(2nd try, hope it isn't a duplicate)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Subject: Have you dealt with this yet? If so,how?
To: foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Four brief points:
1: I think the primary issue here is the appearance that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
gives to the community and the public of a completely transparent and
open Checkuser request process when the discussions have shown that,as
Thatcher131said,
"The vast majority of checks are run following talk page, email or IRC
requests to the checkusers. WP:RFCU is a backup;.."
or as JzG|Guy said at
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
"The vast majority of checkuser requests are, and always have been,
performed quietly and without a request at RFCU."
At the very,very least there should be an acknowledgement at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
that there is also a parallel "back channel"(Guy's phraseology) method
of requesting and processing CHECKUSER activity which is not
transparent to the general Wikipedia community nor the public.
2: In addition, this section of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
"Privacy violation?
* If you feel that a checkuser has led to a violation of the
Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding yourself, please refer
the case to the Ombudsman commission."
is something I find to be quite Orwellian. How can someone report a
privacy violation if they do not know that checkuser has been used on
them?
3: A third aspect is that it seems these "private" Checkuser checks
are being used frivolously on brand new Users to effect 1 second
blocks for "scrutiny" reasons and the Checkuser usage is being so
poorly documented that sometimes no one even knows who used the tool
as shown here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archiv…
Therefore, there should also be full disclosure to all new Users that
Checkuser could be used without their knowledge on the basis of
suspicion at any time after they open a Wikipedia account.
4: I also think User Risker's comments about the privacy aspect have merit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
--- On Tue, 12/11/07, dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> From: dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Jimbo's response re:Rampant Checkuser Privacy Abuse
> To: foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Date: Tuesday, December 11, 2007, 9:06 PM
> Four brief points:
> 1: I think the primary issue here is the appearance that
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> gives to the community and the public of a completely
> transparent and open Checkuser request process when the
> discussions have shown that,as Thatcher131said,
>
> "The vast majority of checks are run following talk
> page, email or IRC requests to the checkusers. WP:RFCU is a
> backup;.."
>
> or as JzG|Guy said at
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
>
> "The vast majority of checkuser requests are, and
> always have been, performed quietly and without a request at
> RFCU."
>
> At the very,very least there should be an acknowledgement
> at
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> that there is also a parallel "back
> channel"(Guy's phraseology) method of requesting
> and processing CHECKUSER activity which is not transparent
> to the general Wikipedia community nor the public.
>
> 2: In addition, this section of
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> "Privacy violation?
>
> * If you feel that a checkuser has led to a violation
> of the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding
> yourself, please refer the case to the Ombudsman
> commission."
>
> is something I find to be quite Orwellian. How can someone
> report a privacy violation if they do not know that
> checkuser has been used on them?
>
> 3: A third aspect is that it seems these
> "private" Checkuser checks are being used
> frivolously on brand new Users to effect 1 second blocks for
> "scrutiny" reasons and the Checkuser usage is
> being so poorly documented that sometimes no one even knows
> who used the tool as shown here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archiv…
>
> Therefore, there should also be full disclosure to all new
> Users that Checkuser could be used without their knowledge
> on the basis of suspicion at any time after they open a
> Wikipedia account.
>
> 4: I also think User Risker's comments about the
> privacy aspect have merit:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
>
> dee dee
>
>
> Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote: In English
> Wikipedida, ArbCom is a good place to go for this sort of
> thing.
>
> However, having reviewed checkuser policy, I see absolutely
> nothing even
> close to a policy violation here.
>
> "Notification to the account that is checked is
> permitted but is not
> mandatory. Similarly, notification of the check to the
> community is not
> mandatory, but may be done subject to the provisions of the
> privacy policy."
>
> I strongly support this element of the policy.
>
>
>
> Cary Bass wrote:
> > dee dee wrote:
> >> Hi, I think the Stewards have authority in this
> matter. The Ombudsman
> >> Commission seems to accept these clandestine
> Checkuser requests but I
> >> doubt the Stewards will. I hope you will forward
> my message to them so
> >> they can decide for themselves.
> >>
> > Hi again, dee dee.
> >
> > Being a steward myself, I responded to you in that
> capacity. I'm sorry
> > my signature didn't indicate such, but I'll
> mention it again.
> >
> > You seem to be mistaken about the function of
> stewards. Why don't you
> > read the relevant page on meta, here:
> >
> >
> > The stewards have no authority over the checkusers or
> checkuser policy.
> > There is no steward committee, only a mailing list
> where the stewards
> > can share their thoughts, actions, etc.
> >
> > Where there is a local policy in place, the stewards
> have no authority
> > over local policy.
> >
> > Where there is a function policy in place (like
> checkuser), the stewards
> > have no authority over that function policy.
> >
> > Short of suggestion you address it to the local Arbcom
> or the Checkuser
> > Ombudsman Commission, there is nothing any steward on
> this list can do
> > for you.
> >
>
> foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote: Due to a
> large amount of spam, emails from non-members of this list
> are now automatically rejected. If you have a valuable
> contribution to
> the list but would rather not subscribe to it, please sent
> an email to
> foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org and we will forward
> your post
> to the list. Please be aware that all messages to this list
> are
> archived and viewable for the public. If you have a
> confidential
> communication to make, please rather email
> info(a)wikimedia.org
>
> Thank you.
>
> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:58:36 -0800 (PST)
> From: dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com>
> Subject: Rampant Checkuser Privacy Abuse
> To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> In regards to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> ''''Privacy violation?
> If you feel that a checkuser has led to a violation of the
> Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding yourself,
> please refer the case to the Ombudsman
> commission.''''
>
> Please note that so-called "private" uses of
> checkuser are occurring and tolerated as seen here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#False_…
>
>
> How can someone report a privacy violation if they do not
> know that checkuser has been used?
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with
> Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler(a)gmail.com
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Subject: Have you dealt with this yet? If so,how?
To: foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Four brief points:
1: I think the primary issue here is the appearance that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
gives to the community and the public of a completely transparent and
open Checkuser request process when the discussions have shown that,as
Thatcher131said,
"The vast majority of checks are run following talk page, email or IRC
requests to the checkusers. WP:RFCU is a backup;.."
or as JzG|Guy said at
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
"The vast majority of checkuser requests are, and always have been,
performed quietly and without a request at RFCU."
At the very,very least there should be an acknowledgement at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
that there is also a parallel "back channel"(Guy's phraseology) method
of requesting and processing CHECKUSER activity which is not
transparent to the general Wikipedia community nor the public.
2: In addition, this section of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
"Privacy violation?
* If you feel that a checkuser has led to a violation of the
Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding yourself, please refer
the case to the Ombudsman commission."
is something I find to be quite Orwellian. How can someone report a
privacy violation if they do not know that checkuser has been used on
them?
3: A third aspect is that it seems these "private" Checkuser checks
are being used frivolously on brand new Users to effect 1 second
blocks for "scrutiny" reasons and the Checkuser usage is being so
poorly documented that sometimes no one even knows who used the tool
as shown here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archiv…
Therefore, there should also be full disclosure to all new Users that
Checkuser could be used without their knowledge on the basis of
suspicion at any time after they open a Wikipedia account.
4: I also think User Risker's comments about the privacy aspect have merit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
--- On Tue, 12/11/07, dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> From: dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Jimbo's response re:Rampant Checkuser Privacy Abuse
> To: foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Date: Tuesday, December 11, 2007, 9:06 PM
> Four brief points:
> 1: I think the primary issue here is the appearance that
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> gives to the community and the public of a completely
> transparent and open Checkuser request process when the
> discussions have shown that,as Thatcher131said,
>
> "The vast majority of checks are run following talk
> page, email or IRC requests to the checkusers. WP:RFCU is a
> backup;.."
>
> or as JzG|Guy said at
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
>
> "The vast majority of checkuser requests are, and
> always have been, performed quietly and without a request at
> RFCU."
>
> At the very,very least there should be an acknowledgement
> at
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> that there is also a parallel "back
> channel"(Guy's phraseology) method of requesting
> and processing CHECKUSER activity which is not transparent
> to the general Wikipedia community nor the public.
>
> 2: In addition, this section of
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> "Privacy violation?
>
> * If you feel that a checkuser has led to a violation
> of the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding
> yourself, please refer the case to the Ombudsman
> commission."
>
> is something I find to be quite Orwellian. How can someone
> report a privacy violation if they do not know that
> checkuser has been used on them?
>
> 3: A third aspect is that it seems these
> "private" Checkuser checks are being used
> frivolously on brand new Users to effect 1 second blocks for
> "scrutiny" reasons and the Checkuser usage is
> being so poorly documented that sometimes no one even knows
> who used the tool as shown here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archiv…
>
> Therefore, there should also be full disclosure to all new
> Users that Checkuser could be used without their knowledge
> on the basis of suspicion at any time after they open a
> Wikipedia account.
>
> 4: I also think User Risker's comments about the
> privacy aspect have merit:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%…
>
> dee dee
>
>
> Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote: In English
> Wikipedida, ArbCom is a good place to go for this sort of
> thing.
>
> However, having reviewed checkuser policy, I see absolutely
> nothing even
> close to a policy violation here.
>
> "Notification to the account that is checked is
> permitted but is not
> mandatory. Similarly, notification of the check to the
> community is not
> mandatory, but may be done subject to the provisions of the
> privacy policy."
>
> I strongly support this element of the policy.
>
>
>
> Cary Bass wrote:
> > dee dee wrote:
> >> Hi, I think the Stewards have authority in this
> matter. The Ombudsman
> >> Commission seems to accept these clandestine
> Checkuser requests but I
> >> doubt the Stewards will. I hope you will forward
> my message to them so
> >> they can decide for themselves.
> >>
> > Hi again, dee dee.
> >
> > Being a steward myself, I responded to you in that
> capacity. I'm sorry
> > my signature didn't indicate such, but I'll
> mention it again.
> >
> > You seem to be mistaken about the function of
> stewards. Why don't you
> > read the relevant page on meta, here:
> >
> >
> > The stewards have no authority over the checkusers or
> checkuser policy.
> > There is no steward committee, only a mailing list
> where the stewards
> > can share their thoughts, actions, etc.
> >
> > Where there is a local policy in place, the stewards
> have no authority
> > over local policy.
> >
> > Where there is a function policy in place (like
> checkuser), the stewards
> > have no authority over that function policy.
> >
> > Short of suggestion you address it to the local Arbcom
> or the Checkuser
> > Ombudsman Commission, there is nothing any steward on
> this list can do
> > for you.
> >
>
> foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote: Due to a
> large amount of spam, emails from non-members of this list
> are now automatically rejected. If you have a valuable
> contribution to
> the list but would rather not subscribe to it, please sent
> an email to
> foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org and we will forward
> your post
> to the list. Please be aware that all messages to this list
> are
> archived and viewable for the public. If you have a
> confidential
> communication to make, please rather email
> info(a)wikimedia.org
>
> Thank you.
>
> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:58:36 -0800 (PST)
> From: dee dee <strategicdesign2001(a)yahoo.com>
> Subject: Rampant Checkuser Privacy Abuse
> To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> In regards to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CHECKUSER
>
> ''''Privacy violation?
> If you feel that a checkuser has led to a violation of the
> Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy regarding yourself,
> please refer the case to the Ombudsman
> commission.''''
>
> Please note that so-called "private" uses of
> checkuser are occurring and tolerated as seen here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#False_…
>
>
> How can someone report a privacy violation if they do not
> know that checkuser has been used?
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with
> Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler(a)gmail.com
On 14 Nov 2008, at 11:30, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Because this is one of the most heavily fought battles that did not
> result in a situation that is acceptable to all.
Well, since "mo" is now deprecated, re-naming it "ro-Cyrl" can be done
without really taking any decision. It's essentially cosmetic.
> The issue is that the people behind the mo.wikipedia are not living
> anywhere near the areas involved and they are not native speakers/
> writers either. It would have been good when this thing had been
> just deleted because the pain would have worn off. However, the
> decision was that when a native speaker comes along, it can be
> restarted...
I don't understand. Is it to be deleted? Is it to be re-named? If not
the former, then surely the latter.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
The European Commission published in July a "Green Paper - Copyright
in the Knowledge Economy" (1) .
In §3.4. They talk about the possibility to adapt copyright law so
that user-created contents would become easier, and they ask to send
them feedback by 30 November 2008 at markt-d1(a)ec.europa.eu .
I thought it would be kind of cool if the foundation or the individual
european chapters would use this opportunity to give them some hints
of what a Wikipedia-friendly copyright law/directive should look like,
or a few concrete examples of the worries we are having in present
time with the current laws. In particular it should be stressed how
laws in some country lacking a "fair use" restriction for pictures
and/or without a "panorama freedom" are cumbersome. Non copyright
issues like the ltalian law on cultural goods should also be
mentioned.
I am sending the same message on the village pump on Commons :
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#European_Commission_…
(1) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0466:FIN:EN:…
(English)
Other languages are available here :
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52008DC0466:FR:…
Hello all,
I would appreciate it if you could copy & translate this message to
your relevant communities; I'll also post it to a couple of the
mailing lists.
First: Does Wikimedia have a funding crisis, does it need to ask
people for money?
The Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit organization, and the vast
majority of its funding comes from fundraising and grants. It operates
more than 300 servers which keep Wikipedia alive, the associated
hosting and bandwidth, and the staff needed to support it. Its annual
expenses for the current fiscal year amount to approximately $6
million. We have already raised $2 million of that, which leaves us
with a gap of $4 million which we need to raise through donations
small and large.
If we fail to meet our budgeted revenue goals during and past this
fundraiser, we will eventually have to lay off staff and reduce our
capacity planning for servers and bandwidth, both of which will
directly affect your experience of Wikipedia. If you feel, for
example, that developers are often slow to respond to requests, well,
imagine how much worse it will be if we have to lay off some of them.
If you feel that editing is often slow, imagine how much worse it will
be if we cannot pay for additional servers or needed software
improvements.
As you know, the world is in economic crisis. At this point in time,
we do not know what the impact of this economic crisis will be on the
Wikimedia Foundation. We need to meet our targets to continue to
operate Wikipedia.
I realize that having a banner on the site you read and/or edit every
day is not convenient. We plan to create a smaller (plaintext) version
of the banner for signed in users. But we do not plan to reduce the
banner size of the standard banner, at least not until we have a
better idea of what the online fundraiser revenue will be for this
year. We are doing some systematic A/B testing of different banners
with different messages, and as we learn more, we will iterate the
banners further.
We do need to raise the funds to operate Wikipedia, so that you can
continue to use it, both as a reader and a contributor. Rather than
invite antagonism, I want to invite your collaboration in refining and
developing the banners. We are open to community suggestions here --
please feel free to post mock-ups on Meta Wiki at this page:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising_2008/design_drafts
However, if we feel (or measure) that a banner will significantly
reduce the number of donations received, we will not use it. So if
your primary goal is to make the banner smaller or less "obtrusive",
rather than making it more effective or at least retaining its current
level of effectiveness, I don't think we'll come up with something
that can replace the current banners.
Please let's remember that the Wikimedia Foundation exists to support
this project's continued existence, and the Wikimedia movement
internationally. This means we need to create awareness for the fact
that we need to raise money, just like any other charity. This
fundraising drive will run until January 15. Until then, I ask for
your patience and cooperation in making it work.
Please feel free to contact me: erik(at)wikimedia(dot)org. Thanks,
Erik Möller 22:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joanne <94356502(a)nccu.edu.tw>
Date: 2008/11/21
Subject: [Wikizh-l] [Help] About Participate in Wikipedia - knowledge
sharing
To: wikizh-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Dear friends,
We are conducting a study on the motivation of the knowledge sharing on
Wikipedia. Your experience of the read from and write to Wikipedia is very
important to the design and management of this knowledge platform. The
survey will take about two minutes. We deeply appreciate your help on
answering the following questions.
After the survey is done, we will randomly select twenty persons and
present them with *USB 2GB Flash Drives*. Besides, with each valid
questionnaire, we will *donate US $1 dollar to the Wikimedia Foundation*.
The result of this survey is analyzed in an anonymous way and is only
regarded as the academic use. Please feel free to fill out the
questionnaire. Thanks again for your time and valuable input.
May happiness and health be with you everyday!
★ On-line Questionnaire: http://140.119.19.152:8080/wiki/
Shari S. C. Shang
Eldon Y. Li
*Professor, *
*Department of Management Information Systems, *
*National** Chengchi University*
Tel.: +886-2-82374038； Fax: +886-2-29393754 ； E-mail: s1213527(a)yahoo.com.tw
_______________________________________________
Wikizh-l mailing list
Wikizh-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikizh-l
--
Chinese wikipedia: http://zh.wikipedia.org/
My blog: http://talk.blogbus.com
twitter: http://twitter.com/shizhao
cnbloggercon2008 at Guangzhou(11/15-16) http://cnbloggercon.org
[[zh:User:Shizhao]]
Thought people might be interested to hear about Open Everything
Berlin, which will take place on Saturday 6th December 2008. More
details at:
http://blog.okfn.org/2008/11/21/open-everything-berlin-saturday-6th-decembe…
Warm regards,
Jonathan Gray
The Open Knowledge Foundation
----
After the success of Open Everything London a few weeks ago, we're now
involved in putting on Open Everything Berlin, which will take place
in early December. It will be a great opportunity to meet people
interested in open knowledge, open source software, and so on. Details
are as follows:
* When: Saturday 6th December 2008
* Where: newthinking store, Tucholskystr. 48, Berlin-Mitte (map)
* Programme: http://openeverything.mixxt.de/networks/wiki/index.Programm
* Registration: Attendance is free! Sign up on the mixxt network!
The event will start with a handover from Open Everything Hong Kong
and finish with a handover to Open Everything Madison - both of which
will also take place on the 6th.
In addition to talks, presentations and discussions, the event will
feature the launch of Ivo Gormley's Us Now, a Creative Commons
licensed documentary about new forms of collaboration produced in
association with the RSA:
Everywhere you look, groups of people are using the internet to
come together to share with one another, work together, or take some
kind of public action" Clay Shirky. For the first time in history, we
have the tools that truly amplify group effort and can change
politics, business and society. Us Now follows the stories of the
people that are redefining what is an institution; it plots the fate
of a football club owned and run by its fans, a bank in which everyone
is the manager, a global network whose members share their homes with
strangers and asks politicians and thinkers such as George Osbourne,
Ed Milliband, Don Tapscott and Clay Shirky; what all this means for
society.
There's also a (relatively) new ok-berlin mailing list. If you're
around Berlin and you'd like to stay in touch with other people
interested in open stuff - we hope you'll join!
Gerard, thank you for your kind comments. I think the system you have set up at Betawiki is extraordinary, and is a fantastic tool for helping people access "the sum of all knowledge" in their own languages.
The "qqq" messages are a fantastic idea (though I can't quite see where to find them of Betawiki...)
For Hebrew we would like the extension set up with due haste. We prefer translating the messages when we can test their meanings in context and revise our translations accordingly. We also plan to make some important local modifications to the interface that are Wikisource-specific (such as the parameters for defining the quality of a page), but we cannot even begin to do so until the extension has been installed!
