Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of the Affiliate Selected Board Seats voting

2019-06-13 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All

Thanks to the election committee for facilitating this election, and all
those who voted. And as Pierre said: thanks to all those who put their name
forward, it is a lot of work and involves a lot of responsibility.

Congrats to Nataliia and Shani!

And thank you so much to Christophe for serving!

Jan-Bart “recycled” de Vreede ;)
Board Member Wikimedia Netherlands



On 13 June 2019 at 00:56:18, Ad Huikeshoven (a...@huikeshoven.org) wrote:

*Dear Wikimedians, We are writing to let you know the result of the
election for the 2 Affiliate Selected Board Seats on the Wikimedia
Foundation board. The successful candidates were Nataliia Tymkiv and Shani
Evenstein Sigalov. A total of 122 affiliates voted, 85% of the 143 eligible
to vote, which is a record. As you know the election was conducted under a
variation of the Single Transferable Vote, which meant that prorated votes
were redistributed between candidates to come up with the final result. In
the 10th step of counting the final place, after Nataliia Tymkiv was
elected, was between Shani Evenstein Sigalov (40.519678) and Richard Knipel
(40.480322). We have put the full count narrative on meta so that others
can verify it if they wish.[1] It is the closest ASBS result for some time,
and all candidates brought very valuable perspectives to the work of the
WMF. In the 9th step of counting Reda Kerbouche lost by a very small
margin. Adding a ballot with rank #1 for Richard or Reda would result in
them being elected instead of Shani. The same goes for removing a ballot.
Changing the ranking on one of the ballots in a specific can way can result
in a different outcome for the second seat. This is an election in which
every vote counts. As in any election, there is a chance that some voters
misinterpreted the instructions and voted wrongly. We don't see a
justification for an action as extraordinary and controversial as opening
votes for review after the vote period is over. The instructions were
visible and clear: "Rank any candidate from 1 (your preferred candidate) to
11 (your least preferred candidate)." After voting, voters received a
confirmation email stating the name of each candidate they voted with the
number of their rank: Rank 1, Rank 2, ... The agency of voters should be
respected. As part of the retrospective we may identify areas of
improvements on our side, but still the process was quite simple and
documented. Some voters realized they made a mistake and requested a new
ballot. New ballots were issued in those cases. This choice was done
because of the specific situation of this election, since the process was
complex for new affiliates and participation, diversity and inclusion were
a clear goal.[2] We have published on meta information about who got a new
ballot within the voting deadline.[3] The Election Facilitators have been
available nearly 24 hours a day monitoring the various communication
channels to answer any questions affiliates might have. We did our best at
answering all of them. After our own scrutiny of the data, and based on our
experience in community processes, we strongly advise the community to
respect the integrity of the process, and advise against allowing any
modifications of votes at this point. If the votes had been reopened for
modification with or without publishing vote results, that would have
caused significant confusion and criticism that could have jeopardized the
entire election. We will publish a debrief with recommendations for a next
ASBS process on meta.[4] We invite all representatives of affiliates to a
feedback session at Wikimania.[5] We would like to congratulate Nataliia
Tymkiv and Shani Evenstein Sigalov and thank everyone who stood. Regards,
Ad Huikeshoven, Lane Rasberry, Jeffrey Keefer, Neal McBurnett, Abhinav
Srivastava, Alessandor MarchettiElection Facilitators [1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/Results

[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/Resolution_2019
<
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/Resolution_2019
>
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/New_ballots
<
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/New_ballots
>
[4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/Debrief

[5]
https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/ASBS_Feedback
*
___
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] 2016 call for Board Governance Committee Volunteer and Advisory members [results]

2016-08-19 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi

Great news, thank you so much for all of you for volunteering and to the board 
for taking a novel approach to having more external expertise involved :)

Thank you Natalia!

Jan-Bart


> On 16 Aug 2016, at 15:47, Nataliia Tymkiv  wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I am honestly delighted to announce the results of the public call for
> Board Governance committee volunteer and Advisory members, announced on
> July 15, 2016  [1]. We received nine applications, and after discussing
> them with BGC and reviewing the committee's needs and interviewing a short
> list of candidates,I have chosen five volunteer advisory members for the
> committee. I'd like to extend my thanks to everyone who offered to serve on
> the committee.
> 
> Please find below a short introduction for our new volunteer advisory
> members. They are all quite well known in the movement and I think their
> insights would be helpful. They join the Committee once they sign the
> documents that Stephen LaPorte, our Interim Secretary, sent to them (the
> same ones as the Board members sign - the confidentiality agreement
> 
> , code of conduct
> 
> , conflict of interest disclosure
> ).
> 
> === Gayle Karen Young ===
> 
> Gayle Karen Young is a WMF's former Chief Talent and Culture office. In her
> time at Wikimedia, she was accountable for building the current HR team and
> had an active hand in board development and staffed the board HR committee.
> She brings experience with the Wikimedia movement, with the workings of the
> Foundation, and through her own consulting work in leadership and board
> development with organizations in both the for-profit and non-profit space,
> and in technology and human rights.
> 
> === Kat Walsh ===
> 
> Kat Walsh is a former member of Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees,
> 12/2006-8/2013 (Chair, 2012-2013; Executive Secretary, 2009-2010). Now she
> works as an attorney specializing in copyright, Internet law, and free and
> open source software.
> 
> 
> === Tim Moritz Hector ===
> 
> Tim Moritz Hector is Chair of the Board of Wikimedia Deutschland since
> 2014. Tim has been an active Wikimedian for more than eight years and was
> engaged in several positions on national and international level. His most
> recent engagement (with Frans Grijzenhout from WMNL) is focussed on
> building the capacities of board members in all Wikimedia-organizations. He
> is going to finish his B.A. in politics and german philology this month and
> shall work as an advisor to the ED at the "Academy for volunteerism" in
> Berlin beginning in September.
> 
> === Ido Ivry ===
> 
> Ido Ivry is a board member of Wikimedia Israel. He has extensive NGO
> experience, as well as business understanding, both in large corporates,
> NGOs, GLAM institution (National Library of Israel), and is currently a CTO
> in his own startup, developing open data solutions for city governments.
> Ido has been active on the Grants Advisory Committee and as part of the
> Simple APG Committee, working with many organizations in our movement on
> carrying out their missions successfully and effectively.
> 
> === Ira B. Matetsky (User:Newyorkbrad) ===
> 
> Ira Brad Matetsky (User:Newyorkbrad) is a long-time editor, administrator,
> and former arbitrator on English Wikipedia as well as a board member of
> Wikimedia New York City.  Professionally, he has been a litigation attorney
> in New York City since 1987.  He has broad experience with board and
> community governance issues, best practices, and legal requirements from
> serving with and representing a number of organizations.
> 
> [1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-July/084756.html
> 
> Best regards,
> antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] With my thanks to everyone ...

2016-07-17 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Geoff

What can I say that others have not said earlier in this thread…

Well… perhaps that you were a Rock(star) during my tenure as (vice-)chair of 
the Foundation Board of Trustees. Relying on you to give sound advice was one 
of the easiest decisions I ever made. You have shaped many of our governance 
aspects, and can take credit for a lot of our growth in professionalism and 
have given us great examples of how to have a department conduct community 
consultations. Your enthusiasm for the mission combined with your warm human 
side always made it a pleasure to work with you. There is a reason that there 
is a stereotype of the typical “Lawyer”, the reason is that you were able to 
clearly break through that ;) The world is a small place and I am sure that 
some of us will run into you sooner or later, if only because you simply get to 
enjoy Wikimania in Montreal as a volunteer? 

Many many many thanks for everything you have contributed to the Foundation 
over the past years.

Jan-Bart



> On 13 Jul 2016, at 23:25, Geoff Brigham  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Over the past five years, I’ve been honored to serve as the General Counsel
> and Secretary of the Wikimedia Foundation. This job has been amazing, and
> I’m grateful to everyone who has made it so rewarding. It's now time for my
> next step, so, in the coming days, I will be leaving the Foundation to
> pursue a new career opportunity.
> 
> I depart with such love for the mission, the Foundation, the Wikimedia
> communities, and my colleagues at work. I thank my past and present bosses
> as well as the Board for their support and guidance. I stand in awe of the
> volunteer writers, editors, and photographers who contribute every day to
> the Wikimedia projects. And I will hold special to my heart my past and
> current teams, including legal and community advocacy. :) You have taught,
> given, and enriched me so much.
> 
> After my departure, Michelle Paulson will serve as interim head of Legal,
> and, subject to Board approval, Stephen LaPorte will serve as interim
> Secretary to the Board. I can happily report that they have the experience
> and expertise to ensure a smooth and professional transition.
> 
> The future of the Foundation under Katherine's leadership is exciting.
> Having had the pleasure of working for her, I know Katherine will take the
> Foundation to its next level in promoting and defending the outstanding
> mission and values of the Wikimedia movement. Although I'm delighted about
> my next opportunity, I will miss this new chapter in the Foundation's
> story.
> 
> My last day at the Foundation will be July 18th. After that, I will take a
> month off to recharge my batteries, and then I start my new gig at YouTube
> in the Bay Area. There, I will serve as Director of YouTube Trust & Safety,
> managing global teams for policy, legal, and anti-abuse operations. As with
> Wikimedia, I look forward to learning from those teams and tackling
> together a new set of exciting, novel challenges.
> 
> For those who want to stay in touch, please do! My personal email is:
> geoffrey.r.brig...@gmail.com.
> 
> With respect, admiration, and gratitude,
> 
> Geoff
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board appointment of Executive Director

2016-06-25 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Congratulations to Katherine for being an incredible positive force and make a 
great impression in such a short time as Interim! A well deserved reward :)

I have all the confidence that you are able to motivate those around you (and 
in our community) to perform at their best, work together and be creative.

The very best wishes in what is (as always) likely to be a challenging time :)

Jan-Bart


> On 24 Jun 2016, at 11:15, Patricio Lorente  wrote:
> 
> Dear all, 
> 
> It is our great pleasure to share that during the Board meeting at Wikimania 
> 2016 in Esino Lario, we unanimously voted to appoint Katherine Maher as 
> Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation. This is effective as of our 
> resolution dated Thursday, 23 June. 
> 
> Katherine served as interim Executive Director for the past three months, 
> during which time she consistently and repeatedly demonstrated the kind of 
> leadership our organization needs. She is deeply committed to our movement’s 
> values, and brings expertise in civic technology and international 
> development that will be an asset to the Wikimedia Foundation and the 
> movement.
> 
> We came to this conclusion after an intensive discovery process led by the ED 
> search committee. Our decision was also informed by direct feedback from 
> staff and community, and our own experience working closely with Katherine. 
> 
> In March, we assembled an Executive Director search committee[1] consisting 
> of four Board members¹ who were chosen to represent different perspectives 
> and capacities.² Additionally, the Board asked the Foundation’s Chief 
> Advancement Officer Lisa Gruwell to represent the executive team, and 
> Foundation staff member Katie Horn was selected by her peers as someone who 
> could represent staff perspectives. The committee was charged with keeping 
> the process on track and on time, engaging important stakeholders, and 
> facilitating transparency in communications. Their first tasks were to 
> identify a search firm, and define the position description. You can review 
> the committee’s updates on Meta.[2]
> 
> The committee recruited Viewcrest Advisors,³ to identify our leadership needs 
> and design a hiring process. Kathleen Yazbak of Viewcrest worked with the 
> committee to conduct interviews with every Foundation department, the 
> executive, the Board, and nearly 20 additional one-on-one interviews with 
> staff. Kathleen attended the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin, collecting 
> feedback from community members and affiliates. The committee launched a 
> community survey in June, receiving more than 1,600 responses about the 
> qualities needed in the next ED; they also asked for feedback on Meta.[3] 
> Taking all of this into account, the transition team developed a profile and 
> requirements for the next Executive Director that reflect our values and our 
> communities.
> 
> Throughout this process, the Board and the transition team received very 
> clear and often unsolicited feedback from both staff and community members 
> that Katherine embodies the values of our movement and the traits needed in 
> our next ED. This feedback was only reinforced by the latest Foundation 
> engagement survey results, which showed a strong shift toward renewed trust 
> in leadership. After taking this all into account, and considering what the 
> organization needs at this moment of transition, we moved to appoint 
> Katherine now. 
> 
> In just three months as interim ED, Katherine worked with the organization 
> and community to make huge strides in management, execution, and 
> transparency. She brought much-needed clarity to our strategic direction, and 
> mobilized the organization to clearly communicate that direction through this 
> year’s annual plan. 
> 
> After her appointment, she worked with the leadership team to swiftly 
> identify the organization’s priorities during the transition period and 
> execute against them, setting ambitious but reachable targets. Under 
> Katherine’s leadership, the Foundation submitted its annual plan to the Funds 
> Dissemination Committee, leaving ample time for community feedback and 
> discussion.
> 
> Katherine is an excellent fit for our movement. She is longtime advocate for 
> global open communities, culture, and technology. She was the Foundation’s 
> Chief Communications Officer from April 2014 until she was appointed interim 
> ED in March. Throughout her career she has focused on freedom of expression, 
> access to information, and digital rights; supporting the efforts of people 
> around the world to deepen participation, advance transparency, and 
> strengthen their communities through her work with UNICEF, National 
> Democratic Institute for International Affairs, and the World Bank.  If you 
> don’t already know Katherine, you can learn more about her on Meta.[4]
> 
> With this appointment, we feel strongly that the Foundation has the 
> leadership and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions

2016-06-24 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Congratulations go to Christophe, and also thank you for making yourself a
candidate. Your years of experience in the movement and personality are are
great asset and we are lucky to have you. The good news is that you have a
great organisation to support you in helping you do a good job!

Like many others have said: thank you Patricio! I know from experience that
this is 'at best' a tough job, and the past year has demanded a lot from
you (and many others) Time to take a well deserved rest, and of course we
will hopefully see you back contributing somewhere/somehow :)

Many thanks to you both!

Jan-Bart de Vreede

On 23 June 2016 at 23:43:41, Johan Jönsson (jjons...@wikimedia.org) wrote:

> Thank you both, Patricio and Alice.
>
> //Johan Jönsson
> --
> Den 23 juni 2016 6:02 em skrev "Patricio Lorente" <
> patricio.lore...@gmail.com>:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I am happy to share that as of today, Christophe Henner and Nataliia Tymkiv
> have formally joined the Board of Trustees as affiliate Board-selected
> members. They both bring deep expertise in the Wikimedia community, and in
> their respective fields. I’m confident they will serve as excellent
> contributors, rooted in the values of our movement. You can learn more
> about them in an announcement we made in May:
>
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/05/24/affiliate-selected-board-trustees-election/
>
>
> Today the Board also voted to appoint Christophe Henner as Chair, and María
> Sefidari as Vice Chair. Both Christophe and María have a long history of
> involvement in the Wikimedia community, and have held leadership roles at
> Wikimedia France and Wikimedia Spain, respectively.
>
> More about Christophe, María, and Natallia is below. I hope you will join
> me in congratulating them on their new positions and wish them success in
> their terms ahead.
>
>
> I would like to thank my friend Alice for working with me in her role as
> Vice Chair, and many thanks to you all for your support during my time as
> Chair.
>
> Patricio Lorente
>
>
> About Christophe Henner
>
> Christophe Henner is the former Chair of Wikimedia France and current
> deputy CEO of Webedia <http://www.webedia.com>'s gaming division, the
> international digital media group headquartered in France.
>
> He has deep and varied experience across the marketing sector, including
> leadership roles at at Webedia and L'Odyssée Interactive.
>
> Christophe has been an active member of the Wikimedia community for more
> than 12 years. In 2007, he joined the Board of Wikimedia France
> <http://www.wikimedia.fr/> and has remained an active Board member in
> various positions for the past ten years. He has served as both Chair and
> Vice Chair of the Board of Wikimedia France. During his time on the Board,
> Christophe helped lead Wikimedia France through a significant period of
> growth. This included leading the development of the chapter’s brand, and
> supporting the development of a clear organizational strategy and vision
> for the chapter.
>
>
>
> About Maria Sefidari
>
> Maria is a professor in the Digital Communications, Culture and Citizenship
> Master's degree program <http://cccd.es/wp/> of Rey Juan Carlos University
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Juan_Carlos_University> at the
> MediaLab-Prado <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/es:MediaLab-Prado>. María
> graduated with a Psychology degree from Universidad Complutense de Madrid
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complutense_University_of_Madrid>, and
> later
> a Master's degree in Management and Tourism at the Business faculty of the
> same university.
>
>
> María started contributing to the Wikimedia projects in 2006, and has since
> served in many different roles across the Wikimedia movement. She was a
> founding member of Wikimedia España
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Espa%C3%B1a> and Wikimujeres
> Grupo de Usuarias <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimujeres>, and also
> created Spanish Wikipedia's LGBT Wikiproject
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/es:Wikiproyecto:LGBT>. She has served on
> several Wikimedia governance committees, including the Affiliations
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee> and Individual
> Engagement Grants <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG> committees.
> In her time on the Affiliations committee, María served as the first
> Treasurer of the committee, effectively overseeing and monitoring
> disbursement of the committee's budget. Maria served a prior term on the
> Wikimedia Foundation board from 2013 to 2015.
>
>
>
> About Nataliia Tymkiv
>
> Nataliia currently serves as Financial Director of the Centre for Demo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Welcome Delphine Ménard as WMF's Annual Plan Grants Program Officer

2016-06-21 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Of course this is likely to change once your children are old enough to run the 
approvals process… which could be a year or two away ;)

Congrats Delphine! 

Jan-Bart


> On 22 Jun 2016, at 00:06, Arne Klempert  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Ting Chen  wrote:
>> Just curious: Will Delphine and family now be moving to SF or will you be
>> working from remote mostly?
> 
> As a spokesperson of our family I can confirm that at this stage there are
> no plans to move away from our current place of residence near Frankfurt,
> Germany.
> 
> Disclaimer: Any forward-looking statement found in this email is only true
> at the time it was written. We are under no obligation to update such
> written statements if conditions change or that unexpected occurrences
> happen to affect the statement afterwards.
> 
> Cheers,
> Arne
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Affiliate Selected Board Seats - Result

2016-05-10 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

Congratulations to the winners! So happy to see that the board will profit from 
your insights. And yes: thanks to all those who helped make the process 
possible or made themselves available to be a candidate :)

Regards

Jan-Bart



> On 09 May 2016, at 16:11, Chris Keating  wrote:
> 
> Dear Wikimedians,
> 
> We are writing to let you know the result of the election for the 2
> Affiliate Selected Board Seats on the Wikimedia Foundation board.
> 
> The successful candidates were *Christophe Henner* and *Nataliia Tymkiv.*
> 
> A total of 40 chapters and thorgs voted - all except for the Macedonia and
> Macau chapters - which is a record.
> 
> The number of first preferences received by each candidate was as follows:
> 
> Christophe Henner (9.00);
> Siska Doviana (6.75);
> Jan Ainali (5.50);
> Osmar Valdebenito (5.50);
> Nataliia Tymkiv (4.75);
> Susanna Mkrtchyan (3.25);
> Lodewijk Gelauff (2.50);
> Maarten Deneckere (1.50);
> Kunal Mehta(1.25);
> Leigh Thelmadatter (0.00)
> 
> As you know the election was conducted under the Single Transferable Vote,
> which meant that votes were redistributed between candidates to come up
> with the final result. In the 9th round of voting the final place, after
> Christophe was elected, was between Nataliia (16.09) and Siska (9.91). We
> will be putting the full count narrative on the Chapters Wiki so that
> others can verify it if they wish.
> 
> We would like to congratulate Christophe and Nataliia and thank everyone
> who stood. It is the closest ASBS result for some time, and all candidates
> brought very valuable perspectives to the work of the WMF.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Chris Keating, Lorenzo Losa, Lane Rasberry
> Election Facilitators
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thank you, Jan-Bart and Stu

2016-01-07 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All,

It has been an honour, this movement and its goals is one of the greatest 
things in the world and I am glad to be a part of it. The diversity of opinion 
is enormous which sometimes makes things hard, but at the same time that is one 
of our biggest strengths. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to get to 
know so many of you and am sure that I will continue to contribute in some way 
and meet a lot of you again.

I have been mulling over a longer message with some more reflections over the 
past days but I think I need a couple more weeks to formulate that properly.

Here is hoping to see a lot of you at Wikimania! 

Thank you!

Jan-Bart


> On 07 Jan 2016, at 06:17, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> thank you both. i enjoyed seeing jan-bart beeing the movements best man in
> many situations. and i appreciated money talks and croissant with stu, who
> was open to globalize the movement in a financial aspect while always
> paying attention that it does not become FIFA. some videos from sunny haifa
> and netherlands:
> * stu, mr decentralization: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ULO0ppoxBs8=2951
> * jan-bart, mr 1 mio $$, and stu, mr 100 years:
> https://youtube.com/watch?v=ULO0ppoxBs8=3912
> * jan-bart, mr stroupwaffel: https://youtu.be/5C0aNWfwaaw?t=835
> * jan-bart, mr hiring sue gardner: https://youtu.be/eCrMJMh4gX0?t=25
> 
> best,
> rupert
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Florence Devouard <anthe...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Thank you for this message Lodewijk !
>> 
>> I would like to join the messages already posted to thank both Stu and
>> Jan-Bart. I was on the board when we ask them to join us and I have no
>> memory of ever regretting that decision ;)
>> 
>> I wish you both the best !
>> JB, can we expect to see you in Italy next summer ? I sure hope so...
>> 
>> Anthere
>> 
>> Le 06/01/16 08:10, Lodewijk a écrit :
>> 
>> While we have long discussions on this list about board composition, we
>>> seem to almost ignore the fact that two long time veterans are leaving the
>>> Wikimedia Foundation board, as scheduled. Jan-Bart de Vreede and Stu West
>>> have been around longer than many regular editors nowadays, and I think
>>> there are not many people who can recall the days that the board didn't
>>> have them on it. I have never had the pleasure to serve on the board with
>>> them, but a little thank-you from our community side, would seem in place.
>>> 
>>> Stu joined the board already in 2008 (filling Michael Davis' seat), and
>>> has
>>> been a solid power on the board's audit responsibilities (I believe he
>>> chaired the audit committee for quite a while) and was a force behind the
>>> accountability of movement affiliates. While we often strongly disagreed
>>> on
>>> affiliate issues, I appreciate the fact that he always remained
>>> constructive and wanted to think about solutions rather than problems. He
>>> served both as treasurer and vice chair.
>>> 
>>> Jan-Bart was on the board even longer, since early 2007, and I recall
>>> already working with him through Kennisnet (a Dutch foundation for
>>> education and IT) before that. Jan-Bart is one of those rare people who
>>> went to ALL wikimania conferences, and can be easily recognised there with
>>> his big smile. I can't remember a theme Jan-Bart didn't work on in the
>>> past
>>> years (Affiliates, HR, searching a new Executive Director) and he served
>>> the board in many positions, including as chair.
>>> 
>>> I'm sure that the WMF communications staff and/or board has a nice
>>> thankyou
>>> coming up - with a more accurate description of the awesome work they did,
>>> that I now made up from the top of my head. But in the mean time, I'd like
>>> to do it myself: Thank you Jan-Bart and Stu for all the time, energy and
>>> effort that you poured into our movement. I know that not all of us
>>> appreciate this as much as we perhaps should, and sometimes you may even
>>> have perceived us as hostile. I do sincerely hope that you had fun with us
>>> though, and I'm confident that you made a big dent in our impossible
>>> mission of sharing the sum of all knowledge with everyone.
>>> 
>>> I hope to meet you again soon, at least in Italy at Wikimania, and I hope
>>> to see you around in our movement in many different ways.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Lodewijk
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does Foundation have 3rd party standing against Harald Bischoff?

2015-07-27 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Pine ( All)

I think that the statement “there is no harm” in asking the Foundation/chapter 
staff (legal or otherwise) to do something is not always true.

Every request has at least an “opportunity cost” (meaning there is something 
else that cannot be done). When there are situations when you genuinely need 
Foundation staff to answer something that is fine, but I think that Risker is 
arguing that it is best to wait with a request such as this until you are 
actually at the point of needing that energy to be spent (when the community 
discussion has concluded)

I am sympathetic to this because I often see requests coming by which really do 
not take into account the amount of time it takes to provide an answer. Of 
course there is always room for legitimate requests but I would encourage 
everyone to think twice before asking staff members (of the Foundation or their 
chapter) to commit time on something which might be of personal interest to 
them, or is a hypothetical situation which might well wait until the situation 
has become reality.

Jan-Bart


 On 27 Jul 2015, at 01:03, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Risker,
 
 James' question is about legal standing. There are also questions about
 license compliance. I believe that those are both within the scope of WMF
 Legal to analyze, and are sepatate from questions about compliance with
 community policy. The community and WMF can look into this situation in
 parallel and make separate determinations of what action, if any, to take.
 WMF might decide to take no action or wait for community actions to take
 place first, or they might decide to be more energetic. There is no harm,
 and potentially much good, in asking WMF what they can do about a situation
 like this.
 
 Pine
 On Jul 26, 2015 3:04 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Pine, why are you pinging WMF Legal on this?  It is considerably premature
 to expect them to do anything much more  than read the relevant
 discussions, maybe, if they have an intern to spare. What action do you
 expect them to take, when the community has yet to determine whether or not
 its own standards have been met, whether there is actually an issue, here,
 whether what the user in question is doing is actually wrong or is well
 within the acceptable parameters of that project.  Should the community
 involved believe that they need assistance on this matter, they will then
 be able to decide if it is necessary to discuss with WMF Legal.  Looking at
 this user's talk page at dewp and Commons, nobody seems to have raised the
 issue directly with him on-wiki.
 
 Calling upon WMF staff and expecting them to deal with all kinds of issues
 that are not ripe for their attention, are still being addressed within the
 relevant community, or (as in this case) are not being discussed in the
 relevant community at all, is not really appropriate, and I for one would
 appreciate if you'd stop doing that.
 
 Risker/Anne
 
 On 26 July 2015 at 17:45, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Pinging WMF Legal to ask about what WMF can do about this entire
 situation.
 
