[Wikimedia-l] Suspensions of affiliates

Hi Kirill, (changing the topic to reflect better the more abstract case: this is no longer about WMPT, as I don't know enough about that specific instance) I appreciate your concerns for embarrassing situations. This may be the least painful approach in many of the cases. I also appreciate that the Committee is between a rock and a hard place here: if such a situation arises, there is no approach that makes everyone happy. However, I think there's another complicating factor, which I'm not sure whether it is currently considered sufficiently. The system of affiliates has been designed so that there is always some level of 'democratic' control: chapters and thematic organizations are required to have a membership, and also user groups are required to have more participants than just the liaisons. At least in the case of Thematic organizations and Chapters, these membership bodies are also legally the highest authority of the organization. (the user groups are more fuzzy, and I'll focus on Chapters and Thematic Organizations for now) If an organization gets suspended, that can be generally for two reasons. First, there could be a simple misunderstanding. In that case, the board can probably resolve this quickly, and a public announcement would definitely do much more good than harm. But there is also the second possibility: that there is a real problem. In that scenario, the democratic control that we require, may be needed to manage the problem. Sure, it may result in some messy questions to the board, and some embarrassment, but it may also result in more actual resolutions. As a member, I would definitely not appreciate it to only learn about the problems when there is no way back (revocation of status). Affiliation with the Wikimedia Movement is a core 'asset' for the Wikimedia affiliates, and should not be revoked lightly - as I'm sure the Committee will agree. I would suggest that the AffCom reviews its approach here, and considers a middle way, where the membership (or the whole community, if there is no way to contact the membership) is informed. Whether that is through the board or directly, whether publicly or privately will depend on the case. The most important thing is that the membership can exercise their responsibility and potentially decide that the board should be replaced, or instructed to act in a certain manner. I can imagine an approach where the board is given a week to respond to the charges to resolve misunderstandings before the step is taken to inform the membership (while leaving the board full discretion to contact the membership earlier than that). Chapters and Thematic Organizations have often a history going back many years in our movement. They are larger than their boards, and if the current board is unable or unwilling to resolve an issue, the membership is at task to interfere. Best, Lodewijk On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 7:39 PM Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote: