+1 on Achal's note. Thanks Achal.
Let me add that the relationship with the Wikimedia India chapter is
evolving...and it is evolving in a good way. Hisham worked collaboratively
with Arjuna in joint support of the Wikiconference India team. We work
very closely with Tinu on communications (as we have since we first started
working in India, before Tinu was on the chapter board). The work Naveen
introduced recently for Wiki Academies is being funded via a grant from WMF
and Hisham's team wants to be supportive of this. From the beginning of our
involvement in India, we sought to have the chapter involved (when I
traveled to India we funded the travel of chapter EC members - Anirudh and
HP Nadig to join me and we provided a prominent role for the chapter in
press discussions. We did the same funding Arun when Jimmy was in India).
We have committed to providing the chapter with funding to support
programs that they have in the works. In fact, I proactively suggested that
the chapter prepare a grant request almost a year ago. We've also helped
the chapter work through regulatory hurdles to getting funds including
supporting a require for prior permission for FCRA. Arjuna was involved in
the discussions at the formation of the Pune Pilot, but the chapter really
didn't have the capacity in Pune to be heavily involved in it at the time.
An argument that the trust is getting in the way or supplanting the chapter
doesn't really hold water. My hope is that the relationship is and will
continue to get closer...and I remain committed to an outcome where the
chapter and trust become one as our collective capacity and work mature in
India.
On the funding issue...this is a bit of a red herring. As of now, there is
sufficient funds available to the chapter to build its organizational
capacity and execute on the plans that it has laid out. We are working hard
to overcome regulatory issues to the flow of funds that would provide more
resources over time to support work of the chapter, the Trust and other
groups in the community. The true focus of both the chapter, Trust and
other interested community groups should be on building the capacity to do
effective work that advances the mission. Money is not the limiting factor
though Indian regulations to create some short term hassles)...it's ideas
and capacity to get things done. That's what we all need to work on and do
so, in good faith, with a shared commitment to the Wikimedia mission.
Look forward to joining all of our Indian colleagues at the Wikiconference
India next week...and to continuing to work to achieve our shared vision in
India...
Barry
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Achal Prabhala <aprabhala(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk,
While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening
for some time - I know that Anirudh has raised these questions before,
for instance. In that sense, I'm not sure how the registration of a
trust changes the situation at all; I think that for anyone involved
with the Wikimedia movement in India, the relationship between the
Foundation entity in India and the India chapter has been perceived as
an interesting, evolving - and highly experimental - situation, at least
since the strategic plan was concluded.
To repeat, I think this discussion is very useful, but I think it's
important to remember that the situation is neither new nor unexpected.
Having said that:
On Friday 11 November 2011 10:09 AM, Anirudh Bhati wrote:
My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself
and not the Chapter or
the
Foundation (I wouldn't dare!).
I'd be interested in understanding what the India chapter and the
WikiConference India organising committee (to name one formal community
grouping outside either the chapter or foundation) think of the
Foundation's presence in India. In my own personal experience, there
have been large periods of time when the India chapter was not as active
as it is now; there have also been (as can be expected) many differences
of opinion between community groupings in India. To that extent, and
assuming good faith, have the presence of several entities (formal and
informal) helped balance out periods of inactivity or dysfunction among
all involved?
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijk<lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much
> interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust
and
> Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or
on
> the advice of - not sure of the legal
wording) the WMF - but will
Wikimedia
> India be involved in that too? Since they are
the chapter in that
country I
could
imagine them to have a say in it.
Nope. Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India
Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the
Wikimedia India Program Trust. And given that not many people are going
to
talk about it, I don't think much will change
in the future.
There appears to be a strong sense of exclusion you are expressing here,
which I think it's important to bring up. I'm curious to understand if
it's a more widespread feeling - are there others who were consulted? Or
weren't but felt they should be? My own understanding of the program is
that the India Education Program involved people who elected to get
involved - as a community member, I, for instance, know very little
about it because I feel I have nothing to contribute there. More
importantly, does the chapter feel it was inadequately consulted? And
does it feel like it was in a position to contribute more? I think this
would be very interesting to probe a little further.
> How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention
that
there is
communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the
default or the exception?
From my own experience and from what I have heard
from a fellow Pune
community member, the general community and the Chapter body
have been
excluded and ignored by WMF consultants from the very beginning. In
fact,
the Chapter representatives were only invited to
attend meetings when
Frank
Schlenburg and Annie Lin were in town.
> And how will it work with regards of who will be the primary point of
> contact in India for institutions who want to partner with Wikimedia?
Will
> they have to approach one of the two or
whichever they like (and if they
> dont get the answer they like, can they just approach the other?). Will
the
chapter
and the trust be competing with each other or collaborating?
I think there is already a lot of confusion with regard to the two
entities
operating out of India. Going by the media, news
reporters are already
very confused by the existence of two Wikimedia bodies and I personally
get
a lot of queries every week asking me to clarify
on the location of
Wikimedia offices. With its paid consultants, the local WMF consultants
have done a good job of making their presence felt (especially in Western
India), and more and more journalists are interested in hearing from WMF
(the "international organization") than WMIN.
Honestly, news reporters in India are confused about *everything*
related to Wikipedia and Wikimedia :) Even a cursory analysis of news
coverage will confirm that they routinely mix up what the movement is,
what the difference between Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation is,
what the difference between a chapter member and a staff member is, etc.
And as someone who has been following this from the outset, I can say
with some confidence that this has nothing to do with the chapter and
the Foundation in India, rather, just our own complicated terminology
and insider-language, and a general laziness on the part of Indian news
media to learn the details. Basically, we'd still get completely whacky
press coverage even if there was no chapter and no Foundation entity.
The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another
non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to
execute specific (and large-scale) programmes. As of now, the WIPT
(Wikimedia India Program Office) can pretty much do anything it wants
with
the Wikimedia brand - partner with institutions,
raise money locally,
have
paid employees and bypass community. This is
what I foresee happening:
WMIN will be involved in community-building and small-scale projects
which
support volunteers and the WIPT will partner with
large institutions in
India (who are understandably looking to club with international
organizations), get a lot of media coverage and acquire the big grants
(since WMIN is not a professional body). WMIN and WIPT will
theoretically
compete for funding within India, much of which
will be allocated to
WIPT,
given that it is professionalized (and because we
never had a chance) and
in WMF's good graces. This is how WMIN has been made redundant
(something
that I have been saying for a long, long time).
I think it's a little premature to say that WMIN has been made
redundant. As someone who helped the chapter group, right from 2008, for
the India chapter to be made redundant would mean that some 3+ years of
work and involvement on my part is flushed down the toilet. If that's
the case, or is ever made the case, I'll be shouting on the streets -
but it isn't, and I'm not sure it's anyone's intention.
For instance, Anirudh, the fact that you are on the board of the India
chapter, but don't live in India anymore (you live in Cambodia now,
right?), leads me to believe that your involvement with India-based
activities, or leading efforts on the ground, is necessarily at a
minimum. Don't you think that overall, the effectiveness of the India
chapter is a consequence of the involvement and productivity of its
members? I recall a host of recent events - the WikiAcademy for
librarians in Bangalore, a widely attended copyright seminar, the AGM,
elections, regular newsletters - that are testament to the fact that the
India chapter is not - and doesn't want to be - "redundant". But perhaps
this is something the chapter can clarify more officially.
I'm not saying that there are no issues of overlap to sort out; I am
saying that from my perspective it does not seem like there is anything
close to the level of antagonism or redundancy you describe in your email.
The most important difference, something many are uncomfortable talking
about, is in the distribution of money. The WIPT in India will have
access
to *significantly *more WMF funding than WMIN
(significant meaning *real
significant*). Around the time when discussions about the India Office
began, Barry came to India and assured us that the WIPT will only be here
for a period of 3-5 years. I am hopeful that the Foundation will stick
to
its words, and with time we will all learn that
small volunteer-driven
projects have a larger impact than costly, ill-designed, large-scale
programmes run by hired consultants who hire consultants with no relevant
background (with a couple of exceptions).
Like you, I read of the India Education Program's work with some
concern. While I think that serious analysis and introspection is in
order, I think it's a little premature to jump on this incident and
dismiss the entire scope of potential Foundation activity in India.
I share your concerns overall, but I think we can be concerned without
launching an outright offensive against all Foundation staff, right?
Think back to some of the tough moments the India chapter has had to
face from Indian community groupings - the chapter was then placed in
the position that the Foundation now finds itself in, i.e. being "the
man" - and I don't think it would have helped anyone to run this kind of
black/white, I'm good/ you're bad dialogue.
Thanks for helping me seeing the situation more
clearly,
No, thank you for asking the right questions.
Thank you too, for opening up the discussion.
Cheers,
Achal
Lodewijk
anirudh
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
Barry Newstead
Chief Global Development Officer
Wikimedia Foundation
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!