[Wikimedia-l] Re: Emerging human rights concern related to invasion of Ukraine

2022-03-12 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Amir,

I'm pretty sure I didn't write that there should not be a policy in place
and I also didn't mention the current arrests, so what exactly are you
referring to?

BR, Philip

On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 at 15:11, Amir Sarabadani  wrote:

> So you're saying if WMF didn't have a human rights policy, the user would
> have not been arrested? Similar to the "fact" that no Wikipedian has been
> arrested before the inception of the policy?
>
> What kind of logic is this?
>
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 3:18 PM Philip Kopetzky 
> wrote:
>
>> This situation does raise the question why the WMF decided to widely
>> publish a human rights policy that will make the Wikimedia projects appear
>> in less of a neutral stance than before.
>>
>> The fact that this move will endanger volunteers was even acknowledged in
>> the FAQs [1], but was just waived off as something that will have little
>> impact. It should be clear by now that the WMF is not in a position to
>> protect those it endangers adequatly, so it might be worthwile in the
>> future to have a less US-centric approach to social topics. It doesn't mean
>> that such a policy shouldn't exist - but the WMF should be aware that
>> announcing this policy on all possible media channels can't be the right
>> approach if it doesn't want to make volunteers' work even more difficult
>> and dangerous.
>>
>> [1]:
>> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Human_Rights_Policy/Frequently_asked_questions#Does_this_policy_inadvertently_expose_volunteers_to_greater_risk
>> ?
>>
>> On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 at 11:02, Pierre-Yves Beaudouin via Wikimedia-l <
>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you Maggie for your message.
>>>
>>> Let us know when the movement should communicate about this terrible
>>> news. I'm sure that a lot of affiliates would be happy to communicate on
>>> that topic, contact our governments and human rights NGOs, but we don't
>>> want to make things worse for Pessimist2006 and others editors living in
>>> Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> --
>>> *Pierre-Yves Beaudouin*
>>> *Membre du conseil d'administration*
>>>
>>> *-*
>>> *WIKIMEDIA FRANCE*
>>> Association pour le libre partage de la connaissance
>>> *www.wikimedia.fr <http://www.wikimedia.fr/>*
>>> *28 rue de Londres, 75009 PARIS*
>>> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1234174880>
>>>
>>> Le 2022-03-11 22:45, Maggie Dennis a écrit :
>>>
>>> Hello, all.
>>>
>>> I’m writing to update you all on an emerging human rights concern
>>> related to the invasion of Ukraine. We are concerned that an effort is
>>> being made to identify Wikipedia editors whose activities are seen as
>>> opposing the Russian narrative of the war.
>>>
>>> I wanted to let you know that we are aware, we are monitoring, and we
>>> are acting in various ways already. While we cannot discuss the details for
>>> the safety of all involved, over a year ago, we hired a Human Rights
>>> Lead <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Team> with
>>> experience in individual safety to help us with such situations. This
>>> includes partnerships with allied organizations experienced in human rights
>>> interventions as well as connecting with appropriate community groups and
>>> functionaries to provide safety support. We care about the safety of
>>> Wikimedians, and I know that you do, too. We have heard as much from many
>>> of you directly.
>>>
>>> I want to take this opportunity to raise your awareness of the need to
>>> protect yourselves and each other online. It’s such a cliche that I’m
>>> almost hesitant to write it, but in this world, sharing information is
>>> sometimes a radical act. Because of this, we ask you all to please be aware
>>> of what information you share about yourself on Wikimedia platforms and how
>>> your Wikimedia activities can be connected to your personal identity. Some
>>> Wikimedians have chosen to operate transparently. Others have chosen to
>>> operate under pseudonyms. Whatever path you’ve chosen, there are best
>>> practices for your personal protection. Some guidance has been gathered
>>> here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Voices_under_Threat
>>>
>>> At the same time as I share these recommendations, I want to firmly
>>> assert that all 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Emerging human rights concern related to invasion of Ukraine

2022-03-12 Thread Philip Kopetzky
This situation does raise the question why the WMF decided to widely
publish a human rights policy that will make the Wikimedia projects appear
in less of a neutral stance than before.

The fact that this move will endanger volunteers was even acknowledged in
the FAQs [1], but was just waived off as something that will have little
impact. It should be clear by now that the WMF is not in a position to
protect those it endangers adequatly, so it might be worthwile in the
future to have a less US-centric approach to social topics. It doesn't mean
that such a policy shouldn't exist - but the WMF should be aware that
announcing this policy on all possible media channels can't be the right
approach if it doesn't want to make volunteers' work even more difficult
and dangerous.

[1]:
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Human_Rights_Policy/Frequently_asked_questions#Does_this_policy_inadvertently_expose_volunteers_to_greater_risk
?

On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 at 11:02, Pierre-Yves Beaudouin via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Thank you Maggie for your message.
>
> Let us know when the movement should communicate about this terrible news.
> I'm sure that a lot of affiliates would be happy to communicate on that
> topic, contact our governments and human rights NGOs, but we don't want to
> make things worse for Pessimist2006 and others editors living in Belarus,
> Russia and Ukraine.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> *Pierre-Yves Beaudouin*
> *Membre du conseil d'administration*
> *-*
> *WIKIMEDIA FRANCE*
> Association pour le libre partage de la connaissance
> *www.wikimedia.fr *
> *28 rue de Londres, 75009 PARIS*
> 
>
> Le 2022-03-11 22:45, Maggie Dennis a écrit :
>
> Hello, all.
>
> I’m writing to update you all on an emerging human rights concern related
> to the invasion of Ukraine. We are concerned that an effort is being made
> to identify Wikipedia editors whose activities are seen as opposing the
> Russian narrative of the war.
>
> I wanted to let you know that we are aware, we are monitoring, and we are
> acting in various ways already. While we cannot discuss the details for the
> safety of all involved, over a year ago, we hired a Human Rights Lead
>  with experience in
> individual safety to help us with such situations. This includes
> partnerships with allied organizations experienced in human rights
> interventions as well as connecting with appropriate community groups and
> functionaries to provide safety support. We care about the safety of
> Wikimedians, and I know that you do, too. We have heard as much from many
> of you directly.
>
> I want to take this opportunity to raise your awareness of the need to
> protect yourselves and each other online. It’s such a cliche that I’m
> almost hesitant to write it, but in this world, sharing information is
> sometimes a radical act. Because of this, we ask you all to please be aware
> of what information you share about yourself on Wikimedia platforms and how
> your Wikimedia activities can be connected to your personal identity. Some
> Wikimedians have chosen to operate transparently. Others have chosen to
> operate under pseudonyms. Whatever path you’ve chosen, there are best
> practices for your personal protection. Some guidance has been gathered
> here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Voices_under_Threat
>
> At the same time as I share these recommendations, I want to firmly assert
> that all who try to get people vital information in times of crisis -
> whether Wikimedian or otherwise - should be celebrated. At the core of our
> movement is the belief that knowledge belongs to everyone, and the
> Foundation is firmly against efforts by anyone to stand in the way of the
> flow of verifiable information in whatever forum it is shared. I believe,
> as is the way with all Wikimedians, that the path to a better world is to
> ensure people everywhere have access to knowledge, and that we, as
> collective societies, should provide them the tools to assess the accuracy
> of the information they encounter. Censorship is not the solution.
>
> If you have information to share about this situation or about other
> potential threats of persecution to the safety of Wikimedia volunteers due
> to their good faith contributions to the projects, please share with
> talktohumanrig...@wikimedia.org. The team is quite busy and may not be
> able to respond to all communications because of that, but they do read
> them, and your emails do matter.
>
> I wish the best for all of you who read this and for all seekers of
> information and sharers of information in Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, and
> beyond. We will share updates of the situation here as we are able within
> the framework of prioritizing people’s safety. In the meantime, I’d like to
> take the 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: December 14 Conversation hour about organizing for #WikiForHumanRights 2022

2021-12-14 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Maybe we should also fill the knowledge gap on how Wikimedia's footprint
could be reduced, if that isn't too complex ;-)

On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 at 17:14, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Thanks for organizing this again.  'Getting more complex' is right...
>
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 8:00 AM Alex Stinson 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Reminder that the conversation hour for #WikiForHumanRights starts in 2
>> hours at 1500 UTC. If you are interested in organizing for this next year,
>> we hope to see you there,
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Alex Stinson
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 2:39 PM Alex Stinson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> *TL:DR --* Join us for a Conversation hour December 14 at 1500 UTC to
>>> learn how to organize for WikiForHumanRights 2022.
>>>
>>> Hello Everyone!
>>>
>>> #WikiForHumanRights: Right to a Healthy Environment  2022 [1]is back!
>>> From April 15  through to June 14 2022 we encourage local affiliates,
>>> individuals or organizations interested in the campaign to organize
>>> activities around the intersecting themes of human rights and the
>>> environment.
>>>
>>> If you are interested in organizing your community for the campaign,
>>> please join us for a conversation hour on December 14 at 1500 UTC [4]
>>> (more details below) to learn how you can participate.
>>>
>>>
>>> Why the Right to a Healthy Environment?
>>>
>>> This October, the Right to a Healthy Environment was formally recognized
>>> [1] by the United Nations Human Rights Council. According to Michelle
>>> Bachelet, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights:
>>>
>>> "A safe, clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is the foundation
>>> of human life. But today, because of human action – and inhuman inaction –
>>> the triple planetary crises of climate change, pollution, and nature loss
>>> is directly and severely impacting a broad range of rights, including the
>>> rights to adequate food, water, education, housing, health, development,
>>> and even life itself."[2]
>>>
>>> The environmental crisis is getting more complex. Humanity needs to make
>>> thousands of big and small decisions to address it. As the UN Environmental
>>> Program described it, we need to make “Peace with Nature”[3] and protect
>>> the human rights of the most vulnerable.
>>>
>>> Wikipedia and other platforms need to fill the knowledge gaps at the
>>> intersection of sustainability and human rights in every context and
>>> language.  The world needs access to reliable information about the link
>>> between environmental sustainability and human rights.
>>>
>>> What can you do? Help us organize!
>>>
>>> We need your help! The campaign will officially launch on April 15 (one
>>> week before Earth Day), but we need your help now to begin preparing this
>>> global call to action.
>>>
>>> Last year we had 24 community-led editathons, workshops, webinars, and
>>> writing contests, with contributions to over 2000 articles in more than 40
>>> languages. To match (and hopefully exceed) these impacts, we need your help
>>> to organize your local communities!
>>>
>>> Activities related to human rights and sustainability are good topics
>>> for local communities to both a) identify new partners, b) recruit
>>> enthusiastic participants and c) fill key topics for impact in their own
>>> language or context.
>>>
>>> Join the Conversation to learn more!
>>>
>>> Join us for 1.5 hours of conversation Tuesday the 14th December 2021
>>> 15:00 UTC on Zoom  [4], to
>>> learn more about:
>>>
>>>-
>>>
>>>How you can participate in this campaign and organize local events
>>>in your community or region.
>>>-
>>>
>>>Which topics this campaign will target, and how you can connect with
>>>subject matter experts, partners, and other resources to support 
>>> successful
>>>content creation activities.
>>>-
>>>
>>>How the Wikimedia Foundation Campaigns team can support you in
>>>designing your event and doing targeted outreach to potential 
>>> contributors
>>>drawn to these topics.
>>>
>>> Organizers can find more information at this (still under development): page
>>> on Meta   [5]
>>>
>>> If you want to join us as an organizer, please join our Telegram Group
>>> [6]
>>>
>>> If you have any questions send us an email at campai...@wikimedia.org
>>>
>>>
>>> Looking forward to hearing you in the conversation,
>>>
>>> Ruby Damenshie-Brown and Alex Stinson
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/10/1102582
>>>
>>> [2]
>>> https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=27443
>>>
>>> [3] https://www.unep.org/interactive/making-peace-nature/
>>>
>>> [4] https://wikimedia.zoom.us/j/84871090509
>>>
>>> [5]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiForHumanRights
>>>
>>> [6] https://t.me/joinchat/k_W9SVMG5K44YjJh
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alex Stinson
>>> Senior Program Strategist
>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>> Twitter: 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 348, Issue 3

2021-12-13 Thread Philip Kopetzky
A meta-RfC would also be dominated by English Wikipedia, which of course is
in the interest of en.wp, but hardly anyone else. So thanks for that idea,
but no thanks.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:57, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Why is it that you consider the "community" a single body that has a remit
> under the law for anything? It is not and it has not.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:40, Nosebagbear  wrote:
>
>> Dear Patrick,
>>
>> Firstly, you (and in this case, I mean, "I notified members of T
>> policy, directly, in discussions where they were involved, as did others"
>> all the way back in phase 1) were made aware of the community need for
>> ratification far before the ArbCom letter.
>>
>> Which of these is the case: that the WMF only notified the Board of a
>> need for actual community ratification when the Arbcom open letter was
>> made, or that the Board declined to consider it as a need prior to that
>> point?
>>
>> Secondly, why does the Board feel that they should be "consider[ing] the
>> input received so far on what would make a fair and practical process." -
>> there are only two bodies with a reasonable remit to be specifying the
>> nature of any ratification method. In the weaker position is the UCOC
>> drafting committee, and in the first place, the Community as a whole,
>> probably by a meta-RfC. Please provide the reasoning for this process.
>>
>> *Richard (Nosebagbear)*
>>
>> Unless otherwise stated within this email, any Movement Charter
>> viewpoints expressed represent my own position(s), and *not* the
>> aggregate judgement of the MCDC.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 at 21:13, 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
>>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit
>>>
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikimedia-l.lists.wikimedia.org/
>>>
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>> wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>> than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
>>>
>>> Today's Topics:
>>>
>>>1. Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Closing the comment period for the
>>> Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Draft Guidelines and next step
>>>   (Andreas Kolbe)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 21:12:54 +
>>> From: Andreas Kolbe 
>>> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Closing the comment
>>> period for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Draft
>>> Guidelines
>>> and next step
>>> To: Patrick Earley 
>>> Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List 
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <
>>> cahrttw9h69ewso1v3m6hzgn4emuglb0gvx9bkd+q0hi6t_f...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>> boundary="55427605d280b9bb"
>>>
>>> Hi Patrick,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your clarification. So if I understand correctly, there
>>> will
>>> be no UCoC policy text review before sometime in 2023.
>>>
>>> As this is quite a long time away, would it be possible to provide some
>>> answers to the questions I asked earlier?
>>>
>>>
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/H4FGTRCTKKCLJXFQVWFOCHMZCOFE2KBM/
>>>
>>> For example: According to the Universal Code of Conduct, are
>>> Wikipedians/Wikimedians allowed –
>>>
>>> – To blog about what happens on Wikipedia?
>>>
>>> – To discuss edits traceable to, say, the Russian or US government on-
>>> and
>>> off-wiki, without the permission of the people making these edits?
>>>
>>> – To discuss cases of individuals engaging in revenge editing or
>>> subverting
>>> Wikipedia for commercial or criminal ends (recall the recent Christian
>>> Rosa
>>> case), or to help the press with related enquiries (recall e.g.
>>>
>>> https://www.dailydot.com/irl/wikipedia-sockpuppet-investigation-largest-network-history-wiki-pr/
>>> and the input made by User:Doctree to that article)?
>>>
>>> – To notify the authorities when they believe a crime has been committed
>>> or
>>> is about to be committed?
>>>
>>> Or should all of these actions categorically be considered harassment of
>>> fellow contributors, and the contributors engaging in these actions be
>>> subject to blocks and bans?
>>>
>>> I think it is important for people to understand the Code's intent
>>> correctly.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 6:42 PM Patrick Earley 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Andreas,
>>> >
>>> > The review of the policy text is planned one year after the close and
>>> the
>>> > ratification of the enforcement outlines, which are still being
>>> revised by
>>> > the Drafting Committee.  Detailed information of the policy text review
>>> > will be communicated soon, as the revised guidelines are published for
>>> > comment and ratification.  The review will likely follow established
>>> policy
>>> > 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Meet the new Movement Charter Drafting Committee members

2021-11-02 Thread Philip Kopetzky
This is probably the most complete discussion on the the bug/feature that
allowed the selectors to see the election result early and adjust the
selection accordingly:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Drafting_Committee/Elections#Community_election_results_leaked.
..


