Hi Craig, To clarify, when we talk about resolving a compliance issue, what we mean -- in most cases -- is producing the reports, records, or similar artifacts that were required by a particular legal agreement, rather than effecting a change in the status of the affected group. For example, suppose that a user group receives a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation, but does not provide a report showing how the funds were spent; the user group would then be out of compliance, and its official representatives -- who would have signed the grant agreement -- would become personally ineligible to create a new user group. However, they could clear their personal records, so to speak, at some future date by delivering the missing report -- even if the recognition of the user group in question had been withdrawn in the meantime. Obviously, reconstructing missing documentation after the fact may be easier in some cases than in others.
There could, of course, be cases where the nature of the non-compliance was such that no resolution would be possible, and the affected individuals would simply be ineligible to create new user groups until the Affiliations Committee or the Wikimedia Foundation determined otherwise; but I imagine that the circumstances of any such case would be quite unusual, and that it would necessarily be handled on a case-by-case basis. Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Craig Franklin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kirill, > > On 26 April 2017 at 02:31, Kirill Lokshin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Having said that, there are certain issues that can prevent a smooth > > transition from a chapter to a user group. In particular, any > individuals > > considered to have personal responsibility for an outstanding compliance > > issue -- which means, generally speaking, the actual signatories of a > > chapter or grant agreement, but could potentially include every member of > > the governing board in the case of an incorporated affiliate -- are not > > eligible to serve as signatories of a new user group agreement until the > > original compliance issue has been resolved. > > > > On this point, how would this apply in situations such as WMPH's where the > group has been disendorsed and can no longer move back towards compliance? > I don't see at this point how for instance folks involved with that chapter > might "resolve" any issues in order to participate in a user group down the > road. Possibly this is a hypothetical situation. > > Generally speaking, I do feel that it's probably not helpful for those of > us who are not familiar with the specific situation at hand to be making > public statements laying blame or sharing opinions. Most of us (myself > included) probably do not know the full story here. > > Cheers, > Craig > _______________________________________________ > 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: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?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: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
