In the light of candidates being rejected based on public views on social media, it seems logical the remaining candidates and WMF board members are subject to the same scrutiny as Lane and Ravan. A failure to meet the same criteria would be unacceptable.
I hope that we can see all trustees being held to account for past social media posts for anything that American and international press would find offensive, so nothing will ever again be controversial for the WMF's "reputation" or "brand" and we can look forward to all future WMF Boards, and presumably Affiliates, meeting this high standard of 100% non-controversial volunteers who themselves are not members of any controversial minority groups, like the newly criminalized "anti-fascists". Reminder current candidates are listed at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2025/Candidates The current 12 board members are listed at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation/Board_of_Trustees#Current_members However their social media accounts have not yet been listed on meta, could the WMF please ensure these are added, for the same transparency they require from the 2025 candidates? Thanks in advance for any more official clarification from the WMF Board, as it exists today. On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 at 13:51, Ivan Martínez <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you Victoria for providing further information on the recent events. > This is particularly necessary given the actions taken by you as members of > the Board. To quote your own words, I would like to say that: > > “Future candidates should be more cautious about what they post on social > media, as some posts pose significant risks to the WMF's reputation.” If this > was the reasoning behind Ravan's removal, I would kindly ask you to share > with us the full reasoning behind the foundation's ponderation to determine > that Ravan's social media post warranted her removal from the electoral > process. Being a woman adds an additional layer of consequences as is quoted > in many international consensus of removal of women into political processes. > If you indicate that it is valid to restrict a person's human rights in order > to protect reputation, could you provide more information about what that > potential reputational damage means for the foundation? Based on what > materials was it concluded that Ravan could jeopardize the movement? > Particularly this reasoning is highly concerning because it sets a negative > precedent for the Right to freedom of expression of Wikimedians who may want > to participate in the future, as they will be affected by chilling effects > (1) that will censor their thoughts in advance and, as a result, their desire > to participate in an election, which irreversibly affects the diversity and > legitimacy of the future electoral process itself. Second, and more > importantly, when you say “the press,” you are referring specifically to The > Jerusalem Post, a news website that, like others, is subject to scrutiny and > does not represent a unanimous position. Moreover, if it is the media outlet > being referred to in public, it is one with clear and declared biases. Could > you share this ponderation? > If the Board supported his reasoning, then it echoed the allegations made by > the media outlet in question. In other words, in its consideration of > restricting a human right, the Board based its reasoning on the fact that > Ravan posted an image with a red Palestinian triangle on his social media > accounts—an image with historical roots, as the Wikipedia article points out > (2). If this is the case, this fact does not mean that Ravan has in any way > called for any kind of violent action or that it can be classified among the > most common reasons for restricting the Right to freedom of expression. As > can be read in the letters that the community has endorsed against this > action(3), this is particularly worrying because the opinions of future Board > candidates (including women and other diverse groups) will then be subject to > opaque scrutiny, without clear and stablished rules and based on vague > concepts such as “reputation.” Just to give one example, at the international > level, many laws that punished conduct against “reputation” have been > repealed because of the high probability of committing injustices based on > bias. > Third, and no less important, in the past, some current and former Board > members have shared controversial thoughts on their social media accounts > about current wars and conflicts on the world, and we have never seen any > assessment of their continued permanency on the Board in this matter. Is it > the case that there was a double standard for Ravan? > > Best regards, > > (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect > (2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_triangle_(Palestinian_symbol) > (3) > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Objections_to_the_2025_WMF_Board_election_removals > > El jue, 9 oct 2025 a las 6:19, Victoria Doronina (<[email protected]>) > escribió: >> >> Hello Hannah, >> >> I'm writing this as a Wikimedian, relying solely on publicly available >> information. I'm sorry, but I will not reply to any questions, as the last >> time I tried, it didn't end well. >> >> It may sound counterintuitive, but WMF is sometimes too nice and careful >> about the reputation of wikimedians and this leaves room for speculation. >> In this case, the WMF left a lot of room for candidates who didn't pass the >> preliminary stages of the vetting process to withdraw with grace, but it >> didn't work, and now we have multiple petitions for the reinstatement of >> these candidates. >> >> Concerning Ravan, future candidates should be more cautious about what they >> post on social media, as some posts pose significant risks to the WMF's >> reputation, primarily because the press is particularly vigilant about the >> WMF board candidates at the moment. I'm supporting women (you may have >> noticed that I'm a woman too) and LGBTQIA+, but in this instance, I cannot >> support her candidacy, because the risks for the public reputation of WMF >> outweigh the risks to gender equity. >> >> As for Lane, he >> >> * publicly stated in his candidate video (1' in) that WMF is going to >> replace some of the text in Wikipedia with the text written by AI - this is >> not true, as anyone who has read the WMF AI strategy would know. >> Wikimedia Foundation elections/2025/Candidates/Lane Rasberry - Meta-Wiki >> >> * Publicly written in the candidate statement: >> >> I set up a Right to Information project on Meta-Wiki because years ago, I >> wanted information, and I could not find a way to communicate to the >> Foundation. As trustee, I encourage the user community to organize to make >> public information requests to me. >> >> To me, it looks like he's going to disclose the non-public information, >> especially as he emphasises that he's an editor of the Signpost and his duty >> as a journalist will come before his duties as a trustee. He also writes: >> >> I want access to Wikimedia Foundation financial records so that I can >> analyze them at my university, or otherwise, the WMF can just be direct in >> saying it does not want to share this info. Right now the WMF's financial >> reports are incomprehensible to the user community. We need transparency in >> those reports so that Wikimedians in each country can know what money the >> Foundation spends on their behalf, and what the development strategy for >> that country is. >> >> It sounds like he's going to disclose non-public financial information. >> >> All people who know Lane well state that he's an honest person who does as >> he says. As a Wikimedian, I cannot support a candidacy for a person who >> makes grossly unsupported statements. As a trustee, I cannot support anyone >> who wishes to disclose non-public information, which is in direct >> contravention of the trustee's duties and responsibilities. >> >> As you can see, my objections to the Lane candidacy have nothing to do with >> him being a minority or any other potential issue that he mentions in his >> communications; it's much more mundane. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 6:52 AM L C <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> It would make sense to add the link to the index of >>> petitions/complaints at >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Objections_to_the_2025_WMF_Board_election_removals >>> so they are all centralized. >>> >>> Selected quotes from other letters boycotting the election in protest. >>> >>> "The Wikimedia Foundation has long emphasized its commitment to good >>> governance and transparency, as well as to gender equity. Yet, by >>> excluding Ravan—the only female candidate in this election—without any >>> clear explanation and amid strong indications of political bias, the >>> Foundation has violated all of these principles." >>> >>> "We write to you with deep concern and strong objection to the recent >>> decision to withdraw candidate Ravan Jaafar al-Taie from the ongoing >>> election process for a seat on the Board of Trustees. This measure, >>> taken without transparency or public justification, undermines the >>> legitimacy of the process and contradicts the values of inclusion, >>> equity, and diversity that the Wikimedia movement has promoted since >>> its inception and that Strategy 2030 ratifies as guiding principles. >>> The action is unfair, arbitrary, and sets a dangerous precedent for >>> democracy and the efforts of female Wikipedians who actively fight for >>> inclusion. Ravan is not only a valid candidate, but also the only >>> woman in this electoral process." >>> >>> "There have been two candidates rejected without a credible >>> explanation. Rejecting either candidate based on “lack of experience”, >>> political attacks or dubious conflict of interest have been based on >>> falsehoods or just incomprehensible. Ravan was the only woman >>> candidate left in the running and Lane was the only openly queer >>> candidate remaining in the election. This has been the opposite of the >>> previously publicly stated values of the WMF commitment to >>> representing minority voices and diversity. The Board and Election >>> Committee stated on Meta that they were aiming for 6 candidates to >>> vote on, but there are just 4 now remaining, all men, and are less >>> representative of the volunteer community." >>> >>> At a minimum, this wide level of objection from different and >>> significant parts of the community should result in an immediate >>> independent investigation or a suspension of the election. >>> >>> On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 at 04:47, Hannah Clover >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi, I have written a heartfelt letter for reform at >>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2025_WMF_Board_reform_petition. I >>> > encourage everyone across the movement to read, translate, and share this >>> > message as it is not just an enwiki issue but something that affects us >>> > all. >>> > >>> > Sincerely, >>> > Hannah Clover >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines >>> > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>> > Public archives at >>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/Q2I6XYSINHJ2CVVXSPWID4LC7O52ZLCE/ >>> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>> Public archives at >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/K4SPN43MOZLWC73ANTMYYKZRBREDTO7Z/ >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> Public archives at >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/VQFNNPWJ2GD5NKD5QH7Y6MSIXG4WNS2S/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > > > -- > Iván Martínez > Voluntario - Wikimedia México A.C. > User:ProtoplasmaKid > > // Mis comunicaciones respecto a Wikipedia/Wikimedia pueden tener una > moratoria en su atención debido a que es un voluntariado. > // Ayuda a proteger a Wikipedia, dona ahora: https://donate.wikimedia.org > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/MZVVVNSVCBMKN2BSLKL5ZNJZYNZSEM5M/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/2ZNVWUWQAM4T2QUHNSWDZSBT4NZRESQ4/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