 Pine
 On Jul 26, 2015 1:06 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 If Harald Bischoff has defrauded Commons reusers by requiring stricter
 attribution than the community requires, does the Foundation have
 standing
 in Germany to require him to return the money to his victims in
 proportion
 to the extent that their attribution was improper?
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of WikiWomen's User Group

2015-07-19 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Congratulations !

Jan-Bart


 On 19 Jul 2015, at 06:24, Carlos M. Colina ma...@wikimedia.org.ve wrote:
 
 Dear all,
 
 I am pleased and honoured to announce on behalf of the Affiliations Committe 
 the recognition [1] of a new member of the family of Wikimedia affiliates: 
 The WikiWomen's User Group. Among their goals are providing a collaborative 
 space for women to work on projects, discuss gender-related issues (but not 
 limited to) and work towards the increase in content and contributor 
 diversity.
 
 Please, join us in welcoming them!! :-)
 
 
 1: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/WikiWomen's_User_Group_-_Liaison_approval,_July_2015
 -- 
 *Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua 
 junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain.
 Carlos M. Colina
 Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve 
 http://wikimedia.org.ve
 Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
 Phone: +972-52-4869915
 Twitter: @maor_x
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Board of Trustees Chair and Vice Chair positions

2015-07-16 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone

I am happy to inform you that the Board has unanimously appointed a new Chair 
and Vice Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

Patricio Lorente will be the new Chair and Alice Wiegand will be the new 
Vice-Chair. Both have several.years of experience on the board and we are 
confident that they will help the board grow and be successful in the coming 
years.

Personally I am looking forward to helping them get acquainted with their new 
role in the coming months as my time on the Wikimedia Board ends in December. 

I hope you can join me in congratulating them on their new position and wish 
them success in the challenges facing them.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Wikimedia Board of Trustees
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Questions for Board QA

2015-07-09 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All

Next week the Wikimedia Board of Trustees will not only elect a new chair (and 
vice chair) but we will also have our annual Board QA session at Wikimania on 
Saturday the 18th of July). Although the session will not be broadcast live we 
do want to take questions from the Board Noticeboard (and either answer them 
during the session or attempt to on the noticeboard). From what I understand 
the session will be streamed at a later stage.

Meanwhile, feel free to add your questions to:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard#Please_Submit_Questions_for_Board_Q.26A
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard

Thanks!

Jan-Bart de Vreede

PS: In order to avoid confusion I feel that it is useful to point out the “Role 
of the Board” so that people are reminded of what we are responsible for. You 
can find this at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Handbook#The_role_of_the_Board
 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Handbook#The_role_of_the_Board



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changing our volunteer structure at Wikimedia UK

2015-06-05 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All,

Despite Fae’s attempt to derail the conversation and make this all about him 
(which I am guessing it isn’t) I would like to applaud this initiative.

I hope that in the coming months you can keep us all up to date on your 
experiences. All of the movement entities are struggling to find meaningful and 
effective ways to keep people involved in all levels of our decision making. 
The different approaches in the initiative described below should teach us a 
lot and I am glad that you are taking such an active approach!

Thanks!

Jan-Bart 








 On 05 Jun 2015, at 16:14, Michael Maggs mich...@maggs.name wrote:
 
 
 Dear movement colleagues
 
 I thought you might like to hear about a new WMUK initiative, following on 
 from our recently-completed staff restructure. We are hopeful our local 
 community will react positively to much greater levels of volunteer 
 engagement.
 
 Our initiative might be of interest to other chapters who are trying - as we 
 are - to get away from a perception of not being sufficiently open to 
 community involvement.
 
 Also, we are looking for movement-wide input.  If you can provide thoughts, 
 ideas or feedback, do please make contact.
 
 For the full details on wiki see: 
 https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Volunteer_strategy_consultation_2015
 
 Best regards
 
 
 Michael
 
 
 
 
 Michael Maggs
 
 Chair, Wikimedia UK
 
 
 *From:* Michael Maggs
 *Date:* 5 June 2015 14:38
 *To:* wikimediau...@lists.wikimedia.org wikimediau...@lists.wikimedia.org
 *Subject:* [Wikimediauk-l] Volunteering with Wikimedia UK: a call to action
 
 Volunteering with Wikimedia UK: a call to action
 
 Wikimedia UK needs your help. We want to transform the way we work so that we 
 can bring volunteering right into the heart of the charity.
 
 We plan to:
 
 * Establish a new volunteer engagement panel
   https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Volunteer_engagement_panel or
   steering group, focusing specifically on volunteering and volunteer
   engagement
 * Embed members into our day-to-day decision making via a new
   evaluation panel https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Evaluation_panel
 * Encourage the setting up of volunteer special-interest working
   groups https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Working_groups to replace the
   existing non-board committees
   https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Committees#Non-board_committees
 * Set up cultural/GLAM
   https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Cultural_and_GLAM_advisory_board and
   educational outreach
   https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Educational_outreach_advisory_board
   expert advisory boards to advise the WMUK main board on high-level
   strategy
 * Change our Articles of Association
   
 https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/2015_Annual_General_Meeting/Resolutions#.281.29_Enabling_non-trustees_to_become_full_members_of_Govcom.2C_ARC_and_any_other_board_committees_that_may_be_constituted
   to allow volunteers to be appointed full members of board committees
 * Provide more effective support for volunteers via the new project
   coordinator https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Project_Coordinator
   staff roles
 * Move toward project-based
   https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Project-based_working working
   practices to improve efficiency and to enable better self-evaluation
   of our work
 
 These draft plans follow on from the excellent feedback we received from our 
 last Volunteer Strategy Gathering 
 https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Volunteer_Strategy_Gathering/July_2015. They 
 deliberately don't attempt to answer all possible questions about 
 implementation, as we think it best that both further questions and the 
 answers to those questions should come out of collaborative discussions. The 
 plans are not set in stone, and with the community's help they can be 
 improved, strengthened and fleshed out.
 
 We would like your feedback, either online or in person at our next Volunteer 
 Strategy Gathering 
 https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Volunteer_Strategy_Gathering/July_2015 on 
 Saturday 25th July 2015, in London. For more information, see the links on 
 the right.
 
 Feedback, comments and discussion are more than welcome on the discussion 
 page, or you can email chairatwikimedia.org.uk if you have feedback you would 
 prefer not to make public.
 
 To read the full details on wiki see here: 
 https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Volunteer_strategy_consultation_2015
 
 Best regards
 
 
 Michael
 
 
 ___
 Michael Maggs
 
 Chair, Wikimedia UK
 
 
 
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

2015-06-05 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Everyone

Thank you to the Election Committee for all the hard work in both these and the 
FDC elections! It is amazing to see how many votes were cast this year, which 
is great. And voters came from a much larger spread of projects than before. As 
we can see from the results every vote really can make a difference. I would 
like to give a special thanks to all the affiliates who facilitated discussion 
within their community’s and encouraged people to vote. 

Congratulations to Dariusz, James and Denny on being elected to the Wikimedia 
Board of Trustees! Their formal appointment will take place at Wikimania. When 
that time comes we will also thank Maria, Phoebe and SJ properly for all the 
hard work over the past years :)

Apart from thanking all those who voted I would like to do a final thank you to 
everyone who ran in these elections. It is an incredible amount of work to run 
in these elections (especaily with all the questions that have to be answered, 
often not in a native language). You are a great pool of volunteers and 
hopefully you are able to help in other places within the movement. As 
discussed with some of you we are looking at a way to keep the candidates 
involved and somehow benefit from your expertise in the future :)

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair 
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation


 On 06 Jun 2015, at 01:14, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Greetings,
 
 The certified results of the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
 election are now available on Meta-Wiki:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Results
 
 Congratulations to Dariusz Jemielniak (User:pundit), James Heilman
 (User:Doc James), and Denny Vrandečić (User:Denny), for receiving the most
 community support. They will join the Wikimedia Foundation as Trustees,
 after they are appointed by the Board at their July meeting at Wikimania.
 
 These results have been certified by the committee, the Wikimedia
 Foundation's legal department, and the Board of Trustees.
 
 There were 5512 votes cast, with 5167 of those being valid. The 345-vote
 difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast ballots
 to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 4.
 
 Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/06/05/board-election-results
 
 More statistics on the elections, a post mortem from the committee, and a
 blog post on the process behind the elections will be published  in the
 coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate your input—what went well
 for you in this election?  What could we do better next time?  These
 reports are crucial to helping future elections be even more successful,
 and we hope that you will offer your feedback and ideas:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Post_mortem
 
 The committee thanks everyone that participated in this year’s election for
 helping make it one of the most diverse and representative in the
 movement’s history.
 
 Sincerely,
 – 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
 Adrian, Anders Wennersten, Daniel, Gregory Varnum, Katie Chan, Mardetanha,
 Ruslan, Savh, and Trijnstel
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board election: we have such good candidates

2015-05-26 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi David

I could not agree more. I think that in general we have a great pool of talent, 
not just in the board candidates, but also in the FDC pool. Having attended the 
Wikimedia Conference in Berlin it was great to meet the volunteers from all the 
different affiliates and similarly: there is a great pool of people. We need to 
figure out some kind of way of allowing people to grow their talents and be 
involved more actively if they want to.

Jan-Bart

 On 24 May 2015, at 23:20, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 I just voted in the board election, and I must note how delighted I am
 at the excellent candidates.
 
 To the board: even the people who don't get in, make sure you're in
 touch with them, use them in an advisory capacity, keep them drawn in
 and involved.
 
 Yet again, Wikimedia amazes me with the stupendous calibre of
 candidates we have even for volunteer jobs.
 
 
 - d.
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A transition and a new chapter.

2015-04-14 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear Erik,

Not sure where to begin :(

Because words cannot begin how important your contribution to Wikimedia so far 
has been. When I started on the board in 2007 you were a little impatient with 
your new fellow board member for simply “not getting it” (fair comment, some 
would argue that 8 years later I still don’t get it  so there). In the 
following months I learned to admire not just your expertise but also your 
unwavering belief in our mission. You made clear what “being bold” meant on 
several occasions. Sue could not have picked a better deputy to help her set up 
the foundation in San Francisco and you deserve a large part of the credit for 
what we have achieved (as it witnessed in this thread).

But there are two things that have always impressed me beyond all others:

1) Knowing what the “right thing” to do is in terms of our movement and 
mission. I have sought you out many times for advice, and have not regretted it 
once. Even if I did not agree your perspective always got me thinking and 
helped me form a better opinion.
2) Your ability to always be frank, but also take the time to reach out and 
spend the time to explain things when needed (and take the criticism for it). 
Several emails to this mailing list are proof of that.

But I can understand your decision that “the time has come”. I might not agree, 
but I am not sure I will ever agree with it…. working with you has made me a 
better person and hopefully we will have the chance to do so again somewhere in 
the future.

As a very small consolation: I am excited to find out what cause you will 
actively support next, and I am sure that your path and that of our community 
will continue to cross regularly.

From the bottom of my heart: THANK YOU!

Jan-Bart “your henchman” de Vreede




 On 13 Apr 2015, at 20:12, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 Hi all --
 
 As Lila noted, since January 2008 I've worn many hats at the Wikimedia
 Foundation, and in the six years before that I was a Wikipedian,
 MediaWiki developer, and member of the WMF board of trustees. I became
 involved in Wikipedia when I was 22 years old. :) The Wikimedia
 movement has accomplished amazing things, but I believe it's time now
 for me to do something different and new.
 
 It's been a long and incredible journey, and one I am privileged to
 have helped to shape. When I joined the Foundation in December 2007 we
 were a staff of a dozen people, with barely enough funds to keep the
 lights on. Since then, we've tackled challenges of a complexity and
 scale faced by few other organisations. In doing so, we’ve been
 generously supported by people all over the world who are grateful for
 the gift of free knowledge.
 
 I’m proud of and happy with what we've achieved. Reaching people on
 mobile. Pioneering new approaches working with universities.
 Painstakingly building a visual editing experience on top of wikitext.
 :) I’m glad we’ve taken a stand when it matters (SOPA blackout, NSA
 lawsuit) and that we don’t shy away from complex issues such as
 community health and diversity.
 
 I’m excited that Wikidata is growing in leaps and bounds with the help
 of Wikimedia Germany, and that more and more powerful tools and
 services are being built on the basis of Wikimedia APIs and data. I’ve
 always believed that Wikimedia chapter and affiliate organizations are
 key to the success of the movement, and I hope they are going to truly
 thrive in years to come.
 
 But it's time. As the leadership team begins to coalesce under Lila, I
 want to open up space for the organization to learn and explore anew
 -- and I’d like to rediscover for myself what it means to tackle
 challenges outside of my areas of comfort and familiarity.
 
 I’m very interested in the technical challenges of federated
 collaboration, and am looking forward to getting my hands dirty in
 that domain. I also want to explore how to make patterns of ethics,
 policy, and self-governance more accessible and re-usable for
 communities. In short, I’m itching to immerse myself in new problem
 spaces and new ideas.
 
 Lila, Damon, Terry, myself and others in the org have been discussing
 how to organize product going forward to set the org up for success in
 the years to come, and we’ll have an update on that very soon. This is
 a very natural point for me to pursue something new.
 
 What Wikimedia does in the world is wonderful  important. I’m sure I
 will continue to cross paths with many of you in future as I continue
 to move in free culture circles, and I very much look forward to it.
 
 I’ll continue to be @ WMF full-time through April, and will make
 myself available as necessary afterwards, for when the org needs human
 institutional memory that surpasses digital archives. I wish you all
 success and joy :-)
 
 Love,
 
 Erik
 -- 
 Erik Möller
 VP of Product  Strategy, Wikimedia Foundation
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Veteran Malayalam Wikipedian BabuG signed off...

2015-03-08 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi

Thank you so much for this tribute. My condolences to you and all others who 
admired and loved him.

Jan-Bart


 On 05 Mar 2015, at 16:07, ViswaPrabha (വിശ്വപ്രഭ) vp2...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Dear Wikimedians all over the world,
 
 One of our stalwarts at ml Wikimedia community, Wikiuser:BabuG
 https://ml.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Babug (
 https://ml.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Babug)  expired yesterday night.
 
 Despite having paralyzed due to a severe stroke and severely affected by
 several subsequent health problems, he was guided to Wikipedia by his son,
 Dr. Ajay, another prominent Malayalam Wikipedian, as a possible remedy to
 escape perpetual loneliness.
 
 His real world name was G. Balachandran.He was born on 14th October 1938 in
 a small village off North Parur, Ernakulam District, Kerala, the
 Southernmost state of India.He  joined the Armed Forces Engineering College
 and then continued to serve the Indian Armed forces for long many years.
 
 He started contributing to Wikimedia, particularly to Malayalam Wikipedia,
 in the year 2008.
 
 His initial contributions to Malayalam Wikipedia were based upon a
 pulp-converted digital Encyclopedia, released by the Government through
 GFDL licence then.  He continued to create even more full-featured articles
 on his own, later. By 2014 October 18 - the day he edited last in
 Wikipedia- he had 1935 full-blown articles initiated and expanded by
 himself in ml.wikipedia.org. Besides, he also contributed more than 350
 images to Wikimedia commons and a handsome  amount of contributions to
 Wikisource, Wikidata and Wiktionary.
 
 He always attributed his renewed energy and life's aspirations to the
 Wikimedia mission, for having returned to a meaningful life after a 20-year
 long and frustrating solitude while constrained to an immobile chair. Ever
 since 2008, he stood up and started walking and moving around. His was an
 extreme example for us in Malayalam WP to showcase how Wikipedia can change
 lives.
 
 In almost all our Wikipedia Outreach sessions, we utilized this great
 example to motivate and excite the newcomers to WP.
 
 Tory Read mentioned about BabuG thus, in a document
 http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/india-chronicles.pdf, a  review
 on the state of Indian Wikimedia Communities, in 2011:
 
 G. Balachandran, a septuagenarian who lives outside of Ernakulum in Kerala
 state, said that working on Malayalam Wikipedia helped him recover after a
 stroke left him paralyzed. “He’s much sharper now,” said his wife Jagadamma
 K. “He’s made a lot of new friends, and that’s been good for his health.”
 
 
 For us in Malayalam Wikipedia, today is a black day, for having lost a
 great beacon on our voyage to ultimate openness and freedom in knowledge
 and wisdom.
 
 
 Yet, we feel, BabuG has made his life stamped immortal for ever and has
 shown us the pathway we should follow in continuing our humble
 contributions to the ultimate cause of mankind.
 
 
 -ViswaPrabha
 (On behalf of Malayalam Wikimedia Community)
 http://ml.wikipedia.org
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: A new structure for WMF Community Engagement

2015-02-20 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear Anasuya,

Like you and many others I hope that this is an Au-Revoir, but nevertheless its 
a good idea to take a moment even when parting with the expectation of meeting 
again in the near future.

Thank you for all that you have done for the Foundation, especially in building 
up our grant making ability in the past years. One of the reasons why the FDC 
is getting better all the time is you and your ability to listen to all the 
different stakeholders and come up with suggestions to improve/simplify the 
process. Having worked with you in the first FDC rounds and follow up 
conversations in the board have been great and as you can see from this thread, 
you will be sorely missed.

I hope that your health issues will be behind you soon and that you will be 
able to dance with/around us soon :)

Best Wishes

Jan-Bart de Vreede




 On 19 Feb 2015, at 23:20, Anasuya Sengupta asengu...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 Dear friends and colleagues, fellow adventurers on the Wikimedia journey -
 
 Goodbyes are overrated.[1] But since I’m sure this will be au revoir, I’ll
 continue: I am leaving the Foundation as head of the Grantmaking
 department, at the end of March. This was not an easy decision to make;
 this is not an easy email to write.
 
 As some of you know, I have been battling health issues over the past few
 months. I’ve learnt sharp and intimate truths about myself as I’ve worked
 to get better, and what I’ve kept coming back to is the compassionate but
 fierce feminist slogan around self-care and sustainability: ‘what’s the
 point of the revolution if we can’t dance?’[2] To reassure you all, I will
 be well,[3] but I need a little time and space to focus on getting my
 dancing legs strong again.
 
 That said, I am pleased that we have a really solid plan in place as I
 leave. As Lila’s email announced, Luis Villa (our current Deputy General
 Counsel) will be taking over the team effective immediately, and leading
 the organisation further in our support of Wikimedia communities worldwide.
 Luis brings with him a range of skills and qualities that I know will stand
 him, the team, and the movement in wonderful stead through it all. As a
 friend and colleague, I am so delighted to be supporting Luis through the
 next few weeks of transition.
 
 I joined the Foundation in July 2012 to oversee and implement the FDC
 process. Since then, I’ve had the privilege of creating and leading a
 department of more than twenty remarkable and passionate people who care
 about our mission, our communities, and the resources needed to match the
 two.
 
 We went from Asaf managing a small grants portfolio on his own, ably
 supported on occasion by Winifred, to a fully fledged grantmaking
 department with a spectrum of monetary and non-monetary resources. We have
 been able to offer these in different ways to different parts of our
 movement: to individual volunteers with great ideas in need of project
 management, to small groups experimenting with new initiatives, and to
 established organisations who form critical content and policy partnerships
 in their local contexts. We built an infrastructure for understanding our
 collective impact. We learned together about what our different communities
 are doing globally, about the successes and challenges we have, and above
 all: about how we can, together, create a more powerful set of outcomes for
 free knowledge.
 
 In doing so, I’ve had the joy of discovery,[4] of learning from and with
 some of the most dedicated volunteers in the world, who believe that
 knowledge matters. Most importantly, that it’s not only free knowledge
 _for_ all that we seek, but even more critically, that we believe in
 knowledge _from_ and _with_ all.
 
 And I’ve discovered that the nerdy, geeky, obsessed-with-data part of me
 found a home in this extraordinary universe, where everybody’s “unimaginable,
 magnificent, wonderful, stupid, amazing worlds” can find expression.[5] I
 look forward to the day when my worlds find more space on Wikipedia, when
 80% of the globe is represented by far more than 20% of the edits, when
 much more than 15% of our contributors can self-identify as women. Till
 then, I’ll keep fighting notability one article at a time...[6]
 
 So thank you for sharing your worlds with me, and no thanks for turning me
 into an obsessive Wikimedian. :-) As I have learnt with you, I know I have
 done so with trust, and as I have challenged you, I hope I have done so
 with respect. I look forward to continuing our friendships and obsessions
 on a wiki near you.
 
 With appreciation and gratitude,
 
 Anasuya
 
 p.s. You can find me in the future at my enWP user page (User:Anasuyas
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anasuyas) or (dare I say it) on
 Facebook. Longer diatribes on liff, the universe and everything can be sent
 to anasuyaATsanmathi.org
 
 [1] Neil Gaiman, American Gods (Chapter 8)
 
 [2] Urgent Action Fund, a funder of women’s human rights defenders, has
 this book

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Its not goodbye, but au revoir

2015-01-29 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear Pavel ( everyone)

Its hard to describe the incredible positive impact that you have had on WMDE 
and the Wikimedia Movement as a whole. While every affiliates contributes 
differently  it is fair to say that under your leadership  WMDE has contributed 
a lot to our movement by facilitating communication between the different 
affiliates (including all the work on the Wikimedia Conferences and the 
chapters dialogue project). And of course Wikidata is an incredible project 
which I cannot praise enough :)

On a more individual note: I think the way you remained on board in order to 
facilitate a good transition within WMDE says a lot about your incredible 
character and dedication to our goals!

Very happy to hear that its not a goodbye, and hope to see your impact in the 
next challenge you choose to take on!

Thank you!

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation

 On 29 Jan 2015, at 08:05, Pavel Richter m...@pavelrichter.de wrote:
 
 Dear Friends of Free Knowledge,
 
 today is my last day at the office as the former Executive Director of
 Wikimedia Deutschland.
 
 For 2012 days, I had the great opportunity and the tremendous pleasure to
 work for one of the greatest causes I can think of: Free Knowledge for
 everybody. What Wikimedia does is nothing short of changing the world, one
 edit at a time.
 
 I reflect a little about this in this blog post:
 http://blog.pavelrichter.de/2012-days-later/
 
 Thank you all for the best time I had in my (professional) life. Of course,
 while I leave my job, I will not leave the Wikimedia movement. Looking
 forward to this!
 
 Cheers,
 
 Pavel
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] November 21, 2014 minutes of the Board of Trustees

2015-01-16 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Everyone,

Thank you for publishing the minutes Stephen. I wanted to add a short note on 
the two days the board spent prior to the board meeting. We had a retreat (our 
first with the new Executive Director) in which we focused on the changing 
nature of the internet, our environment, our users and the way in which 
knowledge is documented and disseminated. We then looked at what the impact of 
these changes should be on the Foundation as a whole, and our Board in 
particular. Some of the proposals were very practical and could be implemented 
quite quickly. A good example of this was the need for faster decision making. 
As a result we now have monthly online board meetings which are 60-90 minutes 
long (so more minutes will follow quickly)

Other ideas need to be worked out in more detail, and we have formed a small 
working group that is currently working on some of these ideas to present back 
to the board. A good example of this is the reduction of the number of two day 
physical meetings… is that feasible and will it allow us to attract a different 
potential group of board members that simply cannot commit the time for 12-16 
days of board meetings including travel). 

The ever changing composition of the board gives an extra value to a two day 
retreat which allows every one to work together in a structured way. All in all 
the retreat was very productive and has already improved some aspects of our 
decision making and working together. 

As usual I refer you to: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard if you 
wish to ask questions to the board, or have a comment. I cannot promise that we 
can answer all questions but this is a good place to keep track of them all.


Regards

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation



 On 16 Jan 2015, at 16:55, Stephen LaPorte slapo...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 Hi all,
 
 At the request of the Board of Trustees, I have posted the minutes of the
 November 21, 2014 meeting in San Francisco, which you can find here:
 *https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-11-21
 https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-11-21*
 
 Thank you,
 
 Stephen LaPorte
 Legal Counsel
 Wikimedia Foundation
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia wins Erasmusprize 2015

2015-01-15 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Rupert,

See

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/01/15/wikipedia-turns-14-receives-erasmus-prize/
 
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/01/15/wikipedia-turns-14-receives-erasmus-prize/

This honor is accompanied by an award of €150,000. In keeping with the 
Praemium Erasmianum Foundation’s intent to recognize the contributions of the 
Wikimedia community, we are redirecting these funds towards the community in 
the form of individual grants and other support for editors and contributors.”

So there you go :)

Jan-Bart





 On 15 Jan 2015, at 20:21, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 150'000 eur for the wikipedia community? How they will pay that ;)
 On Jan 15, 2015 7:32 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 http://www.erasmusprijs.org/?page=Erasmusprijs
 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erasmus_Prize
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising in the Netherlands; informing the donors

2014-12-08 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

Another minor correction with a large impact. The first 60 euro, or 1% of your 
gross income,  (crude translation of Drempelinkomen, but it will do for the 
sake of the argument), whichever is higher, does not count as deductible...

Realistically this means that for people donating any money, it usually comes 
down to the fact that the first several hundred Euro’s donated each year 
(cumulatively) are NOT tax deductible. An exception would be a “periodical” 
gift which is documented.

But overall: its complex and the amount you need to donate to charities is 
relatively high, and most people cannot take advantage of it because of this 
reason. 

I would guess that the ANBI status only really affects large donors… but it 
never hurts to advertise our ANBI status :) (personal opinion)

Jan-Bart
 
PS: http://www.belastingdienst.nl/rekenhulpen/giften/ 
http://www.belastingdienst.nl/rekenhulpen/giften/ (only seems to be available 
in dutch)

 On 07 Dec 2014, at 11:23, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:
 
 Minor correction: this system in the Netherlands works the other way
 around: donors can get back a part of their donation through their tax
 reduction - it is not that the charity gets a bonus.
 
 Interestingly, the Wikimedia Foundation has obtained this status (ANBI) in
 the Netherlands at the urging of the chapter several years ago (2010/2011).
 However, for some reason the WMF chooses not to advertize this (not so
 obvious) fact on the donation home page; which means that the donors are
 unaware that they can donate and get this reduction of their taxes (indeed
 up to 50% of the donation amount!). This is mindboggling to me - it should
 be an easy fix.
 
 Lodewijk
 
 On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
 Hoi,
 A similar possibility is in existence in the Netherlands... National
 charities can easily get such a status. It is possible for international
 organisations but it is more difficult..
 
 In order to optimise fundraisers it is extremely relevant that we optimise
 it for our donors. That makes it very much in need of local efforts.
 
 As it is we lose 50% of the giftst of our donors in the Netherlands to the
 taxman.
 Thanks,
 GerardM
 
 On 4 December 2014 at 22:10, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk
 wrote:
 
 I've split this from a more general thread, for convenience...
 
 
 On 3 December 2014 at 01:16, Megan Hernandez mhernan...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:
 
 Starting today, banners are being shown to 100% of anonymous readers on
 English Wikipedia in the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
 
 How much money do we expect to raise (or did we last year), from the
 UK? How much of the money raised from the UK will attract Gift
 Aid[*] tax releif?
 
 
 [* Gift AId is a UK scheme where the government gives, to a charity,
 tax paid by a  donor. For every £80 such a donor gives, the charty
 would receive £100]
 
 --
 Andy Mabbett
 @pigsonthewing
 http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Au Revoir from WMUK CEO

2014-11-11 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi John (All)

On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation let me give you a heartfelt thanks for 
all that you have done for both Wikimedia UK and the Wikimedia Movement as a 
whole. Being the first Chief Executive is always a hard job and requires a 
positive attitude and lots of energy in order to motivate people to join you on 
a risky journey. Having made a good start with WMUK I can imagine that leaving 
it behind is not easy, but I have confidence that the staff, board and 
volunteers in the United Kingdom will manage to build on the foundation that 
you have put in place.

I think we are all happy to hear that you will still be a volunteer, and 
hopefully our paths will cross in the future.

Best wishes for your next challenge!

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Wikimedia Foundation
Board of Trustees

 On 11 Nov 2014, at 10:10, Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
 
 With some sadness I have to tell you that I will be leaving Wikimedia UK,
 as an employee, if not as a volunteer, at the end of the year. I have
 achieved what I set out to do and leave WMUK in a good state. I now need to
 look for new challenges.
 
 I was the first chief executive and it has been an amazing three years
 watching the chapter grow and develop. It has not always been smooth
 sailing but we have come through it together in good shape. Wikimania
 proved how professional we had become and the positive feedback from the
 participants makes all the work we put in worthwhile.
 
 My heartfelt thanks to everyone in the community, particularly the
 volunteers who are at the heart of all we do, my great colleagues at the
 Foundation and the loyal and hardworking staff at WMUK who have supported
 me so ably and with such good humour over the years.
 
 My best wishes go to my successor in all they seek to achieve.
 
 Cyhoeddiad gan Jon
 
 Gyda pheth tristwch rwy'n eich hysbysu y byddaf yn gadael Wikimedia UK, fel
 cyflogai, os nad
 
 fel gwirfoddolwr, ar ddiwedd y flwyddyn. Dw i wedi cyflawni'r hyn roeddwn
 wedi'i obeithio a dw
 
 i'n gadael WMUK ar delerau da. Edrychaf ymlaen rwan am sialensau newydd. Fi
 oedd y Prif Weithredwr cyntaf ac mae'r dair blynedd diwethaf wedi bod yn
 hollol anhygoel,
 
 wrth i mi weld y siaptr yn tyfu a datblygu. Doedd y daith bob amser ddim yn
 llyfn, ond daethom drwyddi'n y diwedd yn ddianaf! Profodd Wikimania inni
 aeddfedu mewn modd proffesiynol a chafwyd adborth adeiladol gan y cyfranwyr
 oedd yn gwneud yr holl waith yn bleser.
 
 Carwn ddiolch o waelod fy ngalon i bawb o fewn ein cymuned, yn enwedig y
 gwirfoddolwyr sy'n sylfaen i'n gwaith, fy nghydweithwyr bendigedig yn
 Sylfaen Wikimedia a'r staff sydd wedi bod mor driw i mi, wedi fy nghefnogi
 mor effeithiol ac wedi gweithio mor arbennig o galed dros y blynyddoedd ­ a
 hynny gyda hiwmor iach. Dymunaf pob llwyddiant i f'olynydd ym mhopeth y
 ceisiant ei gyflawni.
 
 Jon.
 
 -- 
 *Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*.  Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169
 tweet @jonatreesdavies
 
 Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
 Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
 Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
 United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
 movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
 operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
 Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990.
 
 Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Access by Wikimedia volunteers to WMF records about them

2014-08-22 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Fae/Everyone

Just to be clear, although the text below is factually correct it implies that 
the two of us talked about your request at Wikimania, which we did not. We 
talked for a total of around 60 seconds, most of which was spent on me 
explaining that I was looking for someon in a hurry, that fact is not relevant 
with regards to your request so I am not sure why you mention it.

The topic below is not within the scope of my governance responsibility and I 
should not be involved in this all. So please don’t involve me :)

Thanks,

Jan-Bart

PS: As this is me ‘setting the record straight” the odds are small to zero that 
I will respond to a follow up…. see above



 On 22 Aug 2014, at 17:06, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 I wrote the email below to Lila and the WMF Legal department asking
 for access to records (and reports) they hold on me, but I'm sad to
 say that after 3 weeks waiting, I have yet to receive an
 acknowledgement. As a Wikimania London volunteer I had a moment to
 speak with Jan-Bart, and some of my Wikimedia Commons uploads were
 even featured as part of a presentation by WMF Legal on their
 successes in the past year, so there was plenty of opportunity for us
 to have the friendly chat I suggested.
 
 Can someone recommend if there is a WMF policy on transparency that
 volunteers can rely on for questions like mine, or does the law in the
 USA give me any specific rights of access to records or reports the
 WMF may keep on me that would mean that WMF Legal would do more than
 stay silent in response to reasonable requests from its established
 volunteers?
 
 Thanks,
 Fae
 
 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Fæ fae...@gmail.com
 Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2014 13:49:45 +0100
 Subject: Request for disclosure of all WMF records relating to Fae
 To: Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org
 Cc: legal le...@wikimedia.org, Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
 
 Dear Lila,
 
 The Wikimedia Foundation keeps information such as management
 summaries about me, which have never been shared with me.
 [Redacted example material]
 
 Could you please ensure that all records that the WMF has retained
 about me are copied to me? It would seem fair that I have the
 opportunity to both understand what the WMF management and board have
 available to refer to when discussing my activities for Wikimedia, and
 that I have a chance to both correct any mistakes in this personal
 data, or to ask that inappropriate material gets permanently removed
 from WMF databases.
 
 I will be active in both the Wikimania hackerthon and conference in
 the coming week, should you or an employee wish to informally review
 this request with me in person, along with my reasons for making the
 request at this time.
 ...
 -- 
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Board statement on the Media Viewer roll out

2014-08-14 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi all,

Some of you have asked the Board and its individual members for feedback. Some 
of us are already in conversation with you or are planning to answer on 
different pages. This is our general common statement:

The Board supports the decision to protect the Media Viewer roll out. Our 
platform powers a top-5 website. We need operational protocols that are 
consistent with this position. This includes making improvements, rather than a 
tendency towards reverting to the status quo. 

At the Board meeting before Wikimania, Lila laid out her strategy to put in 
place best practices for product development. We will communicate sooner, we 
will prioritize smarter, we will test more, and we will achieve better 
outcomes. Her vision is to involve the community at each step of product 
development, including more structured feedback stages and reviews. We endorse 
this vision.

We realize that there is concern about the superprotect user right and how it 
affects power balance and influence on content and administration. We recognize 
the concern that we need to explain and introduce our measures better. However, 
stability of the platform is necessary as we seek to improve our sites, and, 
for that reason, we support the creation of this tool. We also understand that 
with more robust rollout plans and better staged community feedback - as Lila 
envisions - the tool should rarely be used.
We urge you to focus on specific improvements you'd like to see in the Media 
Viewer and the roll-out process. Lila intends to incorporate that feedback as 
she plans to improve Media Viewer and the process for future product roll outs.
The Wikimedia Foundation needs to be in a position to make software and 
configuration changes for which it is responsible. We expect restrictions of 
MediaWiki code-level editing to be a temporary step to enable us to move 
forward with improvements. As we say, Media Viewer should be improved; our 
procedures to date have not yet met the high standards we want to set for 
ourselves. Lila wants to address both now, and we need to give her the space to 
do so. She has our full support and confidence as she tackles this tough 
challenge.

On behalf of the Wikimedia Board of Trustees

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Board Meeting Update

2014-08-08 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone

While the minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting will arrive in due time I 
wanted to update you on some internal matters at this point because there have 
been some changes in the board composition. 

Ana Toni joined our board last year but unfortunately the time demands placed 
upon a Wikimedia Board member were not compatible with her other commitments. 
This has given the board something to think about. We aim to be a board that is 
able to incorporate outside expertise to increase our effectiveness and 
possible candidates are often not able to commit the time which we currently 
require.. In the coming period we want to have a look at the time which is 
demanded of a board member (especially our in person meetings which require a 
lot of travel) and look at which activities we need to perform as a board. We 
want to thank Ana for her contributions. The insights gained from her position 
as Chair of Greenpeace International were especially useful to us as a board. 
We are sad to see her go, but we hope to keep her in “our space”.

Bishakha Datta joined our board in March 2010 and has indicated to us that she 
is not available for re-appointment after her term runs out in December of this 
year. We will take the time to properly thank her for her great contributions 
when her term formally ends in December.

While these things are part of of the normal turnover of the composition of the 
board (and are also an opportunity to attract new fields of expertise as 
needed) there is a matter of board stability during the first year of the 
tenure of our new Executive Director. In response to Lila's request for 
stability the board has decided the following:

1) Alice Wiegand was appointed to finish out Ana's term ending December 2014.  
We also appointed Alice to carry out the subsequent term ending December 2016.

2) Last year at Wikimania I was appointed to the board for a two year period, 
but I tendered my resignation effective the end of this year.  At the Board's 
request I reconsidered that resignation, and will serve out the rest of my 
original two year term ending December 2015.  

This does mean we will start the search process for a new board member for the 
appointed seat that Bishakha will vacate at the end of this year. And hopefully 
we will be able to also identify potential candidates to fill the seats of both 
Stuart West and me, which will become vacant at the end of 2015. 

Secondly we have appointed the two officer positions as follows for the coming 
fiscal year 

Chair - Jan-Bart de Vreede 
Vice-Chair - Patricio Lorente

The foundation has a great opportunity to grow under the guidance of our new 
Executive Director and realize our ambitions. The board is looking forward to a 
year of supporting Lila and providing direction for our strategic goals. 

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation

PS: All the relevant resolutions will be published on meta in the coming days
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Agenda Board Meeting 67 august

2014-07-31 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone,

Like every year the Wikimedia Board of Trustees will have a board meeting in 
the days preceding Wikimania. Our meeting in London has the following agenda:

== August 6, 2014 ==

Special items from Committees
Lila's first three months
Strategy planning
Chapter site visits and evaluations
User groups
Funds Dissemination Committee
Wikimedia Belgium

== August 7, 2014 ==

Board appointments
Board legal duties
Board officer elections
Chapter's Dialogue
Trustee evaluation
Executive session

If you have additional comments or questions please feel free to leave a 
message on the Board noticeboard: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard

Alternatively, if you are lucky enough to be able to attend Wikimania it is 
good to know that we are attending as well. Please come and find us if you have 
something  that you think the board should be aware of. At the same time you 
will probably meet a lot more people at Wikimania who have a very practical 
approach in making “cool projects reality”, so I would encourage you to seek 
out other attendees to see if you can make great things happen!

Finally I would like to draw your attention to the annual Board QA which takes 
place at Wikimania on the 8th of August at 15:00. Please feel free to leave 
questions at: 
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Questions_for_the_Q%26A_with_Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees
but we are also just going to answer questions from the audience. I commit that 
all written questions left on the above page will be answered in some online 
way if we do not get to them during the QA. This might take a few weeks but it 
will happen.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Board of Trustees



___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

2014-06-17 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Nemo ( others)

I know of at least one non english project that has implemented a much stronger 
stance against paid contributions

Their are two possibilities when specific projects discuss if they need to have 
their own policy on this topic

a) If all participants of the project agree on what they would like to 
implement, then it should not be a long discussion.
b) If there are different opinions this could be a longer discussion and is a 
worthwhile one to have (and the general ToU is a general fall back in case 
there is no conclusion to that discussion)

In both cases this is a discussion that worth having. One of the most important 
things we have is our integrity (and the perception of that integrity by our 
readers), and having a frank discussion (per project) on how we protect this 
integrity is not a waste of time or useless overhead, its incredibly relevant.

Jan-Bart


On 17 Jun 2014, at 19:55, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:

 phoebe ayers, 17/06/2014 18:56:
 Anyway, I'm not sure why you are assuming that the amendment will
 automatically be abhorrent to every community that's not English Wikipedia.
 
 And why do you think it will be useful? If it was needed, how comes only some 
 50 non-en.wiki editors came to support it (and about as many opposed it)?
 
 Nemo
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Thank you Sue Gardner

2014-06-01 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone,

As Lila officially takes over from Sue as the Executive Director of the 
Wikimedia Foundation after this weekend  it really is a moment to not only wish 
Lila a lot of succes in the coming years, but also to give a tremendous thanks 
to Sue for her work in the past years. Of course I did so last year in March 
when she announced her departure but it bears repeating that Sue took us from a 
small organisation in St. Petersburg Florida, which was struggling to create 
impact, to a mature and stable organisation which makes a huge difference. 
Building up a professional staff who are dedicated to our mission, incredible 
fundraising growth and working through complex situations to create concepts 
such as the FDC stand out amongst many other achievements. 

It was Sue herself who indicated that it was time to find a new Executive 
Director, someone who was more suitable for our focus on Engineering and 
Grantmaking. As I mentioned more than a year ago, its hard to imagine the 
Wikimedia Foundation without Sue at the helm. However, due in large part to her 
efforts we have managed to find a new Executive Director who gives me 
confidence in the future of the Foundation. I am happy that we managed to find 
the “unicorn” that we were looking for, but that didn’t happen by accident. 
Most of you know that we concluded the first round of our search in early 
december with candidates that we did not feel were ideal for the job. We 
decided to change our tactics and this involved both Erik and Sue spending a 
lot of their (spare) time with potential candidates and making sure that we 
were getting the right candidates. As a result our second round had a great set 
of candidates, which ultimately led to the selection of Lila. On the transition 
team Sue has been very crucial in holding up a mirror and reminding us what we 
were looking for.

After a well deserved vacation Sue will be available as a Special Advisor to 
both the Lila and the Board of Trustees and we are grateful to her for making 
herself available to do this. However, what intrigues me more is what she will 
end up doing in the coming years. I am hoping it is in the space of Open 
Content or the Open Internet, as she will undoubtedly have a tremendous impact 
in there, and we need her! I am also happy to inform you that Sue will attend a 
part of Wikimania where she will for once not have an packed schedule, so feel 
free to take the opportunity to thank her in person if you are so inclined :)

On behalf of the entire Board and all the staff of the Wikimedia Foundation: 
thank you so much all that you have given the Foundation, and especially your 
efforts in the past year to ensure that there was both stability within our 
organisation and a great succesor.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees
___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Ukraine's anniversary

2014-05-31 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Indeed, congratulations on achieving these milestones! 

It is great to know that even in these turbulent times you are managing to 
reach new goals and have a positive effect! Sometimes in the bigger picture 
these seem like small steps, but they are important steps for us as a movement 
and society as a whole.

Jan-Bart


On 31 May 2014, at 22:38, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Congratulations Wikimedia Ukraine on these milestones.
 500,000 articles, 10 years as a language wiki, and 5 years
 as an organization are great reasons to celebrate.
 
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Feuerwerk_Dreiländerbrücke.jpg
 
 
 
 Pine
 
 
 Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 21:13:16 +0200
 From: Richard Ames rich...@ames.id.au
 To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Ukraine's anniversary
 Message-ID: 538a29cc.7030...@ames.id.au
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
 
 
 
 - оригінальне повідомлення -
 Тема: Wikimedia Ukraine's anniversary
 Від кого: Levon Azizian levonaziz...@bigmir.net
 Кому: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Копія: Правління Вікімедіа Україна bo...@wikimedia.in.ua
 Відправлено: 31.05.2014 18:40,
 
 Today, our organization celebrates anniversary - 5 years from the date
 of creation.
 
 Exactly 5 years ago, on May 31, 2009, in Kyiv was held the constituent
 meeting, which approved the bylaws and elected its first Board of the new
 organization, known as Wikimedia Ukraine.
 
 Our community has gone through a long and difficult path. Birthday of
 Wikimedia Ukraine for our community is the third remarkable date this
 year. On January 30 was the 10th anniversary of the establishment of
 Ukrainian Wikipedia and on May 12 Ukrainian Wikipedia has crossed the
 threshold of 500 000 articles.
 
 We want to thank to Wikimedia Foundation Inc. for their help, to our
 neighboring communities for fruitful cooperation with us and of course
 to our community for their contributions!
 
 Regards, Levon Azizian
 Deputy chair
 Wikimedia Ukraine
 
 
 
 -- 
 The greatest collection of shared knowledge in history. Help Wikipedia, 
 participate now: http://wikimedia.org/
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC recommendation round 2 announced

2014-05-24 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Dariusz ( Everyone)

On behalf of the Board of Trustees allow me to once again thank the FDC and 
involved WMF Staff members for all the work that has gone into this round. I am 
looking forward to discussing the future of the FDC with you and all the others 
in the coming days as we convene with the FDC Advisory Group.

Also thanks to all those who have participated in the public discussions on the 
different proposals, it is what makes us truly unique as an organisation!

Thank you,

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees


On 24 May 2014, at 15:51, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote:

 Hello friends,
 
 The Funds Dissemination Committee meets twice annually to help make
 decisions about how to effectively allocate movement funds to achieve the
 Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy. [1]
 
 On behalf of the committee, I am pleased to announce that Round 2 2013-2014
 recommendations to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees have now been
 posted on Meta [2]:
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2013-2014_round2
 
 The WMF Board will make their decision on these recommendations by 1 July
 2014.
 
 For the second round of this fiscal year, the committee received four
 proposals.  [3] These four proposals came from two chapters, WMF and one
 non-Wikimedia organization, totaling requests of '''$1.56''' million USD.
 Prior to our face-to-face deliberations in Frankfurt from 21st-24th May,
 the FDC reviewed the proposals in careful detail, aided by staff
 assessments and analysis on programs, finances, grant compliance and
 history, as well as community comments on the proposals. Staff presented an
 overview of these findings to the FDC during the deliberations. The FDC and
 FDC staff also asked clarifying questions to the entities on the proposal
 form discussion pages during the four-week community review period (and
 prior to the publishing of staff assessments), and observed the discussions
 about the proposals.
 
 The committee thanks all organizations that submitted proposals, as it
 required significant effort to both create the proposal and to respond to
 the questions and feedback from the community, FDC, and FDC staff.  We
 sincerely appreciate them all for this work.
 
 For formal complaints or appeals about the recommendations, there is a
 separate process that entities should follow. Note that at the request of
 many stakeholders, we are clarifying the complaints and appeals terminology
 so that complaints are made about the process to the ombudsperson and
 appeals on the recommendations are made to the WMF Board representatives.
 These are further explained below:
 
 Any organization that would like to submit an appeal on the FDC’s Round 2
 recommendation should submit it to the Board representatives to the FDC by
 '''end of day UTC 8 June 2014''' in accordance with the appeal process
 outlined in the FDC Framework. The process is as follows:
 
 Appeals to the WMF Board on the recommendations of the FDC (formerly called
 complaints, terminology changed to avoid further confusion):
 
 * A formal appeal to challenge the FDC’s recommendation should be in the
 form of a 500-or-fewer word summary directed to the two non-voting WMF
 Board representatives to the FDC (Patricio Lorente and Bishakha Datta).
 
 * The appeal should be submitted on-wiki through the FDC portal page
 designated for this purpose. [4]
 
 * Formal appeals can be submitted only by the Board Chair of a
 funding-seeking organization.
 
 * Formal appeals must be filed within seven days of the deadline for
 submission of the FDC slate of recommendations to the WMF Board, even if
 the recommendations are published before the deadline for the
 recommendations i.e. end-of-day '''1 June 2014'''. The deadline for appeals
 is the end-of-day UTC on '''8 June 2014'''.
 
 * These board representatives will present the appeal to the WMF Board at
 the same time as the Board considers the FDC recommendation. Responses to
 an appeal will be made alongside the overall decision on the FDC
 recommendations, i.e. by end-of-day UTC '''1 July 2014'''.
 
 * Any planned or approved disbursements to the organization filing an
 appeal will be put on hold until the appeal is resolved.
 
 * If the WMF Board's consideration of the appeal results in an amendment of
 the FDC's recommendations (which is expected only in extraordinary
 circumstances), the WMF Board may choose to release extra funds from the
 WMF reserves to provide additional funds not allocated by the FDC's initial
 recommendation.
 
 * The Ombudsperson, as well as members of the WMF Board other than the
 Board representatives, may participate in the investigation if approved by
 the Chair of the WMF Board.
 
 Complaints to the ombudsperson about the FDC process (formerly called
 appeals):
 
 * A complaint about the FDC process can be filed by anyone with the
 Ombudsperson and can be made any time during a particular round

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Please welcome Lila Tretikov, the Wikimedia Foundation's new ED

2014-05-01 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear fellow community members,

On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees I am delighted to 
announce that the new Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation will be 
Lila Tretikov. Lila is a widely respected Bay Area technology leader, most 
recently with SugarCRM.

As many of you know, about a year ago Sue Gardner announced she planned to step 
down as our ED. As we launched the search for her successor, we spent some time 
working through the most critical requirements for the role. We decided the new 
ED should be someone with a product/engineering background, ideally in an 
open-source or other online community context. We wanted someone experienced 
with organisations that were growing, who'd managed staff and budgets 
comparable to ours, and who had experience creating continuous delivery of 
technology improvements in an agile context. We wanted a person who is oriented 
towards collaboration, transparency and openness, with some experience with 
complex stakeholder environments, and with an international orientation. We 
knew we needed someone with courage and strong personal integrity, who wouldn't 
be intimidated by attempts to censor the projects. 

Lila is precisely what we set out to find.

Lila was born in the Soviet Union and moved to the United States alone, as a 
teenager. She's been working for technology companies, primarily in open 
source, in the Bay Area for the past 15 years. In 1999 she started her career 
at Sun Microsystems. Shortly afterwards she founded GrokDigital, a technology 
and design company. She spent three years as senior director of development at 
Telespree, a company that provides cloud-based wireless data services for 
mobile carriers. For the past eight years, she was at SugarCRM, where she held 
positions of increasing responsibility as the organization grew, including 
being in charge of internal IT, marketing, customer support and professional 
services, engineering, and product development. She has a stellar reputation as 
a leader who is highly skilled, collaborative, open, passionate and curious. 

We think Lila will be a terrific fit for the ED role. The Transition Team 
(Phoebe, Alice, Kat, Sue, Erik, Geoff, Gayle and I) voted unanimously to 
recommend her to the Board, and the Board voted unanimously to accept the 
recommendation. She strikes all of us as smart, brave and unpretentious, and we 
believe she has the skills the WMF needs.

Lila is going to spend the next few weeks in learning-and-listening mode, and 
will take over the ED position from Sue at the end of the month. Her first 
priority will be to immerse herself in deepening her understanding of the 
Wikimedia projects.

I want to close this announcement by saying a heartfelt and deeply appreciative 
thanks to Sue, who has been the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation 
for the past seven years. When the Board and I hired Sue in 2007, we were just 
a chaotic little non-profit in small-town Florida, with a tiny staff and not 
much money. Over the past seven years, Sue's leadership has built the 
Foundation into an effective, well-funded and well-managed organisation, with 
integrity and a clear sense of purpose, and her steady and committed presence 
throughout the search process was integral in helping us come to this excellent 
result. We will be forever grateful for her leadership and vision, and I hope 
we can continue to rely on her support in the months and years ahead.

In June Sue will move into a new role as a special advisor to me and Lila. 
She'll also take a well-earned holiday, and maybe even a bit of a wiki-break, 
before beginning to think about what she's going to do next. Many of us will 
get a chance to see her in London, at Wikimania, in August.

The Wikimedia Foundation is delighted to have reached such a successful outcome 
to the search. My thanks to Lisa Grossman of m/Oppenheim for helping us with 
it, and I ask you to please join me in extending a warm welcome to Lila 
Tretikov, our new ED.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees

___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Please welcome Lila Tretikov, the Wikimedia Foundation's new ED

2014-05-01 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All

FYI

Jan-Bart

Begin forwarded message:

 From: Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
 Subject: Please welcome Lila Tretikov, the Wikimedia Foundation's new ED 
 Date: 1 May 2014 20:15:04 GMT+2
 To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
 
 Dear fellow community members,
 
 On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees I am delighted to 
 announce that the new Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation will be 
 Lila Tretikov. Lila is a widely respected Bay Area technology leader, most 
 recently with SugarCRM.
 
 As many of you know, about a year ago Sue Gardner announced she planned to 
 step down as our ED. As we launched the search for her successor, we spent 
 some time working through the most critical requirements for the role. We 
 decided the new ED should be someone with a product/engineering background, 
 ideally in an open-source or other online community context. We wanted 
 someone experienced with organisations that were growing, who'd managed staff 
 and budgets comparable to ours, and who had experience creating continuous 
 delivery of technology improvements in an agile context. We wanted a person 
 who is oriented towards collaboration, transparency and openness, with some 
 experience with complex stakeholder environments, and with an international 
 orientation. We knew we needed someone with courage and strong personal 
 integrity, who wouldn't be intimidated by attempts to censor the projects. 
 
 Lila is precisely what we set out to find.
 
 Lila was born in the Soviet Union and moved to the United States alone, as a 
 teenager. She's been working for technology companies, primarily in open 
 source, in the Bay Area for the past 15 years. In 1999 she started her career 
 at Sun Microsystems. Shortly afterwards she founded GrokDigital, a technology 
 and design company. She spent three years as senior director of development 
 at Telespree, a company that provides cloud-based wireless data services for 
 mobile carriers. For the past eight years, she was at SugarCRM, where she 
 held positions of increasing responsibility as the organization grew, 
 including being in charge of internal IT, marketing, customer support and 
 professional services, engineering, and product development. She has a 
 stellar reputation as a leader who is highly skilled, collaborative, open, 
 passionate and curious. 
 
 We think Lila will be a terrific fit for the ED role. The Transition Team 
 (Phoebe, Alice, Kat, Sue, Erik, Geoff, Gayle and I) voted unanimously to 
 recommend her to the Board, and the Board voted unanimously to accept the 
 recommendation. She strikes all of us as smart, brave and unpretentious, and 
 we believe she has the skills the WMF needs.
 
 Lila is going to spend the next few weeks in learning-and-listening mode, and 
 will take over the ED position from Sue at the end of the month. Her first 
 priority will be to immerse herself in deepening her understanding of the 
 Wikimedia projects.
 
 I want to close this announcement by saying a heartfelt and deeply 
 appreciative thanks to Sue, who has been the Executive Director of the 
 Wikimedia Foundation for the past seven years. When the Board and I hired Sue 
 in 2007, we were just a chaotic little non-profit in small-town Florida, with 
 a tiny staff and not much money. Over the past seven years, Sue's leadership 
 has built the Foundation into an effective, well-funded and well-managed 
 organisation, with integrity and a clear sense of purpose, and her steady and 
 committed presence throughout the search process was integral in helping us 
 come to this excellent result. We will be forever grateful for her leadership 
 and vision, and I hope we can continue to rely on her support in the months 
 and years ahead.
 
 In June Sue will move into a new role as a special advisor to me and Lila. 
 She'll also take a well-earned holiday, and maybe even a bit of a wiki-break, 
 before beginning to think about what she's going to do next. Many of us will 
 get a chance to see her in London, at Wikimania, in August.
 
 The Wikimedia Foundation is delighted to have reached such a successful 
 outcome to the search. My thanks to Lisa Grossman of m/Oppenheim for helping 
 us with it, and I ask you to please join me in extending a warm welcome to 
 Lila Tretikov, our new ED.
 
 Jan-Bart de Vreede
 Chair
 Wikimedia Board of Trustees
 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Agenda Board of Trustees Spring Meeting

2014-04-19 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear fellow members of the community,

Following is the board agenda for next weeks meeting. As usual we have tried to 
make room for more substance rather than process. After a thorough consultation 
period the board will be discussing the amendment to the terms of use with 
regards to undisclosed paid editing and we will spend a significant amount of 
time in an executive session thinking about different aspects of our board and 
its role in different processes of the movement. We will also be reflecting on 
the Wikimedia Conference 2014, where 6 board members were present.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees

PS: As always I would ask you to discuss the agenda and other board related 
topics at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard rather 
than on the mailing list



== Thursday, April 24, 2014 ==

Executive Session
Strategy Considerations (Open Discussion)
Board Development
Chapters Dialogue
Update Transition Team


== Friday, April 25, 2014 ==
Housekeeping Items
Status update on the Annual Plan
News from AffCom and FDC
News from committees
Investment Policy
Privacy policy
Amendment to the Terms of Use on undisclosed paid editing
Discussion on user groups
Open and Action Items
Executive Session
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board Wikimedia Nederland

2014-04-08 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi,

It is the season for new boards apparently :) Frans: congratulations on the new 
challenge and looking forward to seeing you in Berlin. As always: thanks to all 
those who volunteer their time to serve on the board!

Jan-Bart


On 07 Apr 2014, at 22:26, Frans Grijzenhout fr...@wikimedia.nl wrote:

 It is with great pleasure that I present to you the new board of Wikimedia
 Netherlands (WMNL).
 
 
 During our General Assembly of March 29, 2014 the following persons were
 elected for a new term of 1 year.
 
 
   -
 
   Ronn Boef - new Board member
   -
 
   Jan Anton Brouwer - Treasurer, board member since 2013
   -
 
   Justus de Bruijn - new Board member
   -
 
   André Engels - Secretary of the Board, new Board member
   -
 
   Frans Grijzenhout - Chair, Secretary since 2013, Board member since 2012
   -
 
   Ad Huikeshoven - Board member since 2012
   -
 
   Marlon Thé - new Board member
 
 
 André en Ronn have been active Wikipedians for a long time and we are glad
 that they are willing to serve the community in a different role.
 
 Justus and Marlon are new to the Wikimedia community but both have a track
 record in serving volunteer organizations.
 
 The general meeting gave a warm applause to the two board members that
 stepped down after serving the community for many years: Ziko van Dijk,
 Board member and Chair since 2011 and Paul Becherer, who served as
 Secretary of the Board and as Treasurer since 2010. They have led the Dutch
 chapter in an outstanding way during turbulent years.
 
 Frans Grijzenhout
 
 
 -- 
 
 *Frans Grijzenhout*, chair
 fr...@wikimedia.nl
 +31 6 5333 9499
 
 Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
 Postbus 167
 3500 AD Utrecht
 
 http://www.wikimedia.nl/
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Italia has a new board

2014-04-07 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi

Congratulations and thank you to all those involved for volunteering their time!

Jan-Bart


On 06 Apr 2014, at 15:25, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi all,
 
 yesterday April 6th, 2014, in Florence at The Impact Hub Wikimedia
 Italia held his general assembly which comprised the vote on the final
 budget for 2013 and the budget for 2014 the election of 3 new board
 members[*].
 
 The new board is:
 * Andrea Zanni, President
 * Simone Cortesi, Vice-president (newly elected)
 * Luca Martinelli, Secretary (newly elected)
 * Cristian Consonni, Treasurer
 * Ginevra Sanvitale, Director of Programmes (newly elected)
 
 Please join me in applauding the new members and wishing them good luck :-)
 
 We would also like to thank Alessio Guidetti, Lorenzo Losa, Francesco
 Tarantini and Frieda Brioschi for their service in the board.
 
 Cristian Consonni
 
 [*] Wikimedia Italia adopted since last year to have two-year long
 board mandates with staggered deadlines so we will be electing either
 2 or 3 board members each year.
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fuck the community, who cares

2014-04-07 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All,

I was not present at this meeting, but gather that it was a weekend that was 
valued by all that attended. As Chris has already indicated, he does not agree 
with the remark and I think that all of us disagree with the remar (and that is 
discounting the fact that the whole statement is taken out of context which 
makes a big difference)

But in the middle of a heated discussion, things get said. Chris has indicated 
that one of the ground rules for the workshop was that individual contributions 
were made on a confidential and non-attributable basis. And I agree that I 
would be terrible to break this confidentiality as this would severely limit 
the effectiveness of future sessions within the movement because feel people 
that they cannot be frank. As a movement we have a tremendous challenge ahead 
of us in the coming years, and we need open interaction amongst the different 
entities in order to make progress on these goals. Are we really interested in 
a movement where all volunteer board members are constantly being politically 
correct and cannot misspeak (whereas other community members can?). I for one 
would enjoy an open environment rather than a punishing one which closely 
resembles some of the political environments we read so much about.

Can we assume that the feedback has already reached the person in question (and 
the person probably got more than enough feedback during and after the 
session). Does it really benefit us as a movement to force this person to 
resign or be publicly shamed? 

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair Wikimedia Board of Trustees

PS: whenever Christophe speaks I would be likely to cheer, only to realise 
minutes later… “What the #(*$ did I just agree with?” ;)



On 07 Apr 2014, at 13:54, Christophe Henner christophe.hen...@gmail.com wrote:

 Ok so the quote taken out of context is actually saying the opposite
 of the original meaning.
 
 The discussion was about what are the goals of the Wikimedia
 Organizations?. Why do they exist?
 
 If we look at what Wikimedia Organizations do, mostly, is investing in
 free knowledge. If that's their main goal, well then we don't have to
 care about the communities. That was said as a way to shock people and
 make them think about why Wikimedia Organizations exist and perhaps
 that they should rethink their goal and their focus. Make
 organizations think a little more about the communities instead of
 sheer free knowledge production.
 
 In that same session I did say some pretty radical things, if you take
 some sentences out of my 10 minutes monologue (yeah I kinda tend to
 speak a lot :() you could say that I said let's disband all Wikimedia
 Organizations.
 
 Taking a single sentence totally out of context can lead, as it is the
 case here, to change it's true meaning.
 
 No need for any witch hunt here, I can't think of anyone in our
 community that doesn't value a lot volunteer and community work as we
 are all part of that community.
 
 Best,
 --
 Christophe
 
 
 On 7 April 2014 13:37, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.net wrote:
 Chris Keating wrote:
 
 This was exactly because we wanted people to speak freely and not worry
 about a witch-hunt on an email list if a couple of trolls got hold of some
 out-of-context quotes.
 
 
 I wish you answered the question instead of smearing me on a public mailing
 list, Chris. I have no idea who you are, but I would expect you to adhere to
 elementary rules of debating, which suggest not to resort to personal
 attacks.
 
 If you are a Wikipedian, I should not have to explain this to you.
 
 What a shameful comment, Chris.
 
Tomasz
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Purpose of WMConf ( was: Cost of Wikimedia Conference 2014)

2014-04-02 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi,

To provide some perspective. The Board of Trustees has traditionally had its 
Board meeting at the Wikimedia Conference. This year is the first year we 
decide to change that and have our board meeting a couple of weeks later so 
that we could actually attend the sessions and have more interaction with all 
the participants. Six of us will be going to Berlin because we feel that it is 
an incredible valuable conference. 

Lets be clear: this is a different event than Wikimania. It is a time to meet 
and discuss governance issues with those that have been entrusted with them in 
our movement, it is a time to exchange organisational experiences and a time to 
look forward to possibilities for that part of the movement that chooses to 
organise itself in chapters or thematic organisations. And although the 
audience is probably a subset of the Wikimania audience the smaller setup 
allows for different interactions etc.

I have no opinion on the decision of certain organisations to send more people 
than expected, this is something that can be discussed for next year, and there 
will always be exceptions. But in general: these conferences, though expensive, 
really provide a place to learn how to be more effective with donor money 
rather than less through the sessions and the interaction. I am happy that many 
volunteers are able to invest their valuable time and am sure that they will 
get a great return on that investment (I notice that many chapters rotate 
participation throughout the years and that there are also familiar faces, and 
its great to see them both)

I am grateful to the German Chapter for hosting us this year, and also to all 
the volunteers who are willing to donate their time to participate. Looking 
forward to seeing you all next week!

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair 
Wikimedia Board of Trustees


On 02 Apr 2014, at 19:15, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 02/04/2014, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.com wrote:
 Great! We are starting to have the conversation we need to have!
 
 So: What is the purpose of the Wikimedia Conference?
 
 This has never been clearly defined, in my view.
 
 I certainly found attending last year useful as it was a chance to get to
 know face-to-face people I only knew over email, to share some useful
 experience of Wikimedia UK's with other chapters,  and  to get an insight
 into how others were thinking, and have some meetings which needed to be
 done face-to-face.
 
 In general those are very useful things. But is that what the conference is
 for?
 
 Chris
 
 This question neatly demonstrates the fundamental issue for me.
 
 I am genuinely puzzled as to why, if nobody on the WMUK board (such as
 the CEO or the current Chairman) is sure what the purpose of the
 conference is, they should chose to invest the donor's money in
 sending 5 trustees and 3 full time employees to it (presumably the
 employees are being paid for their time rather than going as
 volunteers).
 
 If the key benefit claimed is to do social networking, it should be
 recognized that all the same faces will be at Wikimania London in 4
 months, and socializing is part of the defined benefits of Wikimania.
 
 Considering the conference is a week away and it appears that flights
 and accommodation have been paid for, re-framing this as good news,
 rather than admitting it is a problem, appears to be replacing
 pragmatism with sophistry.
 
 Fae (writing from the grave)
 -- 
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Goodbye as the German president of the Dutch chapter

2014-03-31 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear Ziko,

Let me take the opportunity to thank you for all the efforts over the past 
years. While we do not always agree on everything it was pleasure exchanging 
ideas with you and I felt that the leadership of the Dutch chapter was in great 
hands while you where the chair of the Dutch board. I am happy to see that some 
of your thinking behind the WCA has influenced other collaborations between 
chapters and thematic organisations. Wikimedia Netherlands has enjoyed three 
years of your leadership, and is so much the better for it!

Although some are expressing regret at seeing you go I am assuming that you are 
not going anywhere and that we will see you on the projects or maybe in some 
other volunteer role in the future. 

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees

PS: I do not envy your successor for having to fill your role during “speech 
time”. I enjoyed every one of your introductions and talks at conferences and 
will miss the sentence “welkom vrienden van vrije kennis”  (I hope I am quoting 
it accurately) and the always inspiring link to something “completely 
different” which turned out to not be so different after all :)



On 30 Mar 2014, at 19:59, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote:

 Dear colleagues, collaborators and friends of free knowledge,
 
 After three eventful years I left the board of Wikimedia Nederland;
 yesterday was the General Assembly in Utrecht. This means a 'goodbye'.
 
 In this time, I had the privilege and pleasure to work with many great
 people in many different organisations. We saw a lot of small steps
 and some bigger ones directed to our common goal, the support of free
 knowledge. Certainly, not everything we as a movement or parts of the
 movement was achieved, though.
 
 Between many WMNL members and me, there were two grades of separation:
 coming from the humanities, my geekiness differs a little from the
 average Wikipedianess; having the German Wikipedia as my home wiki, I
 was never a very active or 'true' part of the Dutch editing community.
 And when I quoted in my speeches from medieval quests or Prussian
 literary realism, I received therefore some strange looks from some
 members.
 
 But I remain firmly convinced that good governance and respect have no
 nationality. Indeed, stroopwafels do have, and so I adopted the Dutch
 custom to bring them with me to Wikimedian meetings abroad.
 
 Wikimedia Nederland has experienced and overcome a difficult period of
 transition. Office space and employees, more members including more
 members without Wikipedia background, more activities, more money,
 more responsibility; more need for an association to mature and focus
 on what is necessary (and not always easy, cool or fun). We achieved
 that as a collective, slower than previously expected, but with the
 appropriate pride and good feelings about the future.
 
 Goodbye - and Hello: I am looking forward to see many of you again at
 whatever wiki, chat or real life meeting.
 
 Kind regards
 Ziko
 
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Nederland
 
 
 Dr. Ziko van Dijk
 
 Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
 Postbus 167
 3500 AD Utrecht
 http://wikimedia.nl
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding

2014-03-20 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

So while I do not know the background of this case I am a little concerned by 
the tone of the email (and similar emails in the past)

Anasuya, Garfield and indeed the entire legal department work for the Wikimedia 
Foundation. Your email (and Fae’s) seems to imply that they work directly for 
you, which is of course not the case (because they really only need one person 
to be their manager :)  

In this case: thank you both for pointing out this post and someone within the 
Foundation will undoubtedly come back with some response in the coming period. 

Jan-Bart de Vreede



On 20 Mar 2014, at 07:59, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:

 That's a very interesting blog post, and at first glance situation looks bad 
 in a number of ways. I'm bothered by the lack of reporting as well as the COI 
 issues involved.
 
 Anasuya, at I don't think the $53,690 number is the right one, but regardless 
 of how much money was involved,  can you look at this issue, figure out what 
 happened from start to finish, and respond to the other questions raised in 
 this discussion? Can you confirm what the amount of money involved was, 
 clarify why Sandole was listed as a WMF Fundraiser contractor which implied 
 that he raised money for WMF instead of being a grantee receiving money from 
 WMF, that the money came entirely from Stanton, how it was accounted for in 
 the financial statements referenced by Tomasz, and what reports were produced 
 that may have been sent back to Stanton or WMF about what the outcomes of the 
 grant were?
 
 I would also be interested in knowing what COI rules were established as 
 conditions of this grant, by Stanton, Harvard, and/or WMF. It would be 
 interesting to get full copies of any contracts or grant award documents 
 although that may be appropriate for review by the Board in private.
 
 I'm also CCing this to Garfield and WMF Legal. It looks like something went 
 very wrong here.
 
 Thanks,
 
 Pine
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
 and Thematic organisations are an essential 
part of the movement and we would like each and every one to succeed in 
furthering the goals of the movement as a whole. Asking these groups to be a 
user group for the first two years while doing programmatic work really gives a 
good indication of the ability of the “future chapter/thematic organisation” to 
succeed.

We also reference the strategic planning which is due to start this summer. One 
of the things we really have to solve is the roles/responsibilities/privileges 
of each player in the movement. The basic answer to the questions: 

1) What are our long term goals
2) Who is best positioned to achieve these goals

should lead to a “who does what” picture of the movement (and maybe just as 
important “who will stop doing what”), and it is on the basis of this picture 
and the underlying goals that we should create and fund different players in 
the movement. I would argue that at this time the picture is not as clear as it 
should be before committing the resources we currently commit to it.

(just as a small note: when I talk about movement I mean the range from the 
individual volunteer to the Wikimedia Foundation itself)

 
 As a side note, this is the only point that I will keep from Rupert's
 email: this decision completely ignores international cultural
 differences in terms of funding, fundraising and organization in
 general. Indeed, in a quote above, you talk about good lawyer in the
 group who can draw up bylaws; this reinforces the incorrect premise
 your decision is based on: that incorporation is a complicated and
 bureaucratic process that should be avoided. And this is something that
 can not be decided globally.

This is true. But to be clear, its not the possible “bureaucratic” aspect which 
concerns us greatly (as I mentioned above).


 
 Frédéric

Regards

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation



 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Agenda Board meeting 31st of January/1st February posted

2014-01-31 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone,

The agenda for this weeks meeting of the Board of Trustees has been posted at

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Agenda_January_31st-February_1st_2014_Board_Meeting

I would like to invite  to use the Board of Trustees Noticeboard for any 
comments:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard

My apologies for the delay in posting which occurred due to technical 
difficulties on my end.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation

___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community consultation + Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director selection process

2014-01-21 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

There is no “community consultation” period in the selection proces. Its simply 
not feasible or desirable to have someone have a public “vetting” phase. The 
good news is that you elected representatives on the board who have a strong 
voice in the selection process and final approval.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair Wikimedia Board of Trustees


On 18 Jan 2014, at 06:58, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:

 Hi.
 
 Is there a community consultation period built in to the selection process
 for a new Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director? If not, should there be?
 
 In trying to figure out what the selection process may look like, I
 re-reviewed some of the relevant FAQs and timelines:
 
 * https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/90968
 * https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/91132
 * https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/7127367
 
 As I understand the basic process, the Transition Team will ultimately
 find a suitable candidate and will make a recommendation to the Wikimedia
 Foundation Board of Trustees. (Please correct me if this description is
 mistaken... this is largely unchartered territory for Wikimedia.)
 
 When this recommendation is made and prior to the Board voting, should the
 Wikimedia community have the opportunity to weigh in on the candidate
 Selection prior to final approval? If so, in what way?
 
 These questions are not meant to suggest that the Wikimedia community and
 the Transition Team have not been working together already (e.g., in
 creating a connectors list, drafting interview questions, etc.).
 
 While nobody would reasonably argue that every Wikimedia Foundation
 employee be vetted by the Wikimedia community, it seems to me that this
 particular position is unique given its enormous influence in shaping
 Wikimedia's course. As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of
 Trustees is (s)elected to ultimately make the choice of who oversees the
 daily operations of the Wikimedia Foundation as Executive Director.
 However, I believe that ensuring that the community is adequately
 consulted is important.
 
 Relatedly, I've asked the Executive Director Transition Team on-wiki about
 the possibility of more regular status updates on its progress in some
 form (mailing list posts, wiki page updates, etc.).
 
 MZMcBride
 
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community consultation + Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director selection process

2014-01-21 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Frederico

I will write an update for the meta page in the coming week or so but just to 
give you a general sense of where we are at: we are trying to reach potential 
candidates in a different way, and so far that looks like a good strategy. This 
means more direct contact between the Foundation and candidates and more 
pro-actively reaching out to people who initially showed no interest.

There is no scientific way to make the trade-off between characteristics/skills 
of candidates. We might very well choose to ignore an important characteristic 
if all the others fall into place. And it is of course easier to make a 
trade-off on less significant characteristics and skills. The decision to look 
for more candidates rather than make a choice in December was not an easy one, 
but we were not willing to go for a candidate who was missing too many of our 
desired characteristics/skills. This is something that the transition team 
does, and its not something that translates well to a table on meta.

I am not sure what you are referring to as “avoid another fiasco”, but as far 
as I am concerned we are simply in a stage of finding new candidates and trying 
to surface the candidate that is up to the challenge and opportunity that we as 
a unique movement have to offer. This was always an option, and we would have 
liked to have found someone in the first round, but it wasn’t to be.

Jan-Bart de Vreede



On 18 Jan 2014, at 11:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:

 I don't know what to think about a final community consultation on a specific 
 name. Personally I suspect that I wouldn't be able to say anything about it, 
 as with 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Director_Transition_Team/Update_9_December.
   Speaking of which, I wonder how the problems there were addressed: 
 apparently they just expanded the search and reduced the number of people 
 participating, but I see no answers to the question: «Have we been looking 
 for a unicorn -- somebody who doesn't exist in the real world? [...] too 
 insular? [...] unfairly comparing [...]?».
   If an answer was found, I'd like to know it. To me that only looked 
 like a rhetorical question, because of course I have no idea what exact 
 criteria/questions/interview practices are being applied or if unfair 
 comparisons were made. To avoid another fiasco, it would probably be useful 
 to publish on Meta an anonymised table of candidates, pointing out strengths 
 and weaknesses in a single line for each. Then one could say «oh, look, 
 criterion 175 made 12 otherwise awesome candidates fail, do we really 
 need it?».
 
 Nemo
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community consultation + Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director selection process

2014-01-21 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

I am sure it is technically feasible, its just not realistic from a hiring 
perspective. I cannot tell a potential candidate that process includes a public 
vetting process, this is something that is just not going to happen. We are 
hiring an ED for the Wikimedia Foundation, and the Board of Trustees of that 
Foundation is simply the body that is responsible for the final decision on 
this.  

I am not going to debate the different kinds of movement representation in the 
board, but I would argue that the community directly and indirectly influences 
100% of the board, as appointed members are appointed by (s)elected members and 
the founder of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Jan-Bart



On 21 Jan 2014, at 15:57, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:

 Thanks for getting back to me.
 
 Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
 There is no community consultation period in the selection proces. It's
 simply not feasible or desirable to have someone have a public vetting
 phase.
 
 I'm not sure I understand how it would be infeasible. It's 2014, not 1814.
 I think we've figured out how to solicit feedback in a timely manner.
 
 It seems less desirable to me to reduce the Wikimedia community to waiting
 for the white smoke.
 
 The new Executive Director will be publicly vetted, to be sure, it just
 sounds as though it'll happen after or he or she has been firmly appointed
 by the Board. It would be dishonest to suggest that there's no merit to
 this approach, but I do wonder if it's in line with Wikimedia's values.
 
 The good news is that you elected representatives on the board who
 have a strong voice in the selection process and final approval.
 
 I'm not quite sure who you is, but only three of ten Board seats are
 directly elected. I suppose that's a strong voice?
 
 MZMcBride
 
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Update Transition Team on Meta

2013-12-10 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All

I just posted a substantial update at:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Director_Transition_Team/Update_9_December

Regards

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Board of Trustees Meeting Agenda

2013-11-22 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All,

The board will meet this Sunday and Monday for its “Fall” board meeting in San 
Francisco. You can find the tentative agenda at

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Agenda_November_24-25_2013_Board_Meeting

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia France] Welcome to Nathalie, our new ED

2013-10-03 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Nathalie,

I am happy that the time has finally arrived that you are starting :) I wish 
you the best in your new challenge and I was glad to meet you in Hong Kong!

Congrats to WMFR!

Jan-Bart


On 01 Oct 2013, at 16:34, Christophe Henner christophe.hen...@wikimedia.fr 
wrote:

 Hi everyone,
 
 We have the great pleasure to announce Nathalie Martin is starting
 today as the new Executive Director of Wikimédia France!
 
 Her hiring is the tipping point of a process we started last January
 when we hired a HR firm to audit our organization and support us in
 finding the right person for this key role.
 
 With a background in political science and organizations strategy,
 Nathalie has a deep experience managing several associations of
 similar or bigger size as Wikimedia France. Even though she is not
 from the movement, we believe she'll adapt quickly to who we are.
 
 She came to Wikimania in Hong-Kong, and some of you may have had the
 pleasure to meet her. By coming to Wikimania she had the luck to
 experience in 3 day what Wikimedia is at large, to meet wikimedians
 from all around the world. I'm happy to say that she too suffered from
 PWD (Post-Wikimania Depression).
 
 If you need to contact her, her email address is
 nathalie.mar...@wikimedia.fr. Please keep in mind that it's her first
 day within our movement and she still will need few days to adapt to
 our awesomeness
 
 Please join us in welcoming Nathalie!
 
 Best,
 
 PS: please keep her in copy of your answers :)
 
 Christophe HENNER | Vice-chair
 ---
 › Mail : christophe.hen...@wikimedia.fr
 › Mobile : +33(0)6 29 35 65 94
 › Tel : +33(0)5 62 89 12 01
 › Twitter : @Wikimedia_Fr
 -
 Wikimédia France | Association pour le libre partage de la
 connaissance | Visitez notre blog http://blog.wikimedia.fr
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board agenda for Hong Kong meeting

2013-08-05 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi 

No, they are observers on the first day and will be present. Just like Kat will 
be an observer on the first day. We have always done this, but the Wikimania 
meeting was always one day, so the transition took place somewhere in the 
middle of the day. This time the break is more obvious, thats all.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Vice Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees


On Aug 6, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Geoff Brigham, 05/08/2013 16:26:
 == Thursday, August 8, 2013 ==
 
 * Welcoming the newly elected trustees  [...]
 
