[Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust

[Joan Goma]

> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 03:30:06 -0800
> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia India Program Trust
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
>        <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4EBE58BE.504 at telus.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Thank you Liam for using the term, "organisational roles," instead of
> the more pretentious, "movement roles." I find the whole thread
> disturbing. I am and have always been a strong supporter of the autonomy
> of both projects and chapters, and from that vantage point it is
> difficult to see this initiative as leading to anything other than the
> undermining of a chapter.
>

I am also in favor of the autonomy of the projects and the chapters
but autonomy
does not mean autism. Whether we like it or not, there is a relationship
between the chapters and projects. We can create channels to vehiculate it or
we can ignore it and go to have conflicts one after another.


>
> It is all proceeding in a predictable pattern.  It pits young amateurs
> who have embraced an ideal as a labour of love and who have a na?vet?
> about the ways of the world against goal-oriented professionals well
> schooled in the sophisms that produce success. This does not establish
> intent or malice; it's just the way things develop unless someone is
> willing to step away and recognize the process for what it is.
>

And the way things develop lead to a series of values ​​that are good to
grow and prosper trading companies: selfishness, envy, private property,
exclusivity, greed ... The values ​​of our edditing community are completely
opposed to those. I think we need to establish channels for the values ​​and
motivations of the edditing communities be moved to chapters.


>
> I am an amateur. I am not motivated by dreams of a sinecure or reveries
> of prestige. I don't care if anything that I do becomes a polished
> feature articles. I don't care if the site has a professional appearance
> with consistent format throughout. I am not obsessed by growth, or by
> leading the global south by the hand into salvation. It's nice if that
> can happen, and nicer if they can figure it out for themselves.  My
> bottom line remains a commitment to share the sum of the world's
> knowledge. Not more, not less.
>

> When I hear of things like these Indian developments, I start to get the
> impression that we have lost our way. As much as the organizers may
> deny, it's as plain as day that these two organizations are being set up
> to compete. That alienates people.
>
> Ray
>

If members of these organizations were like you it would be impossible to
compete in the worst sense of the word. I also think that we have begun to
lose out way but not by establishing two organizations in the same
territory and that this will necessarily lead to a savage competition among
them but because of the risk that these organizations and the individuals that
compose them were not imbued enought with the values ​​and the mechanisms that
would make this result impossible.

I think there is no reason to believe that we will have more problems by
having 2 organizations in India thant those we have by having 20
organizations in Europe. In fact to go for a similar proportion we should
have 50 organizations in India.