[Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust

Fri Nov 11 17:21:17 UTC 2011

+1 on Achal's note. Thanks Achal.

Let me add that the relationship with the Wikimedia India chapter is
evolving...and it is evolving in a good way.  Hisham worked collaboratively
with Arjuna in joint support of the Wikiconference India team.  We work
very closely with Tinu on communications (as we have since we first started
working in India, before Tinu was on the chapter board).  The work Naveen
introduced recently for Wiki Academies is being funded via a grant from WMF
and Hisham's team wants to be supportive of this. From the beginning of our
involvement in India, we sought to have the chapter involved (when I
traveled to India we funded the travel of chapter EC members - Anirudh and
HP Nadig to join me and we provided a prominent role for the chapter in
press discussions. We did the same funding Arun when Jimmy was in India).
 We have committed to providing the chapter with funding to support
programs that they have in the works. In fact, I proactively suggested that
the chapter prepare a grant request almost a year ago. We've also helped
the chapter work through regulatory hurdles to getting funds including
supporting a require for prior permission for FCRA.  Arjuna was involved in
the discussions at the formation of the Pune Pilot, but the chapter really
didn't have the capacity in Pune to be heavily involved in it at the time.
An argument that the trust is getting in the way or supplanting the chapter
doesn't really hold water. My hope is that the relationship is and will
continue to get closer...and I remain committed to an outcome where the
chapter and trust become one as our collective capacity and work mature in
India.

On the funding issue...this is a bit of a red herring.  As of now, there is
sufficient funds available to the chapter to build its organizational
capacity and execute on the plans that it has laid out. We are working hard
to overcome regulatory issues to the flow of funds that would provide more
resources over time to support work of the chapter, the Trust and other
groups in the community.  The true focus of both the chapter, Trust and
other interested community groups should be on building the capacity to do
effective work that advances the mission.  Money is not the limiting factor
though Indian regulations to create some short term hassles)...it's ideas
and capacity to get things done. That's what we all need to work on and do
so, in good faith, with a shared commitment to the Wikimedia mission.

Look forward to joining all of our Indian colleagues at the Wikiconference
India next week...and to continuing to work to achieve our shared vision in
India...

