[Foundation-l] Questions about new Fellow

[MZMcBride]

Achal Prabhala wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> I'm happy to tell you a little more about myself and the scope of this
> short-term research project I'm undertaking, and I'm as happy to assume
> that you fully intended for your messages to come across as decorous and
> rational.

Hi. I appreciate you taking the time to reply to my post. However, you seem
to have only replied, not responded.

> I am, however, involved on a daily basis with all kinds of work that is
> related to the movement, and I'm delighted to be of use to you.

What kind of daily involvement? Is this work in your capacity as a
volunteer, as a member of the Advisory Board, or as a Wikimedia Fellow?

> Now to the project. I see that neither of you gentlemen has any thoughts
> on it, and I welcome your engagement.

I'll admit that I don't particularly care what you're working on. That's
approximately my attitude toward what the other Wikimedia Fellows are
working on as well. I do care if you received the Fellowship for different
reasons than the other Fellows, though. I do care if there's the appearance
of impropriety or a conflict of interest (or worse, actual impropriety or
conflicts of interest).

I'll repeat the questions I feel you haven't answered. You're obviously free
to not answer them ever, but I do want to make sure that your reply to the
opening thread isn't viewed as a response to most of the questions asked
about/to you.

MZMcBride wrote:
> More importantly, is there a concern about an Advisory Board member being
> chosen as a Wikimedia Fellow? Is there a conflict of interest there? Is
> there a concern about the appearance of impropriety?
> 
> Achal has a growing influence on Wikimedia, particularly its new operations
> in India. This has included being part of the hiring decisions, etc. This is
> more of a consultant role, making his selection as a Wikimedia Fellow even
> stranger. And his growing influence and power in such a big part of
> Wikimedia's five-year strategy is making people wary.

If you could answer some of these questions, particularly about what your
specific role has been in hiring in India, I'd really appreciate it (as
would many members of this list, I imagine). In your reply, you say that
you're involved "on a daily basis with all kinds of work that is related to
the movement," but also "that reports of my influence are greatly
exaggerated" [in the context of the strategy report]. These statements don't
seem to reconcile with me currently. And I never meant to suggest that you
were deeply involved with the strategy _report_, but with the strategy
_implementation_. There's a world of difference.

If you've been involved with the hiring process in India, you should say so
outright as someone who's committed to openness and transparency. If you've
been involved with site selection in India or whatever else, you should say
so. These are the things I'm hearing, but I've no idea what level of truth
there is to them. That's why I started this thread and that's why I'm glad
you've replied (though I'd be more glad if you responded). As E. Forrester
noted, there is a wariness among some Wikimedia participants that an inner
circle exists, but I think you might be able dispel some of this notion with
more candid responses.

MZMcBride