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(a)gmail.com> escreveu: _______________________________________________ Affiliates mailing list Affiliates(a)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 &lt;chicocvenancio(a)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 &lt;paulosperneta(a)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" &lt;kirill.lokshin(a)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 &lt;nawrich(a)gmail.com <mailto:nawrich@gmail.com>> wrote: and the fact that to a resolution. It one disputant is a led by those for one side could procedure after much work an error and step is at least sharing the results of &lt;kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com <mailto:kirill.lokshin@gmail.com>> particular topic came up, we nonprofit law by expressed their position: control Wikimedia Portuguese law.  At expressed a contrary comply with those to make any real small part on reading of the applicable actual Portuguese future.  Until that this to closure, <mailto:Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> 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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates _______________________________________________ Affiliates mailing list Affiliates(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Affiliates@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates _______________________________________________ Affiliates mailing list Affiliates(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates