The by laws are at https://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Rules - 4(5), (6) and (9) give the committee the ability to accept or reject, but don't specify grounds. Policies listed on the site don't mention criteria for accepting or rejecting membership.
I'd love to help but the chapter just rejected my own application for membership without giving reasons and I'm still trying to find out why.
Kindest regards Andrew
WMAU is a registered charity in Victoria state and a registered NFP and so complies with guidelines from the Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. WMAU is therefore required to comply with the Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles.[1] This includes how an individual can access documents about them, their chapter membership or indeed all discussions about their membership rejection.
As a well managed charity, WMAU are set up to understand and correctly respond to requests for information. Here's a draft neutral access request that could be done by email:
To: Wikimedia Australia Subject: Access Request under the Australian Privacy Principles
I am writing to request access to all correspondence and documents relating to my membership for Wikimedia Australia.
Under the Australian Privacy Principles, I have the right to access my personal information that is held by Wikimedia Australia. This includes any correspondence and documents that were used in the decision to reject my membership.
I would like to receive a copy of all of this information in electronic format. Please send the information to the email address provided above.
I understand that you have 30 days to respond to my request. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
[Contact details]
Links 1. https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/australian-privacy-principles/australian-pri...
On Mon, 29 May 2023 at 06:25, Andrew Owens orderinchaos78@gmail.com wrote:
The by laws are at https://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Rules - 4(5), (6) and (9) give the committee the ability to accept or reject, but don't specify grounds. Policies listed on the site don't mention criteria for accepting or rejecting membership.
I'd love to help but the chapter just rejected my own application for membership without giving reasons and I'm still trying to find out why.
Kindest regards Andrew _______________________________________________ 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
Transparency and privacy protection are critical features of any organization, especially registered charities like WMAU. It is admirable that WMAU is dedicated to adhering to the Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles, which protect individuals' rights. https://www.yelp.careers/us/en
The proposed access request template displays a straightforward and professional approach to requesting personal information maintained by WMAU, such as membership communications and records. The template complies with legal requirements by mentioning the Australian Privacy Principles and emphasizing the right to access personal information.
Andrew's statement emphasizes the significance of knowing the criteria for admitting or refusing membership, as well as the value of clear communication. His own experience of having his membership application denied without explanation raises legitimate concerns. It is critical for organizations like WMAU to react to member access requests and queries in a timely and appropriate manner. Open and honest communication builds trust and makes people feel heard and valued.
WMAU can demonstrate its commitment to openness and fair decision-making by responding to Andrew's concerns and offering a suitable solution. It is critical that WMAU takes these issues seriously and works hard to preserve its ideals and duties as a registered charity.
Overall, this blog post emphasizes the value of privacy and openness at WMAU. It acts as a reminder to organizations to address access requests professionally and swiftly, strengthening community confidence and responsibility. Links:
Privacy Act 1988: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00003 https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/australian-privacy-principles/
This is not the forum for WMAU to respond about private issues, it gets more complicated with a legal avenue against WMAU being recommended.
On Mon, 29 May 2023 at 23:38, nidoxiv838--- via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Transparency and privacy protection are critical features of any organization, especially registered charities like WMAU. It is admirable that WMAU is dedicated to adhering to the Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles, which protect individuals' rights. https://www.yelp.careers/us/en
The proposed access request template displays a straightforward and professional approach to requesting personal information maintained by WMAU, such as membership communications and records. The template complies with legal requirements by mentioning the Australian Privacy Principles and emphasizing the right to access personal information.
Andrew's statement emphasizes the significance of knowing the criteria for admitting or refusing membership, as well as the value of clear communication. His own experience of having his membership application denied without explanation raises legitimate concerns. It is critical for organizations like WMAU to react to member access requests and queries in a timely and appropriate manner. Open and honest communication builds trust and makes people feel heard and valued.
WMAU can demonstrate its commitment to openness and fair decision-making by responding to Andrew's concerns and offering a suitable solution. It is critical that WMAU takes these issues seriously and works hard to preserve its ideals and duties as a registered charity.
Overall, this blog post emphasizes the value of privacy and openness at WMAU. It acts as a reminder to organizations to address access requests professionally and swiftly, strengthening community confidence and responsibility. Links:
Privacy Act 1988: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00003 https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/australian-privacy-principles/ _______________________________________________ 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
Actually, this is the correct venue when the WMAU refuses to respond to reasonable queries in a timely manner. I too would like to know why the WMAU rejected Andrew’s application for membership.
