Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[Gabriel Thullen]

Thank you Katherine for your long and thoughtful message on this difficult
subject. I feel that the Foundation took the necessary steps to ensure that
all parties concerned were treated fairly. I also tend to trust the
Foundation board when they say that there was "no merit to the charges".

This appears to be a classic case of "claims and counter claims" which the
Foundation has settled. Now that the smoke screen has been cleared, we now
need to address the other issues that are plaguing Wikimedia France.

Once again, thank you for setting the record straight in such a calm and
measured fashion. I sincerely hope that we will now be able to answer our
member's grievances and get to the bottom of this mess, with the
Foundation's help, experience and guidance,

Best regards
Gabriel

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 3:56 AM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> On Oct 19, 2017 7:41 PM, "Richard Farmbrough" 
> wrote:
>
> I think it very clear that these allegations were the last gasp of an
> ancient regime,
>
>
> Legal threats are surely the universal language of bad faith.  And I have
> complete trust in Pierre-Selim and Caroline.
>
> Thanks Katherine, for sharing details of what has been happening.
>
> Sam.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[Samuel Klein]

On Oct 19, 2017 7:41 PM, "Richard Farmbrough" 
wrote:

I think it very clear that these allegations were the last gasp of an
ancient regime,


Legal threats are surely the universal language of bad faith.  And I have
complete trust in Pierre-Selim and Caroline.

Thanks Katherine, for sharing details of what has been happening.

Sam.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[Richard Farmbrough]

I think it very clear that these allegations were the last gasp of an
ancient regime, mired as it was in nepotism and other unsavoury practices.

The criminal allegations can be left to the police.  The description of the
steps taken by the WMF in this case seems to be of a very sensible
handlingerie of a difficult situation.

On 20 Oct 2017 12:22 am, "Emeric VALLESPI" 
wrote:

Katherine,

Your answer is particularly shocking. Which right has the Foundation to
feel legitimate in order to describe the situation experienced by Nathalie
Martin or by other people? Only a judge can.
The movement organization does not take precedence over the laws of the
countries.

You rely on a single document (a letter) to judge that there is no moral or
sexual harassment?
What about the criminal complaint? And the medical leaves? And the
testimonies attached to the complaint? These other elements were not taken
into account, why?

The Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation ridiculed himself in the press [0]
when he said that he had discovered yesterday the reproaches that were
addressed to him as well as the complaint. His lawyer even tried to make it
appear that the complaint had never been filed.
Even though this whole situation has been known by the Wikimedia Foundation
for months!

Mockery reaches its top with your so-called measures. In case you do not
know Katherine, in France independent lawyers do not exist. Judges are
independent, not lawyers.
The lawyers you have appointed have been paid by the Foundation. They
*only* interviewed the defendant. In these conditions, how could the
outcome not be favorable to his version?

You did not answer any of my previous questions:

Why did not the Wikimedia Foundation hear Nathalie Martin at her request?
Just to have her version of the facts, it would have been - maybe ... - a
good idea.
Why did the experts who were supposed to conduct an adversarial
investigation not discussed with Nathalie or Marie-Alice? Would not that
have been the least of the things? Why did not they hear the board of
trustees’ member? Why did you refuse to organize, as you (or your
representatives) were offered, a confrontation between
complainant/defendant?
Why fear so much to hear the version of Nathalie?

You have witnessed what Marie-Alice and Nathalie have experienced with
social media as well as on the mailing-list you're hosting. You've done
absolutely nothing to protect them.
You're mentioning complaints that have been filed to the Support and Safety
committee, which has no legal existence in the real world (outside of the
movement). I am talking about real criminal complaints in a police station.
Whether you can compare the two shows your total unconsciousness.

Again, the role of the Wikimedia Foundation is not to determine whether the
current Chair is guilty or innocent. Nor whether the acts are sexual or
moral harassment.
Your role, as an organization, is, to a minimum, to hear the victims and to
ensure their protection. You have undertaken everything to mask this
situation in order to guarantee your tranquility. It is a shame for a
movement that wants to be humanistic.

Regards,
--
Emeric Vallespi

2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher :

> Everyone,
>
> The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all
> harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal
here
> today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
> Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which
> our movement finds itself.
>
> As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the
French
> Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and the
> Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number
of
> the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
> community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
> Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging harassment
> and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> whenever applicable.
>
> Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
> about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
> essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims
> of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
> allegations against the Wikimed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[Emeric VALLESPI]

Katherine,

Your answer is particularly shocking. Which right has the Foundation to
feel legitimate in order to describe the situation experienced by Nathalie
Martin or by other people? Only a judge can.
The movement organization does not take precedence over the laws of the
countries.

You rely on a single document (a letter) to judge that there is no moral or
sexual harassment?
What about the criminal complaint? And the medical leaves? And the
testimonies attached to the complaint? These other elements were not taken
into account, why?

The Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation ridiculed himself in the press [0]
when he said that he had discovered yesterday the reproaches that were
addressed to him as well as the complaint. His lawyer even tried to make it
appear that the complaint had never been filed.
Even though this whole situation has been known by the Wikimedia Foundation
for months!

Mockery reaches its top with your so-called measures. In case you do not
know Katherine, in France independent lawyers do not exist. Judges are
independent, not lawyers.
The lawyers you have appointed have been paid by the Foundation. They
*only* interviewed the defendant. In these conditions, how could the
outcome not be favorable to his version?

You did not answer any of my previous questions:

Why did not the Wikimedia Foundation hear Nathalie Martin at her request?
Just to have her version of the facts, it would have been - maybe ... - a
good idea.
Why did the experts who were supposed to conduct an adversarial
investigation not discussed with Nathalie or Marie-Alice? Would not that
have been the least of the things? Why did not they hear the board of
trustees’ member? Why did you refuse to organize, as you (or your
representatives) were offered, a confrontation between
complainant/defendant?
Why fear so much to hear the version of Nathalie?

You have witnessed what Marie-Alice and Nathalie have experienced with
social media as well as on the mailing-list you're hosting. You've done
absolutely nothing to protect them.
You're mentioning complaints that have been filed to the Support and Safety
committee, which has no legal existence in the real world (outside of the
movement). I am talking about real criminal complaints in a police station.
Whether you can compare the two shows your total unconsciousness.

Again, the role of the Wikimedia Foundation is not to determine whether the
current Chair is guilty or innocent. Nor whether the acts are sexual or
moral harassment.
Your role, as an organization, is, to a minimum, to hear the victims and to
ensure their protection. You have undertaken everything to mask this
situation in order to guarantee your tranquility. It is a shame for a
movement that wants to be humanistic.

Regards,
--
Emeric Vallespi

2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher :

> Everyone,
>
> The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all
> harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal here
> today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
> Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which
> our movement finds itself.
>
> As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the French
> Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and the
> Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number of
> the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
> community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
> Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging harassment
> and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> whenever applicable.
>
> Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
> about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
> essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims
> of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
> allegations against the Wikimedia Foundation’s current Board Chair.
>
> In May of 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation was informed, in a letter and for
> the first time, that the then-Executive Director of Wikimédia France was
> alleging claims of harassment against the current Board Chair of the
> Wikimedia Foundation, dating back to his tenure as former Chair of
> Wikimédia France. In this letter the Executive Di

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[Patricio Lorente]

Thanks so much, Katherine, for this detailed report. I really appreciate
this.

   Patricio

El jue., 19 de oct. de 2017 a la(s) 18:20, Katherine Maher <
kma...@wikimedia.org> escribió:

> Everyone,
>
> The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all
> harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal here
> today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
> Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which
> our movement finds itself.
>
> As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the French
> Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and the
> Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number of
> the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
> community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
> Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging harassment
> and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> whenever applicable.
>
> Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
> about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
> essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims
> of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
> allegations against the Wikimedia Foundation’s current Board Chair.
>
> In May of 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation was informed, in a letter and for
> the first time, that the then-Executive Director of Wikimédia France was
> alleging claims of harassment against the current Board Chair of the
> Wikimedia Foundation, dating back to his tenure as former Chair of
> Wikimédia France. In this letter the Executive Director described a number
> of interactions with the Foundation’s Board Chair when he was Chair of
> Wikimédia France, and went on to accuse him of using his position as
> Foundation Board Chair to to turn the Wikimedia Foundation’s sentiment
> against the French chapter.
>
> Contrary to the assertion in the Medium essay, while the former Wikimédia
> France Executive Director’s letter detailed tense and disagreeable
> interactions between the two individuals, it did not characterize those
> interactions as sexual harassment. Also contrary to the essay’s assertions,
> the Wikimedia Foundation took immediate and appropriate action after
> receiving the complaint.
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation, under clear direction from our Board, responded
> promptly:
>
>- We notified the Vice Chair and Board Governance Chair immediately
>after receiving the then-Executive Director’s letter.
>- Under their direction and supervision, we promptly hired expert French
>legal counsel to conduct an investigation on this issue.
>- The Foundation Board Chair was informed of the investigation and
>recused from all relevant discussions. The Board Chair was also recused
>from any discussion regarding Wikimédia France and the French Wikimedia
>community, including any participation in funding decisions.
>- The investigation by the experts found that the French chapter’s
>Executive Director’s detailed statements of facts, in addition to not
> being
>characterized by her as sexual harassment, also did not support a
> finding
>of sexual harassment.
>- Based on the information provided, French counsel also looked at
>whether the allegations supported a finding of “moral” harassment,
>ultimately concluding that they did not.
>- The findings were conveyed to the then-chair of the board of Wikimédia
>France. The chapter leadership was asked on more than one occasion if it
>had any additional evidence or wished to further discuss the
> conclusions.
>No additional information was provided.
>- Under these circumstances, the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation found
>no merit to the charges.
>
>
> *As has been repeatedly stated, the Foundation remains fully committed to
> reviewing and investigating additional information, if presented, of sexual
> or other harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation staff
> or board member. We fully condemn harassment in the Wikimedia movement.*
>
> The essay in Medium also references experiences of a number of former
> Wikimédia France Board members who reporte

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[Katherine Maher]

Everyone,

The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all
harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal here
today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which
our movement finds itself.

As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the French
Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and the
Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number of
the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging harassment
and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
whenever applicable.

Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims
of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
allegations against the Wikimedia Foundation’s current Board Chair.

In May of 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation was informed, in a letter and for
the first time, that the then-Executive Director of Wikimédia France was
alleging claims of harassment against the current Board Chair of the
Wikimedia Foundation, dating back to his tenure as former Chair of
Wikimédia France. In this letter the Executive Director described a number
of interactions with the Foundation’s Board Chair when he was Chair of
Wikimédia France, and went on to accuse him of using his position as
Foundation Board Chair to to turn the Wikimedia Foundation’s sentiment
against the French chapter.

Contrary to the assertion in the Medium essay, while the former Wikimédia
France Executive Director’s letter detailed tense and disagreeable
interactions between the two individuals, it did not characterize those
interactions as sexual harassment. Also contrary to the essay’s assertions,
the Wikimedia Foundation took immediate and appropriate action after
receiving the complaint.

The Wikimedia Foundation, under clear direction from our Board, responded
promptly:

   - We notified the Vice Chair and Board Governance Chair immediately
   after receiving the then-Executive Director’s letter.
   - Under their direction and supervision, we promptly hired expert French
   legal counsel to conduct an investigation on this issue.
   - The Foundation Board Chair was informed of the investigation and
   recused from all relevant discussions. The Board Chair was also recused
   from any discussion regarding Wikimédia France and the French Wikimedia
   community, including any participation in funding decisions.
   - The investigation by the experts found that the French chapter’s
   Executive Director’s detailed statements of facts, in addition to not being
   characterized by her as sexual harassment, also did not support a finding
   of sexual harassment.
   - Based on the information provided, French counsel also looked at
   whether the allegations supported a finding of “moral” harassment,
   ultimately concluding that they did not.
   - The findings were conveyed to the then-chair of the board of Wikimédia
   France. The chapter leadership was asked on more than one occasion if it
   had any additional evidence or wished to further discuss the conclusions.
   No additional information was provided.
   - Under these circumstances, the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation found
   no merit to the charges.


*As has been repeatedly stated, the Foundation remains fully committed to
reviewing and investigating additional information, if presented, of sexual
or other harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation staff
or board member. We fully condemn harassment in the Wikimedia movement.*

The essay in Medium also references experiences of a number of former
Wikimédia France Board members who reportedly left their posts because of
alleged harassment from French Wikimedia community members. In the majority
of these cases, the Wikimedia Foundation has not received complaints and
has no further information about these allegations.

We are aware that some people working at the Foundation for some months
have received comments from a number of community members through informal
channels abo

[Wikimedia-l] Invitation to WMF October 2017 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, October 26, 18:00 UTC

[Lena Traer]

Hello everyone,

The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take
place on Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC
channel is #wikimedia-office on https://webchat.freenode.net, and the
meeting will be broadcast as a live YouTube stream.[1]

During the October metrics meeting, we'll hear from different presenters
along the theme of knowledge equity -- understanding and addressing
barriers to participation in free knowledge globally.

Meeting agenda:

* Welcomes, theme introduction
* Movement update
* Wikimedia grants
* Aulas AMiGAS (Juan Manuel Lopera)
* Movement strategy update
* Questions and discussion

Please review
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities_meetings
for further information about the meeting and how to participate.

We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.

Thank you,
Lena

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN3rOgNECjQ

Lena Traer
Project Coordinator // Communications // Advancement
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,