Hi Greta, Thank you for the explanation.
This reminds me a lot to what happened in Macedonia, albeit with different names of the recognised user groups. The artificially created problem by the Aff Com has eventually ended up in two user groups being eligible for WMF grants (another contentious decision), then a raising concern that the WMF can not extend funds to two user groups in a small country serving community with a small number of speakers and finally a substantial reduction of the annual grants approved for 2019 and threat that no grants will be extended for 2020 if the conflict does not get resolved. My kind advice for you is to start thinking about external funding for the next budget year (though it is not an easy task in our region) because this is something that the WMF might do for Albania as well. I also strongly agree with Paulo that we need to start thinking about preventing this from happening in the future. The problem is not only that people do not care about the consequences from their decisions in a volunteer community but that they just bagger off after complicating things and simply leave the issue to be solved by the volunteers who did not want it to happen. I was thinking about introducing a complaint process on Meta where people from the communities can directly complain about similar instances of problems created by the WMF, the Aff Com, the grantmaking committees or any other decision-making party. Frankly speaking, my impression is that the movement migrates from decisions about big things made through community-based discussions to a centralised decision-making process made entirely within the WMF or the committees that do not seem to serve all communities equally. Best, Kiril On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 2:17 PM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Greta, > > Thank you very much for your clarifications and insight into this question. > > This is very similar with what happened in Brazil, when the 2013 > chapter-like UG (Grupo de Usuários Wikimedia no Brasil) and its clone UG > (Wiki Educação Brasil) approved by AffCom in 2015 ended up competing for > the same activities and partnerships. > > Hopefully this time AffCom will not have the reckless approach they had > with Brazil, extinguishing both groups to try to solve a problem they > created themselves, and our wikimedian friends from Albania and Albanian > Language will be spared the destruction of their community. > > I believe that we, as the broad community, really should do something to > prevent this kind of thing which is mining and destroying parts of the > Wikimedia Movement. It is not possible that we have to stay here quietly > seeing AffCom dealing with all those cases in such an incompetent and > reckless way. If it's obviously not working, why keep it that way? > > Best, > Paulo > > Greta Doçi <gretad...@gmail.com> escreveu no dia segunda, 25/02/2019 à(s) > 12:34: > > > Dear everyone, > > > > First, we want to thank everyone who contributed in this discussion. > > > > We want to start with the first conflict, which is the name. If you read > > carefully Affcon's email above, and you check the info online as claimed > by > > Affcon, you will see that actually Affcon itself has confused both UG > > names, crediting events to the other UG, that actually are done by our > UG ( > > WoALUG > > < > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Albanian_Language_User_Group > > >) > > and vice versa. > > > > After the new UG was recognized and people started raising questions in > > this thread, we received an email by Affcon to explain to them what we > > thought was the overlapping. We did send our activities and explained why > > we thought there was overlapping. Reading Camelias and Sami email above, > > clearly that email was ignored. > > > > Exactly during the time that the new UG was applying, the old one > (WoALUG) > > was applying for the annual simple grant, which btw took us at least 4 > > months to complete, all our activities in Albania were clearly stated, > and > > GLAM and EDUCATION were our main goals. There are also institutions > > mentioned and details of what we wanted to do in Albania. So, claiming > that > > theres no overlapping of activities is not valid. > > > > WoALUG goes beyond Albania or Kosovo, because some Albanian contributors > > who don't live in Albania created it at the first place, so we wish we > can > > help Albanian speakers in diaspora to continue to contribute, and if they > > need information, sources or whatever, our team present in Albania, > Kosova, > > Macedonia, or Arberesh in Italy, will use our resources to make that > > happen. Our UG means to be inclusive of what is a small Wikimedia > language > > community anyways. > > > > GLAM and Education institutions are depended on public institutions. To > > collaborate with an institution, let's say Historic Museum of Albania, > you > > need to get permission from the Ministry of Culture. Think about the > > scenario (which is currently happening): one UG requests to collaborate > > with Museum of Elbasan and the other UG want to collaborate with Museum > of > > Tirana, both should sent the request to Ministry of Culture. Wikipedia > is a > > new thing (still) in Albania, considering that is already hard to > establish > > collaborations with public institutions, confusing the UGs will result in > > bad outcome for both UGs. > > > > And of course, for the other private institutions, it is a competition > who > > is going to contact them first. > > > > Splitting institutions is also not an option because for sure we will aim > > the same ones, since there's not that many of them. > > > > We were confused, we still are and none of our members have the time to > > follow this even after a year. > > > > on behalf of Wikimedians of Albanian Language User Group > > < > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Albanian_Language_User_Group > > > > > . > > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:30 PM Фархад Фаткуллин / Farkhad Fatkullin < > > f...@yandex.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear Kiril and Paulo, > > > Thank you for explanations. > > > > > > You have my deepest respect for showing your concern for our fellow > > > colleagues from Albania, so they avoid repeating the mistakes that have > > > been made previously elsewhere. Just like you, I certainly hope that > our > > > volunteer-colleagues serving in AffCom did their best to assess and > > > minimize possible risks that might come in case of competition. As for > > > Albanian language & Albania centered multilingual UGs, let's hope they > > are > > > getting along well and work hand in hand on the aspects in which they > can > > > help advancing each other's missions. > > > > > > Our current situation is actually encouraging us to consider developing > > > Russian-speaking UGs in all regions of Russia, and my home Republic > might > > > be one of the first ones where this will be useful. Our chapter consist > > of > > > representatives of various Wikimedia projects, languages & ethnic > groups, > > > but our weakness is rather low regional representation and empowerment, > > > which we hope to balance through UGs. The world is in constant flux, so > > > eventually we might also witness similar competition for attention that > > you > > > are talking about. We currently don't seem to have reasons for conflict > > > between Wikimedia Russia chapter and Russian & other language or > > > territorial UGs because: > > > * UGs have representatives in the national chapter > > > * National chapter meetings are broadcast live on YouTube, > > > * Chapter leadership prioritizes country-wide tasks of importance for > > > growing the movement, > > > * Wikimedia projects in Russian and other languages are not that famous > > > yet, > > > * neither affiliates, nor individuals in Russia get their grant > requests > > > approved by WMF (there are reasons for that), and > > > * Russian language is teaching us to be anarchic inside (affiliate > > > structures are nothing more than just legal tools), whilst locals have > > > centuries-old history of living together in Hunnic Empire, Cumania, > > > Mongolic Empire, Golden Horde, Russian Empire, Soviet Union & now > Russian > > > Federation (something we remember despite the fact that Golden Horde > and > > > earlier ones don't get much coverage in high-school history courses). > > > > > > regards, > > > farhad > > > > > > -- > > > Farkhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин http://sikzn.ru/ > Тел.+79274158066 / > > > skype:frhdkazan / Wikipedia:frhdkazan > > > > > > > > > 15.02.2019, 17:37, "Paulo Santos Perneta" <paulospern...@gmail.com>: > > > > Hi Farhad, > > > > > > > > It is very easily understood by the so called Brazilian scenario: > > > > > > > > Step 1 - AffCom recognizes a chapter style UG, with geographic focus > > > > Step 2 - Dissidents from first group start warring first UG while > > > > attempting to form a second UG, clone of the first UG > > > > Step 3 - AffCom recognizes second UG > > > > Step 4 - Conflict between UGs dramatically increases with time, > > spreading > > > > into the Wikimedia projects > > > > Step 5 - AffCom dissolves both UGs > > > > > > > > Current status: No recognized Wikimedia community in the country > > > > > > > > My opinion: Terrible disservice by AffCom to the Wikimedia Movement. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Paulo > > > > > > > > Фархад Фаткуллин / Farkhad Fatkullin <f...@yandex.com> escreveu no > dia > > > > sexta, 15/02/2019 à(s) 10:59: > > > > > > > >> Dear Kiril, Philip and colleagues, > > > >> > > > >> Please explain the nature of reasons that cause trouble in having > > > multiple > > > >> Wikimedia affiliates in the area, as this seems to be context > > specific. > > > >> It's possible that our context in Russia is very different, which > is > > > why > > > >> we are actually welcoming creation of new UGs throughout the > country, > > > both > > > >> territorially and thematically oriented ones (on top of the > Wikimedia > > > >> Russia national chapter). > > > >> Should you give more reasons why this seems causing conflict, I > > might. > > > >> > > > >> Over here we are quite happy with existing collaboration at all > > levels > > > and > > > >> are even looking forward to developing a mechanism to speed up > their > > > >> formation throughout the country - namely > > > >> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Languages_of_Russia_Community_User_Group > > > >> Myself and other representatives of Wikimedia Russia discussed this > > in > > > >> detail and welcomed by AffCom secretary during Wikimania 2017 > > > >> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Frhdkazan/Wikimania2017#Aug.12 > > > And > > > >> in the framework of https://ru.wikimedia.org/wiki/Smart_region > > > >> initiative, I will eventually proceed to registering a > > > Tatarstan-oriented > > > >> thematic multilingual UG, on top of recently registered > > > >> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_of_Tatar_language_User_Group > > > >> & Wikimedia Russia, in both of which I am currently a member. > > > >> > > > >> regards, > > > >> farhad > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Farkhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин http://sikzn.ru/ > > > Тел.