Hi Abhinav,
I think this discussion will have a better direction if it is first done
on the Wikimedia India community mailing list[1]. I say so because, many
Wikimedians in India (non-members) and active affiliates (such as
user-groups) haven't heard from the Chapter for a long time about its
status (WMF compliance, legal, financial, etc.) and issues faced. We only
heard about the state of the Chapter from this email. Otherwise, we are
unaware of the situation.
It will be better if there is a discussion first on the Indian mailing
list where WMIN's leadership can explain the current state in detail to the
community (what happened till data - including AffCom conversation, and the
future actions planned to take). Personally, as Wikimedian from India, I
was surprised to see this email on wikimedia-l without any prior
information or discussion on about the Chapter or this issue on
wikimediaindia-l.
Best,
Krishna
[1]
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 3:37 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulosperneta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Reading about these developments in India has been absolutely painful, and
a sad reminiscent of a number of past situations.
Most of all, the case with Wikimedia Portugal, when AffCom started
imposing
restrictions and "mediation plans" without having any kind of official
hearing with the chapter; the whole environment of secrecy and power/fear
games; the prerogative of making all kinds of unsubstantiated
affirmations,
presented as if they were god's truth; the notice of suspension for the
chapter, based on information which remains to be substantiated till
today;
the feeling of hopelessness.
Then the old, cold case of Brazil, where back in 2010, like in India, the
WMF decided to experiment with local WMF representations, with very tragic
consequences, heavily disturbing the progress of the local Wikimedia
community, and hindering its progress for about a decade; the reckless
approval by AffCom, and subsequent WMF support of clone/conflicting local
affiliates with the one (s) already existing in the region; and the way it
was unilaterally "solved" by AffCom, dismantling a community which was
hanging around Wikimedia since 2008.
And then the recent case which happened to myself where an old and
exclusively Wikipedia-related case was somehow morphed and cooked in
secret
inside WMF, deceitfully presenting it as affiliate related, and secretly
judged, with false accusations and sanctions issued without even informing
the target of what was happening.
One thing common to all those situations is the environment of secrecy and
obscurity cultivated by AffCom, completely at odds with the values of the
Wikimedia Movement - starting with the way AffCom deceitfully defines and
presents itself - "a Wikimedia community-run committee" [1], when it is
all
but run by the Wikimedia community. It's not even chosen by the community,
to start with, but by the committee itself. But the main question probably
is: Why is AffCom cultivating all this environment of secrecy and
obscurity
in what should be straightforward and clear proceedings? What may be
secretive at all, in the quest of a group of Wikimedians to become an
affiliate? Why those processes do not occur in daylight from their start
till the end - with the obvious exception of sensitive information
involving privacy, such as real names? And then - who is AffCom
accountable
to? Who oversees AffCom? The BoT? Are they monitoring AffCom? Does the BoT
agrees with this way of acting?
All this cult of secrecy by AffCom and other powers-that-be inside WMF
creates a very unhealthy and toxic environment for everyone. I personally
appreciate and hold in high esteem a number of members of AffCom, possibly
the majority of them. And it has been very much mind-boggling watching the
way AffCom choses to act as a whole. I've suggested to the Strategy WG of
Roles & Responsibilities that AffCom should be wholly redefined, to make
it
more transparent, community-connected and accountable. The way it is now,
I
don't believe it is properly filling and complying with its role.
I really hope things improve, and our Wikimedian brothers at WMIN - who I
believe have made the right decision of bringing their case into the
clarity of daylight - will manage to revert the suspension and continue
working for a world of free knowledge accessible to everyone, despite the
difficulties they are passing through at this moment.
And it would be much more motivating for everyone if we could get out of
this kind of Age of Darkness at AffCom (and WMF in general).
[1] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee
Best,
Paulo
Abhinav srivastava <abhinav619(a)gmail.com> escreveu no dia terça,
9/07/2019
à(s) 08:10:
Hi Lodewijk,
I will try and simplify
(a) *What is the exact and complete set of reasons that Affcom put the
chapter on suspension?*
This has been listed under six bullet points in my initial mail. I
encourage you and everyone reading here to have a look at them. I have
further shared a synopsis for the same again in part (c) along with WMIN
responses.
