On 20 March 2018 at 15:36, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 20 March 2018 at 15:03, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted as >> > legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that matter). >> >> Hi Kirill, >> >> In the spirit of an open and transparent process, could you please >> provide a link to the scope of the new approved User Group is >> published, as the one on Meta is not the one that AffCom reviewed with >> the UG application? >> > > The Affiliations Committee publishes all of our application review and > approval resolutions on Meta; the one for the group in question can be > found at > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_Grŵp_Defnyddwyr_Cymuned_Wicimedia_Cymru
Thanks for the link, that's great. It would be super to include a link to the relevant resolution when making announcements. Unfortunately your emails seem in conflict with the resolution. The statement by the Affiliations Committee links to the meta page to define the reviewed scope, the words used are "The scope of the group, which can be found on their meta page" and then gives a link to the same page I used previously and read that the User Group represents WMUK. In fact there are no other links to any other document that can be interpreted as "officially" publishing the scope of the new user group. Consequently there is no ambiguity that the AffCom approval was literally for a regional User Group with a stated objective to represent the national Chapter. The exact words are "Cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales". It is worth noting that the italicized sentence in the very brief summary appears to be intended to be a direct quote from the meta page, however it is a rephrasing which turns the sentence into an objective for the new User Group when the phrasing on the original page is a description of members (i.e. not the group itself). It is not stated whether the interpreted objective was part of the UG application, or someone else's interpretation of the published scope. This seems misleading unless the meta page is rephrased to include the statement of scope as explicitly that. This may seem a fine point, but there exact words that officially define a new Affiliate or User Group seem worth getting precise so everyone understands what has been authorized. Thanks, Fae > > >> > Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK >> > should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself. >> >> This brush-off is surprising, with the clear implication that AffCom >> has not approached WMUK with any question. I was mistaken in believing >> that AffCom had a responsibility to consider obvious legal >> implications, before approving a User Group that is granted the right >> to use official logos and the name "Wikipedia" and its language >> variants when advertising their events. It is disappointing to see >> that AffCom does not see their official process as needing to address >> these areas, which may well be a barrier to direct funding, legal >> recognition or represent a risk to other named pre-existing Affiliates >> within the scope of the proposed new UG. >> > > Your implication is entirely incorrect; AffCom consulted with -- and > received an endorsement from -- Wikimedia UK prior to approving the user > group. However, we are neither experts in UK charity law nor empowered to > speak on behalf of Wikimedia UK; consequently, any questions regarding the > chapter's legal position should be posed to the chapter, not to us. For the sake of openness and transparency, can you provide a link to where the endorsement and any questions raised are published? It is not included with the AffCom resolution. > Regards, > Kirill Lokshin > Chair, Affiliations Committee > _______________________________________________ > 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> -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae _______________________________________________ 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>