+79274158066 / > > > >> skype:frhdkazan / Wikipedia:frhdkazan > > > >> > > > >> 14.02.2019, 03:25, "Kiril Simeonovski" < > kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com > > >: > > > >> > Hi Paulo, > > > >> > > > > >> > Camelia's paragraph that you referred to tells a story that is > > > exactly > > > >> the > > > >> > opposite of what the Affiliations Committee is doing in practice. > > The > > > >> > so-called 'Brazilian scenario' emerged in Macedonia when, in > 2016, > > > the > > > >> > committee decided to recognise a second user group on the same > > > territory > > > >> > without consulting the existing one. This has eventually > developed > > > into a > > > >> > problem regarding the overlap in the scope of the two user groups > > > and the > > > >> > resolution was normally sought from the people (more importantly > > > >> > volunteers) who were not willing this to happen. It should be > also > > > noted > > > >> > that Macedonia is a country with only 2 million inhabitants > unlike > > > >> Brazil's > > > >> > over 200 million and this has been mentioned numerous times by > > > different > > > >> > people in the movement to refer to the severity of the problem. > > > >> > > > > >> > My opinion is that the Affiliations Committee has no vision on > the > > > future > > > >> > of the Wikimedia movement and their main efficiency indicator is > > the > > > >> number > > > >> > of user groups they recognise with no care about the > consequencies > > > of the > > > >> > apparent wrongdoing. They managed to bring the tally to over 100 > > user > > > >> > groups and the Wikimedia Foundation even got engaged to celebrate > > > this > > > >> > achievement, while they did not give a damn about the problems > that > > > they > > > >> > have posed with their light-minded routine. Moreover, when you > > > approach > > > >> > them with some relevant questions, they simply brush off and > > respond > > > >> with a > > > >> > months-long delay. > > > >> > > > > >> > In conclusion, the Affiliations Committee is artificially > creating > > > >> problems > > > >> > as a result of their recognition policy and is seeking resolution > > > from > > > >> > volunteers that were not consulted at all about the potential > > > >> > consequencies. This is a waste of volunteer time and efforts for > > > >> something > > > >> > that could have easily been prevented. Unfortunately, the > Wikimedia > > > >> > Foundation and some other voices in the movement contribute to > this > > > >> misery > > > >> > and it is highly unprobable that any complaint to any one in the > > > movement > > > >> > would pay off. > > > >> > > > > >> > Best regards, > > > >> > Kiril > > > >> > > > > >> > On сре., 13 фев. 2019 г. at 16:13 Paulo Santos Perneta < > > > >> > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >> Hello, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> camelia boban <camelia.bo...@gmail.com> escreveu no dia terça, > > > >> 12/02/2019 > > > >> >> à(s) 11:18: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > (...) > > > >> >> > In line with the philosophy of the inclusion of the movement, > > > AffCom > > > >> has > > > >> >> > acted as it always does when it receives affiliation requests: > > it > > > >> >> assesses > > > >> >> > the territorial overlap and the declared purpose of the > requests > > > with > > > >> >> > others affiliates present in the territory, contacting the > > already > > > >> >> > recognized affiliates to hear from them about any concerns, > > using > > > the > > > >> >> > experience and knowledge on the territory of each of its > > members. > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> I suppose this was not in effect back in 2015, when Wiki > Education > > > >> Brazil > > > >> >> was approved, as neither the existing affiliate in Brazil - UG > > > >> Wikimedia > > > >> >> in Brazil -, nor Wikimedia Portugal, have been consulted about > it, > > > even > > > >> >> when it totally overlapped with the territory of the existing > > > >> affiliate in > > > >> >> Brazil, and was announced by AffCom as having a Lusophone > target, > > > >> therefore > > > >> >> interfering in Portugal as well. Furthermore, at the date it was > > > >> approved, > > > >> >> Wiki Education Brazil was already in open conflict with the > > existing > > > >> >> affiliate in Brazil, which makes the approval decision by AffCom > > > >> absolutely > > > >> >> incomprehensible. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Actually, I really fail to understand why the candidatures to > > AffCom > > > >> >> continue allowed to be proposed in absolute secrecy, leaving any > > > >> problems > > > >> >> caused by their approvals to be dealt with by the community > after > > > the > > > >> >> problem is already installed. Does not seem a very clever way of > > > >> acting. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Best, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Paulo - DarwIn > > > >> >> Wikimedia Portugal > > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> >> 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> > > _______________________________________________ > > 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>
