During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.
AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development.
Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.
Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom
Hi Wojciech,
thanks for this statement, it will definitely be helpful to have AffCom's insights into the current affiliates network when talking about hubs. While approval by the WMF BoT is one option, wouldn't that require a hub to be a formal organisation? Otherwise the BoT would be involved in micro-managing project grants that are funding some of the hub pilots.
It would also be helpful to design the process in a way that has the Global Council in mind where in its absence the WMF BoT acts in its absence, to make clear that this is only a temporary solution because of how slow progress on the movement charter has been in the last two years.
Best, Philip
On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 20:54, Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.
AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development.
Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.
Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom _______________________________________________ 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
As hubs are not replacing the relationship between affiliates and affcom, hubs purpose is to serve its community across multiple countries. I can see the value in Affcom sharing some of its experiences but I caution against the building of deeper power structures that widen the gap between individual contributors, the BOT, and the WMF. That gap will get even wider once the global council is put in place, there are already significant communication problems, made worse by the lack of project experience within the WMF staff, its contractors, and the BOT
For many years these hubs have successfully existed outside Affcom control, I think there should be greater respect shown to hubs for that work treating hubs as pilots is itself disrespectful. Outside of Europe where EU law allows cross border responsibility, hubs governance structures face considerable legal hurdles from insurance to individuals being required to make themselves subject to the laws of another jurisdiction to hold a position of responsibility.
<edit conflict with Ilario Valdelli>
This discussion should be naturally a discussion done by the community and not by the Affcom itself, naturally, like it's happening for the whole strategy.
I wholeheartedly support this point, these discussions need to run independent Affcom.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 at 16:34, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wojciech,
thanks for this statement, it will definitely be helpful to have AffCom's insights into the current affiliates network when talking about hubs. While approval by the WMF BoT is one option, wouldn't that require a hub to be a formal organisation? Otherwise the BoT would be involved in micro-managing project grants that are funding some of the hub pilots.
It would also be helpful to design the process in a way that has the Global Council in mind where in its absence the WMF BoT acts in its absence, to make clear that this is only a temporary solution because of how slow progress on the movement charter has been in the last two years.
Best, Philip
On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 20:54, Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.
AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development.
Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.
Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom _______________________________________________ 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/... 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Dear all,
AffCom’s response here is to a specific Hub pilot project, not necessarily the long-term future of Hubs, and hence the initial statement published on July 11. AffCom is comprised of a body of volunteers from across the Movement who have joined the Committee from various projects and who have a wide range of experience across opportunities and challenges when Wikimedia groups gather and formalize.
We do not see the situation in which Hubs are emerging as any threat to the communities that already exist. Hubs, in their structure, can be seen as a variety of affiliates who are gathering together to create something new. In this manner, AffCom is definitely in a position to help Hubs grow and prosper. While structures similar to the current discussion on Hubs have previously existed, there is an advantage in having Hubs work officially as structures similar to Affiliates, and this is where the word “pilot” comes in. This is intended to indicate the beginning of having Hubs as established structures with the current infrastructure of communities that already exists.
Kind regards Wojciech, on behalf of AffCom
W dniu 12.07.2022 o 11:13, Gnangarra pisze:
As hubs are not replacing the relationship between affiliates and affcom, hubs purpose is to serve its community across multiple countries. I can see the value in Affcom sharing some of its experiences but I caution against the building of deeper power structures that widen the gap between individual contributors, the BOT, and the WMF. That gap will get even wider once the global council is put in place, there are already significant communication problems, made worse by the lack of project experience within the WMF staff, its contractors, and the BOT
For many years these hubs have successfully existed outside Affcom control, I think there should be greater respect shown to hubs for that work treating hubs as pilots is itself disrespectful. Outside of Europe where EU law allows cross border responsibility, hubs governance structures face considerable legal hurdles from insurance to individuals being required to make themselves subject to the laws of another jurisdiction to hold a position of responsibility.
<edit conflict with Ilario Valdelli>
This discussion should be naturally a discussion done by the community and not by the Affcom itself, naturally, like it's happening for the whole strategy.I wholeheartedly support this point, these discussions need to run independent Affcom.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 at 16:34, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wojciech, thanks for this statement, it will definitely be helpful to have AffCom's insights into the current affiliates network when talking about hubs. While approval by the WMF BoT is one option, wouldn't that require a hub to be a formal organisation? Otherwise the BoT would be involved in micro-managing project grants that are funding some of the hub pilots. It would also be helpful to design the process in a way that has the Global Council in mind where in its absence the WMF BoT acts in its absence, to make clear that this is only a temporary solution because of how slow progress on the movement charter has been in the last two years. Best, Philip On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 20:54, Wojciech Pędzich <wpedzich@gmail.com> wrote: During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like. AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development. Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees. Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom _______________________________________________ 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/JKTUL7UPO3U37WNFF4B4B5SNDTXFR62P/ 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/MB7HVIYRYFYUASIWCI4QHJIFSJJ64SD6/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org-- GN. //
Wikimedia-l mailing list --wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines andhttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives athttps://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email towikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi
Affcom has a conflict in this situation because hubs are not affiliates nor are they being piloted as hubs have functioned as organisations in their own right for many years. The word 'pilot' is disrespectful to work that these hubs have been doing for that time. I acknowledge Affcom can provide useful information but it would be more useful if this was done in a respectful way rather than as a consolidation of and further power grab.
Structurally puting hubs under Affcom means pushing Affiliates and the contributing community further away from the WMF, that disconnection will get even wider when the Global Council starts up, if anything hubs should be separate from Affcom and sit as equals to affcom within the Global Council.
Affiliates have their own connections to affcom, where affcom sits in judgement of affiliates and whether they are worthy of being considered an affiliate. Hubs dont sit in judgement, they serve Affiliates by supporting them in connecting with communities where cultural and regional ties exist. Hubs also help to support communities where no affiliate exists or is likely to exist yet they need the access to resources and specific skill sets. Hubs also provide a safety net to the contributors within communities where the affiliate isn't compliant with affcom requirements to ensure their voices are being heard and engaging with the WMF.
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 at 19:43, Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
AffCom’s response here is to a specific Hub pilot project, not necessarily the long-term future of Hubs, and hence the initial statement published on July 11. AffCom is comprised of a body of volunteers from across the Movement who have joined the Committee from various projects and who have a wide range of experience across opportunities and challenges when Wikimedia groups gather and formalize.
We do not see the situation in which Hubs are emerging as any threat to the communities that already exist. Hubs, in their structure, can be seen as a variety of affiliates who are gathering together to create something new. In this manner, AffCom is definitely in a position to help Hubs grow and prosper. While structures similar to the current discussion on Hubs have previously existed, there is an advantage in having Hubs work officially as structures similar to Affiliates, and this is where the word “pilot” comes in. This is intended to indicate the beginning of having Hubs as established structures with the current infrastructure of communities that already exists.
Kind regards Wojciech, on behalf of AffCom W dniu 12.07.2022 o 11:13, Gnangarra pisze:
As hubs are not replacing the relationship between affiliates and affcom, hubs purpose is to serve its community across multiple countries. I can see the value in Affcom sharing some of its experiences but I caution against the building of deeper power structures that widen the gap between individual contributors, the BOT, and the WMF. That gap will get even wider once the global council is put in place, there are already significant communication problems, made worse by the lack of project experience within the WMF staff, its contractors, and the BOT
For many years these hubs have successfully existed outside Affcom control, I think there should be greater respect shown to hubs for that work treating hubs as pilots is itself disrespectful. Outside of Europe where EU law allows cross border responsibility, hubs governance structures face considerable legal hurdles from insurance to individuals being required to make themselves subject to the laws of another jurisdiction to hold a position of responsibility.
<edit conflict with Ilario Valdelli>
This discussion should be naturally a discussion done by the community and not by the Affcom itself, naturally, like it's happening for the whole strategy.
I wholeheartedly support this point, these discussions need to run independent Affcom.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 at 16:34, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wojciech,
thanks for this statement, it will definitely be helpful to have AffCom's insights into the current affiliates network when talking about hubs. While approval by the WMF BoT is one option, wouldn't that require a hub to be a formal organisation? Otherwise the BoT would be involved in micro-managing project grants that are funding some of the hub pilots.
It would also be helpful to design the process in a way that has the Global Council in mind where in its absence the WMF BoT acts in its absence, to make clear that this is only a temporary solution because of how slow progress on the movement charter has been in the last two years.
Best, Philip
On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 20:54, Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.
AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development.
Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.
Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom _______________________________________________ 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/... 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
-- GN.
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/... 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
*"....Hubs, in their structure, can be seen as a variety of affiliates who are gathering together to create something new. "*
The definition, scope, metes and bounds of *hubs* will be determined by an independent body, such as MCDC and codified by a document such as an MC that is agreed upon through the global community.
When our Roles & Responsibilities WG deliberate on this we intend the hub function as the word itself, a hub. Never thought to agree with of your interpretation.
Kind regards,
Butch
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022, 7:43 pm Wojciech Pędzich, wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
AffCom’s response here is to a specific Hub pilot project, not necessarily the long-term future of Hubs, and hence the initial statement published on July 11. AffCom is comprised of a body of volunteers from across the Movement who have joined the Committee from various projects and who have a wide range of experience across opportunities and challenges when Wikimedia groups gather and formalize.
We do not see the situation in which Hubs are emerging as any threat to the communities that already exist. Hubs, in their structure, can be seen as a variety of affiliates who are gathering together to create something new. In this manner, AffCom is definitely in a position to help Hubs grow and prosper. While structures similar to the current discussion on Hubs have previously existed, there is an advantage in having Hubs work officially as structures similar to Affiliates, and this is where the word “pilot” comes in. This is intended to indicate the beginning of having Hubs as established structures with the current infrastructure of communities that already exists.
Kind regards Wojciech, on behalf of AffCom W dniu 12.07.2022 o 11:13, Gnangarra pisze:
As hubs are not replacing the relationship between affiliates and affcom, hubs purpose is to serve its community across multiple countries. I can see the value in Affcom sharing some of its experiences but I caution against the building of deeper power structures that widen the gap between individual contributors, the BOT, and the WMF. That gap will get even wider once the global council is put in place, there are already significant communication problems, made worse by the lack of project experience within the WMF staff, its contractors, and the BOT
For many years these hubs have successfully existed outside Affcom control, I think there should be greater respect shown to hubs for that work treating hubs as pilots is itself disrespectful. Outside of Europe where EU law allows cross border responsibility, hubs governance structures face considerable legal hurdles from insurance to individuals being required to make themselves subject to the laws of another jurisdiction to hold a position of responsibility.
<edit conflict with Ilario Valdelli>
This discussion should be naturally a discussion done by the community and not by the Affcom itself, naturally, like it's happening for the whole strategy.
I wholeheartedly support this point, these discussions need to run independent Affcom.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 at 16:34, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wojciech,
thanks for this statement, it will definitely be helpful to have AffCom's insights into the current affiliates network when talking about hubs. While approval by the WMF BoT is one option, wouldn't that require a hub to be a formal organisation? Otherwise the BoT would be involved in micro-managing project grants that are funding some of the hub pilots.
It would also be helpful to design the process in a way that has the Global Council in mind where in its absence the WMF BoT acts in its absence, to make clear that this is only a temporary solution because of how slow progress on the movement charter has been in the last two years.
Best, Philip
On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 20:54, Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.
AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development.
Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.
Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom _______________________________________________ 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/... 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
-- GN.
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/... 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
The justification of " body of volunteers from across the Movement who have joined the Committee from various projects and who have a wide range of experience across opportunities and challenges when Wikimedia groups gather and formalize" indicates that *any body of volunteers* can "pilot".
At the moment I suppose that you should indicate why Affcom is better than any other body of volunteers because, as I said, *there are some barriers to enter in the Affcom* and these barriers don't assure a real variety of experiences. Specifically I have doubts that Affcom is better than any body of volunteers.
Kind regards
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 1:43 PM Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
AffCom’s response here is to a specific Hub pilot project, not necessarily the long-term future of Hubs, and hence the initial statement published on July 11. AffCom is comprised of a body of volunteers from across the Movement who have joined the Committee from various projects and who have a wide range I suppose that you should of experience across opportunities and challenges when Wikimedia groups gather and formalize.
We do not see the situation in which Hubs are emerging as any threat to the communities that already exist. Hubs, in their structure, can be seen as a variety of affiliates who are gathering together to create something new. In this manner, AffCom is definitely in a position to help Hubs grow and prosper. While structures similar to the current discussion on Hubs have previously existed, there is an advantage in having Hubs work officially as structures similar to Affiliates, and this is where the word “pilot” comes in. This is intended to indicate the beginning of having Hubs as established structures with the current infrastructure of communities that already exists.
Kind regards Wojciech, on behalf of AffCom W dniu 12.07.2022 o 11:13, Gnangarra pisze:
As hubs are not replacing the relationship between affiliates and affcom, hubs purpose is to serve its community across multiple countries. I can see the value in Affcom sharing some of its experiences but I caution against the building of deeper power structures that widen the gap between individual contributors, the BOT, and the WMF. That gap will get even wider once the global council is put in place, there are already significant communication problems, made worse by the lack of project experience within the WMF staff, its contractors, and the BOT
For many years these hubs have successfully existed outside Affcom control, I think there should be greater respect shown to hubs for that work treating hubs as pilots is itself disrespectful. Outside of Europe where EU law allows cross border responsibility, hubs governance structures face considerable legal hurdles from insurance to individuals being required to make themselves subject to the laws of another jurisdiction to hold a position of responsibility.
<edit conflict with Ilario Valdelli>
This discussion should be naturally a discussion done by the community and not by the Affcom itself, naturally, like it's happening for the whole strategy.
I wholeheartedly support this point, these discussions need to run independent Affcom.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 at 16:34, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wojciech,
thanks for this statement, it will definitely be helpful to have AffCom's insights into the current affiliates network when talking about hubs. While approval by the WMF BoT is one option, wouldn't that require a hub to be a formal organisation? Otherwise the BoT would be involved in micro-managing project grants that are funding some of the hub pilots.
It would also be helpful to design the process in a way that has the Global Council in mind where in its absence the WMF BoT acts in its absence, to make clear that this is only a temporary solution because of how slow progress on the movement charter has been in the last two years.
Best, Philip
On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 20:54, Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.
AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development.
Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.
Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom _______________________________________________ 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/... 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
-- GN.
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/... 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
That's a good option but I suppose that the same Affcom structure must be re-considered probably enlarging the number of members and diversifying more in terms of representatives of the different stakeholders (including maybe more people from the affiliates and chapters?).
This discussion should be naturally a discussion done by the community and not by the Affcom itself, naturally, like it's happening for the whole strategy.
Kind regards
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 8:54 PM Wojciech Pędzich wpedzich@gmail.com wrote:
During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.
AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, able to use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their development.
Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, working with the community to develop a process that will lead, ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.
Wojciech Pędzich on behalf of AffCom _______________________________________________ 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/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org