Hoi,

What do you hope to achieve with this legalistic approach ? What is your
bias ?
Thanks,
      GerardM


On 23 April 2014 15:11, Ravishankar <ravidre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee
>
> states that
>
> "The *Affiliations Committee* (formerly known as *Chapters Committee*,
> colloquially *AffCom*) is a Wikimedia community 
> committee<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_board_manual#Active_Community_Committees>entrusted
>  with advising the Wikimedia
> Foundation Board of 
> Trustees<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees>on
>  the approval of new movement
> affiliates<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_affiliation_models>:
> national or subnational chapters, thematic organisations and user groups.
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models
>
> recognizes only an additional category of affiliation called "Movement
> partners" which states that
>
> "Like-minded organizations that actively support the Wikimedia movement’s
> work. They are listed publicly and granted limited use of the marks for
> publicity indicating their support of and collaboration with Wikimedia."
>
> Examples for like minded organizations are Mozilla, Creative Commons,
> WikiEducator, Freenode. A glaring observation about these examples are that
> they don't get involved with direct Wikimedia content generation work.
>
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partners
>
> is itself in draft stage yet and there are no known (at least to me)
> movement partners publicly listed yet.
>
> There are no clear guidelines on the nature of work they can do and the
> extent of funding they can get.
>
> There are very clear requirements and application page for chapters,
> thematic organizations and user groups. Please see the
>
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requirements_for_future_thematic_organizations
>
> In the infobox in the same page, you can see that there are clear and
> strict guidelines, agreements and requirements that should be met by all
> such organizations.
>
> So, my question is:
>
> How is CIS-A2K eligible to get Annual Plan Grant through FDC? What is it's
> status within the Wikimeda affiliation model? Where are the guidelines,
> requirements and agreements for that?
>
> It is not a joke to be recognized as a movement parter sans any
> transparency and bottom-up process when other affiliates like chapters and
> thematic organizations (like Amical Wikimedia) make a very tedious journey
> to be recognized.
>
> If there is no convincing answer for this, CIS-A2K program can only be
> seen as a proxy program run by WMF to achieve its strategic goals in the
> region and it has no business doing work that should be done by the WMIN
> and the respective language communities.
>
> Lack of "mature" regional communities / affiliates is not an excuse to
> fund unrecognized entities like this.
>
> Extensive guidelines should be drafted for movement partners, CIS-A2K
> should go through the process and then only can it become eligible to apply
> for next round of funds irrespective of its legacy and history.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ravi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to