Re: [Wikimedia-l] Affiliate Selected Board Seats - Resolution finalized. Next steps.

2019-04-06 Thread Chris Keating
Thank you, facilitators, for your hard work on this process!

Chris
(ASBS facilitator the last two times around)

On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 11:12 AM Ad Huikeshoven  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The Election Facilitators met on Friday, April 5. We finalized the
> resolution, which is now frozen.[1] The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia
> Foundation will be asked to approve the resolution.
>
> We have made two small changes to be more inclusive. We extended the date
> for compliance with AffCom reporting and being in good standing to May 8 to
> allow time for as many Affiliates as possible to be current with these
> requirements. The Election Facilitators adjusted the language in case a
> quorum is not met during the election.
>
> On the talk page of the resolution one issue was raised. The issue looks
> like to be about a possible candidate. Affiliates will have ample time to
> discuss the merits of candidates during nomination time, screening time,
> and they can cast their votes on candidates. The Election Facilitators
> didn't see the necessity for this change, and left the resolution on this
> point unchanged.
>
> The Election Facilitators will be Abhinav Srivastava, Lane Rasberry,
> Jeffrey Keefer, Ad Huikeshoven, Neal McBurnett and Alessandro Marchetti. We
> will welcome more volunteers to assist us in this process, to reach out to
> the diversity in language and gender in our communities, and do so in an
> advisory role.
>
> The nomination period opens op April 15. We are going to prepare nomination
> pages on meta. You can expect a call for nominations. There is a draft
> call, including a candidates' profile section with non-binding guidelines
> about experience and characteristics for nominees.[2] You are welcome to
> add your insights, or discuss on the talk page.
>
> Erica Litrenta (WMF staff) supports us in this process. She will reach out
> to all affiliates through mail and other channels to make sure we are up to
> date with (user)name and contact details of your primary contact.
>
> On behalf of the Election Facilitators,
>
> Ad Huikeshoven
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/Resolution_2019
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/Call_for_Candidates#Candidates%27_profiles
> ___
> 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, 


[Wikimedia-l] Affiliate Selected Board Seats - Resolution finalized. Next steps.

2019-04-06 Thread Ad Huikeshoven
Hi all,

The Election Facilitators met on Friday, April 5. We finalized the
resolution, which is now frozen.[1] The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia
Foundation will be asked to approve the resolution.

We have made two small changes to be more inclusive. We extended the date
for compliance with AffCom reporting and being in good standing to May 8 to
allow time for as many Affiliates as possible to be current with these
requirements. The Election Facilitators adjusted the language in case a
quorum is not met during the election.

On the talk page of the resolution one issue was raised. The issue looks
like to be about a possible candidate. Affiliates will have ample time to
discuss the merits of candidates during nomination time, screening time,
and they can cast their votes on candidates. The Election Facilitators
didn't see the necessity for this change, and left the resolution on this
point unchanged.

The Election Facilitators will be Abhinav Srivastava, Lane Rasberry,
Jeffrey Keefer, Ad Huikeshoven, Neal McBurnett and Alessandro Marchetti. We
will welcome more volunteers to assist us in this process, to reach out to
the diversity in language and gender in our communities, and do so in an
advisory role.

The nomination period opens op April 15. We are going to prepare nomination
pages on meta. You can expect a call for nominations. There is a draft
call, including a candidates' profile section with non-binding guidelines
about experience and characteristics for nominees.[2] You are welcome to
add your insights, or discuss on the talk page.

Erica Litrenta (WMF staff) supports us in this process. She will reach out
to all affiliates through mail and other channels to make sure we are up to
date with (user)name and contact details of your primary contact.

