also happens to be on a fellowship/grant, I'm not. As for solicitation and being open for the famed India education program, I recall mentioning this to Hisham when he first brought it up, weeks after he was hired. My opinion at the time, and now is, he did it in the wrong city, the wrong colleges and with the wrong people. I still stand by my opinion. You brought up Anirudh's physical presence as affecting his judgement about the chapter. Actually no. Anirudh is not speaking for the chapter, and clearly said he is speaking for himself. I respect that. I'm simply reiterating that as he has been in Cambodia the last year or so, he hasn't attended chapter meetings, the AGM, or participated in any of the chapter events (physically) - which I, and several other people based here, have. Anirudh is a long standing and dedicated Wikipedian who has every right to an opinion; I'm merely pointing out that living in the country whose Wikimedia chapter you are a board member of is likely to provide more opportunities to do things for the chapter and not make it redundant. First you say he's not speaking for the chapter, only himself, which you respect then you proceed to make an argument how he is unfit to speak for the chapter? I'm not sure how someone's physical presence or attending certain meetings relates to their effectiveness on the board, certainly their personal opinion. I pointed out there are several chapters with little or no restrictions to its board members being resident or present in the country, again, you are more than free to check. I also don't understand the point of quoting redundant, are those quotes intended to be ironic? I'm not sure how his physical presence is related to this, I would go so far as to say, it's his personal business. One that you don't exactly have a position to question, just as much as someone else does to question yours, helping chapters and communities in two continents. Can someone ask you to stop representing India as the advisory board member when you represent South Africa or vice-versa, after missing a couple of meetings? Last I checked the board of a chapter was a non-paid
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Hi Theo, I find your tone needlessly rude - do you really think this is the best way to communicate? It makes it very difficult to have a useful conversation. Best wishes, Achal On 11 November 2011 18:07, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, we disagreed on a couple of things during the filter discussion on this very list, I'm sure you can look it up. Along with the local discussions, your thoughts on the strategy plan, and movement roles, I wasn't there at the time to disagree so I suppose you have no idea. You are more than welcome to bring any of this up on Internal-l however, I would be happy to go into much more detail for your elucidation. On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Theo On 11 November 2011 14:10, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Ohai Achal As usual, I disagree. ?? I didn't realise we disagree frequently...you must fill me in off list :) I am a bit more informed of the current situation than most people, maybe not as much as the current WMF advisory board member but who knows. Theo, this isn't a competition. I value your perspective, as do several other people. Never said it is. My opinion on this is from a regular community member before much of the community in other cities was active. I am not affiliated with the chapter or the India operations. Honestly, from my proximity, and I have been in close proximity for a while to both entities, there is some tension and a sense of antagonism on a lot of issues. The fact they can't and usually don't co-ordinate before, only heightens the issue. While I value your perspective on this issue, I think it would be also helpful to hear from people who have a direct relationship with the chapter, and from people who are in a formal/semi-formal community grouping who've interacted with the chapter and Foundation in India. I don't disagree with you or dispute what you say; I just think that there are many others who are in a better position to speak to this. So by implication, you mean I have no direct relationship with the chapter and India operations. I don't think I ever stopped being active on the local mailing lists or the conference organizing committee to be considered not-direct, however, I can't say the same for you or others. I can go into the specifics of my involvement with the foundation in India, with things like the office, all the India-operation pages on Meta, the regular IRC meetings I moderated as well as my work for the chapter like customizing the chapter wiki, Wikiconference pages, general outreach etc.. Again, I'm not sure if my work qualifies me to comment or be considered direct, which you seem to be entitled to judge. I find it odd since you are dismissing Anirudh for being in the chapter and not in the country, and then me for being in the country and not on the chapter or in proximity. You suggested asking the organizers in your last mail, last I checked I was one of them. Pranav also responded but he also happens to be on a fellowship/grant, I'm not. As for solicitation and being open for the famed India education program, I recall mentioning this to Hisham when he first brought it up, weeks after he was hired. My opinion at the time, and now is, he did it in the wrong city, the wrong colleges and with the wrong people. I still stand by my opinion. You brought up Anirudh's physical presence as affecting his judgement about the chapter. Actually no. Anirudh is not speaking for the chapter, and clearly said he is speaking for himself. I respect that. I'm simply reiterating that as he has been in Cambodia the last year or so, he hasn't attended chapter meetings, the AGM, or participated in any of the chapter events (physically) - which I, and several other people based here, have. Anirudh is a long standing and dedicated Wikipedian who has every right to an opinion; I'm merely pointing out that living in the country whose Wikimedia chapter you are a board member of is likely to provide more opportunities to do things for the chapter and not make it redundant. First you say he's not speaking for the chapter, only himself, which you respect then you proceed to make an argument how he is unfit to speak for the chapter? I'm not sure how someone's physical presence or attending certain meetings relates to their effectiveness on the board, certainly their personal opinion. I pointed out there are several chapters with little or no restrictions to its board members being resident or present in the country, again, you are more than free to check. I also don't understand the point of quoting redundant, are those quotes intended to be ironic? I'm not sure how his physical presence is related to this, I would go so far as to say, it's his personal business. One that you
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
I don't think you've interacted on these mailing lists or on-wiki a lot, have you? As far as I can see, barring maybe my last line in the previous reply, I was civil thorough-out, maybe sarcastic or acerbically restrained. You don't know me, but I assure you this was not me attempting to be rude. Second, as far as tones go on a written medium, I would say I dislike your authoritative tone generally, especially when you dismiss my or other's arguments. That is not helpful either. You are however, more than free to ignore me to avoid any further acrimony. Theo On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 4:44 AM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Theo, I find your tone needlessly rude - do you really think this is the best way to communicate? It makes it very difficult to have a useful conversation. Best wishes, Achal On 11 November 2011 18:07, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, we disagreed on a couple of things during the filter discussion on this very list, I'm sure you can look it up. Along with the local discussions, your thoughts on the strategy plan, and movement roles, I wasn't there at the time to disagree so I suppose you have no idea. You are more than welcome to bring any of this up on Internal-l however, I would be happy to go into much more detail for your elucidation. On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Theo On 11 November 2011 14:10, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Ohai Achal As usual, I disagree. ?? I didn't realise we disagree frequently...you must fill me in off list :) I am a bit more informed of the current situation than most people, maybe not as much as the current WMF advisory board member but who knows. Theo, this isn't a competition. I value your perspective, as do several other people. Never said it is. My opinion on this is from a regular community member before much of the community in other cities was active. I am not affiliated with the chapter or the India operations. Honestly, from my proximity, and I have been in close proximity for a while to both entities, there is some tension and a sense of antagonism on a lot of issues. The fact they can't and usually don't co-ordinate before, only heightens the issue. While I value your perspective on this issue, I think it would be also helpful to hear from people who have a direct relationship with the chapter, and from people who are in a formal/semi-formal community grouping who've interacted with the chapter and Foundation in India. I don't disagree with you or dispute what you say; I just think that there are many others who are in a better position to speak to this. So by implication, you mean I have no direct relationship with the chapter and India operations. I don't think I ever stopped being active on the local mailing lists or the conference organizing committee to be considered not-direct, however, I can't say the same for you or others. I can go into the specifics of my involvement with the foundation in India, with things like the office, all the India-operation pages on Meta, the regular IRC meetings I moderated as well as my work for the chapter like customizing the chapter wiki, Wikiconference pages, general outreach etc.. Again, I'm not sure if my work qualifies me to comment or be considered direct, which you seem to be entitled to judge. I find it odd since you are dismissing Anirudh for being in the chapter and not in the country, and then me for being in the country and not on the chapter or in proximity. You suggested asking the organizers in your last mail, last I checked I was one of them. Pranav also responded but he also happens to be on a fellowship/grant, I'm not. As for solicitation and being open for the famed India education program, I recall mentioning this to Hisham when he first brought it up, weeks after he was hired. My opinion at the time, and now is, he did it in the wrong city, the wrong colleges and with the wrong people. I still stand by my opinion. You brought up Anirudh's physical presence as affecting his judgement about the chapter. Actually no. Anirudh is not speaking for the chapter, and clearly said he is speaking for himself. I respect that. I'm simply reiterating that as he has been in Cambodia the last year or so, he hasn't attended chapter meetings, the AGM, or participated in any of the chapter events (physically) - which I, and several other people based here, have. Anirudh is a long standing and dedicated Wikipedian who has every right to an opinion; I'm merely pointing out that living in the country whose Wikimedia chapter you are a board member of is likely to provide more opportunities to do things for
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org wrote: Announcement of Wikimedia India Program Trust Congratulations, Hisham. I know this has been a lot of work for you and the team over the last few months. I look forward to seeing the programs that the trust and the chapter develop together. There's tons of work to do. :-) -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: My personal view is that there is enough work ahead for not just one, or two, but numerous entities, formal and informal, to enter the fray and actualize this potential. Already, there are many more requests for collaboration within India than either WMIN or WIPT or both put together can handle. No kidding. Nor do I think there's any point in playing blame games when a first pilot (!) like the India Education Program doesn't meet expectations. The point of trying things is to learn so we can improve over time. I look forward to seeing some of you based in India at the Hackathon and WikiConference next week: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/India_Hackathon_2011 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiConference_India_2011 Cheers, Erik -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
This thread started out with questions about the legal and practical differences between chapter and trust, but has veered much more into the terrain of funding and money. In addition, there have been numerous emails on bank accounts, grants, fellowships and what not. I'm glad we're talking about money and funding, but it's seeming like this is of greater concern than programs and activities - surely, funding is just a means to an end, rather than an end in itself? Funding is being discussed almost as if funding is an 'end' in itself - as if money is of greater importance than the huge amounts of work needed to build editing communities. This is both ironical in a volunteer community, and a source of worry, and I would like to place this on record. Best Bishakha ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
the result of 10 minutes googling is ... hisham mundol. total edits 138, in 38 different pages. active since 4 months, active time 100% paid by wikimedia foundation. no free software development. created even articles, an example: * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cafe_Qahwa sunil abraham. no edits. no free software development. but is mentioned in wikipedia articles like: * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia_Commons rahul matthan. no edits. no free software development. founded a law firm. the trust employs KPMG as auditor, which got sued over the madoff scheme [1]. additionally, the trust plans paying consultants and getting money from the foundation. as well i was able to find some messages of wikimedia india community members saying they are ignored by the trust and its people. i was not able to find discussion pages where the india community seems to be somehow included. as they seem to be interested in organizational structures, not only in program work, i was searching for signs how hisham, sunil and rahul contributed in building up the chapter, e.g. beeing the chapters first program manager, beeing the chapters first paid staff, beeing the chapters first advisors. then i searched for reasons why they would not do it or could not do it. but no luck in both cases. i also looked up the critieria to create a chapter, stating participation, and critical mass ... and was wondering if this is applied to a trust as well: * http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requirements_for_future_chapters to get a feeling about the size, the number of readers, contributors, and a trend in it, i tried to find the india country statistics on editing and reading: * http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaML.htm (just took the second most prominent language after english) 100 people making more than 5 edits, not increasing * http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_-_India_Programs/Indic_Languages/Statistics/2011_September 100 editors for every language, same as last year * http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportPageEditsPerCountryTrends.htm the share is 1.7%, stable. switzerland with 8 mio inhabitants (half of dehli) has 0.8% at the same time, another part of the world, a foto competition, no trust, no consultants, no KPMG involved, but a lot of volunteers and chapters. it gave 160'000 images for wikimedia commons, in one month. and, 30% new contributors. [2] i know, i am not good at googling ... so bare with me if above info is not 100% correct. but it is what an outsider in this matter like me perceives. rupert [1] - http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/3897984/kpmg-jpmorgan-sued-over-madoff-scheme/ [2] - http://wikilovesmonuments.eu On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 07:44, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Hisham, Interesting development :-) My question is with regards to the relationship of the new trust to the existing India Chapter. The purpose of the trust (as defined as The objective of the Trust is to promote the objectives of the Wikimedia movement and work closely with the Wikimedia community on various projects with an India focus.) seems synonymous with the purpose of a Chapter, and you now also have trustees which is synonymous with a Chapter's board. One difference I can see is that you don't have Members. Can you elaborate on the legal and practical differences between the new India Trust and the India Chapter? -Liam On 11 November 2011 05:11, Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org wrote: cross-posting to foundation-l internal-l from India Community list; apologies if you've read this already. hisham Begin forwarded message: From: Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org Subject: Wikimedia India Program Trust Date: November 11, 2011 9:55:00 AM GMT+05:30 To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindi...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi Folks, I'm writing to share an update with you on certain developments of relevance to the Wikimedia movement in India. Announcement of Wikimedia India Program Trust For some time, efforts have gone into creating an organization that would provide an appropriate structure to support Wikimedia program activities in India. Aspects such as the current regulatory framework (regarding funding, taxation, etc.) as well as the legal protection for the India team have been considered to determine this structure. In this context, a host of options (e.g. subsidiary, branch, Section 25) were evaluated and a determination was made towards an independent non-profit public trust. Legal advice has been taken at every stage in this decision. A new entity, the “Wikimedia India Program Trust”, has now been formed and registered (in Delhi.) This will be the organization that will eventually drive India programs and house the team in India. Why an Independent Public Trust? The Trust will provide an effective vehicle within India to marshal resources to support programs and partner
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:04 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote: to get a feeling about the size, the number of readers, contributors, and a trend in it, i tried to find the india country statistics on editing and reading: The major program initiative undertaken by Hisham's team so far is the India Education Program. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:India_Education_Program/Courses So far there's been a pilot program, which uncovered lots of serious issues with the quality of content contributed by the participating courses. This is now driving further iteration of the program, as it should. The pilot very much built on, and was informed by, the lessons learned in the Public Policy Initiative, which was the largest and most successful student engagement program ever undertaken in the Wikimedia movement (!). Both the India Education Program and the PPI have been led by Frank Schulenburg, who is an experienced and accomplished Wikipedian. at the same time, another part of the world, a foto competition, no trust, no consultants, no KPMG involved, but a lot of volunteers and chapters. it gave 160'000 images for wikimedia commons, in one month. and, 30% new contributors. [2] WLM is a wonderful project, one which WMF actively supported (most importantly by improving Upload Wizard to directly support the management of the upload campaigns). It really is credit to all the people who developed it, and built on the lessons from last year's WLM in the Netherlands. It's also a photo competition, which by its very nature is a very different kind of program than something like the IEP, with very different risks and opportunities. It's easy to compare apples and oranges and say those apples are rotten, my oranges are so much nicer. But they are very different fruit entirely. :) I don't think anyone is served by stereotyping people or programs. We're all pulling towards the same goal. That doesn't mean constantly patting ourselves on the back, but let's focus on the the substance of the work rather than on peddling stereotypes about ignorant consultants and outsiders. -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On 12 November 2011 06:53, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: This thread started out with questions about the legal and practical differences between chapter and trust, but has veered much more into the terrain of funding and money. In addition, there have been numerous emails on bank accounts, grants, fellowships and what not. I'm glad we're talking about money and funding, but it's seeming like this is of greater concern than programs and activities - surely, funding is just a means to an end, rather than an end in itself? Funding is being discussed almost as if funding is an 'end' in itself - as if money is of greater importance than the huge amounts of work needed to build editing communities. This is both ironical in a volunteer community, and a source of worry, and I would like to place this on record. Best Bishakha I understand what you mean, and agree with the sentiment, but I think the funding question you're referring to is the practical application of the broader issue of organisational roles. What I still don't understand, despite the fast and helpful answers from both yourself and Hisham (thank you) is the differentiation of the organisational roles between the Trust and the Chapter. I had originally assumed that the Trust was set up because it provided a legal way for the WMF India Team to be a 'branch' organisation of the WMF (not just individual contractors). But, from reading the description of the legal setup of the Trust, it seems that the Trust is, in fact, legally independent. Presumably this means that Hisham and the rest of the team are now employees of the Trust and no longer contractors to the WMF directly. If that is the case, then presumably the WMF has basically the same amount of legal and financial control over the Trust than it has over the Chapter. Namely, it provides project funds (one-off or ongoing) and provides trademark permission. Both organisations, presumably, also have the right to seek funding and undertake projects independently from the WMF so long as they meet their organisation's mission. Therefore... I'm confused about the differentiation of organisational roles because it seems we now have two, independent from each other, non-profit organisations in India that are both also equally independent from the WMF. The only difference, as I understand it from what Bishakha explained earlier, is that the Chapter is legally a Society (with an elected board and members) and the Trust has two appointed trustees. Is that the case? As a practical question - to make it more concrete and less abstract - what can the Trust do that the Chapter cannot? And, if the Chapter can legally do all the things that the Trust can do (and the WMF has the same amount of control either way), why do we need two organisations? -Liam p.s. and yes, to support Erik's point, let's please focus on what actual work can be done rather than arguing about who was present at which meetups and whether contractors are outsiders. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
Hi Hisham, Interesting development :-) My question is with regards to the relationship of the new trust to the existing India Chapter. The purpose of the trust (as defined as The objective of the Trust is to promote the objectives of the Wikimedia movement and work closely with the Wikimedia community on various projects with an India focus.) seems synonymous with the purpose of a Chapter, and you now also have trustees which is synonymous with a Chapter's board. One difference I can see is that you don't have Members. Can you elaborate on the legal and practical differences between the new India Trust and the India Chapter? -Liam On 11 November 2011 05:11, Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org wrote: cross-posting to foundation-l internal-l from India Community list; apologies if you've read this already. hisham Begin forwarded message: From: Hisham hmun...@wikimedia.org Subject: Wikimedia India Program Trust Date: November 11, 2011 9:55:00 AM GMT+05:30 To: Wikimedia India Community list wikimediaindi...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi Folks, I'm writing to share an update with you on certain developments of relevance to the Wikimedia movement in India. Announcement of Wikimedia India Program Trust For some time, efforts have gone into creating an organization that would provide an appropriate structure to support Wikimedia program activities in India. Aspects such as the current regulatory framework (regarding funding, taxation, etc.) as well as the legal protection for the India team have been considered to determine this structure. In this context, a host of options (e.g. subsidiary, branch, Section 25) were evaluated and a determination was made towards an independent non-profit public trust. Legal advice has been taken at every stage in this decision. A new entity, the “Wikimedia India Program Trust”, has now been formed and registered (in Delhi.) This will be the organization that will eventually drive India programs and house the team in India. Why an Independent Public Trust? The Trust will provide an effective vehicle within India to marshal resources to support programs and partner with local institutions. The objective of the Trust is to promote the objectives of the Wikimedia movement and work closely with the Wikimedia community on various projects with an India focus. It is important to understand that the Trust will not have any editorial control over content on any of the Wikimedia projects. The Trust is a not for profit organization. Introduction of Trustees Trustees have been identified based upon their support for Wikimedia movement's principles and plans in addition to having reputations for good governance and management. Sunil Abraham and Rahul Matthan have been requested to be the initial Trustees. Both are friends of Wikipedia and have extensive experience. Sunil is Executive Director of the Centre for Internet Society (CIS), is a long term advocate of free software and IP reform and has been supporting the Wikimedia community and movement for some time now. Rahul is a partner and heads the technology practice at Trilegal. He brings deep expertise and relationships that will be valuable for the Trust. These initial Trustees will serve for a term of three years at the maximum. All additional or subsequent Trustees will serve on rotation in accordance with a trustee selection plan that will be prepared. Trustees will not be compensated for their services. Governance, Funding, Financial Standards Communications of the Trust The Trust will be governed by Trustees who will provide oversight and guidance regarding the operations and governance of the Trust. Since the Trust is an independent organization, it will require funding for its operations which is in compliance with the legal and regulatory framework in India. It will seek funding from private donors within India as well as external sources. The Trust has the support of the Wikimedia Foundation which is a United States based non-profit foundation. However, in India all non-profit organizations need to be in existence for 3 years before they can receive funding from sources outside India. In the interim, they can apply for prior-permission under the FCRA regulations to help expedite the process. As a result, the Trust will shortly be applying for approval to receive funds from the Wikimedia Foundation in the future. As a Trust, we are required to have an independent external auditor. We have appointed KPMG. KPMG is experienced in auditing non-profit companies and are also auditors for the Wikimedia Foundation. Annually, the Trust will publicly disclose it's independently audited financial statements. The Trust will publish a monthly newsletter outlining its current activities and future plans. This will commence in December 2011. Operations of the Trust The trust deed under which the Trust must operate
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: Can you elaborate on the legal and practical differences between the new India Trust and the India Chapter? Dear Liam, Since I run a non-profit in India in my other life, I'll pitch in on one part of this: the legal differences between the India trust and the India chapter. There are three common ways of legally incorporating a non-profit in India: trust, society, section 25 company. The chapter is registered as a society, traditionally considered a more open incorporation structure, with members, elections etc. All these are specified in its by-laws. The program office is registered as a trust, which requires a minimum of two trustees to function. A trust does not usually have members; trustees can be appointed or elected (as per what's specified as the method on the trust deed). Check out the table at the bottom of the attachment [1] to get more details on this. Cheers Bishakha [1] http://www.ngosindia.com/resources/ngo_registration.php ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
