On 02/05/2017 10:10 PM, Michelle Paulson wrote:
Dear All,
<snip> We know that the Foundation’s prior statement[4] on this executive order has generated debate in the communities, on mailing lists and in other forums. Some disapprove, with concern that the Foundation has taken a political stance on behalf of the movement. Others approve, with concerns about the impact of this order on the practicalities and values of open collaboration and sharing.
Michelle, thank you for this update and clarification.
I've followed this discussion (and previous, similar discussions) with great interest. My personal views align strongly with the WMF's position, but I also found Yair Rand's argument compelling. There's an important distinction I haven't seen clearly articulated, that might be helpful:
The WMF has a clear interest in protecting *its own* operations, and on that level, I think it makes perfect sense for it to advocate -- along with companies like the partners listed -- against policies that may substantially impede its employees' travel.
But the arguments I have seen advanced by the WMF about what is in its *communities'* interest are not as clear-cut as it may seem. The core activities of Wikimedians involve online collaboration; and while it may be the case that research and qualitative experience supports the notion that travel can enhance that collaboration, there are -- and will always be -- highly productive Wikimedians who never meet fellow volunteer in person, and have no particular interest in doing so. The projects have been built by millions of volunteers, but I would guess that the number of volunteers who have crossed international borders to serve the project number in the thousands (and even fewer have crossed the U.S. border).
Perhaps in the future, things will go more smoothly if the WMF be very clear in its public statements when it is speaking on *its own behalf*, and when it is speaking *on behalf of its communities*. And when it's the latter, if public statements could only result from consultations that clearly establish a strong consensus within the communities.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]