I do think it is more than fair that people be able to request their legal right to private information as per the Australian Privacy Act. Perhaps this might spark some modicum of transparency with the WMAU. The behaviour we are seeing so far from the Chapter is looking increasingly extremely concerning! In fact, given there are only 68 members and this doesn’t appear to have changed much over many years makes it look more like an exclusive club than an inclusive and welcoming organisation.
Chris
One thing further I would like to point out. Increasingly I have been getting private emails advising me that those who wish to understand who or why a decision has been made by the Committee is a form of stalking, and against the UCoC.
I think it is very concerning that an excellent initiative such as this is being weaponised to prevent reasonable requests about decisions made by the WMAU Committee. It would mean, for instance, that asking for your private information and any correspondence about decision made about yourself might be seen as a form of harassment. The irony is that decisions made about existing members or people attempting to gain membership of the WMAU is being kept complete opaque and preventing any right of reply against adverse commentary against those people. It means that the Committee who directly reviews these things have no accountability.
I am increasingly concerned there is a culture of exclusivity and discrimination within the WMAU committee. In fact, it might be interesting if a privacy request was indeed sent to find out about what is being said, per the Australian citizens legal right.
I also raise as a concern that the committee is unwilling to respond in writing in a timely manner to these requests. What does seem to be happening is they want private phone calls to provide responses, thus leaving no record of decision making.
Chris
Indeed. This too considering that Wikimedia Foundation have identified transparency as one of their core values. While the document containing this is quite clear that this is for the Foundation itself and not for the movement as a whole, one would expect chapter organisations to operate in the same vein - and certainly not to act contrary to it as WMAU appears to be doing.
As an earlier contributor to this thread noted, I have no idea why my membership application has been declined - I have been very reasonable in my requests to find out why, but have been met with a wall of silence. It's unfortunate that I should have to resort to compliance measures with an organisation I once ably served as both a secretary and an international delegate over several years, and with which, despite being uninvolved for some time, I have never had any dispute or falling-out.
Kindest regards Andrew
On Tue, 30 May 2023, 01:07 , chris.sherlock79@gmail.com wrote:
One thing further I would like to point out. Increasingly I have been getting private emails advising me that those who wish to understand who or why a decision has been made by the Committee is a form of stalking, and against the UCoC.
I think it is very concerning that an excellent initiative such as this is being weaponised to prevent reasonable requests about decisions made by the WMAU Committee. It would mean, for instance, that asking for your private information and any correspondence about decision made about yourself might be seen as a form of harassment. The irony is that decisions made about existing members or people attempting to gain membership of the WMAU is being kept complete opaque and preventing any right of reply against adverse commentary against those people. It means that the Committee who directly reviews these things have no accountability.
I am increasingly concerned there is a culture of exclusivity and discrimination within the WMAU committee. In fact, it might be interesting if a privacy request was indeed sent to find out about what is being said, per the Australian citizens legal right.
I also raise as a concern that the committee is unwilling to respond in writing in a timely manner to these requests. What does seem to be happening is they want private phone calls to provide responses, thus leaving no record of decision making.
Chris _______________________________________________ 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
Hello,
Have you considered asking the Affiliation Committee about what you have been reporting?
Paulo
On Tue, May 30, 2023, 09:03 Andrew Owens orderinchaos78@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed. This too considering that Wikimedia Foundation have identified transparency as one of their core values. While the document containing this is quite clear that this is for the Foundation itself and not for the movement as a whole, one would expect chapter organisations to operate in the same vein - and certainly not to act contrary to it as WMAU appears to be doing.
As an earlier contributor to this thread noted, I have no idea why my membership application has been declined - I have been very reasonable in my requests to find out why, but have been met with a wall of silence. It's unfortunate that I should have to resort to compliance measures with an organisation I once ably served as both a secretary and an international delegate over several years, and with which, despite being uninvolved for some time, I have never had any dispute or falling-out.
Kindest regards Andrew
On Tue, 30 May 2023, 01:07 , chris.sherlock79@gmail.com wrote:
One thing further I would like to point out. Increasingly I have been getting private emails advising me that those who wish to understand who or why a decision has been made by the Committee is a form of stalking, and against the UCoC.
I think it is very concerning that an excellent initiative such as this is being weaponised to prevent reasonable requests about decisions made by the WMAU Committee. It would mean, for instance, that asking for your private information and any correspondence about decision made about yourself might be seen as a form of harassment. The irony is that decisions made about existing members or people attempting to gain membership of the WMAU is being kept complete opaque and preventing any right of reply against adverse commentary against those people. It means that the Committee who directly reviews these things have no accountability.
I am increasingly concerned there is a culture of exclusivity and discrimination within the WMAU committee. In fact, it might be interesting if a privacy request was indeed sent to find out about what is being said, per the Australian citizens legal right.
I also raise as a concern that the committee is unwilling to respond in writing in a timely manner to these requests. What does seem to be happening is they want private phone calls to provide responses, thus leaving no record of decision making.
Chris _______________________________________________ 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
Andrew’s point about transparency is something I completely agree with. I recently went through the meeting minutes for this year and I found the following extraordinary minute that further makes me wonder if the Safe Spaces and UCoC policy is being weaponised by WMAU members:
“Safe Spaces Policy
A community member has raised concerns via email to James (cc’d Belinda) about our Safe Spaces Policy and specifically how our community meeting agenda and zoom link are public, and that anyone can join the meetings. They suggest that all attendees should have to register to attend each meeting, are vetted, and then sent the zoom link. They would like WMAU to maintain a list of “undesirables” who are banned from attending, but has not clearly stated whether they currently feel unsafe.”
https://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Meeting:Committee_(2023-01-16)#Social_media_re...
This does seem to highlight that there is a problem with an exclusive clique in the membership! I could be wrong, but is it a policy of any other chapter to maintain lists of “undesirables”? And if so, how does such a list get decided?
Chris
Compliance with the Australian Privacy Principles is indeed a legal requirement for the Wikimedia Australia charity.
Describing this simple fact as "a legal avenue against WMAU" is unnecessarily confrontational, when it is very clearly NOT a legal instrument, nor a legal threat of any kind.
Any member or rejected member of the charity has a legal right to make a request per the APP. If the "politics" of Wikimedia Australia are so bad that this very basic compliance requirement on all charities is taken as a threat, then I strongly recommend that WMAU's trustees consider withdrawing its registration as a charity.
Could someone ping Amanda Lawrence as the current President, just to avoid opinions given here being mistaken for the official view of the charity?
Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AmandaSLawrence
On Mon, 29 May 2023 at 16:50, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
This is not the forum for WMAU to respond about private issues, it gets more complicated with a legal avenue against WMAU being recommended.
On Mon, 29 May 2023 at 23:38, nidoxiv838--- via Wikimedia-l wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Transparency and privacy protection are critical features of any organization, especially registered charities like WMAU. It is admirable that WMAU is dedicated to adhering to the Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles, which protect individuals' rights. https://www.yelp.careers/us/en
The proposed access request template displays a straightforward and professional approach to requesting personal information maintained by WMAU, such as membership communications and records. The template complies with legal requirements by mentioning the Australian Privacy Principles and emphasizing the right to access personal information.
Andrew's statement emphasizes the significance of knowing the criteria for admitting or refusing membership, as well as the value of clear communication. His own experience of having his membership application denied without explanation raises legitimate concerns. It is critical for organizations like WMAU to react to member access requests and queries in a timely and appropriate manner. Open and honest communication builds trust and makes people feel heard and valued.
WMAU can demonstrate its commitment to openness and fair decision-making by responding to Andrew's concerns and offering a suitable solution. It is critical that WMAU takes these issues seriously and works hard to preserve its ideals and duties as a registered charity.
Overall, this blog post emphasizes the value of privacy and openness at WMAU. It acts as a reminder to organizations to address access requests professionally and swiftly, strengthening community confidence and responsibility. Links:
Privacy Act 1988: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00003 https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/australian-privacy-principles/ _______________________________________________ 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
-- Boodarwun Gnangarra 'ngany dabakarn koorliny arn boodjera dardoon ngalang Nyungar koortaboodjar'
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
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you're asking. It seems like you're providing a blog post or statement about the importance of transparency, privacy protection, and responding to access requests for an organization like WMAU (assuming it stands for something specific). https://zaubee.com/countries If you have a specific question or need assistance with something related to this post, please let me know, and I'll be happy to help.
Why is an obvious bot account allowed to keep responding on the list?
On Tue, 30 May 2023 at 18:25, nidoxiv838--- via Wikimedia-l wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you're asking. It seems like you're providing a blog post or statement about the importance of transparency, privacy protection, and responding to access requests for an organization like WMAU (assuming it stands for something specific). https://zaubee.com/countries If you have a specific question or need assistance with something related to this post, please let me know, and I'll be happy to help. _______________________________________________ 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