[Foundation-l] some worries about fundraiser and editor appeals boycotting it

Ernesto García wbibliotecario at yahoo.com
Tue Dec 7 06:39:27 UTC 2010

Seeing http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics  I'm quite worried about the onlook.. choosing "year to date" tab shows a definite  deacceleration (and we still need about 4x the current cumulative amount).

Therefore I'm particularly concerned about an ongoing campaign on catalan wikipedia asking to NOT donate to wikimedia (and instead give money to their own association).
Here is the campaign:http://ca.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usuari:Martorell&oldid=6331799   
It basically says "I want to donate, but I wont donate to Wikimedia, instead I will donate to Amical. My donation will be appreciated and well used. Sorry Jimbo, but I need to think locally"
Now who are these users? These are cawiki sysops campaining about not donating in the very worst timing, and in the very worst circumstances (fundarising is getting short).

Now.. what is Amical?
Amical is NOT a wikimedia chapter. It's an non profit association of wikimedians with aims to becoming a chapter
REF1: http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viquip%C3%A8dia:Associaci%C3%B3
And if you follow the external link, you see that for example, Martorell above is member of its board:
REF2: http://www.viquimedia.cat/viqui/Junta (notice they present themselves, in domain and logo as "viquimedia " (localized spelling) and not as "Amical" (yet they haven't been approved as chaper)
Now, these days a banner across wikis from the president of Amical (and appointed president of the non-yet-approved WM:CAT  (REF3) Joan Gomà) is replacing Jimbo's in asking for donations
REF3: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_in_Catalan/ca#Junta
I see a conflict of interests. Amical people (including a board member) is promoting NOT to donate to Wikimedia and instead give to their association, while its president says otherwise.
Notwhistanding the use of a WP userpage for propaganda (campaigning for money to a non WM organization), and giving my concern about the fundraising going slower I feel I need to point out this campaign so it is publicly known.

...................Now.. why would members of an association whose objective is to support Wikimedia would be torpedoing the fundraiser?
Notice the diff dates (mid november).
Here's the context: there's a nationalist conflict regarding Catalunya status in Spain (they want to separate). 
Not directly related, but influenced by this, there has been friction over the past months about the proposals of Wikimedia CAT and Wikimedia ES. 

WM:CAT gets rejected
REF:  http://lists.wikimedia.org.ar/pipermail/wikimedia-es/2010-November/002097.html  (november 5)Quote:"Catalan Group has been rejected by the chapters committee. There is nosuch thing as Wikimedia Catala.
Cheers, Delphine"

And then attacks on Delphine start  REF: http://lists.wikimedia.org.ar/pipermail/wikimedia-es/2010-November/002120.html  (november 13)
"Delphine, as always, boicoting the cooperation between Catalans and the rest of the world.Now it seems she is also against cooperation with iberoamerica."
Notice "Marc Fontevila" is User:Mafoso  (as signature shows)

AlsoREF: http://lists.wikimedia.org.ar/pipermail/wikimedia-es/2010-November/002181.html  (nov 16)

Next day, the banners boycotting the fundraiser appear on the Amical supporter pages. (Nov 17)Notice the wording about lack of transparencyhttp://ca.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usuari:Vriullop&oldid=6331931

A few day latters, it's crosswiki posted a request on meta with biased wording about transparency againBut it's very soon found that the proposal is ***just another attempt to further the WMCAT agenda***disguised as "solving a general problem"http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Chapters._Proposal_to_give_transparency_and_voice_to_the_communitiesOnly catalan sysops have yet spoken pro proposal.
Wording was later changed and sections added to present things differently, but original wording can be seen onhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_comment/Chapters._Proposal_to_give_transparency_and_voice_to_the_communities&oldid=2226785"if you don't support, you're against transprency"

Basically, that's the context.
I'm REALLY CONCERNED about this boycott for purely wikipolitics reasons.
Given that Joan Goma is one of the few selected editors appearing on banners requesting donations, while at the same time the users on the association he's president of boycott Wikimedia for what seems a grudge, this has been up for several weeks, I think at least Amical as association (or Goma as president) should step forward and help clear things.
It's not acceptable an association who claims to support Wikimedia is boycotting it.
Sorry Jimbo, but as they say on their campaing: they have to thing first to themselves


More information about the wikimedia-l mailing list