<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Responding to both Srikanth R & Arjun's responses.<br><div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic; "><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">hisham</span></span>
</div>
<br><div><div>On Dec 11, 2011, at 11:07 AM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>Thank you for your explanation for the explanation Arjuna, but I still<br>have a question. What feedback are you looking for?<br><br>On 11/12/2011, Arjuna Rao Chavala <<a href="mailto:arjunaraoc@gmail.com">arjunaraoc@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Hi Srikanth R,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Please allow me to share my view.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan <<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:parakara.ghoda@gmail.com">parakara.ghoda@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hisham, I don't understand why the Executive Committee offer to be<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">informed 48 HOURS in advance of the community. Isn't Wikipedia a<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">community based system? If the chapter or trust is everything then<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">what is the community sitting here to do? I know I sound rude, but I<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">fail to understand why some people get prior preference. </blockquote></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Srikanth R: It is indeed a community-based system and it is the community that is "everything"!, and yes, everyone is equal. My thinking when I had volunteered the advance notice idea was a combination of continuing to build stronger communication with the Chapter, facilitating better co-ordination with the Chapter , professional courtesy to the Chapter as well as to get their advice and counsel in case we were not on the right track. The idea of 48 hours was just to give some time to look and reflect and feedback. In any case, the information would be shared with the community at large after the 48 hours - and it would hopefully be better that way. As a community member, you should hopefully have better thought out and better communicated initiatives through this. </div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Especially<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">after I spend an entire day talking to newcomers telling them that<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">everyone in Wiki is equal.<br></blockquote></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Thank you taking time out for this session! </div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">I am some times puzzled by assumption that people have about Wikipedia<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">policies for individuals related to editing a wiki page online apply<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">equally to real world Wikimedia organisations with accountabilties to<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">various stakeholders including Government. I am also concerned about the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">assumed separation between community and chapter based on some recent mails<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">to the India list.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Let me elaborate my thoughts on this.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Chapter members including EC members are part of community and serve<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Community and the movement. It is just the level and structure of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">engagement of a person that determines whether he/she is part of Chapter.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">If a person reads Wikipedia, he/she is member of community. If a person<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">contributes to Wikipedia, he/she is part of smaller subset of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">communitycalled editors. If a person would like to promote Wikipedia<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">in real world,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">he could do as an individual or become a member of chapter, leverage the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">benefits of the legal entity called "Wikimedia chapter", get affiliated<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">with SIGs and contribute.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Chapter IRC is open for everyone. Even membership is open for every Indian<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">aged above 18. So I would request everyone to treat Chapter as a subset of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">community with more focus on growing the movement in real world.<br></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Completely agree with Arjun.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Coming to your specific question about the plan for sharing public<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">communications in advance, here is my view. As I understand, Trust is an<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">independent legal entity contributing to Wikimedia movement in India. So<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the coordination calls are a mechanism to share plans and issues so that<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the overall effectiveness can be improved. Advance notice for any public<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">communication was agreed so that each entity could provide the other<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">feedback if any, if such communication were to attribute some things to the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">other or lead to confusion in the stakeholders. It is mutual. I am sorry<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the minutes did not reflect the same, though it was discussed and agreed.<br></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Srikanth R: As clarified by Arjun, the Chapter will also be sharing information to India Programs - and I'll be happy to give my feedback to them on anything they send. It'll help in co-ordination and make sure that the action (of India Programs or India Chapter) is appropriate and is appropriately communicated.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Hope the above helps. I request Hisham to share his view as well.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>