I understand it as an official message from WMBE emanating from their last
General Assembly, posted by one of the board members on behalf of the
chapter.
But probably it should have been posted by another person, indeed, to avoid
confusion.
Paulo
Isaac Olatunde <reachout2isaac(a)gmail.com> escreveu no dia segunda,
17/06/2019 à(s) 15:32:
Considering that it was sent by that person, one may
reasonably conclude
that it was written by them. That being said, I do not want to believe that
it was not reviewed and approved by the governing board (assuming it was
written by that person). BUT if it was written by another person, reviewed
and approved by the board why is the involved person sending this email on
behalf of WMBE? Just curious.
Regards,
Isaac
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 2:27 PM Thomas Townsend <homesec1783(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Am I right in thinking that this email,
containing a long account of
the alleged poor treatment of the Treasurer of WMBE, referred to
throughout in the third person, was in fact written by that person?
The Turnip
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 10:00, Romaine Wiki <romaine.wiki(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hello all,
On Saturday 15 June 2019 Wikimedia Belgium had its annual General
Assembly
in Brussels.
*New board*
Two board members have indicated to step down:
* Afernand74
* SPQRobin
We thank them for their work and valuable input in the past years!
They remain available for advice to the board.
Two board members were up for re-election after their previous terms
ended.
Both board members have been re-elected without
any votes against them,
and
> they will keep serving Wikimedia Belgium in their roles.
> * Geertivp - president
> * Romaine - treasurer
>
> One new board member has been elected without any votes against.
> * Taketa - long term Wikipedia editor and organiser of various
activities
Welcome Taketa!
The rest of the board remains the same and the board continues the work
and
> development of our chapter.
>
>
> *Evaluation behaviour WMF*
> As board we have the obligation to inform the General Assembly and
other
stakeholders about the developments with our chapter, both the good
developments as well as the bad developments.
A year ago, with our previous General Assembly, we were hopeful to
resolve
the issues we then had with on other organisation
in the movement, the
Wikimedia Foundation. Sadly we had to inform the General Assembly that
instead of improvements, the behaviour of multiple individuals from the
Wikimedia Foundation is below any standard. This concerns one member of
the
> grants team and multiple members of the Trust and Safety team, as well
as
> their supervisors.
>
> On request of the Trust & Safety team no names are mentioned. Below is
a
> summary of what happened.
>
>
> *Case 1*
> In April 2017 the treasurer of Wikimedia Belgium (Romaine) spoke with
our
new
grants staff member from the Wikimedia Foundation as WMBE was
scheduled
> to change from successful project grants in 2017 and earlier years to
> Simple Annual Plan grants. During this meeting the plan for WMBE in
2018
was
proposed and was fine for the grants staff member. In the Summer of
2017 this had been worked out, and with an online call our annual plan
was
considered fine. With the final submission in
October 2017, our annual
grants proposal was reviewed by the grants staff member from WMF, had
some
> minor remarks we fixed, and was considered to be excellent.
>
> In December 2017 we were informed that our grant request (suddenly)
was,
to
> summarise, complete wrong. It contained factual errors (like facts do
not
> matter), inconsistencies, the comment that
Wikimedia France and
Wikimedia
Netherlands could take everything over in Belgium, suggesting that
Belgium
> has no culture (this is a serious insult to us), and much more.
> (For your reference: Wikimedia Belgium had over 90 events and
activities
in
> 2017, including a photo contest, education program, GLAM program with
> content donations, workshops and edit-a-thons, and more.)
>
> It raised us a lot of questions, which we asked, but our grants member
of
> WMF refused to seriously answer them.
>
> Even with our lack of information and received insults, we tried to be
> constructive and before Christmas we proposed to the grants staff
member
> that we would re-write during the Christmas
holidays our annual plan
(as
the staff
member had said many times we could improve it). With the
e-mail
following from the grants member of WMF this
proposal was not rejected.
So
during the two weeks of the Christmas holidays we
spent many days,
together
> with the help from another experienced chapter representative,
re-writing
our
annual plan. After the Christmas holidays, we were ready, and the
response from the grants member from WMF was then that the re-written
version could not be taken into account...
After some further e-mails with this staff member we concluded as WMBE
mid
January 2018 that a collaboration with this
individual from WMF is
impossible and we banned this individual from ever contacting us again
and
we never communicated ever with this person
again.
The supervisor of this staff member has been informed by us about what
happened, and refused to even investigate the situation.
A colleague from the staff member took over and we received our budget
for
2018. Later during 2018 and 2019 this WMF staff
member helped us very
well
with questions, provided useful feedback and the
annual plan for 2019
which
> was approved. We are now happy with this collaboration.
>
>
> *Case 2*
> During the Wikimedia Conference in April 2018 we still had many
questions
> and our treasurer spoke with various other
affiliates if they had
advice,
good
practices, etc etc, so that we could improve our future annual
plans.
> Instead of that good advice was given, they shared their similar bad
> experiences they had in the past years with our former grants person
from
> WMF. Many of them indicated that they do not
want the
feedback/criticism
to
> be public as they feel that their budget would be cut by WMF as result
of
> it.
>
> With multiple chapter representatives we started to collect the
feedback
so
> that we could come up with some recommendations for improvements for
both
> the WMF processes regarding grants as well
as recommendations for
> affiliates for how to write better annual plans.
>
> Our former grants person from WMF heard about the initiative and
started
to
tell bad (untrue) stories about WMBE's
treasurer to bring him in
discredit.
Multiple people have testified that our former
grants person was doing
this, gossip like that WMBE's treasurer was planning to attack that
grants
> person. The Trust & Safety team heard about it and drew immediately the
> conclusion that the gossip was true, without checking the facts,
without
even
talking to any of the involved individuals, and asked WMBE's
treasurer
not to approach or contact the former grants
person. (To be crystal
clear:
there was never ever a plan to contact the grants
person from WMF at
all.)
>
> Even after the Trust & Safety team spoke with WMBE's treasure, the
gossip
> continued, causing a very unsafe conference
space. A member of the
Trust
&
Safety team was later informed about the ongoing
gossip and refused to
take
> any action to stop it, indicating not to take it seriously.
>
>
> *Case 3*
> During Wikimania 2018, WMBE's treasurer was asked to help the
organisers
of
Wikimania in Cape Town to help and assist
wherever needed. One of the
tasks
> was to bring stuff from A to B on request. Everything seemed to go
fine.
Halfway the conference, WMBE's treasurer was casually approached by a
member of the Trust and Safety team with a question to have a chat. A
second team member came and they took an elevator together. In the
elevator
the team members made jokes and were laughing. As
soon as they were in
the
room, it was made clear that the Trust &
Safety team had received
complaints about WMBE's treasurer.
The main complaint was: being in the same (large) room as the grants
member
of WMF. The complainant was the grants member of
WMF, and this person
claimed that WMBE's treasurer had said something and that the grants
member
> from WMF had been highly distressed resulting in not being able to do
the
> presentation (later in that session) well.
>
> The situation was that WMBE's treasurer was asked to bring something
to
a
> room where a session just started (such
requests happen many times
during
the
conference, the grants person who complained was not presenting at
that
time), the materials were handed to someone in
the back of the room and
he
> left the room silently as quickly as possible. Multiple people present
in
that
session have testified that he did not speak while bringing
materials
> to the room, and they also testified that the presentation by the
grants
> person from WMF went reasonable well.
> Also, during lunch WMBE's treasurer was sitting somewhere very visible
to
everyone,
where the grants person from WMF came standing next to the
treasurer, approached from the front. If the grants person from WMF
really
> gets highly distressed by his presence, this person would not have done
> that.
>
> The Trust & Safety team blindly believed the statements made by their
WMF
colleague, the team did not ask witnesses in the room about what
happened,
all the information here above was provided to
the Trust & Safety team,
but
> the Trust & Safety team fully ignored this information and the
witnesses
> who say otherwise.
>
> Three additional anonymous complaints were:
> * speaking to loud
> * standing to close
> * having touched someone's hand/arm
>
> It must be noted that *none* of the people that complained to the
Trust
&
Safety
team had indicated to WMBE's treasurer to experience anything as
problem.
Also, WMBE's treasurer has as disability that he hears less, does not
hear
well what the height of his volume is (but still
trying to not to speak
too
> loud), and with bad acoustics has to stand closer to people to hear
them
> well. The Trust & Safety team was
informed about this during the
meeting.
> Also in the local culture where he comes
from touching is a normal
thing.
Also many
people that have been frequently with WMBE's treasurer at the
conference have indicated that he did not speak too loud.
During the meeting the Trust & Safety team told that they already had
informed everyone in the organising team that they demanded WMBE's
treasurer must stop helping in organising Wikimania 2018, meaning that
they
> already had drawn the conclusion even before speaking with him.
>
> They also indicated that they "had to do something" so they could show
> the complainants
> that they do something when complaints are received, even while their
> decision did not solve/improve the complaints at all. The Trust &
Safety
> team refused to think about real solutions,
they refused to organise a
> dialogue to solve the complaints, they refused to mediate, they
promised
to
> organise a meeting with a supervisor, but that they never did. It also
> became clear they have zero feeling with people with autism. The Trust
&
> Safety said they could not share any more
information about what
happened
> because of the privacy of the complainants.
>
> During the conference WMBE's treasurer made it public, to prevent
having
to
> tell emotionally what happened, as well as for transparency reasons.
This
did not
take away that he felt ever since that chat highly unsafe as
result
> by the behaviour of the Trust & Safety team, and still continues up to
> today, as well as he also had been five weeks ill after the conference
> because of this.
>
> Many people at the conference indicated to disagree with the decision
of
> the Trust & Safety team, including WMF
staff members and Wikimania's
> organising team. During the conference many of them approached the
Trust
&
Safety team about it, various of them also
proposing other solutions
that.
