Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

We dont blame a life saver for attempting to rescue and resuscitate a person who is drowning At the end of a community groups life its the very people we want to step up are the ones who end up in the positions of responsibility as they endeavor to save that which has great significance to them.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

There is a flaw in the assumption that the current responsible person of the chapter is the same person who was the recipient. Example: WMAu applies for a grant to run a project in September that project is finished but before I've written up a report I lose my seat on the committee. If I choose

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > When individuals are discredited in this way, your option, you are judging > these people. That is in my opinion a mistake. You may judge a situation > and determine because of what you consider your

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hi Craig, To clarify, when we talk about resolving a compliance issue, what we mean -- in most cases -- is producing the reports, records, or similar artifacts that were required by a particular legal agreement, rather than effecting a change in the status of the affected group. For example,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hi Kirill, On 26 April 2017 at 02:31, Kirill Lokshin wrote: > > Having said that, there are certain issues that can prevent a smooth > transition from a chapter to a user group. In particular, any individuals > considered to have personal responsibility for an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hi Kirill, Nowhere in my last three e-mails did I imply that the process was arbitrary or unfair. I have expressed in both my correspondence to this list AND to my private correspondence with the parties involved that it is your prerogative to determine our status or not. That’s fine and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hoi, When individuals are discredited in this way, your option, you are judging these people. That is in my opinion a mistake. You may judge a situation and determine because of what you consider your responsibility to either accept or no longer accept the existence of a chapter, whatever entity.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

For a long time, we saw a few chapters with too little or no activity in the movement and their recognition was kept in spite of it. I saw that and it bothered me a little but not so much so I didn't say something about it. Last year, AffCom started to do what it have to be done (better late than

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

User groups are, indeed, a more "light-weight" model of affiliation, with significantly fewer compliance requirements -- at least for groups which are unincorporated and do not receive significant grants -- and the Affiliations Committee has, in the past, encouraged chapters struggling with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Gnangarra wrote: > > I look at the current processes around affiliates thats made it a longer > journey for any group to become a chapter, but once there it appears rather > to not take that way in reverse. Maybe the process could be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Running a "user group" is much less bureaucratic overhead. Can WMPH not just rejoin the movement as that? When the capacity to return to chapter status develops the group can than apply for chapter status. James On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Josh Lim wrote: > First

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Thank you Kirill that is a lot clearer and answers sufficiently most of my concerns. To me this process and these announcements(Philippines and Hong Kong) have been distasteful in the harshness of the language being used, while such formal language is necessary and appropriate for the official

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Josh, We are, as a movement, remarkably forgiving of things like missed deadlines, incomplete reports, and other compliance issues that, in a different environment, might be regarded with rather more severity. This is, I think, as it should be; we are, for the most part, volunteers -- often

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

First of all, I'm not blaming anyone. I'm merely stating what is our position: that is, that we've been dealing with our issues to the best of our ability.   That said, I'm sorry, but I will not tolerate being told that I am "misleading" the movement by telling people what we've done to get

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

..@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines Date: Tue, Apr 25, 2017 1:43 PM In the original email from Josh he raises some points about still working to address the issues in the five hours between his email and your response which ha

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hello Gnangarra, I joined AffCom in 2015, at that time the issue with Wikimedia Philippines was already on the table. The AffCom and the WMF had tried two years to get a settlement without a de-recognition with them. Meanwhile it is 2017, I don't believe Josh could resolve the problem in the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

In the original email from Josh he raises some points about still working to address the issues in the five hours between his email and your response which have occurred between 9pm and 2am in San Francisco it appears that it could not be possible for the WMF to have considered and refuted what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

I think that the biggest misunderstanding is in the acronym because in the page the Phil-community uses the acronym of WMPH which seems more connected to WM Philippines instead of PH-WC. Kind regards On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Maor Malul wrote: > Hello, > > The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Thanks Ting, It was indeed a hard decision, but like you say, disclosing details may avoid rumours and drama, which probably cause more damage to the movement. We'll raise your observation with the WMF and see if that can implemented. Anyway, I also hope no more affiliates have to be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hello, The wikimedians from the Phillippines that attended the WMCON are /not /members of WMPH but of PhilWiki Community [1], which is a completely different Wikimedia affiliate. If you read the original e-mail sent, the governance issues started to appear in 2014, and the chapter was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

It appears to me as this discussion has caused some confusion and it should be clarified as I know that the Philippines had two members at the recent Wikimedia Conference in Berlin arent there reporting requirements attached to eligibility requirements. They are also part of the group organising

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hello dear all, we try, and some times try very very hard to be nice and to protect other people. But the world is some times not nice and some times really really bad things happen. Just for the next time (and there will be next times coming), my suggestion for the WMF and also for other

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hello Josh, The WMF and the AffCom have decided not to disclose further details of the very serious governance issues in order not to hurt the movement and the reputation of the people involved. Please, avoid misleading and adding drama to this situation -which is already difficult, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hey Josh Thanks for sharing the other side of the issue. If you were actively working towards compliance agree having the chapter status pulled is concerning. Government bureaucracy is horribly slow. Anything we as the wider movement can do to help? Has affcom given you guidance regarding how to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hi James, Towards the end of the process, and I will admit I was guilty of this as well, we have been so demotivated by the process that we felt it wasn’t worth it to continue communicating with the Affiliations Committee further. Over the last year, we had been working to return to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

Hey Josh So where was the missed communication? Were there extenuating circumstances regarding why Wikimedia Philippines was not able to produce the required documents? Was active communication between Wikimedia Philippines and affcom ongoing? James On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Josh Lim

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

If you folks seriously think that we weren’t being “accountable”, then I have serious doubts about how this process will remain sustainable. I’m sorry, but this process has been exceedingly demotivating for everyone involved. I’ve been trying to keep myself composed throughout the entire