Carlos, My apologies for not responding right away, but for some reason I did not receive this in my mailbox until this morning.
You are not responding to the point we raised. Please see my emails of 2/19 & 2/20. The point is that there is a difference between what AffCom Wiki communicates to affiliates & potential affiliates & what is reality. Yes, at its retreat on November 22 - 23, 2013, the BoT instituted a requirement that "All organizations wishing to be recognized as a chapter or thematic organization must first be recognized as a (not necessarily incorporated) Wikimedia user group for at least two years. <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11-24#Movement_roles>" This was first published three months later, here <http://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Minutes/2013-11-24&oldid=95803> . Yet a year after that, I could not find anything under the Affiliations Committee portal <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee> that reflected this requirement. Are you implying that potential affiliates need to go to BoT minutes to find their requirements rather than to AffCom's documentation? I think not, but AffCom failure to document the BoT requirement for at least a year is a problem. Even today, the Wikimedia user groups/Requirement <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_user_groups/Requirements&oldid=10838200> lists a requirement of "Two years of activities prior to applying" for Chapters & Thematic organisations. As I stated in my 2/20 email, two years of activities is a _very_ different thing than being recognized as a Wikimedia user group for two years. The Portland, OR & Seattle, WA meetups, components of CWUG, have been organizing activities for over three years, as opposed to when AffCom resolved to recognize Cascadia Wikimedians as a Wikimedia User Group last September. Inadequate & outdated documentation will only lead to disappointment & frustration for affiliates & potential affiliates who feel that they are be tripped up by esoteric rules & deadlines known only to AffCom. CWUG wants to show our due diligence by adhering to both requirements & timelines, but we need to know what is required of us, when it is required, & when we can expect responses. We ask for your help in this matter by clearly documenting requirements, timelines, & deadlines. The failure to clearly document the length of time required for a user group to become a chapter or a thematic organization is not the only issue. Please review the emails from both Pine & myself earlier in this thread. As Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee, surely you can initiate some change in this regard. Yours, Peaceray On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Carlos M. Colina <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Pine, > > I think it is easy to understand that, even in the event that the AffCom > recommends to the WMF Board the recognition of a certain group to become a > chapter, the WMF Board has made it clear that it will not accept a group > that has been recognized as a Wikimedia User Group for at least two years. > I honestly do not see why it is so hard to understand that the AffCom > guidelines have not changed and that simply, the WMF Board is the entity > who has the final word on chapterhood status. > > Thank you, > Carlos > > El 01/03/2015 a las 09:07 a.m., Pine W escribió: > > Hi all, > > I am hoping that we hear back from Affcom about Peaceray's point. > > I am planning to take Luis up on his suggestion to have a discussion on > Meta, in which I will discuss the various delays and > communications/documentaion issues that seem to plague our attempts to make > ourselves impactful and get the approvals to enable us to make progress. > > My work on the budget this week has been delayed by the need to spend many > hours dealing with car issues, plus my working a little overtime at paid > work. Hopefully I will have a chance to work on the budget next week. > > Pine > On Feb 20, 2015 10:22 AM, "Raymond Leonard" < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Kirill & all, >> >> This proves my point. The WMF Board stated that it seeks an approval >> requirement that “All organizations wishing to be recognized as a chapter >> or thematic organization must first be recognized as … a (not necessarily >> incorporated) Wikimedia user group for at least two years” was made at a >> retreat that occurred November 22 - 23, 2013. Yet fifteen months later, >> where is this codified in the Requirements, Guidelines, & Creation guides >> for Chapters, Thematic organisations, or User groups? The nearest that I >> can find is at Wikimedia usergroups/Requirements >> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_user_groups/Requirements&oldid=10838200>, >> where it states “Two years of activities prior to applying” as a >> requirement for Chapters & Thematic organisations. Two years of >> activities is a _very_ different thing than being recognized as a Wikimedia >> user group for two years. The discrepancy makes it feel like the goal posts >> are being moved on us. >> >> >> The Affiliations Committee should rightfully expect transparency & >> promptness from its present and future affiliates. We are asking that the >> Affiliations Committee treat us with the same transparency & promptness. >> >> Yours, >> Peaceray >> >> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Kirill Lokshin <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Hi Peaceray, >>> >>> I just wanted to clarify one point regarding chapters and user groups. >>> CWUG wasn't classified as a user group instead of as a chapter because it >>> was more expedient, or because the Affiliations Committee is skittish about >>> new chapters; rather, the mandatory classification of all new groups as >>> user groups -- and a two-year period of activity *as a user group* before >>> being able to apply for recognition as a chapter -- are requirements that >>> have been set by the WMF Board of Trustees [1]. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Kirill >>> >>> [1] >>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11-24#Movement_roles >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:38 AM, Raymond Leonard < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Pine & all, >>>> >>>> I am agreed that this has been rough & frustrating process, especially >>>> considering that our goal is to become a chapter & that we got the word >>>> that initially becoming a user group should be more expedient. Consider >>>> that beyond membership goals, there are an additional six requirements >>>> (listed first) in common for user groups, chapters, & thematic >>>> organizations, & an additional six for chapters & thematic organizations. >>>> Here is how CWUG stack up on those requirements: >>>> >>>> >>>> - *Focus:* Geographic >>>> - *Mission aligned with Wikimedia Foundation:* Yes >>>> - *Compliance with naming guidelines and trademark policy:* Yes >>>> (signed agreement); consulted with legal team when designing CWUG logo >>>> - *Information about group published on a Wikimedia wiki:* Yes >>>> - *Plans for activities or efforts to advance Wikimedia projects:* >>>> Yes >>>> - *Allows new members:* Yes >>>> - *Two designated contacts for Wikimedia Foundation:* Yes >>>> - *Legally incorporated:* In progress >>>> - *Amendable bylaws approved by Affiliations Committee:* CWUG has >>>> bylaws >>>> - *Two years of activities prior to applying:* Starting October >>>> 2011, mostly monthly activities (36 meetups or events) in Seattle; Since >>>> January 2012, Portland has had 30 meetups or events >>>> - *Requires approval by Wikimedia Foundation Board: *WMF >>>> responsibility >>>> - *Governing board elected by members, including new members:* >>>> Board formed, election at end of first year (11/2015, if I am correct) >>>> - *Activity and financial reports posted regularly on Meta-Wiki:* >>>> Mission statement, goals, plans, & budget posted, reports coming at >>>> appropriate intervals >>>> >>>> I do think that CWUG has done its due diligence thus far, given that we >>>> have gone beyond the requirements of a user group & that we just recently >>>> got the go ahead. >>>> >>>> Alex, >>>> >>>> I know that WMF has had some misgivings with the how chapters are >>>> working. I can see at >>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reports&oldid=11312318 >>>> that 31% of the chapters & thematic reports are overdue on their reports. >>>> (Bluerasberry & Pharos, if you are reading this, please light a fire under >>>> Wikimedia New York City, because their report was due at the end of >>>> October.) I know that some are years behind or just plain defunct. There >>>> have been reports of one chapter in turmoil, having completely voted out >>>> its board. I can understand why the Affiliations Committee is skittish >>>> about new chapters & is encouraging groups to initially start as a user >>>> group. >>>> >>>> However, even though "Wikimedia user groups are intended to be simple >>>> and flexible affiliates", it is feeling a bit broken & anything but simple. >>>> I know that Pine has submitted applications & documentation in a timely >>>> manner, but the projected time for approval that was supposed to be 2 to 4 >>>> weeks then stretched into months. The suddenness of the grantmaking >>>> deadline was, well, unexpected. Had we gotten a more timely approval to >>>> become a user group, we would have had more time to consult or have a >>>> back-and-forth about the budget instead of feeling like we had to rush >>>> headlong into it. And for a group that yearns to become a chapter, consider >>>> how discouraging it is that the Step-by-step chapter creation guide >>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Step-by-step_chapter_creation_guide&oldid=8213725> >>>> begins with "This page is outdated ..." >>>> >>>> So please forgive us that even with you approach us with a legitimate >>>> concern that we need to grow our membership at first, it feels to us like >>>> another roadblock. Frankly, we just want to get to the point where we can >>>> just start moving ahead as a user group with events, partnerships, member >>>> recruiting, and reporting so we can further Wikipedia & the other Wikimedia >>>> projects. This is the fifth board that II have served on, & I know that >>>> while accounting & documentation are important, the thing that really >>>> perpetuates an organization is serving its purpose & its members. Please >>>> help us to expedite this process so we can turn our attention to that. >>>> >>>> Yours, >>>> Peaceray >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Peaceray, >>>>> >>>>> I think that expanded membership and volunteer capacity is part of >>>>> the picture, yes. >>>>> >>>>> One thing I think we should consider discussing with WMF at a fairly >>>>> high level are the systematic problems we have been encountering with our >>>>> group's formation and funding. We have had issues with Affcom delays, WMF >>>>> Legal delays, Grantmaking springing a deadline on us related to the >>>>> Inspire >>>>> campaign, and now a need to reorient our annual plan based on expectations >>>>> that do not appear to be documented on Meta (something that I confirmed >>>>> with someone who is active in another chapter). I am starting to >>>>> understand >>>>> why chapters get so frustrated with WMF. My experience with WMF prior to >>>>> this has never had such a series of speedbumps, and I would like to know >>>>> if >>>>> the Board would like me to address this series of issues that spans WMF >>>>> departments with WMF's new Senior Director of Community Engagement, Luis >>>>> Villa, who was recently promoted out of WMF's Legal department. Personally >>>>> I am quite frustrated at