The pronouncement of Fri Aug 19 12:36:01 UTC 2016 states "the Board of Trustees has instructed the Affiliations Committee to provisionally use these three new criteria for all new applicants" and as a consequence the Board Chair has stated, on Tue Aug 23 06:46:47 UTC 2016, "This is not a discussion". In the interests of transparency, please could the Community be informed of the text of the Board Resolution that laid down these criteria?
The Board chair has also informed us (on Tue Aug 23 12:34:37 UTC 2016) that *"*Everything is a discussion" and "our main goal for this year is to make sure we finally have a comprehensive movement strategy". This is of course excellent news, especially since dialogue between the Board and the Community on these issues has been conspicuous by its absence [ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Archi...]. Exactly how and where will this engagement take place? Perhaps https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Strategy_Alpha might be a place to plan the mechanisms for that engagement?
"Rogol Domedonfors"
Hello Rogol,
Let me try to clarify that. When the AffCom discussed with the board liaisons whether we needed a new resolution at our July meeting, we agreed that the existing resolution [1] is already sufficient as we're not stepping outside of the existing framework. These criteria are a first attempt to communicate more clearly what the AffCom expects in terms of "demonstrable programmatic results" in order for an application to be supported and passed on to the board for approval. Still, the idea is to have the AffCom work on a coordinated consultation on these criteria and other aspects of affiliate strategy in the upcoming movement consultations since at the end, all are related.
So instead of keeping Chapter and ThOrg applications on hold for longer, and because it's been a long while already, the Board has approved the Affiliations Committee to accept applications under the potential new criteria to test them and to remove the block on applications immediately -and it was about time 8-) Based on this future consultation, the proposed new criteria will probably be revised and refined to reflect the feedback received from the community before putting them as "official" for all Chapters and ThOrgs.
Additionally, and trying to make the discussion clearer: AFAIK the discussion is an essential part of the movement, but at this time, this is not a coordinated consultation because again, it will be part of a larger and coordinated movement consultation. In order that the AffCom can focus on reopening Chapter and ThOrg applications, everyone is welcome to share valuable input on the talk pages [2] [3] on Meta, as it will be better organized and useful for reference when the coordinates consultation starts in a few months from now. In the meantime, we can answer questions here, or there, but still, it would be better done on the talk pages for transparency, clarity and easiness of interaction, since not everyone is on the Wikimedia-l, Affiliates-l or Chapters-L lists.
Thanks, M.
[1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11#Movement_roles [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/Talk:Affiliations_Committee/Thematic_Organisati... [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Affiliations_Committee/Chapter_Summary_...
El 24/08/2016 a las 04:17 p.m., Rogol Domedonfors escribió:
The pronouncement of Fri Aug 19 12:36:01 UTC 2016 states "the Board of Trustees has instructed the Affiliations Committee to provisionally use these three new criteria for all new applicants" and as a consequence the Board Chair has stated, on Tue Aug 23 06:46:47 UTC 2016, "This is not a discussion". In the interests of transparency, please could the Community be informed of the text of the Board Resolution that laid down these criteria?
The Board chair has also informed us (on Tue Aug 23 12:34:37 UTC 2016) that *"*Everything is a discussion" and "our main goal for this year is to make sure we finally have a comprehensive movement strategy". This is of course excellent news, especially since dialogue between the Board and the Community on these issues has been conspicuous by its absence [ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Archi...]. Exactly how and where will this engagement take place? Perhaps https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Strategy_Alpha might be a place to plan the mechanisms for that engagement?
"Rogol Domedonfors" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Thanks Carlos - that seems a very clear explanation of where we are to me.
Regards,
Chris
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Carlos M. Colina maorx@wikimedia.org.ve wrote:
Hello Rogol,
Let me try to clarify that. When the AffCom discussed with the board liaisons whether we needed a new resolution at our July meeting, we agreed that the existing resolution [1] is already sufficient as we're not stepping outside of the existing framework. These criteria are a first attempt to communicate more clearly what the AffCom expects in terms of "demonstrable programmatic results" in order for an application to be supported and passed on to the board for approval. Still, the idea is to have the AffCom work on a coordinated consultation on these criteria and other aspects of affiliate strategy in the upcoming movement consultations since at the end, all are related.
So instead of keeping Chapter and ThOrg applications on hold for longer, and because it's been a long while already, the Board has approved the Affiliations Committee to accept applications under the potential new criteria to test them and to remove the block on applications immediately -and it was about time 8-) Based on this future consultation, the proposed new criteria will probably be revised and refined to reflect the feedback received from the community before putting them as "official" for all Chapters and ThOrgs.
Additionally, and trying to make the discussion clearer: AFAIK the discussion is an essential part of the movement, but at this time, this is not a coordinated consultation because again, it will be part of a larger and coordinated movement consultation. In order that the AffCom can focus on reopening Chapter and ThOrg applications, everyone is welcome to share valuable input on the talk pages [2] [3] on Meta, as it will be better organized and useful for reference when the coordinates consultation starts in a few months from now. In the meantime, we can answer questions here, or there, but still, it would be better done on the talk pages for transparency, clarity and easiness of interaction, since not everyone is on the Wikimedia-l, Affiliates-l or Chapters-L lists.
Thanks, M.
[1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11#Movement_roles [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/Talk:Affiliations_Committee/ Thematic_Organisation_Summary_Matrix [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Affiliations_ Committee/Chapter_Summary_Matrix
El 24/08/2016 a las 04:17 p.m., Rogol Domedonfors escribió:
The pronouncement of Fri Aug 19 12:36:01 UTC 2016 states "the Board of Trustees has instructed the Affiliations Committee to provisionally use these three new criteria for all new applicants" and as a consequence the Board Chair has stated, on Tue Aug 23 06:46:47 UTC 2016, "This is not a discussion". In the interests of transparency, please could the Community be informed of the text of the Board Resolution that laid down these criteria?
The Board chair has also informed us (on Tue Aug 23 12:34:37 UTC 2016) that *"*Everything is a discussion" and "our main goal for this year is to make sure we finally have a comprehensive movement strategy". This is of course excellent news, especially since dialogue between the Board and the Community on these issues has been conspicuous by its absence [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Archi...]. Exactly how and where will this engagement take place? Perhapshttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Strategy_Alpha might be a place to plan the mechanisms for that engagement?
"Rogol Domedonfors" _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe <wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
-- "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain." Carlos M. Colina Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve http://wikimedia.org.ve Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee Phone: +972-52-4869915 Twitter: @maor_x
El logotipo y el nombre de Wikimedia, Wikimedia Venezuela http://wikimedia.org.ve/wiki/P%C3%A1gina_principal, Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia Incubator, Wiktionary y otros proyectos relacionados https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Our_Projects son marcas registradas usadas bajo permiso expreso de su titular, la Fundación Wikimedia, Inc. http://www.wikimediafoundation.org, una organización sin fines de lucro. Otros nombres y marcas pertenecen a sus respectivos propietarios.
Asociación Civil Wikimedia Venezuela (Wikimedia Venezuela) | RIF.: J-40129321-2 | Los Teques, Estado Miranda. Venezuela _______________________________________________ Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org