Since the first reports about Vasconcelos from WMPT to AffCom, before the 15 April General Assembly, we were asking AffCom for legal support to deal with the situation caused by Vasconcelos, as we are all volunteers and, unlike AffCom, we have no easy access to lawyers - or at least are unable to pay them. It was never provided. Instead, AffCom chose to put WMPT on the freezer for six months already, while continuously listening to the legal gibberish coming from the "other side", meaning Vasconcelos, a person that was repeatedly reported to AffCom for severe harassment against WMPT members. And during the whole process, AffCom was taking their own conclusions from that legal gibberish, and trying to reach a "middle point" between WMPT and Vasconcelos in a situation which is ruled by the law, like if that would ever be possible, or even advisable at all.
We had to do everything by ourselves with our limited resources, without any legal support facilitated by AffCom. We have extensively read the country law and many court cases dealing with associations General Assemblies, we have informally consulted lawyers and jurisconsults, we have done the best we could to appease AffCom without breaking any country laws. But, to me, everything would have been incredibly much easier, clearer and smoother if AffCom had since the beginning requested the legal expertise we were asking for.
But apparently, at last, after six months of this purgatory, we finally are on the right path.
Regards, Paulo
Em 12/10/2018 04:46, "Kirill Lokshin" kirill.lokshin@gmail.com escreveu:
The Affiliations Committee has no intention whatsoever of changing the process; rather, we are simply trying to determine whether the conditions that we originally set out have in fact been met.
It would, perhaps, have been easier for everyone if we could have done this without having to solicit specialized legal expertise, but the circumstances seem to have unfortunately precluded a procedure whose validity is obvious from a simple reading of the applicable rules.
Regards, Kirill
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:17 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for acknowledging the existence of this thread and the fact
that
AffCom is still making some effort to bring the problem to a resolution.
It
doesn't seem like it should be all that challenging, if one disputant is
a
single individual and the other is a community of people led by those for whom they have repeatedly expressed support.
If, as described, AffCom laid out a procedure by which one side could legitimize itself and then decided to revoke that procedure after much
work
by those trying to follow it... AffCom could acknowledge an error and apologize. That you have described your proposed next step is at least progress in the right direction.
In any case, I'm sure we all look forward to AffCom sharing the results
of
its solicitation of advice with the Wikimedia public.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:07 PM Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin@gmail.com
wrote:
As I believe we mentioned the last time this particular topic came up,
we
are unlikely to resolve the intricacies of Portuguese nonprofit law by debating them on a mailing list.
Gonçalo and his colleagues have quite clearly expressed their position: they believe that the process by which they came to control Wikimedia Portugal complies with the applicable provisions of Portuguese law. At
the
same time, the other side in this conflict has expressed a contrary position: that the process in question does *not* comply with those provisions.
The Affiliations Committee has obviously been unable to make any real headway here, particularly as the dispute hinges in no small part on interpretations of case law rather than a plain reading of the
applicable
legal codes; consequently, we've solicited advice from actual
Portuguese
legal experts, which we hope to receive in the near future. Until that happens, however, we are not going to be able to bring this to closure,
one
way or the other.
Regards, Kirill
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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 mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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
I am not surprised by the lack of follow through by Affcom. In the Brazilian case we were told a few times we met all requisites for chapter recognition, but the existence of another user group in the country was something they felt was enough to disqualify us until they figured out their rules. Upon us insisting on a formal evaluation of our request we had a promise of a site visit to make an evaluation, another promise that was never fulfilled.
When I and others decided to report harassment the result was very much worse. Affcom demanded, on less than a week notice, that an onperson meeting with the reported harrasser and a few of the reported harassed. Upon resistance to that plan, Affcom held separate meetings with each group. Nonetheless did nothing to actually evaluate the matter and maintained the position that we would not achieve chapter status despite meeting the requirements. WMF trust and safety then had the brilliant idea of pushing the harassment matter to Affcom, which did absolutely nothing despite promising mediation and now stating a mediation has taken place.[1] In fact, when we managed to secure a community led mediation, Affcom and WMF managed to quickly torpedo it after the first meeting.
To be honest, I have very little hope for WMPT at this point, it is an obviously manufactured crisis with sides that have acted in very different ways but Affcom and WMF do not care. As Brazil did, Portugal is rocking the boat, and Affcom does not tolerate boat rocking.
Chico Venancio
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Brazil_Next_Steps Em sex, 12 de out de 2018 05:56, Paulo Santos Perneta < paulosperneta@gmail.com> escreveu:
Since the first reports about Vasconcelos from WMPT to AffCom, before the 15 April General Assembly, we were asking AffCom for legal support to deal with the situation caused by Vasconcelos, as we are all volunteers and, unlike AffCom, we have no easy access to lawyers - or at least are unable to pay them. It was never provided. Instead, AffCom chose to put WMPT on the freezer for six months already, while continuously listening to the legal gibberish coming from the "other side", meaning Vasconcelos, a person that was repeatedly reported to AffCom for severe harassment against WMPT members. And during the whole process, AffCom was taking their own conclusions from that legal gibberish, and trying to reach a "middle point" between WMPT and Vasconcelos in a situation which is ruled by the law, like if that would ever be possible, or even advisable at all.
We had to do everything by ourselves with our limited resources, without any legal support facilitated by AffCom. We have extensively read the country law and many court cases dealing with associations General Assemblies, we have informally consulted lawyers and jurisconsults, we have done the best we could to appease AffCom without breaking any country laws. But, to me, everything would have been incredibly much easier, clearer and smoother if AffCom had since the beginning requested the legal expertise we were asking for.
But apparently, at last, after six months of this purgatory, we finally are on the right path.
Regards, Paulo
Em 12/10/2018 04:46, "Kirill Lokshin" kirill.lokshin@gmail.com escreveu:
The Affiliations Committee has no intention whatsoever of changing the process; rather, we are simply trying to determine whether the conditions that we originally set out have in fact been met.
It would, perhaps, have been easier for everyone if we could have done this without having to solicit specialized legal expertise, but the circumstances seem to have unfortunately precluded a procedure whose validity is obvious from a simple reading of the applicable rules.
Regards, Kirill
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:17 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for acknowledging the existence of this thread and the fact
that
AffCom is still making some effort to bring the problem to a
resolution. It
doesn't seem like it should be all that challenging, if one disputant
is a
single individual and the other is a community of people led by those
for
whom they have repeatedly expressed support.
If, as described, AffCom laid out a procedure by which one side could legitimize itself and then decided to revoke that procedure after much
work
by those trying to follow it... AffCom could acknowledge an error and apologize. That you have described your proposed next step is at least progress in the right direction.
In any case, I'm sure we all look forward to AffCom sharing the results
of
its solicitation of advice with the Wikimedia public.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:07 PM Kirill Lokshin <
kirill.lokshin@gmail.com>
wrote:
As I believe we mentioned the last time this particular topic came
up, we
are unlikely to resolve the intricacies of Portuguese nonprofit law by debating them on a mailing list.
Gonçalo and his colleagues have quite clearly expressed their
position:
they believe that the process by which they came to control Wikimedia Portugal complies with the applicable provisions of Portuguese law.
At
the
same time, the other side in this conflict has expressed a contrary position: that the process in question does *not* comply with those provisions.
The Affiliations Committee has obviously been unable to make any real headway here, particularly as the dispute hinges in no small part on interpretations of case law rather than a plain reading of the
applicable
legal codes; consequently, we've solicited advice from actual
Portuguese
legal experts, which we hope to receive in the near future. Until
that
happens, however, we are not going to be able to bring this to
closure,
one
way or the other.
Regards, Kirill
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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 mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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
Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
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@gmail.com escreveu no dia sexta, 12/10/2018 à(s) 13:24:
I am not surprised by the lack of follow through by Affcom. In the Brazilian case we were told a few times we met all requisites for chapter recognition, but the existence of another user group in the country was something they felt was enough to disqualify us until they figured out their rules. Upon us insisting on a formal evaluation of our request we had a promise of a site visit to make an evaluation, another promise that was never fulfilled.
When I and others decided to report harassment the result was very much worse. Affcom demanded, on less than a week notice, that an onperson meeting with the reported harrasser and a few of the reported harassed. Upon resistance to that plan, Affcom held separate meetings with each group. Nonetheless did nothing to actually evaluate the matter and maintained the position that we would not achieve chapter status despite meeting the requirements. WMF trust and safety then had the brilliant idea of pushing the harassment matter to Affcom, which did absolutely nothing despite promising mediation and now stating a mediation has taken place.[1] In fact, when we managed to secure a community led mediation, Affcom and WMF managed to quickly torpedo it after the first meeting.
To be honest, I have very little hope for WMPT at this point, it is an obviously manufactured crisis with sides that have acted in very different ways but Affcom and WMF do not care. As Brazil did, Portugal is rocking the boat, and Affcom does not tolerate boat rocking.
Chico Venancio
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Brazil_Next_Steps Em sex, 12 de out de 2018 05:56, Paulo Santos Perneta < paulosperneta@gmail.com> escreveu:
Since the first reports about Vasconcelos from WMPT to AffCom, before the 15 April General Assembly, we were asking AffCom for legal support to deal with the situation caused by Vasconcelos, as we are all volunteers and, unlike AffCom, we have no easy access to lawyers - or at least are unable to pay them. It was never provided. Instead, AffCom chose to put WMPT on the freezer for six months already, while continuously listening to the legal gibberish coming from the "other side", meaning Vasconcelos, a person that was repeatedly reported to AffCom for severe harassment against WMPT members. And during the whole process, AffCom was taking their own conclusions from that legal gibberish, and trying to reach a "middle point" between WMPT and Vasconcelos in a situation which is ruled by the law, like if that would ever be possible, or even advisable at all.
We had to do everything by ourselves with our limited resources, without any legal support facilitated by AffCom. We have extensively read the country law and many court cases dealing with associations General Assemblies, we have informally consulted lawyers and jurisconsults, we have done the best we could to appease AffCom without breaking any country laws. But, to me, everything would have been incredibly much easier, clearer and smoother if AffCom had since the beginning requested the legal expertise we were asking for.
But apparently, at last, after six months of this purgatory, we finally are on the right path.
Regards, Paulo
Em 12/10/2018 04:46, "Kirill Lokshin" kirill.lokshin@gmail.com escreveu:
The Affiliations Committee has no intention whatsoever of changing the process; rather, we are simply trying to determine whether the conditions that we originally set out have in fact been met.
It would, perhaps, have been easier for everyone if we could have done this without having to solicit specialized legal expertise, but the circumstances seem to have unfortunately precluded a procedure whose validity is obvious from a simple reading of the applicable rules.
Regards, Kirill
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:17 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for acknowledging the existence of this thread and the fact
that
AffCom is still making some effort to bring the problem to a
resolution. It
doesn't seem like it should be all that challenging, if one disputant
is a
single individual and the other is a community of people led by those
for
whom they have repeatedly expressed support.
If, as described, AffCom laid out a procedure by which one side could legitimize itself and then decided to revoke that procedure after much
work
by those trying to follow it... AffCom could acknowledge an error and apologize. That you have described your proposed next step is at least progress in the right direction.
In any case, I'm sure we all look forward to AffCom sharing the
results of
its solicitation of advice with the Wikimedia public.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:07 PM Kirill Lokshin <
kirill.lokshin@gmail.com>
wrote:
As I believe we mentioned the last time this particular topic came
up, we
are unlikely to resolve the intricacies of Portuguese nonprofit law
by
debating them on a mailing list.
Gonçalo and his colleagues have quite clearly expressed their
position:
they believe that the process by which they came to control Wikimedia Portugal complies with the applicable provisions of Portuguese law.
At
the
same time, the other side in this conflict has expressed a contrary position: that the process in question does *not* comply with those provisions.
The Affiliations Committee has obviously been unable to make any real headway here, particularly as the dispute hinges in no small part on interpretations of case law rather than a plain reading of the
applicable
legal codes; consequently, we've solicited advice from actual
Portuguese
legal experts, which we hope to receive in the near future. Until
that
happens, however, we are not going to be able to bring this to
closure,
one
way or the other.
Regards, Kirill
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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 mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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
Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
Hello, **
*To the members of Wikimedia Portugal struggling with the ambiguity of the situation, we offer our sincere sympathy and appreciation for your continued efforts to find a healthy path forward for your community. These issues are very close to the heart and the challenges the chapter is facing can be burdensome to address without additional support. The future of the chapter community is very important to the AffCom as well and we are sincere in wanting to help the group to find resolution to the current issues. There is no predetermined outcome intended by the committee’s actions. We are continuing to attend to these issues carefully in order to respect all of the different parties involved. We are also continuing to examine the details as well as full situation. *
*
Importantly, the last message sent was indeed to ensure what transparency we can in the process and to identify that we have had concerns surface around the process from different parties and that we are continuing to look into these, as well as review the plans you have submitted, and all other facts regarding the matter. This will take time however. It was becoming apparent that you may be expecting a more immediate release from the suspension and we wanted to update you as to where we are at in the process.
As communicated originally in the July 2018 suspension notice [1] “If Wikimedia Portugal fully and completely resolves the issues and requirements listed above and is otherwise in compliance with the Chapter Agreement and board resolution on organizational best practices [2], the suspension will be lifted.” however if they failto address these issues by the datesdescribed above, in accordance with terms of the Chapter Agreement, we will send a notice of revocationby October 30, 2018.”To review the current status of the requirements set by the suspension notice:
Requirement
Status
Submit an Action Plan. ByAugust 15, 2018 the Chapter must submit an updated Action Plan to the Affiliations Committee and Wikimedia Foundation, including a timeline with dates for calling a new meeting and elections to ensure the Chapter has a valid Boardby September 15, 2018.
Assembly was relocated in order to be held September 1, 2018. The committee is currently investigating the issues and concerns raised by various parties during the course of planning and holding the event.
Submit a plan for active contributor involvement and improved chapter capacity. By October 15, 2018 the chapter must submit a plan, via email or posted online, demonstrating how the chapter meets the two specific chapter requirements, or alternatively a plan and timeline for how you will correct the issues.
Plan received October 1, 2018 and currently under review.
Complete and submit the required overdue chapter financial reporting. By September 15, 2018 the chapter must post the required financial reports to its meta reports page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports
2017 Financial report submitted September 2, 2018.
Regarding our last message, our goal was to be transparent about the continued concerns without getting into the specific details that we are having to sort through and investigate. It was not our intention to be too vague to understand what those concerns are. For clarity, they are: (1) Reputationstandardsand concerns related to ability to manage conflicts and (2) Concerns related to fulfilling the basic transparency and disclosure commitments of your jurisdiction and your governing documents in order to ensure open participation. As stated in the last message to the chapter, we are currently reviewing the group’s capacity plan and the situation overall in order to identify needed next steps. We will be in touch regarding any additional information we need.
Sincerely,
Maor
**
On behalf of the Affiliations Committee
*
On 13/10/2018 8:40 a.m., Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
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@gmail.com mailto:chicocvenancio@gmail.com> escreveu no dia sexta, 12/10/2018 à(s) 13:24:
I am not surprised by the lack of follow through by Affcom. In the Brazilian case we were told a few times we met all requisites for chapter recognition, but the existence of another user group in the country was something they felt was enough to disqualify us until they figured out their rules. Upon us insisting on a formal evaluation of our request we had a promise of a site visit to make an evaluation, another promise that was never fulfilled. When I and others decided to report harassment the result was very much worse. Affcom demanded, on less than a week notice, that an onperson meeting with the reported harrasser and a few of the reported harassed. Upon resistance to that plan, Affcom held separate meetings with each group. Nonetheless did nothing to actually evaluate the matter and maintained the position that we would not achieve chapter status despite meeting the requirements. WMF trust and safety then had the brilliant idea of pushing the harassment matter to Affcom, which did absolutely nothing despite promising mediation and now stating a mediation has taken place.[1] In fact, when we managed to secure a community led mediation, Affcom and WMF managed to quickly torpedo it after the first meeting. To be honest, I have very little hope for WMPT at this point, it is an obviously manufactured crisis with sides that have acted in very different ways but Affcom and WMF do not care. As Brazil did, Portugal is rocking the boat, and Affcom does not tolerate boat rocking. Chico Venancio [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Brazil_Next_Steps Em sex, 12 de out de 2018 05:56, Paulo Santos Perneta <paulosperneta@gmail.com <mailto:paulosperneta@gmail.com>> escreveu: Since the first reports about Vasconcelos from WMPT to AffCom, before the 15 April General Assembly, we were asking AffCom for legal support to deal with the situation caused by Vasconcelos, as we are all volunteers and, unlike AffCom, we have no easy access to lawyers - or at least are unable to pay them. It was never provided. Instead, AffCom chose to put WMPT on the freezer for six months already, while continuously listening to the legal gibberish coming from the "other side", meaning Vasconcelos, a person that was repeatedly reported to AffCom for severe harassment against WMPT members. And during the whole process, AffCom was taking their own conclusions from that legal gibberish, and trying to reach a "middle point" between WMPT and Vasconcelos in a situation which is ruled by the law, like if that would ever be possible, or even advisable at all. We had to do everything by ourselves with our limited resources, without any legal support facilitated by AffCom. We have extensively read the country law and many court cases dealing with associations General Assemblies, we have informally consulted lawyers and jurisconsults, we have done the best we could to appease AffCom without breaking any country laws. But, to me, everything would have been incredibly much easier, clearer and smoother if AffCom had since the beginning requested the legal expertise we were asking for. But apparently, at last, after six months of this purgatory, we finally are on the right path. Regards, Paulo Em 12/10/2018 04:46, "Kirill Lokshin" <kirill.lokshin@gmail.com <mailto:kirill.lokshin@gmail.com>> escreveu: The Affiliations Committee has no intention whatsoever of changing the process; rather, we are simply trying to determine whether the conditions that we originally set out have in fact been met. It would, perhaps, have been easier for everyone if we could have done this without having to solicit specialized legal expertise, but the circumstances seem to have unfortunately precluded a procedure whose validity is obvious from a simple reading of the applicable rules. Regards, Kirill On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:17 PM Nathan <nawrich@gmail.com <mailto:nawrich@gmail.com>> wrote: > Thank you for acknowledging the existence of this thread and the fact that > AffCom is still making some effort to bring the problem to a resolution. It > doesn't seem like it should be all that challenging, if one disputant is a > single individual and the other is a community of people led by those for > whom they have repeatedly expressed support. > > If, as described, AffCom laid out a procedure by which one side could > legitimize itself and then decided to revoke that procedure after much work > by those trying to follow it... AffCom could acknowledge an error and > apologize. That you have described your proposed next step is at least > progress in the right direction. > > In any case, I'm sure we all look forward to AffCom sharing the results of > its solicitation of advice with the Wikimedia public. > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:07 PM Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin@gmail.com <mailto:kirill.lokshin@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > > As I believe we mentioned the last time this particular topic came up, we > > are unlikely to resolve the intricacies of Portuguese nonprofit law by > > debating them on a mailing list. > > > > Gonçalo and his colleagues have quite clearly expressed their position: > > they believe that the process by which they came to control Wikimedia > > Portugal complies with the applicable provisions of Portuguese law. At > the > > same time, the other side in this conflict has expressed a contrary > > position: that the process in question does *not* comply with those > > provisions. > > > > The Affiliations Committee has obviously been unable to make any real > > headway here, particularly as the dispute hinges in no small part on > > interpretations of case law rather than a plain reading of the applicable > > legal codes; consequently, we've solicited advice from actual Portuguese > > legal experts, which we hope to receive in the near future. Until that > > happens, however, we are not going to be able to bring this to closure, > one > > way or the other. > > > > Regards, > > Kirill > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org>?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org>?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates _______________________________________________ Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
Affiliates mailing list Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
wikimediapt@lists.wikimedia.org