 So the new trustees enter in office only on the second day?
 
 Nemo
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board agenda for Hong Kong meeting

2013-08-05 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Its a bit early in jet lag time , that should of course Kat will be an 
observer on the SECOND day

:)

Jan-Bart

On Aug 6, 2013, at 9:10 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hi 
 
 No, they are observers on the first day and will be present. Just like Kat 
 will be an observer on the first day. We have always done this, but the 
 Wikimania meeting was always one day, so the transition took place somewhere 
 in the middle of the day. This time the break is more obvious, thats all.
 
 Jan-Bart de Vreede
 Vice Chair
 Wikimedia Board of Trustees
 
 
 On Aug 6, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Geoff Brigham, 05/08/2013 16:26:
 == Thursday, August 8, 2013 ==
 
 * Welcoming the newly elected trustees  [...]
 
 So the new trustees enter in office only on the second day?
 
 Nemo
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Questions for the WMF Board of Trustees?

2013-07-29 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Lodewijk,

I would be happy to attend any roundtable on that topic, or other topic on that 
level. I just do NOT have the time to get it on the agenda. In other words: if 
you send me anywhere on fri/sat/sun I will turn up :)

To you and others: As usual: please feel free to find me walking around and 
accost me regarding anything :)

Regards

Jan-Bart


On Jul 29, 2013, at 4:50 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote:

 Hi Phoebe,
 
 thanks for pointing to this!
 
 I see that this year we only have one hour of board QA. I have always seen
 a lot of value in these board discussions, especially when it can come to
 actually that: discussions. As there are several discussion sessions
 scheduled, without a specific topic, would you and perhaps a few other
 board members be willing to commit to use some of these sessions to dig a
 bit deeper into a few specific topics? For example, would there be three
 board members willing to have a round table discussion about transparency
 and openness at a board level? Or perhaps the technical strategy (at a
 board level)? If we could do that in somewhat smaller groups (max 50
 people), maybe even parallel, I think we could finally engage in truly
 helpful and constructive discussions. It would of course require a neutral
 discussion facilitator each time, but I'm sure we'd be able to arrange that
 somehow?
 
 We could then flag those discussion topics during the QA even.
 
 Best,
 Lodewijk
 
 
 2013/7/29 phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com
 
 Hi all,
 
 Every year at Wikimania the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees hosts a
 panel where they take questions from the audience on the work of the WMF
 and the Board.
 
 In past years the board has also taken questions via IRC. This year we'd
 also like to provide the opportunity to leave questions on a wiki page
 ahead of time:
 http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Board_Q%26A
 
 While there is only time to answer a few questions during the session
 itself, hopefully this will be a good way of getting questions from
 attendees as well as from those who can't make it. The board will also take
 questions from the audience at Wikimania, as time permits.
 
 Remember the Board doesn't deal directly with work on or problems on the
 projects, and does not have a direct hand in how the WMF operates
 day-to-day. Rather, the board thinks about the big picture, and gives
 direction on strategy for the WMF. You can find out more about what the
 board does (and does not do) here:
 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees and
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_handbook
 
 best,
 phoebe
 
 --
 * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at
 gmail.com *
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Draft ED Job Description Online

2013-05-17 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Everyone

I have posted the draft ED job description online at the ED transition site.

If you want to comment on:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Director_Transition_Team/Position_description

Please do so before the end of Sunday (PST). Sorry for the rush, but its not a 
long document :) Along with other members of the transition team I will be 
available to discuss this this weekend.

Thanks

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair ED Transition Team

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] Ting's resignation, Thank you for five great years

2013-05-05 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Everyone,

As today is the day that Ting's resignation from the Board of Trustees becomes 
effective I would like to take this opportunity to thank him for the tremendous 
contribution he has made to the board over the past five years. I did not know 
Ting when he joined our board but from what I heard we were lucky that the 
community elected him. And that certainly proved to be the case. In my opinion 
a board functions best when there are many divergent opinions at the table who 
are able to discuss matters in a sensible and constructive way in order to come 
to creative solutions. Ting certainly contributed his uniqueness to that mix 
over the past five years, and I am grateful that he was able to make as much 
time available as he did in order to remain on the board for such a long time. 
Apart from being a really really nice person Ting has a lot of wisdom 
(something which he will probably deny ;)

As some of you might know I ran against Ting for the Chair position of the 
Board of Trustees in 2010 and lost. At that time I thought that I was 
definitely the better candidate but the following two years proved me wrong. I 
was happy to serve as his vice chair during the second year. His diligent way 
of going about things made sure that a lot of things got done during his tenure 
as chair and also ensured that all the voices at the table got heard. Ting was 
always willing to go and visit a local chapter or a Wikimedia event in order to 
represent the board and Foundation. His unwavering principles and spirited way 
of discussing topics about which he is passionate (of which there are several) 
are an inspiration. At the same time he was more than willing to listen to all 
the different viewpoints and able to change his mind if others presented valid 
arguments (something which sounds simple but with which a lot of people, 
including myself, have difficulty with ;) During several different discussions 
Ting managed to convince me of the fact that his viewpoint was the correct one, 
and I will miss his input in the future.

As is tradition Ting will attend the next Wikimania (Hong Kong here we come!) 
and we will take that opportunity to formally thank him for his efforts for the 
Wikimedia Board of Trustees. I hope you will all join me in this :)

Thank you Ting! I am not sure how or when, but I hope that our paths will cross 
again in the coming years!

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Vice Chair Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] Update ED Transition Team pages

2013-05-02 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Everyone,

As mentioned after Sue's announcement of her intention to depart the Foundation 
we will try to ensure transparency in the work of the Transition Team where 
possible (and respect privacy where necessary). To that end I would like to 
draw you attention to a set of recent changes made to the Transition Team pages 
on Meta:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Director_Transition_Team

These changes include a preliminary timeline, FAQ and an invitation to add 
people to the connectors list. Please feel free to add more questions and 
other discussion points. We expect to add more information (such as the choice 
we made with regards to the Search firm that will assist us) in the coming week.

Regards

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair Executive Director Transition Team



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

2013-04-30 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Deryck,

On Apr 29, 2013, at 10:25 PM, Deryck Chan deryckc...@wikimedia.hk wrote:

 
 But you say we … We refers to WMHK I assume, but did you do this after a
 discussion with the Grants Programme, or did you decide this on your own?
 
 I work for the non-profit sector, and there is not way that any
 organisation I know could get away with something like that I am afraid. If
 you are given money for a reason, you cannot simply decide to take it as an
 advance on a possible next grant without agreement of the party that
 supplied you with the grant. I am sorry, but this is not Irony, this is
 governance…
 
 
 From my reply to THO (also on this thread): We have replied multiple times
 that we want the remaining funds from the 2010-11 grants to be considered
 in conjunction with the FDC proposal. (ie. the FDC proposal is the
 reallocation request.) This is because it is logistically impractical for
 us to return any funds to WMF before the end of Wikimania.
 

Yes I read your reply, but you keep stating we want, that is not that same as 
together with the grant giver we agreed… I cannot overstate the importance of 
the difference between the two…

(and again: this is not the only issue with the WMHK request that the FDC 
pointed out). 

 
 Additionally I see that the community consultation phase asked for the
 annual report and you stated that it would be available on the WMHK website
 after the meeting of the 16th of March…  I wanted to go through it, but
 could not find it on the home page (I would assume its under
 documentation?) Can you point me to it?
 
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Hong_Kong_2011-12_Annual_Report_and_Financial_Report.pdf
 (or scroll halfway down the proposal page)
 

Thanks!

Jan-Bart
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

2013-04-30 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Florence

On Apr 30, 2013, at 1:12 AM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com wrote:

 Le 4/30/13 12:04 AM, Nathan a écrit :
 
 
 It's not logical to assume that because the WMF has funds it should in
 some way equitably distribute those funds around the world.
 
 What happens to the idea according to which the funds belong to the Wikimedia 
 mouvement rather than to Wikimedia Foundation ?

Please note that you are disagreeing with Nathan, not with others (like me and 
as far as I know the entire board) who have supported the idea of the FDC 
because it is a great way to ensure that the funds are distributed amongst the 
movement in the interest of the movement. The funds are those of the movement, 
and although we might disagree on how the funds are divided we agree on that. I 
am happy to see that the FDC as a body (and the community review process as a 
important addition) ensures much more transparent processes.

 
 Supporting
 chapter operations, and funding offices and staff in dozens of
 countries, is not the chief object of the money raised from donors. We
 need to get away from the belief that chapters are unquestionably the
 best use of movement resources. There is a place for outreach,
 publicity, and targeted educational programs. But the WMF is best
 situated to supplement the efforts begun by volunteers, in the same
 way the WMF itself was created and has grown.
 
 I would object to the idea that WMF is best situated to supplement efforts 
 started by volunteers and that statement parts from the decision made some 
 months ago to deflate WMF role.
 But we may agree to disagree on this.

I would agree with you here. I think that the WMF is in a good position to help 
certain initiatives and that in several cases there are better alternatives. 
This is why I am so excited about chapters helping chapters and all 
affiliations being able to join the wikimedia conference in Milan this year. It 
is that kind of exchange of experience which is perfect for all involved, and 
lets remember that what works for some might not work for others.

 
 Additionnaly... I must add that when WMF was precisely at the current stage 
 of most chapters (with no staff and no office), it was run in a rather 
 creative fashion that would make everyone cough today in comparison to the 
 requirements and obligations made mandatory to chapters. Uh. You may have a 
 slightly more ideal view of the past :)

True, but just because things used to be bad is no reason that they should be 
bad now if we can prevent it (I was there with you, and we are both happy 
that we outgrew that phase with a minimal of damage and a LOT of luck in 
finding the right ED)  the scale of the organisation now makes it impossible to 
tolerate that kind of creativity when not absolutely necessary.
 
 It would be a poor use
 of movement funds indeed if the WMF decided to pour money into infant
 chapters with minimal development and fuzzy strategic goals. That's a
 recipe for, at an absolute minimum, good-faith mismanagement and waste
 of scarce donor resources. Avoiding this path was a very wise decision
 by the trustees, and I only hope they remain resolute despite
 criticism and Sue's impending departure.
 
 I mostly hope that they stay consistant with their own past decisions (=we 
 were sold the fact that the money collected belong to the mouvement, not to 
 the entity collecting it. If so, decisions of allocations should not become 
 WMF ones).

Agreed, which is why I think the FDC's advice is so important and I hope to 
never have to question it (although the board does have to have a final say in 
these matters as a matter of governance)

 
 In any cases... I know not if WM HK should have been funded or not. What I 
 know is that the mouvement need happy and rested and humanly treated 
 volunteers to stay healthy.

True, but volunteers also have to ensure not to force themselves into positions 
of make or break and thereby put themselves at risk.

 
 We keep talking about editors decrease. Maybe in the future, we'll talk about 
 irl volunteers (as in chapter members) decrease as well.

I think we should, and I think that some of that discussion took place in 
Milan. As we know there are different kind of volunteers who organise 
affiliates (because the problem is not limited to chapters) and it takes 
different ways to keep motivated. These are important topics to discuss and 
keep track of. But lets not fall into the trap of blaming the big bureaucratic 
body of the WMF for all the problems we have. Volunteers burn out because of 
lots of reasons and we should all take care to fix those problems that are 
within our reach to control, and try to reduce the risk of burnout for all 
those involved (and again: meeting each other physically and exchanging 
experiences is a really good way of recharging)...

 In the past years, we have seen several times organizers of Wikimania plain 
 disappear after the event. Burn-out. I do not think it is a 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

2013-04-29 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede

 
 P. S. again, internal-l discussions that should be public. Damn.
 

Agreed, I am not on Internal either…

Jan-Bart


 [1] http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/wmconf2013-fdc-process
 
 Tom
 
 --
 Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
 A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
 useful than a life spent doing nothing.
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

2013-04-29 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone

I was an observer on the first round of the FDC, Patricio was the observer of 
the recent round of FDC requests so he will probably be able to tell you more 
on the specific details. But in general I have been (and still am) extremely 
impressed with the level of scrutiny   AND the flexibility of the FDC members. 
I was witness to several spirited discussions and saw a group of thoughtful 
people doing what they were good at: reviewing proposals for large grants.

But as I understand there were several issues with the proposal, please do 
not pick on one issue. We had a community review period which also resulted in 
some serious questions (some without answers).  And the FDC feedback gave 
several reasons. 

I would have seriously disappointed if $200K+ was granted. I do think that we 
need to provide a way to support an organisation after the FDC process… and we 
have in several cases in the past. 

David: I do not agree with you. you are blaming the WMF for the fact that the 
FDC is doing a good job in reviewing funding proposals. The Centralisation of 
payment processing has little to do with this. In fact, most chapters that do 
not payment process since the change (and there were not that many to begin 
with) are happy with the new process (and a lot of other chapters go through 
Grants process, which they would have done anyway regardless of the change to 
an FDC which exists alongside). I argue that the FDC is the best thing that has 
happened to our movement and combined with an improved process and chapter peer 
review we are going to get even better. I would love to hear how you would have 
handled this particular FDC request.


Jan-Bart




On Apr 29, 2013, at 5:38 PM, Deryck Chan deryckc...@wikimedia.hk wrote:

 We have replied multiple times that we want the remaining funds from the 
 2010-11 grants to be considered in conjunction with the FDC proposal. (ie. 
 the FDC proposal is the reallocation request.) This is because it is 
 logistically impractical for us to return any funds to WMF before the end of 
 Wikimania.
 
 Winifred informed us of the out of compliance well after the grant report 
 was accepted and the FDC eligibility of WMHK was announced. There was no 
 indication whatsoever that this late notice of out of compliance may lead 
 to retrospective disqualification.
 
 Deryck
 
 (cc. Patricio and Jan-Bart as the official contacts for FDC complaints. Yes, 
 I'm accusing WMF grants staff of foul play with the FDC rules.)
 
 
 On 29 April 2013 12:50, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com wrote:
 Deryck please could you confirm what happened with regards to the unused 
 funds - did WMHK request a reallocation?
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
 ---
 Thehelpfulone
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone
 
 On 29 Apr 2013, at 12:43, Deryck Chan deryckc...@wikimedia.hk wrote:
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Deryck Chan deryckc...@gmail.com
  Date: 29 Apr 2013 12:42
  Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark
  to everyone
  To: cfrank...@halonetwork.net
  Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 
  See the footnotes on the FDC decision page. Both WMHK and WMCZ were
  declared eligible at the time of submission, but the WMF subsequently found
  new faults during the review period which they chose to use as convenient
  excuses to disqualify these 2 chapters.
  On 29 Apr 2013 12:33, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote:
 
  I'd like to come back to this - if the entity was told they were eligible
  (which certainly looks to be the case from the public documents), when was
  it discovered they were not?  Obviously, putting together an FDC
  application is a tremendous amount of work for a chapter, and if the effort
  was futile from the start, then the time that Deryck and WMHK put into this
  could have been better spent on useful programme work instead.
 
  Cheers,
  Craig Franklin
 
 
  On 29 April 2013 17:25, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 29 Apr 2013, at 07:52, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
  I'm not familiar with the case, but reading that page, it seems that
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:WM_HK/Education_Toolkits_For_Liberal_Studies/Report#Remaining_funds
  might also have played a role for the FDC's recommendation?
 
  Indeed, yet it looks like there has been no (public) follow up by the
  paid
  WMF grants staff for over a month. In addition,
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2012-2013_round2/Wikimedia_Hong_KongshowsWMHK
   to still be an eligible entity.
 
  Winifred/Asaf, please can you clarify whether WMHK is still an eligible
  entity and what follow up was done after that message a month ago?
 
  ---
  Thehelpfulone
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

2013-04-29 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

So while I really regret your decision and hope that you will reconsider I 
would like to ask you something.

 
 Or, ironically, putting together a reallocation grant. Here's another
 hen-and-egg problem for you all. We saw little value in settling the
 remaining funds from the 2010-11 grants because the FDC results will change
 everything anyway. Ironically the WMF and FDC became convinced that this is
 a valid reason to retrospectively disqualify us.
 

But you say we … We refers to WMHK I assume, but did you do this after a 
discussion with the Grants Programme, or did you decide this on your own? I 
work for the non-profit sector, and there is not way that any organisation I 
know could get away with something like that I am afraid. If you are given 
money for a reason, you cannot simply decide to take it as an advance on a 
possible next grant without agreement of the party that supplied you with the 
grant. I am sorry, but this is not Irony, this is governance…

Additionally I see that the community consultation phase asked for the annual 
report and you stated that it would be available on the WMHK website after the 
meeting of the 16th of March…  I wanted to go through it, but could not find it 
on the home page (I would assume its under documentation?) Can you point me to 
it?

And again: the FDC stated more reasons to turn down the request,not just the 
fact that WMHK was not in compliance, they obviously spent a significant amount 
of time discussing this...

Jan-Bart







 
 Cheers,
 Craig Franklin
 
 
 On 29 April 2013 17:25, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 On 29 Apr 2013, at 07:52, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 I'm not familiar with the case, but reading that page, it seems that
 
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:WM_HK/Education_Toolkits_For_Liberal_Studies/Report#Remaining_funds
 might also have played a role for the FDC's recommendation?
 
 Indeed, yet it looks like there has been no (public) follow up by the
 paid
 WMF grants staff for over a month. In addition,
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2012-2013_round2/Wikimedia_Hong_KongshowsWMHK
  to still be an eligible entity.
 
 Winifred/Asaf, please can you clarify whether WMHK is still an eligible
 entity and what follow up was done after that message a month ago?
 
 ---
 Thehelpfulone
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resignation announcement, and a parting remark to everyone

2013-04-29 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Markus,

I am not sure but I have the feeling that WMHK is free to apply for a Grant 
once they are in compliance with the terms of the earlier grant? But I am out 
of my depth here, probably someone like Asaf could inform us better…

And I was happy that the chapters are setting up peer review amongst 
themselves, I think its great and heard enthusiasm for the idea in Milan

Jan-Bart


On Apr 29, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Markus Glaser markus.gla...@wikimedia.de wrote:

 Deryck,
 
 it makes me sad to read your leaving message, as I have got to know you as a 
 very constructive and engaged person, and I think your input and 
 contributions are very valuable to the movement.
 
 It seems to me that we all kind of agree there's a gap between GAC and FDC 
 funding when it comes to professionalization, esp. setting up an office and 
 first staff. Also, there's the possibility of losing all the funding. That, 
 IMHO, is a very dangerous situation for an organisation. Maybe it would help 
 to have a process to up- or downgrade a funding proposal from GAC to FDC 
 and vice versa, so in case a FDC proposal is not approved at all, there's 
 still a fallback option.
 
 Also, I think we should offer some guidance through the process based on the 
 experience we made so far. As has been stated before, the step from zero to 
 three employees is a big one. Maybe an early assessment of the proposal might 
 have lead to other options and better success in funding. Personally, I am no 
 expert in FDC funding, but can we not get a group of people together who are 
 willing to help with such an assessment?
 
 Best,
 Markus
 
 -- 
 Markus Glaser
 WCA Council Member (WMDE)
 Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC Letter of Intent process and schedule for 2013-14

2013-04-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Milos,

I am sorry I don't understand the remarks completely… can you tell me a little 
bit more about what you are referring to?

Jan-Bart

On Apr 18, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:

 It would be very useful to express the current state of the FDC in emails
 like this one -- at the top of email.
 
 For a couple of months I was mislead that FDC is actually working and that
 Wikimedia entities should do a kind of action toward FDC if they want to
 get funds.
 
 Contrary to that, just if emails like this one have been carefully read,
 one can conclude that all of them present lists of non-binding wishes for
 informational purpose, although it's explicitly stated that Wikimedia
 entities should do an action.
 
 Wikimedians will treat FDC as seriously as its members treat their own
 work. So, at least, please take care about the accuracy of your language to
 avoid misleading Wikimedians reading your emails.
 On Apr 18, 2013 9:01 AM, Patricio Lorente patricio.lore...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
 Dear friends and colleagues,
 
 We want to share with you information about the Letter of Intent process
 and the FDC schedule for next year (July 2013 - June 2014). As you may
 remember, the *Letter of Intent (LoI)* is the first step towards applying
 for funds from the FDC, as discussed in the FDC framework [1]. This was not
 part of the first year's process, but is meant to be an integral part of
 the FDC calendar from this next round (Round 1, 2013-14) onwards. *The
 Letter of Intent asks all entities who intend to apply for Round 1 (or
 Round 2) to formally state their intention to do so.* In addition, the LoI
 now asks applying entities to include a notional dollar figure (or local
 currency figure) in the Letter of Intent. Applying entities will be able to
 update this amount in their final FDC proposals. The updated Letter of
 Intent template will be available on the FDC portal [2] by May 1, but the
 sample is here for reference [3].
 
 With the Letter of Intent, the FDC staff can support applying entities in
 their proposal process well before the deadline for proposals. We hope this
 will remove some of the challenges faced by applicants in the first year of
 the FDC process. The FDC can also plan better with a clear understanding of
 who intends to apply, and an estimation of the funds requested.
 
 The FDC framework originally stated that the deadlines for the LoI were
 June 1 for Round 1 and November 1 for Round 2. However, we are pushing back
 the deadline *by one week*, since the community review period was also
 extended by two weeks. *The LOI deadline will now be June 8 for Round 1,
 and November 8 for Round 2. *
 
 For your reference, here is the updated 2013-2014 Round 1 proposal process
 schedule:
 
 
   - *Letter of Intent deadline for Round 1: 8 June 2013*
   - Deadline for WMF Staff to post eligibility: 15 July 2013
   - Deadline for entities to meet eligibility requirements: 15 September
   2013
   - Proposal submission deadline: 1 October 2013
   - Community review period: 1 October - 31 October 2013
   - Staff assessment deadline: 8 November 2013
   - FDC recommendation due: 1 December 2013
   - Board decision due: 1 January 2014
 
 
 The schedule for the 2013-14 Round 2 proposal process:
 
   - *Letter of Intent deadline for Round 1: 8 November 2013*
   - Deadline for WMF Staff to post eligibility: 15 December 2013
   - Deadline for entities to meet eligibility requirements: 15 February
   2014
   - Proposal submission deadline: 1 March 2014
   - Community review period: 1 March - 31 March 2014
   - Staff assessment deadline: 8 April 2014
   - FDC recommendation due: 1 May 2014
   - Board decision due: 1 June 2014
 
 
 It is our hope that the Letter of Intent process will help in planning for
 both the entities and the FDC, and ensure that the FDC and FDC staff are
 supporting the applying entities significantly ahead of the proposal
 deadlines.
 
 As always, do not hesitate to let us or the FDC support staff (
 fdcsupp...@wikimedia.org) know if you have any questions or concerns about
 this important process.
 
 Warm regards,
 Patricio and Jan-Bart
 (Board representatives to the FDC)
 
 [1]
 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_the_Creation_and_Initial_Operation_of_the_FDC#Process_overview
 [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal
 [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Sample_letter_of_intent
 
 
 --
 Patricio Lorente
 Blog: http://www.patriciolorente.com.ar
 Identi.ca // Twitter: @patriciolorente
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] CFAAA+CALEA vs. SOPA+PIPA: the amortization

2013-04-13 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey James

So while we have actively started looking for a new ED I am happy to report 
that Sue is still on the job !

Which means you do not have to fill in for the position and tell Garfield what 
to do :) 

On a more realistic tone: my gut feeling is that you are asking an impossible 
question (and aware of this) and I assume that Garfield has much better things 
to do, but I guess if Sue wants to sound time on this, she will get back to you.

Kind regards,

Jan-Bart de Vreede





On Apr 13, 2013, at 5:03 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Garfield,
 
 Would you please find out how much the CFAA and CALEA amendements
 would be expected to cost readers, editors, and the Foundation
 compared to what SOPA or PIPA would have cost if they had passed, and
 let the wikimedia-l and advocacy advisors lists know?
 
 Best regards,
 James Salsman
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] Transition team update

2013-04-01 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone,

With a little help from TheHelpfulOne we have made a start with the Meta pages 
for the transition team.

The central page is located at: 
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ED_Transition_Team

Feel free to browse and comment/suggest!

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Chair Transition Team
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] reminder: Office Hours at 11PST, 6PM UTC

2013-03-30 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Sue and I will be having office hours in a few hours to answer questions on her 
decision and the Transition Team and the next steps. 

(Europeans: please note that different implementations of daylight savings time 
has made the current difference between PST and CET 8 hours rather than 9!)

Regards

Jan-Bart
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Wikimedia Armenia

2013-03-27 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Congratulations! 

Jan-Bart


On Mar 27, 2013, at 9:26 PM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear all,
 
 I am happy to announce that the the WMF Board of Trustees have resolved to
 recognize Wikimedia Armenia as the newest Wikimedia chapter:
 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Recognition_of_Wikimedia_Armenia
 
 This group has  already put a lot of effort into promoting Wikipedia and
 the other projects in Armenia on their road to recognition and I am really
 looking forward to hearing of their future endeavours.
 
 Please give a warm welcome to Wikimedia Armenia!
 
 Best regards,
 Bence
 (Affiliations Committee)
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement *please read*

2013-03-27 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear members of the community.
 
As they say… all good things must come to an end…
 
It’s hard for me and the rest of the Board to imagine the Wikimedia Foundation 
without Sue at the helm, but we’re confident, as is she, that we can make this 
transition positive for everyone. Sue is going to continue to work in what we 
broadly think of as “our space”, and we know she’s going to continue to be our 
friend and supporter. So, this isn’t goodbye.
 
I understand and respect Sue’s reasoning here, and know she’s going to continue 
to do important work. Although I’m tempted to write a big note of praise and 
love, I want to respect her request that we not move into thanking mode just 
yet.  She’s right, we have lots of work to do, and she’s not going anywhere 
right away. There will be lots of time for thanking later.
 
But I do wish to make the general statement that her contribution to the 
movement through the position of Executive director (and very active editor) 
has been and will continue to be incredible. As a board member I will forever 
be grateful that she was willing to bet on a small organization with a lot of 
potential… and then continued on to build on that potential to make it one of 
the most powerful examples in the space of open knowledge and learning.
 
Here’s what will happen next.
 
The Board has appointed a Transition Team which consists of the Chair of the 
Board of Trustees Kat Walsh,  and HR Committee member Alice Wiegand, Sue, Sue’s 
deputy and the Wikimedia Foundation’s Vice-President of Product and Engineering 
Erik Moeller, Geoff Brigham our General Counsel, and Gayle Karen Young, our 
Chief Talent and Culture Officer. I am the final member and am the Chair of the 
Transition Team, and Sue will be facilitating its work on my behalf.
 
(In case you don’t know, non-profit organizations often have outgoing EDs 
support the recruitment of their successors. The Board is of course ultimately 
responsible for appointing the Executive Director, but we want our search to be 
supported by our staff members, including Sue. Sue , Erik, Geoff and Gayle have 
done a lot of hiring for the Wikimedia Foundation over the past number of 
years, and we know they will bring experience and wisdom to the process.)
 
I will also be responsible for making this a transparent (where possible) and 
confidential (where needed) process and will set up the corresponding pages on 
Meta in the coming days (please give me some time to do so :). First step will 
be the office hours with Sue and myself this Saturday.
 
We haven’t yet defined exactly what the process will look like, although we do 
know that we will be engaging a search firm to help us. The Transition Team 
will be meeting informally over the next several weeks, and will have our first 
face-to-face meeting together in mid-April in Milan, as part of the Wikimedia 
Conference. I will give a status report shortly after that.
 
I’d be very happy to answer any questions you’ve got. To that end, Sue and I 
will be having office hours this Saturday, 30 of March, at 11AM PST [6PM UTC]. 
Or, we can talk on this list.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Vice Chair
Wikimedia Board of Trustees

On Mar 27, 2013, at 11:04 PM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hello Wikimedia community members,
 
 This is not an easy e-mail to write, and it’s been a very hard
 decision to make. But I’m writing to tell you that I’m planning to
 leave my position as the Executive Director of the Wikimedia
 Foundation.
 
 My departure isn’t imminent -- the Board and I anticipate it’ll take
 at least six months to recruit my successor, and I’ll be fully engaged
 as Executive Director all through the recruitment process and until we
 have a new person in place. We’re expecting that’ll take about six
 months or so, and so this note is not goodbye -- not yet.
 
 Making the decision to leave hasn’t been easy, but it comes down to two 
 things.
 
 First, the movement and the Wikimedia Foundation are in a strong place
 now. When I joined, the Foundation was tiny and not yet able to
 reliably support the projects. Today it's healthy, thriving, and a
 competent partner to the global network of Wikimedia volunteers. If
 that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t feel okay to leave. In that sense, my
 leaving is a vote of confidence in our Board and executive team and
 staff --- I know they will ably steer the Foundation through the years
 ahead, and I’m confident the Board will appoint a strong successor to
 me.
 
 And I feel that although we’re in good shape, with a promising future,
 the same isn’t true for the internet itself. (This is thing number
 two.) Increasingly, I’m finding myself uncomfortable about how the
 internet’s developing, who’s influencing its development, and who is
 not. Last year we at Wikimedia raised an alarm about SOPA/PIPA, and
 now CISPA is back. Wikipedia has experienced censorship at the hands
 of industry groups and governments, and we’re --increasingly, I
 think-- seeing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Info: Markus Glaser is elected Chair of the Wikimedia Chapters Association Council

2013-03-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi

Congratulations! I look forward to a continuation of the more practical and 
transparent approach that the Chapters Association has been taking in the past 
month (and thanks Fae and the rest for starting that). I enjoyed exchanging 
some ideas with you in London!

I hope to see that the Association will soon be able to benefit all the 
chapters (member or not) :)

Jan-Bart

On Mar 18, 2013, at 1:58 AM, Markus Glaser markus.gla...@wikimedia.de wrote:

 Hi,
 
 thanks for voting and thank you for your trust. Time will show if I can meet 
 your expectations. Thank you, Fae, for all the work you have done so far. I 
 assume I can continue to count on your experience :)
 
 In order to get things going, I totally depend on the help and support of the 
 Council members. We also need to involve all chapters and affiliate 
 organisations. Furthermore, I hope for very friendly relations to WMF and 
 their organisations.
 
 In order to shape the future of the WCA, please approach me with all 
 comments, criticism and suggestions!
 
 There's quite some work ahead of us! Our next milestone will be the Milan 
 conference.
 
 Cheers,
 Markus
 
 Am 18.03.2013 01:12, schrieb Kirill Lokshin:
 Congratulations to Markus!  I look forward to working with everyone to make
 the WCA a success in the coming year!
 
 Cheers,
 Kirill
 
 
 On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Congratulations to Markus on becoming the Chair of the WCAC.
 
 The election results is available at
 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Elections/2013_Chair#Votes
 ,
 with an associated detailed QA from the candidates on the associated
 talk page.
 
 Thank you to all candidates for coming forward and taking part in the
 public debate so well.
 
 I look forward to supporting Markus in his role as our Chair, and the
 discussions with everyone at the Milan conference next month.
 
 Cheers,
 Fae
 --
 Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae...@gmail.com
 Chapters Association Council sChair/s
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA
 Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 
 -- 
 Markus Glaser
 WCA Council Member (WMDE)
 Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Zero wins!

2013-03-13 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Congrats to all!

Jan-Bart


On Mar 13, 2013, at 2:28 AM, Kul Wadhwa kwad...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hey all,
 
 Wikipedia Zero just won the Activism Award @ SXSW!
 
 A big thanks to all of you for keeping knowledge free for EVERYONE!
 
 -- 
 Kul Wadhwa
 Head of Mobile
 Wikimedia Foundation
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] fiction: WMF policy of paying less than market

2013-03-07 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi james, (renamed thread to not distract from NDA discussion)

Your concerns have been noted, several times.

But I do want to make sure you (and everyone else) realise that there is no 
FACT like the one that you mention.

fact that the
 Foundation's policy of paying below market salary discriminates
 against potential hires with large expenses such as kids in college or
 a mortgage from 2007?

because
a)  there is no such policy. There are several areas where WMF pays market 
salary or more. Please don't create a myth. I have talked to our recruiters and 
they confirm this. Stating it as fact does not help your case or your 
credibility. In my experience WMF compensation and other benefits is well 
thought about and choices have been made (you might not agree with their 
outcome but they are being made, they don't happen to us)
b) you could argue that any salary level discriminates against people who need 
more. Just because I chose to have three kids (who will hopefully end up going 
to college if they want to do so) and choose to live where I want to live does 
not mean someone who offers me a salary which is unable to support my choices 
is discriminating against me… I live by the choices I make…

Finally I find the idea of restraining people to talk about salary almost 
comical in the WMF sense… as I find the idea of any substantial discussion 
amongst WMF employees being restrained by a document unrealistic. I am 
grateful that we have enough critical employees who are willing to voice their 
opinion on pretty much everything.

While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I think that its time to stop spreading a 
myth. If you do insist on tackling the issue, please base yourself on facts and 
not small sets of data an generalisations. I don't have all the fact either, 
but I know enough to know that your generalising statements are incorrect, so 
please stop making them.

Jan-Bart


On Mar 7, 2013, at 12:51 AM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 I'd like to know more about the non-disparagement clause which
 multiple people have stated that the Foundation's NDA includes. In
 particular, does it forbid employees from discussing the fact that the
 Foundation's policy of paying below market salary discriminates
 against potential hires with large expenses such as kids in college or
 a mortgage from 2007? Does it forbid employees from discussing the
 fact that the only evidence ever produced by Foundation employees in
 support of that policy is a non-peer reviewed popular press book which
 is not only contradicted by all of the recent secondary sources on the
 subject, but the interpretation of which is contradicted by the author
 of the book himself?
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Info: Election for WCA Chairperson

2013-02-25 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Ziko

No actually we did not agree on that. We agreed that there were several reasons 
that chapters might not join the Chapters Association. Again: i do not know all 
the specifics and cannot give you the arguments for the chapters that did not 
join, but some certainly voiced a reluctance to become part of a membership 
organisation within the Wikimedia Movement, simply because they felt it was a 
bit much)

And I am not sure that creating a membership model within a group of approved 
chapters (who have therefore already passed the AffCom test) can be described 
as a democratic model. You are creating an preferred status. You could argue 
that it is much more democratic to give all the approved organisations a vote. 
After all the Chapters Association intends to help all chapters with the 
exchange of knowledge of skills… regardless of wether they are a member or not 
(that was the last status I heard).

Jan-Bart



On Feb 25, 2013, at 1:13 AM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote:

 Jan-Bart, what you call a 'membership model' is a democratically
 established international NGO in which members have rights and obligations.
 It operates under a charter accepted by the chapters that joined. Maybe you
 would like to read the charter first, or think about the way the WMF (!)
 approves new chapters, or consider to improve the democratic character of
 the WMF before trying to undermine the WCA as such. I thought that we
 agreed in London that many chapters did not join because they now busy with
 other things.
 Ziko
 
 
 Am Montag, 25. Februar 2013 schrieb Fae :
 
 @Jan-Bart
 One of the early discussions before agreeing the WCA charter was the
 possibility of automatically counting all legally recognized chapters
 as members. It was felt that this would not result in a credible
 democratic process, indeed the current 21 members are not all very
 active in votes and the current voting pattern shows participation at
 around 2/3 of the members or less in any vote. If we counted all
 Chapters, then a quorum would have to be set to be artificially
 low.
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Resolutions/2012_votes
 
 
 Should any Chapter wish to vote in this election, they need only
 provide a statement to me and then the new Council member sends in a
 statement that they support the charter. The Council member need not
 be on the board of the Chapter. There are no fees, there are no
 specific duties and we are always looking for more light-weight ways
 of handing our processes. Any Council member recognized before the
 vote opens, will be eligible to vote.
 
 @Newyorkbrad
 My original thought was to allow an overall three week process, but
 was put under pressure to do this quickly to make a clear
 demonstration that I was going; however I would guess that opening the
 election does this rather than bringing forward the deadline to close
 it. I will take a look at the schedule again later today and
 reconsider the deadlines. In practice, I have had the opposite
 feedback from Council members, who thought that allowing 2 weeks for a
 vote as our past custom, was unnecessarily long.
 
 Thanks,
 Fae
 --
 Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae...@gmail.com javascript:;
 Chapters Association Council Chair http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA
 Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 
 
 -- 
 
 ---
 Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
 dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter
 http://wmnederland.nl/
 
 Wikimedia Nederland
 Postbus 167
 3500 AD Utrecht
 ---
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Info: Election for WCA Chairperson

2013-02-24 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All,

Not to be incredibly mean about this, but how about giving a vote to all 
chapters approved by the AffCom, rather than just the members? I know you are 
looking at the membership model and trying to see if it will work for you, but 
this sort of limits your options and perpetuates the feeling that you are not 
representing cooperation between ALL the chapters...

Jan-Bart


On Feb 24, 2013, at 2:29 PM, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,
 
 The schedule of election for the Chapters Association Council Chair
 has been announced at
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Elections/2013_Chair
 
 The schedule is:
Nominations open midnight (UTC) on Monday 25 February 2013.
Nominations close midnight on Monday 4 March 2013 and voting is opened.
Voting closes midnight Monday 11 March 2013.
 
 Note that all 21 Council members will be eligible to vote, including
 those that stand for election. In a heavily contested election,
 expecting nominated candidates to refrain from voting would not be
 workable.
 
 Thanks,
 Fae
 -- 
 Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae...@gmail.com
 Chapters Association Council Chair http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA
 Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Info: Election for WCA Chairperson

2013-02-24 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
So I would not dare speak for the specific chapters, but I gather some of them 
did not want to join simply because they did not like the membership model. So 
it might be good to open things up the other way around :)

Jan-Bart

On Feb 24, 2013, at 4:39 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:

 If chapters won't to be involved, why don't they join? I don't think there
 is even a plan to charge membership fees yet, so what have they got to lose?
 On Feb 25, 2013 12:35 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:
 
 Hi All,
 
 Not to be incredibly mean about this, but how about giving a vote to all
 chapters approved by the AffCom, rather than just the members? I know you
 are looking at the membership model and trying to see if it will work for
 you, but this sort of limits your options and perpetuates the feeling that
 you are not representing cooperation between ALL the chapters...
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 On Feb 24, 2013, at 2:29 PM, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 The schedule of election for the Chapters Association Council Chair
 has been announced at
 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Elections/2013_Chair
 
 
 The schedule is:
   Nominations open midnight (UTC) on Monday 25 February 2013.
   Nominations close midnight on Monday 4 March 2013 and voting is
 opened.
   Voting closes midnight Monday 11 March 2013.
 
 Note that all 21 Council members will be eligible to vote, including
 those that stand for election. In a heavily contested election,
 expecting nominated candidates to refrain from voting would not be
 workable.
 
 Thanks,
 Fae
 --
 Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae...@gmail.com
 Chapters Association Council Chair http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WCA
 Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are chapters part of the community and board seats for affiliates?

2013-02-22 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

So my 2 cents

I do consider the chapters to be an integral part of the community. Some of our 
community members prefer to work individually and some prefer to work together. 
Some things can be done by individuals and some things require organisations 
like chapters or thematic organisations. Wiki Loves Monuments is a great 
example of supporting the cause and it could only be done by collaboration 
between several chapters. Discussion about the role of chapters, thematic 
organisations or indeed the foundation itself are very healthy, but lets not 
forget that we are all part of the movement and share the common goals. If any 
one of the players of the movement does not support the goals, we should 
address that, but lets not disqualify those people that choose to help that are 
simply not editing individuals (as someone once said: it takes all kinds to 
make the world go round

So I regard both the elected and the selected seats to be community seats.

Jan-Bart


On Feb 22, 2013, at 6:42 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Le 19/02/2013 11:23, Christophe Henner a écrit :
 
 
 I would even add that chapters should, and perhaps are, be key part of our
 community. Online communities tend to die slowly over the time. The main
 reason is that virtual bonds are much easier to forget than physical
 ones. I mean it's easier stop sending email to someone than stopping to see
 someone.
 
 I think Wikipedia gathered such a community because of an ideal, not of 
 social bonds. Though parts of the community may form social, professional or 
 political bonds, and thus perdure through these mechanisms, the cause 
 sharing the knowledge should be the main raison d'être of the community. 
 Thus, I disagree that Chapters should be considered the key part of the 
 community: the cause should be the key part. In fact, if the cause ceases to 
 be the highest priority, then the community will tend to die and only the 
 institutions will tend to remain because of their own inertia and interests. 
 I don't consider that a good thing per se since this tends to lead to 
 sclerosis and a hollow structure with no other point than perpetuating 
 itself, instead of pushing for the next needed accomplishments to collect and 
 disseminate knowledge.
 
 Yes, chapter as such do not edit the projects directly. But does this mean
 they're not part of the community? I don't think so. They're a different
 part of the community, but still are a part of the community.
 Being part of the community doesn't allow to act on the name of the entire 
 community. The gap between the community and the Chapters is significant 
 enough to distinguish both, in particular for political and communicational 
 matters.
 
 
 
 So should the Chapters seats be considered asa Community seats ? I'd say
 that the term is wrong.
 
 We have the editing community seats, the meta community seats and the
 appointed seats. Perhaps we should differentiate the two sides of the
 community.
 Why not distinguish the community seats from the Chapters seats with the 
 terms community seats and  Chapters seats?
 Using the word community in both cases may induce to believe that's it's the 
 same community with two branches. But nothing guarantees that unity.
 
 By the way, what would you say Chapters actually are? Is it correct to say 
 that they're an administrative organization financed by the WMF through Fund 
 Dissemination Commitees?
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-19 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

I think that chapters represent a different part of the movement, and that 
their input in board composition results in different candidates than we would 
possibly elect :) At the same time the increased scope of affcom also gives us 
the option of increasing the scope of these two selected seats to include 
thematic organisations and user groups (giving them more community coverage 
than is the case now). That would be a good discussion to have over de coming 
months as the selected seats term expires in july next year…

thoughts anyone?

Jan-Bart


On Feb 19, 2013, at 8:42 AM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com wrote:

 Snipping a bunch for simplicities sake
 
 On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Jan-Bart de Vreede 
 jdevre...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 
 I simply don't agree.
 a) Chapters are part of the community
 b) Whenever a vote comes up for an appointed seat that seat obviously does
 not vote, therefore the (s)elected seats have a majority vote on any
 appointed seat (5 our of 9 votes) Apart from that I would say that Jimmy's
 seat is a community seat, but recognise that not all share that viewpoint.
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 :-/ To be honest I don't particularly like this meme that the chapter are
 part of the community either. The chapters may be part of the community
 (and so the statement not false) but we use the phrasing in such a way as
 to say that they are more then they are.  There may be a part of the
 community but they are really a very small part of it overall.
 
 Their power in board selection and movement voice (both formally and
 informally) is disproportionately huge and we set them up to represent the
 community when that is a serious misstatement. They represent their members
 who are a very small subset of the community and often have a very
 different goal and interest set then the, much larger, remainder of the
 community and depending on the chapter may include more donors or readers
 then editors.
 
 That is not to say they don't do good things at times (or that it is a
 problem to include donors or readers, personally I think they are part of
 our larger community) but we should not confuse what they actually are.
 
 Jimmy is a whole different question ;) I would certainly say he deserves a
 seat at the table, I prefer to just categorize him as Jimmy because he's
 just a class of his own in all ways :).
 
 James
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking back at the London Conference

2013-02-19 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

So just to add my perspective on the mail below (as one of the two board 
members that were present).

As mentioned before the board has several big issues with the WCA where it was 
going (as outlined on the meta discussion page and our statement: 
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Chapters_Association#WMF_Board_letter_regarding_the_Chapters_Association)

We felt that our statement was needed at the time, and some good debate has 
taken place. If we were inconsistent in our behaviour (in the eyes of Ziko) 
this was simply because things increasingly seemed to be going the wrong way 
and views evolve over time. 

The discussion we had was a very useful one, and you can read a pretty accurate 
transcript at: http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/WCA/ (and I see that minutes are 
being worked on as I type this, so a formal report is likely to be announced 
here soon I guess)

The main focus that I tried to bring across is that the people working on the 
Chapter Association stop focusing on process, structure, incorporation, hiring 
and strategy but rather focus on getting things started and trying to develop 
things that work and can grow. Rather than focus on membership and voting, 
focus on getting an exchange of knowledge, experience and skills between all 
the chapters (members or not).

And though it might not come across right now without seeing the results,  I 
feel that the weekend was very useful. There was a lot of energy in the room 
and a willingness to re-assess where the CA is, and where it needs to go (thank 
you for that everyone, and thank you to Fae for helping create this open 
environment). Public discussion on meta, along with open exchange and notes are 
a good start, and I am sure that a lot of things will be happening the next 
months. Hopefully this will grow into the potential that chapter cooperation 
has always had. 

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Wikimedia Board of Trustees


On Feb 19, 2013, at 5:10 PM, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote:

 Dear Council Members and everyone interested in the WCA,
 
 On 16/17th February 2013 a number of Council Members visited the
 London Conference I had proposed in mid January to talk about the way
 of the WCA and to prepare the Wikimedia Conference in Milan. We are
 happy that the London Conference did happen, and, in spite of the
 debatable WMF board statement of 5th February, that two WMF board
 members still agreed to join us.
 
 Because in 2012/2013 the signals from the WMF were not very consistent
 I tried to receive more clarity about the relationship between
 Foundation and Association. This was only partially successful, but I
 understand that the two present WMF board members were as open as it
 was possible within the constraints of the WMF board unity. We very
 much appreciated the commitment of Alice and Jan-Bart and were happy
 not to hear certain allegations from the board statement again.
 
 The London Conference discussed many WCA subjects collected during the
 last months. One of them was communication, and I am content that I
 could convince the participants of a major change. For someone who is
 interested in the WCA it has been very difficult to follow the
 proceedings, plans and results. When e.g. a Council Member wanted to
 talk to others or discuss something, he or she used one of the several
 mailing lists the movement has, or Meta Wiki, or private email
 addresses. I believe that this has been a fundamental problem with the
 regard to the perception of the WCA, and that the participation even
 from Council Members suffered also because of this kind of
 communication.
 
 After the election of a new Chair, the Chair of the WCA Council will
 issue a Bulletin, a kind of short report, with a summary of what
 happened recently and what are the plans for the near future. This
 will be put on Meta Wiki, and, naturally, discussions will centre
 around those Bulletins. For those who are interested it will be much
 easier to follow and to participate. If someone wants to support the
 WCA via translations, he or she can translate those Bulletins instead
 of a lot of messages.
 
 There will be a special list 'WCA-announcements. If you want to be
 informed about Bulletins and discussions, join the list and you will
 get links to Meta Wiki. It's a one-way-list, because the discussions
 are supposed to be on Meta Wiki. This is a WCA service for Council
 Members and non Council Members alike. In this way, nobody is obliged
 to be on a heavy traffic list such as Wikimedia-l.
 
 When we talked about the future and a possible new election of the
 Chair I also asked about my position. If for any reason someone
 believed that there should be a new election of the Deputy Chair, I
 wanted to hear. The participants said that that is no issue and that
 it is good to have continuity. The role of the Deputy Chair is to be
 there for the case that at some moment there is no Chair, and then the
 Deputy has to arrange the election.
 
 The WCA

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking back at the London Conference

2013-02-19 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
yeah, I was going to suggest the same thing, why make a different list with 
different membership? 

Jan-Bart (personally agreeing with mike's personal viewpoint… please don't take 
it personally)


On Feb 19, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Michael Peel michael.p...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:

 
 On 19 Feb 2013, at 19:57, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 On 19 February 2013 16:10, Ziko van Dijk vand...@wmnederland.nl wrote:
 
 There will be a special list 'WCA-announcements. If you want to be
 informed about Bulletins and discussions, join the list and you will
 get links to Meta Wiki. It's a one-way-list, because the discussions
 are supposed to be on Meta Wiki. This is a WCA service for Council
 Members and non Council Members alike. In this way, nobody is obliged
 to be on a heavy traffic list such as Wikimedia-l.
 
 
 Thanks Ziko, I'm happy to create this list for you on the Foundation
 servers, please follow the instructions at
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists#Create_a_new_list to file a
 bug. I'd suggest WCA-Announce to match our similar announcement lists for
 MediaWiki, WLM, Toolserver etc and to keep it relatively short.
 
 Is there a reason why wikimediaannounce-l can't be used here?
 
 Thanks,
 Mike
 (Personal viewpoint)
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey 

Thanks!

I am sure that Alice is grateful for the input. I must confess though that I 
think that most of these questions require a deep knowledge of the movement and 
the community and as such disqualify a lot of potential candidates… (I would 
hazard a guess that none of the past appointed candidates (including myself) 
were not able to answer 80% of these questions until about 6 months on the 
job. So are you proposing these questions to select new candidates or are you 
simply trying to get attention for these issues (as you have been doing over 
the past months… which is fair enough to some degree?)

(and to be fair: at this point, with all the experience I have within the 
movement I would want to see most of these decisions researched before 
committing to a point of view)

Jan-Bart



On Feb 18, 2013, at 9:19 AM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
 ...
 if you have questions that you think we should ask: feel free to suggest 
 them here :)
 
 I have these ten questions:
 
 1. What do you think a reasonable goal for the growth of the Wikimedia
 Education Program over the next five years is?
 
 2. Do you believe that the Foundation should establish an endowment?
 If so, how large do you think such an endowment should be; in
 particular, should the Foundation establish an endowment large enough
 to subsist at present staffing levels and growth rates from current
 investment grade bond interest rates without accepting additional
 donations? If so, over how many years do you think it would be most
 appropriate to establish such an endowment?
 
 3. How often do you think the Foundation should propose advocacy
 actions to the community? Do you believe the Foundation should survey
 the opinion of the community and donors on this question?
 
 4. Should the Foundation meet or exceed Silicon Valley competitive pay
 to attract and retain the best talent while competing with firms able
 to offer equity participation? Do you believe the Foundation should
 survey the opinion of the community and donors on this question? Why
 or why not?
 
 5. Should the Foundation establish a system of awarding employee
 bonuses in amounts determined by anonymous peer evaluations? Why or
 why not?
 
 6. Some proportion of long term project editors are impoverished,
 probably within a few percentage points of the impoverished proportion
 of the population as a whole. How do you think the Foundation could
 best assist impoverished long term volunteers? Do you think it should?
 Why or why not?
 
 7. To what extent do you believe the Foundation should reimburse
 travel and content development expenses for Wikinews contributors? In
 particular, if you were to propose a pilot grant program to grant
 travel and expense funds directly to individual Wikinews reporters,
 how many such awards would you begin with and how would you measure
 their effectiveness?
 
 8. PeerWise is a popular closed-source assessment question and answer
 database (http://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/) used in hundreds of
 higher education institutions. Unlike textbooks, traditional courses,
 MOOCs, and Moodle-style courses, PeerWise question databases can and
 often are populated entirely by learners, with answers reviewed in a
 style very similar to wiki content. Do you believe it would be
 appropriate for the Foundation to develop an open source version of
 PeerWise? Why or why not?
 
 9. Do you believe the Foundation should employ professional fact
 checkers who would not edit reader-facing content on the projects, but
 who would be available to research questions pertaining to content
 disputes at the request of projects' dispute resolution volunteers
 (e.g. Wikipedia mediators) to prepare reports to help volunteers
 resolve content disputes? Why or why not? Do you believe the
 Foundation should survey the opinion of the community and donors on
 this question?
 
 10. What is your experience with editing or otherwise supporting
 Foundation projects?
 
 Sincerely,
 James Salsman


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi

Sounded like good intervention, thanks for reminding me :)

Truth is of course that board Governance Committee is driving this process 
together with Gayle. That means that multiple community (s)elected board 
members are involved in the initial screening and that the whole board will be 
included in the final selection. 

This would also be a good opportunity to make a small point: not all external 
consultancy is evil :) As a community we tend to be naturally suspicious of 
people that get paid a lot of money for tasks that theoretically could also 
be done my the community… There is a good reason why we sometimes rely on paid 
external advisors, some of which were given by Gayle. 

m|Oppenheim in particular has been a great partner in WMF hiring with great 
results, and I hope that they can be as effective in this search (which we hope 
you can help out with by suggesting good candidates to them)

Regards

Jan-Bart 


On Feb 18, 2013, at 1:23 PM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga t...@wikimedia.org 
wrote:

 Hi all.
 
 I would like to recommend to see the Brazil case where the recruitment
 of the coordinator of the Catalyst Project was done in partnership
 with the community
 
 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/01/11/brazil-recruiting-and-partnership-with-the-community-moves-forward/
 
 After the community noticed the mistake being done in hiring and
 expensive and useless headhunter, this was critized
 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.brazil/161 and,
 fortunately, promptly listened by Wikimedia Foundation people in
 charge of the process. The community even had the idea of a more open
 and transparent process, where the candidates would engage in a wiki
 task - four finalists for the whole process engaged in such task. Also
 in the interview with two wikimedians, the 10 candidates could have a
 taste of what they would expect. :)
 
 We all saw the dozens of mistakes of this headhunters, that luckly
 were solved on time by the community, improving a lot the final
 results. Not saying the model shouldn't be adapted and improved, it
 must. And after all, no one better than locals to tell about their own
 community.
 
 Best,
 
 Tom
 
 On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede
 jdevre...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 Hey
 
 Thanks!
 
 I am sure that Alice is grateful for the input. I must confess though that I 
 think that most of these questions require a deep knowledge of the movement 
 and the community and as such disqualify a lot of potential candidates… (I 
 would hazard a guess that none of the past appointed candidates (including 
 myself) were not able to answer 80% of these questions until about 6 months 
 on the job. So are you proposing these questions to select new candidates 
 or are you simply trying to get attention for these issues (as you have been 
 doing over the past months… which is fair enough to some degree?)
 
 (and to be fair: at this point, with all the experience I have within the 
 movement I would want to see most of these decisions researched before 
 committing to a point of view)
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 
 On Feb 18, 2013, at 9:19 AM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
 ...
 if you have questions that you think we should ask: feel free to suggest 
 them here :)
 
 I have these ten questions:
 
 1. What do you think a reasonable goal for the growth of the Wikimedia
 Education Program over the next five years is?
 
 2. Do you believe that the Foundation should establish an endowment?
 If so, how large do you think such an endowment should be; in
 particular, should the Foundation establish an endowment large enough
 to subsist at present staffing levels and growth rates from current
 investment grade bond interest rates without accepting additional
 donations? If so, over how many years do you think it would be most
 appropriate to establish such an endowment?
 
 3. How often do you think the Foundation should propose advocacy
 actions to the community? Do you believe the Foundation should survey
 the opinion of the community and donors on this question?
 
 4. Should the Foundation meet or exceed Silicon Valley competitive pay
 to attract and retain the best talent while competing with firms able
 to offer equity participation? Do you believe the Foundation should
 survey the opinion of the community and donors on this question? Why
 or why not?
 
 5. Should the Foundation establish a system of awarding employee
 bonuses in amounts determined by anonymous peer evaluations? Why or
 why not?
 
 6. Some proportion of long term project editors are impoverished,
 probably within a few percentage points of the impoverished proportion
 of the population as a whole. How do you think the Foundation could
 best assist impoverished long term volunteers? Do you think it should?
 Why or why not?
 
 7. To what extent do you believe the Foundation should reimburse
 travel and content development expenses for Wikinews contributors? In
 particular, if you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

And I was not responding specifically to you, no worries!

Jan-Bart


On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:01 PM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga t...@wikimedia.org 
wrote:

 Hi,
 
 sure I didn't mean every external consultancy is evil. Sorry if I
 sounded like that. Firstly, the world is not divided between good and
 evil, like if we had an axis of evil. :P
 
 Just as an example, the same company I just criticized had a better
 performance in another country. Things can vary a lot and I am sure
 people in charge of the particular process are aware of that. I just
 wanted to remind a particular case that I believe is worth studying.
 
 And I do think sometimes to have an external consultancy can help us
 to diminish our own bias.  ;)
 
 Tom
 
 On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede
 jdevre...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 Hi
 
 Sounded like good intervention, thanks for reminding me :)
 
 Truth is of course that board Governance Committee is driving this process 
 together with Gayle. That means that multiple community (s)elected board 
 members are involved in the initial screening and that the whole board will 
 be included in the final selection.
 
 This would also be a good opportunity to make a small point: not all 
 external consultancy is evil :) As a community we tend to be naturally 
 suspicious of people that get paid a lot of money for tasks that 
 theoretically could also be done my the community… There is a good reason 
 why we sometimes rely on paid external advisors, some of which were given by 
 Gayle.
 
 m|Oppenheim in particular has been a great partner in WMF hiring with great 
 results, and I hope that they can be as effective in this search (which we 
 hope you can help out with by suggesting good candidates to them)
 
 Regards
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 
 -- 
 Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
 A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
 useful than a life spent doing nothing.
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

I seriously can't follow this, could you explain?

Jan-Bart

On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:11 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:

 I don't think it's about childish beliefs about evil. Money has a real 
 influence, conflicts of interests are a real thing, and opacity at any stage 
 allow abuses. It has been shown countless times in countless situations, 
 empirically and scientifically, that people in power WILL use it to keep it, 
 as much as they can.
 When an entity is using its influence to determine who will supervise it, 
 it's a matter of keeping the power of self-determination. You may agree or 
 not with this strategy, but there is no way to lift doubts about the fairness 
 of such appointment and obtain a clean cut legitimacy from such premises.
 
 Cheers.
 
 
 Le 18/02/2013 09:52, Jan-Bart de Vreede a écrit :
 Hi
 
 Sounded like good intervention, thanks for reminding me :)
 
 Truth is of course that board Governance Committee is driving this process 
 together with Gayle. That means that multiple community (s)elected board 
 members are involved in the initial screening and that the whole board will 
 be included in the final selection.
 
 This would also be a good opportunity to make a small point: not all 
 external consultancy is evil :) As a community we tend to be naturally 
 suspicious of people that get paid a lot of money for tasks that 
 theoretically could also be done my the community… There is a good reason 
 why we sometimes rely on paid external advisors, some of which were given by 
 Gayle.
 
 m|Oppenheim in particular has been a great partner in WMF hiring with great 
 results, and I hope that they can be as effective in this search (which we 
 hope you can help out with by suggesting good candidates to them)
 
 Regards
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 On Feb 18, 2013, at 1:23 PM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga t...@wikimedia.org 
 wrote:
 
 Hi all.
 
 I would like to recommend to see the Brazil case where the recruitment
 of the coordinator of the Catalyst Project was done in partnership
 with the community
 
 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/01/11/brazil-recruiting-and-partnership-with-the-community-moves-forward/
 
 After the community noticed the mistake being done in hiring and
 expensive and useless headhunter, this was critized
 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.brazil/161 and,
 fortunately, promptly listened by Wikimedia Foundation people in
 charge of the process. The community even had the idea of a more open
 and transparent process, where the candidates would engage in a wiki
 task - four finalists for the whole process engaged in such task. Also
 in the interview with two wikimedians, the 10 candidates could have a
 taste of what they would expect. :)
 
 We all saw the dozens of mistakes of this headhunters, that luckly
 were solved on time by the community, improving a lot the final
 results. Not saying the model shouldn't be adapted and improved, it
 must. And after all, no one better than locals to tell about their own
 community.
 
 Best,
 
 Tom
 
 On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede
 jdevre...@wikimedia.org wrote:
 Hey
 
 Thanks!
 
 I am sure that Alice is grateful for the input. I must confess though that 
 I think that most of these questions require a deep knowledge of the 
 movement and the community and as such disqualify a lot of potential 
 candidates… (I would hazard a guess that none of the past appointed 
 candidates (including myself) were not able to answer 80% of these 
 questions until about 6 months on the job. So are you proposing these 
 questions to select new candidates or are you simply trying to get 
 attention for these issues (as you have been doing over the past months… 
 which is fair enough to some degree?)
 
 (and to be fair: at this point, with all the experience I have within the 
 movement I would want to see most of these decisions researched before 
 committing to a point of view)
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 
 On Feb 18, 2013, at 9:19 AM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
 ...
 if you have questions that you think we should ask: feel free to suggest 
 them here :)
 I have these ten questions:
 
 1. What do you think a reasonable goal for the growth of the Wikimedia
 Education Program over the next five years is?
 
 2. Do you believe that the Foundation should establish an endowment?
 If so, how large do you think such an endowment should be; in
 particular, should the Foundation establish an endowment large enough
 to subsist at present staffing levels and growth rates from current
 investment grade bond interest rates without accepting additional
 donations? If so, over how many years do you think it would be most
 appropriate to establish such an endowment?
 
 3. How often do you think the Foundation should propose advocacy
 actions to the community? Do you believe the Foundation should survey
 the opinion of the community and donors on this question?
 
 4. Should the Foundation meet or exceed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
yes:

this bit:


I don't think it's about childish beliefs about evil. Money has a real 
influence, conflicts of interests are a real thing, and opacity at any stage 
allow abuses. It has been shown countless times in countless situations, 
empirically and scientifically, that people in power WILL use it to keep it, as 
much as they can.
When an entity is using its influence to determine who will supervise it, it's 
a matter of keeping the power of self-determination. You may agree or not with 
this strategy, but there is no way to lift doubts about the fairness of such 
appointment and obtain a clean cut legitimacy from such premises.


I don't understand what you are trying to say or imply?

Jan-Bart

On Feb 18, 2013, at 3:30 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Jan-Bart,
 
 can you be more specific?
 
 Cheers
 
 
 Le 18/02/2013 10:55, Jan-Bart de Vreede a écrit :
 Hey
 
 I seriously can't follow this, could you explain?
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:11 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 I don't think it's about childish beliefs about evil. Money has a real 
 influence, conflicts of interests are a real thing, and opacity at any 
 stage allow abuses. It has been shown countless times in countless 
 situations, empirically and scientifically, that people in power WILL use 
 it to keep it, as much as they can.
 When an entity is using its influence to determine who will supervise it, 
 it's a matter of keeping the power of self-determination. You may agree or 
 not with this strategy, but there is no way to lift doubts about the 
 fairness of such appointment and obtain a clean cut legitimacy from such 
 premises.
 
 Cheers.
 
 
 Le 18/02/2013 09:52, Jan-Bart de Vreede a écrit :
 Hi
 
 Sounded like good intervention, thanks for reminding me :)
 
 Truth is of course that board Governance Committee is driving this process 
 together with Gayle. That means that multiple community (s)elected board 
 members are involved in the initial screening and that the whole board 
 will be included in the final selection.
 
 This would also be a good opportunity to make a small point: not all 
 external consultancy is evil :) As a community we tend to be naturally 
 suspicious of people that get paid a lot of money for tasks that 
 theoretically could also be done my the community… There is a good 
 reason why we sometimes rely on paid external advisors, some of which were 
 given by Gayle.
 
 m|Oppenheim in particular has been a great partner in WMF hiring with 
 great results, and I hope that they can be as effective in this search 
 (which we hope you can help out with by suggesting good candidates to them)
 
 Regards
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi

On Feb 18, 2013, at 8:52 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:

 To ensure a representation of the interests of the community, the 
 determination of a new Board Trustee cannot be influenced by the people 
 within the Board Trustee (and even less by the WMF itself). Otherwise, it 
 would boil down to a disguised form of cooptation.
 Cooptation is a way to absorb new elements into a structure without 
 threatening it, which is good for stability, but bad if changes or trust are 
 needed. In particular, if the community differs  from what the WMF or the 
 Board of Trustees are doing, cooptation cannot repair the divergence. In 
 fact, it tends to aggravate it.

But it wasn't intended to repair any possible divergence, this is what the five 
community (s)elected seats are for… if there is a divergence you can (s)elect 
different people for those five seats. The appointed seats are intended to help 
add specific skills/expertise to the board to make sure that it can perform its 
governance tasks effectively….

 
 Now, if the Board of Trustees sets requirements, or pays the people who will 
 recommend the candidates, it immediately breaks the guaranty that there is 
 something else than people in power keeping their power structure intact. It 
 doesn't mean it is happening, but it can't guaranty it's not, which defeats 
 the point of having Trustees.

Simply don't agree with that reasoning. The point of trustees it to provide 
governance and direction to the WMF. The five community (s)elected seats and 
the founders seat select four others to help them perform this task. They will 
look for skills and expertise that they find lacking within their composition. 
If you cannot trust them to select the right people, how can you trust them to 
do anything? Which leads to … why vote for them at all?

 
 That's why, even if you agree with the strategy behind the current proposal 
 and its advantages, you should be aware that it decreases the legitimacy of 
 the governance structure to the eyes of the community.

I don't think it does, or should. If it does then I think its worth explaining 
(like I have hopefully done above)


 
 Personally, I think the main function of the Board of Trustees should be to 
 increase the trust of the community, thanks to a rigorous and transparent 
 scrutiny of its internal processes.
 

I, and most of the non-profit world (not to mention the law ;)  respectfully 
disagree and would argue that the main function of any board of trustees is 
more governance related. For a good summary of what our Board of Trustees' 
function is I would refer you to:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual#Roles_and_responsibilities

Jan-Bart





 Le 18/02/2013 14:14, Jan-Bart de Vreede a écrit :
 yes:
 
 this bit:
 
 
 I don't think it's about childish beliefs about evil. Money has a real 
 influence, conflicts of interests are a real thing, and opacity at any stage 
 allow abuses. It has been shown countless times in countless situations, 
 empirically and scientifically, that people in power WILL use it to keep it, 
 as much as they can.
 When an entity is using its influence to determine who will supervise it, 
 it's a matter of keeping the power of self-determination. You may agree or 
 not with this strategy, but there is no way to lift doubts about the 
 fairness of such appointment and obtain a clean cut legitimacy from such 
 premises.
 
 
 I don't understand what you are trying to say or imply?
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 On Feb 18, 2013, at 3:30 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Jan-Bart,
 
 can you be more specific?
 
 Cheers
 
 
 Le 18/02/2013 10:55, Jan-Bart de Vreede a écrit :
 Hey
 
 I seriously can't follow this, could you explain?
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:11 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 I don't think it's about childish beliefs about evil. Money has a real 
 influence, conflicts of interests are a real thing, and opacity at any 
 stage allow abuses. It has been shown countless times in countless 
 situations, empirically and scientifically, that people in power WILL use 
 it to keep it, as much as they can.
 When an entity is using its influence to determine who will supervise it, 
 it's a matter of keeping the power of self-determination. You may agree 
 or not with this strategy, but there is no way to lift doubts about the 
 fairness of such appointment and obtain a clean cut legitimacy from such 
 premises.
 
 Cheers.
 
 
 Le 18/02/2013 09:52, Jan-Bart de Vreede a écrit :
 Hi
 
 Sounded like good intervention, thanks for reminding me :)
 
 Truth is of course that board Governance Committee is driving this 
 process together with Gayle. That means that multiple community 
 (s)elected board members are involved in the initial screening and that 
 the whole board will be included in the final selection.
 
 This would also be a good opportunity to make a small point: not all 
 external consultancy is evil :) As a community we tend

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Nemo,

I seriously have no idea what you are talking about. I looked at the talk page 
and could not find a hint. In what way is the board manual a highly misleading 
link?

Jan-Bart


On Feb 18, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Jan-Bart de Vreede, 18/02/2013 21:09:
 I, and most of the non-profit world (not to mention the law ;)  respectfully 
 disagree and would argue that the main function of any board of trustees is 
 more governance related. For a good summary of what our Board of Trustees' 
 function is I would refer you to:
 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual#Roles_and_responsibilities
 
 I'm getting sick of this linking [[Wikipedia board manual]], can you please 
 fix your highly misleading links?
 I'm considering restoring the original page under that title and adding a 
 disambiguation note, please express disagreement on talk page if you don't 
 want me to.
 Thanks,
   Nemo


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

(have cut some items to focus on main points)


On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:22 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 if there is a divergence you can (s)elect different people for those five 
 seats. The appointed seats are intended to help add specific 
 skills/expertise to the board to make sure that it can perform its 
 governance tasks effectively….
 
 Now, if the Board of Trustees sets requirements, or pays the people who 
 will recommend the candidates, it immediately breaks the guaranty that 
 there is something else than people in power keeping their power structure 
 intact. It doesn't mean it is happening, but it can't guaranty it's not, 
 which defeats the point of having Trustees.
 Simply don't agree with that reasoning. The point of trustees it to provide 
 governance and direction to the WMF.
 Of course they must provide governance and direction, but with the greater 
 priority of representing the values of the community, in order to deserve the 
 alleged trust.

I think that governance is the greatest priority, and community comes into it 
as an integral part.




  If you cannot trust them to select the right people, how can you trust them 
 to do anything?
 Exactly my point.
 
But if no one is likely to trust the (s)elected board members, why not simply 
have a completely appointed board? You don't trust them anyway? In my view the 
(s)elected seats are the core of the board (see below) and they are the link to 
the community.

 
 
 
 Personally, I think the main function of the Board of Trustees should be to 
 increase the trust of the community, thanks to a rigorous and transparent 
 scrutiny of its internal processes.
 
 I, and most of the non-profit world (not to mention the law ;)  respectfully 
 disagree and would argue that the main function of any board of trustees is 
 more governance related.
 You should not leave the community out the equation. I agree that the 
 internal function of the Board of Trustees is governance related. But from 
 the community's perspective, WMF should not exist by itself and for itself, 
 and that's why there are trustees: to *guaranty *that the main reason of its 
 existence is something else that getting money, prestige or any other 
 personal leverage. That's where the trust comes from.
 WMF exists to empower the community and its cause, and all the governance's 
 decisions are subsumed by this principle.

I am not leaving them out, I simply view governance as the main priority of the 
board.

 
  For a good summary of what our Board of Trustees' function is I would refer 
 you to:
 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual#Roles_and_responsibilities
 Thank you for the link. I understand now why you think that five seats belong 
 to the community, the article is twice misleading: by saying that Chapters 
 ARE the community, and by saying that five out of ten is a majority.

I simply don't agree. 
a) Chapters are part of the community
b) Whenever a vote comes up for an appointed seat that seat obviously does not 
vote, therefore the (s)elected seats have a majority vote on any appointed seat 
(5 our of 9 votes) Apart from that I would say that Jimmy's seat is a community 
seat, but recognise that not all share that viewpoint.

Jan-Bart



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-18 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
AHHH!

Oh wow, thats pretty bad. 

Funny thing is: I really don't have the board manual url bookmarked (terrible 
of me) and i googled BOARD MANUAL WIKIMEDIA… and you will never guess what 
the first result was…. the Wikimedia one doesnt really show up until the 6th 
result :( sorry about that.. my intentions were good…

(so yes, please feel free to make sure we no longer have a Wikipedia Board 
Manual, as we don't have a wikipedia board :)

Jan-Bart


On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:55 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

 The link you provided said Wikipedia board manual, Jan-Bart.  The correct
 link is: 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_board_manual#Roles_and_responsibilities
 
 
 Risker/Anne
 
 
 
 On 19 February 2013 01:52, Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
 
 Hey Nemo,
 
 I seriously have no idea what you are talking about. I looked at the talk
 page and could not find a hint. In what way is the board manual a highly
 misleading link?
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 On Feb 18, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
 Jan-Bart de Vreede, 18/02/2013 21:09:
 I, and most of the non-profit world (not to mention the law ;)
 respectfully disagree and would argue that the main function of any board
 of trustees is more governance related. For a good summary of what our
 Board of Trustees' function is I would refer you to:
 
 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual#Roles_and_responsibilities
 
 I'm getting sick of this linking [[Wikipedia board manual]], can you
 please fix your highly misleading links?
 I'm considering restoring the original page under that title and adding
 a disambiguation note, please express disagreement on talk page if you
 don't want me to.
 Thanks,
  Nemo
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Your support is wanted: The WMF Board of Trustees is looking for a new Board member

2013-02-17 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi

I would not think so. In my experience we end up with candidates who appreciate 
a confidential process (especially if they get turned down). We have different 
processes for each of the three different board member types, this is probably 
the most private one. But if you have questions that you think we should ask: 
feel free to suggest them here :)

Regards

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation


On Feb 18, 2013, at 5:16 AM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 Samuel Klein wrote:
 
 ... The person we find this time will also be through our community
 and advisor networks
 
 Will there be an opportunity for the community to pose questions to
 finalists, the answers to which the Board might be able to evaluate in
 making a final decision?
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13

2012-11-16 Thread Jan-bart de Vreede
 good and in
 depth
 discussions about this, but this is not reflected in the
 recommendation in
 their specific case. I guess this might be the case for a few more
 applications.
 
 I don't want to go to a specific case here, but just want to illustrate
 why I feel the arguments are poorly presented. Since you did go into
 such
 great discussion, I feel it would be a waste of your efforts if the
 arguments are so shallow.
 
 I am still hopeful you will change your mind, and add more reasoning to
 the cases.
 
 Kind regards,
 
 Lodewijk
 
 
 2012/11/15 Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 
 hi Lodewijk,
 
 first, this is basically a recommendation for the Board, not the final
 allocation. However, regarding your specific question: We are not
 planning
 on providing further detailed responses - we have already offered a
 great
 many details in our overall recommendations in terms of process and
 methodology.
 
 Per the fact that some organizations got so much less than they
 requested: please, keep in mind that there was a suggested 120%
 maximum
 budget growth capping, and also that WCA membership fees have been
 deducted
 for everyone (but not other WCA-related costs), as WCA may apply for
 FDC
 funding directly (or choose a different model, once it is decided,
 and the
 organization incorporated).
 
 Also, our recommendations make it very clear that smaller entities,
 which were making significant leaps in maturity tended to get most of
 what
 they asked for, while entities which are medium to large, staffed and
 already on a clear growth path, were looked at with even greater
 rigor in
 terms of sustainable and appropriate plans (also because of the budget
 sizes). Small entities are often going from no/part-time staff to a
 full-staff position, which can increase the budget (as compared to the
 previous year) significantly, but cannot be avoided. Larger entities
 can
 grow more harmoniously.
 
 best,
 
 dariusz
 
 
 
 
 On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Lodewijk 
 lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 From the arguments, I had a hard time to understand why some
 organizations got so much less than they requested, and some got
 every
 single dollar. I assume more detailed arguments will follow?
 
 Kind regards,
 Lodewijk
 
 
 2012/11/15 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
 
 Hi Everyone
 
 Rather than repeat everything I would like to point you to a blog
 post
 created earlier today.
 
 
 
 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/11/15/fdc-process-milestone-sharing-wikimedia-movement-funds/
 
 I do want to take the opportunity to once again thank all those
 involved in this first round, including all the participating
 chapters. As
 expressed earlier: this is the future of our funds dissemination
 and we
 will refine the process, but this first round has exceeded my
 expectations
 on all levels. Thanks everyone!
 
 Jan-Bart
 (who now goes digging in the attic for some barn stars)
 
 
 On 15 Nov 2012, at 19:38, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 wrote:
 
 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 Date: Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:25 PM
 Subject: FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13
 To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
 
 
 The inaugural Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) is pleased to
 announce
 recommendations [1] on Round 1 of funds allocations for the year
 2012-13.
 The WMF Board of Trustees will make a decision on these
 recommendations by
 December 15, 2012.
 
 The FDC received proposals from 12 movement entities for Round 1
 for
 a
 total requested amount of 10.4 million USD. These proposals were
 from 11
 Wikimedia chapters and the Wikimedia Foundation. Three proposals
 were
 received after the deadline of 1 October had passed, but the FDC
 decided
 that since it was the first time for the process, the late
 proposals
 would
 be accepted and discussed. Since the proposal deadline, the FDC and
 FDC
 support staff have spent many hours reviewing and assessing these
 proposals
 to determine a set of allocations that would best support movement
 goals.
 This assessment included a 4-day in-person deliberation session in
 San
 Francisco over the period October 28-31, where the FDC members
 discussed
 the proposals in depth and determined allocation amounts for each
 applying
 entity.
 
 The FDC recognizes that this is not a perfect process, and that the
 process
 and the outcome will improve over time as we learn more about what
 works in
 the movement and what drives impact. We invite the community to
 provide
 overall feedback on these recommendations on the talk page for
 these
 recommendations [2] and to provide feedback about the FDC process
 on-wiki
 to the Ombudsperson [3], who will collect this feedback and use it
 in our
 continuous improvement process. For formal complaints about the
 recommendations, there is a separate process, outlined below.
 
 If any entity has a complaint about the FDC's recommendation, it
 should

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13

2012-11-15 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi Everyone

Rather than repeat everything I would like to point you to a blog post created 
earlier today.

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/11/15/fdc-process-milestone-sharing-wikimedia-movement-funds/

I do want to take the opportunity to once again thank all those involved in 
this first round, including all the participating chapters. As expressed 
earlier: this is the future of our funds dissemination and we will refine the 
process, but this first round has exceeded my expectations on all levels. 
Thanks everyone!

Jan-Bart
(who now goes digging in the attic for some barn stars….)


On 15 Nov 2012, at 19:38, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote:

 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 Date: Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:25 PM
 Subject: FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13
 To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
 
 
 The inaugural Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) is pleased to announce
 recommendations [1] on Round 1 of funds allocations for the year 2012-13.
 The WMF Board of Trustees will make a decision on these recommendations by
 December 15, 2012.
 
 The FDC received proposals from 12 movement entities for Round 1 for a
 total requested amount of 10.4 million USD. These proposals were from 11
 Wikimedia chapters and the Wikimedia Foundation. Three proposals were
 received after the deadline of 1 October had passed, but the FDC decided
 that since it was the first time for the process, the late proposals would
 be accepted and discussed. Since the proposal deadline, the FDC and FDC
 support staff have spent many hours reviewing and assessing these proposals
 to determine a set of allocations that would best support movement goals.
 This assessment included a 4-day in-person deliberation session in San
 Francisco over the period October 28-31, where the FDC members discussed
 the proposals in depth and determined allocation amounts for each applying
 entity.
 
 The FDC recognizes that this is not a perfect process, and that the process
 and the outcome will improve over time as we learn more about what works in
 the movement and what drives impact. We invite the community to provide
 overall feedback on these recommendations on the talk page for these
 recommendations [2] and to provide feedback about the FDC process on-wiki
 to the Ombudsperson [3], who will collect this feedback and use it in our
 continuous improvement process. For formal complaints about the
 recommendations, there is a separate process, outlined below.
 
 If any entity has a complaint about the FDC's recommendation, it should be
 submitted by 23:59 UTC on 22 November 2012 in accordance with the complaint
 process outlined in the Framework for the Creation and Initial Operation of
 the FDC [4]:
 
   - The complaint should be in the form of a 500-or-fewer word summary
   directed to the two non-voting WMF Board representatives on the FDC
   (Jan-Bart and Patricio)
   - The complaint should be submitted on-wiki, through the FDC portal page
   designated for this purpose [5]
   - These board representatives will present the complaint to the WMF
   Board at the same time it considers the FDC recommendation.
   - Formal complaints can be submitted only by the Board Chair of a
   funding-seeking entity.
   - Formal complaints must be filed within seven days of the submission of
   the FDC slate of recommendations to the WMF Board (by end of day UTC
   November 22)
   - Any planned or approved disbursements to the organization filing a
   complaint will be put on hold until the complaint is resolved.
   - If the WMF Board's consideration of the complaint results in an
   amendment of the FDC's recommendations (which is expected only in
   extraordinary circumstances), the WMF Board may choose to release extra
   funds from the WMF reserves to provide additional funds not allocated by
   the FDC's initial recommendation.
   - Other members of the WMF Board may participate in the investigation if
   approved by the Chair of the WMF Board.
 
 
 
 on behalf of the FDC
 
 Dariusz Jemielniak (Chair)
 
 [1]
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2012-2013_round1
 
 
 
 
 [2]
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2012-2013_round1
 
 
 
 [3] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Appeals_regarding_FDC_process
 
 
 
 [4]
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_the_Creation_and_Initial_Operation_of_the_FDC#Complaint_submission_process
 
 
 
 [5]
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Complaints_regarding_FDC_recommendations_to_the_board
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 
 __
 dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
 profesor zarządzania
 kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
 i centrum badawczego CROW
 Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
 http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13

2012-11-15 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey Thomas,

I think I can take this one. I think that the FDC has expressed that its up to 
the WCA to determine its own financing model, while at the same time indicating 
that the membership fees model might not be the optimal solution for this, and 
that there are better ways)

At the same time the FDC has already expressed that the current FDC framework 
might not work for every situation (and has recommended one or two exceptions 
this time around). It is also suggesting that the Board of Trustees might want 
to make an exception to the current rules for applying to the FDC because of 
the unique nature of the WCA.

(and I think it is a good suggestion which is worth discussing)

Jan-Bart



On 15 Nov 2012, at 20:54, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Nov 15, 2012 7:26 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote:
 
 and also that WCA membership fees have been deducted
 for everyone (but not other WCA-related costs), as WCA may apply for FDC
 funding directly (or choose a different model, once it is decided, and the
 organization incorporated).
 
 Can you elaborate on that? By my understanding of the eligibility
 requirements, the WCA is not eligible for FDC funding and won't be for at
 least two years.
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13

2012-11-15 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
 in the case of Wikimedia France I guess the 120% cap was
 not the reason you only allocated 10% of the amount they requested. I find
 the reasoning in their case quite poor for such a major decision which
 could potentially mean that people get fired and the organization has to
 scale down significantly. I'm confident that you had very good and in depth
 discussions about this, but this is not reflected in the recommendation in
 their specific case. I guess this might be the case for a few more
 applications.
 
 I don't want to go to a specific case here, but just want to illustrate
 why I feel the arguments are poorly presented. Since you did go into such
 great discussion, I feel it would be a waste of your efforts if the
 arguments are so shallow.
 
 I am still hopeful you will change your mind, and add more reasoning to
 the cases.
 
 Kind regards,
 
 Lodewijk
 
 
 2012/11/15 Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 
 hi Lodewijk,
 
 first, this is basically a recommendation for the Board, not the final
 allocation. However, regarding your specific question: We are not planning
 on providing further detailed responses - we have already offered a great
 many details in our overall recommendations in terms of process and
 methodology.
 
 Per the fact that some organizations got so much less than they
 requested: please, keep in mind that there was a suggested 120% maximum
 budget growth capping, and also that WCA membership fees have been deducted
 for everyone (but not other WCA-related costs), as WCA may apply for FDC
 funding directly (or choose a different model, once it is decided, and the
 organization incorporated).
 
 Also, our recommendations make it very clear that smaller entities,
 which were making significant leaps in maturity tended to get most of what
 they asked for, while entities which are medium to large, staffed and
 already on a clear growth path, were looked at with even greater rigor in
 terms of sustainable and appropriate plans (also because of the budget
 sizes). Small entities are often going from no/part-time staff to a
 full-staff position, which can increase the budget (as compared to the
 previous year) significantly, but cannot be avoided. Larger entities can
 grow more harmoniously.
 
 best,
 
 dariusz
 
 
 
 
 On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Lodewijk 
 lodew...@effeietsanders.orgwrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 From the arguments, I had a hard time to understand why some
 organizations got so much less than they requested, and some got every
 single dollar. I assume more detailed arguments will follow?
 
 Kind regards,
 Lodewijk
 
 
 2012/11/15 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
 
 Hi Everyone
 
 Rather than repeat everything I would like to point you to a blog post
 created earlier today.
 
 
 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/11/15/fdc-process-milestone-sharing-wikimedia-movement-funds/
 
 I do want to take the opportunity to once again thank all those
 involved in this first round, including all the participating chapters. 
 As
 expressed earlier: this is the future of our funds dissemination and we
 will refine the process, but this first round has exceeded my 
 expectations
 on all levels. Thanks everyone!
 
 Jan-Bart
 (who now goes digging in the attic for some barn stars)
 
 
 On 15 Nov 2012, at 19:38, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 wrote:
 
 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl
 Date: Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:25 PM
 Subject: FDC recommendations on funds allocation, Round 1, 2012-13
 To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
 
 
 The inaugural Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) is pleased to
 announce
 recommendations [1] on Round 1 of funds allocations for the year
 2012-13.
 The WMF Board of Trustees will make a decision on these
 recommendations by
 December 15, 2012.
 
 The FDC received proposals from 12 movement entities for Round 1 for
 a
 total requested amount of 10.4 million USD. These proposals were
 from 11
 Wikimedia chapters and the Wikimedia Foundation. Three proposals were
 received after the deadline of 1 October had passed, but the FDC
 decided
 that since it was the first time for the process, the late proposals
 would
 be accepted and discussed. Since the proposal deadline, the FDC and
 FDC
 support staff have spent many hours reviewing and assessing these
 proposals
 to determine a set of allocations that would best support movement
 goals.
 This assessment included a 4-day in-person deliberation session in
 San
 Francisco over the period October 28-31, where the FDC members
 discussed
 the proposals in depth and determined allocation amounts for each
 applying
 entity.
 
 The FDC recognizes that this is not a perfect process, and that the
 process
 and the outcome will improve over time as we learn more about what
 works in
 the movement and what drives impact. We invite the community to
 provide
 overall feedback on these recommendations on the talk page for these
 recommendations [2

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The new narrowed focus by WMF: conflicts of interest

2012-10-27 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi,

So just as a note from me personally (as a individual WMF Trustee member). What 
I think is the general idea is that 

1) Sue formulates her thoughts on meta rather than privately
2) This is influenced by the public discussion on meta
3) She wraps up at a certain point
4) and sends her final proposition to the board
5) And the board takes her proposition, and the feedback on meta (which she 
will have included in her proposition) and makes a decision

And in this case I think that all of that was done. Its not a 
community-consensus thing as far as I see. As your Board of Trustees (which 
also includes your representation) its our task to make that final decision. 
Having Sue prepare this decision in a public way is a great way of preparing 
for that decision.

Jan-Bart



On 27 Oct 2012, at 10:32, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:

 
 
 I agree with Denny’s point about COIs in this discussion, and I believe that 
 the same issue has been raised regarding the FDC. 
 
 I find it helpful when people who have financial interests or other potential 
 COIs disclose that information in their statements on that Meta page and/or 
 in Wikimedia-l depending on where they make their comments, and I would be in 
 favor of a policy requiring that potential conflicts of interest be disclosed 
 in a situation like this. These potential COIs include being a staff member 
 of WMF whose budget or employment would be affected positively or negatively 
 by these proposed changes.
 
 In my own case, I'm not a fellow or aspiring fellow, chapter executive, paid 
 researcher, or WMF staff person whose department would be affected by these 
 proposed changes, so I believe that as far as my own comments are concerned, 
 I can speak without a financial interest in the outcome of the discussion.
 
 If we operate by consensus instead of by mere vote-counting, and if editors 
 and WMF staff participate in good faith, then hopefully there will be enough 
 balancing and give-and-take negotiation among those with COIs for a 
 supermajority consensus to solidify. The other option is to ask for people 
 who don’t have potential COIs to make a decision based on the opinions and 
 information provided by others. However, this may all be a moot issue since 
 it appears to me that Sue, a few of her chosen associates, and the Board 
 apparently intend to make decisions themselves, so the community discussion 
 on that Meta talk page will be used for discussion but not for finalizing a 
 decision. Someone please correct me if I’m mistaken.
 
 Pine 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC members

2012-09-16 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hi All,

I would also like to add my thanks to the FDC advisory committee for helping us 
get started and Anasuya Sengupta and her WMF team for all the interviews and 
all the hard work getting this organized!

I am looking forward to a good first year in which we can help great things 
happen and learn how to improve the process!

Jan-Bart




 Dear friends:
 
 I just posted the initial composition of the Funds Dissemination
 Committee in 
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/2012_FDC_members
 as resolved today by the Board of Trustees. The resolution will be
 published as soon as possible.
 
 I would like to thank all the nominees, on behalf of the Board of
 Trustees. Many committed and valuable wikimedians nominated themselves
 to serve in this Committe. For those who were not appointed, we will
 ask you to help us in other ways. For those who were appointed,
 welcome aboard!
 
 Best,
 
  Patricio.
 
 -- 
 Patricio Lorente
 Blog: http://www.patriciolorente.com.ar
 Identi.ca // Twitter: @patriciolorente
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Upcoming Survey, Feedback requested, and Office Hour

2012-09-14 Thread Jan-bart de Vreede
Hey

So someone sent me the internal-l mail and I do think that the zero 
real-world thing is taken out of context here. But a few points

1) Lets not have these discussions on internal-l, there is no reason to not 
have those in public
2) See 1)
3) I am sure that the data set allows us to see chapter's individual responses, 
depending on whether or not we know the country (I would figure we do?)
4) Doesn't every survey contain questions that don't apply to the whole 
responding audience?

Jan-Bart




On 14 sep. 2012, at 17:05, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com wrote:

 
 
 On 9/12/12 4:14 PM, Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
 Hey
 
 So I might have missed some mails on this thread (perhaps because they were 
 not posted on this public list) but I highly doubt that Sue perform surveys 
 that do not have a real-world impact on our operations. I know that the 
 results of the previous surveys were used in several discussions (including 
 at a board level) in order to provide more insight….
 
 
 Indeed. I agree. These surveys do have real-world impact, which is why we 
 objected to a survey asking people from all over the world how they would 
 rate Wikimedia Chapters activities when
 1) there is likely no chapter in their country
 2) they may have no idea that a wikimedia chapter is for example Wikimedia 
 Washington DC or Wikimedia Israel
 3) all chapters are collectively considered regardless of individual 
 differences
 
 And since you comment on that specific sentence
 
 I'll point out also that there are zero real-world implications for the 
 survey results.
 
 I'd like to clarify that these exact words come from Sue herself in an email 
 sent on the 10th of September on internal-l.
 
 I am glad to read that you disagree with that statement and recognize that 
 there is real-world impact.
 
 
 (did not want to comment any further on that problematic survey, but wanted 
 to attribute statement properly)
 
 
 Flo
 
 
 On the other hand, using these surveys to gain more insight is not the same 
 as using them to hold each other accountable which is sometimes easy to 
 do. Every survey (and questions) has a lots of interpretation magic which 
 can easily lead you astray, but I don't have to tell you (the community) 
 this :)
 
 
 Jan-Bart
 
 
 On 10 Sep 2012, at 23:01, Delphine Ménard 
 notafishz-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
 
 Contrarily to Sue, I do
 think that these surveys (should) have a real-world impact and
 (should) keep us all on our toes, fine tuned to the critisicism, needs
 and wishes of the editors of the WIkimedia projects. As such I expect
 us to make sure that we do get as precise a picture as possible of
 what those are.
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 wikimedia-l-rusutvdil2icgmh+5r0dm0b+6bgkl...@public.gmane.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 
 
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] commons promotion

2012-09-13 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

So I had a great time handing out flyers for the Wiki takes Gouda promotion 
last weekend. We quickly learned to look for people with camera's or camera 
bags and target them with flyers. Since then I have been walking around and 
have noticed how many people walk around with a semi professional camera taking 
pictures of whatever.

How about having a business card size promotion leaflet which we can hand out 
to photographers, tourists or whatever in our countries. It would briefly 
explain that Wikimedia needs useable (and what usable means for us) pictures 
and that they can contribute with photographs. It would explain the free 
license and contain a link to a special URL helping them upload.

Not only could this result in a lot of new material (although we might want to 
add that we do not need the umpteenth picture of the white house or eiffel 
tower) but it would also create awareness amongst a group we have not typically 
targeted before…

(or has this already been done?)

Jan-Bart de Vreede
(obviously representing just his own point of view here)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] commons promotion

2012-09-13 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

I told no one I was a board member ;) Funny thing was they organised Wiki takes 
Gouda and then they asked me to join ;) But there were a lot of stroopwafels 
involved so it probably was way beyond conflict of interest but just corrupt ;)

I would claim that you should have this on business card size, so that you can 
always have them with you, because you find photographers everywhere.

Agreed that we might want to focus on wikipedia as a destination for the 
pictures (please donate your pictures for use on wikipedia)

Jan-Bart


On 13 Sep 2012, at 10:23, Thierry Coudray thierry.coud...@wikimedia.fr wrote:

 Hum... a Dutch WMF board of Trustees member promoting Gouda  -  Conflict
 of interest.   ;-)
 
 More seriously, WMFr have a folder which explains what is Commons, how that
 works, that everyone can contribute, free licence, what you can or cannot
 upload, etc. (
 http://www.wikimedia.fr/sites/default/files/Brochure_Wikimedia_Commons.pdf).
 For example, some of WMFr volonteers use it during their city photos
 huntings.
 
 But we probably need something more Wikipedia oriented so people we met
 could easely understand that most of the photos they see on Wikipedia come
 from people like them who shoot when they visit a monument or a museum
 orsimply when they walk
 in the street. And they can easely become a WP photographer.
 Some of our volonteers have already this idea in mind. So we just have to
 be bold.  :)
 
 Thierry
 
 
 
 2012/9/13 Jan-Bart de Vreede jdevre...@wikimedia.org
 
 Hey
 
 So I had a great time handing out flyers for the Wiki takes Gouda
 promotion last weekend. We quickly learned to look for people with camera's
 or camera bags and target them with flyers. Since then I have been walking
 around and have noticed how many people walk around with a semi
 professional camera taking pictures of whatever.
 
 How about having a business card size promotion leaflet which we can hand
 out to photographers, tourists or whatever in our countries. It would
 briefly explain that Wikimedia needs useable (and what usable means for us)
 pictures and that they can contribute with photographs. It would explain
 the free license and contain a link to a special URL helping them upload.
 
 Not only could this result in a lot of new material (although we might
 want to add that we do not need the umpteenth picture of the white house or
 eiffel tower) but it would also create awareness amongst a group we have
 not typically targeted before…
 
 (or has this already been done?)
 
 Jan-Bart de Vreede
 (obviously representing just his own point of view here)
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Thierry Coudray
 Directeur exécutif
 Wikimédia France http://www.wikimedia.fr/
 Mob. 06.82.85.84.40
 http://blog.wikimedia.fr/
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Upcoming Survey, Feedback requested, and Office Hour

2012-09-12 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hey

So I might have missed some mails on this thread (perhaps because they were not 
posted on this public list) but I highly doubt that Sue perform surveys that do 
not have a real-world impact on our operations. I know that the results of the 
previous surveys were used in several discussions (including at a board level) 
in order to provide more insight….

On the other hand, using these surveys to gain more insight is not the same as 
using them to hold each other accountable which is sometimes easy to do. 
Every survey (and questions) has a lots of interpretation magic which can 
easily lead you astray, but I don't have to tell you (the community) this :)

Jan-Bart


On 10 Sep 2012, at 23:01, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com wrote:

 Contrarily to Sue, I do
 think that these surveys (should) have a real-world impact and
 (should) keep us all on our toes, fine tuned to the critisicism, needs
 and wishes of the editors of the WIkimedia projects. As such I expect
 us to make sure that we do get as precise a picture as possible of
 what those are.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] Short list FDC / Ombudsman Candidates on Meta

2012-09-02 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Hello Everyone

Because Anasuya is taking a small weekend break she asked me to post the 
shortlist of candidates after going through it one more time with the FDC 
Advisory Group.

I just posted that list on:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/2012_Shortlist_FDC_Nominees

I also would like to take this opportunity to all candidates, whether or not 
they made this shortlist. As you know the FDC has an important role in funds 
dissemination and we are very grateful that so many of you volunteered to help 
make it a success! Also a thank you to all those involved in the selection 
process so far :)

The next steps for the final selection process are also outlined on the Meta 
page.

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Vice Chair Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC

2012-07-13 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
I would like to personally thank Arne and Phoebe for their service to the the 
Board. I found their viewpoints to be extremely helpful in the many discussions 
that we have had over the past years. I was happy that the chapters were able 
to come to their selection and that we had the opportunity to work together! By 
selecting Patricio and Alice the chapters have continued the tradition of 
choosing candidates that are thoughtful and who will add new perspectives which 
we as a board can benefit from.

A special thank you to Phoebe who showed us what it takes to be a real board 
secretary. Her tireless efforts to help organize the many simultaneous 
discussions that often take place made sure that we got things done in a more 
efficient way.

While Ting is not leaving the board I would like to take this opportunity to 
thank him for his work in the past years as Chair of the Board of Trustees. 
Taking over from Michael Snow he had big shoes to fill, and he managed to do so 
:) Working closely with Ting as Vice Chair has taught me the real meaning of 
the word humility as well as what it takes to be able to represent a part of 
our movement to the outside world (not an enviable task). 

I am very excited that Kat is willing to take on the Chair position and look 
forward to supporting her as the Vice Chair as Board of Trustees of this great 
movement.

Warm regards

Jan-Bart de Vreede
Vice-Chair Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation



On 12 jul. 2012, at 16:42, Matthew Roth mr...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 Hello all,
 Please find a press release from the Wikimedia Foundation announcing Board
 of Trustees election results and welcoming Alice Wiegand and Patricio
 Lorente to the Board.
 
 thanks,
 Matthew
 
 -- 
 Matthew Roth
 Global Communications
 Wikimedia Foundation
 
 
 
 (This release is also posted at
 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/WMF_Board_Election_July_2012
 )
 
 *Wikimedia Foundation Announces 2012-13 Board of Trustees and Elected
 Officers at Wikimania in Washington DC*
 
 Washington, DC -- July 12, 2012-- The Wikimedia Foundation today announced
 recent appointments and elected officers for the 2012-13 Board of Trustees.
 Every year at Wikimania, the annual gathering of Wikimedia contributors
 from around the world, the Wikimedia Board appoints its officers for the
 coming year, and this year’s appointments were announced in Washington, DC.
 
 This year, Kat Walsh was appointed Chair of the Board, Jan-Bart de Vreede
 was re-appointed Vice-chair, Stuart West was re-appointed as Board
 Treasurer and Bishaka Dhatta becomes Board Secretary. The Board expressed
 its great thanks to former Board Chair Ting Chen, as well as outgoing
 trustees Arne Klempert and Phoebe Ayers. Their leadership has strengthened
 and nurtured the growth of the worldwide Wikimedia movement.
 
 I am honored to have been chosen to chair the Board in the coming year,”
 said Kat Walsh, Chairman of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. “I
 want to thank Ting Chen for his service in his period as Chair, and I look
 forward to working closely with him as I take on this new role. It's an
 important time in the history of the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia
 movement: I look forward to leading the Board in the year ahead.
 
 “It’s been a pleasure to serve the Wikimedia movement as Chair of the Board
 of Trustees,” said Ting Chen. “Since I took on the role of Chair we’ve
 worked with our global community and the Foundation to introduce an
 ambitious five-year plan to increase the diversity and overall population
 of our community, while also establishing long-term financial plans to
 ensure sustainability for our movement and our projects. Our Board has
 matured and strengthened, and I’m proud of the tireless work of my
 colleagues.”
 
 There are 10 seats on the Board and according to the Foundation's bylaws,
 three members are elected by the Wikimedia community, two are selected by
 the Wikimedia chapters, the Founder seat is held by Jimmy Wales, and four
 members are appointed by the Board itself to provide additional, specific
 expertise.
 
 The Foundation is happy to welcome its two newest members of the Board,
 Patricio Lorente and Alice Wiegand, who were elected to the Board by the
 Wikimedia chapters in May 2012. The chapters seat selection process was
 created in April 2008, in order to demonstrate the Board's commitment to
 the chapters as an important player in the fulfillment of the Wikimedia
 mission.
 
 Patricio Lorente is the former President of Wikimedia Argentina. He has
 worked as Project Manager of the Association for Social Development in
 Argentina and he currently serves as General ProSecretary of the National
 University of La Plata. Alice Wiegand is personal aide to the Mayor of
 Meerbusch, Germany. She has recently begun her Master’s studies in Public
 Policy and Governance.
 
 *The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees for 2012-2013:*
 *Kat Walsh, Board Chair (current term

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimania-l] Selection of winning bid for Wikimania 2013: Hong Kong

2012-05-02 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Congratulations to the winning bid ! Its amazing to see all the hard work all 
the cities put in their bids!

And a thanks to James and all the jury members for once again going through an 
intensive process to reach a decision!

Jan-Bart





On 3 mei 2012, at 01:52, James Forrester jdforres...@gmail.com wrote:

 On behalf of the Wikimania 2013[0] selection Jury[1], I can announce
 that we have awarded the conference to Hong Kong. Congratulations to
 the bidding team, and to the London team who also did a particularly
 excellent job.
 
 There were five official bids: Bristol, Naples and Surakarta, as well
 as the two finalists of Hong Kong and London[2]. The Jury and the
 bidding teams discussed them in three public IRC meetings in April. We
 determined that Hong Kong and London were the strongest contenders,
 and decided to focus on these two as the finalists. After further
 e-mail enquiries, and considering evaluation by Wikimedia Foundation
 staff, a final, private meeting was held to reach a final decision.
 
 The Jury was pleased by the high quality in both the final bids, and
 required over three hours' discussion to reach the final verdict. We
 considered each bid according to the criteria[3], focussing on
 following factors: Venue, Program, Geo-location  Logistics, Local
 Opportunities, Accommodations, Team  Chapter, and Budget  Finances.
 We found consensus that the Hong Kong bid was the stronger, especially
 because of their strong advance planning; solid support by the local
 Wikimedia Chapter, the community, local government, and a partner
 organisation that is experienced in planning conferences; and their
 good combination of venue and accommodation.
 
 The Jury has confidence that the Hong Kong bidding team will pull off
 a magnificent Wikimania, and we are pleased for our global community
 to return to Asia once again. With a motivated group of volunteers who
 have experience in organizing smaller Wikimedia activities, and a
 partner with experience in organizing larger-scale events, they have
 found a good mix to create a successful conference. The Jury did also
 identify some weaker points in each the bids, and will be happy to
 share those privately with the teams so that the Hong Kong team can
 use that to their advantage in organizing Wikimania 2013, and the
 other teams can use the feedback to improve their bids for a future
 year.
 
 We thank all candidate teams - the process is gruelling and requires a
 very substantial time investment. They are all to be commended for
 their submissions.
 
 To use this soap-box for a moment, as Moderator I would like to remind
 the community that we hope that this time was the last that we use
 this ad-hoc process to decide on the Wikimania venue, and encourage
 everyone to engage with the discussion on Meta[4] about how we might
 select Wikimania 2014 and beyond in a more open, community-led way.
 Please, do join in the discussions.
 
 Yours,
 
 James Forrester
 Moderator, Wikimania 2013 Jury
 For the Wikimania 2013 Jury
 
 [0] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2013
 [1] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2013_jury
 [2] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2013_bids
 [3] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2013_judging_criteria
 [4] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_Advisory_Group
 -- 
 James D. Forrester
 jdforres...@wikimedia.org | jdforres...@gmail.com
 [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
 
 ___
 Wikimania-l mailing list
 wikimani...@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Foundation-l] Volunteers Wanted: Funds Dissemination Process Advisory Group

2012-04-10 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede

On 10 apr. 2012, at 14:31, Thomas Dalton wrote:

 On 10 April 2012 13:25, Christophe Henner christophe.hen...@gmail.com wrote:
 Here is my understanding of the goal of this committee, but I might be
 wrong.
 
 The board defined the broader lines of the committee, but did not tackled
 the operational details. Bridgespan is there to work on that, and the
 Advisory Groups is there to help them define the operational details.
 
 Can you elaborate on what you see as being the operational details
 that need to be defined?

Sure

just about everything

as in

1) Who should be on this committee
2) On what kind of requests should they form an opinion (not microgrants for 
example)
3) What are criteria
4) What is the process/timeline

+ 401 other things that we can come up with as questions.

Jan-Bart


 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


  1   2   >