The Affiliations Committee (AffCom) will be releasing more details about the changes to the Wikimedia User Group (WUG) Renewal Process, but I did want to share some info in this conversation that has already been posted on Meta[1] and will be discussed more in an upcoming blog post.

In this specific case, we were in contact with one of the four listed organizers on the group's Meta page.[2] I was not personally the one that was in touch with them, but I believe it was Vinicius the AffCom members spoke with. My understanding is that the group will be posting more information on-wiki soon. However, I would obviously prefer they speak to that. Our resolution was based on our assessment that there was an interest to continue the group, and that they were not causing harm.

Intentionally the process moving forward is not meant to be based on reports or requirements nearly as complex as those in place for chapters and thematic organizations (ThOrgs). We still encourage WUGs to produce reports (and certainly they will still have to do so for things like grants), and it is possible that will remain in the agreement. However, AffCom is using our authorized discretion, with the WMF Board's blessing, to be lenient on this specific issue to favor growth over bureaucracy. Essentially, we have received feedback that the user groups would like as little administrative burden as possible, and we are responding to that. If a user group is interested in remaining active and is not causing harm, they will be empowered to remain an affiliate.

AffCom will be talking about reports for chapters and ThOrgs more in the coming months, but the conversation around WUGs is focused on simplification, promoting growth, and removing barriers to development of new groups - including complicated affiliation or renewal processes - while balancing the need to protect the community.

I hope that helps answer your questions and provide insight into this evolving process. We appreciate the patience Wikimedians have shown as we all continue to learn from this new area of growth for Wikimedia.

-greg aka varnent Vice Chair, Wikimedia Affiliations Committee

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Reports/January_2015_... [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Brasil

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton < rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello, how are you guys?

Cornelius Kibelka send me the link of this thread, by mistake, in one discussion on Meta.[1]

And the Carlos Colina's answer is, lets say, "wow! It's super freak weird!!!", because in the WMBR mailing list, one volunteer "asked" who send the request and one of the "proposal's organizers" wrote:

*"Eu não pedi e até onde sei ninguém pediu."* [2] < https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediabr-l/2015-February/016241.htm...

...

pt >>> en

I did not request and as far I know, no one did.

So, Mr. Colina, could pleas clarify to the Movement who requested? And where? Because the Brazilian community and not even the WUG BR proposal's organizers know that.

[1]

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Conference_2015/Overview_Elig... [2]

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediabr-l/2015-February/016241.htm...

-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argenton@gmail.com +55 11 979 718 884 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe