"Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community elected committee." - No, despite the dubious information that AffCom keeps about themselves on their meta page, they are not "elected", and they do not answer to the community 8Wikimedia Movement), as you seem to believe. 
They are nominated (by themselves, none the less), and they work for WMF BoT (they are a committee of the BoT), and answer to none other than WMF BoT. So yes, I'm pretty sure these principles do fully apply to them.

Best,
Paulo

Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> escreveu no dia terça, 26/10/2021 à(s) 00:45:
Michal

The guiding principles you refer to state "These are not principles intended to cover the entire Wikimedia movement, just the Wikimedia Foundation"  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles.  Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community elected committee. As a liaison for the WMF to AFFCOM the person you refer to must follow the decisions of the committee and is limited to how much they can respond.   This is the third forum you have shopped in attacking someone who is unable to respond, your complaint is that you dont like a decision made by Affcom.

Your action do clearly read as a personal public attack intended to negatively affect her reputation, you state that it is by saying " I would much rather to communicate about these affairs privately. Unfortunately, I have recognized her in the MCDC too lately for private communication"   It is never too late for private discussion and in every event it is always best to work directly with people to resolve an issue rather than post long rambling emails to lists like this and other pub;ic communication channels as the person cannot respond in every forum and will never have the ability for everyone who has read your rant to get a clear outcome.  As an employee future employers will also see these threads, again they wont find resolutions or any apology.

Act respectfully and take your issues to AFFCOM or to the WMF employees line manager privately.

Regards
Gnangarra

On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 02:45, Michal Matúšov <kubof.hromoslav@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Risker,

first of all I would like to emphasize that I am not sure whether AffCom is violating WMF Guiding principles or not. I have my strong opinion based on months of interactions, but I consider that investigation is needed to be sure. And in order to receive diverse data for a meaningful investigation I have launched this thread and some data have started to come (thanks Lane!).

Now to the point, what are the possible AffCom's violations of WMF Guiding principles? Here are some examples (sorry in advance that they are going to be bit longer that I would like..):

Over the last months I have been in intense communication with AffCom over several things. While I have expected (and accepted) that some communication can be rather slow (because of the structure of AffCom), it showed up that some communication from AffCom is at best very misleading. E.g. AffCom reactively (on my question) informed WUG Esperanto and Free Knowledge (EliSo) that AffCom put on hold EliSo's recognition as a hematic Organisation. As a reason AffCom mentioned "several issues" and that AffCom is already dealing about them "with the group". It showed up that nor issues, nor dealing up with the group [EliSo] was true... I have asked AffCom several times when it put EliSo's recognition on hold but AffCom never clearly answered that. That is taking 3 months now! AffCom despite my clear question to inform ELiSo about when AffCom put ELiSo's recognition on hold never answered this question. That would be rather annoying, but the additional fact is that EliSo asked for ThemOrg recognition on late november 2020. So according to ThemOrg requirements page [1] , the projected time for approval is 4–6 months, meaning that ELiSo would be projected to be recognized in late March - May 2021. So AffCom reactively (!) informed ELiSo about putting on hold its ThemOrg application after 2 months of the longest projected time for approval... In summary: AffCom have communicated false information, non-proactively and in a secretive manner. In my personal opinion it is in conflict with the principle of transparency and accountability.

I am during last 4,5 years involved in helping WUG WMSVK to stop violating its bylaws and correct its past and current intentional {and possibly non-intentional) violations of Bylaws, Board agreements and possibly national laws. AffCom is formally involved since early 2020 and in December 2021 AffCom took full responsibility for WUG WMSVK. During the time of most engagement, AffCom was (and still is) very secretive and hardly ever and only after several attempts to communication does provide a clear answer of meaningful clarification. Under AffCom's full responsibility, WMSVK did nearly nothing to stop violations and correct the past ones. So AffCom is fully responsible for these violations, what is in conflict with the WMF Guiding principle of Shared power, as it is Bylaw which define power division. Later AffCom pushed for a mediation between me and WMSVK. After about 2 months of delays, AffCom informed me that the mediation is canceled. After that, the WMSVK's chair informed me, that AffCom informed WMSVK, that it was me who canceled the mediation (what is false). I do not know if AffCom really falsely informed WMSVK that it was me who canceled the mediation, so I have explicitly asked AffCom that. AffCom after nearly 1 month still haven't responded to this question. It is so much frustrating that both me and WMSVK have lost our time, effort, energy and nerves but AffCom haven't even responded such a simple question. It would require 3 words (!) from AffCom but it has never provided them... I and WMSVK are now in a state of not knowing and it is really damaging the possibility of success of the Wikimedia movement in Slovakia.

These are some concrete (and (maybe too) long) examples that I feel exemplifies the issues best. There are a lot of similar situations with AffCom that I have personally experienced.
Lane Rasberry also provided some evidence about the India chapter. I haven't dug into that topic yet, so I don't have enough data to draw a solid conclusion. But a preliminary analysis of the publicly shared information suggests high similarity with my own experiences, suggesting that there can be a structural weakness of AffCom which makes it prone to consistently manifest a behaviour conflicting with the Wikimedia Foundation Guiding Principles (mostly Transparency and Accountability, and one can argue that to lesser extend also Stewardship).

I hope that now you have a better understanding, Risker!


Best regards
KuboF Hromoslav (Michal Matúšov)


po 25. 10. 2021 o 0:28 Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> napísal(a):
KuboF, I have read your email, but I am none the wiser. Please explain precisely what your concerns are. In what way is AffCom not following the WMF guiding principles?

Risker/Anne

On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 at 18:18, Michal Matúšov <kubof.hromoslav@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi wikimedians, especially functionaries of affiliations!

If nothing substantial will change, in about 2 weeks I am going to start a formal investigation of possible AffCom's violations of Wikimedia Foundation Guiding Principles [1].

During last months and especially weeks I have noticed several issues about AffCom which showed up to hinder work and development of Wikimedia affiliations. While I have originally considered them to be exceptions, they have shown a consistent pattern through time indicating possible structural weakness. I have already asked AffCom non-publicly about some elements of them and AffCom's answers (respectively lack of them) for now show it to be higher probable that the issues are real and structural.

In order to make the investigation more efficient and productive I need your help! If you during last year experienced non-trivial issues with AffCom, especially if they hindered your affiliation (holding up your recognition with lack of reasonable communication, non-action to prevent violations of agreements, very slow work, communication of false information etc etc etc), please let me know personally (non-publicly, outside of the list) by email (possibly by sending email using Meta [2]). I much prefer if you are willing to accept that in case of investigation I could identify you and your affiliation. But as I understand that such identification could possibly make AffCom more prone to target its issues towards you and your affiliation, I accept to receive your evidence and make a reasonable effort to anonymize it (paraphrasing your words, getting the essence of the experience without specifics - or to not use it if it would be unreasonable to anonymize it). Please, write "AffCom investigation" (without parenthesis) in the title, so I can find it more easily! Many thanks!

Last, but urgent related affair:
As AffCom's Staff Liaison Manavpreet Kaur is currently a candidate for the very responsible role of Movement Charter Drafting Committee member, I have asked her about her involvement in AffCom's issues and the possibility for her to "import" the AffCom-like issues to the Movement Charter Drafting Committee [3] [4]. I am sorry for not starting this conversation publicly sooner! (I have checked the candidates too lately and also needed some time to prepare the message, as it must be very precise) I know that such information would be very interesting for many of you and would help you in your voting decision. (In a similar way I wanted to challenge Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight during her candidacy for community elected Board of Trustees seat several months ago, as she in that time was the AffCom's Chair. Unfortunately, I have too lately considered her possible role in AffCom's issues to be potentially significant. Sorry again!)


Best regards!
KuboF Hromoslav (Michal Matúšov)
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/D7XUOJ3YOQ4KAFHSAUCI7WA2KAFN24XN/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WBETDE263GXT6RWXRMEP66OCDM3SBDBW/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LJOI4544TBMIJ2QLCHYUW7EJDSDDJNQD/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org


--
GN.
                                                                     2021


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/BFCNFQ5C7KLZREMBKXASXSWJ27CHQG3I/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org