This last factor is a need that Betawiki, outstanding as it is, cannot provide for.
A good part of the interface has already been translated in any case. It would reflect good will on your part if you clarified that while your suggestions are personal recommendations, you nonetheless understand that the decisions of communities with other views should be honored and implemented.
I ask the developers to implement the decision of the Hebrew Wikisource community as found in Bug 14648, along with the other languages that they have kindly implemented recently. We have been waiting for this for quite a long time, and will provide a quality localization of the system messages. While Gerard's views on localization-as-prerequisite-in-every-case are important to consider, he is not a member of the community that has requested the extension.
Link: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14648
Dovi
Apparently the German portal on wikipedia.de has been shut down after
a legal case. Is there any more information on this?
http://www.wikipedia.de/
Bryan
Dear all,
the ChapCom has drafted changes to its current Rules of Procedure, as
they were quite out of touch with reality (and it seemed less
convenient to change reality).
The rules as they are in force can be seen at
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Chapters_committee/Rules_of_…
I'm posting the new draft below, as it is currently only on the
private chapcom wiki.
Note, to avoid misunderstandings: This is *not* a document (discussed
here) for aspiring chapters or other interested parties to see how the
chapters approval process works. This here is a rather
technical-formal set of rules which legally determine our internal
meeting, voting, membership and resolutions procedures. But still, if
you have any specific opinions on this, we're interested. In the end,
we'll submit it for approval to the board.
Regards,
Michael
==Rules of Procedure of the Chapters Committee, draft of amended
version as of 11/16/08==
'''Membership'''<br>
The committee will comprise no fewer than five voting "members" and a
number of non-voting "advisers", serving at the pleasure of the board.
The committee can choose how to conduct its ordinary business, either
through regular meetings or through other means (wiki, mailinglist).
The term "meeting" refers both to virtual and physical meetings.
Additional members and advisers will be appointed by 2/3 vote of the
committee, and removed in the same manner. A member or adviser may
resign at any time by notifying the committee of this intent in
writing. The Board of Trustees, after consultation with the committee,
has the power to remove or appoint any further members and advisers if
desired.
The Board of Trustees will appoint at least one of its members as
adviser to the Chapters committee.
The committee will be presided over by a chairperson, appointed by
resolution of the committee.
A vice chairperson will also be appointed by resolution, to stand in
the chairperson's stead as required. The chairperson's and the vice
chairperson's term end with their voluntary resignation, the
appointment of a successor by the committee or their removal by the
board. If the board decides to remove a chairperson or vice
chairperson from its office, it is required to consult the Committee.
After a chairperson or vice chairperson is removed by the board, the
committee shall elect a successor at the earliest convenience.
The committee will decide on the responsibilities of the chair person
and the vice chairperson. It may also create additional roles and
assign them such responsibilities as desired.
'''Resolutions and motions'''<br>
Actions effected by the committee are usually to take the form of a
resolution. Resolutions may be proposed by a member or adviser, or by
an individual from outside the committee with the support of a member
or adviser. A resolution will be considered adopted once a majority
of members has voted in favour.
The usual manner of proposing a resolution is by notice on the
committee mailing list, referring to a draft of the resolution on the
wiki. Votes will usually be taken on the wiki or during a meeting. If
a vote on a resolution is to be taken during a meeting, the resolution
has to be proposed at least seven days in advance of the meeting,
unless two/third of the committee decide to waive this requirement
("emergency motions"). If a vote is to be taken on the wiki, after the
notice of the proposed resolution, members have seven days to vote
either in favour of or against, after which point they are considered
to have abstained. The resolution will then be considered adopted or
defeated if a majority of members has so voted; otherwise, the
committee will decide by consensus (or vote) to extend the period of
voting, to let the motion lapse or to reconsider the motion at a later
date.