On behalf of the Election Facilitators,

Ad Huikeshoven

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/Resolution_2019
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/Call_for_Candidates#Candidates%27_profiles
___
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] [strategy process] Fwd: I decided to leave the working group

2019-04-06 Thread Itzik - Wikimedia Israel
Hi Philip and all,

I debated whether to respond and continue this discussion. Finally, I
decided to do it first to apologize. I stand behind my feedback about the
process, but I'm afraid it was sent at the wrong time, a few days before
the Wikimedia Summit. It wasn't my intention to cause a storm a moment
before the summit and especially not during it, and I didn't take that it
into consideration when I sent the email. It would have been more
appropriate if this mail had been sent long enough before, or after, the
summit.

If my email wasn't clear, let me clarify it: I think the strategy process
is one of the most important steps we had so far as a movement. And I truly
believe (or at least desire to) it will bring change. Saying that, I think
we should also look more deeply and review how we bring these
recommendations, asking ourselves if this is the only way. In the Friday
morning session, two extreme directions were presented as to how the
process could take place. That's exactly the point that bothered me, the
look of black or white only. There are so many ways in between that can
combine the good in both ways.

What saddens me the most is our fear of having an open conversation. I
received many responses to this email, some off-list, but so many in-person
during the last weekend in Berlin (and because I talked about it two days
ago with someone, here is a screenshot just for an example:
https://imgur.com/FM1naPJ).

I told many of them and I say it publicly, I didn't look for any public
support for what I wrote. Each of us has a different opinion or feedback.
Good and bad. And all these deserve to be said. It saddens me that we keep
things in our stomachs. We do things that we don't feel comfortable with
just because [enter your reason].

In one of the conversations, someone told me that he thinks that the
process is problematic, but they are his friends, and he doesn't want to
criticize them. That's one of the things that hurt me more and bothered me
during the whole weekend, wonder to myself if maybe I did something wrong.

The criticism is not personal towards anyone. Or at least that wasn't the
intention. There are questions that I think we as a movement, who
responsible together to this process, should ask about it. This is our duty
as a movement. Are we using the money correctly? Do we manage the work time
of the staff and volunteers right? It may be that everything is fine, but
it may not be. If we don't ask ourselves the questions from time to time,
we will not do our job. Assessment should be done all along, not just at
the end of a process. The fact this process is SUPER important is obvious
to everyone. But you can not go blind because of it.

It doesn't change the fact that the people behind it are my friends too,
some of them for many years. I love them all. And I know, and sure with all
my heart, that they do the best they can for the sake of movement. I
believe feedback, comments, are also important to them to adjust and
change. To talk about them and criticize their work behind their back it's
probably the most non-friendship thing to do.

Have a great weekend.



*Itzik Edri*
Chairperson (volunteer)
it...@wikimedia.org.il
+972-54-5878078



On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 3:19 PM Philip Kopetzky 
wrote:

> Hi Itzik,
>
> I'm sorry you feel this way and would hope you would still feel inclined to
> provide a critical point of view on the process. I agree with you that
> we're bad at changing processes that are evidently broken, but don't you
> think that we are exactly changing this fact by moving on from an affiliate
> system that has been broken for at least 3-4 years now and are finally
> prioritising measures that will support our communities in becoming
> healthier and more fun to work in?
>
> Best,
> Philip
>
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 19:09, Kiril Simeonovski <
> kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Anders,
> >
> > There is an expression in Macedonian that says „Секое вештачко нешто се
> > распаѓа на природен начин.“ (Every artificial creation breaks down
> > naturally.). This is exactly what is going to happen with this strategy.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Kiril
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 7:05 PM Anders Wennersten <
> > m...@anderswennersten.se>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > There is a Swedish expression "har man tagit fan i båten får man ro
> > > honom i land" (If you have taken the devil into your boat you must row
> > > him ashore"
> > >
> > > Independent if this process has been bad or not, I see it is as just
> > > some six month left of it. And it is important to do the best of it. It
> > > would be a bad move to stop it at thois point in time, and would also
> be
> > > too late to correct the process if it has been flawed.
> > >
> > > Anders
> > >
> > >
> > > Den 2019-03-27 kl. 14:05, skrev Itzik - Wikimedia Israel:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Two weeks ago I sent this email to my strategy working group
> (resource
> > > > allocation). I didn't plan to send a public