the amount of volunteer time that is being >>>>> expended in unproductive ways, and the systemic nature of the problems >>>>> suggests to me that these issues need to be addressed by someone in WMF >>>>> who >>>>> is placed highly enough in the organization that they can streamline >>>>> processes and address communication issues across departments. Please let >>>>> me know if you would like me to set up a conversation with Luis. >>>>> >>>>> Pine >>>>> >>>>> Pine >>>>> >>>>> *This is an Encyclopedia* <https://www.wikipedia.org/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> * One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep >>>>> rock of our past, in which we must delve The well of our future, The clear >>>>> water we must leave untainted for those who come after us, The fertile >>>>> earth, in which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands, And >>>>> the broad fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how >>>>> much >>>>> we do not know. * >>>>> >>>>> *—Catherine Munro * >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Raymond Leonard < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think that the "Comparison of requirements for affiliation models" >>>>>> table in >>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_user_groups/Requirements#eligibility >>>>>> probably applies to the WMF's current perception of us. >>>>>> >>>>>> To the point of "our priority should be expanding the number and >>>>>> the capacity of our volunteers," the rows at the head of the stable state >>>>>> that the Minimum active Wikimedia editors & Suggested minimum members >>>>>> are 3 >>>>>> & 10 respectively for a Wikimedia user groups and 10 & 20 respectively >>>>>> for >>>>>> both Chapters & Thematic organizations. >>>>>> >>>>>> My takeaway from that page is that the easiest way to build >>>>>> credibility with WMF is to grow our recognized membership beyond the >>>>>> board >>>>>> & to implement "plans for activities or efforts to advance Wikimedia >>>>>> projects." We already have folks beyond the board who have worked to do >>>>>> this. I think our first step should be to enable & recruit them to join >>>>>> CWUG as members, & then to engage them. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yours, >>>>>> Peaceray >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Cascadians, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I had a conversation about our draft annual plan with Alex this >>>>>>> afternoon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alex believes that at this point in our development, our priority >>>>>>> should be expanding the number and the capacity of our volunteers, and >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> we are too early in our development for the temporary / part-time paid >>>>>>> positions that we proposed in our budget. This means that our goals to >>>>>>> develop institutional partnerships and to do outreach work must be >>>>>>> significantly reduced in proportion to the capacity of our volunteer >>>>>>> network. We know that we have many opportunities for partnerships and >>>>>>> public engagement in the Cascadia region, and hopefully we will still be >>>>>>> able to pursue those partnerships and engagement opportunities at a low >>>>>>> intensity level that our volunteers can support in a sustainable way. >>>>>>> Again, Alex believes that our first goal should be to expand our >>>>>>> volunteer >>>>>>> network. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We will need to reorient our plans and our budget to focus on >>>>>>> development and support of our volunteer network. I will work on >>>>>>> redrafting >>>>>>> the goals, calendar, plan and budget over the course of the next week, >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> have a conversation with Alex about the possible revisions next week. I >>>>>>> have also asked Alex to create a learning pattern that describes the >>>>>>> development path of organizations such as ours; I think that such a >>>>>>> learning pattern would have been very helpful to us when we were first >>>>>>> discussing our goals for this year. After the conversations with Alex >>>>>>> have >>>>>>> finished, I plan to re-engage with our Board to discuss the goals and >>>>>>> funding that Alex and WMF feel that they are willing to support. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am cc'ing this email to Alex and hope that she will add any >>>>>>> comments or clarifications that she has. It would probably be best to >>>>>>> direct any questions or comments from Cascadians directly to Alex, >>>>>>> preferably on this list so that others can benefit from the discussion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pine >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *This is an Encyclopedia* <https://www.wikipedia.org/> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep >>>>>>> rock of our past, in which we must delve The well of our future, The >>>>>>> clear >>>>>>> water we must leave untainted for those who come after us, The fertile >>>>>>> earth, in which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands, >>>>>>> And >>>>>>> the broad fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how >>>>>>> much >>>>>>> we do not know. * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *—Catherine Munro * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Affiliations Committee mailing > [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affcom > > > -- > "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua > junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain." > Carlos M. Colina > Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve > <http://wikimedia.org.ve> > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee > Phone: +972-52-4869915 > Twitter: @maor_x > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
