Thanks SJ, very interesting. And cool to hear that there’s interest around offline wikis.
The million-dollar question I guess after what you wrote is whether we should support or not this Charter when it is put up for a vote? SCM > On 28 Apr 2024, at 13:29, Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dearly offline, > > The Wikimedia Summit was last weekend in Berlin, which I attended on behalf > of WOW. It focused entirely on the idea of a Charter for our movement and > setting up a representative Council that could make global decisions > independently of the WMF. > > Notes from the WM Summit > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Summit_2024#Final_Outputs_of_the_Wikimedia_Summit_2024> > compiled by the hosts. > Photos from the event > <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_Summit_2024> > > Charter thoughts > > I found aspects of the current charter draft to be arbitrary and too > operational > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#In_flux,_incomplete,_tries_to_do_too_many_things_at_once>, > creating a large body without clarity about what it would do, with little > connection to the work of editors on the projects, and with hard-to-change > founding documents. > > The main focus of the Berlin discussions was to identify changes that > attendees felt had to be made to the charter, for it to work. Answers to > questions posed ['what do you see as deal-breakers to approving a charter? / > how would you improve the current text?"] were workshopped over two days in > groups. Then there was a final filtering into 46 condensed suggestions that > those in attendance voted on, and this filter removed some important points > of feedback. Given how the whole progressed, it would have benefited from > input from a broader group [at least sharing regular photos back with our > groups? I would try this next time] and from having already responded to the > most common feedback given on the charter talk page > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter>. > > I don't feel the conclusion of the process worked. Some of the condensed > statements were underspecified, overcomplicated, or costly for little > benefit. Some common points -- for instance, that the charter had to be > simpler; or that a supermajority should be needed for ratification -- were > filtered out entirely. Only one proposal even mentioned unaffiliated editors > + groups, and translated that concept as 'unorganized volunteers' which, > considering the wealth and depth of on-wiki organization, is not accurate at > all. The emotional build-up to the vote, and the presentation of proposals in > isolation, as though there were no tradeoffs involved, contributed to every > proposal getting majority support. > > As an alternate example of how we could make progress in global governance, I > drafted a minimalist charter > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Sj/Design_chats/Charter/en> that > captures tasks I heard people expect such a body to do, and would stay > flexible while we try to actually address those tasks in the coming year. > This is a wiki document: if the idea appeals, please edit it. > > The drafting committee's plan is unchanged: to revise the charter draft once > more, then hold a movement-wide vote to ratify it in June. The ratification > would include a vote of affiliates (one vote per affiliate?), and a > simultaneous vote of all editors (one vote per person). > > Other movement thoughts > > Many recurring topics at the Summit seemed healthy: WMDE was adamant about > helping others learn to manage movement-governance events like the Summit, > and about not hosting themselves in two years' time. The spirit of peer > support and mentorship was very strong. > And some recurring topics felt unhealthy: mainly a sense of dependency. > Some affiliates said they felt they could not do anything without WMF > approval and grants, but did not want to feel any obligation to learn how to > develop independent support and partnerships. Some committee members felt > they could only function with WMF-assigned staff and substantial budgets, > based on a bureaucratic model of governance that has not worked well for us. > > WOW interest > > There was much interest in offline wikis among other attendees, and people > who said they would reach out in the coming weeks. We might think about > running an online workshop on getting started with offline wikis, before > Wikimania. Jan Ainali interviewed me and others about our groups, for a > podcast series; I will let you know when it comes out. > > — SJ > _______________________________________________ > Offline-l mailing list -- offline-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe send an email to offline-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Offline-l mailing list -- offline-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to offline-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
