Re: [wikimedia-pt] [Affiliates] [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

I don't think there is little hope neither for WMPT, not for AffCom. WMPT is, by all accounts, an healthy chapter - or at least in frank recovery - which, for about one year is having intermittent problems with a single associate, in what can be well described as a growing pain. Since the long dormancy period was broken early this year, we have already successfully realized two well participated General Assemblies, both of them successfully reported and validated to the Portuguese state tax authority. Since we have been dedicatedly and actively following the mission and objectives of the Wikimedia Movement, I don't believe there's any rational reason to fear AffCom concerning the legality and compliance of the chapter. Due to all the obscurity surrounding AffCom procedures, only they can know for sure the reasons that led them to act in such a bizarre way during all this time. My impression is AffCom initially attempted to play a "moderation process" on the WMPT case similar to those generally used in editorial conflicts, where both parts are assumed to have some reason, and then consensus is attempted to reach between them, usually by mutual concessions. However, this was all but an "editorial"-like conflict. It's quite hard to imagine how a negotiation could be envisaged with an individual who kept presenting himself as chair of the Portuguese chapter "in representation of the Wikimedia Foundation" (sic), sending legal and personal threats left and right, and constantly claiming everything done by the WMPT associates at the General Assemblies was illegal. What would WMPT have to "negotiate" with him? How could the chapter appease this person? I can't see. Anyway, I believe that with all goodwill AffCom may have had dealing with this case, since the beginning it was impossible to solve without requesting specialized legal advice, as what was in question was exactly a judicial dispute, or the threat of that happening. Either request legal advice, or ignore the threatening party would be options. Try to decide on legal maters using common sense - the proverbial IANAL - seems to be not advisable at all. I'm very glad that, at last, AffCom seems to have recognized that, so we finally may move on, and see some way out of this conundrum we have unwillingly be stuck in for the last six months. Despite the AffCom decision about WMPT, which I'm confident will be favorable, I frankly do hope that productive and constructive public discussion on AffCom continues, as it is happening now. I'm a member of my local chapter, but also a member of the movement, and I fully recognize the very positive role that a well prepared and functional AffCom has for the movement. From this experience, as well as other situations like the one Teles described, it seems probable that AffCom would gain a lot if it would became more professional. I concur with Pine that the movement would gain a lot if some money is spent by the Foundation with the preparation of AffCom. It's basically an investment, as it would work with efficiency in preventing crisis that end up both wasting precious Foundation resources, but also potentially damaging the fundraising potential on the region the crisis is happening. I also concur and fully agree that AffCom role should be essentially for interaffilliate relations, and very limited on internal affiliate intervention. My personal understanding is that this WMPT case, for instance, should have gone directly to the legal department of the Foundation, as we were dealing with a person that was (is?) constantly misrepresenting himself both locally and abroad not only as chair of the chapter, but also as a representative of the Wikimedia Foundation itself. I've never understood why we had to deal with AffCom, when this seemed something for the legal department. Regards, Paulo Chico Venancio <chicocvenancio(a)gmail.com> escreveu no dia sexta, 12/10/2018 à(s) 13:24: