Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Open Letter to Affiliations Committee : Wikimedia India's Demand For A Fair And Transparent Hearing
Sparing the unprofessional and dismissive tone, can you please be more specific on the "CIS-A2K attribution grabbing case for a Chapter's self-financed initiative" ? Please back such aspersions (over a public-list) with relevant links and all that .. ~Ambarish||WBGodric___ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Open Letter to Affiliations Committee : Wikimedia India's Demand For A Fair And Transparent Hearing
Dear Krishna, This is an open letter to the Affiliations Committee, a majority of those happen to be on this list. This message is however also on the Indian Mailing List [1]. All information in relation from Reports [2] to financial and legal status have been repeatedly shared on the list [3]. Regarding, issues with the Affiliations Committee all information is present on the Chapter's member's mailing list. I would be grateful if the response is restrictive to the issue shared. There are so many different mailing list [4] and you are free to take the public information to them. You have the second-accused in the CIS-A2K attribution grabbing case for a Chapter's self-financed initiative and I am afraid but may not revert to any subsequent messages from you, if they are not relevant and to the topic. To everyone, this is what happens when WMF decides to "divide and rule" by having a staff-based organisation (CIS-A2K) and a volunteer driven Chapter both at the same time. Abhinav [1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2019-July/014199.html [2] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2019-April/013994.html [3] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2018-August/013467.html On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 18:13, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga wrote: > Hi Abhinav, > > I think this discussion will have a better direction if it is first done > on the Wikimedia India community mailing list[1]. I say so because, many > Wikimedians in India (non-members) and active affiliates (such as > user-groups) haven't heard from the Chapter for a long time about its > status (WMF compliance, legal, financial, etc.) and issues faced. We only > heard about the state of the Chapter from this email. Otherwise, we are > unaware of the situation. > > It will be better if there is a discussion first on the Indian mailing > list where WMIN's leadership can explain the current state in detail to the > community (what happened till data - including AffCom conversation, and the > future actions planned to take). Personally, as Wikimedian from India, I > was surprised to see this email on wikimedia-l without any prior > information or discussion on about the Chapter or this issue on > wikimediaindia-l. > > Best, > Krishna > > [1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 3:37 PM Paulo Santos Perneta < > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Reading about these developments in India has been absolutely painful, and >> a sad reminiscent of a number of past situations. >> >> Most of all, the case with Wikimedia Portugal, when AffCom started >> imposing >> restrictions and "mediation plans" without having any kind of official >> hearing with the chapter; the whole environment of secrecy and power/fear >> games; the prerogative of making all kinds of unsubstantiated >> affirmations, >> presented as if they were god's truth; the notice of suspension for the >> chapter, based on information which remains to be substantiated till >> today; >> the feeling of hopelessness. >> >> Then the old, cold case of Brazil, where back in 2010, like in India, the >> WMF decided to experiment with local WMF representations, with very tragic >> consequences, heavily disturbing the progress of the local Wikimedia >> community, and hindering its progress for about a decade; the reckless >> approval by AffCom, and subsequent WMF support of clone/conflicting local >> affiliates with the one (s) already existing in the region; and the way it >> was unilaterally "solved" by AffCom, dismantling a community which was >> hanging around Wikimedia since 2008. >> >> And then the recent case which happened to myself where an old and >> exclusively Wikipedia-related case was somehow morphed and cooked in >> secret >> inside WMF, deceitfully presenting it as affiliate related, and secretly >> judged, with false accusations and sanctions issued without even informing >> the target of what was happening. >> >> One thing common to all those situations is the environment of secrecy and >> obscurity cultivated by AffCom, completely at odds with the values of the >> Wikimedia Movement - starting with the way AffCom deceitfully defines and >> presents itself - "a Wikimedia community-run committee" [1], when it is >> all >> but run by the Wikimedia community. It's not even chosen by the community, >> to start with, but by the committee itself. But the main question probably >> is: Why is AffCom cultivating all this environment of secrecy and >> obscurity >> in what should be straightforward and clear proceedings? What may be >> secretive at all, in the quest of a group of Wikimedians to become an >> affiliate? Why those processes do not occur in daylight from their start >> till the end - with the obvious exception of sensitive information >> involving privacy, such as real names? And then - who is AffCom >> accountable >> to? Who oversees AffCom? The BoT? Are they monitoring
Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Open Letter to Affiliations Committee : Wikimedia India's Demand For A Fair And Transparent Hearing
Hi Abhinav, I think this discussion will have a better direction if it is first done on the Wikimedia India community mailing list[1]. I say so because, many Wikimedians in India (non-members) and active affiliates (such as user-groups) haven't heard from the Chapter for a long time about its status (WMF compliance, legal, financial, etc.) and issues faced. We only heard about the state of the Chapter from this email. Otherwise, we are unaware of the situation. It will be better if there is a discussion first on the Indian mailing list where WMIN's leadership can explain the current state in detail to the community (what happened till data - including AffCom conversation, and the future actions planned to take). Personally, as Wikimedian from India, I was surprised to see this email on wikimedia-l without any prior information or discussion on about the Chapter or this issue on wikimediaindia-l. Best, Krishna [1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 3:37 PM Paulo Santos Perneta wrote: > Hello, > > Reading about these developments in India has been absolutely painful, and > a sad reminiscent of a number of past situations. > > Most of all, the case with Wikimedia Portugal, when AffCom started imposing > restrictions and "mediation plans" without having any kind of official > hearing with the chapter; the whole environment of secrecy and power/fear > games; the prerogative of making all kinds of unsubstantiated affirmations, > presented as if they were god's truth; the notice of suspension for the > chapter, based on information which remains to be substantiated till today; > the feeling of hopelessness. > > Then the old, cold case of Brazil, where back in 2010, like in India, the > WMF decided to experiment with local WMF representations, with very tragic > consequences, heavily disturbing the progress of the local Wikimedia > community, and hindering its progress for about a decade; the reckless > approval by AffCom, and subsequent WMF support of clone/conflicting local > affiliates with the one (s) already existing in the region; and the way it > was unilaterally "solved" by AffCom, dismantling a community which was > hanging around Wikimedia since 2008. > > And then the recent case which happened to myself where an old and > exclusively Wikipedia-related case was somehow morphed and cooked in secret > inside WMF, deceitfully presenting it as affiliate related, and secretly > judged, with false accusations and sanctions issued without even informing > the target of what was happening. > > One thing common to all those situations is the environment of secrecy and > obscurity cultivated by AffCom, completely at odds with the values of the > Wikimedia Movement - starting with the way AffCom deceitfully defines and > presents itself - "a Wikimedia community-run committee" [1], when it is all > but run by the Wikimedia community. It's not even chosen by the community, > to start with, but by the committee itself. But the main question probably > is: Why is AffCom cultivating all this environment of secrecy and obscurity > in what should be straightforward and clear proceedings? What may be > secretive at all, in the quest of a group of Wikimedians to become an > affiliate? Why those processes do not occur in daylight from their start > till the end - with the obvious exception of sensitive information > involving privacy, such as real names? And then - who is AffCom accountable > to? Who oversees AffCom? The BoT? Are they monitoring AffCom? Does the BoT > agrees with this way of acting? > > All this cult of secrecy by AffCom and other powers-that-be inside WMF > creates a very unhealthy and toxic environment for everyone. I personally > appreciate and hold in high esteem a number of members of AffCom, possibly > the majority of them. And it has been very much mind-boggling watching the > way AffCom choses to act as a whole. I've suggested to the Strategy WG of > Roles & Responsibilities that AffCom should be wholly redefined, to make it > more transparent, community-connected and accountable. The way it is now, I > don't believe it is properly filling and complying with its role. > > I really hope things improve, and our Wikimedian brothers at WMIN - who I > believe have made the right decision of bringing their case into the > clarity of daylight - will manage to revert the suspension and continue > working for a world of free knowledge accessible to everyone, despite the > difficulties they are passing through at this moment. > > And it would be much more motivating for everyone if we could get out of > this kind of Age of Darkness at AffCom (and WMF in general). > > [1] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee > > Best, > Paulo > > > Abhinav srivastava escreveu no dia terça, 9/07/2019 > à(s) 08:10: > > > Hi Lodewijk, > > > > I will try and simplify > > > > (a) *What is the exact and complete set of reasons that Affcom put the > >
