Bence, Thanks for the board resolution document.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Eligibility_criteria has 6 requirements and an exception clause that says: "In some cases, an exception may be made when an organization is actively working toward meetings these requirements as part of a plan with WMF." However, I assume a WMF board resolution would over rule all these requirements. It is a brilliant plan to create and fund an entity like CIS-A2K (Wikipedia programs) out of nowhere by WMF and then give validity for its own plan by means of board approval. So, the larger global community and the process for recognizing affiliate organizations can be bypassed. The board resolution makes it clear that CIS-A2K is not a recognized movement partner yet. It also makes sense why WMF would hesitate to make the MoU public. Because, it is not a MoU first of all and can only be seen as a service provider agreement in a working relationship. It also makes sense why CIS-A2K would want to consult WMF before providing details about their site visits. // the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) and the Centre for the Internet and Society (CIS) have engaged in a working relationship// In plainspeak, this is outsourcing and WMF can be held responsible and accountable for all the work done by and through CIS-A2K. CIS-A2K is engaging in paid content generation models and I would welcome WMF's comment on this. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/The_Centre_for_Internet_and_Society/Proposal_form#Q15 for context. Their anchor staffs do not have dedicated stand alone user names with CIS-A2K affiliation and it is not clear yet what is the nature of work they undertake in language community programs. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/The_Centre_for_Internet_and_Society/Proposal_form#Q12 So, what is an edit made during paid time could be misinterpreted for the growth of the community resulting out of their programs. Please note that three of their full time staff are also active community members. If this can be considered paid content generation should be investigated. Especially, for individual engagement grants ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG#ieg-learn ) it clearly says: Content-creation is not directly funded. Projects should foster conditions that encourage editing by volunteers (e.g. editor recruitment campaigns), not replace volunteer action by funding someone to edit articles, upload photos, etc. //in India since September 1, 2012;// //for the limited term of CIS’ agreement with WMF.// So, can someone clarify what is the end date for this "working relationship" as per the agreement? 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
