Hello Pine,
I think it is easy to understand that, even in the event that the AffCom
recommends to the WMF Board the recognition of a certain group to become a
chapter, the WMF Board has made it clear that it will not accept a group
that has been recognized as a Wikimedia User Group for at least two years.
I honestly do not see why it is so hard to understand that the AffCom
guidelines have not changed and that simply, the WMF Board is the entity
who has the final word on chapterhood status.
Thank you,
Carlos
El 01/03/2015 a las 09:07 a.m., Pine W escribió:
Hi all,
I am hoping that we hear back from Affcom about Peaceray's point.
I am planning to take Luis up on his suggestion to have a discussion on
Meta, in which I will discuss the various delays and
communications/documentaion issues that seem to plague our attempts to make
ourselves impactful and get the approvals to enable us to make progress.
My work on the budget this week has been delayed by the need to spend
many hours dealing with car issues, plus my working a little overtime at
paid work. Hopefully I will have a chance to work on the budget next week.
Pine
On Feb 20, 2015 10:22 AM, "Raymond Leonard" <
raymond.f.leonard.jr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Kirill & all,
This proves my point. The WMF Board stated that it seeks an approval
requirement that “All organizations wishing to be recognized as a chapter
or thematic organization must first be recognized as … a (not necessarily
incorporated) Wikimedia user group for at least two years” was made at a
retreat that occurred November 22 - 23, 2013. Yet fifteen months later,
where is this codified in the Requirements, Guidelines, & Creation guides
for Chapters, Thematic organisations, or User groups? The nearest that
I can find is at Wikimedia usergroups/Requirements
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_user_groups/Requirements&oldid=10838200>,
where it states “Two years of activities prior to applying” as a
requirement for Chapters & Thematic organisations. Two years of
activities is a _very_ different thing than being recognized as a Wikimedia
user group for two years. The discrepancy makes it feel like the goal posts
are being moved on us.
The Affiliations Committee should rightfully expect transparency &
promptness from its present and future affiliates. We are asking that the
Affiliations Committee treat us with the same transparency & promptness.
Yours,
Peaceray
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Kirill Lokshin <
kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Peaceray,
>
> I just wanted to clarify one point regarding chapters and user
> groups. CWUG wasn't classified as a user group instead of as a chapter
> because it was more expedient, or because the Affiliations Committee is
> skittish about new chapters; rather, the mandatory classification of all
> new groups as user groups -- and a two-year period of activity *as a user
> group* before being able to apply for recognition as a chapter -- are
> requirements that have been set by the WMF Board of Trustees [1].
>
> Cheers,
> Kirill
>
> [1]
>
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11-24#Movement_roles
>
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:38 AM, Raymond Leonard <
> raymond.f.leonard.jr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Pine & all,
>>
>> I am agreed that this has been rough & frustrating process,
>> especially considering that our goal is to become a chapter & that we got
>> the word that initially becoming a user group should be more expedient.
>> Consider that beyond membership goals, there are an additional six
>> requirements (listed first) in common for user groups, chapters, & thematic
>> organizations, & an additional six for chapters & thematic
organizations.
>> Here is how CWUG stack up on those requirements:
>>
>>
>> - *Focus:* Geographic
>> - *Mission aligned with Wikimedia Foundation:* Yes
>> - *Compliance with naming guidelines and trademark policy:* Yes
>> (signed agreement); consulted with legal team when designing CWUG logo
>> - *Information about group published on a Wikimedia wiki:* Yes
>> - *Plans for activities or efforts to advance Wikimedia projects:*
>> Yes
>> - *Allows new members:* Yes
>> - *Two designated contacts for Wikimedia Foundation:* Yes
>> - *Legally incorporated:* In progress
>> - *Amendable bylaws approved by Affiliations Committee:* CWUG has
>> bylaws
>> - *Two years of activities prior to applying:* Starting October
>> 2011, mostly monthly activities (36 meetups or events) in Seattle; Since
>> January 2012, Portland has had 30 meetups or events
>> - *Requires approval by Wikimedia Foundation Board: *WMF
>> responsibility
>> - *Governing board elected by members, including new members:*
>> Board formed, election at end of first year (11/2015, if I am correct)
>> - *Activity and financial reports posted regularly on Meta-Wiki:*
>> Mission statement, goals, plans, & budget posted, reports coming at
>> appropriate intervals
>>
>> I do think that CWUG has done its due diligence thus far, given that
>> we have gone beyond the requirements of a user group & that we just
>> recently got the go ahead.
>>
>> Alex,
>>
>> I know that WMF has had some misgivings with the how chapters are
>> working. I can see at
>>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reports&oldid=11312318
>> that 31% of the chapters & thematic reports are overdue on their reports.
>> (Bluerasberry & Pharos, if you are reading this, please light a fire under
>> Wikimedia New York City, because their report was due at the end of
>> October.) I know that some are years behind or just plain defunct. There
>> have been reports of one chapter in turmoil, having completely voted out
>> its board. I can understand why the Affiliations Committee is skittish
>> about new chapters & is encouraging groups to initially start as a user
>> group.
>>
>> However, even though "Wikimedia user groups are intended to be
>> simple and flexible affiliates", it is feeling a bit broken & anything
but
>> simple. I know that Pine has submitted applications & documentation in a
>> timely manner, but the projected time for approval that was supposed to be
>> 2 to 4 weeks then stretched into months. The suddenness of the grantmaking
>> deadline was, well, unexpected. Had we gotten a more timely approval to
>> become a user group, we would have had more time to consult or have a
>> back-and-forth about the budget instead of feeling like we had to rush
>> headlong into it. And for a group that yearns to become a chapter, consider
>> how discouraging it is that the Step-by-step chapter creation guide
>>
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Step-by-step_chapter_creation_guide&oldid=8213725>
>> begins with "This page is outdated ..."
>>
>> So please forgive us that even with you approach us with a
>> legitimate concern that we need to grow our membership at first, it feels
>> to us like another roadblock. Frankly, we just want to get to the point
>> where we can just start moving ahead as a user group with events,
>> partnerships, member recruiting, and reporting so we can further Wikipedia
>> & the other Wikimedia projects. This is the fifth board that II have served
>> on, & I know that while accounting & documentation are important, the
thing
>> that really perpetuates an organization is serving its purpose & its
>> members. Please help us to expedite this process so we can turn our
>> attention to that.
>>
>> Yours,
>> Peaceray
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Peaceray,
>>>
>>> I think that expanded membership and volunteer capacity is part of
>>> the picture, yes.
>>>
>>> One thing I think we should consider discussing with WMF at a
>>> fairly high level are the systematic problems we have been encountering
>>> with our group's formation and funding. We have had issues with Affcom
>>> delays, WMF Legal delays, Grantmaking springing a deadline on us related to
>>> the Inspire campaign, and now a need to reorient our annual plan based on
>>> expectations that do not appear to be documented on Meta (something that I
>>> confirmed with someone who is active in another chapter). I am starting to
>>> understand why chapters get so frustrated with WMF. My experience with WMF
>>> prior to this has never had such a series of speedbumps, and I would like
>>> to know if the Board would like me to address this series of issues that
>>> spans WMF departments with WMF's new Senior Director of Community
>>> Engagement, Luis Villa, who was recently promoted out of WMF's Legal
>>> department. Personally I am quite frustrated at the amount of volunteer
>>> time that is being expended in unproductive ways, and the systemic nature
>>> of the problems suggests to me that these issues need to be addressed by
>>> someone in WMF who is placed highly enough in the organization that they
>>> can streamline processes and address communication issues across
>>> departments. Please let me know if you would like me to set up a
>>> conversation with Luis.
>>>
>>> Pine
>>>
>>> Pine
>>>
>>> *This is an Encyclopedia* <https://www.wikipedia.org/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep
>>> rock of our past, in which we must delve The well of our future, The clear
>>> water we must leave untainted for those who come after us, The fertile
>>> earth, in which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands, And
>>> the broad fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how much
>>> we do not know. *
>>>
>>> *—Catherine Munro *
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Raymond Leonard <
>>> raymond.f.leonard.jr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I think that the "Comparison of requirements for affiliation
>>>> models" table in
>>>>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_user_groups/Requirements#eligibil…
>>>> probably applies to the WMF's current perception of us.
>>>>
>>>> To the point of "our priority should be expanding the number and
>>>> the capacity of our volunteers," the rows at the head of the stable
state
>>>> that the Minimum active Wikimedia editors & Suggested minimum members
are 3
>>>> & 10 respectively for a Wikimedia user groups and 10 & 20
respectively for
>>>> both Chapters & Thematic organizations.
>>>>
>>>> My takeaway from that page is that the easiest way to build
>>>> credibility with WMF is to grow our recognized membership beyond the
board
>>>> & to implement "plans for activities or efforts to advance
Wikimedia
>>>> projects." We already have folks beyond the board who have worked to
do
>>>> this. I think our first step should be to enable & recruit them to
join
>>>> CWUG as members, & then to engage them.
>>>>
>>>> Yours,
>>>> Peaceray
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Cascadians,
>>>>>
>>>>> I had a conversation about our draft annual plan with Alex this
>>>>> afternoon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex believes that at this point in our development, our priority
>>>>> should be expanding the number and the capacity of our volunteers,
and that
>>>>> we are too early in our development for the temporary / part-time
paid
>>>>> positions that we proposed in our budget. This means that our goals
to
>>>>> develop institutional partnerships and to do outreach work must be
>>>>> significantly reduced in proportion to the capacity of our volunteer
>>>>> network. We know that we have many opportunities for partnerships
and
>>>>> public engagement in the Cascadia region, and hopefully we will still
be
>>>>> able to pursue those partnerships and engagement opportunities at a
low
>>>>> intensity level that our volunteers can support in a sustainable
way.
>>>>> Again, Alex believes that our first goal should be to expand our
volunteer
>>>>> network.
>>>>>
>>>>> We will need to reorient our plans and our budget to focus on
>>>>> development and support of our volunteer network. I will work on
redrafting
>>>>> the goals, calendar, plan and budget over the course of the next
week, and
>>>>> have a conversation with Alex about the possible revisions next week.
I
>>>>> have also asked Alex to create a learning pattern that describes the
>>>>> development path of organizations such as ours; I think that such a
>>>>> learning pattern would have been very helpful to us when we were
first
>>>>> discussing our goals for this year. After the conversations with Alex
have
>>>>> finished, I plan to re-engage with our Board to discuss the goals
and
>>>>> funding that Alex and WMF feel that they are willing to support.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am cc'ing this email to Alex and hope that she will add any
>>>>> comments or clarifications that she has. It would probably be best
to
>>>>> direct any questions or comments from Cascadians directly to Alex,
>>>>> preferably on this list so that others can benefit from the
discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Pine
>>>>>
>>>>> *This is an Encyclopedia* <https://www.wikipedia.org/>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> * One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep
>>>>> rock of our past, in which we must delve The well of our future, The
clear
>>>>> water we must leave untainted for those who come after us, The
fertile
>>>>> earth, in which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many
hands, And
>>>>> the broad fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing
how much
>>>>> we do not know. *
>>>>>
>>>>> *—Catherine Munro *
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>>> Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
>> Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
> Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
_______________________________________________
Affiliations Committee mailing
listAffCom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affcom
--
"*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee
wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi
waya junain."
Carlos M. Colina
Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 |
<http://wikimedia.org.ve>
Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
Phone: +972-52-4869915
Twitter: @maor_x
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list
Wikimedia-Cascadia(a)lists.wikimedia.org