In these talks the Trust & Safety team shared
a lot more details which
they
> refused to share with WMBE's treasurer. Also the Trust & Safety team
told
that he
had been warned before (which is not true), as well as
exaggerating
and framing what supposedly had happened.
*Afterwards*
After Wikimania the Trust & Safety team received an e-mail from WMBE's
treasurer with a more detailed overview of what happened, including the
many witnesses who claim differently. But all of this was fully ignored
by
> the Trust & Safety team. After the conference nothing had been heard
from
the Trust
& Safety team, until mid December 2018.
In the first two weeks of December 2018 WMBE's treasurer received
multiple
> e-mails from WMF staff members, including strangely in what was
written a
farewell
and thank you for all the work. Apparently the Trust & Safety
team
had shared their new decision with other
departments, while actual
stakeholders were not informed.
About a week later both the treasurer of WMBE as the president of WMBE
(but
none of the other organisations he is active for)
received an e-mail in
what the Trust & Safety team indicates to have received further
complaints:
- First they refer to the situation in December
2017-January 2018
concerning the interaction with the former grants person from WMF.
Apparently the Trust & Safety team fully has ignored all the insults at
the
address of our chapter and country. Also the
e-mail reads largely like
the
grants person itself had written the e-mail.
- Because of this they forbid WMBE's treasurer to ever contact WMBE's
former grants person at WMF (one way only!) (Even while WMBE had banned
every contact with this person already in January 2018.)
- And they forbid to have contact with WMF grants grants team for about
two
> years. (Even while the contact with all the other members of the grants
> team was going fine, even receiving various compliments. )
>
> Still it was decided by Wikimedia Belgium to keep WMBE's treasurer as
> treasurer of WMBE.
>
> - Someone at the conference saw WMBE's treasurer with a mascot and
asked
> the name of the mascot. Answer: "Wendy
the Weasel", clearly indicating
a
female
name. The question that followed was what the gender was of the
mascot. WMBE's treasurer was thinking that this was just said, and
replied
that as there are no outer organs the mascot must
be female. (Having
asked
> around, in the part of the world where WMBE's treasurer lives this is
not
considered a problem, but maybe this is differently elsewhere and is
there
a taboo.)
- Someone had indicated that WMBE's treasurer has been standing in the
way
> of that person and blocking the complainants path at Wikimania. It was
a
space of
about 1.5 to 2 metres, where also multiple other people where
standing, and people passing by were asked question, but everyone who
wanted to pass by could do so.
- Someone has told that WMBE's treasurer would have said that he would
visit conferences "to pick up girls". Everybody who knows WMBE's
treasurer
knows this is nonsense. Some contest: WMBE's
treasurer has someone he
loves
> in his home country with zero interest of that kind in anyone else, and
> falls in the category of LGBT+ and does not fall on the women at the
> conferences. It must be noticed extremely suggestive interpretations of
> other people (that do not have the regular impressions, like due being
> LGBT+), have far reaching effects as conclusions. Such is an insult.
> - Because of this they forbid WMBE's treasurer to be present at events
> funded directly/indirectly by WMF for two years.
>
>
> Again it must be noticed that the Trust & Safety team for the third
time
on
a row refuses to talk with the individual who it
concerns first, before
drawing any conclusions. The Trust & Safety team comes in their e-mail
with
> a lot of assumptions based on loose sand. They also claim that WMBE's
> treasurer fails to assume good faith.
> In an e-mail to the presidents of two chapters they said that "they
know
how he
thinks", followed by a lot of nonsense and false claims. The
Trust &
> Safety team does not assume good faith themselves if they write that.
>
>
> The Trust & Safety team provided in their communication zero examples
of
where the
Friendly Space Policy has been breached.
The situation of WMBE's treasurer and the Trust & Safety team has been
reviewed by an independent professional with expertise in complaints
handling. The conclusion of this expert: almost everything that the
Trust &
Safety team could have done wrong in handling
complaints, they did do
wrong. Many basic principles in complaint handling and conflict
resolution
have been ignored by the Trust & Safety team.
In addition to this, they
communicate very intimidating as well as with treats.
The way how they work/communicate gives the impression like a staff
member
of WMF is more worth than a volunteer from the
community.
Two chapters have reached out to the Wikimedia Foundation, indicating
that
> the way how the Trust & Safety team was operating is not appropriate,
but
> WMF refuses to take these concerns seriously
and has ignored this
fully.
Again the
Trust & Safety team refuses to work together on actual
solutions.
>
>
> To summarise, feedback/information from WMBE's treasurer has been
ignored
by WMF,
feedback from the president of WMBE has been ignored by WMF,
feedback from the president and director of WMNL have been ignored by
WMF,
feedback from other staff members in WMF have
been ignored by WMF,
feedback
> from many community members from the movement have been ignored.
>
> Because of the behaviour of the trust & Safety team that causes for
> everyone in the movement an unsafe place, WMBE's treasurer has decided
> to indefinitely
> stop attending WMF funded events.
>
>
> At the General Assembly it was requested to request an internal audit
in
WMF to
bring all the problems there to the light.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>