Hi Kirill,

(changing the topic to reflect better the more abstract case: this is no
longer about WMPT, as I don't know enough about that specific instance)

I appreciate your concerns for embarrassing situations. This may be the
least painful approach in many of the cases. I also appreciate that the
Committee is between a rock and a hard place here: if such a situation
arises, there is no approach that makes everyone happy.

However, I think there's another complicating factor, which I'm not sure
whether it is currently considered sufficiently. The system of affiliates
has been designed so that there is always some level of 'democratic'
control: chapters and thematic organizations are required to have a
membership, and also user groups are required to have more participants
than just the liaisons. At least in the case of Thematic organizations and
Chapters, these membership bodies are also legally the highest authority of
the organization. (the user groups are more fuzzy, and I'll focus on
Chapters and Thematic Organizations for now)

If an organization gets suspended, that can be generally for two reasons.
First, there could be a simple misunderstanding. In that case, the board
can probably resolve this quickly, and a public announcement would
definitely do much more good than harm. But there is also the second
possibility: that there is a real problem. In that scenario, the democratic
control that we require, may be needed to manage the problem. Sure, it may
result in some messy questions to the board, and some embarrassment, but it
may also result in more actual resolutions. As a member, I would definitely
not appreciate it to only learn about the problems when there is no way
back (revocation of status).

Affiliation with the Wikimedia Movement is a core 'asset' for the Wikimedia
affiliates, and should not be revoked lightly - as I'm sure the Committee
will agree.

I would suggest that the AffCom reviews its approach here, and considers a
middle way, where the membership (or the whole community, if there is no
way to contact the membership) is informed. Whether that is through the
board or directly, whether publicly or privately will depend on the case.
The most important thing is that the membership can exercise their
responsibility and potentially decide that the board should be replaced, or
instructed to act in a certain manner.

I can imagine an approach where the board is given a week to respond to the
charges to resolve misunderstandings before the step is taken to inform the
membership (while leaving the board full discretion to contact the
membership earlier than that).

Chapters and Thematic Organizations have often a history going back many
years in our movement. They are larger than their boards, and if the
current board is unable or unwilling to resolve an issue, the membership is
at task to interfere.

Best,
Lodewijk

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 7:39 PM Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> The Affiliations Committee would like to provide some clarification around
> the privacy of affiliate suspension notices, particularly in the context of
> ongoing conflict mediation within and between affiliates.
>
> When we conduct investigations into the behavior of individual editors, we
> strive to maintain privacy for the individual as to the specific concerns
> under investigation.  In the case of affiliate compliance investigations,
> we similarly treat the specific concerns and the details of any
> intermediate measures (including possible suspensions) with an appropriate
> degree of privacy.  This is to avoid undue public embarrassment or ridicule
> for the individuals involved in the conflict mediation process, and to
> ensure that people are able to work with us in good faith to resolve issues
> without feeling that they will be subjected to public shaming during the
> process.
>
> Basic reporting compliance is documented in the reporting table on the
> [[m:Reports]] page, where you can see those groups which have fallen behind
> on compliance [1].  The suspension-remediation-derecognition process is
> also publicly documented on Meta [2].
>
> It is 100% at the discretion of the suspended organization whether and how
> to communicate publicly about their suspension or the details of their
> non-compliance.  Only upon revocation of recognition does the committee
> communicate publicly about the issue; even then, private details are not
> shared except as required to correct misinformation.
>
> As for ways this could be more transparent without causing undue
> embarrassment, perhaps suspension status could be indicated on the reports
> page on Meta; however, even this seems appropriate only if done at the
> discretion of those who have been suspended.  We would be interested in
> hearing more thoughts about this from those who have been through the
> process.  For anyone who wants to share their views without public
> disclosure, please feel free to message the private AffCom mailing list
> with your perspective on this topic at aff...@lists.wikimedia.org.
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_movement_affiliates/Protocol_for_noncompliant_Wikimedia_movement_affiliates/Derecognition_Process_Mapping
>
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 3:40 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I second, and strongly support Pine's suggestion.
> >
> > Being the Affiliations Committee a community-run Wikimedia committee
> > emanating from the Wikimedia Movement itself, transparency is to be
> > expected whenever it is possible. As far as I know, there is nothing
> > confidential in that resolution.
> >
> > Obscurity is the mother of all rumors, and we're dearly suffering from
> > that.
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> escreveu no dia segunda, 3/09/2018 à(s)
> > 19:18:
> >
> > > Hello Gonçalo,
> > >
> > > Thank you for this report.
> > >
> > > I would like to ask the Affiliations Committee to post the July 2018
> > > resolution regarding Wikimedia Portugal to this mailing list and to
> > publish
> > > that resolution on Meta.
> > >
> > > I am an advocate for transparency about financial and governance
> matters,
> > > which includes the activities of the Affiliations Committee. I request
> > that
> > > going forward, all similar resolutions from the Affiliations Committee
> > > should be sent to Wikimedia-l and published on Meta within one week of
> > > their approval by AffCom.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:56 AM GoEthe.wiki <goethe.w...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear all,
> > > >
> > > > As part of the roadmap AffCom agreed with us after they decided to
> > > suspend
> > > > some of our benefits within the Wikimedia Foundation programs
> > > > (
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private/wikimediapt/2018-July/002625.html
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private/wikimediapt/2018-July/002625.html
> > > > >),
> > > > Wikimedia Portugal held an Extraordinary General Assembly on the 1st
> of
> > > > September, and a board was elected. This board is identical, with one
> > > > exception, to the board elected in April of this year and that I
> > > announced
> > > > in a similar message (
> > > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-April/090073.html
> > > ).
> > > >
> > > > The board is now composed of:
> > > >
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    Gonçalo Themudo, president
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    André Barbosa, treasurer
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    Ana Cravo, secretary
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We also elected members for the other governing bodies of the
> chapter:
> > > >
> > > > General Assembly
> > > >
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    Paulo Santos Perneta, president
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    Carlos Barradas, secretary
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    João Carvalho, member
> > > >
> > > > Fiscal Council
> > > >
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    Waldir Pimenta, president
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    Manuel de Sousa, secretary
> > > >    -
> > > >
> > > >    João Lemos, member
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The general assembly also approved the financial statement of our
> > annual
> > > > report, which is published at
> > > > https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Relatórios/Anual/2017. An English
> > > > translation
> > > > is provided at
> https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Relatórios/Anual/2017/en.
> > > >
> > > > The minutes of the meeting are available at
> > > > https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reuni%C3%B5es/XI_Assembleia-Geral (in
> > > > Portuguese only).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We are currently working on the final step of the roadmap, which is a
> > > plan
> > > > for active contributor involvement and improved chapter capacity. The
> > > first
> > > > part is to gather signatures of at least 20 chapter members who are
> > > active
> > > > contributors to Wikimedia projects, which is currently underway at
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Utilizador:GoEThe/P%C3%A1gina_de_apoio_%C3%A0_Wikimedia_Portugal
> > > > .
> > > > We will keep you informed of the second part, once we have developed
> > it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Gonçalo
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> _______________________________________________
> 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