On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 at 21:05, 4nn1l2 <4nn1l2.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Which bug, Philip?
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 1:58 PM Philip Kopetzky 
> wrote:
>
>> Some people here seem to think that because the outcome had at least most
>> regions represented, that the process itself ensured this. This is not the
>> case - we only got this outcome because of a bug/feature in the election
>> software.
>> Just in case anyone else thinks that this kind of process would be worth
>> repeating ;-)
>>
>> On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 at 11:07, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
>> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Yaroslav,
>>>
>>> Personally, I was also in favor of proactively seek and build an
>>> efficient team so that the process starts quickly. Different recommendation
>>> working groups had already discussed a lot for more than a year on how a
>>> movement charter would look like while drafting their recommendations and
>>> they could have been included. If that happened, everything would not to
>>> have to be built from scratch again. Anyway, somehow that didn't happen.
>>>
>>> Regarding affiliate selection, I am not a very big fan of selectors. I
>>> am sure they are all amazing Wikimedians but the process looked odd to me.
>>> The entire selection process depended on only one selector per region.
>>> There was no guarantee to the affiliates that the selectors will not select
>>> people out of their own biases or preferences instead of what affiliates
>>> had asked them to do. For example, during the South Asian call, those who
>>> were there as affiliate contacts, all said, that we need to select the most
>>> skilled and experienced person in the committee from the region and we were
>>> ensured that our feedback will be taken care of during the selectors
>>> meeting. When results came out, we couldn't find our best candidate in the
>>> committee. Affiliates there still don't know what happened to change the
>>> decision. If affiliates could directly select instead going through
>>> selectors, that might not happened.
>>>
>>> Another odd thing happened, the voting software eliminated a candidate
>>> from South Asia at the last moment because he mentioned that his homewiki
>>> was English Wikipedia (not a good strategy, now it seems) although he was
>>> the best candidate who had the necessary skills and immense experience and
>>> understanding to represent our region in the charter. I find it extremely
>>> odd to keep an English Wikipedia editor from Europe and from Asia on the
>>> same filter. He didn't make it to the final list anyway.
>>>
>>> Anyways, I rest my arguments here. I know, what is done is done and it
>>> would take lots of efforts from powerless affiliates and communities like
>>> us to change anything. To clear any existing confusion, I am just against
>>> the broken process which we had adopted and not against the newly formed
>>> drafting committee. I sincerely hope in future to see a global charter fit
>>> to encompass our movement and all its people.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Bodhisattwa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021, 14:13 Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Bodhisattwa,
>>>>
>>>> this is an issue which has been raised at the strategy transition group
>>>> I was part of, and also during the events following these discussions which
>>>> were intended to shape the specific process to draft the Charter.
>>>> Basically, the choice was between two options - either have a (relatively)
>>>> small group elected/appointed fast which would not be fully representative
>>>> but would be efficient and would draft the Charter quickly, or to go for
>>>> representation at the expense of the time and possibly also size of the
>>>> group - if it includes everybody needed for representation it would be
>>>> unworkable. The decision, which I personally also supported, was to go for
>>>> speed and efficiency at the expense of representation. I see your
>>>> arguments, and they have merit, but we can not do everything at once. It
>>>> was clear that the community 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Feedback requested on draft updated Wikimedia Foundation Conflict of Interest Policy

2021-11-02 Thread Philip Kopetzky
I would also find that helpful (if this isn't a policy that's been
completely rewritten). The legal text isn't especially easy to read and
understand either, so my only question would be if this new policy would
prevent past events that happened because this kind of policy did not exist
back then.

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 14:44, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 13:00, Amanda Keton  wrote:
>
> > The Wikimedia Foundation legal team has posted a draft of an updated
> conflict of interest policy on Meta-Wiki:
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest_policy/2021_updates
> >
> > We are collecting feedback on the policy for the next three weeks: today
> until 22 November.
>
> Is there a version which highlights the changes from the current policy?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PU2SRZPV6TPK2D4D2ULV7MCKOWL64EUJ/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/NTC7Y7WIBG26EXGASUD4IW2ZIRC5BT7L/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Meet the new Movement Charter Drafting Committee members

2021-11-02 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Some people here seem to think that because the outcome had at least most
regions represented, that the process itself ensured this. This is not the
case - we only got this outcome because of a bug/feature in the election
software.
Just in case anyone else thinks that this kind of process would be worth
repeating ;-)

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 at 11:07, Bodhisattwa Mandal 
wrote:

> Hi Yaroslav,
>
> Personally, I was also in favor of proactively seek and build an efficient
> team so that the process starts quickly. Different recommendation working
> groups had already discussed a lot for more than a year on how a movement
> charter would look like while drafting their recommendations and they could
> have been included. If that happened, everything would not to have to be
> built from scratch again. Anyway, somehow that didn't happen.
>
> Regarding affiliate selection, I am not a very big fan of selectors. I am
> sure they are all amazing Wikimedians but the process looked odd to me. The
> entire selection process depended on only one selector per region. There
> was no guarantee to the affiliates that the selectors will not select
> people out of their own biases or preferences instead of what affiliates
> had asked them to do. For example, during the South Asian call, those who
> were there as affiliate contacts, all said, that we need to select the most
> skilled and experienced person in the committee from the region and we were
> ensured that our feedback will be taken care of during the selectors
> meeting. When results came out, we couldn't find our best candidate in the
> committee. Affiliates there still don't know what happened to change the
> decision. If affiliates could directly select instead going through
> selectors, that might not happened.
>
> Another odd thing happened, the voting software eliminated a candidate
> from South Asia at the last moment because he mentioned that his homewiki
> was English Wikipedia (not a good strategy, now it seems) although he was
> the best candidate who had the necessary skills and immense experience and
> understanding to represent our region in the charter. I find it extremely
> odd to keep an English Wikipedia editor from Europe and from Asia on the
> same filter. He didn't make it to the final list anyway.
>
> Anyways, I rest my arguments here. I know, what is done is done and it
> would take lots of efforts from powerless affiliates and communities like
> us to change anything. To clear any existing confusion, I am just against
> the broken process which we had adopted and not against the newly formed
> drafting committee. I sincerely hope in future to see a global charter fit
> to encompass our movement and all its people.
>
> Regards,
> Bodhisattwa
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021, 14:13 Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>
>> Dear Bodhisattwa,
>>
>> this is an issue which has been raised at the strategy transition group I
>> was part of, and also during the events following these discussions which
>> were intended to shape the specific process to draft the Charter.
>> Basically, the choice was between two options - either have a (relatively)
>> small group elected/appointed fast which would not be fully representative
>> but would be efficient and would draft the Charter quickly, or to go for
>> representation at the expense of the time and possibly also size of the
>> group - if it includes everybody needed for representation it would be
>> unworkable. The decision, which I personally also supported, was to go for
>> speed and efficiency at the expense of representation. I see your
>> arguments, and they have merit, but we can not do everything at once. It
>> was clear that the community elections would favor North American and East
>> European candidates, as for example the board elections always do. There
>> was some hope that affiliates would elect more candidates from the rest of
>> the world, which is indeed what happened (I am not an affiliate member and
>> I am not familiar with the specific selection process). The WMF mitigated
>> that even further by appointing one person of Indian background (even
>> though residing in the US if I am not mistaken). There are other safeguards
>> in place - I assume the draft Charter will be up to the community
>> discussion, and if there are omissions they will be noticed. But the main
>> idea was to elect/appoint people who understand what they are doing and who
>> would implement what is best for the movement, taking into account that the
>> Charter is for evetrybody, and not their personal vision. Those drafting
>> committee members I know fit this definition. This is now our turn, as a
>> community, to make sure that we read the draft - when it is out - carefully
>> and make sure it is acceptable for everybody.
>>
>> Best
>> Yaroslav
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 7:08 PM Bodhisattwa Mandal <
>> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Samuel,
>>>
>>> On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 21:35, Samuel Klein  wrote:
>>>


[Wikimedia-l] Re: Report about Regional Hubs Ready

2021-10-12 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Thanks Anass!

It is a very interesting and lengthy paper (which shows how much work went
into preparing and conducting the research/discussions), with some familiar
questions and problems that still need answering.

I'm not sure that using old structures to solve these new issues is
necessarily the path forward, especially when we are trying to decide
issues as close as possible to the people those decisions affect, but it
does show the need for (professional) support in these matters. Having
someone dedicated to finding those solutions would definitely be helpful.

Best,
Philip

On Mon, 11 Oct 2021 at 17:27, Anass Sedrati  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I would like to inform you that I have published a report related to
> Wikimedia Regional Hubs
> 
> from the perspective of the Arabic speaking community. The report is ready,
> and complies background of the region, as well as different opinions and
> analysis of the community views on hubs, before providing recommendations
> on the way forward. It was funded by a rapid grant from the Wikimedia
> strategy & governance team.
>
> I believe that this report can be useful for all of you interested in the
> implementation of Wikimedia hubs, and in the Wikimedia strategy in general.
> I am also encouraging those who can to create similar reports for their
> regions, so that experiences and insights are shared.
>
> If anyone has a question, please feel free to contact me (through email or
> on Meta ), and I will
> be happy to discuss this further.
>
> Have a good evening/day everyone!
>
> Best regards,
> --
> -
> *Anass SEDRATI*
> Wikimedia MA User Group
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/F23INR24PKYNGD5BQ6WOCZCPG4FKOTF4/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/222L6BF4Z2NHDFEFMOVVS3VXHKXQESIG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: News about some CTeam transitions in Wikimedia Foundation

2021-07-26 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Thanks Lodewijk - it seems as if it wasn't picked up by this mailing
thread. Considering how little progress has been made with essential
programs like the strategy implementation and the new grants model in July,
I really doubt this "strong interim leadership in place to provide
continuity" is really happening, or that the WMF isn't on auto-pilot at a
time where it needs active input.

On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 at 02:49, effe iets anders 
wrote:

> Hi Philip,
>
> just to make sure, are you aware of the email under the topic "REPLY TO:
> News about CTeam transitions from Wikimedia Foundation" ? I believe that
> was sent within the day.
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
>
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 2:18 PM Philip Kopetzky 
> wrote:
>
>> I find it quite worrying that after a month no one has deemed it
>> necessary to reply to the concerns voiced by a former chair of the WMF
>> Board of Trustees. There isn't even a PR-level denial of there being a
>> crisis.
>>
>> The C-Suite turnover would be a major challenge for any company or
>> organisation. Just describing it as a "natural part of evolution" doesn't
>> explain what direction this "evolution" is taking and why so many of the
>> C-Suite don't deem this worth sticking around for. In the meantime, the
>> "smooth operation" is leading to uncertainty and stagnation that is wasting
>> valuable time and momentum for the implementation of the 2030 strategy.
>>
>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 23:36, Christophe Henner <
>> christophe.hen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Heather, you have been someone I have always loved to talk with.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have fond memories with you there, such as talking with you and Zack
>>> on Thanksgiving eve having beers in the Foundation office creating the
>>> Museums of Things People don't Want To Know. Or crafting my email in Esino
>>> Lario to announce my term as chair, everyone sitting on the floor in a room
>>> with you, Katherine, Greg, and Juliet. I have so many others.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wherever you will go next they will be as lucky as we have been to count
>>> you as part of our movement. Perhaps even more as you take your experiences
>>> with you.
>>>
>>>
>>> Most people in the movement might not know you, but you have made a big
>>> difference behind the scenes.
>>>
>>>
>>> You reshaped how we are positioning ourselves in the world and provided
>>> a speaker to our voices. I am sad to see you leave the Foundation, I only
>>> hope we will keep on seeing you around and that, life willing, we will have
>>> other drinks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Grant, I left when you joined so I can only remember the job interview I
>>> gave you. We never had the chance to create memories allowing me to make an
>>> email like I can for Heather. But nonetheless, I can only fare you well for
>>> the future.
>>>
>>>
>>> And remembering our discussions and your experiences, I can just hope
>>> you will start on your own project!
>>>
>>>
>>> Raju, thank you for the update.
>>>
>>>
>>> Change is natural in an org, but it had been years since we had that
>>> level of turnover. I do understand, running orgs myself and being a former
>>> chair of the board right after the last crisis, that those are very tough
>>> situations.
>>>
>>>
>>> I also know that when you are in the middle of change it is tough to
>>> make decisions that can be fully understood.
>>>
>>>
>>> However, it might be good if some better information about the situation
>>> were provided.
>>>
>>>
>>> Here one can only have theories about the situation, and remember with
>>> concern the the last time such turmoiled happened.
>>>
>>>
>>>  In the span of 6 months the Foundation lost its CEO, COO, CCO, CTO, CoS
>>> (Chief of Staff). That is more than half of the C-Suite. When facing such
>>> turnover, it usually is a sign of deeper issues.
>>>
>>>
>>> As everyone in org theory loves to say, never waste a good crisis.
>>>
>>>
>>> As usual, we all have the best of the movement at heart. Any criticism
>>> comes from a place of deep care about our movement; as members of the loyal
>>> opposition. We can be wonderful allies and support if you allow us to be.
>>>
>>>
>>> Le lun. 28 juin 2021 à 9:14 PM, Raju Narisetti 
>>> a écrit :

[Wikimedia-l] Re: News about some CTeam transitions in Wikimedia Foundation

2021-07-25 Thread Philip Kopetzky
I find it quite worrying that after a month no one has deemed it necessary
to reply to the concerns voiced by a former chair of the WMF Board of
Trustees. There isn't even a PR-level denial of there being a crisis.

The C-Suite turnover would be a major challenge for any company or
organisation. Just describing it as a "natural part of evolution" doesn't
explain what direction this "evolution" is taking and why so many of the
C-Suite don't deem this worth sticking around for. In the meantime, the
"smooth operation" is leading to uncertainty and stagnation that is wasting
valuable time and momentum for the implementation of the 2030 strategy.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 23:36, Christophe Henner 
wrote:

> Heather, you have been someone I have always loved to talk with.
>
>
> I have fond memories with you there, such as talking with you and Zack on
> Thanksgiving eve having beers in the Foundation office creating the Museums
> of Things People don't Want To Know. Or crafting my email in Esino Lario to
> announce my term as chair, everyone sitting on the floor in a room with
> you, Katherine, Greg, and Juliet. I have so many others.
>
>
> Wherever you will go next they will be as lucky as we have been to count
> you as part of our movement. Perhaps even more as you take your experiences
> with you.
>
>
> Most people in the movement might not know you, but you have made a big
> difference behind the scenes.
>
>
> You reshaped how we are positioning ourselves in the world and provided a
> speaker to our voices. I am sad to see you leave the Foundation, I only
> hope we will keep on seeing you around and that, life willing, we will have
> other drinks.
>
>
> Grant, I left when you joined so I can only remember the job interview I
> gave you. We never had the chance to create memories allowing me to make an
> email like I can for Heather. But nonetheless, I can only fare you well for
> the future.
>
>
> And remembering our discussions and your experiences, I can just hope you
> will start on your own project!
>
>
> Raju, thank you for the update.
>
>
> Change is natural in an org, but it had been years since we had that level
> of turnover. I do understand, running orgs myself and being a former chair
> of the board right after the last crisis, that those are very tough
> situations.
>
>
> I also know that when you are in the middle of change it is tough to make
> decisions that can be fully understood.
>
>
> However, it might be good if some better information about the situation
> were provided.
>
>
> Here one can only have theories about the situation, and remember with
> concern the the last time such turmoiled happened.
>
>
>  In the span of 6 months the Foundation lost its CEO, COO, CCO, CTO, CoS
> (Chief of Staff). That is more than half of the C-Suite. When facing such
> turnover, it usually is a sign of deeper issues.
>
>
> As everyone in org theory loves to say, never waste a good crisis.
>
>
> As usual, we all have the best of the movement at heart. Any criticism
> comes from a place of deep care about our movement; as members of the loyal
> opposition. We can be wonderful allies and support if you allow us to be.
>
>
> Le lun. 28 juin 2021 à 9:14 PM, Raju Narisetti 
> a écrit :
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> On behalf of the Foundation Board, I’m writing to share with you that
>> Chief Creative Officer Heather Walls and Chief Technology Officer Grant
>> Ingersoll will be leaving the Wikimedia Foundation, at the end of July.
>>
>>
>> We, along with the Foundation Transition Team, have been working with
>> them for several weeks on a smooth transition in their respective
>> functions. We are grateful to them for their service and dedication to
>> the Foundation and the movement. In their time with us, both Heather and
>> Grant have used their unique talents and skills to preserve and provide
>> free knowledge to the world while also elevating the voices of community
>> members around the globe.
>>
>>
>>
>> Heather has been with the Foundation for almost ten years, driving
>> creative and communication efforts. In that time we’ve seen a revolution in
>> how our projects are perceived by the world. She has played a pivotal role
>> at the Foundation, shaping its identity and strengthening our mission to be
>> a trusted and valued resource for sharing and accessing knowledge globally.
>> Heather brought communities around the world closer together by developing
>> and executing innovative means of communications and leading campaigns that
>> helped grow our community and  elevated the voices of our community
>> members. Most recently, on Wikipedia’s 20th Birthday, she, with her team,
>> connected people in more than 70 countries so that we could celebrate “20
>> Years Human” and our important movement together.
>>
>>
>>
>> In her words:
>>
>> “There is nothing that can sum up nearly a decade with Wikimedians. The
>> joy, the conflict, the evolution, and the unchanging. I’ve seen things
>> change for the better; focused 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

2021-06-27 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Adding to Chris' points, I would also like to illustrate the point where in
the future, founding a user group or chapter (the latter is pretty unlikely
nowadays), applying for a grant proposal and being hired by your colleagues
as the first staff member of the user group you founded would be something
totally legal, just lacking any ethical or moral compass.

Now of course whatever volunteer committee at the WMF rejects this proposal
would be confronted with the fact that the WMF saw no problem where this
affected the WMF. Good luck explaining that and keeping any sense of
ethical coherence.
I really hope the Movement Charter can provide some guidance on this issue,
which the WMF would have to adhere to as well.

Cheers,
Philip

On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 at 13:03, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> I will note that, as Chris pointed out, even WMUK's current policies
>> would permit a transaction like the one we're discussing if approved
>> by the Board ("no trustee may _without the consent of the board_"
>> [8]), and Wikimedia Austria's Good Governance Kodex would permit it if
>> approved by the Gremium ("bedarf diese Anstellung der ausdrücklichen
>> Genehmigung durch das Good-Governance-Gremium" [9]).
>>
>> If such transactions are sometimes viewed as permissible, as part of
>> harmonizing governance standards, it would be good to enumerate
>> examples: would this transaction qualify? If the emerging consensus is
>> to enforce waiting periods at all times, clauses which permit Boards
>> to overrule them should perhaps be revised as part of harmonization
>> efforts.
>>
>
> Hi Erik,
>
> Indeed, most of these policies are written with a certain level of
> flexibility. And I do know of cases where board members of affiliates have
> gone on to have staff roles within the movement, and asked for and received
> permission to do so. So why might this be a problem and other instances not
> a problem?
>
> It's probably worth setting out the objective of this kind of policy,
> which is to give confidence that organisations are making decisions based
> on what will best fulfill their mission, and to avoid the perception that
> decisions are made for the personal gain of trustees.
>
> Whatever a conflict of interest policy says, if it doesn't end up
> achieving that goal, then either the policy or the associated
> decision-making is at fault.
>
> My concern over this specific instance is prompted by several things:
> - A paid role has been created for a specific person, based on their
> contributions as a trustee
> - the trustee concerned was involved in shaping the role: certainly at a
> 'meta' level in terms of championing the work area the role is about, and
> evidently also in conversations about how the role would work out while
> still being Chair of the organisation
> - there was no open recruitment process, so it's unclear if there really
> was no other conceivable candidate. I understand this is not unheard of for
> the WMF, but it's poor practice, particularly when there are
> other warning flags. (I am told that when jobs are openly advertised, the
> recruitment process can be long and arduous.)
> - there was no gap at all between the trustee departing as Chair, and
> starting the role. Indeed the role was evidently offered, in some form,
> while the Trustee in question was still Chair of the Board.
> - it's unclear in what manner or at what level of detail the Board's
> approval of this was given
> - all of this refers to a Chair of the Board of Trustees. Chairs are
> typically responsible for the management of the Chief Executive on behalf
> of the Board, which puts them in a particularly high-profile position.
> While I don't fully understand how this has worked out during the WMF
> executive transition, it seems reasonable to ask whether the trustee in
> question was simultaneously holding performance reviews or pay negotiations
> with members of the WMF interim executive team while also having
> conversations with them about what her own future paid role at the WMF
> might be.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/TKRGZLDEXLDAABGM6K6HOYZL4PSDVGSX/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/56ZBLFKBMCCWOJ4ZTTDUKKZGEITJOAZF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

2021-06-24 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi SJ!

The 12 month waiting/cooldown period is something that was implemented in
the Good Governance Kodex of Wikimedia Austria in 2014, see
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_%C3%96sterreich/Good_Governance_Kodex,
with an independent committee consisting of a staff, board and community
representative deciding cases that do not fulfill the 12 months waiting
period.

Best,
Philip

On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 at 16:28, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Jan-Bart: Spot on.  It is always uplifting to see one of your measured
> notes come over the wire.
>
> Jan-Bart de Vreede  writes:
>
>> The Foundation is supposed to be an example of good Governance for our
>> entire movement. We (as a movement) have come a long way in the past 20
>> years (and that is important: as our organisation and budget grows, so do
>> our responsibilities and the critical questions we get from the world)
>>
>> It is NOT good governance to have a current board member suddenly resign
>> and then create a situation where that person receives compensation for a
>> position that seems to have been created specifically for that board member
>> (or at least was not publicly posted?).
>>
>
> The impact of this increases as the movement grows, and clear
> communication is at a premium. How can we use this moment to model the
> norms we want for the future?  Any *particular* moment can feel like a
> special exception when you are close to it, but the WMF's actions set a
> standard, translated across time and context, more instantly and
> effectively than words.
>
>
>> It is a good practice to create a 12 month waiting period before board
>> members of non-profits can become a staff member/paid contractor/consultant.
>>
>
> A few people mentioned that their own orgs or committees have norms or
> policies around this (Chris, Philip, Tito); could you describe specifics
> that are in place now around the movement?
>
> SJ.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/7FW7WRGMLPS7MYUI4UPD7YTSCUVP2LVG/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WH33IFBCEQSM7VQUELMW5KYFRRWAXFWY/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

2021-06-23 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Maggie,

to be honest this is really difficult to understand. While the WMF, through
it's various committees, pushed affiliates to clearly draw the lines
between board and staff by introducing stringent governance measures (and
rightly so), which also include paragraphs about introducing a cooldown
period before switching between board and being employed by the same
organisation, the WMF is ignoring all of that governance advice it has
given over the last few years.

I feel quite silly now having been on the simpleAPG committee for three
years and having advised affiliates who wanted to hire staff for the first
time to draw clear lines between staff and board members, to now have to
see this exact scenario I warned against play out at the WMF. Maria's
departure from the BoT, even before her tenure was over and subsequent
hiring really calls into question what the WMF thinks good governance
should look like, notwithstanding the fact that the BoT now has one
community elected seat less at a critical time in the strategy
implementation process.

All in all I can only call for a governance overhaul at the WMF so that
murky situations like this don't happen again.

Quite frustrated regards,
Philip


On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 at 21:46, Maggie Dennis  wrote:

> Hello, all. :)
>
> I hope and trust that everyone is keeping well during these times!
>
> I’m Maggie Dennis, Vice President of the Community Resilience &
> Sustainability group of Wikimedia Foundation, within the Legal department.
> I wanted to announce with pleasure that Maria Sefidari has agreed to
> consult with the Foundation on Movement Strategy and the ongoing Board
> evolution for the upcoming year. Many of us know María from her role as the
> chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, from which she
> provided invaluable leadership in governance, oversight, and fundraising.
> Others may know her from her volunteer work as User:Raystorm
> , in which she has a broad
> range of experience.
>
> María, based in Spain, commenced her assignment with the Foundation this
> week. We intend to tap into her expertise and knowledge of the Foundation
> to support a successful implementation of the Movement’s Strategy and to
> tap into new opportunities. (With her Board work, she will be supporting
> Quim Gil’s team with the Board election and helping Margo Lee in improving
> onboarding, documentation practices, and training.) María will report to me
> as part of our Community Resilience & Sustainability group. I’m excited
> that she accepted our offer for a more hands-on assignment, particularly
> given how important all of the work she’ll be supporting is. :) With more
> than 15 years of Wikimedia experience, her contributions in the next phase
> will be a tremendous benefit to me and my team as we continue settling into
> our own work on Movement Strategy.
>
> Those of you who are involved with Movement Strategy are used to seeing
> her at related meetings and still will. :) I anticipate María will be
> joining one or more of the Movement Strategy global conversations
> 
> this weekend. Advertisement alert: maybe you can, too? Here’s more detail
> !
> I myself will be attending at least one of those sessions and look forward
> to seeing some of you there.
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Maggie
>
>
> --
> Maggie Dennis
> She/her/hers
> Vice President, Community Resilience & Sustainability
> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PFOBFWCBFACRGY3OMXAQG54ALPXGT3K3/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4V5RUB237FID73UVOWLEYDBHY3SOETM3/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution about the upcoming Board elections

2021-04-25 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Luis,

this has been brought up on the talk page of the proposed bylaw changes,
including a statement by Jimmy:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes#Founder_seat

Would be interesting to know if the status has changed from "being open for
discussion" in the last 7 months ;-)

Cheers,
Philip

On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 at 00:24, Luis Villa  wrote:

> This looks like a very thoughtful start on a very thorny problem, well
> done.
>
> Given that we’re trying to diversify the board, and that Jimmy has
> recently criticized FSF for having lifetime board appointments for
> founders,* I was surprised not to see any mention in this document of
> sunsetting Jimmy’s founder seat. Making him a peer of the rest of the
> board, subject to the same terms, selection process, and requalification
> standards, rather than a first-among-equals, would potentially free up an
> additional seat to improve global board diversity and definitely be
> consistent with general best practices for non-profit governance.
>
> Has the board discussed that?
>
> Thanks-
> Luis
>
> P.S. the links on the last page of
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/8/83/BGC_Community_Trustee_Selection_Proposal_April_2021.pdf
> are broken.
>
> * well, he criticized them for _secretive_ board appointments, but from a
> governance perspective a lifetime founder seat is problematic regardless of
> whether it is secret/defacto (FSF) or public/de jure (WMF).
>
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 1:45 PM Jackie Koerner 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees met last week to decide on a
>> plan for the 2021 Board elections. The Board Governance Committee created
>> this proposal, based on the Call for Feedback about Community Board
>> Seats.[1] Please check the related announcement for details.[2]
>>
>> The Board wants to thank the more than 800 volunteers that participated
>> in the Call for Feedback in one way or another.[3] There were almost a
>> hundred conversations in multiple languages and in multiple regions. There
>> was additional discussion on Meta, Telegram, and other channels used by
>> local communities. Three new ideas were presented by volunteers during the
>> Call. It has been very difficult to decide on every open question
>> considering the quantity and diversity of opinions received. We hope this
>> resolution feels sensible to everybody.
>>
>> In the upcoming days, the Board elections facilitation team will share
>> their ideas to support candidates and voters. Let's work together on
>> elections with high and very diverse participation!
>>
>> [1] Call for Feedback Community Board Seats
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees/Call_for_feedback:_Community_Board_seats/Main_report
>>
>> [2] Announcement of Board Governance Committee proposal
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/2021-04-15_Resolution_about_the_upcoming_Board_elections
>>
>> [3] Call for Feedback Community Board seats metrics
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees/Call_for_feedback:_Community_Board_seats/Main_report#Metrics
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Jackie Koerner*
>>
>> *she/her*
>> Board Governance Facilitator
>> *English language and Meta-Wiki*
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l 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] Board Ratification of Universal Code of Conduct

2021-02-22 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Congrats to everyone (and I'm talking about 50+ people here) who helped to
make this possible!