Barry
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Achal Prabhala <aprabhala at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk,
>
> While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening
> for some time - I know that Anirudh has raised these questions before,
> for instance. In that sense, I'm not sure how the registration of a
> trust changes the situation at all; I think that for anyone involved
> with the Wikimedia movement in India, the relationship between the
> Foundation entity in India and the India chapter has been perceived as
> an interesting, evolving - and highly experimental - situation, at least
> since the strategic plan was concluded.
>
> To repeat, I think this discussion is very useful, but I think it's
> important to remember that the situation is neither new nor unexpected.
> Having said that:
>
> On Friday 11 November 2011 10:09 AM, Anirudh Bhati wrote:
> > My personal opinion, and I only speak for myself and not the Chapter or
> the
> > Foundation (I wouldn't dare!).
>
> I'd be interested in understanding what the India chapter and the
> WikiConference India organising committee (to name one formal community
> grouping outside either the chapter or foundation) think of the
> Foundation's presence in India. In my own personal experience, there
> have been large periods of time when the India chapter was not as active
> as it is now; there have also been (as can be expected) many differences
> of opinion between community groupings in India. To that extent, and
> assuming good faith, have the presence of several entities (formal and
> informal) helped balance out periods of inactivity or dysfunction among
> all involved?
>
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Lodewijk<lodewijk at effeietsanders.org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> thanks a lot all for exmplaining the differences. I would be very much
> >> interested to know more about the ''relationship'' between the trust and
> >> Wikimedia India. You seem to suggest that trustees get appointed by (or
> on
> >> the advice of - not sure of the legal wording) the WMF - but will
> Wikimedia
> >> India be involved in that too? Since they are the chapter in that
> country I
> >> could imagine them to have a say in it.
> >>
> > Nope.  Up until now WMIN has not received any say either with the India
> > Education Programs design and implementation or the structuring of the
> > Wikimedia India Program Trust.  And given that not many people are going
> to
> > talk about it, I don't think much will change in the future.
>
> There appears to be a strong sense of exclusion you are expressing here,
> which I think it's important to bring up. I'm curious to understand if
> it's a more widespread feeling - are there others who were consulted? Or
> weren't but felt they should be? My own understanding of the program is
> that the India Education Program involved people who elected to get
> involved - as a community member, I, for instance, know very little
> about it because I feel I have nothing to contribute there. More
> importantly, does the chapter feel it was inadequately consulted? And
> does it feel like it was in a position to contribute more? I think this
> would be very interesting to probe a little further.
>
>
> >
> >> How closely will this trust and the chapter work together? You mention
> that
> >> there is communication etc - but is cooperation likely to become the
> >> default or the exception?
> >
> > > From my own experience and from what I have heard from a fellow Pune
> > community member, the general community and the Chapter body have been
> > excluded and ignored by WMF consultants from the very beginning.  In
> fact,
> > the Chapter representatives were only invited to attend meetings when
> Frank
> > Schlenburg and Annie Lin were in town.
> >
> >
> >> And how will it work with regards of who will be the primary point of
> >> contact in India for institutions who want to partner with Wikimedia?
> Will
> >> they have to approach one of the two or whichever they like (and if they
> >> dont get the answer they like, can they just approach the other?). Will
> the
> >> chapter and the trust be competing with each other or collaborating?
> >>
> > I think there is already a lot of confusion with regard to the two
> entities
> > operating out of India.  Going by the media, news reporters are already
> > very confused by the existence of two Wikimedia bodies and I personally
> get
> > a lot of queries every week asking me to clarify on the location of
> > Wikimedia offices.  With its paid consultants, the local WMF consultants
> > have done a good job of making their presence felt (especially in Western
> > India), and more and more journalists are interested in hearing from WMF
> > (the "international organization") than WMIN.
>
> Honestly, news reporters in India are confused about *everything*
> related to Wikipedia and Wikimedia :) Even a cursory analysis of news
> coverage will confirm that they routinely mix up what the movement is,
> what the difference between Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation is,
> what the difference between a chapter member and a staff member is, etc.
> And as someone who has been following this from the outset, I can say
> with some confidence that this has nothing to do with the chapter and
> the Foundation in India, rather, just our own complicated terminology
> and insider-language, and a general laziness on the part of Indian news
> media to learn the details. Basically, we'd still get completely whacky
> press coverage even if there was no chapter and no Foundation entity.
>
> >
> > The initial idea, if I understood it correctly, was to establish another
> > non-profit body within India, for a period of three to five years to
> > execute specific (and large-scale) programmes.  As of now, the WIPT
> > (Wikimedia India Program Office) can pretty much do anything it wants
> with
> > the Wikimedia brand - partner with institutions, raise money locally,
> have
> > paid employees and bypass community.  This is what I foresee happening:
> >   WMIN will be involved in community-building and small-scale projects
> which
> > support volunteers and the WIPT will partner with large institutions in
> > India (who are understandably looking to club with international
> > organizations), get a lot of media coverage and acquire the big grants
> > (since WMIN is not a professional body).  WMIN and WIPT will
> theoretically
> > compete for funding within India, much of which will be allocated to
> WIPT,
> > given that it is professionalized (and because we never had a chance) and
> > in WMF's good graces.  This is how WMIN has been made redundant
> (something
> > that I have been saying for a long, long time).
>
> I think it's a little premature to say that WMIN has been made
> redundant. As someone who helped the chapter group, right from 2008, for
> the India chapter to be made redundant would mean that some 3+ years of
> work and involvement on my part is flushed down the toilet. If that's
> the case, or is ever made the case, I'll be shouting on the streets -
> but it isn't, and I'm not sure it's anyone's intention.
>
> For instance, Anirudh, the fact that you are on the board of the India
> chapter, but don't live in India anymore (you live in Cambodia now,
> right?), leads me to believe that your involvement with India-based
> activities, or leading efforts on the ground, is necessarily at a
> minimum. Don't you think that overall, the effectiveness of the India
> chapter is a consequence of the involvement and productivity of its
> members? I recall a host of recent events - the WikiAcademy for
> librarians in Bangalore, a widely attended copyright seminar, the AGM,
> elections, regular newsletters - that are testament to the fact that the
> India chapter is not - and doesn't want to be - "redundant". But perhaps
> this is something the chapter can clarify more officially.
>
> I'm not saying that there are no issues of overlap to sort out; I am
> saying that from my perspective it does not seem like there is anything
> close to the level of antagonism or redundancy you describe in your email.
>
> >
> > The most important difference, something many are uncomfortable talking
> > about, is in the distribution of money.  The WIPT in India will have
> access
> > to *significantly *more WMF funding than WMIN (significant meaning *real
> > significant*).  Around the time when discussions about the India Office
> > began, Barry came to India and assured us that the WIPT will only be here
> > for a period of 3-5 years.  I am hopeful that the Foundation will stick
> to
> > its words, and with time we will all learn that small volunteer-driven
> > projects have a larger impact than costly, ill-designed, large-scale
> > programmes run by hired consultants who hire consultants with no relevant
> > background (with a couple of exceptions).
>
> Like you, I read of the India Education Program's work with some
> concern. While I think that serious analysis and introspection is in
> order, I think it's a little premature to jump on this incident and
> dismiss the entire scope of potential Foundation activity in India.
>
> I share your concerns overall, but I think we can be concerned without
> launching an outright offensive against all Foundation staff, right?
> Think back to some of the tough moments the India chapter has had to
> face from Indian community groupings - the chapter was then placed in
> the position that the Foundation now finds itself in, i.e. being "the
> man" - and I don't think it would have helped anyone to run this kind of
> black/white, I'm good/ you're bad dialogue.
>
> >
> >
> >> Thanks for helping me seeing the situation more clearly,
> >>
> > No, thank you for asking the right questions.
>
> Thank you too, for opening up the discussion.
>
> Cheers,
> Achal
>
> >
> >
> >> Lodewijk
> >>
> >>
> > anirudh
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

-- 
Barry Newstead
Chief Global Development Officer
Wikimedia Foundation

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate