[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Isla Haddow-Flood]

I took Mike's use of the Meta (Wikimedia, not Facebook) to point out that
there would have indeed been a LOT less confusion and irritation on the
part of many members of the community if the WMF team involved had (at the
very least) put some of the details or listed the intent behind the
engagement on a Wikimedia META page, rather than us just having to guess
who was involved and what this related to ...

In a direct answer to Yael ... If this had been mentioned on a Meta page,
then Florence would have known who to direct her concerns to ... however, I
imagine she used Wikimedia-L because she could find no reference to it on
ANY Wikimedia page - hence, how was she meant to approach you first? Beyond
it being the best practice, the Community is pushed relentlessly to
document all their engagements on Meta, but it seems that in this and other
cases, the WMF team feels that they do not have to. See how not documenting
things openly also doesn't work out for the WMF's too?

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 06:42, Gnangarra  wrote:

> Kaya Mike
>
> I see the joke in
>
>> So ... you're not involving https://meta.wikimedia.org/ in this project?
>
> as some of us will also remember Meta Dioxin of Yes Minister fame from the
> 1980's
> but the Meta involvement is Facebooks new alias or corporate brand not our
> project   and that would have been at the centre of everyones mind when
> reading that press release as FB had just made their announcement and would
> also be one of the first announce by a third party using the new
> name/branding
>
> I agree with Flo here surely any WMF collaboration would have included WMF
> legal getting to review and veto any press releases mentioning our
> trademarks/community before they go public
>
> Boodarwun
>
>>
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 02:01, Mike Peel  wrote:
>
>> So ... you're not involving https://meta.wikimedia.org/ in this project?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
>>
>> On 22/12/21 16:43:17, Florence Devouard wrote:
>> > Hello Jorge
>> >
>> >
>> > I really appreciate you took the time to send a public update before
>> the
>> > holiday season, as well as the private email with additional food for
>> > thought. On Monday afternoon, I was gloomingly watching the mailing
>> list
>> > and thinking "still nothing in there". So I really appreciate the
>> feedback.
>> >
>> > I'll get back to you in January on a couple of points that I think
>> > deserve clarification. Before or after the diff depending.
>> >
>> > In the meanwhile, please enjoy the break.
>> >
>> > Florence
>> >
>> >
>> > PS: by the way... I fully agree with Sj... it is a good idea to
>> actually
>> > discuss with partners to agree in advance on how respective brands will
>> > be used. And to actually *require* that our brand not be used in
>> certain
>> > circonstances (such as in association with other brands) without prior
>> > agreement.
>> >
>> > For those who forgot about this page :
>> > https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Trademark_policy
>> >
>> > It reminds to all partners (which really ought to be, not only
>> > individuals, loose groups, and wikimedia affiliates, BUT ALSO big
>> > partners), what is automatically allowed, what requires notification,
>> > and what requires authorization.
>> >
>> > Obviously, it is a big complicated to get a trademark policy with
>> > details about what not to do (such as associating Wikimedia name with
>> > Meta in a press release). This would be too detailed.
>> > But if the trademark policy had been properly applied, it would have
>> > required a legal review of the full project terms of agreement. And the
>> > project terms of agreement could have included a provision regarding
>> > communication does and don't and prevented our brand to be used in such
>> > a unthoughtful manner.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Le 21/12/2021 à 19:24, Jorge Vargas a écrit :
>> >> Dear Florence,
>> >>
>> >> As promised, wanted to make sure we circled back before the holiday
>> >> break after getting more information. Per my last communication, I
>> >> want to reiterate we are indeed working on a project that is framed
>> >> under a larger collaboration being discussed with the Africa Union.
>> >> This collaboration was not initiated or directed specifically with
>> >> Africa No Filter, which was only involved by the African Union as part
>> >> of the process. Along the way, Africa No Filter has shown more
>> >> interest in playing a more active role in the project, which we're
>> >> still currently discussing if and how they partake. So far, our main
>> >> focus has been identifying ways to work with the Africa Union to plug
>> >> them into ongoing and future priorities and initiatives in the region,
>> >> with this project being the first step towards that.
>> >>
>> >> Due to some WMF staff absences and a few logistical mishaps, we were
>> >> not in a good position to fully coordinate on Africa No Filter’s
>> >> announcement, which went live without final confirmation from them.
>> >> That was not our 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Gnangarra]

Kaya Mike

I see the joke in

> So ... you're not involving https://meta.wikimedia.org/ in this project?

as some of us will also remember Meta Dioxin of Yes Minister fame from the
1980's
but the Meta involvement is Facebooks new alias or corporate brand not our
project   and that would have been at the centre of everyones mind when
reading that press release as FB had just made their announcement and would
also be one of the first announce by a third party using the new
name/branding

I agree with Flo here surely any WMF collaboration would have included WMF
legal getting to review and veto any press releases mentioning our
trademarks/community before they go public

Boodarwun

>
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 02:01, Mike Peel  wrote:

> So ... you're not involving https://meta.wikimedia.org/ in this project?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> On 22/12/21 16:43:17, Florence Devouard wrote:
> > Hello Jorge
> >
> >
> > I really appreciate you took the time to send a public update before the
> > holiday season, as well as the private email with additional food for
> > thought. On Monday afternoon, I was gloomingly watching the mailing list
> > and thinking "still nothing in there". So I really appreciate the
> feedback.
> >
> > I'll get back to you in January on a couple of points that I think
> > deserve clarification. Before or after the diff depending.
> >
> > In the meanwhile, please enjoy the break.
> >
> > Florence
> >
> >
> > PS: by the way... I fully agree with Sj... it is a good idea to actually
> > discuss with partners to agree in advance on how respective brands will
> > be used. And to actually *require* that our brand not be used in certain
> > circonstances (such as in association with other brands) without prior
> > agreement.
> >
> > For those who forgot about this page :
> > https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Trademark_policy
> >
> > It reminds to all partners (which really ought to be, not only
> > individuals, loose groups, and wikimedia affiliates, BUT ALSO big
> > partners), what is automatically allowed, what requires notification,
> > and what requires authorization.
> >
> > Obviously, it is a big complicated to get a trademark policy with
> > details about what not to do (such as associating Wikimedia name with
> > Meta in a press release). This would be too detailed.
> > But if the trademark policy had been properly applied, it would have
> > required a legal review of the full project terms of agreement. And the
> > project terms of agreement could have included a provision regarding
> > communication does and don't and prevented our brand to be used in such
> > a unthoughtful manner.
> >
> >
> >
> > Le 21/12/2021 à 19:24, Jorge Vargas a écrit :
> >> Dear Florence,
> >>
> >> As promised, wanted to make sure we circled back before the holiday
> >> break after getting more information. Per my last communication, I
> >> want to reiterate we are indeed working on a project that is framed
> >> under a larger collaboration being discussed with the Africa Union.
> >> This collaboration was not initiated or directed specifically with
> >> Africa No Filter, which was only involved by the African Union as part
> >> of the process. Along the way, Africa No Filter has shown more
> >> interest in playing a more active role in the project, which we're
> >> still currently discussing if and how they partake. So far, our main
> >> focus has been identifying ways to work with the Africa Union to plug
> >> them into ongoing and future priorities and initiatives in the region,
> >> with this project being the first step towards that.
> >>
> >> Due to some WMF staff absences and a few logistical mishaps, we were
> >> not in a good position to fully coordinate on Africa No Filter’s
> >> announcement, which went live without final confirmation from them.
> >> That was not our intention, and we regret if this caught you or anyone
> >> else off guard. The goal remains to finalize a Diff post that will
> >> share the details of the project and was meant to be posted prior to
> >> any other announcements. In the interest of allowing everyone their
> >> holiday rest (and because this project is not really yet in motion),
> >> we will be communicating more about it in January 2022 in a Diff post
> >> and other channels. We also want to reiterate that this partnership
> >> has absolutely nothing to do with Meta or the Hewlett Foundation, and
> >> although we would have preferred not to be grouped together in a
> >> single announcement, we can't control the way a third party decides to
> >> share their information.
> >>
> >> Our work with the Africa Union has started in 2021 as part of the work
> >> the Foundation has done to listen to local initiatives, identify ways
> >> to engage, and support existing priorities in the region. Recognizing
> >> we can always do better, our teams are plugged into the field as much
> >> as possible, hearing needs and identifying synergies to what the
> >> movement is prioritizing 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Mike Peel]

So ... you're not involving https://meta.wikimedia.org/ in this project?

Thanks,
Mike

On 22/12/21 16:43:17, Florence Devouard wrote:

Hello Jorge


I really appreciate you took the time to send a public update before the 
holiday season, as well as the private email with additional food for 
thought. On Monday afternoon, I was gloomingly watching the mailing list 
and thinking "still nothing in there". So I really appreciate the feedback.


I'll get back to you in January on a couple of points that I think 
deserve clarification. Before or after the diff depending.


In the meanwhile, please enjoy the break.

Florence


PS: by the way... I fully agree with Sj... it is a good idea to actually 
discuss with partners to agree in advance on how respective brands will 
be used. And to actually *require* that our brand not be used in certain 
circonstances (such as in association with other brands) without prior 
agreement.


For those who forgot about this page : 
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Trademark_policy


It reminds to all partners (which really ought to be, not only 
individuals, loose groups, and wikimedia affiliates, BUT ALSO big 
partners), what is automatically allowed, what requires notification, 
and what requires authorization.


Obviously, it is a big complicated to get a trademark policy with 
details about what not to do (such as associating Wikimedia name with 
Meta in a press release). This would be too detailed.
But if the trademark policy had been properly applied, it would have 
required a legal review of the full project terms of agreement. And the 
project terms of agreement could have included a provision regarding 
communication does and don't and prevented our brand to be used in such 
a unthoughtful manner.




Le 21/12/2021 à 19:24, Jorge Vargas a écrit :

Dear Florence,

As promised, wanted to make sure we circled back before the holiday 
break after getting more information. Per my last communication, I 
want to reiterate we are indeed working on a project that is framed 
under a larger collaboration being discussed with the Africa Union. 
This collaboration was not initiated or directed specifically with 
Africa No Filter, which was only involved by the African Union as part 
of the process. Along the way, Africa No Filter has shown more 
interest in playing a more active role in the project, which we're 
still currently discussing if and how they partake. So far, our main 
focus has been identifying ways to work with the Africa Union to plug 
them into ongoing and future priorities and initiatives in the region, 
with this project being the first step towards that.


Due to some WMF staff absences and a few logistical mishaps, we were 
not in a good position to fully coordinate on Africa No Filter’s 
announcement, which went live without final confirmation from them. 
That was not our intention, and we regret if this caught you or anyone 
else off guard. The goal remains to finalize a Diff post that will 
share the details of the project and was meant to be posted prior to 
any other announcements. In the interest of allowing everyone their 
holiday rest (and because this project is not really yet in motion), 
we will be communicating more about it in January 2022 in a Diff post 
and other channels. We also want to reiterate that this partnership 
has absolutely nothing to do with Meta or the Hewlett Foundation, and 
although we would have preferred not to be grouped together in a 
single announcement, we can't control the way a third party decides to 
share their information.


Our work with the Africa Union has started in 2021 as part of the work 
the Foundation has done to listen to local initiatives, identify ways 
to engage, and support existing priorities in the region. Recognizing 
we can always do better, our teams are plugged into the field as much 
as possible, hearing needs and identifying synergies to what the 
movement is prioritizing locally. We strongly believe this project is 
aligned and follows the line of other projects we've been supporting 
in the region. This or any other project is also not coming from staff 
or stakeholders outside of Africa, and it's our critical intention 
that relevant work for the region and our movement there is led and 
supported regionally. We can also assure you that the project will 
continue to have plenty of room for feedback and discussion, as it's 
meant to be implemented within the movement priorities in 2022. We 
expect to have those interested partake and get involved!


Your email does flag something relevant that we take to heart, which 
is how we can find ways to make sure relevant stakeholders locally can 
have better participation and due diligence earlier in these 
processes. Our intention will never be to create competing priorities, 
yet we don't think it's also feasible to consult each and every 
opportunity at hand, creating even extra work for volunteers. We 
believe there's a delicate 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Samuel Klein]

> our main focus has been identifying ways to work with the Africa Union to
plug them into
> ongoing and future priorities and initiatives in the region, with this
project being the first step towards that.

Perhaps an easy 'zeroth step' would be naming at least one community
lead/contact for any planned project, along with a description of the
project, somewhere on one of our wikis.  [A partnerships page on meta?]

> we don't think it's also feasible to consult each and every opportunity
at hand, creating even extra work for volunteers.

Confusion and uncertainty create more work than transparency. :)
Just share what is known in a public document, and make sure anything that
reaches the stage of a publicly announcable effort has active community
leadership.  Having to reconstruct this (here an exclusive reliance on
staff seems to mean at least a 5-week delay in even understanding what the
project might entail! unless one follows up with ANF to find out what they
hope to realize w/ their wikimedian in residence -- duplicating effort)

> although we would have preferred not to be grouped together in a single
announcement,
> we can't control the way a third party decides to share their information.

Perhaps we can.  Just today I had to sign boilerplate language from a large
org that says "you may list our name/logo on your site to indicate
collaboration or partnership only if part of at least 5 other logos, and
our logo may not be larger/more emphasized than the others".

I recommend requiring any partners to agree that our brands and names will
never be used in the same sentence as "Meta" as it refers to Facebook's
parent org, in public announcements or on web pages, for obvious reasons of
confusion and divergence of principles and goals.

SJ
#WTW /1

On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 1:25 PM Jorge Vargas  wrote:

> Dear Florence,
>
> As promised, wanted to make sure we circled back before the holiday break
> after getting more information. Per my last communication, I want to
> reiterate we are indeed working on a project that is framed under a larger
> collaboration being discussed with the Africa Union. This collaboration was
> not initiated or directed specifically with Africa No Filter, which was
> only involved by the African Union as part of the process. Along the way,
> Africa No Filter has shown more interest in playing a more active role in
> the project, which we're still currently discussing if and how they
> partake. So far, our main focus has been identifying ways to work with the
> Africa Union to plug them into ongoing and future priorities and
> initiatives in the region, with this project being the first step towards
> that.
>
> Due to some WMF staff absences and a few logistical mishaps, we were not
> in a good position to fully coordinate on Africa No Filter’s announcement,
> which went live without final confirmation from them. That was not our
> intention, and we regret if this caught you or anyone else off guard. The
> goal remains to finalize a Diff post that will share the details of the
> project and was meant to be posted prior to any other announcements. In the
> interest of allowing everyone their holiday rest (and because this project
> is not really yet in motion), we will be communicating more about it in
> January 2022 in a Diff post and other channels. We also want to reiterate
> that this partnership has absolutely nothing to do with Meta or the Hewlett
> Foundation, and although we would have preferred not to be grouped together
> in a single announcement, we can't control the way a third party decides to
> share their information.
>
> Our work with the Africa Union has started in 2021 as part of the work the
> Foundation has done to listen to local initiatives, identify ways to
> engage, and support existing priorities in the region. Recognizing we can
> always do better, our teams are plugged into the field as much as possible,
> hearing needs and identifying synergies to what the movement is
> prioritizing locally. We strongly believe this project is aligned and
> follows the line of other projects we've been supporting in the region.
> This or any other project is also not coming from staff or stakeholders
> outside of Africa, and it's our critical intention that relevant work for
> the region and our movement there is led and supported regionally. We can
> also assure you that the project will continue to have plenty of room for
> feedback and discussion, as it's meant to be implemented within the
> movement priorities in 2022. We expect to have those interested partake and
> get involved!
>
> Your email does flag something relevant that we take to heart, which is
> how we can find ways to make sure relevant stakeholders locally can have
> better participation and due diligence earlier in these processes. Our
> intention will never be to create competing priorities, yet we don't think
> it's also feasible to consult each and every opportunity at hand, creating
> even extra 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Jorge Vargas]

Dear Florence,

As promised, wanted to make sure we circled back before the holiday break
after getting more information. Per my last communication, I want to
reiterate we are indeed working on a project that is framed under a larger
collaboration being discussed with the Africa Union. This collaboration was
not initiated or directed specifically with Africa No Filter, which was
only involved by the African Union as part of the process. Along the way,
Africa No Filter has shown more interest in playing a more active role in
the project, which we're still currently discussing if and how they
partake. So far, our main focus has been identifying ways to work with the
Africa Union to plug them into ongoing and future priorities and
initiatives in the region, with this project being the first step towards
that.

Due to some WMF staff absences and a few logistical mishaps, we were not in
a good position to fully coordinate on Africa No Filter’s announcement,
which went live without final confirmation from them. That was not our
intention, and we regret if this caught you or anyone else off guard. The
goal remains to finalize a Diff post that will share the details of the
project and was meant to be posted prior to any other announcements. In the
interest of allowing everyone their holiday rest (and because this project
is not really yet in motion), we will be communicating more about it in
January 2022 in a Diff post and other channels. We also want to reiterate
that this partnership has absolutely nothing to do with Meta or the Hewlett
Foundation, and although we would have preferred not to be grouped together
in a single announcement, we can't control the way a third party decides to
share their information.

Our work with the Africa Union has started in 2021 as part of the work the
Foundation has done to listen to local initiatives, identify ways to
engage, and support existing priorities in the region. Recognizing we can
always do better, our teams are plugged into the field as much as possible,
hearing needs and identifying synergies to what the movement is
prioritizing locally. We strongly believe this project is aligned and
follows the line of other projects we've been supporting in the region.
This or any other project is also not coming from staff or stakeholders
outside of Africa, and it's our critical intention that relevant work for
the region and our movement there is led and supported regionally. We can
also assure you that the project will continue to have plenty of room for
feedback and discussion, as it's meant to be implemented within the
movement priorities in 2022. We expect to have those interested partake and
get involved!

Your email does flag something relevant that we take to heart, which is how
we can find ways to make sure relevant stakeholders locally can have better
participation and due diligence earlier in these processes. Our intention
will never be to create competing priorities, yet we don't think it's also
feasible to consult each and every opportunity at hand, creating even extra
work for volunteers. We believe there's a delicate balance, and the
Foundation continues to do its best to find the best ways to reach. We take
this opportunity as a learning on how more expansive and trust-building
forums can be created while balancing volunteer requests, as we continue to
regionalize and localize our work as much as possible as mandated by
Movement Strategy.

We look forward to sharing more about this project in January 2022, and to
more opportunities for dialogue in the new year. I wish you a restful and
lovely break, in hopes the new year brings us more spaces to share and
build together.

Warmly,
Jorge

On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 12:58 AM Gnangarra  wrote:

> HI Jorge
>
> I find it disturbing that you dont have a detailed answer even now, and
> that the WMF would agree to partnerships which dont respect the community
> its the community who has built and maintain the credibility of the
> projects.
>
> While its nice to see high level efforts from the WMF extreme care should
> be being taken in who we partner with and how they present the
> relationship.  I find it troubling that a partner can make an announcement
> and include a third party, especially when that third party has a long
> history for data collection, private data resale, supporting fake news, and
> violating copyright.
>
> Knowing this how robust are the data privacy exchanges what security is in
> place between the WMF and ANf & AU given that they are working with such a
> concerning third party and see the two as intertwined the "jumping of the
> gun" and link that third both very little respect for us
>
> Regards
> Gnangarra
>
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 03:39, Yael Weissburg 
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you, Jorge, for this thoughtful and clear response.
>>
>> Florence, Xavier, and others: I know there's often good reason to message
>> Wikimedia-l, and also to let you know that you can always reach the WMF
>> Partnerships 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Gnangarra]

HI Jorge

I find it disturbing that you dont have a detailed answer even now, and
that the WMF would agree to partnerships which dont respect the community
its the community who has built and maintain the credibility of the
projects.

While its nice to see high level efforts from the WMF extreme care should
be being taken in who we partner with and how they present the
relationship.  I find it troubling that a partner can make an announcement
and include a third party, especially when that third party has a long
history for data collection, private data resale, supporting fake news, and
violating copyright.

Knowing this how robust are the data privacy exchanges what security is in
place between the WMF and ANf & AU given that they are working with such a
concerning third party and see the two as intertwined the "jumping of the
gun" and link that third both very little respect for us

Regards
Gnangarra

On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 03:39, Yael Weissburg 
wrote:

> Thank you, Jorge, for this thoughtful and clear response.
>
> Florence, Xavier, and others: I know there's often good reason to message
> Wikimedia-l, and also to let you know that you can always reach the WMF
> Partnerships team at partnersh...@wikimedia.org and on our Meta page
>  if
> you want to engage with us directly!
>
> Best,
>
> Yael
>
> --
> Yael Weissburg (she / her)
> Director, Strategic Partnerships
> Wikimedia Foundation
> E: yweissb...@wikimedia.org 
> M: +1.415.513.6643
>
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 11:28 AM Jorge Vargas 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Florence,
>>
>> Thanks for your email. We wanted to acknowledge receipt and say that
>> we're working on a more detailed answer about the partnership with Africa
>> No Filter (ANF) and the Africa Union (AU), and to some of the higher-level
>> points you've raised around our general approach to this work.
>>
>> We're gathering all the right information to make sure we can offer a
>> comprehensive answer, but in short, to your first question, the
>> collaboration between WMF and ANF described in the announcement, is led by
>> the Foundation's Partnerships and Community Programs teams and will be
>> implemented in collaboration with Wikimedia communities. This collaboration
>> sits under a larger ongoing relationship with the African Union, who were
>> actually the ones who first connected us to ANF. We broadly introduced the
>> project during this specific session [1] at WikiIndaba, and have a
>> comprehensive Diff post coming up soon with more information about this
>> project's goals and how it connects with existing movement priorities,
>> which we are happy to forward to this thread when it’s live. Unfortunately,
>> ANF went slightly earlier on what was going to be a joint announcement, and
>> we're talking with them on how this came about.
>>
>> To be clear, we are not partnering on this project with Meta; we are
>> partnering solely with ANF and the Africa Union, within their 2063 Agenda
>> strategy [2] for the region. We have no involvement in the separate
>> partnership that ANF announced with Meta in the same announcement.
>>
>> We read your email as elevating some larger concerns we want to make sure
>> are heard, for us all to have a good faith and important dialogue on how we
>> inform, collaborate, and work with the Movement in partnership-related
>> activity. Our intention is never to create overlapping/conflictive work
>> with the ones in the Movement, but rather add value and collaborate, as we
>> believe we are doing in this case.
>>
>> We will be providing an answer soon with more details.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jorge Vargas
>> Director of Regional Partnerships
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiIndaba_conference_2021/Program/The_future_of_knowledge_creation_in_Africa_through_partnerships
>> [2] https://au.int/en/agenda2063/overview
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 11:36 AM F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l <
>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Thank you for raising up this topic in the list, Florence. I fully agree
>>> with you in all your points and find it of great concern, especially
>>> regarding accountability of the WMF towards the community. But also because
>>> its increasing agreements and decisions that are not thoroughly reviewed or
>>> shared before a long way (i.e. money, hiring and staffing time expenditure)
>>> has already been done.
>>>
>>> This matter can be linked a lot with the long debate that Galder (user
>>> Theklan) had here about a month and a half ago on the disappointing WMF
>>> tech support, while we see big efforts on content that disrupt the
>>> decentralized role of communities and that, in this precise case, they seem
>>> to be even very unequally communicated.
>>>
>>> I am looking forward to read more on this in case someone is aware of
>>> what's going on. It does not look any good so far, especially for the
>>> silence on "our" side (as what 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Yael Weissburg]

Thank you, Jorge, for this thoughtful and clear response.

Florence, Xavier, and others: I know there's often good reason to message
Wikimedia-l, and also to let you know that you can always reach the WMF
Partnerships team at partnersh...@wikimedia.org and on our Meta page
 if
you want to engage with us directly!

Best,

Yael

--
Yael Weissburg (she / her)
Director, Strategic Partnerships
Wikimedia Foundation
E: yweissb...@wikimedia.org 
M: +1.415.513.6643

On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 11:28 AM Jorge Vargas  wrote:

> Hi Florence,
>
> Thanks for your email. We wanted to acknowledge receipt and say that we're
> working on a more detailed answer about the partnership with Africa No
> Filter (ANF) and the Africa Union (AU), and to some of the higher-level
> points you've raised around our general approach to this work.
>
> We're gathering all the right information to make sure we can offer a
> comprehensive answer, but in short, to your first question, the
> collaboration between WMF and ANF described in the announcement, is led by
> the Foundation's Partnerships and Community Programs teams and will be
> implemented in collaboration with Wikimedia communities. This collaboration
> sits under a larger ongoing relationship with the African Union, who were
> actually the ones who first connected us to ANF. We broadly introduced the
> project during this specific session [1] at WikiIndaba, and have a
> comprehensive Diff post coming up soon with more information about this
> project's goals and how it connects with existing movement priorities,
> which we are happy to forward to this thread when it’s live. Unfortunately,
> ANF went slightly earlier on what was going to be a joint announcement, and
> we're talking with them on how this came about.
>
> To be clear, we are not partnering on this project with Meta; we are
> partnering solely with ANF and the Africa Union, within their 2063 Agenda
> strategy [2] for the region. We have no involvement in the separate
> partnership that ANF announced with Meta in the same announcement.
>
> We read your email as elevating some larger concerns we want to make sure
> are heard, for us all to have a good faith and important dialogue on how we
> inform, collaborate, and work with the Movement in partnership-related
> activity. Our intention is never to create overlapping/conflictive work
> with the ones in the Movement, but rather add value and collaborate, as we
> believe we are doing in this case.
>
> We will be providing an answer soon with more details.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jorge Vargas
> Director of Regional Partnerships
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiIndaba_conference_2021/Program/The_future_of_knowledge_creation_in_Africa_through_partnerships
> [2] https://au.int/en/agenda2063/overview
>
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 11:36 AM F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thank you for raising up this topic in the list, Florence. I fully agree
>> with you in all your points and find it of great concern, especially
>> regarding accountability of the WMF towards the community. But also because
>> its increasing agreements and decisions that are not thoroughly reviewed or
>> shared before a long way (i.e. money, hiring and staffing time expenditure)
>> has already been done.
>>
>> This matter can be linked a lot with the long debate that Galder (user
>> Theklan) had here about a month and a half ago on the disappointing WMF
>> tech support, while we see big efforts on content that disrupt the
>> decentralized role of communities and that, in this precise case, they seem
>> to be even very unequally communicated.
>>
>> I am looking forward to read more on this in case someone is aware of
>> what's going on. It does not look any good so far, especially for the
>> silence on "our" side (as what WMF does has an impact in the discursive
>> trustworthiness of all volunteers) and because in that newsletter it is
>> being mentioned as a project side to side with Facebook.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Xavier Dengra
>>
>> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>> El dimecres, 8 de desembre 2021 a les 4:51 PM, Florence Devouard <
>> fdevou...@gmail.com> va escriure:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>>
>> Got that in my mailbox today.
>> I had known that for a few days because it had been displayed on ANF
>> website and been the object of an ANF previous email a few days ago about a
>> partnership between Wikimedia Foundation / ANF / African Union to fix the
>> gap related to African representation. So it is not really a surprise to
>> ME, but...
>>
>> On one hand, it is a good news to see the big organisations get involved.
>>
>> On the other hand... there are a few points bugging me and I wanted to
>> share just that.
>>
>>
>> ANF has been announcing those partnerships for several days on their
>> networks.
>> But from WMF... I see a complete silence. No announcement in the lists,
>> nor 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[Jorge Vargas]

Hi Florence,

Thanks for your email. We wanted to acknowledge receipt and say that we're
working on a more detailed answer about the partnership with Africa No
Filter (ANF) and the Africa Union (AU), and to some of the higher-level
points you've raised around our general approach to this work.

We're gathering all the right information to make sure we can offer a
comprehensive answer, but in short, to your first question, the
collaboration between WMF and ANF described in the announcement, is led by
the Foundation's Partnerships and Community Programs teams and will be
implemented in collaboration with Wikimedia communities. This collaboration
sits under a larger ongoing relationship with the African Union, who were
actually the ones who first connected us to ANF. We broadly introduced the
project during this specific session [1] at WikiIndaba, and have a
comprehensive Diff post coming up soon with more information about this
project's goals and how it connects with existing movement priorities,
which we are happy to forward to this thread when it’s live. Unfortunately,
ANF went slightly earlier on what was going to be a joint announcement, and
we're talking with them on how this came about.

To be clear, we are not partnering on this project with Meta; we are
partnering solely with ANF and the Africa Union, within their 2063 Agenda
strategy [2] for the region. We have no involvement in the separate
partnership that ANF announced with Meta in the same announcement.

We read your email as elevating some larger concerns we want to make sure
are heard, for us all to have a good faith and important dialogue on how we
inform, collaborate, and work with the Movement in partnership-related
activity. Our intention is never to create overlapping/conflictive work
with the ones in the Movement, but rather add value and collaborate, as we
believe we are doing in this case.

We will be providing an answer soon with more details.

Regards,

Jorge Vargas
Director of Regional Partnerships

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiIndaba_conference_2021/Program/The_future_of_knowledge_creation_in_Africa_through_partnerships
[2] https://au.int/en/agenda2063/overview

On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 11:36 AM F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thank you for raising up this topic in the list, Florence. I fully agree
> with you in all your points and find it of great concern, especially
> regarding accountability of the WMF towards the community. But also because
> its increasing agreements and decisions that are not thoroughly reviewed or
> shared before a long way (i.e. money, hiring and staffing time expenditure)
> has already been done.
>
> This matter can be linked a lot with the long debate that Galder (user
> Theklan) had here about a month and a half ago on the disappointing WMF
> tech support, while we see big efforts on content that disrupt the
> decentralized role of communities and that, in this precise case, they seem
> to be even very unequally communicated.
>
> I am looking forward to read more on this in case someone is aware of
> what's going on. It does not look any good so far, especially for the
> silence on "our" side (as what WMF does has an impact in the discursive
> trustworthiness of all volunteers) and because in that newsletter it is
> being mentioned as a project side to side with Facebook.
>
> Best,
>
> Xavier Dengra
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> El dimecres, 8 de desembre 2021 a les 4:51 PM, Florence Devouard <
> fdevou...@gmail.com> va escriure:
>
> Hello
>
>
> Got that in my mailbox today.
> I had known that for a few days because it had been displayed on ANF
> website and been the object of an ANF previous email a few days ago about a
> partnership between Wikimedia Foundation / ANF / African Union to fix the
> gap related to African representation. So it is not really a surprise to
> ME, but...
>
> On one hand, it is a good news to see the big organisations get involved.
>
> On the other hand... there are a few points bugging me and I wanted to
> share just that.
>
>
> ANF has been announcing those partnerships for several days on their
> networks.
> But from WMF... I see a complete silence. No announcement in the lists,
> nor in the grant space, nor on diff, nor to the affiliates impacted by this
> announcement;
> Nothing. No mention of an Africa Knowledge Initiative on meta either.
> Nothing at all.
>
>
> The total silence from WMF raises questions and concerns in my mind. Such
> as :
>
> 1) Is that partnership real and known from the Wikimedia Foundation ?
>
> 2) If it is, why is Wikimedia Foundation not informing the community about
> what seems to be a significant partnership ?
> Is it that in truth no one at WMF cares about this partnership ? Or is it
> by fear of community reaction ? Or is it a wish to not have local groups
> involved at all ?
>
> 3) What's the role of the Wikimedia Foundation in that partnership ?
> Is it 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fwd: Meta, WikiMedia, and the Hewlett Foundation partner with Africa No Filter

[F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l]

Hi all,

Thank you for raising up this topic in the list, Florence. I fully agree with 
you in all your points and find it of great concern, especially regarding 
accountability of the WMF towards the community. But also because its 
increasing agreements and decisions that are not thoroughly reviewed or shared 
before a long way (i.e. money, hiring and staffing time expenditure) has 
already been done.

This matter can be linked a lot with the long debate that Galder (user Theklan) 
had here about a month and a half ago on the disappointing WMF tech support, 
while we see big efforts on content that disrupt the decentralized role of 
communities and that, in this precise case, they seem to be even very unequally 
communicated.

I am looking forward to read more on this in case someone is aware of what's 
going on. It does not look any good so far, especially for the silence on "our" 
side (as what WMF does has an impact in the discursive trustworthiness of all 
volunteers) and because in that newsletter it is being mentioned as a project 
side to side with Facebook.

Best,

Xavier Dengra

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
El dimecres, 8 de desembre 2021 a les 4:51 PM, Florence Devouard 
 va escriure:

> Hello
>
> Got that in my mailbox today.
> I had known that for a few days because it had been displayed on ANF website 
> and been the object of an ANF previous email a few days ago about a 
> partnership between Wikimedia Foundation / ANF / African Union to fix the gap 
> related to African representation. So it is not really a surprise to ME, 
> but...
>
> On one hand, it is a good news to see the big organisations get involved.
>
> On the other hand... there are a few points bugging me and I wanted to share 
> just that.
>
> ANF has been announcing those partnerships for several days on their networks.
> But from WMF... I see a complete silence. No announcement in the lists, nor 
> in the grant space, nor on diff, nor to the affiliates impacted by this 
> announcement;
> Nothing. No mention of an Africa Knowledge Initiative on meta either. Nothing 
> at all.
>
> The total silence from WMF raises questions and concerns in my mind. Such as :
>
> 1) Is that partnership real and known from the Wikimedia Foundation ?
>
> 2) If it is, why is Wikimedia Foundation not informing the community about 
> what seems to be a significant partnership ?
> Is it that in truth no one at WMF cares about this partnership ? Or is it by 
> fear of community reaction ? Or is it a wish to not have local groups 
> involved at all ?
>
> 3) What's the role of the Wikimedia Foundation in that partnership ?
> Is it just allowing ANF to use the Wikipedia brand ? Is Wikimedia Foundation 
> providing a grant to ANF ? Is Wikimedia Foundation providing staff time to 
> ANF ? Is Wikimedia Foundation offering volunteer time from the communities or 
> facilitating recruitement of cheap labour ? Is Wikimedia Foundation planning 
> to provide networking support in connecting ANF to the communities and 
> usergroups ?
>
> What is WMF role in this ?
>
> 4) When Usergroup Affiliates are approved, a thorough review of their request 
> is made to avoid any situation of overlapping activities with the other 
> usergroups. And once approved, there is a concern that they have to 
> coordinate and inform about overlapping activities.
> Clearly, the WMF is here officially supporting a collection of initiatives 
> that will overlap with already existing activities and could impact existing 
> usergroups. However, WMF did not inquire of existing groups opinion on such a 
> partnership, nor did it actually sought to simply inform them. Did WMF tried 
> to involve the impacted parties ?
>
> In short, in a spirit of collaboration and shared mission... would not that 
> be expected that impacted communities be informed/polled/or even involved ?
>
> 5) In the past few months, I have seen WMF staff increasingly get directly 
> involved into Content Projects. It seems that WMF staff who once where busy 
> developing tools to support the communities, are now rather spending time 
> creating, leading or facilitating content projects. I suppose there are 
> benefits to doing that. And do not misunderstand me, I appreciate every staff 
> member involved in such effort and recognise their skills.
> But when WMF staff move from support function to Content Projects leadership, 
> it also can have detrimental consequences in our ecosystem, such as inequity 
> in resources access between projects organized by WMF and projects organized 
> by community members (*). It can have detrimental consequences in decreasing 
> the opportunities for community members to take on leadership roles. It can 
> have detrimental consequences in making WMF appear like a content producer.
>
> My question would be... is this shift in WMF staff activities ... simply due 
> to the lack of leadership at WMF level for the past months... or is it an 
> deliberate move ?
>
> Sorry, long rant