On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 at 15:00, Dan Garry (Deskana)  wrote:

> It's so great to see the Universal Code of Conduct come to fruition. As a
> movement we were severly lagging behind others in adopting a code of
> conduct, and I'm glad to see we've reached parity. This is a step in the
> right direction.
>
> Dan
>
> On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 at 11:59, María Sefidari  wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I’m pleased to announce that the Board of Trustees has unanimously
>> approved a Universal Code of Conduct for the Wikimedia projects and
>> movement.[1]  A Universal Code of Conduct was one of the final
>> recommendations of the Movement Strategy 2030 process - a multi-year,
>> participatory community effort to define the future of our movement. The
>> final Universal Code of Conduct seeks to address disparities in conduct
>> policies across our hundreds of projects and communities, by creating a
>> binding minimum set of standards for conduct on the Wikimedia projects that
>> directly address many of the challenges that contributors face.
>>
>> The Board is deeply grateful to the communities who have grappled with
>> these challenging topics. Over the past six months, communities around the
>> world have participated in conversations and consultations to help build
>> this code collectively, including local discussions in 19 languages,
>> surveys, discussions on Meta, and policy drafting by a committee of
>> volunteers and staff. The document presented to us reflects a significant
>> investment of time and effort by many of you, and especially by the joint
>> staff/volunteer committee who created the base draft after reviewing input
>> collected from community outreach efforts. We also appreciate the
>> dedication of the Foundation, and its Trust & Safety policy team, in
>> getting us to this phase.
>>
>> This was the first phase of our Universal Code of Conduct - from here,
>> the Trust & Safety team will begin consultations on how best to enforce
>> this code. In the coming weeks, they will follow-up with more instructions
>> on how you can participate in discussions around enforcing the new code.
>> Over the next few months, they will be facilitating consultation
>> discussions in many local languages, with our affiliates, and on Meta to
>> support a new volunteer/staff committee in drafting enforcement pathways.
>> For more information on the process, timeline, and how to participate in
>> this next phase, please review the Universal Code of Conduct page on
>> Meta.[2]
>>
>> The Universal Code of Conduct represents an essential step towards our
>> vision of a world in which all people can participate in the sum of all
>> knowledge. Together, we have built something extraordinary. Today, we
>> celebrate this milestone in making our movement a safer space for
>> contribution for all.
>>
>> On behalf of the Board of Trustees,
>>
>> María Sefidari
>> Board Chair
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Draft_review
>>
>> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l 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] Updates from Wikimedia Foundation Board

2020-10-02 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi,

it is a bit puzzling to see an expansion of the WMF Board of Trustess at a
time where the start of implementing a global council is not far off. Right
now I can't see how these two directions will merge into one, especially
since the 2030 strategy does not make an appearance in this statement at
all.

Best,
Philip

On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 at 22:06, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Dear Nataliia  --
>
> Any update on the first two points?
>
> Does the BGC
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Governance_Committee
> >
> recommend a Bylaws update or an election this calendar year?
> Posting minutes  for the
> last 3 meetings would be, as ever, welcome.
>
> Warmly, Sam
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



Re: [Wikimedia-l] Trust and safety on Wikimedia projects

2020-05-26 Thread Philip Kopetzky
What Martin mentions should be covered in the recommendations for the 2030
strategy, the measures mentioned here being "fast-tracked" to provide a
starting point for improving Community Health.
Conflict resolution needs to happen on the lowest possible level so that we
don't run into situations we've encountered in the past. Of course it's
difficult for one aspect to work without the other, so the overall goal
won't be achieved until every part is in place.

On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 17:46, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> > A former steward fellow and I
> > discussed this topic at the Safety Space at Wikimania. Due to the nature
> of
> > the space, the discussion have not been documented but you can find the
> > presentation with backgrounds of the situation and open questions on
> > Commons
> > <
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimania_2019_%E2%80%93_Do_we_need_a_global_dispute_resolution_committee%3F.pdf
> > >.
> > Maybe it can give some ideas how to proceed with this.
> >
>
> Yes -- I was just thinking of your discussions of this while reading the
> thread. I hope these steward reflections are considered as people move
> forward.
>
> The case of disputes that embroil an entire community and their admins
> should (also) specifically be addressed.
> S
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Early thoughts regarding a global code of conduct and a GCC committee

2020-04-20 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Pine,

I don't think a global commitee would be the right place - stewards are
currently filling this gap involuntarily, and it seems extremely difficult
to judge situations on a local project properly (the Azerbaijani case might
come to mind here).

For me the ideal version of a universal CoC would limit itself to a very
basic foundation, which would then be adapted and developed on a regional
and local level to better fit the needs of the various communities, as you
mention above, including local laws that may prohibit certain behaviour (as
is the case in Germany and Austria with any glorification of
nationalsocialism for example).
The global council would also arbitrate in certain conflicts that happen
between regions or projects, but this is more of a theoretical experiment
right now I think.

Best,
Philip




On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 04:37, Pine W  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have published a draft proposal at the bottom of
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct. Discussion
> is welcome.
>
> A difficult issue is how to support diversity of expressions and
> opinions, even when those expressions or opinions may offend others,
> while also supporting civility. At this point, I think that civility
> policies are best left to local communities. However, I welcome
> others' opinions, including alternate proposals.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] FY1819 Fundraising Report

2020-02-20 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Chuck,

since this is hopefully a less busy season of the year, have the internal
discussions yielded anything that might help in breaking these numbers down
a little bit more? :-)

Best,
Philip

On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 03:59, Chuck Roslof  wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts about how this information could be useful
> for local affiliates and communities. We'll discuss internally to see if we
> might be able to share more information in the future in order to achieve
> those benefits in ways that don't raise legal concerns or create excessive
> overhead for our fundraising team. We're entering into the busiest time of
> the year for online fundraising, though, so it'll be at least a few months
> before we are able to address the question internally.
>
>  - Chuck
>
> ==
> Charles M. Roslof
> Legal Counsel
> Wikimedia Foundation
> Pronouns: they <http://pronoun.is/they/.../themself>/he
> <http://pronoun.is/he>
>
> NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical
> reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
> members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
> on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>.
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:27 AM Philip Kopetzky 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Chuck for digging out that old email, it does explain why this
> isn't
> > done for every country.
> > Chris and Sandra have a point though, because this can't be a legal issue
> > for most European countries for example. In return, the local
> organisations
> > and communities would benefit from an added layer of feedback based on
> > their work.
> >
> > Furthermore, how and how much we fundraise will be one of the important
> > talking points when implementing the recommendations, especially to set a
> > benchmark to evaluate if involving local organisations in the fundraising
> > process actually works or not.
> >
> > Best,
> > Philip
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 09:38, Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
> > rient...@wikimedia.nl> wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with Chris.
> > > Furthermore: Wikimedia Nederland, like all chapters, puts a lot of
> effort
> > > in raising awareness of and support for the Wikimedia projects.  I
> would
> > > really like to know if these efforts 'pay off'.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sandra Rientjes
> > > Directeur/Executive Director Wikimedia Nederland
> > >
> > > tel.(+31) (0)30 3200238 (ma, di, do)
> > > mob. (+31) (0)6  31786379 (wo, vrij)
> > >
> > > www.wikimedia.nl
> > >
> > >
> > > Mariaplaats 3
> > > 3511 LH  Utrecht
> > >
> > >
> > > Op do 3 okt. 2019 om 09:13 schreef Chris Keating <
> > > chriskeatingw...@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > >
> > > > Hi Chuck,
> > > >
> > > > The reasons the question keeps getting asked is because it was never
> > > really
> > > > answered in the first place.
> > > >
> > > > The only good reason I can think of for not publishing country-level
> > data
> > > > is that there are some countries where that could create risks to the
> > WMF
> > > > or individuals because they're places where giving donations to a US
> > > > nonprofit is either illegal or politically risky.
> > > >
> > > > However that doesn't apply to most countries, so why not publish the
> > data
> > > > for most of the world?
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 1:34 AM Chuck Roslof 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Philip,
> > > > >
> > > > > We do not publish country-level fundraising numbers. My colleague
> > > Stephen
> > > > > discussed why on this list a few years back, so rather than
> > > paraphrasing
> > > > > his previous email I'll just provide a link to it:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-November/085576.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > > ==
> > > > > Charles M. Roslof
> > > > > Legal Counsel
> > > > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > > > Pronouns: they <http://pr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AffCom - Candidates for new mandate

2020-01-23 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Perhaps the self-re-electing AffCom members can elighten us what the future
of AffCom will look like in the light of the recommendations.

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 10:57, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> To me the main surprise is that AffCom continues to exist despite being
> obviously broken.
>
> It does not fulfill its mandate, it never has done, everyone knows this,
> yet still the WMF is happy to have a non-functional committee.
>
> Chris
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 12:23 AM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> >  On January the 10th I put it in the home page of meta
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Main_Page/WM_News=prev=19695407
> > , I think I did the same last year but I was considering obvious we had
> > received some mails and I did not pay attention.
> > I am surprised there are so many candidates considering the limited
> > publicity the page gets in the month of December.
> >
> > Next year I will try to put it on the news section of the meta home page
> > sooner.
> > Alessandro
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giovedì 23 gennaio 2020, 01:14:00 CET, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> >  Not sure this made it to the Wikimedia-L - I couldn't find it easily, at
> > least. But the candidates for the new mandate in AffCom are under
> > discussion now (and have been for some time already.
> >
> > Interested ppl, please follow the link and comment/endorse/ask questions
> to
> > them there:
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Candidates/December_2019
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo - DarwIn
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations released, join the conversation

2020-01-21 Thread Philip Kopetzky
I'm not sure why you want to vote on something that you will have to adapt
to your community needs and implement accordingly, Ziko. What exactly is
contentious about them that needs a vote, especially when the
implementation will hopefully lead to more decentralised structures? Or do
you think it could get worse? ;-)

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 12:57, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:

> Hello Anders,
>
> Could you please explain which of the mails in this thread are problematic
> in your opinion? I think that I made a factual statement in the most
> neutral way.
>
> Anders, your opinion is that the recommendations are „wonderful“. I want to
> tolerate your opinion. But do you also tolerate other opinions? Or do you
> think that opponents need a better „attitude“?
>
> Kind regards,
> Ziko
>
>
> Anders Wennersten  schrieb am Di. 21. Jan. 2020
> um 12:14:
>
> > Sometimes I wonder if we really belong to the same movement or even live
> > on the same planet.
> >
> > A wonderful work has been done with the recomendations, and the end
> > result looks very fine, with only a few minor comments needed as far as
> > I can see.
> >
> >   And I believe whatever we think of the endresult we should commend the
> > people who have participated, both their commitment and quality of work.
> >
> > As a 8 hours-a- day contributor to a project, I know, as all my
> > colleagues, the importance to have a positive tone in our
> > communityinternal conversation and always be strong in good faith. And I
> > meet that positive tone in my activities in the community and when I
> > meet volunteers and  functionaries IRL. But in this list i find
> > appalling negative entries as i find to  be in direct opposition to our
> > movement values.
> >
> > So please, please use a better tone and attitude in this discussion of
> > the recommendations
> >
> > Andersw
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Den 2020-01-21 kl. 11:49, skrev Fæ:
> > > Ziko, we can vote on whatever we want, whenever we want.
> > >
> > > Us having a RFC on meta does not need the WMF to approve it or like it.
> > An
> > > openly run RFC could itself recommend a board resolution asking the
> > > community appointed board members (you know, the legitimate ones that
> are
> > > accountable to us) to reject or amend the 'recommendations' as the
> > > community sees fit. The WMF board and their CEO know it is in their
> > > interest to take on any firm community consensus rather than playing
> > > political games to get around it.
> > >
> > > I suggest folks take some time out to re-review the recommendations and
> > > wait for the dust to settle before deciding if we want to start a
> > correctly
> > > community-led process for voting on it.
> > >
> > > As others have expressed, I am not in the least bit inclined to give
> any
> > > feedback on meta. It's a waste of volunteer time, as effective as
> > shouting
> > > out of your office window expecting to make the weather change.
> > >
> > > Fae
> > >
> > > On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 09:54, Ziko van Dijk 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> We now have the confirmation on a Meta Wiki talk page: the WMF is not
> > going
> > >> to let the communities vote on the recommendations.
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations#Community_consensus
> > >>
> > >> Kind regards
> > >> Ziko
> > >>
> > >> Am Di., 21. Jan. 2020 um 09:39 Uhr schrieb Yaroslav Blanter <
> > >> ymb...@gmail.com>:
> > >>
> > >>> We will be again talking to the wall. (Would be, I am not going to
> > react
> > >>> this time).
> > >>>
> > >>> Best
> > >>> Yaroslav
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 5:06 AM Todd Allen 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> >  Katherine,
> > 
> >  These are very disappointing. It does not seem like a bit of the
> > >> feedback
> >  on earlier versions was taken into consideration at all. Can we
> expect
> >  anything we say to matter this time around, or will we once again be
> >  talking to the wall?
> > 
> >  Todd
> > 
> >  On Mon, Jan 20, 2020, 8:24 PM Katherine Maher  >
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I wanted to share some news with you: the first version of the
> > >> movement
> > > strategy recommendations document has been published on Meta [1].
> On
> >  behalf
> > > of the movement strategy working groups and recommendation
> writers, I
> > >>> am
> > > honored to present them to you. We ask you to please take a moment
> to
> >  read
> > > through, review, and comment.
> > >
> > > In 2017, we set about building the future we want, together. In
> 2020,
> >  your
> > > fellow Wikimedians have written and shared a framework for how we
> can
> >  bring
> > > to life our vision of becoming the essential support system of the
> > > ecosystem of free knowledge.
> > >
> > > == Review the recommendations ==
> > >
> > > These recommendations are the result of 18 months 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: New roles for working group members, synthesis underway, and more

2019-11-28 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Yaroslav, the recommendations have always come with the caveat that the
actual implementation depends on the communities implementing them
themselves, adapting them to fit the needs of a specific community.