(b)* what additional complaints are part of the big picture ?*
The trouble of having a Staff-based organisation (CIS-A2K) at national
level where there is lesser transparency such that there MoU is not in
public domain [1] and the trouble caused to India Chapter like
attribution
grabbing for WMIN's self-financed projects
etc. [2]
(c) w*hat is the response from WMIN.*
Our primary concern remains that Affcom on a good-faith could have
asked
for a clarification and if found they could have
proceeded with the
suspension. They took an official position without even hearing us once.
There basis has been further described again in brief
* Legal Structure : Affcom asked WMIN to resolve their necessary
financial
licenses. WMIN informed them that Government
directives [3] have been
restrictive in this regard, however, to keep the movement active,
activities have been happening by members self-financing programs.
Affcom
has further cited problems with WMIN's
leadership. WMIN regrets such
statements, it is a nation-wide problem.
* Open Governance : WMIN has repeatedly informed Affcom that a member
need
not be in physical presence to cast vote or raise
voice during assembly.
To do so as claimed by Affcom, WMIN would have to change it bylaws and
also
inform WMF as per Chapter Agreement. No evidence
have been brought to
notice for any violation.
* Active Contributor Involvement : Affcom claims we do not have members
and
have made some allegations (check initial mail
for details) but haven't
provided any evidence. WMIN is always open to sharing its member's data
base with them after discussing privacy.
* Capacity : Affcom claims that WMIN has not been doing activities and
Chapter has repeatedly informed that WMIN has been hosting zero-budget,
self-financed activities. All reports are available [4]. Affcom has also
cited concerns over delay in report submission and WMIN has informed
about
problems with government regulations. Detailed
response in initial mail.
* Organizational Best Practices : Affcom claims that WMIN has not been
abiding to Best Practices, however they haven't informed the respective
areas. WMIN has shared the document with them, however they say late
submission hence proceeding with de-recognition.
* Action Plan : Based on all five points, WMIN has been asked to
prepare an
action plan. WMIN continues to contest all the
five basis and asked
Affcom
to review Organizational Best Practices to
understand the action-items.
Affcom claims late hence proceeding with de-recognition.
Also responding to few other statements categorically from your mail
* *It sounds more like they heard your responses *
As stated in my initial mail, WMIN has been providing justifications in
writing over mail however Affcom does not address them and invites for a
Call and shares expectation gap response over Cloud Document. Hence,
during
Call,clarifications are again provided for they
being not justified (eg
-
Affcom finding WMIN's leadership flaws when
13,000 institutes struggle
with foreign funding) however nothing is taken into consideration.
* *it is their job to make the best decision both for the best decision
both for the movement as a whole and the Wikimedia movement in India.*
Absolutely, it is for the very reason I ask them to make this public. If
Affcom is more transparent about its investigation and decision making,
community can provide valuable inputs and no reason to question them.
* *I was unable to find the resolution that explains this decision*
WMIN has been repeatedly asking Affcom to put everything in public
domain
including the resolution. Please find Annexure
[A] in my initial mail.
[1]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2013-November/010627…
[2] Board of Directors at CIS, acknowledged in
March, 2019 for a
compliant
made in August, 2018 for CIS-A2K Staff not doing
their duty to the
order.
[3] Foreign Currency (Regulation) Act, 1960
compliance do not permit
India
Chapter to receive money from its primary fiscal
sponsor, Wikimedia
Foundation.
[4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports/Wikimedia_India#…
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 08:52, effe iets anders <effeietsanders(a)gmail.com
wrote:
> Thanks Abhinav for your email. I'm having a hard time splitting the
email
> out in a) what is the exact and complete set
of reasons that Affcom
put
the
> chapter on suspension. b) what additional complaints are part of the
big
> picture. c) what is the response from WMIN.
>
> I realize it is really hard for you to separate these components,
because
> you have been living this discusion for the
past 8 months (at least),
if
I
> read this correctly.
>
> You mention that AffCom has not heard your objections, but from the
rest
of
your email, it sounds more like they heard your
responses (you mention
both
> written and oral communication), but they hold a different opinion on
the
> value of those objections. That may be
because of a different set of
> expectations. I know these discussions are always painful for
everyone,
and
> I'm confident that AffCom does not enjoy suspending chapters. While
this
is
no legal procedure, it is their job to make the
best decision both for
the
> movement as a whole and the Wikimedia movement in India.
>
> Anyhow, I was unable to find the resolution that explains this
decision,
so
> it's hard to really understand it. I do hope that you and affcom will
be
able to
work towards a solution together - probably by addressing the
underlying concerns.
Best,
Lodewijk
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 4:19 PM ravinder jadeja <tnkpndy(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > It is such a long message and what I understand a very painful one
for
the
> writer. Asking Affcom to come in public with data is a right demand
> everyone can read then.
>
> I know FCRA is very tough thing today and I feel sorry reading that
point
>
> What is this problem with CIS I am new and would like to know.
>
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 00:04, Subhashish Panigrahi <
psubhashish(a)gmail.com
>
> wrote:
>
>> Forwarding esp. for those Indian Wikimedians who are on the
Wikimedia-l
>> list
>>
>> Subha
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Abhinav srivastava <abhinav619(a)gmail.com>
>> Date: Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 2:20 PM
>> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Open Letter to Affiliations Committee :
Wikimedia
>> India's Demand For A Fair And
Transparent Hearing
>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>>
>>
>> Dear Friends From Affcom,
>>
>> I am posting an open public request for your notice of Suspension
moved
> at
> >> Wikimedia India (WMIN) which we continue to contest and to our
ignored
> >> demand of having a public hearing
as shared with you all over mail
and
>>
shared again here under Annexure [A]. You have taken an official
position
>> on suspension without even hearing us even once, unexplained
accusations
>> have been provided and we continue to
believe Affcom has been
>> insufficiently investigating facts before making judgements. We
repeatedly
>> over and over again provided justifications over Mail but you never
took
>> them to your notice and only over calls
you heard us, provided your
>> rationale for expectation gaps but never took our oral commentary
which
> >> refutes your claims,in any action, anywhere. Now you say WMIN won’t
> remain
> >> a Chapter after 14th September and be transformed into a User
Group.
> >>
> >> Republic of India happens to be one of the only few countries where
> >> besides
> >> volunteer driven Chapter and User Groups has a full-time staff
based
> WMF’s
> >> Allied Organisation CIS-A2K [1]. Wikimedia India activities [2]
may
be
>>
less
>> due to no source of funds [3] however, Community Members from India
put
> >> their efforts, strive hard to take the movement ahead. Whether it
be
> the
> >> previous financial year or the present, no Wikimedia Foundation
Grants
>>
like
>> Rapid Grant, Project Grant etc have been applied by Wikimedia India
>> members
>> to support any Chapter activity. They remain self-financed. We
received
>> your notice last year when Wikimedia
India was contesting a dispute
with
> >> CIS-A2K over attribution grabbing for our self-financed projects
and
>>
ignoring Chapter at important National level initiaves [4]. While
working
>> with virtually no source of funds and struggles with WMF’s Allied
>> Organisation, your notice of suspension was the least bad we could
have
> >> had.
> >>
> >> We continue to contest your suspension notice. It was Suo Moto (on
its
> >> own)
> >> decision making and as found and re-stated above and below in
detail,
>>
there
>> were gaps and misunderstanding in your basis. We also continue to
contest
>> there has been a Rush-to-decision making. No written responses via
Mail
to
>> Chapter’s clarification are being provided and invitation for calls
are
> >> initiated where brief responses are shared on a Cloud Document. It
has
>>
been
>> subsequently found by both parties on there being gaps in
communication.
>> However, even after clarity during call,
Affcom has not taken any
action
> >> over them.
> >>
> >> The basis of your suspension notice has been shared here for the
wider
>>
audience.
>>
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> Legal Structure : Affcom asked Wikimedia India to resolve and
obtain
> >> its
> >> necessary license in order to obtain funds. At present, as per
> >> Government
> >> of India restrictions it is difficult to obtain foreign funding.
> >> Wikimedia
> >> India informed the Affcom on roughly 13,000 Non-Government
> >> Organisations
> >> (NGO)s [5] are struggling with a similar crisis to which Affcom
> >> responded, “reconsider applying for a User Group.” and “no
evidence
> >> that
> >> the current organization’s leadership will be able to drive this
> >> problem
> >> toward resolution”. Chapter efforts and commitment in resolving
the
>>
said
>> crisis cannot be dusted in few words. A Government restrictive
policy
> >> which
> >> has an impact on 13,000 NGOs and Affcom finding flaws in WMIN
Board
> >> Members
> >> capability. WMIN would leave it for public interpretation.
> >>
> >>
> >> Why not a capability audit for hosting zero-budget activities?
While
most
>> of the time are being spent on resolving the said crisis, WMIN
continues
>> to
>> undertake activities as listed. Taking the Open Knowledge Movement
forward
>> remains a commitment for the Chapter irrespective of whatsoever
political
>> climate may remain. Affcom was asked two questions respectively in
this
>> regard however no response has been
attained. The questions are
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> Would zero-budget activities, those self-financed not meet
sufficiency
>> ?
>> Please elaborate for us to stand better and to improve upon.
>> 2.
>>
>> Would resolving Legal Structure and being able to receive WMF
Grants
> be
> >> a necessary criteria for WMIN to meet sufficiency or continued
> >> activities
> >> not meet the fulfilment criteria?
> >>
> >>
> >> (2) Open Governance : Affcom informed Chapter that a member needs
to
be
> in
> >> physical presence at the Chapter Assembly to cast vote and raise
voice
> and
> >> asked The Chapter to change its bylaws. This information is
anything
but
> >> false. This was communicated during the Call but Affcom did not
bring
> >> anything in action. Also, as per
the Chapter Agreement between WMF
and
> >> WMIN, a copy of bylaws was provided
in English Language to WMF. The
> bylaws
> >> were approved by the then Chapter’s Council. No evidence has been
> brought
> >> to notice on WMIN violating the Clause 7.2 of the Chapter’s
Agreement,
> >>
> >> “The Wikimedia Chapter shall be required to advise the Foundation
of
any
> >> planned or actual change in the bylaws or status of the Chapter
which
> >> might
> >> affect the Foundation or the continued existence or effectiveness
of
> this
> >> Agreement.”
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> (3) Active Contributor Involvement :The November 10 email carried
the
> >> statement, “The chapter lacks broad
and diverse membership,
community
> >> representation, as well as buy-in
and involvement “ and “Membership
> seems
> >> to be sourced through university leadership rather than through
open
>>
community participation and representation.” Chapter till date
received
> >> no
> >> evidence or logic construction on how the said argument was
reached.
Later
>> during the call, Affcom did acknowledge that there has been a
>> communication
>> gap. Chapter further floated the idea of sharing the Member’s data
base
> >> after discussing privacy policy over them.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> (4) Capacity : WMIN was able to submit its annual reports on 21st
> >> December,
> >> 2018 (3.5 months late) due to a notice by Income-Tax department
which
>>
caused delay in preparing our Financial reports. Although we do not
have
>> any annual grants or use any money to
support any activity, as per
>> Chapter’s agreement, affiliate is required to submit Financial
Results.
> >> Meanwhile, WMIN reported its activities on every quarterly basis
and
>>
shared
>> it with the wider Indian community via India Mailing List and also
other
>> channels [6], [7], [8],[9]. Annual
activity report is a compilation
from
>> the quarterly reports.
>>
>>
>>
>> Affcom claimed via Cloud document that no high level response
submitted
>> and
>> repeated delay is not accepted. WMIN informed Affcom that previous
delay
> >> needs to be looked at independently from earlier financial period
and
>>
suspension notice (WMIN then had a grant), but we received no
response.
