Hi Maor/Kirill/AffCom,

Which organisations are we talking about here? From the crosses on the reports 
page on Meta, it looks like it is:
- Wikimedia Chile
- Wikimedia Hong Kong
- Wikimedia India
- Wikimedia Macedonia
- Wikimedia Macau
- Wikimedia Mexico
- Wikimedia Philippines
- Wikimedia Uruguay
- New England Wikimedians
- PhilWiki Community
- Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan
- Wikimedia Digitization User Group
- Wikimedians of Iceland User Group
- Wikimedians of Nepal
- Wikimedians of Uzbekistan Community

Is it all of those or a subset of them? Some of these seem to be active and/or 
have representatives going to the Wikimedia Conference.

Thanks,
Mike

> On 5 Feb 2017, at 10:13, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Nathan,
> 
> To expand a bit on Maor's reply: the Affiliations Committee and the
> Wikimedia Foundation continue to view affiliate de-recognition as a last
> resort for cases where an affiliate is not only in violation of affiliate
> requirements or agreements with the WMF, but is also unwilling or unable to
> fix the problem when asked to do so.
> 
> The underlying issue that causes an affiliate to be "non-compliant" will
> usually be publicly visible (such as a lack of required reporting, for
> example). The affiliate's inability or unwillingness to address it will
> usually not be, as it's reflected in the affiliate's communications with
> AffCom and the WMF (or lack thereof).
> 
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Vice-Chair, Affiliations Committee
> 
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 6:33 AM Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
>>> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hoi,
>>> I fail to see who you are targeting and on what basis. My impression is
>>> that it only has to do with money.. I understand this. For other parts
>> like
>>> the language committee there are no reports except for the activity on
>> its
>>> mailing list. I fail to see why it has to report to anyone. It is not the
>>> task the committee seeks and it does its activity on behalf of the
>>> Wikimedia board.
>>> Thanks,
>>>      GerardM
>> 
>> 
>> You misread - evidently both the original message and my reply. I answer
>> your question in my prior post, and hopefully subsequent posts by others
>> have cleared up any other confusion.
>> 
>> Maor - thank you for your explanation. Would it be fair to say that the
>> criteria for considering denying renewal are informal, and that some
>> factors (including communication with AffCom) may not be publicly available
>> for review?
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>


_______________________________________________
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>

Reply via email to