On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 16:36, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> The recommendations must be first presented to the movement (and,
> specifically, to the project communities) for approval, and only them
> whatever will be approved, can be presented to the Board,
>
> The reverse sequence will likely result in outright rejection of
> recommendations by the editing communities and further alienation WMF from
> the communities.
>
> Best
> Yaroslav
>
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 5:20 PM Nicole Ebber 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I’m happy to share an overview of what’s been happening in movement
> > strategy lately.
> >
> > == New roles and bringing the recommendations together ==
> > From now until the end of the year, the focus will be on identifying
> > the overlaps in the 89 recommendations produced by the nine thematic
> > area working groups. The goal here is to create one synthesized set of
> > recommendations and an accessible, digestible Movement Strategy
> > document to be shared publicly in January.
> >
> > To do this, we asked working group members in October to let us know
> > if they’d be interested in continuing to contribute to the Wikimedia
> > 2030 Movement Strategy in one of the following roles: Writer,
> > connector, or reviewer.[1]
> >
> > 15 have signed up to be writers, 10 as connectors, and 17 as
> > reviewers. Writers will look for overlaps and similarities in the
> > existing content to see where multiple recommendations could be merged
> > and unified. Connectors will work closely with writers to help them
> > improve and expand the content and assess how and where to best
> > integrate phase 1 material, research, and community input. Reviewers
> > will go through the synthesized recommendations and provide specific
> > additional perspectives, expertise, contexts, and advice as needed.
> >
> > The writers are currently in a high period of activity, which began in
> > early November and will run through December, with ongoing support
> > from the connectors. Alongside bringing together the existing
> > recommendations, they are also defining principles that underpin and
> > guide the content of these recommendations. The writers will come
> > together in Berlin in the first week of December to work intensively
> > on consolidating the recommendations and finalize the work.
> >
> > == Next steps ==
> > When the synthesized recommendations are ready and published in early
> > 2020, a final round of movement conversations will take place.
> > Movement stakeholders will have a chance to understand the path
> > towards these recommendations and to review the semi-final document.
> > The final recommendations will be presented to the Board of Trustees
> > in March and subsequently to the movement for approval. The first step
> > towards implementation will be discussing prioritization and
> > sequencing of the recommendations, as well as agreeing upon
> > responsibilities for bringing each recommendation to life.[2]
> >
> > We’ll keep you posted on future developments and more concrete steps
> > towards approval here and on Wikimedia Space, so stay tuned!
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Nicole
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups#Synthesis_Groups
> > [2]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Overview/Timeline#Detailed_timeline_October_2019_to_June_2020
> >
> > --
> > Nicole Ebber
> > Leiterin Internationale Beziehungen
> > Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > https://wikimedia.de
> >
> > Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> > Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns
> > dabei! https://spenden.wikimedia.de
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.
> > V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
> > Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
> > anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
> > Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-04 Thread Philip Kopetzky
I can only reiterate what Lodewijk said - I'm trying to find the approach
and goals in the decision to acknowledge user groups that seem to be an
integral part (or from an outside perspective, should be) of the national
chapter. In the past this has been an indicator of personal conflicts
within a chapter or user group and AffCom perpetuating these conflicts by
setting up competing affiliates (the situation in Albania being a recent
example of this).

Best,
Philip


On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 06:33, effe iets anders 
wrote:

> I would like to note that one of the contacts of this user group is
> Vladimir Medeyko, the director of Wikimedia Russia. I'm assuming
> comfortably that this application happened in full coordination with
> Wikimedia Russia.
>
> The question about process is still an interesting one though (what is
> nowadays the approach of Affcom, and what are the considerations) when a
> user group application comes in from a geographic area with an active
> affiliate at a 'higher level' (in this case, a country). You could continue
> the comparison with what happens if an application would come in from South
> of Nevsky (a neighborhood in St. Petersburg).
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 3:29 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia NYC is a very different situation, there is not a national
> > chapter in the US, so it's not a cell of anything.
> > Just to clarify: Saint Petersburg eventually could not be a cell, but the
> > way it is presented (to promote Wikimedia RU activities in SP, with same
> > Wikimedia RU people), it's basically a cell.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Yuri Astrakhan  escreveu no dia quinta,
> 3/10/2019
> > à(s) 23:06:
> >
> > > What about Wikimedia NYC?  (I'm not sure of its organizational status)
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > paulospern...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Wales is a whole country complete with it's own language, I don't
> > believe
> > > > it compares with a city UG.
> > > >
> > > > Paulo
> > > >
> > > > Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > > 3/10/2019
> > > > à(s) 22:53:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 20:45, Paulo Santos Perneta
> > > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's
> > > > > basically
> > > > > > a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's a curious precedent.
> > > > >
> > > > > The precedent was already set, in March 2017, by Wikimedia
> Community
> > > > > User Group Wales (c/f Wikimedia UK).
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Andy Mabbett
> > > > > @pigsonthewing
> > > > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > > > >
> > > > > ___
> > > > > 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,
> > > > >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-03 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Kirill,

so it seems like geographically large countries are being split up into
different user groups - do you think that this is a viable model for the
future or just happened because of certain circumstances within the Russian
community? Would your template allow a User Group from Rome, Paris, Munich
or Sydney for example?

Best,
Philip

On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 12:20, Kirill Lokshin 
wrote:

> Hi everyone!
>
> I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> [1] the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User
> Group. The group aims to unite Wikimedians living in St. Petersburg, to
> support the development of content on topics related to St. Petersburg
> across different Wikimedia projects, to promote the Wikimedia projects and
> movement in St. Petersburg, and to build partnerships between the Wikimedia
> community and cultural, scientific, educational, and media institutions in
> St. Petersburg.
>
> Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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] FY1819 Fundraising Report

2019-10-03 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Thanks Chuck for digging out that old email, it does explain why this isn't
done for every country.
Chris and Sandra have a point though, because this can't be a legal issue
for most European countries for example. In return, the local organisations
and communities would benefit from an added layer of feedback based on
their work.

Furthermore, how and how much we fundraise will be one of the important
talking points when implementing the recommendations, especially to set a
benchmark to evaluate if involving local organisations in the fundraising
process actually works or not.

Best,
Philip

On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 09:38, Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
rient...@wikimedia.nl> wrote:

> I agree with Chris.
> Furthermore: Wikimedia Nederland, like all chapters, puts a lot of effort
> in raising awareness of and support for the Wikimedia projects.  I would
> really like to know if these efforts 'pay off'.
>
>
>
> Sandra Rientjes
> Directeur/Executive Director Wikimedia Nederland
>
> tel.(+31) (0)30 3200238 (ma, di, do)
> mob. (+31) (0)6  31786379 (wo, vrij)
>
> www.wikimedia.nl
>
>
> Mariaplaats 3
> 3511 LH  Utrecht
>
>
> Op do 3 okt. 2019 om 09:13 schreef Chris Keating <
> chriskeatingw...@gmail.com
> >:
>
> > Hi Chuck,
> >
> > The reasons the question keeps getting asked is because it was never
> really
> > answered in the first place.
> >
> > The only good reason I can think of for not publishing country-level data
> > is that there are some countries where that could create risks to the WMF
> > or individuals because they're places where giving donations to a US
> > nonprofit is either illegal or politically risky.
> >
> > However that doesn't apply to most countries, so why not publish the data
> > for most of the world?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 1:34 AM Chuck Roslof 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Philip,
> > >
> > > We do not publish country-level fundraising numbers. My colleague
> Stephen
> > > discussed why on this list a few years back, so rather than
> paraphrasing
> > > his previous email I'll just provide a link to it:
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-November/085576.html
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > > ==
> > > Charles M. Roslof
> > > Legal Counsel
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > Pronouns: they <http://pronoun.is/they/.../themself>/he
> > > <http://pronoun.is/he>
> > >
> > > NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged
> > > information in it. If you have received this message by accident,
> please
> > > delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the
> > > Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal
> > advice
> > > to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff
> > > members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please
> > see
> > > our legal disclaimer
> > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:05 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Patricia,
> > > >
> > > > thanks for the report! Is it possible to get a country-by-country
> > > breakdown
> > > > of the donations as well?
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards,
> > > > Philip
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 01:25, Patricia Pena 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I’m excited to share with you our FY1819 Fundraising Report
> > > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2018-19_Report>. This
> > > > report
> > > > > is an opportunity to provide insight into our revenue model and the
> > > > > strategy that goes into creating an impactful fundraising
> campaign. A
> > > > > sincere thank you to the millions of donors in nearly 30 countries
> > who
> > > > > support our mission.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd also like to thank everyone who contributed and collaborated on
> > > this
> > > > > document: Online Fundraising, Major Gifts & Endowment, Fundraising
> > > > > Operations, Donor Services, Fundraising Tech, Legal,
> Communications,
> > > > > Finance and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FY1819 Fundraising Report

2019-10-01 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Patricia,

thanks for the report! Is it possible to get a country-by-country breakdown
of the donations as well?

Kind regards,
Philip

On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 01:25, Patricia Pena  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I’m excited to share with you our FY1819 Fundraising Report
> . This report
> is an opportunity to provide insight into our revenue model and the
> strategy that goes into creating an impactful fundraising campaign. A
> sincere thank you to the millions of donors in nearly 30 countries who
> support our mission.
>
> I'd also like to thank everyone who contributed and collaborated on this
> document: Online Fundraising, Major Gifts & Endowment, Fundraising
> Operations, Donor Services, Fundraising Tech, Legal, Communications,
> Finance and more! Special thanks to Thea Skaff for once again project
> managing this entire effort.
>
> We welcome your feedback and questions on the talk page.
> Thank you,
> Pats
> --
> *Pats Pena (she/her) *
> Director, Online Fundraising I Wikimedia Foundation
> 1 Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94104
> pp...@wikimedia.org I +1 (415) 816 3349
>
>
> *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate.
> *
>
>
> Please Note: If I am emailing after hours or on the weekend, it's because
> Wikimedia allows me an awesome flexible schedule. Please do not respond
> until reasonable business hours in your timezone, unless of course I am
> shouting for help ;-)
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] "The Foundation does not care so much of the French-speaking contributors"

2019-09-16 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Gereon, you clearly forget the whole Mediaviewer saga and attendance of WMF
staff at the following WikiCon in Cologne ;-) But that was a long time ago
:-)

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 01:53, Gereon Kalkuhl  wrote:

> Since 2010 we have the WikiCon for the German language communities with
> more than 300 attendants. I don't remember that the WMF has sent anyone
> to these conventions. And why should they? It's all in German, the
> communities are established and have strong chapters. I suppose the same
> applies to the French language communites. The WMF visits emerging
> communities, to learn about them and to help them by transfering
> knowlege. They visit the CEE meetings, they visit Wiki Indabas. I don't
> think that the WMF is neglecting big communities, it rather makes sense
> that when sending employes across half the planet they check before,
> what benefits the conferences have from their attendance and what
> benefits their attendance bring to the particpants of the conference.
> Cheers, Gereon
>
> Am 15.09.2019 um 20:02 schrieb Thierry Coudray:
> > "*The Foundation does not care so much of the French-speaking
> contributors*".
> > This harsh sentence is the translation of a statement in French, I've
> just
> > said in a conversation a week ago at the Francophone Wikiconvention held
> > last weekend in Brussels. The statement may seem excessive, because the
> > Foundation does things for the Francophone community as well as for other
> > communities (and its website is fairly well translated into French). But
> it
> > reflected my feeling, shared by my three interlocutors, all non-French,
> > facing that no Foundation high-level members were present to this
> > Wikiconvention: no executive director, nor members of the Board, nor any
> > level-C staff. In an another conversation, where the subject came up over
> > again, someone said this absence was offensive. I do not know if it
> > reflects the majority of attendees feelings but with varying degrees, I
> > would said it was widely shared.
> >
> > In 2017, for the Francophone Wikiconvention in Strasbourg we had a very
> > quick visit of Katherine Maher, in 2018, a simple video message and in
> 2019
> > ... nothing. At the same time, the Francophone Wikiconvention has stepped
> > up with ever more participants, always more countries represented. This
> > year, it brought together more than 220 Francophones, Algerian, Belgian,
> > Beninese, Cameroonian, Canadian, French, Guinean, Ivorian, Swiss and
> > Tunisian contributors, and I may forget some, with varied and enriching
> > conferences and meetings. A huge success, very well organized by
> employees
> > but also by several volunteers, who dedicated time and energy. This
> > Wikiconvention and the projects and achievements submitted have shown the
> > French-speaking Wikimedia community vitality, which will continue to
> grow.
> > FYI, French is foreseen, thanks to Africa, to be the most rapidly growing
> > languages in the next twenty years and will be the mother tongue or the
> > language used for communication for more than 8% of the world's
> population
> > in thirty years' time. But my reaction would have been the same if I had
> > attended an Arabic, Chinese, Spanish, Swahili-speaking or any other
> > important languages Wikiconvention.
> >
> > So yes, this Wikiconvention is not in English. Fortunately, not all
> > Wikimedia meetings are in English. In a previous discussion on this
> mailing
> > list about the question of whether or not it is appropriate to continue
> > Wimania, one of the participants argued that unlike other Wikimedia
> > meetings, anyone could attend Wikmania. It may be obvious for those who
> > have English as a mother tongue or for Northern Europeans for whom
> English
> > is almost a second mother tongue but this is false: English is spoken
> only
> > by a small minority in the world, less than one human in six. So only one
> > human in six or seven could attend Wikimania or any other
> english-speaking
> > conferences or meetings (the case of the vast majority of global
> Wikimedia
> > conferences). I do not deny a common working language usefulness but a
> > Wikiconvention in French, as I hope other languages ones will be more to
> > come soon, allows all non-English speaking Francophones to participate in
> > the Wikimedia movement and above all, help them to meet our common goal
> of
> > spread freeknowledge.The movement talks a lot about its efforts to
> overcome
> > differents gaps (gender, LGBT,...) and it's rightly pointed, these topics
> > are important. But it simply forget the language gap and the almost
> > exclusive use of English excludes a very large majority.
> >
> > So why no high level Foundation members in Brussels ?
> > I was told that Valerie D'Costa, the new Chief of Community Engagement,
> > should initially be there but finally told she will not. But then, no
> other
> > member could then replace her and why only one Foundation representant
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Change in WMAU Committee

2019-09-02 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Congrats to the elected members of WMAU :-)

On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 at 13:08, Biyanto Rebin 
wrote:

> Congratulations, Robert and all WMAU team!
>
> Regards,
>
> Pada tanggal Jum, 30 Agu 2019 pukul 06.01 Robert Myers <
> robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au> menulis:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Sunday 25 August 2019, Wikimedia Australia held its Annual General
> > Meeting (AGM).
> >
> > Two long term Committee members, Gideon Digby and Tom Hograth, have
> taken a
> > step back from WMAU as Committee members but will be still involved
> within
> > the movement.
> >
> > Current WMAU Committee as of 25 August 2019
> >
> > Office-bearers
> >
> >- Pru Mitchell - President
> >- Alex Lum - Vice-President
> >- Robert Myers - Secretary
> >- Steven Crossin - Treasurer
> >
> > Ordinary Committee Members
> >
> >- Caddie Brain
> >- Matthew Moore
> >- Jacinta Sutton
> >- Sam Wilson
> >
> > Regards,
> > Robert
> >
> > --
> >
> > Robert Myers
> > Secretary - Wikimedia Australia
> > M: +61 400 670 288
> > robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au
> > http://www.wikimedia.org.au
> >
> > Wikimedia Australia Inc. is an independent charitable organisation which
> > supports the efforts of the Wikimedia Foundation in Australia. We welcome
> > your support by membership or donations to keep the Wikimedia mission
> > alive.
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Biyanto Rebin | Ketua Umum (*Chair*) 2016-2018
> Wikimedia Indonesia
> Surel: biyanto.re...@wikimedia.or.id
> -
> Dukung upaya kami membebaskan pengetahuan:
> https://wikimedia.or.id/sumbangan/
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

2019-08-15 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hey Ziko,

I'm sure you yourself can point out the recommendations that are based on a
year of deliberations and research than those that are not. It is pretty
hard work to gather all the feedback from the last year as well as analyse,
weight and incorporate it into the final recommendations. This work is
still taking place and won't be finished until mid-September, so right now
it would be great to get your view on the goals for 2030 in the
recommendations rather than pick apart one-liners (and those views a can
also be more than just one's own opinion, if you're so inclined).

Best,
Philip



On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 15:48, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have
> been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the future
> of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of the
> working groups.
>
> If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give
> feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be
> ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing
> the recommendations.
>
> Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the
> documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are much
> more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the Wikimeda
> volunteers.
>
> There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one
> sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to
> back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At least
> at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".
>
> The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought through.
> There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how
> that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the statement
> that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC
> content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After
> years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open content
> organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic change?
>
> And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed
> about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All change
> has negative connotations to some members of the community."
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
>
> I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents
> before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is giving
> a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the very
> same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).
>
> This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations
> are unusable or damaging. I also cannot judge about the efforts invested,
> as I have no insight in the inner workings. But it is very frustrating for
> me to read the documents and often have to guess what they actually mean.
> And it seems to me, given the comments on the user pages on Meta Wiki, on
> this list, on de:WP:Kurier and on Facebook, that I am not the only one who
> feels this frustration.
>
> Therefore, I ask the people responsible: please reconsider the timeline. If
> these documents are the result of one year work, then the documents will
> not be ready within two and a half months. Consider several months for the
> working groups to use the present feedback for a redraft, and then give the
> Wikimedia volunteers at least the same amount of time for giving feedback
> again.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-12 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Andy,

the way the recommendations were drafted was not straightforward and they
are still drafts, some less defined than might be ideal at this point in
time. Personally I would not accept such a statement in a final
recommendation, but these are still rather talking points than specific
visions of the future and it would be great to discuss them in that way.

Best,
Philip

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 18:53, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 16:51, Nicole Ebber 
> wrote:
>
> > This is a
> > process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
> > engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.
>
> Perhaps it would also be in keeping with that spirit for this:
>
> Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
>
> All change has negative connotations to some members of the community
>
> to be re-written, to actually reflect the proposal's real and significant
> risks?
>
> As it stands, I do not find it to be "solution-oriented", nor
> indicative of "due review and reflection", nor "in the spirit of
> collegial collaboration", and I do not think anyone could plausibly
> argue that it is any of those things.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-12 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list. You're
the only one telling people to shut up here.

And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can incorporate
indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
licensing scheme?
___
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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-12 Thread Philip Kopetzky
I'm pretty sure that that licensing recommendation is still
work-in-progress and the legal implications haven't been analysed yet.

I guess that assuming good faith is not your strong suit, Fae? Be part of
the solution, for once.

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 11:25, Fæ  wrote:

> I agree that the official announcement on Commons is worse than
> unfortunate.
>
> The announcement by the Diversity Working Group on a sub-page of the
> VP of their recommendation to permit NC and ND license restrictions on
> Commons, comes after no attempt in advance to discuss the
> recommendation or its wording with Wikimedia Commons community *on
> Commons*. It is not helped by the poster being a volunteer with barely
> any activity on Commons, so not the best person to discuss the future
> of Commons with.
> Link:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump%2FCopyright=revision=361624891=361607626
>
> The justifications for the change read as unsourced and arbitrary. In
> particular there is no evidence that using Commons to host NC ND
> material that may be important to minority communities, such as
> traditional folk art, would help better to educate the public about
> those arts when the same NC restriction would halt in its
> tracks the general use of Commons by educators and universities. The
> change in commons policies would have the consequence of advice to
> educators being against using our media in lectures, study materials,
> academic papers, academic books etc.
>
> The Meta page that is linked to verges on being blatantly hostile to
> the views of the Wikimedia Commons communities
> * Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
> * (Answer) All change has negative connotations to some members of the
> community.
> This appears deliberately flippant and provocative. Bizarre.
>
> If the WMF sponsored recommendation is hostile up front, I do not see
> much point in the community discussing the change, it may as well just
> be mass voted down. Discussion when the team recommending the strategy
> is openly hostile to "some members of the community" on its own
> recommendations page, will only lead to more polarization of the WMF
> versus everyone else type.
>
> Fae
>
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 02:11, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> > (Response apparently wasn't sent to list previously.)
> >
> > Yes, I think there ought to be a place to discuss the whole thing, as
> > several share a fatal flaw in that they advocate dictating to local
> > communities from above.
> >
> > Is this getting announced anywhere other than on the mailing list? There
> is
> > a proposal in these to literally undermine Wikipedia's free content
> mission
> > by allowing nonfree licenses. (
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
> )
> > Do you think, maybe, we shouldn't attempt to slip that through unnoticed
> > and uncommented?
> >
> > For example, here's the notice that was left on Commons:
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump=revision=360549650=360506118
> > .
> > It's totally anodyne, and gives absolutely no indication that such
> massive
> > changes, which would entirely strip the communities of autonomy, are
> > proposed there. For example, I suspect Commons might be just a bit
> > interested to know these proposals would force them to accept nonfree
> > content. If this is in any way an honest process, make sure the
> > announcements indicate how breathtakingly broad and destructive these
> > proposals are.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 7:35 AM Isaac Olatunde  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe there are related discussion pages, Todd. Do you think there
> > > should have been separate pages for discussion aside the talk pages?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Isaac.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 2:29 PM Szymon Grabarczuk <
> tar.locesil...@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> How about talk pages?
> > >>
> > >> Z poważaniem / Kind regards
> > >>
> > >> *Szymon Grabarczuk*
> > >> userpage: pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tar_Lócesilion
> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> ᐧ
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 14:28, Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > There does not seem to be anywhere to comment on these, which there
> > >> should
> > >> > be. I saw at least one which is highly objectionable and which I
> would
> > >> like
> > >> > to object to.
> > >> >
> > >> > Todd
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 12:37 PM Nicole Ebber <
> nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de
> > >> >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Dear fellow Wikimedians,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> > >> > > draft recommendations 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-21 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Questioning is ok - we might indeed need to introduce some oversight, but
to be honest, I doubt this would solve the trust issue as long as some
people demand full transparency where there can never be full transparency.

Speculating and accusing victims of being the actual perpetrators,
believing the perpetrators more than the victims, perpetrators depicting
themselves as the victims, is a sad default behaviour in our community.
This needs to change. Seriously.

On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 08:17, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> How can we BE safe in the movement if we cannot question the decisions of
> T? (when they appear questionable and unsafe)
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 7:57 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Some goodbye to all
>
> First of all I don’t know the context of this conversation. I know that I
> personnally find that the actions of  Trust& Safety  very valuable and
> wise. I totally support and trust their judgement.
>
> I am tired of seing their work criticized, and do not appreciate official
> chapter representants and employees publicly supporting alleged offenders,
> showing no aknowledgement of the fact that this is very toxic for alleged
> victims, and does not help to change attitude towards issues of
> harrassment.
>
> How can we feel safe in the movement if the decisions of T are
> questionned by official members of our movement?
>
> Nattes à chat
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 21 juin 2019 à 01:04, Chris Keating  a
> écrit :
>
> >>
> >> It is extremely disappointing, and *extremely typical* of the Wikimedia
> >> movement, to see an entire thread like this dedicated to supporting
> someone
> >> who Trust & Safety has found to have acted in such a way that they had
> to
> >> intervene. It is even more disappointing to see a person who was
> affected
> >> by his actions told "this is not your story" and "it may help you when
> you
> >> grow some sensitivity and respect this experience, the
> >> feelings of others."
> >>
> >> If you're wondering why women leave the Wikimedia movement, and why
> >> Wikimedia has such a bad harassment problem in general, just reflect on
> >> this thread.
> >
> >
> > Thank you, Molly, for expressing what I was just trying to summon the
> > energy to write.
> >
> > Chris
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-20 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Thanks Molly for your thoughtful words, I really hope your words make some
people think about their own replies in this thread.

On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 23:42, GorillaWarfare <
gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I do not know Romaine, I do not know Caroline, and I do not know much about
> the events that have led up to all of this other than what has been said on
> this mailing list. It is easy to take sides in cases like these, based on
> who you know best, your past experiences with that person, and a multitude
> of other reasons. I suspect no one truly knows the whole story (even the
> folks who were directly involved—after all, you can never know the
> intentions of another person, or how they are interpreting your own
> actions). But what we do know is that some actions Romaine took led to
> Trust & Safety deciding they needed to intervene. They are tasked with
> keeping people within our movement safe, both online and in person at
> events. In my experience they do an extremely good job.
>
> It is extremely disappointing, and *extremely typical* of the Wikimedia
> movement, to see an entire thread like this dedicated to supporting someone
> who Trust & Safety has found to have acted in such a way that they had to
> intervene. It is even more disappointing to see a person who was affected
> by his actions told "this is not your story" and "it may help you when you
> grow some sensitivity and respect this experience, the
> feelings of others."
>
> If you're wondering why women leave the Wikimedia movement, and why
> Wikimedia has such a bad harassment problem in general, just reflect on
> this thread.
>
> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GorillaWarfare
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 6:26 PM Pierre-Selim 
> wrote:
>
> > Her POV ?
> >
> > Well I can confirm what Caroline said.
> >
> > What more do you want ? To verify all other reports ?
> >
> > It's sad that things have escalated this far, but may be it's time to
> > wonder why it escalated like that. There was multiple incidents reported.
> > Things that should have stayed private were told on this mailing list by
> > Romaine... well when do we stop this ?
> >
> > Please keep in mind when you cast your support here that people who have
> > reported Romaine might be reading this.
> >
> > Le jeu. 20 juin 2019 à 23:12, Gerard Meijssen  >
> > a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Caroline,
> > > For me this is not your story. Your insistence of making it so has
> quite
> > > the opposite effect. I have known Romaine, the tireless efforts for us
> > all
> > > he has given us over the years, I grieve for our collective loss. I do
> > not
> > > know you and you are intruding on what is a feeling shared by many. It
> > may
> > > help you when you grow some sensitivity and respect this experience,
> the
> > > feelings of others. Maybe it is too difficult for you, I do not know
> as I
> > > do not know you at all.
> > >
> > > What I wonder is to what extend do you know Romaine, to what extend are
> > you
> > > stuck in your pov.
> > > Thanks,
> > >  GerardM
> > >
> > > On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 19:00, Caroline Becker 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is such a lost. Not only did you waisted an opportunity to learn
> > and
> > > > grow from your mistakes the first time, you reiterate here, showing
> no
> > > > willingness to grow and learn.
> > > >
> > > > But why would you take the difficult path, when by just claiming your
> > > right
> > > > to "weirdness" (which I guess only apply to you and none to the
> people
> > > you
> > > > hurt), you're rewarding with public support ?
> > > >
> > > > Caroline
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le jeu. 20 juin 2019 à 18:55, Dennis During  a
> > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > I am ashamed that the movement has a climate that allows this
> > > unfortunate
> > > > > outcome
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 7:15 AM Romaine Wiki <
> romaine.w...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >  Dear community,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > About a month ago I have decided that I will indefinitely no
> longer
> > > > > attend
> > > > > > any WMF funded events as result of bullying, attempts to silence
> > me,
> > > > > > intimidation and treats against me. This has resulted in that I
> > feel
> > > > > > extremely unsafe as the result of the behaviour of only a few
> > > > > individuals.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Dennis C. During
> > > > > ___
> > > > > 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,
> > > > >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki Movimento Brasil

2019-06-11 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Well, I just hope things turn out better this time. Fingers crossed!

On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 at 09:31, Paulo Santos Perneta 
wrote:

> Hey,
>
> The affiliate was originally formed in 2008 as the wannabe chapter
> Wikimedia Brasil, and made its life as a chapter until 2010 when it was
> noticed that it was not incorporated nor had any intention of becoming
> incorporated, and the whole thing was canceled.
>
> Some of its members and new volunteers in Brazil then immediately joined
> together to form the chapter again, and there even is a resolution in
> Wikimania Haifa 2011 about that. The negotiations with affcom took an awful
> lot of time and bureaucracy, and by 2013 they had already incorporated but
> were still waiting to have the chapter approved. They eventually managed to
> be approved as an user group by tlsummer 2013, which is the one that was
> reapproved now.
>
> Paulo
>
> A sexta, 7 de jun de 2019, 23:50, Nathan  escreveu:
>
> > Philip - as can be seen from the group's meta page, this is the former
> > Wikimedia Community User Group Brasil. Originally founded in 2013, this
> > organization was de-recognized by AffCom about one year ago.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Grupo de Usuários Wiki Movimento Brasil

2019-06-05 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Chico,

I'm still confused who "we" is and what the history of this group is
compared to the previous user groups. Is there now one big community that
is represented in this user group? Because that would be a great step
forward :-)

Best,
Philip

On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 05:32, Chico Venancio 
wrote:

> Dear Seddon,
>
> Thank you for your interest in the Brazilian community.
>
> The Affiliations Committee has created a page to discuss the situation in
> the Brazilian community. You may want to direct questions to them or in
> general to community members on this page [1].
>
> The User Group Wiki Movimento Brasil is strongly committed to improving
> community health, striving to engage the Wikimedian communities and keep a
> safe environment for participation. With that commitment in mind --and even
> before the official re-recognition-- we have looked for support and have
> created a code of conduct [2] and a friendly space policy [3], to which all
> members must abide. We are currently working on a diversity plan with
> Community Development staff members, that should be ready in less than six
> months.
>
> We take this space as an opportunity to invite the global community to get
> to know and engage with the set of activities we run. Since 2013, we have
> led numerous GLAM partnerships [4], one of the largest education programs
> in the world [5], many community events focused on advanced Wikidata topics
> [6] and several other outreach activities and programs.
>
> Thank you all and good contributions.
>
> Chico Venancio,
> On behalf of User Group Wiki Movimento Brasil
>
> References
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Brazil_Next_Steps
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Movement_Brazil_User_Group/Code_of_Conduct
> [3]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Movement_Brazil_User_Group/Friendly_Space_Policy
> [4]
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:This_Month_in_GLAM_Brazil_reports
> [5]
> https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/campaigns/grupo_de_usu%C3%A1rios_wikimedia_no_brasil/programs
> [6] https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoria:!Wikidata_Labs
>
>
> Em sáb, 1 de jun de 2019 às 08:59, Joseph Seddon 
> escreveu:
> >
> > I didn't mean for any intended accusation in my initial question, and to
> > clarify I do not sit on AffCom along I have a long standing interest in
> > affiliates.
> >
> > After the issues with the two previous affiliates in Brazil, it was the
> > Brazilian community themselves who could take the situation into their
> own
> > hands and move forward and I was genuinely interested how the community
> > plans to do that and avoid repeats of the past.
> >
> > Regards
> > Seddon
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:24 PM Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Joseph
> > >
> > > Perhaps we could assume that your colleagues on the Affiliations
> Committee
> > > are well aware of the past history and have taken it into consideration
> > > privately, which is exactly how such issues sould be considered, rather
> > > than on a public mailing list.  Unless you have evidence to the
> cotrary?
> > >
> > > Thrapostibongles
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:43 AM Joseph Seddon  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Asking as a volunteer with a broad interest in affiliate matters
> rather
> > > > than as a staff member:
> > > >
> > > > What steps is the Brazilian community taking to ensure there isn't a
> > > repeat
> > > > of past breakdowns in community cooperation?
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > >
> > > > Seddon
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:50 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi!
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to correct myself, as since October 2018 there is one
> more
> > > > > Wikimedia affiliate with Portuguese as its official language, our
> very
> > > > good
> > > > > friends "Muj(lh)eres latinoamericanas en Wikimedia", who have been
> > > doing
> > > > > quite a notable work in LATAM:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Muj(lh)eres_latinoamericanas_en_Wikimedia
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Paulo
> > > > >
> > > > > Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu no dia
> quinta,
> > > > > 30/05/2019 à(s) 15:40:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Wonderful news!
> > > > > > Brazil has been for long one of the world leaders in Wikimedia
> > > > > educational
> > > > > > projects, with an excellent work on GLAMs, often in line with the
> > > > > > educational projects, and generally with full Wikidata
> integration.
> > > > > > It is very rewarding to see the group recognized again as a
> > > full-right
> > > > > > Wikimedia affiliate.
> > > > > > It also happens to be the only other Portuguese speaking
> affiliate,
> > > > > > besides Wikimedia Portugal. Still a long way to go for one of the
> > > most
> > > > > > spoken native languages in the globe, but that's a great
> improvement.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Paulo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

2019-05-14 Thread Philip Kopetzky
I really think that the main problem here is not automation but the problem
Asaf pointed out: A small circle of people dictating the rules and who's
allowed to participate and who isn't. Automation just perpetuates the cycle
of those same people being in control of those processes.

On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 17:08, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> I love this thread.  Thank you to all participating in it...
>
> Also: speeding these things with automation is also much easier once there
> is a quarantine where anyone can see flagged material without being an
> admin!   SJ
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 7:39 AM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > This is wrong: "The upload system allow you to upload something if you
> > are the author. Period."
> >
> > The system as it is now will allow anyone to upload a file given (s)he
> > has the necessary rights. That does not imply the uploader being the
> > author of the material.
> >
> > Note that verifying whether the uploaded material already exist out on
> > the web must be done before the file is made public, otherwise any
> > attempt on detecting a copyviolation will fail. That would imply that
> > a copyvio algorithm must be automated. The questionable material could
> > still be uploaded, but then a permission should be forwarded to OTRS.
> > Also, a report from the copyvio algorithm should be stored with the
> > uploaded material, as it is impossible to retrace the detection after
> > the material is made public.
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 4:23 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
> > >
> > >   *   Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of
> > the Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place
> is
> > unfair and nonsense.
> > >   *   Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to
> > think on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying
> > to convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't
> know
> > how to communicate and why they must do it.
> > >   *   The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the
> > author. Period.
> > >   *   Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which
> > is the original work is not a good practice.
> > >   *   Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great
> > job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this can
> > take a whole year of volunteer work.
> > >   *   After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was
> > able to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
> > >
> > > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have
> > less problems.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Galder
> > > 
> > > From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf
> > of Vi to 
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
> > >
> > > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images
> > on
> > > commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come
> > from
> > > cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <
> jmh...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested
> in
> > > > having more admins?
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > > > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> > > > > copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> > > > > terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to
> see
> > > > > if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> > > > > reduced.[1]
> > > > >
> > > > > Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> > > > > image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make
> mass
> > > > > housekeeping very easy.
> > > > >
> > > > > A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> > > > > hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons
> > hat
> > > > > on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use
> than
> > > > > mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to
> suck
> > > > > up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long,
> that
> > > > > several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> > > > > originally interested have since retired. Without some positive
> short
> > > > > term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> > > > > experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
> > > > >
> > > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing our newest chapter, Wikimedia Korea

2019-04-24 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Congrats Korea! :-)

On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 05:17, Roman Bustria Jr.  wrote:

> In behalf of the East, Southeast Asia and the Pacific Regional Cooperation
> (ESEAP) we would like to extend our congratulations to our member country
> for being elevated as a fully recognized chapter!
>
> We are looking forward to our future regional meeting and collaboration!
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Butch
> Philippines
>
>
>
>
> Note: ESEAP is a regional collaborative composed of affiliates Wikimedia
> Indonesia, Wikimedia Taiwan, Wikimedia Australia, Wikimedia Korea,
> Wikimedians in Thailand, Philippine Wikimedia Community User Group,
> Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia, Wikimedia User Group China,
> Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong, and Vietnam Wikimedians.
> Membership also include Wikimedia communities and nationalities of Brunei,
> Cambodia, Japan, Laos, Macau, Mongolia, Myanmar, New Zealand, Papua New
> Guinea, Singapore, and Timor Leste (East Timor).
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 6:11 AM María Sefidari 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I am happy to share that earlier this year, the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > of Trustees approved our newest Wikimedia chapter - Wikimedia Korea!
> >
> > For more information about our newest Wikimedia chapter, Wikimedia Korea,
> > please see the announcement on the Wikimedia Foundation website:
> >
> >
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/2019/04/23/wikimedia-korea-new-chapter-affiliate-launches-in-south-korea/
> >
> > I want to congratulate the new chapter and recognize their commitment,
> > efforts, and time involved in moving through the chapter recognition
> > process over the past year. From their work building partnerships with
> > universities, to supporting and training new editors in South Korea, we
> > look forward to seeing the impactful work from our community members in
> > South Korea as they advance in their new affiliate role.
> >
> > As many of you know, this is our first chapter approval in several years
> -
> > since the newest Wikimedia affiliate approval processes were put in
> place.
> > This marks a new moment in the history of our Wikimedia movement
> > affiliates. The Board appreciates the amazing work coming from these user
> > groups around the world, and is inspired to see how far some of these
> > groups have come in terms of their impact both on our movement and their
> > local communities. Indeed, we should all be proud of the impact our
> > affiliates continue to have on our projects, our vision, and the world
> > around us.
> >
> > Any affiliate interested in becoming a chapter or thematic organization
> > must have at least two years of activities and experience as a user group
> > before applying. Please check out the user group creation guide to get a
> > user group started - it is meant to be very easy:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_user_groups/Creation_guide
> >
> >
> > You can find a lot more information about our movement affiliates model
> on
> > Meta:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_movement_affiliates/Models
> >
> > You may also reach out to the Affiliations Committee with questions or to
> > begin the approval process for your group:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee
> > Please join me in congratulating Wikimedia Korea for this important
> > achievement and thanking the members of the Affiliations Committee and
> > Wikimedia Foundation staff who supported and worked with them during this
> > long process.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > María
> >
> > --
> >
> > María Sefidari Huici
> >
> > Chair of the Board
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [strategy process] Fwd: I decided to leave the working group

2019-04-01 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Itzik,

I'm sorry you feel this way and would hope you would still feel inclined to
provide a critical point of view on the process. I agree with you that
we're bad at changing processes that are evidently broken, but don't you
think that we are exactly changing this fact by moving on from an affiliate
system that has been broken for at least 3-4 years now and are finally
prioritising measures that will support our communities in becoming
healthier and more fun to work in?

Best,
Philip

On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 19:09, Kiril Simeonovski 
wrote:

> Hi Anders,
>
> There is an expression in Macedonian that says „Секое вештачко нешто се
> распаѓа на природен начин.“ (Every artificial creation breaks down
> naturally.). This is exactly what is going to happen with this strategy.
>
> Best regards,
> Kiril
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 7:05 PM Anders Wennersten <
> m...@anderswennersten.se>
> wrote:
>
> > There is a Swedish expression "har man tagit fan i båten får man ro
> > honom i land" (If you have taken the devil into your boat you must row
> > him ashore"
> >
> > Independent if this process has been bad or not, I see it is as just
> > some six month left of it. And it is important to do the best of it. It
> > would be a bad move to stop it at thois point in time, and would also be
> > too late to correct the process if it has been flawed.
> >
> > Anders
> >
> >
> > Den 2019-03-27 kl. 14:05, skrev Itzik - Wikimedia Israel:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Two weeks ago I sent this email to my strategy working group (resource
> > > allocation). I didn't plan to send a public email, just to share with
> the
> > > rest of the group my reason to leave and just to disappear.
> > > I receive feedbacks with many of the group members and also requesting
> > > permissions to transfer it with others outside of the group, which
> leads
> > to
> > > more conversations that I had around it.
> > >
> > > Last week we had our weekly phone call, during which we discussed our
> > > feelings and opinions about the process so far. From our long
> > conversation
> > > and the conversations with the others, I learned that many of these
> > > feelings exist among the other members, as well some ideas on how to
> make
> > > it easier and less demanding and at the same time publishing the
> > > conclusions sooner.
> > > Yesterday, following a good conversation with one of the WMF's board
> > > members about it, I was asked to share these thoughts with the
> movement's
> > > list, so that it may also involve the community's feedback as well.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Itzik Edri*
> > > Chairperson (volunteer)
> > > it...@wikimedia.org.il
> > > +972-54-5878078
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -- Forwarded message -
> > > From: Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
> > > Date: Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 2:08 PM
> > > Subject: I decided to leave the working group
> > > To: 
> > >
> > > Dear friends,
> > >
> > > For a long time I have been considering leaving the working group but
> > each
> > > time I decided to give it another chance. Yesterday, after long
> > > consideration, I decided to write this email.
> > >
> > > I must be honest - I was skeptical from the first moment about this
> > > process. The huge amount of money which the board allocated to this
> > process
> > > together with the complicated and (very) long process planned for it -
> > make
> > > me doubt the ability to really have a real outcome in a reasonable
> time.
> > > For the past two years, it seems to me like the strategy took over
> almost
> > > every movement event and activity. I feel bad for investing millions of
> > > dollars from our donations and uncounted hours of volunteer time into
> > this
> > > process.
> > >
> > > I also felt hypocritical in the way the foundation acts - while
> > "freezing"
> > > grant programs (such as APG) and holding affiliates from increasing
> their
> > > programs and budgets, "because of the strategy process" while
> > > simultaneously approving itself to increase its budget and staff year
> > after
> > > year by tens of percentage.
> > >
> > > Despite my distrust of the chances of this process and the criticism I
> > felt
> > > for it, I instructed my organization to give it the full support we
> been
> > > asked, as all our movement did. Later on, I decided to join this
> working
> > > group as I felt we almost reached the final step of the process and I
> > > wanted to help shape the recommendations. I was totally wrong.
> > >
> > > In the first months of the workgroups, I felt it was completely wasted
> of
> > > time. I saw how wonderful volunteers tried to lead the process within
> > each
> > > group (thank you Daria!) - but it wasn't their job, nor none of us. I
> > felt
> > > like I was returning to university, and every few weeks I received
> > > instructions and homework from the lecturer, with assignments to the
> > > following week - and in between, that we need to lead it and solve
> things
> > > by ourselves. It took the core team a 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Albania

2019-02-12 Thread Philip Kopetzky
6 /
>> skype:frhdkazan / Wikipedia:frhdkazan
>>
>>
>> 06.02.2019, 21:02, "Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l" <
>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>:
>> >  I guess... probably one include also the majority of Kosovo,
>> Albanian-speaking regions of Greece, P.Y.R.O.M./North Macedonia and maybe
>> even Southern Italy and the other one is just centered on Albania as a
>> state. This is not the same scenario as Brazil (not sure if, partially,
>> also Greece) since in that case we had two group precisely centered on one
>> country.
>> >
>> > It's not totally practical but the geopolitical situation is not
>> practical in the end by itself...  You cannot force people to get rid of a
>> group that might become a future national chapter because their language is
>> spoken by many other people in neighboring countries who already clustered
>> in a  previous UG. So it should not be considered a critical situation per
>> se, although the interaction of the two UGs should be closely monitored and
>> addressed since the beginning.
>> >
>> > What is missing is a precise guideline or attention to UG related to
>> languages (of minorities or globally spoken). You could have the same
>> problem with a future Italian minor languages UG active in Corsica or
>> Croatia, with a Retho-romance Alpine language user group, with a gender gap
>> UG active in a language distributed along various borders... and so on.
>> They don't seem to show huge problems when similar situation exist in
>> reality but they could degenerate, stop cooperation, or never start it with
>> other UGs or national chapters.
>> > I value plurality, I want UG to be created and catalyze activities, and
>> I think that the problem is mostly the character of people. However, I
>> strongly advocate a more structured architecture of language-based UG to be
>> implemented. Basically what I suppose was done with Catalan Wikimedia
>> Thematic Organization, although in that case there is no main entity
>> competing on the area of a sovereign country where Catalan is spoken (which
>> is not necessarily a better scenario, just complex in a different way). We
>> call them almost all "User groups" but they are sometimes local
>> geographical unions of users and volunteers (embryonic future national
>> chapters or just regional associations), language-oriented associations
>> created to involve minorities or cross-projects of interested users unified
>> by a topic. They all have different purpose and should be rationalized
>> somehow. I think I pushed a little bit in that direction on the application
>> to WikiSummit, stressing the importance to make order in the field.
>> > IMHO, we should have single-language thematic organizations
>> (specifically for a language), cross-language thematic organization or
>> local UG centered on a vague historic geographical area or a very precise
>> administrative one. And think carefully about their status. This is however
>> just a vague idea.
>> >
>> > Alessandro
>> >Il mercoledì 6 febbraio 2019, 18:11:57 CET, Philip Kopetzky <
>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> >
>> >  Just to close off this thread, there seemingly is no plan and others
>> are
>> > left to deal with the fallout of this decision.
>> >
>> > On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 at 08:23, Paulo Santos Perneta <
>> paulospern...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>  Hi Kirill,
>> >>
>> >>  I join Philip and Mardetanha on their concerns and questions. Having
>> >>  followed closely the Brazil situation - which ended up in the worst
>> >>  possible way, IMO - I'm very interested in your answer.
>> >>
>> >>  Best,
>> >>
>> >>  Paulo
>> >>
>> >>  2018-06-11 13:07 GMT+01:00 Mardetanha :
>> >>
>> >>>  ​ Hi Kirill
>> >>>
>> >>>   Philip's concerns were not answered, would you please respond, I
>> had the
>> >>>  very same question.
>> >>>
>> >>>  Mardetanha
>> >>>
>> >>>  On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Philip Kopetzky <
>> >>>  philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
>> >>>  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>  > Hi Kirill,
>> >>>  >
>> >>>  > what's the difference/relationship between this group and the
>> >>>  Wikimedians
>> >>>  > of Albanian Languag

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposed changes to the Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws

2019-02-10 Thread Philip Kopetzky
I just wanted to re-iterate Chris' point - meetings and plans are starting
to be put together for the summit, so if this is actually happening, it
should start soon. (Just to appear as non-committal as possible ;-) )

Cheers,
Philip

On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:43, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> Hi Maria,
>
> I wondered if there was any news about whether the Board had, in the end,
> adopted any of these proposals.
>
> I see that the ASBS process is now on the agenda for the Wikimedia Summit
> in late March. There is now not much time to figure out who is going to run
> this process and what the process will look like!
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 3:46 PM María Sefidari 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is considering amending the
> > Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws. Nataliia Tymkiv, Chair of the Board
> Governance
> > Committee, is leading this process. She has posted the proposed changes
> on
> > Meta for discussion
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_bylaws/December_2018_-_Affiliate-selected_trustees,_term_limits,_and_diversity
> > >
> > prior to our vote on them during the Board meeting scheduled for January
> > 23, 2019. We invite you to comment on the proposal's talk page. As usual
> in
> > these cases, two weeks are provided for community comment, from December
> 7
> > to December 21.
> >
> > By making the proposed changes to the Bylaws, the Board intends to
> achieve
> > three goals:
> >
> > *1. Include User Groups in the trustee selection process*
> >
> > Though User Groups have existed as a model of affiliation within the
> > Wikimedia movement for a number of years, they have not been included
> > together with Chapters and Thematic Organizations as participants in
> > selecting Wikimedia Foundation trustees. There are now over 100
> recognized
> > User Groups, many of which represent emerging communities within the
> > Wikimedia movement. The Board believes that the perspectives of User
> Groups
> > combined with those of Chapters and Thematic Organizations will lead to
> the
> > selection of the best trustee candidates.
> >
> > The Board acknowledges that the ongoing Wikimedia movement strategy
> process
> > may result in changes to many aspects of the Wikimedia movement,
> including
> > the structure of movement affiliates. As a result, any changes we make
> now
> > to the Foundation Bylaws regarding the role of affiliates in the trustee
> > selection process may need to be modified again in the future, in turn
> > requiring additional amendments to the Bylaws. However, the Board did not
> > want to delay providing User Groups with a voice in the upcoming 2019
> > trustee selection process.
> >
> > *2. Raise term limits for trustees from two to three consecutive terms*
> >
> > Term limits for trustees were added to the Bylaws in 2015. At the time,
> > there was a desire on the Board to bring in new voices and specific
> > skill-sets needed for the growth and development of Wikimedia projects.
> The
> > changes made at that time have resulted in some notable successes in that
> > regard. The Board remains committed to seeking out new voices, and
> > providing the community with ample opportunities to promote such voices
> as
> > candidates for the Board.
> >
> > As the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation think forward
> > further to the future, the Board will need to oversee the Foundation in
> > setting, following through on, and achieving longer-term goals. The Board
> > believes it will be better able to fulfill its role if it allows for the
> > potential of a longer time on the Board for individual trustees who bring
> > essential expertise and insight to the Board. The possibility of serving
> > one additional term on the Board also reduces the amount of time the
> Board
> > and Foundation staff spend on trustee recruitment and onboarding. Raising
> > the maximum number of consecutive terms a trustee may serve from two to
> > three terms achieves these goals, and is also consistent with the
> practice
> > of many other boards. Raising the maximum number of terms that can be
> > served consecutively does not change the fact that the community,
> including
> > affiliates, will continue to be able to determine every three years
> whether
> > or not to re-elect currently serving trustees or whether to elect new
> > candidates - just as is the case now.
> >
> > *3. Reaffirm the Board’s commitment to diversity*
> >
> > The Wikimedia movement is global, built on a vision of reaching every
> > single human being and working toward a strategic goal of knowledge
> equity
> > for all. The Board believes that it can best serve the Wikimedia
> Foundation
> > and the movement by reflecting a wide range of human experiences. We want
> > to underscore and codify this belief in the Bylaws by adding express
> > language affirming our commitment to diversity and inclusion of all
> voices,
> > throughout 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Albania

2019-02-06 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Just to close off this thread, there seemingly is no plan and others are
left to deal with the fallout of this decision.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 at 08:23, Paulo Santos Perneta 
wrote:

> Hi Kirill,
>
> I join Philip and Mardetanha on their concerns and questions. Having
> followed closely the Brazil situation - which ended up in the worst
> possible way, IMO - I'm very interested in your answer.
>
> Best,
>
> Paulo
>
> 2018-06-11 13:07 GMT+01:00 Mardetanha :
>
>> ​ Hi Kirill
>>
>>   Philip's concerns were not answered, would you please respond, I had the
>> very same question.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mardetanha
>>
>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Philip Kopetzky <
>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Kirill,
>> >
>> > what's the difference/relationship between this group and the
>> Wikimedians
>> > of Albanian Language User Group, which is currently applying for a
>> > simpleAPG grant? How do we avoid creating more Brazilian scenarios by
>> > reconising even more user groups from the same area?
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Philip
>> >
>> > On 22 May 2018 at 22:07, Kirill Lokshin 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi everyone!
>> > >
>> > > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>> recognized
>> > > [1] Wikimedia Community User Group Albania [2] as a Wikimedia User
>> Group.
>> > > The group aims to improve content about Albania across the Wikimedia
>> > > projects, including Commons and Wikidata, and to collaborate with
>> other
>> > > Wikimedia user groups, chapters, and other free culture groups in
>> Albania
>> > > and across the region.
>> > >
>> > > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Kirill Lokshin
>> > > Chair, Affiliations Committee
>> > >
>> > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/
>> > > Resolutions/Recognition_Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Albania
>> > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
>> > Group_Albania
>> > >
>> > > ___
>> > > Affiliates mailing list
>> > > affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>> > >
>> > >
>> > ___
>> > 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,
>> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>> >
>> ___
>> 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,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of the Wikimedia Community of Tatar Language User Group

2018-12-05 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Congrats Farhad :-)

On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 12:51, Фархад Фаткуллин / Farkhad Fatkullin <
f...@yandex.com> wrote:

> Our St.Petersburg colleagues wrote a Russian Wikinews article dedicated to
> the event.
>
> https://ru.wikinews.org/wiki/Татарские_викимедийцы_создали_четвёртую_в_России_юзер-группу_Викимедиа
>
> It's English translation is available in November 2018 CEE Newsletter @
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CEE/Newsletter/November_2018/Contents/Russia_report#Russia_report:_Tatar_Wikimedians_created_Russia's_4th_Wikimedia_User_Group
>
> For Erzya language version, see
> https://ru.wikinews.org/wiki/Татаронь_викис_витни-петнийтне_тейсть_нилеце_Россиясо_Викимедиянь_пурнавкс
>
> Translation into Tatar is also coming along @
> https://ru.wikinews.org/wiki/Татарча_язучы_викимедиачылар_Россиядә_дүртенче_Викимедиа_кулланучылар_төркемен_төзеде
>
> regards,
> farhad
>
> --
> Farkhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин http://sikzn.ru/ Тел.+79274158066 /
> skype:frhdkazan / Wikipedia:frhdkazan
>
>
> 27.11.2018, 20:15, "Kirill Lokshin" :
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > [1] the Wikimedia Community of Tatar Language User Group [2] as a
> Wikimedia
> > User Group. The group aims to develop Wikipedia in Tatar into most
> popular
> > content portal of the Tatar-language internet; to grow other Wikimedia
> > projects in the Tatar language; and to teach new generations of
> > Tatar-language Wikimedians, developing their skills through sharing
> > experiences.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikimedia_Community_of_Tatar_language_User_Group
> > [2]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_of_Tatar_language_User_Group
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l 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] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

2018-09-19 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Ellie,

is there an official statement by the WMF that explains why Wikimania 2020
is happening and that the funding for this event is secured? Wikimania does
cost quite a lot of money and I was under the impression that it was
unclear as to if, how and why Wikimania should take place 2020. But maybe
I'm also mistaken on that point.

Best,
Philip

On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 18:53, Ellie Young  wrote:

> No.   We are looking more at rotating regions if we can, and excellent
> proposals/teams.
>
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 3:31 AM Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Ellie,
> >
> > Is Wikimania still on its programme of "1 EU/US Wikimania" followed by an
> > "Away Wikimania"?
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:44 PM Ellie Young 
> wrote:
> >
> > > The Wikimania Steering Committee and Wikimedia Foundation are seeking
> > > expressions of interest from interested parties for
> > >  hosting
> > > Wikimani
> > > a 2020.
> > >
> > > Please see the following for more information:
> > >
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2020
> > >
> > > If you are interested in discussing the possibilities and working with
> > the
> > > WMF Events Manager in preparing a proposal to host and organize
> Wikimania
> > > 20
> > > 20
> > > , please contact eyoung at wikimedia.org
> > >  by October
> > > 15th.  Also, if you
> > > know of an individual or group that we should approach about hosting,
> we
> > > encourage  nominations as well. The Steering Committee and WMF expect
> to
> > > make a decision by early
> > > 2019.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks, Ellie
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
> --
> Ellie Young
> Events Manager
> Wikimedia Foundation
> eyo...@wikimedia.org
> c. 510 701 8649
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Commons 2017 Picture of the Year competition is now open

2018-06-13 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Thanks Steinplitter! Especially the topic categories are very helpful! :-)

On 13 June 2018 at 12:39, Steinsplitter Wiki 
wrote:

> >> Not trying to criticize anyone or anything, but why is this starting so
> late in the year? I think it would make more sense to have it as early as
> possible.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the question.  Because lack time by people who are running it,
> and setting up POTY is quite tricky (generating lists, setting up scripts,
> setting up the interface, requesting CN banner, bugfixes of issues, etc.)
> and it involves bureaucracy ;).
>
>
> Best,
>
> Steinsplitter
>
>
> 
> Von: Wikimedia-l  im Auftrag von
> Jon Harald Søby 
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2018 09:20
> An: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Cc: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List
> Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Commons 2017 Picture of the Year
> competition is now open
>
> Not trying to criticize anyone or anything, but why is this starting so
> late in the year? I think it would make more sense to have it as early as
> possible.
>
> 2018-06-12 14:53 GMT+02:00 Steinsplitter Wiki  >:
>
> > Dear Wikimedians,
> >
> > We are happy to announce that the 2017 Picture of the Year competition is
> > now open.
> >
> > Picture of the Year 2017 is the twelfth edition of the annual Wikimedia
> > Commons image competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by
> > users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their
> > favorite images featured on Commons (FP) during the year 2017, to
> produce a
> > single Picture of the Year.
> >
> > Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the
> > international Wikimedia Commons community. From professional animal and
> > plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, historically relevant
> > images, images portraying the world's best architecture, Commons features
> > pictures of all flavors.
> >
> > For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories.
> Two
> > rounds of voting will be held: In the first (and current) round, you can
> > vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and
> > the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round,
> > when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one
> image
> > that you want to become the Picture of the Year.
> >
> > To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2017 page on Wikimedia
> > Commons:  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_
> > Year/2017
> >
> > Round 1 will end 24 June 2018, 23:59:59 [UTC].
> >
> > Thanks,
> > POTY 2017 committee
> >
> > Note: Users must vote with an account meeting following requirements:
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_
> Year/2017/Rules
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
>
> --
> mvh
> Jon Harald Søby
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Albania

2018-05-23 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Kirill,

what's the difference/relationship between this group and the Wikimedians
of Albanian Language User Group, which is currently applying for a
simpleAPG grant? How do we avoid creating more Brazilian scenarios by
reconising even more user groups from the same area?

Best,
Philip

On 22 May 2018 at 22:07, Kirill Lokshin  wrote:

> Hi everyone!
>
> I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> [1] Wikimedia Community User Group Albania [2] as a Wikimedia User Group.
> The group aims to improve content about Albania across the Wikimedia
> projects, including Commons and Wikidata, and to collaborate with other
> Wikimedia user groups, chapters, and other free culture groups in Albania
> and across the region.
>
> Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/
> Resolutions/Recognition_Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Albania
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Albania
>
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
>
___
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] Recognition of Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru

2018-03-20 Thread Philip Kopetzky
Hi Kirill!

It would be really helpful to outline these kind of decisions with
arguments/deliberations that AffCom decided to follow, considering that
this sets a precedence in the worldwide community. For example, UG Wales
states that they "cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales" -
does this mean that we are now accepting UGs within chapters? Is this UG
supposed to be able to apply for grants, despite its overlap with WMUK?

Best,
Philip



On 11 March 2018 at 15:44, Shlomi Fish  wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:32:34 -0400
> Kirill Lokshin  wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User Group
> > Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the
> > Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia
> > projects and content in the Welsh language.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
>
> congratulations!
>
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
> --
> -
> Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
> My Favourite FOSS - http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/favourite/
>
> Windows Update doesn’t.
> — http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/
>
> Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,