>>
>>
>>
>> (5) Organizational Best Practices : Affcom asked us to ‘Resolve’
issues
> >> relating to Organizational Best Practices, however, no information
had
>>
been
>> received on respective deliverables not been met. The November 10,
email
>> carried the statement, “There are
concerns about whether” referring
that
> >> Affcom was also not sure themselves. WMIN shared the best practices
> after
> >> placing it in front of the community on member’s mailing list for
more
>>
than
>> 15 days. To this Affcom responded that you are late with your
submission
> >> hence we are terminating your contract. They never shared an
evidence
> and
> >> when WMIN took its time placed it in-front of the community and
then
> >> submitted, they said delayed and
instead of sending their response
in
> >> writing over mail they again
invited us for a call. We continue to
> insist
> >> on providing a written response via Mail but no action.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> (6) Action Plan : Affcom asked us to submit an Action Plan and we
kept
>>
asking what deliverable are needed. We cannot commit on resolving
>> Government restrictions within a said timeline as more than 13,000
NGOs
>> struggle with the similar crisis. We
emphasised again and again we
have
> >> been running zero-budget activities and working for the movement.
We
> asked
> >> them to review Organizational Best Practices, based on gaps we
could
> have
> >> taken things into consideration. They rather said, you have missed
the
> >> deadline, so WMIN has to be closed
now.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> To sum up, Affcom friends, you made up your own decision, you made
up
you
>> own hearing and you made up your own decision. It was a monologue
masked
> >> in
> >> the name of a dialogue.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I encourage you all to be in our boots someday, hosting activities
on
> >> zero-budget, fighting with the
Government bureaucracy to attain
some
> >> funding as a help, the challenge of
having a staff-based
organisation
in
> >> parallel, struggle with self-financing activities and most
importantly
>>
working with Affcom to save yourself from their de-recognition
threats.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> If you believe you are correct, please abide to the request made
under
> >> Annexure [A] and put everything in
public domain. Let community
read
for
>> themselves and decide. If Affcom is more
transparent about its
>> investigation and actions then community would be able to better
>> understand
>> the work and provide an opinion.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Abhinav
>>
>>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2019-April/013994.ht…
> >> \
> >>
> >> [3] Foreign Currency (Regulation) Act, 1960 compliance do not
permit
India
>> Chapter to receive money from its primary fiscal sponsor, Wikimedia
>> Foundation.
>>
>> [4] Board of Directors at CIS, acknowledged in March, 2019 for a
compliant
>> made in August, 2018 for CIS-A2K Staff not doing their duty to the
order.
>>
>> [5]
>>
>>
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/07/democracies-need-a-little-help-from-th…
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2017-July/013030.html
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2017-October/013089.…
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2018-January/013188.…
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/2018-April/013295.ht…
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Annexure
>>
>> [A] Reallocating the Affcom - WMIN Communication To Meta : No
>> communications over email, video call, social media, instant
messaging,
or
>> anywhere but wiki! While this would not just be aligned with the
editing
> >> spirit, it would promote greater transparency and also helpful for
us
to
> >> communicate the message to our community members. While, we
understand
> >> Affcom had been advocating the
same, however, taking care of
privacy
> >> concerns, do let us. Once we hear
from Affcom on having no privacy
> >> concerns, we may reallocate the discussions.
> >>
> >> If there a consent to this, would request a green light also for
> >>
> >> 1.
> >>
> >> Archiving the entire email conversation over a cloud document
and
> >> linking it to the relevant Meta
page.
> >> 2.
> >>
> >> Documenting Internet Calls in an attempt to resolve
communication
> gaps
> >> and linking them to Meta page for greater transparency.
> >> 3.
> >>
> >> Based on Principal of Free Speech, allowing anybody to use the
> >> discussion page for expression of their views.
> >> 4.
> >>
> >> Any Volunteer is free to translate the text into the language of
> their
> >> choice.
> >> 5.
> >>
> >> Upload All PDF sent via Mails to Commons and link them to the
Meta
> >> Page.
> >> 6.
> >>
> >> All relevant customs and procedures which exist for any Meta
page
to
> be
> >> in action.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >> Unsubscribe:
,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>
_______________________________________________
> >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> >> Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> >>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
> >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> Unsubscribe:
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
Unsubscribe:
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
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit