P.S. The choice* is between.... On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 12:53 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote: > Mario, > > The is between arbitrary border security theater and allowing the > Foundation to recruit and hire the best candidates. If the Foundation > was silent on the matter, there would be less of a chance of retaining > the right. > > Thank you for your reply on the other thread about the Executive > Director's Letter to Donors. I think you raise a few good points, > which I hope to respond to soon. But your argument isn't compelling > enough to make it a priority over my work at present. I look forward > to reading a reply from you responding to more than just the first > reference on free college. The answers to most if not almost all of > your questions are in the other three references on free college, > although they are dense and difficult to read, and require the > understanding of amortization. > > [from that other thread:] > >>> I've spoken with perhaps fifty wikimedians over the past couple years, >>> and I simply do not believe that more than 20% could wish such ill >>> will on their peers. >> >> Let me be bold and suggest that around 99% of the people on this list >> disagree with the percentages you keep making up. > > Why the Foundation wouldn't have already called this question with a > survey is beyond me. > > Best regards, > Jim > > > On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 5:10 AM, Mario Gómez <mariogomw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I find these activities by the WMF really disturbing for the community. >> Looking at previous discussions, I am not the first one to voice these >> issues, but here is my summary: >> >> == It is cherry-picking == >> >> The WMF has no long-term commitment to immigration issues. This leads to >> the appearance that the WMF is cherry-picking an issue against a specific >> US administration while ignoring both previous administrations and >> established bipartisan trends in US foreign policy. When I read these >> communiqués, there are immediate questions that arise about its consistency: >> >> * Why does the WMF remain silent about US immigration policies towards >> Mexicans, which have been going on for more time? >> >> * Why does the WMF position itself against religious discrimination on >> immigration policies, but ignores ideological discrimination? >> >> >> == It is not necessary == >> >> A lot of us in the community support organizations that engage in advocacy >> on immigration issues. We chose to support organizations that match our >> political positions and I encourage other members of the community to get >> involved in organizations matching theirs. But it does not make sense that, >> when I support the Wikimedia Foundation, I get to support an organization >> sustaining political positions that enter in conflict with mine. >> >> >> == It does not respect ideological diversity in the community == >> >> As an extension of previous point: the WMF position does not respect the >> ideological diversity in the community. We signed up for free knowledge, >> not to promote a very narrow and particular political position. Some >> example of issues that raise political conflicts for some members of the >> community: >> >> * When the WMF says "the U.S., where we have unique freedoms that are >> essential to supporting the Wikimedia projects", what unique freedom are >> they referring to? Some of us find that plainly offensive from a country >> that we consider to have severe problems for freedom, and that we consider >> that play an international role that is damaging to freedom worldwide. >> >> * When the WMF specifically refers to Libya: why doesn't it condemn NATO >> invasion of Libya, which destroyed the country and caused a major >> immigration crisis in Europe? Some of us find this kind of position >> offensive too. >> >> >> == It alienates the community == >> >> If the WMF wants to get involved in advocacy activities beyond its core >> mission, at least, it should perform a global consultation process with the >> community to approve it. Otherwise, a lot of us are alienated by the fact >> that we are supporting a project that performs advocacy activities that we >> might not share, and we didn't even had the chance to get out voices heard. >> >> >> Best, >> >> MarioGom >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Katherine Maher <kma...@wikimedia.org> >> wrote: >> >>> *This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here: >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068 >>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068>* >>> *Please consider supporting with translations. * >>> >>> Dear friends, >>> >>> On Tuesday, the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court, >>> ruled in favor of the current U.S. administration’s restrictions[1] on >>> travel and immigration from seven countries.[2] In a 5-4 ruling, the Court >>> found that the restrictions were lawfully created, despite their breach of >>> the longstanding ideals of the U.S. immigration system and disturbing >>> comments [3] made by the current administration about the religious basis >>> for some of these restrictions. >>> >>> Of the seven countries named, at least three have active Wikimedia >>> communities. The Wikimedia chapter in Venezuela, Iranian Wikimedians user >>> group, and proposed Libyan user group represent the reality that our >>> movement has no borders. Our mission does not discriminate, it unites: in >>> these and other countries, we have friends, allies, and fellow Wikimedians. >>> >>> To our fellow Wikimedians, particularly those from or with family in >>> affected countries: we stand with you and reject the premise of this >>> outcome. Our movement is possible because of the belief that everyone, >>> everywhere, should be able to contribute to shared human understanding. We >>> believe in a world where every country, language, and culture can freely >>> collaborate without restriction in our shared effort of making free >>> knowledge accessible to every person. Wikipedia is proof of what can happen >>> when these freedoms are unrestricted. When our ability to come together is >>> limited, the world is a poorer place. >>> >>> The Wikimedia Foundation has opposed the restrictions since earlier >>> versions were first introduced. We responded to an executive order in early >>> 2017[4] by joining many other organizations and companies in signing a >>> series of amicus briefs before the courts hearing these cases.[5] We have >>> posted an update on the Wikimedia blog detailing our position on the most >>> recent outcome of this case. [6] >>> >>> We are mindful that these restrictions may have real impacts on individual >>> staff and community members, as well as our families and communities. The >>> Wikimedia Foundation rejects the spirit of this ban and similar >>> restrictions in place around the world that treat some more equally than >>> others. Our commitment to our global ethos and shared vision will continue >>> to guide our policy efforts into the future, as we strive to uphold the >>> values that make our movement possible. >>> >>> Katherine >>> >>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13780 >>> [2] >>> https://www.apnews.com/3a20abe305bd4c989116f82bf53539 >>> 3b/High-court-OKs-Trump's-travel-ban,-rejects-Muslim-bias-claim >>> [3] >>> https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/donald-trump- >>> calls-halt-muslims-entering-151207220200817.html >>> [4] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/30/knowledge-knows-no-boundaries/ >>> [5] See >>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/02/06/amicus-brief-immigration-travel- >>> restrictions/, >>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/03/15/amicus-brief-us-travel-restrictions/ >>> , >>> and >>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/09/18/amicus-brief-us-travel-immigration/ >>> [6] >>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/07/02/supreme-court- >>> immigration-wikimedia-values/ >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Katherine Maher >>> >>> Executive Director >>> Wikimedia Foundation >>> >>> 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600 >>> San Francisco, CA 94104 >>> >>> +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 >>> +1 (415) 712 4873 >>> kma...@wikimedia.org >>> https://annual.wikimedia.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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>
